Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions; Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Utah, 29688-29695 [2011-12606]
Download as PDF
29688
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
submission addresses Virginia’s
compliance with the portion of CAA
Section 110(a)(2)(C) & (J) relating to the
CAA’s part C PSD permit program for
the 1997 Ozone NAAQS, because this
proposed approval would approve
regulating NOX as a precursor to ozone
in Virginia’s SIP in accordance with the
Federal Register action dated November
29, 2005 (70 FR 71612) that finalized
NOX as a precursor for ozone
regulations set forth at 40 CFR 51.166
and in 40 CFR 52.21.
We are proposing to fully approve the
Virginia SIP revision request for these
changes only. Prior ‘‘limited approval’’
of certain aspects of Virginia’s PSD
program elements remain valid. A
description of these items for ‘‘limited
approval’’ can be found in the Technical
Support Document contained in this
Docket or in the Federal Register action
dated October 22, 2008 (73 FR 62897).
EPA is soliciting public comments on
the issues discussed for this proposed
approval document only. These
comments will be considered before
taking final action.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
merely proposes to approve state law as
meeting Federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule to
include NOX as a precursor to ozone in
Virginia does not have tribal
implications as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), because the SIP is not approved
to apply in Indian country located in the
state, and EPA notes that it will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: April 25, 2011.
James W. Newson,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. 2011–12515 Filed 5–20–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R08–OAR–0210–0302; FRL–9309–9]
Approval and Promulgation of State
Implementation Plan Revisions;
Infrastructure Requirements for the
1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards; Utah
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed Rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
and conditionally approve the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submissions
from the State of Utah which
demonstrate that the State meets the
requirements of section 110(a)(1) and (2)
of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS) promulgated for ozone on July
18, 1997. Section 110(a) of the CAA
requires that each state adopt and
submit an ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ for the
implementation, maintenance and
enforcement of each NAAQS
promulgated by the EPA. The State of
Utah submitted two certifications of
their Infrastructure SIP for the 1997
ozone NAAQS, one dated December 3,
2007, which was determined to be
complete on March 27, 2008 (73 FR
16205), and one dated December 21,
2009. EPA does not propose to act on
the State’s March 22, 2007 submission
to meet the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA, relating to
interstate transport of air pollution, for
the 1997 ozone NAAQS. EPA approved
the State’s interstate transport SIP
submission on May 28, 2008 (73 FR
16543).
Written comments must be
received on or before June 22, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08–
OAR–2010–0302, by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: dolan.kathy@epa.gov
• Fax: (303) 312–6064 (please alert
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing
comments).
• Mail: Director, Air Program,
Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P–AR,
1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado
80202–1129.
• Hand Delivery: Director, Air
Program, Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P–
AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver,
Colorado 80202–1129. Such deliveries
are only accepted Monday through
Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
federal holidays. Special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R08–OAR–2010–
0302. 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
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
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, 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,
General Information, 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 Air Program, Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8,
1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado
80202–1129. EPA requests that if at all
possible, you contact the individual
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section to view the hard copy
of the docket. You may view the hard
copy of the docket Monday through
Friday, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., excluding
federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kathy Dolan, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P–AR,
1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado
80202–1129. 303–312–6142,
dolan.kathy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
Definitions
For the purpose of this document, we
are giving meaning to certain words or
initials as follows:
(i) The words or initials Act or CAA
mean or refer to the Clean Air Act,
unless the context indicates otherwise.
(ii) The words EPA, we, us or our
mean or refer to the United States
Environmental Protection Agency.
(iii) The initials SIP mean or refer to
State Implementation Plan.
Table of Contents
I. General Information
II. Background
III. What infrastructure elements are required
under sections 110(a)(1) and (2)?
IV. How did the State of Utah address the
infrastructure elements of sections
110(a)(1) and (2)?
V. What action is EPA taking?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. General Information
What should I consider as I prepare my
comments for EPA?
1. Submitting Confidential Business
Information (CBI). Do not submit CBI 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 on 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.
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 and organize your
comments;
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;
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
29689
Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats; and,
Make sure to submit your comments
by the comment period deadline
identified.
II. Background
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated
new NAAQS for ozone based on 8-hour
average concentrations. The 8-hour
averaging period replaced the previous
1-hour averaging period, and the level of
the NAAQS was changed from 0.12
parts per million (ppm) to 0.08 ppm (62
FR 38856). By statute, SIPs meeting the
requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and
(2) are to be submitted by states within
three years after promulgation of a new
or revised standard. Section 110(a)(2)
provides basic requirements for SIPs,
including emissions inventories,
monitoring, and modeling, to assure
attainment and maintenance of the
standards. These requirements are set
out in several ‘‘infrastructure elements,’’
listed in section 110(a)(2).
Section 110(a) imposes the obligation
upon states to make a SIP submission to
EPA for a new or revised NAAQS, and
the contents of that submission may
vary depending upon the facts and
circumstances. In particular, the data
and analytical tools available at the time
the state develops and submits the SIP
for a new or revised NAAQS affects the
content of the submission. The contents
of such SIP submissions may also vary
depending upon what provisions the
state’s existing SIP already contains. In
the case of the 1997 ozone NAAQS,
states typically have met the basic
program elements required in section
110(a)(2) through earlier SIP
submissions in connection with
previous NAAQS. In a guidance issued
on October 2, 2007, EPA noted that, to
the extent an existing SIP already meets
the section 110(a)(2) requirements,
states need only to certify that fact via
a letter to EPA.1
On March 27, 2008, EPA published a
final rule entitled, ‘‘Completeness
Findings for Section 110(a) State
Implementation Plans for the 8-hour
Ozone NAAQS’’ (73 FR 16205). In the
rule, EPA made a finding for each State
that it had submitted or had failed to
submit a complete SIP that provided the
basic program elements of section
110(a)(2) necessary to implement the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. In
particular, EPA found that Utah had
1 Memorandum from William T. Harnett,
Director, Air Quality Policy Division, ‘‘Guidance on
SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1)
and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and PM2.5
National Ambient Air Quality Standards’’ (Oct. 2,
2007).
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
29690
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
submitted a complete SIP to meet these
requirements.
III. What infrastructure elements are
required under sections 110(a)(1) and
(2)?
Section 110(a)(1) provides the
procedural and timing requirements for
SIP submissions after a new or revised
NAAQS is promulgated. Section
110(a)(2) lists specific elements the SIP
must contain or satisfy. These
infrastructure elements include
requirements, such as modeling,
monitoring, and emissions inventories,
which are designed to assure attainment
and maintenance of the NAAQS. The
elements that are the subject of this
action are listed below.
• 110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and
other control measures.
• 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality
monitoring/data system.
• 110(a)(2)(C): Program for
enforcement of control measures.
• 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate and
international pollution.
• 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate resources
and authority.
• 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source
monitoring and reporting.
• 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency powers.
• 110(a)(2)(H): Future SIP revisions.
• 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with
government officials; public
notification; and prevention of
significant deterioration (PSD) and
visibility protection.
• 110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling/
data.
• 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees.
• 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/
participation by affected local entities.
A detailed discussion of each of these
elements is contained in the next
section.
Two elements identified in section
110(a)(2) are not governed by the three
year submission deadline of section
110(a)(1) and are therefore not
addressed in this action. These elements
relate to part D of Title I of the CAA, and
submissions to satisfy them are not due
within three years after promulgation of
a new or revised NAAQS, but rather are
due at the same time nonattainment area
plan requirements are due under section
172. The two elements are: (i) Section
110(a)(2)(C) to the extent it refers to
permit programs (known as
‘‘nonattainment new source review
(NSR)’’) required under part D, and (ii)
section 110(a)(2)(I), pertaining to the
nonattainment planning requirements of
part D. As a result, this action does not
address infrastructure elements related
to the nonattainment NSR portion of
section 110(a)(2)(C) or related to
110(a)(2)(I).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
This action also does not address the
‘‘interstate transport’’ requirements of
element 110(a)(2)(D)(i). In a separate
action, EPA approved the State’s
submission to meet the requirements of
110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS. (73 FR 16543).
IV. How did the State of Utah address
the infrastructure elements of sections
110(a)(1) and (2)?
1. Emission limits and other control
measures: Section 110(a)(2)(A) requires
SIPs to include enforceable emission
limitations and other control measures,
means, or techniques (including
economic incentives such as fees,
marketable permits, and auctions of
emissions rights), as well as schedules
and timetables for compliance as may be
necessary or appropriate to meet the
applicable requirements of this Act.
a. Utah’s response to this requirement:
SIP Section I (Legal Authority) A.1.a,
codified at R307–110–2, identifies the
statutory provisions that allow adoption
of standards and limitations for
attainment and maintenance of national
standards. (19–2–104 and 109, Utah
Code Annotated 1953 (UCA)). EPA
approved this SIP originally in the early
1980’s and most recently on June 25,
2003 (68 FR 37744).
b. EPA analysis: Utah’s SIP meets the
requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(A) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS,
subject to the following clarifications.
First, although Utah’s certification cited
its legal authority to adopt emissions
limitations for maintenance of the
NAAQS, the certification did not
identify emissions limitations specific
to the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS that
the State has adopted and that have
been approved into the SIP. EPA notes
that, among other emissions limitations,
the Utah SIP contains emissions
limitations originally developed to
attain the previous 1-hour ozone
standard. For the purposes of this
action, EPA is reviewing any rules
originally submitted in response to part
D solely for the purposes of determining
whether they support a finding that the
State has met the basic infrastructure
requirements under section 110(a)(2).
