Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Utah; Revisions to UAC Rule 401-Permit: New and Modified Sources, 37859-37862 [2012-15476]
Download as PDF
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 122 / Monday, June 25, 2012 / Proposed Rules
contain more than one emissions unit.
For a petroleum refinery, there are
several categories of process units that
could include: those that separate and/
or distill petroleum feedstocks; those
that change molecular structures;
petroleum treating processes; auxiliary
facilities, such as steam generators and
hydrogen production units; and those
that load, unload, blend or store
intermediate or completed products.
SO2 means sulfur dioxide.
Startup means the setting in operation
of an affected facility for any purpose.
(3) Reasonable Progress Measures. On
June 7, 2011, EPA and HOVENSA
entered into a Consent Decree (CD) in
the U.S. District Court for the Virgin
Islands to resolve alleged Clean Air Act
violations at its St. Croix, Virgin Islands
facility. The CD requires HOVENSA,
among other things, to achieve emission
limits and install new pollution controls
pursuant to a schedule for compliance.
The measures required by the CD are
expected to reduce emissions of NOX by
5,031 tons per year (tpy) and SO2 by
3,460 tpy. The emission limitations,
pollution controls, schedules for
compliance, reporting, and
recordkeeping provisions of the
HOVENSA CD constitute an element of
the long term strategy and address the
reasonable progress provisions of 40
CFR 51.308(d)(1). Should the existing
federally enforceable HOVENSA CD be
revised, EPA will reevaluate, and if
necessary, revise the FIP after public
notice and comment.
(4) HOVENSA requirement for
notification and four factor analysis.
HOVENSA must notify EPA 60 days in
advance of startup and resumption of
operation of refinery process units at the
HOVENSA, St. Croix, Virgin Islands
facility. HOVENSA shall submit such
notice to the Director of the Clean Air
and Sustainability Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
Region 2, 290 Broadway, 25th Floor,
New York, New York, 10007–1866.
HOVENSA’s notification to EPA that it
intends to start up refinery process units
must include a complete analysis of
reasonable measures needed to comply
with regional haze requirements. EPA
will revise the FIP as necessary, after
public notice and comment, in
accordance with regional haze
requirements including the ‘‘reasonable
progress’’ provisions in 40 CFR
51.308(d)(1). HOVENSA will be
required to install any controls that are
required by the revised FIP as
expeditiously as practicable, but no later
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:54 Jun 22, 2012
Jkt 226001
than 5 years after the effective date of
the revised FIP.
[FR Doc. 2012–15463 Filed 6–22–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R08–OAR–2012–0168; FRL–9692–2]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Utah;
Revisions to UAC Rule 401—Permit:
New and Modified Sources
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revisions submitted by the State of Utah
on April 17, 2008 and partially approve
SIP revisions submitted by the State of
Utah on September 15, 2006. The
revisions contain new rules in Utah’s
Title 307 Rule 401 (Permit: New and
Modified Sources). The intended effect
of this action is to propose to approve
the rules that are consistent with the
Clean Air Act (CAA.) This action is
being taken under sections 110 and 112
of the CAA.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before July 25, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08–
OAR–2012–0168, by one of the
following methods:
• www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Email: leone.kevin@epa.gov.
• Fax: (303) 312–6064 (please alert
the individual listed in FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing
comments).
• Mail: Carl Daly, Director, Air
Program, Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P–
AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver,
Colorado 80202–1129.
• Hand Delivery: Carl Daly, Director,
Air Program, Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P–
AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver,
Colorado 80202–1129. Such deliveries
are only accepted Monday through
Friday, 8:00 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–2012–
0168. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
37859
docket without change and may be
made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or email. The www.regulations.gov Web
site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an email
comment directly to EPA, without going
through www.regulations.gov, your
email address will be automatically
captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public
docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact
information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
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 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. Publiclyavailable docket materials are available
either electronically in
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, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.