In this action, EPA is not proposing to
approve or disapprove any existing state
rules with regard to director’s discretion
or variance provisions. A number of
states have such provisions which are
contrary to the CAA and existing EPA
guidance (52 FR 45109, Nov. 24, 1987),
and the Agency plans to take action in
the future to address such state
regulations. In the meantime, EPA
encourages any state having a director’s
discretion or variance provision which
is contrary to the CAA and EPA
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
guidance to take steps to correct the
deficiency as soon as possible.
Finally, in this action, EPA is also not
proposing to approve or disapprove any
existing state provisions with regard to
excess emissions during startup,
shutdown, or malfunction (SSM) of
operations at a facility. A number of
states have SSM provisions which are
contrary to the CAA and existing EPA
guidance 2 and the Agency plans to
address such state regulations in the
future. In the specific case of SSM
provisions in the Utah SIP, EPA has
issued a finding of substantial
inadequacy and call for a SIP revision
for Utah’s ‘‘unavoidable breakdown’’
rule (76 FR 21639, Apr. 18, 2011). As
stated above, though, EPA is not
proposing to address SSM provisions in
the context of this action and therefore
proposes to approve the Utah
certification for infrastructure element
110(a)(2)(A) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
2. Ambient air quality monitoring/
data system: Section 110(a)(2)(B)
requires SIPs to provide for
establishment and operation of
appropriate devices, methods, systems,
and procedures necessary to (i) monitor,
compile, and analyze data on ambient
air quality, and (ii) upon request, make
such data available to the
Administrator.
a. Utah’s response to this requirement:
SIP Section IV (Ambient Air Monitoring
Program), codified at R307–110–5,
provides a brief description of the
purposes of the air monitoring program.
EPA approved this SIP originally in the
early 1980’s and most recently on June
25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
b. EPA analysis: Utah’s air monitoring
programs and data systems do not meet
the requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(B) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
In particular, deficiencies in Utah’s
monitoring network plan are detailed in
a memorandum in the docket for this
action. Utah has formally committed to
submitting an adequate annual
monitoring plan not later than one year
after the date of final action on Utah’s
infrastructure SIP for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS. The specific measures Utah
will take are detailed in the
commitment letter, which may be found
in the docket for this action. EPA has
reviewed these measures and agrees that
they will rectify the deficiencies in
Utah’s ambient air monitoring network.
2 Steven Herman, Assistant Administrator for
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, and
Robert Perciasepe, Assistant Administrator for Air
and Radiation, Memorandum to EPA Air Division
Directors, ‘‘State Implementation Plans (SIPs):
Policy Regarding Excess Emissions During
Malfunctions, Startup, and Shutdown.’’ (Sept. 20,
1999).
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
As a result of Utah’s formal
commitment, EPA proposes to
conditionally approve the Utah
infrastructure SIP for section
110(a)(2)(B) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
If, however, Utah does not implement
the measures specified in its
commitment within one year after the
date of final action on Utah’s
infrastructure SIP for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS, EPA’s conditional approval
will automatically revert to disapproval
of the infrastructure SIP for section
110(a)(2)(B) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
3. Program for enforcement of control
measures: Section 110(a)(2)(C) requires
SIPs to include a program to provide for
the enforcement of the measures
described in subparagraph (A), and
regulation of the modification and
construction of any stationary source
within the areas covered by the plan as
necessary to assure that NAAQS are
achieved, including a permit program as
required in parts C and D.
a. Utah’s response to this requirement:
SIP Section I (Legal Authority) A.1.b,
identifies the statutory provisions that
allow the Division of Air Quality (DAQ)
to enforce applicable laws, regulations
and standards and seek injunctive relief.
(Sections 19–2–104 and 19–2–115,
UCA.)
SIP Section I (Legal Authority) A.1.d,
codified at R307–110–2, identifies the
statutory provisions that allow the DAQ
to prevent construction, modification or
operation of any stationary source at any
location where emissions from such
source will prevent the attainment or
maintenance of a national standard or
interfere with PSD requirements.
(Authority Utah Code Section 19–2–
108) EPA approved this SIP originally in
the early 1980’s and most recently on
June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
SIP Section VIII (PSD), codified at
R307–110–9 and R307–405, describes
the program to prevent significant
deterioration of areas of the State where
the air is clean. EPA approved the PSD
SIP originally in the early 1980’s and
most recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR
37744). EPA most recently approved
R307–405 on August 19, 2004 (69 FR
51368). Utah submitted revisions to the
PSD SIP and R307–405 on September
15, 2006. Updates to the incorporation
by reference (IBR) date of 40 CFR 52.21
were submitted on October 1, 2007 and
March 3, 2008. The October 1, 2007
update incorporated provisions in the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) that
added NOX as a precursor for ozone.
The most recent update of the IBR date
was adopted on February 5, 2009 and
will be submitted to EPA in the near
future when the final administrative
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
paperwork is available. EPA has not yet
acted on these submittals.
SIP Section XVII (Visibility
protection), codified at R307–10–25,
describes the program to protect
visibility, especially within the
boundaries of the five national parks
located in Utah. (Sections 19–2–101 and
104, UCA) EPA approved this SIP in
April 1997 and most recently on June
25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
b. EPA analysis: To generally meet the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C), the
State is required to have SIP-approved
PSD, nonattainment New Source
Review (NSR), and minor NSR
permitting programs adequate to
implement the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. As explained above, in this
action EPA is not evaluating
nonattainment related provisions, such
as the nonattainment NSR program
required by part D of the Act. EPA is
evaluating the State’s PSD program as
required by part C of the Act, and the
State’s minor NSR program as required
by 110(a)(2)(C).
Utah has a SIP-approved PSD program
that meets the general requirements of
part C of the Act (51 FR 31125). Below,
EPA considers requirements for the PSD
program specific to the 1997 ozone
NAAQS, but first considers the effects of
recent rules regulating greenhouse gases
on Utah’s PSD program.
Greenhouse Gas Regulation
EPA notes a potential inconsistency
between Utah’s December 3, 2007 and
December 21, 2009 infrastructure SIP
certifications and EPA’s recently
promulgated rule, ‘‘Limitation of
Approval of Prevention of Significant
Deterioration Provisions Concerning
Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in
State Implementation Plans’’ (‘‘PSD SIP
Narrowing Rule’’), 75 FR 82536 (Dec. 30,
2010). In the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule,
EPA withdrew its previous approval of
Utah’s PSD program to the extent that it
applied PSD permitting to greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions increases from
GHG-emitting sources below thresholds
set in EPA’s June 3, 2010 ‘‘Prevention of
Significant Deterioration and Title V
Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule’’
(‘‘Tailoring Rule’’), 75 FR 31514. EPA
withdrew its approval on the basis that
the State lacked sufficient resources to
issue PSD permits to such sources at the
statutory thresholds in effect in the
previously-approved PSD program.
After the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule, the
portion of Utah’s PSD SIP from which
EPA withdrew its approval had the
status of having been submitted to EPA
but not yet acted upon. In its December
3, 2007 and December 21, 2009
certifications, Utah relied on its PSD
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
29691
program as approved at that date—
which was before December 30, 2010,
the effective date of the PSD SIP
Narrowing Rule—to satisfy the
requirements of infrastructure element
110(a)(2)(C). Given EPA’s basis for the
PSD SIP Narrowing Rule, EPA proposes
approval of the Utah infrastructure SIP
for infrastructure element (C) if either
the State clarifies (or modifies) its
certification to make clear that the State
relies only on the portion of the PSD
program that remains approved after the
PSD SIP Narrowing Rule issued on
December 30, 2010, and for which the
State has sufficient resources to
implement, or the State acts to
withdraw from EPA consideration the
remaining portion of its PSD program
submission that would have applied
PSD permitting to GHG sources below
the Tailoring Rule thresholds. In the
alternative, if Utah does not take either
action, EPA proposes to disapprove the
infrastructure SIP to the extent it
incorporates that portion of the
previously-approved PSD program from
which EPA withdrew its approval in the
PSD SIP Narrowing Rule, which is the
portion which would have applied PSD
permitting requirements to GHG
emissions increases from GHG-emitting
sources below the Tailoring Rule
thresholds. Such disapproval, if
finalized, would not result in a need for
Utah to resubmit a SIP revision,
sanctions, or a federal implementation
plan (FIP).
Regulation of Ozone Precursors
In order for the State’s SIP-approved
PSD program to satisfy the requirements
of section 110(a)(2)(C) for the 1997
ozone NAAQS, the program must
properly regulate ozone precursors. On
November 29, 2005, EPA promulgated
the phase 2 implementation rule for the
1997 ozone NAAQS (Phase 2 Rule),
which includes requirements for PSD
programs to treat nitrogen oxides (NOX)
as a precursor for ozone (72 FR 71612).
The Phase 2 Rule accordingly updated
the federal program at 40 CFR 52.21 to
meet these requirements, effective
January 30, 2006. On August 7, 2008,
Utah submitted to EPA revisions to the
State’s PSD program. The State’s PSD
program, as submitted, for the most part
incorporates by reference the federal
program at 40 CFR 52.21. The August 7,
2008 submittal updates the date of
incorporation by reference to July 1,
2007, after the effective date of the
Phase 2 Rule, and thereby implementing
the requirements of the rule. On January
7, 2009, EPA proposed approval of the
August 7, 2008 submittal (74 FR 667).
We anticipate finalizing that approval in
conjunction with finalizing approval of
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
29692
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Utah’s infrastructure SIP. Contingent on
that approval, Utah’s PSD program
meets the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(C) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
Minor NSR
The State has a SIP-approved minor
NSR program, adopted under section
110(a)(2)(C) of the Act that regulates
emissions of ozone and its precursors.
The minor NSR program is found in
section II of the Utah SIP, and was
originally approved by EPA as section 2
of the SIP (See 68 FR 37744, June 25,
2003). Since approval of the minor NSR
program, the State and EPA have relied
on the program to assure that new and
modified sources not captured by the
major NSR permitting programs do not
interfere with attainment and
maintenance of the NAAQS.
In this action, EPA is proposing to
approve Utah’s infrastructure SIP for the
1997 ozone NAAQS with respect to the
general requirement in section
110(a)(2)(C) to include a program in the
SIP that regulates the modification and
construction of any stationary source as
necessary to assure that the NAAQS are
achieved. EPA is not proposing to
approve or disapprove the State’s
existing minor NSR program itself to the
extent that it is inconsistent with EPA’s
regulations governing this program. A
number of states may have minor NSR
provisions that are contrary to the
existing EPA regulations for this
program. EPA intends to work with
states to reconcile state minor NSR
programs with EPA’s regulatory
provisions for the program. The
statutory requirements of section
110(a)(2)(C) provide for considerable
flexibility in designing minor NSR
programs, and it may be time to revisit
the regulatory requirements for this
program to give the states an
appropriate level of flexibility to design
a program that meets their particular air
quality concerns, while assuring
reasonable consistency across the
country in protecting the NAAQS with
respect to new and modified minor
sources.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Visibility Protection
Finally, Utah cited SIP provisions
relating to visibility protection. With
regards to part C of title I of the Act,
section 110(a)(2)(C) of the Act (unlike
section 110(a)(2)(J)) refers only to the
required PSD permit program, and not
to visibility protection. Moreover, as
explained below under infrastructure
element (J), EPA finds that no new
visibility obligation is ‘‘triggered’’ under
section 110(a)(2)(J) when a new NAAQS
becomes effective. EPA is therefore not
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
assessing in this action the visibility
protection provisions cited by Utah.
4. Interstate transport: Section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) requires SIPs to contain
adequate provisions prohibiting,
consistent with the provisions of this
title, any source or other type of
emissions activity within the state from
emitting any air pollutant in amounts
which will (I) contribute significantly to
nonattainment in, or interfere with
maintenance by, any other state, with
respect to any such national primary or
secondary ambient air quality standard,
or (II) interfere with measures required
to be included in the applicable
implementation plan for any other state
under part C to prevent significant
deterioration of air quality or to protect
visibility.
a. Utah’s response to this requirement:
SIP Section XXIII (Interstate Transport),
codified at R307–110–36, was written to
satisfy the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA for the 1997
NAAQS for 8-hour ozone. This SIP was
approved by EPA on March 28, 2008 at
73 FR 16543.
b. EPA Analysis: EPA approved the
State’s Interstate Transport provisions
for the 1997 ozone NAAQS on March
28, 2008 (73 FR 16543). EPA is taking
no action relevant to section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) in this proposal.
5. Interstate and International
transport provisions: Section
110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires that each SIP
shall contain adequate provisions
insuring compliance with applicable
requirements of sections 126 and 115
(relating to interstate and international
pollution abatement).
a. Utah’s response to this requirement:
Utah did not cite any specific provisions
for this requirement.
b. EPA Analysis: Section 126(a)
requires notification to affected, nearby
states of major proposed new (or
modified) sources. Sections 126(b) and
(c) pertain to petitions by affected states
to the Administrator regarding sources
violating the ‘‘interstate transport’’
provisions of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i).
Section 115 similarly pertains to
international transport of air pollution.
Utah’s rules for PSD permits IBR the
public participation requirements at 40
CFR 51.166(q)(2). (See UAC R307–405–
18). In particular, the rule incorporates
40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(iii), which requires
notice to states whose lands may be
affected by the emissions of sources
subject to PSD. This rule was submitted
to EPA and proposed for approval in the
action discussed in section IV.3 above
(74 FR 667, Jan. 7, 2009). Contingent on
approval of this rule, the Utah SIP
satisfies the requirements of section
126(a).
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Utah has no pending obligations
under sections 126(c) or 115(b),
therefore, Utah’s SIP currently meets the
requirements of those sections. The SIP
therefore meets the requirements of
110(a)(2)(D)(ii) for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS.
6. Adequate resources: Section
110(a)(2)(E) requires states to provide (i)
Necessary assurances that the state will
have adequate personnel, funding, and
authority under state law to carry out
the SIP (and is not prohibited by any
provision of federal or state law from
carrying out the SIP or portion thereof),
(ii) requires that the state comply with
the requirements respecting state boards
under section 128, and (iii) necessary
assurances that, where the state has
relied on a local or regional government,
agency, or instrumentality for the
implementation of any SIP provision,
the state has responsibility for ensuring
adequate implementation of such SIP
provision.
a. Utah’s response to this requirement:
SIP Section V (Resources), codified at
R307–110–6, commits to implement
program activities in relation to
resources provided by the annual State/
EPA Agreement and 105 grant
applications. EPA approved this SIP
originally in the early 1980’s and most
recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
SIP Section I (Legal Authority) A.1.g,
codified at R307–110–2, identifies the
statutory provisions that implement the
provisions of the CAA (Section 128)
respecting State Boards (Section 9–2–
104 UCA.) EPA approved this SIP
originally in the early 1980’s and most
recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
Section 41–6a–1642 UCA provides
the counties the authority to run their
own emissions inspection and
maintenance program, and Subsection
41–6a–1642 (2)(b)(i) UCA requires that
the counties’ emissions inspection and
maintenance program ‘‘shall be made to
attain or maintain ambient air quality
standards in the county, consistent with
the SIP and federal requirements.’’
Section X of the SIP, codified at sections
R307–110–31 to –35, outlines the
specific requirements of the automotive
inspection and maintenance program.
EPA approved this SIP section in action
on July 17, 1997 (62 FR 38213), August
1, 2005 (70 FR 44055), September 14,
2005 (70 FR 54267), and November 2,
2005 (70 FR 66264).
b. EPA Analysis: Chapter 2 of Title 19
of the Utah Code gives the DAQ and Air
Quality Board (AQB) adequate authority
to carry out the SIP. UCA 19–2–103
requires the AQB be composed and act
in accordance with section 128 of the
CAA. The State receives sections 103
and 105 grant funds through its
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Performance Partnership Grant along
with required State matching funds to
provide funding necessary to carry out
Utah’s SIP requirements. Utah’s SIP
meets the requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(E) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
7. Stationary source monitoring
system: Section 110(a)(2)(F) requires (i)
the installation, maintenance, and
replacement of equipment, and the
implementation of other necessary
steps, by owners or operators of
stationary sources to monitor emissions
from such sources, (ii) periodic reports
on the nature and amounts of emissions
and emissions-related data from such
sources, and (iii) correlation of such
reports by the state agency with any
emission limitations or standards
established pursuant to the Act, which
reports shall be available at reasonable
times for public inspection.
a. Utah’s response to this requirement:
SIP Section I (Legal Authority) A.1.f,
codified at R307–110–2, identifies the
statutory provisions that require owners
or operators of stationary sources to
install, maintain, and use emission
monitoring devices and to make
periodic reports to the State Department
of Environmental Quality (DEQ) on the
nature and amounts of emissions from
such sources. The State DEQ will make
such data available to the public as
reported and as correlated with any
applicable emission standards or
limitations (Section 19–2–104, UCA).
EPA approved this SIP originally in the
early 1980’s and most recently on June
25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
SIP Section III (Source Surveillance),
codified at R307–110–4, includes
inventory requirements, stack testing,
and plant inspections (Sections 19–2–
107 and 19–2–108, UCA, allow
inspection of air pollution sources). EPA
approved this SIP section originally in
the early 1980’s and most recently on
June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
b. EPA Analysis: Utah’s SIP meets the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F) for
the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
8. Emergency powers: Section
110(a)(2)(G) requires states to provide
for authority to address activities
causing imminent and substantial
endangerment to public health,
including contingency plans to
implement the emergency episode
provisions in their SIPs.
a. Utah’s response to this requirement:
SIP Section 1 (Legal Authority) A.1.c,
codified at R307–110–2, identifies the
statutory provisions to abate pollutant
emissions on an emergency basis to
prevent substantial endangerment to the
health of persons (Section 19–2–112,
UCA). EPA approved this SIP originally
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
in the early 1980’s and most recently on
June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
More details can be found in SIP
Section VII (Prevention of Air Pollution
Emergency Episodes), codified at R307–
110–8 (Section 19–2–112, UCA). EPA
approved this SIP originally in the early
1980’s and most recently on June 25,
2003 (68 FR 37744).
b. EPA analysis: Section 19–2–112 of
the UCA provides DEQ with general
emergency authority comparable to that
in section 303 of the Act. The SIP also
requires DEQ to follow criteria in 40
CFR 51.151 in proclaiming an
emergency episode and to develop a
contingency plan. The SIP meets the
requirements of 110(a)(2)(G) for the
1997 ozone NAAQS.