E:\FR\FM\25JNP1.SGM
25JNP1
37860
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 122 / Monday, June 25, 2012 / Proposed Rules
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kevin Leone, Air Program, Mailcode
8P–AR, Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop
Street, Denver, Colorado 80202–1129,
(303) 312–6227, or leone.kevin@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. General Information
II. Background
III. What Authorities Apply to EPA’s
Proposed Action
IV. EPA’s Analysis and Proposed Action on
SIP Revisions
V. Summary of Proposed Actions
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
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 HAP mean or refer to
Hazardous Air Pollutant.
(iv) The initials MACT mean or refer
to Maximum Achievable Control
Technology.
(v) The initials NAAQS mean or refer
to National Ambient Air Quality
Standards.
(vi) The initials NSR mean or refer to
New Source Review.
(vii) The initials SIP mean or refer to
State Implementation Plan.
(viii) The words State or Utah mean
the State of Utah, unless the context
indicates otherwise.
(ix) The initials UAC mean or refer to
the Utah Administrative Code.
I. General Information
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
A. What should I consider as I prepare
my comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this
information to EPA through
www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly
mark the part or all of the information
that you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information in a disk or CD–ROM that
you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the
disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then
identify electronically within the disk or
CD–ROM the specific information that
is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that
includes information claimed as CBI, a
copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked
will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:54 Jun 22, 2012
Jkt 226001
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments.
When submitting comments, remember
to:
a. Identify the rulemaking by docket
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date and page number).
b. Follow directions—The agency may
ask you to respond to specific questions
or organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.
c. Explain why you agree or disagree;
suggest alternatives and substitute
language for your requested changes.
d. Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
e. If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
f. Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns, and suggest
alternatives.
g. Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats.
h. Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
II. Background
On September 20, 1999, the State of
Utah submitted a renumbering and
recodification of its Utah Administrative
Code (UAC) rules within the Utah SIP.
EPA took final action to approve
portions of this submittal on February
13, 2006 (71 FR 7670). In that action
EPA approved the recodification of
R307–413–7 (Exemption from Notice of
Intent Requirements for Used Oil
Burned for Energy Recovery, previously
found under R307–7–2 and 3). On
September 15, 2006, the State of Utah
again submitted a renumbering and
recodification of its UAC rules within
the Utah SIP which renumbered R307–
413–7 to R307–401–14 (Used Oil
Burned for Energy Recovery). We are
proposing to approve this renumbering
in this action.
On April 17, 2008, the State of Utah
submitted a revision to R307–401–14
which changed the definition of
‘‘Boiler.’’ We are proposing to approve
this definition change in this action.
On October 1, 1990, R307–6 (De
minimis Emissions from Air Strippers
and Soil Venting Projects) was approved
into the Utah SIP. On August 14, 1998,
EPA approved revisions to R307–6 (63
FR 43624). On January 8, 1999, Utah
submitted substantive revisions to
R307–6, which also renumbered R307–
6 to R307–413–8 and R307–413–9. EPA
did not act on this submittal. On
September 15, 2006, Utah submitted
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
revisions which moved R307–413–8 and
R307–413–9 to R307–401–15 (Air
Strippers and Soil Venting Projects) and
R307–401–16 (De minimis Emissions
from Soil Aeration Projects). Utah’s
January 8, 1999, submittal is superceded
by the September 15, 2006, submittal.
EPA is proposing to conditionally
approve R307–401–15 and approve
R307–401–16 as submitted on
September 15, 2006, in this action.
All other portions of the September
15, 2006, submittal not addressed in this
action will be addressed at a later date.
III. What Authorities Apply to EPA’s
Proposed Action
Section 110(l) of the CAA states,
‘‘Each revision to an implementation
plan submitted by a State under this Act
shall be adopted by such State after
reasonable notice and public hearing.
The Administrator shall not approve a
revision to a plan if the revision would
interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress (as defined
in section 171), or any other applicable
requirement of this Act.’’
The states’ obligation to comply with
each of the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) is
considered as ‘‘any applicable
requirement(s) concerning attainment.’’
A demonstration is necessary to show
that this revision will not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of the
NAAQS, including those for ozone,
particulate matter, carbon monoxide,
sulfur dioxide, lead, nitrogen oxides or
any other requirement of the Act.