9. Future SIP revisions: Section
110(a)(2)(H) requires that SIPs provide
for revision of such plan (i) from time
to time as may be necessary to take
account of revisions of such national
primary or secondary ambient air
quality standard or the availability of
improved or more expeditious methods
of attaining such standard, and (ii),
except as provided in paragraph (3)(C),
whenever the Administrator finds on
the basis of information available to the
Administrator that the SIP is
substantially inadequate to attain the
NAAQS which it implements or to
otherwise comply with any additional
requirements under this Act.
a. Utah’s response to this requirement:
SIP Section I (Legal Authority) A.1.a,
codified at R307–110–2, identifies the
statutory provisions that allow the DAQ
to revise its plans to take account of
revisions of a NAAQS and to adopt
expeditious methods of attaining and
maintaining such standard. EPA
approved this SIP originally in the early
1980’s and most recently on June 25,
2003 (68 FR 37744).
b. EPA analysis: Section 19–2–104 of
the UCA gives the AQB sufficient
authority to meet the requirements of
110(a)(2)(H).
10. Nonattainment Area Plan or Plan
Revision under Part D: Section
110(a)(2)(I) requires that a SIP or SIP
revision for an area designated as a
nonattainment area must meet the
applicable requirements of part D of this
subchapter (relating to nonattainment
areas).
a. EPA analysis for section
110(a)(2)(I): As noted above, the specific
nonattainment area plan requirements
of section 110(a)(2)(I) are subject to the
timing requirement of section 172, not
the timing requirement of section
110(a)(1). This element is therefore not
applicable to this action. EPA will take
action on part D attainment plans
through a separate process.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
29693
11. Consultation with government
officials, public notification, PSD and
visibility protection: Section 110(a)(2)(J)
requires that each SIP meet the
applicable requirements of section 121
of this title (relating to consultation),
section 127 of this title (relating to
public notification), and part C of this
subchapter (relating to PSD of air
quality and visibility protection).
a. Utah’s response to this requirement:
SIP Section I (Legal Authority) A.2,
codified at R307–110–2, adopts
requirements for transportation
consultation (Section 174, Clean Air
Act). EPA approved this SIP originally
in the early 1980’s and most recently on
June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
SIP Section I (Legal Authority) A.1.d,
codified at R307–110–2, identifies the
statutory authority to prevent
construction, modification or operation
of any stationary source at any location
where emissions from such source will
prevent the attainment or maintenance
of a national standard or interfere with
PSD requirements. (UCA Section 19–2–
108) EPA approved this SIP originally in
the early 1980’s and most recently on
June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
SIP Section VI (Intergovernmental
Cooperation), provides a brief listing of
federal, state, and local agencies
involved in protecting air quality in
Utah. Codified at R307–110–7/EPA
approved this SIP originally in the early
1980’s and most recently on June 25,
2003 at 68 FR 37744.
SIP Section XII (Transportation
Conformity Consultation), codified at
R307–110–20, establishes the
consultation procedures on
transportation conformity issues when
preparing State plans. EPA approved
SIP Section XII, Transportation
Conformity Consultation, on September
2, 2008 (73 FR 51222).
SIP Section VIII (PSD), codified at
R307–110–9 and R307–405, describes
the program to prevent significant
deterioration of areas of the State where
the air is clean. EPA approved the PSD
SIP originally in the early 1980’s and
most recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR
37744). EPA most recently approved
R307–405 on August 18, 2004 (69 FR
51368). Utah submitted revisions to the
PSD SIP and R307–405 on September
15, 2006. Updates to the IBR date of 40
CFR 52.21 were submitted on October 1,
2007 and March 3, 2008. The October 1,
2007 update incorporates provisions in
the CFR that added NOX as a precursor
for ozone. The most recent update of the
IBR date was adopted on February 5,
2009 and will be submitted to EPA in
the near future when the final
administrative paperwork is available.
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
29694
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
EPA has not yet acted on these
submittals.
SIP Section XVI (Public Notification),
codified at R307–110–24, includes
provisions to notify the public when
NAAQS have been exceeded as per
section 127 of the CAA. EPA approved
this SIP originally in the early 1980’s
and most recently on June 25, 2003 (68
FR 37744).
SIP Section XVII (Visibility
Protection), codified at R307–110–25,
describes the program to protect
visibility, especially within the
boundaries of the five national parks
located in Utah. (Sections 19–2–101 and
104, UCA) EPA approved this SIP in
April 1997 and most recently on June
25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
SIP Section XX (Regional Haze),
codified at R307–110–28, addresses the
requirements in part C of the CAA
relating to regional haze. The SIP was
based on the recommendations of the
Grand Canyon Visibility Transport
Commission established by section
169B(f) of the CAA. (Sections 19–2–104,
UCA). The Regional Haze SIP was
submitted to EPA on December 12,
2003. Revisions to the Regional Haze
SIP were submitted on August 8, 2004;
May 8, 2006; and September 9, 2008.
EPA has not yet acted on these
submittals.
b. EPA Analysis: The State has
demonstrated that it has the authority
and rules in place to provide a process
of consultation with general purpose
local governments, designated
organizations of elected officials of local
governments and any Federal Land
Manager having authority over federal
land to which the SIP applies,
consistent with the requirements of
CAA section 121. Furthermore, SIP
section XVI, cited by Utah, satisfies the
requirements of section 127 of the Act.
The State has a SIP-approved PSD
program that incorporates by reference
the federal program at 40 CFR 52.21.
The federal program (and therefore
Utah’s SIP-approved PSD program)
automatically implements new PSD
requirements triggered by the effective
date of any new NAAQS. EPA has
further evaluated Utah’s SIP-approved
PSD program in this proposed action
under IV.3 of section 110(a)(2)(C).
Finally, with regard to the applicable
requirements for visibility protection,
EPA recognizes that states are subject to
visibility and regional haze program
requirements under part C of the act. In
the event of the establishment of a new
NAAQS, however, the visibility and
regional haze program requirements
under part C do not change. Thus we
find that there is no new visibility
obligation ‘‘triggered’’ under section
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
110(a)(2)(J) when a new NAAQS
becomes effective. In conclusion, the
Utah SIP meets the requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(J) for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS.
12. Air quality and modeling/data:
Section 110(a)(2)(K) requires that each
SIP provide for (i) the performance of
such air quality modeling as the
Administrator may prescribe for the
purpose of predicting the effect on
ambient air quality of any emissions of
any air pollutant for which the
Administrator has established a
NAAQS, and (ii) the submission, upon
request, of data related to such air
quality modeling to the Administrator.
a. Utah’s response to this requirement:
SIP Section II (Review of New and
Modified Air Pollution Sources),
codified at R307–110–3, provides that
new or modified sources of air pollution
must submit plans to the DAQ and
receive an Approval Order before
operating. (Section 19–2–104, UCA)
EPA approved this SIP originally in the
early 1980’s and most recently on June
25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
b. EPA Analysis: Utah’s SIP meets the
requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(K) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
In particular, Utah’s PSD program
incorporates by reference the federal
program at 40 CFR 52.21, including the
provision at 52.21(l)(1) requiring that
estimates of ambient air concentrations
be based on applicable air quality
models specified in Appendix W of 40
CFR part 51, and the provision at
52.21(l)(2) requiring that modification or
substitution of a model specified in
Appendix W must be approved by the
Administrator. As a result, the SIP
provides for such air quality modeling
as the Administrator has prescribed.
13. Permitting fees: Section
110(a)(2)(L) requires SIPs to require the
owner or operator of each major
stationary source to pay to the
permitting authority, as a condition of
any permit required under this act, a fee
sufficient to cover (i) the reasonable
costs of reviewing and acting upon any
application for such a permit, and (ii) if
the owner or operator receives a permit
for such source, the reasonable costs of
implementing and enforcing the terms
and conditions of any such permit (not
including any court costs or other costs
associated with any enforcement
action), until such fee requirement is
superseded with respect to such sources
by the Administrator’s approval of a fee
program under title V.
a. Utah’s response to this requirement:
SIP Section I (Legal Authority) A.1.h,
codified at R307–110–2, identifies the
statutory authority to charge a fee to
major sources to cover permit and
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
enforcement expenses. EPA approved
this SIP originally in the early 1980s
and most recently on June 25, 2003 (68
FR 37744).
b. EPA Analysis: Utah’s approved title
V operating permit program meets the
requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(L) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
Final approval of the title V operating
permit program was approved on June
8, 1995 (60 FR 30192). As discussed in
the notice proposing approval of the
title V program (60 FR 15105, Mar. 22,
1995), the State demonstrated that the
fees collected were sufficient to
administer the program.
14. Consultation/participation by
affected local entities: Section
110(a)(2)(M) requires states to provide
for consultation and participation in SIP
development by local political
subdivisions affected by the SIP.
a. Utah’s response to this requirement:
SIP Section VI (Intergovernmental
Cooperation), codified at R307–110–7,
lists federal, state, and local agencies
involved in protecting air quality in
Utah. EPA approved this SIP originally
in the early 1980’s and most recently on
June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
SIP Section XII (Transportation
Conformity Consultation), codified at
R307–110–20, establishes the
consultation procedures on
transportation conformity issues when
preparing state plans. EPA approved SIP
Section XII, Transportation Conformity
Consultation, on September 2 2008 (73
FR 51222).
b. EPA Analysis: Utah’s submittal
meets the requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(M) for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS.
V. What action is EPA taking?
In this action, EPA is proposing to
approve the following infrastructure
elements for the 1997 ozone NAAQS:
(A), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L),
and (M). EPA proposes to approve the
section 110(a)(2)(C) infrastructure
element in full for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS in the event that Utah takes one
of the actions described in the
discussion of that element; in the
alternative, EPA proposes to disapprove
the section 110(a)(2)(C) element to the
extent described and to otherwise
approve this element. EPA proposes to
conditionally approve the section
110(a)(2)(B) infrastructure element for
the 1997 ozone NAAQS based on the
formal commitment by Utah described
in the discussion of that element.
Finally, in this action, EPA is taking no
action on infrastructure elements (D)(i)
and (I) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
costs on Tribal governments or preempt
Tribal law.
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable federal regulations
(42 U.S.C. 7410(k), 40 CFR 52.02(a)).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed
action merely approves some state law
as meeting federal requirements and
disapproves other state law because it
does not meet federal requirements; this
proposed action does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
this proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999); is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and,
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have
Tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the State, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
Dated: May 16, 2011.
James B. Martin,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2011–12606 Filed 5–20–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R05–OAR–2008–0396; FRL–9307–1]
Approval, and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana;
Redesignation of the Evansville Area
to Attainment of the Fine Particulate
Matter Standard
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
On April 3, 2008, the Indiana
Department of Environmental
Management (IDEM) submitted a
request for EPA to approve the
redesignation of the Evansville, Indiana
nonattainment area to attainment of the
1997 annual fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) standard. The air quality
improvement in this area and
maintenance of the standard in this area
is attributable in substantial part to
power plant emission reductions in the
Eastern United States prompted by the
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). The
United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit (D.C.
Circuit) has remanded CAIR, but EPA
has proposed a replacement rule known
as the Transport Rule. The Evansville
area has attained the standard with only
a fraction of the reductions that the
proposed Transport Rule proposed to
require. Therefore, EPA is proposing to
approve the redesignation request for
the Evansville area, along with related
SIP revisions, if and when EPA takes
final action to promulgate the Transport
Rule, provided that the final Transport
Rule requires emission reductions that
are at least substantially equivalent to
those of the proposed Transport Rule for
purposes of maintaining the standard in
the Evansville area.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before June 22, 2011.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
29695
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2008–0396, by one of the
following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (312) 692–2551.
4. Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, Air
Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney,
Chief, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Regional Office
normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information. The
Regional Office official hours of
business are Monday through Friday,
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal
holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2008–
0396. 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, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional instructions on
submitting comments, go to Section I of
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 99 (Monday, May 23, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29688-29695]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-12606]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R08-OAR-0210-0302; FRL-9309-9]
Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions;
Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards; Utah
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed Rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve and conditionally approve the
State Implementation Plan (SIP) submissions from the State of Utah
which demonstrate that the State meets the requirements of section
110(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the National Ambient
Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) promulgated for ozone on July 18, 1997.
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires that each state adopt and submit an
``infrastructure SIP'' for the implementation, maintenance and
enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated by the EPA. The State of Utah
submitted two certifications of their Infrastructure SIP for the 1997
ozone NAAQS, one dated December 3, 2007, which was determined to be
complete on March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16205), and one dated December 21,
2009. EPA does not propose to act on the State's March 22, 2007
submission to meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the
CAA, relating to interstate transport of air pollution, for the 1997
ozone NAAQS. EPA approved the State's interstate transport SIP
submission on May 28, 2008 (73 FR 16543).
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 22, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2010-0302, by one of the following methods:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: dolan.kathy@epa.gov
Fax: (303) 312-6064 (please alert the individual listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing comments).
Mail: Director, Air Program, Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver,
Colorado 80202-1129.
Hand Delivery: Director, Air Program, Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop
Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. Such deliveries are only accepted
Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding federal holidays.
Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-
2010-0302. 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
[[Page 29689]]
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, 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,
General Information, 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 Air Program,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street,
Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to view the hard copy of the docket. You may view the hard copy
of the docket Monday through Friday, 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., excluding
federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathy Dolan, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. 303-312-6142,
dolan.kathy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Definitions
For the purpose of this document, we are giving meaning to certain
words or initials as follows:
(i) The words or initials Act or CAA mean or refer to the Clean Air
Act, unless the context indicates otherwise.
(ii) The words EPA, we, us or our mean or refer to the United
States Environmental Protection Agency.
(iii) The initials SIP mean or refer to State Implementation Plan.
Table of Contents
I. General Information
II. Background
III. What infrastructure elements are required under sections
110(a)(1) and (2)?
IV. How did the State of Utah address the infrastructure elements of
sections 110(a)(1) and (2)?
V. What action is EPA taking?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. General Information
What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
1. Submitting Confidential Business Information (CBI). Do not
submit CBI 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 on 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.
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 and organize your comments;
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; and,
Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.
II. Background
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated new NAAQS for ozone based on 8-
hour average concentrations. The 8-hour averaging period replaced the
previous 1-hour averaging period, and the level of the NAAQS was
changed from 0.12 parts per million (ppm) to 0.08 ppm (62 FR 38856). By
statute, SIPs meeting the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2)
are to be submitted by states within three years after promulgation of
a new or revised standard. Section 110(a)(2) provides basic
requirements for SIPs, including emissions inventories, monitoring, and
modeling, to assure attainment and maintenance of the standards. These
requirements are set out in several ``infrastructure elements,'' listed
in section 110(a)(2).
Section 110(a) imposes the obligation upon states to make a SIP
submission to EPA for a new or revised NAAQS, and the contents of that
submission may vary depending upon the facts and circumstances. In
particular, the data and analytical tools available at the time the
state develops and submits the SIP for a new or revised NAAQS affects
the content of the submission. The contents of such SIP submissions may
also vary depending upon what provisions the state's existing SIP
already contains. In the case of the 1997 ozone NAAQS, states typically
have met the basic program elements required in section 110(a)(2)
through earlier SIP submissions in connection with previous NAAQS. In a
guidance issued on October 2, 2007, EPA noted that, to the extent an
existing SIP already meets the section 110(a)(2) requirements, states
need only to certify that fact via a letter to EPA.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Memorandum from William T. Harnett, Director, Air Quality
Policy Division, ``Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections
110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and PM2.5
National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' (Oct. 2, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 27, 2008, EPA published a final rule entitled,
``Completeness Findings for Section 110(a) State Implementation Plans
for the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS'' (73 FR 16205). In the rule, EPA made a
finding for each State that it had submitted or had failed to submit a
complete SIP that provided the basic program elements of section
110(a)(2) necessary to implement the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. In
particular, EPA found that Utah had
[[Page 29690]]
submitted a complete SIP to meet these requirements.
III. What infrastructure elements are required under sections 110(a)(1)
and (2)?
Section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and timing requirements
for SIP submissions after a new or revised NAAQS is promulgated.
Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements the SIP must contain or
satisfy. These infrastructure elements include requirements, such as
modeling, monitoring, and emissions inventories, which are designed to
assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. The elements that are
the subject of this action are listed below.
110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and other control measures.
110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality monitoring/data system.
110(a)(2)(C): Program for enforcement of control measures.
110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate and international pollution.
110(a)(2)(E): Adequate resources and authority.
110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source monitoring and reporting.
110(a)(2)(G): Emergency powers.
110(a)(2)(H): Future SIP revisions.
110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with government officials;
public notification; and prevention of significant deterioration (PSD)
and visibility protection.
110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling/data.
110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees.
110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/participation by affected local
entities.
A detailed discussion of each of these elements is contained in the
next section.
Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not governed by
the three year submission deadline of section 110(a)(1) and are
therefore not addressed in this action. These elements relate to part D
of Title I of the CAA, and submissions to satisfy them are not due
within three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, but
rather are due at the same time nonattainment area plan requirements
are due under section 172. The two elements are: (i) Section
110(a)(2)(C) to the extent it refers to permit programs (known as
``nonattainment new source review (NSR)'') required under part D, and
(ii) section 110(a)(2)(I), pertaining to the nonattainment planning
requirements of part D. As a result, this action does not address
infrastructure elements related to the nonattainment NSR portion of
section 110(a)(2)(C) or related to 110(a)(2)(I).
This action also does not address the ``interstate transport''
requirements of element 110(a)(2)(D)(i). In a separate action, EPA
approved the State's submission to meet the requirements of
110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. (73 FR 16543).
IV. How did the State of Utah address the infrastructure elements of
sections 110(a)(1) and (2)?
1. Emission limits and other control measures: Section 110(a)(2)(A)
requires SIPs to include enforceable emission limitations and other
control measures, means, or techniques (including economic incentives
such as fees, marketable permits, and auctions of emissions rights), as
well as schedules and timetables for compliance as may be necessary or
appropriate to meet the applicable requirements of this Act.
a. Utah's response to this requirement: SIP Section I (Legal
Authority) A.1.a, codified at R307-110-2, identifies the statutory
provisions that allow adoption of standards and limitations for
attainment and maintenance of national standards. (19-2-104 and 109,
Utah Code Annotated 1953 (UCA)). EPA approved this SIP originally in
the early 1980's and most recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
b. EPA analysis: Utah's SIP meets the requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(A) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, subject to the following
clarifications. First, although Utah's certification cited its legal
authority to adopt emissions limitations for maintenance of the NAAQS,
the certification did not identify emissions limitations specific to
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS that the State has adopted and that have
been approved into the SIP. EPA notes that, among other emissions
limitations, the Utah SIP contains emissions limitations originally
developed to attain the previous 1-hour ozone standard. For the
purposes of this action, EPA is reviewing any rules originally
submitted in response to part D solely for the purposes of determining
whether they support a finding that the State has met the basic
infrastructure requirements under section 110(a)(2).