The CAA at section 110(a)(2)(C)
requires states to include a minor New
Source Review (NSR) program in their
SIP to regulate modifications and new
construction of stationary sources
within the area as necessary to assure
the NAAQS are achieved. EPA’s
implementing regulations at 40 CFR
51.160–164 are intended to ensure that
new source growth is consistent with
maintenance of the NAAQS and 40 CFR
51.160(e) requires states to identify
types and sizes of facilities which will
be subject to review under their minor
NSR program. For sources identified
under 40 CFR 51.160(e), section
51.160(a) requires that the SIP include
legally enforceable procedures that
enable a state or local agency to
determine whether construction or
modification of a facility, building,
structure or installation, or combination
of these will result in a violation of
applicable portions of the control
strategy; or interference with attainment
or maintenance of a national standard in
the state in which the proposed source
(or modification) is located or in a
E:\FR\FM\25JNP1.SGM
25JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 122 / Monday, June 25, 2012 / Proposed Rules
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
neighboring state. Section 110(i) of the
CAA specifically precludes states from
changing the requirements of the SIP
except through SIP revisions approved
by EPA. SIP revisions will be approved
by EPA only if they meet all
requirements of section 110 of the CAA
and the implementing regulations at 40
CFR part 51. See CAA section 110(l); 40
CFR 51.104.
EPA recognizes that, under the
applicable Federal regulations, states
have broad discretion to determine the
scope of their minor NSR programs as
needed to attain and maintain the
NAAQS. The states have significant
discretion to tailor minor NSR
requirements that are consistent with
the requirements of 40 CFR part 51.
States may also provide a rationale for
why the rules are at least as stringent as
the 40 CFR part 51 requirements where
the revisions are different from those in
40 CFR part 51. For example, states may
exempt from minor new source review
certain categories of changes based on
de minimis or administrative necessity
grounds in accordance with the criteria
set out in Alabama Power Co. v. Costle,
636 F.2d 323, 360–361 (D.C. Cir. 1979).
De minimis sources are presumed not to
have an impact and their emissions
would not prevent or interfere with
attainment of the NAAQS, even within
nonattainment areas.
Since there are no ambient air quality
standards for air toxics, the area’s
compliance with any applicable
maximum achievable control
technology (MACT) standards, as well
as any Federal mobile source control
requirements under CAA sections 112
or 202(l) would constitute an acceptable
demonstration of noninterference for air
toxics. A revision to the SIP cannot
interfere with any federally mandated
program such as a MACT standard (or
related section 112 requirements).
IV. EPA’s Analysis and Proposed
Action on SIP Revisions
In this proposed rulemaking, we are
proposing to approve the renumbering
of R307–413–7 to R307–401–14 (Used
Oil Burned for Energy Recovery) as
submitted by the State of Utah on
September 15, 2006, because this
provision had been previously approved
into the Utah SIP (71 FR 7670) and the
revision does not contain substantive
changes to the rule. We are also
clarifying that R307–401–14(3) refers to
the owner or operator of a boiler as
described in R307–401–14(1).
We are proposing to approve changes
to the definition of ‘‘Boiler’’ in R307–
401–14(1) as submitted by the State of
Utah on April 17, 2008, in this action.
The current federally approved
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:54 Jun 22, 2012
Jkt 226001
definition of ‘‘Boiler’’ in R307–413–7
references Utah’s solid and hazardous
waste definition of ‘‘Boiler’’ in R315–1–
1 as it was defined in 40 CFR 260.10,
as amended on July 1, 2002. Utah’s
current federally approved version of
R315–1–1 incorporates by reference 40
CFR 260.10, as amended on July 1,
2008. Since there is no substantive
difference between 40 CFR 260.10, as
amended on July 1, 2002, and 40 CFR
260.10, as amended on July 1, 2008, we
are proposing to approve this definition
change in R307–401–14.
We are proposing to conditionally
approve R307–401–15 and approve
R307–401–16 as submitted on
September 15, 2006, in this action. We
are proposing to conditionally approve
R307–401–15 because R307–401–15(3)
allows for ‘‘test or monitoring method
approved by the executive secretary,’’
which is director’s discretion. Utah
submitted a letter to EPA on February
24, 2012, committing to revise R307–
401–15(3) to remove the executive
secretary’s discretion to approve
alternate test or monitoring methods
(see docket). Utah must submit a SIP
revision to change or remove this
language not later than one year after
the date of final publication of this
rulemaking. If, however, Utah does not
submit such a revision within this
timeframe, EPA’s conditional approval
of R307–401–15(3) will revert to a
disapproval.
R307–401–15 and R307–401–16
allows all air stripper, soil venting and
soil aeration projects to be exempt from
notice of intent and approval order
requirements if the estimated actual air
emissions from volatile organic
compounds from a given project are less
than 5 tons per year (R307–401–9(1)(a))
and the level of any one hazardous air
pollutant (HAP) or combination of HAPs
is less than the levels listed in R307–
410–4(1)(d) (Toxic Screening Levels and
Averaging Periods). EPA has approved
similar de minimis thresholds for
criteria pollutants in past rulemakings:
The State of Idaho’s permit to construct
regulations, which were approved final
on January 16, 2003 (68 FR 2217); and
the State of Montana’s exclusion for de
minimis changes, which were approved
final on February 13, 2012 (77 FR 7531).
R307–401–15 and R307–401–16 contain
provisions which are smaller in nature
and scope than the previously approved
rulemakings, as they generally only
apply to the remediation of
underground storage tanks. EPA finds
the revisions would not interfere with
any applicable requirement concerning
attainment of the NAAQS, rate of
progress and reasonable further progress
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
37861
(as defined in section 171), or any other
applicable requirement of this Act.
A review of air stripper, soil venting
and soil aeration projects from 2008–
2010 which were exempted from notice
of intent and approval order
requirements under R307–401–15 and
R307–401–16 show negligible criteria
pollutant emissions (see docket). In
addition, data from the Utah leaking
underground storage tank program
shows a significant decrease in the
number of new cleanups initiated over
the last 10 years (see docket). These
provisions meet the requirements of 40
CFR 51.160 because they require prior
written approval (R307–401–15(2),
R307–401–16(1)) of the State and have
testing requirements (R307–401–15(3))
to ensure that exempted projects do not
exceed the de minimis thresholds as
described in R307–401–9.
V. Summary of Proposed Actions
Based on the above discussion, EPA
finds that the revisions are consistent
with all CAA requirements. We are
proposing to approve the renumbering
of R307–413–7 to R307–401–14 (Used
Oil Burned for Energy Recovery) as
submitted by the State of Utah on
September 15, 2006; changes to the
definition of ‘‘Boiler’’ in R307–401–
14(1), as submitted by the State of Utah
on April 17, 2008; and conditionally
approve R307–401–15 and approve
R307–401–16 as submitted on
September 15, 2006.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, 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 Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action
merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this action:
• 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
E:\FR\FM\25JNP1.SGM
25JNP1
37862
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 122 / Monday, June 25, 2012 / Proposed Rules
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 Clean Air Act;
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 6, 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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: June 7, 2012.
Howard M. Cantor,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
[FR Doc. 2012–15476 Filed 6–22–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:54 Jun 22, 2012
Jkt 226001
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
42 CFR Part 84
RIN 0920–AA38
[Docket No. CDC–2012–0009; NIOSH–258]
Open-Circuit Self-Contained Breathing
Apparatus Remaining Service-Life
Indicator Performance Requirements
Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, HHS.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
As a component of its ongoing
update of respirator certification
standards under Part 84 and in response
to a petition to amend 42 CFR 84.83(F),
HHS proposes a revision to the current
requirement for open-circuit selfcontained breathing apparatus (OC–
SCBA) remaining service-life indicators
(indicators), which are devices built into
a respirator to alert the user that the
breathing air provided by the respirator
is close to depletion. HHS intends to
revise the current standard, employed
by the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health
(NIOSH) located within the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC),
to allow greater latitude in the setting of
the indicator alarm to ensure that the
alarm more effectively meets the
different worker protection needs of
different work operations. This revision
sets a default service life at 25 percent
of the rated service time and allows the
indicator to be adjusted higher by the
manufacturer, at the request of the
purchaser.