In this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove any
existing state rules with regard to director's discretion or variance
provisions. A number of states have such provisions which are contrary
to the CAA and existing EPA guidance (52 FR 45109, Nov. 24, 1987), and
the Agency plans to take action in the future to address such state
regulations. In the meantime, EPA encourages any state having a
director's discretion or variance provision which is contrary to the
CAA and EPA guidance to take steps to correct the deficiency as soon as
possible.
Finally, in this action, EPA is also not proposing to approve or
disapprove any existing state provisions with regard to excess
emissions during startup, shutdown, or malfunction (SSM) of operations
at a facility. A number of states have SSM provisions which are
contrary to the CAA and existing EPA guidance \2\ and the Agency plans
to address such state regulations in the future. In the specific case
of SSM provisions in the Utah SIP, EPA has issued a finding of
substantial inadequacy and call for a SIP revision for Utah's
``unavoidable breakdown'' rule (76 FR 21639, Apr. 18, 2011). As stated
above, though, EPA is not proposing to address SSM provisions in the
context of this action and therefore proposes to approve the Utah
certification for infrastructure element 110(a)(2)(A) for the 1997
ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Steven Herman, Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance, and Robert Perciasepe, Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation, Memorandum to EPA Air Division Directors,
``State Implementation Plans (SIPs): Policy Regarding Excess
Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup, and Shutdown.'' (Sept. 20,
1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Ambient air quality monitoring/data system: Section 110(a)(2)(B)
requires SIPs to provide for establishment and operation of appropriate
devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to (i) monitor,
compile, and analyze data on ambient air quality, and (ii) upon
request, make such data available to the Administrator.
a. Utah's response to this requirement: SIP Section IV (Ambient Air
Monitoring Program), codified at R307-110-5, provides a brief
description of the purposes of the air monitoring program. EPA approved
this SIP originally in the early 1980's and most recently on June 25,
2003 (68 FR 37744).
b. EPA analysis: Utah's air monitoring programs and data systems do
not meet the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(B) for the 1997
ozone NAAQS. In particular, deficiencies in Utah's monitoring network
plan are detailed in a memorandum in the docket for this action. Utah
has formally committed to submitting an adequate annual monitoring plan
not later than one year after the date of final action on Utah's
infrastructure SIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. The specific measures Utah
will take are detailed in the commitment letter, which may be found in
the docket for this action. EPA has reviewed these measures and agrees
that they will rectify the deficiencies in Utah's ambient air
monitoring network.
[[Page 29691]]
As a result of Utah's formal commitment, EPA proposes to conditionally
approve the Utah infrastructure SIP for section 110(a)(2)(B) for the
1997 ozone NAAQS. If, however, Utah does not implement the measures
specified in its commitment within one year after the date of final
action on Utah's infrastructure SIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, EPA's
conditional approval will automatically revert to disapproval of the
infrastructure SIP for section 110(a)(2)(B) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
3. Program for enforcement of control measures: Section
110(a)(2)(C) requires SIPs to include a program to provide for the
enforcement of the measures described in subparagraph (A), and
regulation of the modification and construction of any stationary
source within the areas covered by the plan as necessary to assure that
NAAQS are achieved, including a permit program as required in parts C
and D.
a. Utah's response to this requirement: SIP Section I (Legal
Authority) A.1.b, identifies the statutory provisions that allow the
Division of Air Quality (DAQ) to enforce applicable laws, regulations
and standards and seek injunctive relief. (Sections 19-2-104 and 19-2-
115, UCA.)
SIP Section I (Legal Authority) A.1.d, codified at R307-110-2,
identifies the statutory provisions that allow the DAQ to prevent
construction, modification or operation of any stationary source at any
location where emissions from such source will prevent the attainment
or maintenance of a national standard or interfere with PSD
requirements. (Authority Utah Code Section 19-2-108) EPA approved this
SIP originally in the early 1980's and most recently on June 25, 2003
(68 FR 37744).
SIP Section VIII (PSD), codified at R307-110-9 and R307-405,
describes the program to prevent significant deterioration of areas of
the State where the air is clean. EPA approved the PSD SIP originally
in the early 1980's and most recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
EPA most recently approved R307-405 on August 19, 2004 (69 FR 51368).
Utah submitted revisions to the PSD SIP and R307-405 on September 15,
2006. Updates to the incorporation by reference (IBR) date of 40 CFR
52.21 were submitted on October 1, 2007 and March 3, 2008. The October
1, 2007 update incorporated provisions in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) that added NOX as a precursor for ozone.
The most recent update of the IBR date was adopted on February 5, 2009
and will be submitted to EPA in the near future when the final
administrative paperwork is available. EPA has not yet acted on these
submittals.
SIP Section XVII (Visibility protection), codified at R307-10-25,
describes the program to protect visibility, especially within the
boundaries of the five national parks located in Utah. (Sections 19-2-
101 and 104, UCA) EPA approved this SIP in April 1997 and most recently
on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
b. EPA analysis: To generally meet the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(C), the State is required to have SIP-approved PSD,
nonattainment New Source Review (NSR), and minor NSR permitting
programs adequate to implement the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. As
explained above, in this action EPA is not evaluating nonattainment
related provisions, such as the nonattainment NSR program required by
part D of the Act. EPA is evaluating the State's PSD program as
required by part C of the Act, and the State's minor NSR program as
required by 110(a)(2)(C).
Utah has a SIP-approved PSD program that meets the general
requirements of part C of the Act (51 FR 31125). Below, EPA considers
requirements for the PSD program specific to the 1997 ozone NAAQS, but
first considers the effects of recent rules regulating greenhouse gases
on Utah's PSD program.
Greenhouse Gas Regulation
EPA notes a potential inconsistency between Utah's December 3, 2007
and December 21, 2009 infrastructure SIP certifications and EPA's
recently promulgated rule, ``Limitation of Approval of Prevention of
Significant Deterioration Provisions Concerning Greenhouse Gas
Emitting-Sources in State Implementation Plans'' (``PSD SIP Narrowing
Rule''), 75 FR 82536 (Dec. 30, 2010). In the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule,
EPA withdrew its previous approval of Utah's PSD program to the extent
that it applied PSD permitting to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
increases from GHG-emitting sources below thresholds set in EPA's June
3, 2010 ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V
Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule'' (``Tailoring Rule''), 75 FR 31514. EPA
withdrew its approval on the basis that the State lacked sufficient
resources to issue PSD permits to such sources at the statutory
thresholds in effect in the previously-approved PSD program. After the
PSD SIP Narrowing Rule, the portion of Utah's PSD SIP from which EPA
withdrew its approval had the status of having been submitted to EPA
but not yet acted upon. In its December 3, 2007 and December 21, 2009
certifications, Utah relied on its PSD program as approved at that
date--which was before December 30, 2010, the effective date of the PSD
SIP Narrowing Rule--to satisfy the requirements of infrastructure
element 110(a)(2)(C). Given EPA's basis for the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule,
EPA proposes approval of the Utah infrastructure SIP for infrastructure
element (C) if either the State clarifies (or modifies) its
certification to make clear that the State relies only on the portion
of the PSD program that remains approved after the PSD SIP Narrowing
Rule issued on December 30, 2010, and for which the State has
sufficient resources to implement, or the State acts to withdraw from
EPA consideration the remaining portion of its PSD program submission
that would have applied PSD permitting to GHG sources below the
Tailoring Rule thresholds. In the alternative, if Utah does not take
either action, EPA proposes to disapprove the infrastructure SIP to the
extent it incorporates that portion of the previously-approved PSD
program from which EPA withdrew its approval in the PSD SIP Narrowing
Rule, which is the portion which would have applied PSD permitting
requirements to GHG emissions increases from GHG-emitting sources below
the Tailoring Rule thresholds. Such disapproval, if finalized, would
not result in a need for Utah to resubmit a SIP revision, sanctions, or
a federal implementation plan (FIP).
Regulation of Ozone Precursors
In order for the State's SIP-approved PSD program to satisfy the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, the
program must properly regulate ozone precursors. On November 29, 2005,
EPA promulgated the phase 2 implementation rule for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS (Phase 2 Rule), which includes requirements for PSD programs to
treat nitrogen oxides (NOX) as a precursor for ozone (72 FR
71612). The Phase 2 Rule accordingly updated the federal program at 40
CFR 52.21 to meet these requirements, effective January 30, 2006. On
August 7, 2008, Utah submitted to EPA revisions to the State's PSD
program. The State's PSD program, as submitted, for the most part
incorporates by reference the federal program at 40 CFR 52.21. The
August 7, 2008 submittal updates the date of incorporation by reference
to July 1, 2007, after the effective date of the Phase 2 Rule, and
thereby implementing the requirements of the rule. On January 7, 2009,
EPA proposed approval of the August 7, 2008 submittal (74 FR 667). We
anticipate finalizing that approval in conjunction with finalizing
approval of
[[Page 29692]]
Utah's infrastructure SIP. Contingent on that approval, Utah's PSD
program meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) for the 1997
ozone NAAQS.
Minor NSR
The State has a SIP-approved minor NSR program, adopted under
section 110(a)(2)(C) of the Act that regulates emissions of ozone and
its precursors. The minor NSR program is found in section II of the
Utah SIP, and was originally approved by EPA as section 2 of the SIP
(See 68 FR 37744, June 25, 2003). Since approval of the minor NSR
program, the State and EPA have relied on the program to assure that
new and modified sources not captured by the major NSR permitting
programs do not interfere with attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS.
In this action, EPA is proposing to approve Utah's infrastructure
SIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS with respect to the general requirement in
section 110(a)(2)(C) to include a program in the SIP that regulates the
modification and construction of any stationary source as necessary to
assure that the NAAQS are achieved. EPA is not proposing to approve or
disapprove the State's existing minor NSR program itself to the extent
that it is inconsistent with EPA's regulations governing this program.
A number of states may have minor NSR provisions that are contrary to
the existing EPA regulations for this program. EPA intends to work with
states to reconcile state minor NSR programs with EPA's regulatory
provisions for the program. The statutory requirements of section
110(a)(2)(C) provide for considerable flexibility in designing minor
NSR programs, and it may be time to revisit the regulatory requirements
for this program to give the states an appropriate level of flexibility
to design a program that meets their particular air quality concerns,
while assuring reasonable consistency across the country in protecting
the NAAQS with respect to new and modified minor sources.
Visibility Protection
Finally, Utah cited SIP provisions relating to visibility
protection. With regards to part C of title I of the Act, section
110(a)(2)(C) of the Act (unlike section 110(a)(2)(J)) refers only to
the required PSD permit program, and not to visibility protection.
Moreover, as explained below under infrastructure element (J), EPA
finds that no new visibility obligation is ``triggered'' under section
110(a)(2)(J) when a new NAAQS becomes effective. EPA is therefore not
assessing in this action the visibility protection provisions cited by
Utah.
4. Interstate transport: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requires SIPs to
contain adequate provisions prohibiting, consistent with the provisions
of this title, any source or other type of emissions activity within
the state from emitting any air pollutant in amounts which will (I)
contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with
maintenance by, any other state, with respect to any such national
primary or secondary ambient air quality standard, or (II) interfere
with measures required to be included in the applicable implementation
plan for any other state under part C to prevent significant
deterioration of air quality or to protect visibility.
a. Utah's response to this requirement: SIP Section XXIII
(Interstate Transport), codified at R307-110-36, was written to satisfy
the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA for the 1997
NAAQS for 8-hour ozone. This SIP was approved by EPA on March 28, 2008
at 73 FR 16543.
b. EPA Analysis: EPA approved the State's Interstate Transport
provisions for the 1997 ozone NAAQS on March 28, 2008 (73 FR 16543).
EPA is taking no action relevant to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) in this
proposal.
5. Interstate and International transport provisions: Section
110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires that each SIP shall contain adequate
provisions insuring compliance with applicable requirements of sections
126 and 115 (relating to interstate and international pollution
abatement).
a. Utah's response to this requirement: Utah did not cite any
specific provisions for this requirement.
b. EPA Analysis: Section 126(a) requires notification to affected,
nearby states of major proposed new (or modified) sources. Sections
126(b) and (c) pertain to petitions by affected states to the
Administrator regarding sources violating the ``interstate transport''
provisions of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). Section 115 similarly pertains
to international transport of air pollution.
Utah's rules for PSD permits IBR the public participation
requirements at 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2). (See UAC R307-405-18). In
particular, the rule incorporates 40 CFR 51.166(q)(2)(iii), which
requires notice to states whose lands may be affected by the emissions
of sources subject to PSD. This rule was submitted to EPA and proposed
for approval in the action discussed in section IV.3 above (74 FR 667,
Jan. 7, 2009). Contingent on approval of this rule, the Utah SIP
satisfies the requirements of section 126(a).
Utah has no pending obligations under sections 126(c) or 115(b),
therefore, Utah's SIP currently meets the requirements of those
sections. The SIP therefore meets the requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(ii)
for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
6. Adequate resources: Section 110(a)(2)(E) requires states to
provide (i) Necessary assurances that the state will have adequate
personnel, funding, and authority under state law to carry out the SIP
(and is not prohibited by any provision of federal or state law from
carrying out the SIP or portion thereof), (ii) requires that the state
comply with the requirements respecting state boards under section 128,
and (iii) necessary assurances that, where the state has relied on a
local or regional government, agency, or instrumentality for the
implementation of any SIP provision, the state has responsibility for
ensuring adequate implementation of such SIP provision.
a. Utah's response to this requirement: SIP Section V (Resources),
codified at R307-110-6, commits to implement program activities in
relation to resources provided by the annual State/EPA Agreement and
105 grant applications. EPA approved this SIP originally in the early
1980's and most recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
SIP Section I (Legal Authority) A.1.g, codified at R307-110-2,
identifies the statutory provisions that implement the provisions of
the CAA (Section 128) respecting State Boards (Section 9-2-104 UCA.)
EPA approved this SIP originally in the early 1980's and most recently
on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
Section 41-6a-1642 UCA provides the counties the authority to run
their own emissions inspection and maintenance program, and Subsection
41-6a-1642 (2)(b)(i) UCA requires that the counties' emissions
inspection and maintenance program ``shall be made to attain or
maintain ambient air quality standards in the county, consistent with
the SIP and federal requirements.'' Section X of the SIP, codified at
sections R307-110-31 to -35, outlines the specific requirements of the
automotive inspection and maintenance program. EPA approved this SIP
section in action on July 17, 1997 (62 FR 38213), August 1, 2005 (70 FR
44055), September 14, 2005 (70 FR 54267), and November 2, 2005 (70 FR
66264).
b. EPA Analysis: Chapter 2 of Title 19 of the Utah Code gives the
DAQ and Air Quality Board (AQB) adequate authority to carry out the
SIP. UCA 19-2-103 requires the AQB be composed and act in accordance
with section 128 of the CAA. The State receives sections 103 and 105
grant funds through its
[[Page 29693]]
Performance Partnership Grant along with required State matching funds
to provide funding necessary to carry out Utah's SIP requirements.
Utah's SIP meets the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(E) for the
1997 ozone NAAQS.
7. Stationary source monitoring system: Section 110(a)(2)(F)
requires (i) the installation, maintenance, and replacement of
equipment, and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners
or operators of stationary sources to monitor emissions from such
sources, (ii) periodic reports on the nature and amounts of emissions
and emissions-related data from such sources, and (iii) correlation of
such reports by the state agency with any emission limitations or
standards established pursuant to the Act, which reports shall be
available at reasonable times for public inspection.
a. Utah's response to this requirement: SIP Section I (Legal
Authority) A.1.f, codified at R307-110-2, identifies the statutory
provisions that require owners or operators of stationary sources to
install, maintain, and use emission monitoring devices and to make
periodic reports to the State Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ)
on the nature and amounts of emissions from such sources. The State DEQ
will make such data available to the public as reported and as
correlated with any applicable emission standards or limitations
(Section 19-2-104, UCA). EPA approved this SIP originally in the early
1980's and most recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
SIP Section III (Source Surveillance), codified at R307-110-4,
includes inventory requirements, stack testing, and plant inspections
(Sections 19-2-107 and 19-2-108, UCA, allow inspection of air pollution
sources). EPA approved this SIP section originally in the early 1980's
and most recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
b. EPA Analysis: Utah's SIP meets the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(F) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
8. Emergency powers: Section 110(a)(2)(G) requires states to
provide for authority to address activities causing imminent and
substantial endangerment to public health, including contingency plans
to implement the emergency episode provisions in their SIPs.
a. Utah's response to this requirement: SIP Section 1 (Legal
Authority) A.1.c, codified at R307-110-2, identifies the statutory
provisions to abate pollutant emissions on an emergency basis to
prevent substantial endangerment to the health of persons (Section 19-
2-112, UCA). EPA approved this SIP originally in the early 1980's and
most recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
More details can be found in SIP Section VII (Prevention of Air
Pollution Emergency Episodes), codified at R307-110-8 (Section 19-2-
112, UCA). EPA approved this SIP originally in the early 1980's and
most recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
b. EPA analysis: Section 19-2-112 of the UCA provides DEQ with
general emergency authority comparable to that in section 303 of the
Act. The SIP also requires DEQ to follow criteria in 40 CFR 51.151 in
proclaiming an emergency episode and to develop a contingency plan. The
SIP meets the requirements of 110(a)(2)(G) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
9. Future SIP revisions: Section 110(a)(2)(H) requires that SIPs
provide for revision of such plan (i) from time to time as may be
necessary to take account of revisions of such national primary or
secondary ambient air quality standard or the availability of improved
or more expeditious methods of attaining such standard, and (ii),
except as provided in paragraph (3)(C), whenever the Administrator
finds on the basis of information available to the Administrator that
the SIP is substantially inadequate to attain the NAAQS which it
implements or to otherwise comply with any additional requirements
under this Act.
a. Utah's response to this requirement: SIP Section I (Legal
Authority) A.1.a, codified at R307-110-2, identifies the statutory
provisions that allow the DAQ to revise its plans to take account of
revisions of a NAAQS and to adopt expeditious methods of attaining and
maintaining such standard. EPA approved this SIP originally in the
early 1980's and most recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
b. EPA analysis: Section 19-2-104 of the UCA gives the AQB
sufficient authority to meet the requirements of 110(a)(2)(H).
10. Nonattainment Area Plan or Plan Revision under Part D: Section
110(a)(2)(I) requires that a SIP or SIP revision for an area designated
as a nonattainment area must meet the applicable requirements of part D
of this subchapter (relating to nonattainment areas).
a. EPA analysis for section 110(a)(2)(I): As noted above, the
specific nonattainment area plan requirements of section 110(a)(2)(I)
are subject to the timing requirement of section 172, not the timing
requirement of section 110(a)(1). This element is therefore not
applicable to this action. EPA will take action on part D attainment
plans through a separate process.
11. Consultation with government officials, public notification,
PSD and visibility protection: Section 110(a)(2)(J) requires that each
SIP meet the applicable requirements of section 121 of this title
(relating to consultation), section 127 of this title (relating to
public notification), and part C of this subchapter (relating to PSD of
air quality and visibility protection).
a. Utah's response to this requirement: SIP Section I (Legal
Authority) A.2, codified at R307-110-2, adopts requirements for
transportation consultation (Section 174, Clean Air Act). EPA approved
this SIP originally in the early 1980's and most recently on June 25,
2003 (68 FR 37744).
SIP Section I (Legal Authority) A.1.d, codified at R307-110-2,
identifies the statutory authority to prevent construction,
modification or operation of any stationary source at any location
where emissions from such source will prevent the attainment or
maintenance of a national standard or interfere with PSD requirements.
(UCA Section 19-2-108) EPA approved this SIP originally in the early
1980's and most recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
SIP Section VI (Intergovernmental Cooperation), provides a brief
listing of federal, state, and local agencies involved in protecting
air quality in Utah. Codified at R307-110-7/EPA approved this SIP
originally in the early 1980's and most recently on June 25, 2003 at 68
FR 37744.
SIP Section XII (Transportation Conformity Consultation), codified
at R307-110-20, establishes the consultation procedures on
transportation conformity issues when preparing State plans. EPA
approved SIP Section XII, Transportation Conformity Consultation, on
September 2, 2008 (73 FR 51222).
SIP Section VIII (PSD), codified at R307-110-9 and R307-405,
describes the program to prevent significant deterioration of areas of
the State where the air is clean. EPA approved the PSD SIP originally
in the early 1980's and most recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
EPA most recently approved R307-405 on August 18, 2004 (69 FR 51368).
Utah submitted revisions to the PSD SIP and R307-405 on September 15,
2006. Updates to the IBR date of 40 CFR 52.21 were submitted on October
1, 2007 and March 3, 2008. The October 1, 2007 update incorporates
provisions in the CFR that added NOX as a precursor for
ozone. The most recent update of the IBR date was adopted on February
5, 2009 and will be submitted to EPA in the near future when the final
administrative paperwork is available.
[[Page 29694]]
EPA has not yet acted on these submittals.
SIP Section XVI (Public Notification), codified at R307-110-24,
includes provisions to notify the public when NAAQS have been exceeded
as per section 127 of the CAA. EPA approved this SIP originally in the
early 1980's and most recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
SIP Section XVII (Visibility Protection), codified at R307-110-25,
describes the program to protect visibility, especially within the
boundaries of the five national parks located in Utah. (Sections 19-2-
101 and 104, UCA) EPA approved this SIP in April 1997 and most recently
on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
SIP Section XX (Regional Haze), codified at R307-110-28, addresses
the requirements in part C of the CAA relating to regional haze. The
SIP was based on the recommendations of the Grand Canyon Visibility
Transport Commission established by section 169B(f) of the CAA.
(Sections 19-2-104, UCA). The Regional Haze SIP was submitted to EPA on
December 12, 2003. Revisions to the Regional Haze SIP were submitted on
August 8, 2004; May 8, 2006; and September 9, 2008. EPA has not yet
acted on these submittals.
b. EPA Analysis: The State has demonstrated that it has the
authority and rules in place to provide a process of consultation with
general purpose local governments, designated organizations of elected
officials of local governments and any Federal Land Manager having
authority over federal land to which the SIP applies, consistent with
the requirements of CAA section 121. Furthermore, SIP section XVI,
cited by Utah, satisfies the requirements of section 127 of the Act.
The State has a SIP-approved PSD program that incorporates by
reference the federal program at 40 CFR 52.21. The federal program (and
therefore Utah's SIP-approved PSD program) automatically implements new
PSD requirements triggered by the effective date of any new NAAQS. EPA
has further evaluated Utah's SIP-approved PSD program in this proposed
action under IV.3 of section 110(a)(2)(C).
Finally, with regard to the applicable requirements for visibility
protection, EPA recognizes that states are subject to visibility and
regional haze program requirements under part C of the act. In the
event of the establishment of a new NAAQS, however, the visibility and
regional haze program requirements under part C do not change. Thus we
find that there is no new visibility obligation ``triggered'' under
section 110(a)(2)(J) when a new NAAQS becomes effective. In conclusion,
the Utah SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(J) for the
1997 ozone NAAQS.
12. Air quality and modeling/data: Section 110(a)(2)(K) requires
that each SIP provide for (i) the performance of such air quality
modeling as the Administrator may prescribe for the purpose of
predicting the effect on ambient air quality of any emissions of any
air pollutant for which the Administrator has established a NAAQS, and
(ii) the submission, upon request, of data related to such air quality
modeling to the Administrator.
a. Utah's response to this requirement: SIP Section II (Review of
New and Modified Air Pollution Sources), codified at R307-110-3,
provides that new or modified sources of air pollution must submit
plans to the DAQ and receive an Approval Order before operating.
(Section 19-2-104, UCA) EPA approved this SIP originally in the early
1980's and most recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
b. EPA Analysis: Utah's SIP meets the requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(K) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. In particular, Utah's PSD
program incorporates by reference the federal program at 40 CFR 52.21,
including the provision at 52.21(l)(1) requiring that estimates of
ambient air concentrations be based on applicable air quality models
specified in Appendix W of 40 CFR part 51, and the provision at
52.21(l)(2) requiring that modification or substitution of a model
specified in Appendix W must be approved by the Administrator. As a
result, the SIP provides for such air quality modeling as the
Administrator has prescribed.
13. Permitting fees: Section 110(a)(2)(L) requires SIPs to require
the owner or operator of each major stationary source to pay to the
permitting authority, as a condition of any permit required under this
act, a fee sufficient to cover (i) the reasonable costs of reviewing
and acting upon any application for such a permit, and (ii) if the
owner or operator receives a permit for such source, the reasonable
costs of implementing and enforcing the terms and conditions of any
such permit (not including any court costs or other costs associated
with any enforcement action), until such fee requirement is superseded
with respect to such sources by the Administrator's approval of a fee
program under title V.
a. Utah's response to this requirement: SIP Section I (Legal
Authority) A.1.h, codified at R307-110-2, identifies the statutory
authority to charge a fee to major sources to cover permit and
enforcement expenses. EPA approved this SIP originally in the early
1980s and most recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
b. EPA Analysis: Utah's approved title V operating permit program
meets the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(L) for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS. Final approval of the title V operating permit program was
approved on June 8, 1995 (60 FR 30192). As discussed in the notice
proposing approval of the title V program (60 FR 15105, Mar. 22, 1995),
the State demonstrated that the fees collected were sufficient to
administer the program.
14. Consultation/participation by affected local entities: Section
110(a)(2)(M) requires states to provide for consultation and
participation in SIP development by local political subdivisions
affected by the SIP.
a. Utah's response to this requirement: SIP Section VI
(Intergovernmental Cooperation), codified at R307-110-7, lists federal,
state, and local agencies involved in protecting air quality in Utah.
EPA approved this SIP originally in the early 1980's and most recently
on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
SIP Section XII (Transportation Conformity Consultation), codified
at R307-110-20, establishes the consultation procedures on
transportation conformity issues when preparing state plans. EPA
approved SIP Section XII, Transportation Conformity Consultation, on
September 2 2008 (73 FR 51222).
b. EPA Analysis: Utah's submittal meets the requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(M) for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
V. What action is EPA taking?
In this action, EPA is proposing to approve the following
infrastructure elements for the 1997 ozone NAAQS: (A), (D)(ii), (E),
(F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). EPA proposes to approve the
section 110(a)(2)(C) infrastructure element in full for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS in the event that Utah takes one of the actions described in the
discussion of that element; in the alternative, EPA proposes to
disapprove the section 110(a)(2)(C) element to the extent described and
to otherwise approve this element. EPA proposes to conditionally
approve the section 110(a)(2)(B) infrastructure element for the 1997
ozone NAAQS based on the formal commitment by Utah described in the
discussion of that element. Finally, in this action, EPA is taking no
action on infrastructure elements (D)(i) and (I) for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS.
[[Page 29695]]
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations (42 U.S.C. 7410(k), 40 CFR 52.02(a)). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely approves some state law as meeting federal
requirements and disapproves other state law because it does not meet
federal requirements; this proposed action does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this
proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); is not an
economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety
risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and,
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have Tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,
Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: May 16, 2011.
James B. Martin,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2011-12606 Filed 5-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P