SUMMARY:
Comments must be received by
August 24, 2012.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments,
identified by HHS RIN 0920–AA38, by
either of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments to
Docket CDC–2012–0009.
• Mail: NIOSH Docket Office, Robert
A. Taft Laboratories, MS–C34, 4676
Columbia Parkway, Cincinnati, OH
45226.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number or Regulation Identifier
Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. All
relevant comments received will be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided. For
detailed instructions on submitting
comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the
‘‘Public Participation’’ heading of the
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to https://
www.regulations.gov or https://
www.cdc.gov/niosh/docket/review/
docket258/default.html.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jonathan Szalajda, NIOSH National
Personal Protective Technology
Laboratory (NPPTL), P.O. Box 18070,
626 Cochrans Mill Road, Pittsburgh, PA
15236, (412) 386–5200 (this is not a tollfree number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
preamble to this notice of proposed
rulemaking is organized as follows:
I. Public Participation
II. Background
A. Introduction
B. Background and Significance
C. Need for Rulemaking
D. Public Meetings for Discussion and
Comment
III. Summary of Proposed Rule
IV. Regulatory Assessment Requirements
A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
F. Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice)
G. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
H. Executive Order 13045 (Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks)
I. Executive Order 13211 (Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use)
J. Plain Writing Act of 2010
V. Proposed Rule
I. Public Participation
Interested persons or organizations
are invited to participate in this
rulemaking by submitting written views,
arguments, recommendations, and data.
Comments are invited on any topic
related to this proposal. In addition,
HHS invites comment specifically on
the following question related to this
rulemaking:
1. HHS proposes that the remaining
service-life indicator (indicator) be set at
25 percent of the rated service time of
the respirator, as a default setting, with
the option for the setting to be adjusted
higher by the manufacturer, at the
discretion of the purchaser. Is 25
percent of the rated service time of the
respirator an appropriate default setting
for the indicator?
2. Should the rule specify an upper
limit that would require that the
indicator be set to alarm no earlier than
a set amount, such as 50 percent of rated
service time? Are there possible
emergency or rescue scenarios for which
E:\FR\FM\25JNP1.SGM
25JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 122 (Monday, June 25, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 37859-37862]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15476]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R08-OAR-2012-0168; FRL-9692-2]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Utah; Revisions to UAC Rule 401--Permit: New and Modified Sources
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revisions submitted by the State of Utah on April 17, 2008 and
partially approve SIP revisions submitted by the State of Utah on
September 15, 2006. The revisions contain new rules in Utah's Title 307
Rule 401 (Permit: New and Modified Sources). The intended effect of
this action is to propose to approve the rules that are consistent with
the Clean Air Act (CAA.) This action is being taken under sections 110
and 112 of the CAA.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 25, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2012-0168, by one of the following methods:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
Email: leone.kevin@epa.gov.
Fax: (303) 312-6064 (please alert the individual listed in
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing comments).
Mail: Carl Daly, Director, Air Program, Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street,
Denver, Colorado 80202-1129.
Hand Delivery: Carl Daly, Director, Air Program,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. Such deliveries are only
accepted Monday through Friday, 8:00 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-
2012-0168. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA, without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 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
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 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, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.
[[Page 37860]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin Leone, Air Program, Mailcode 8P-
AR, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street,
Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, (303) 312-6227, or leone.kevin@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. General Information
II. Background
III. What Authorities Apply to EPA's Proposed Action
IV. EPA's Analysis and Proposed Action on SIP Revisions
V. Summary of Proposed Actions
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
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 HAP mean or refer to Hazardous Air Pollutant.
(iv) The initials MACT mean or refer to Maximum Achievable Control
Technology.
(v) The initials NAAQS mean or refer to National Ambient Air
Quality Standards.
(vi) The initials NSR mean or refer to New Source Review.
(vii) The initials SIP mean or refer to State Implementation Plan.
(viii) The words State or Utah mean the State of Utah, unless the
context indicates otherwise.
(ix) The initials UAC mean or refer to the Utah Administrative
Code.
I. General Information
A. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD-ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
a. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
b. Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
c. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
d. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
e. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
f. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
g. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
h. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.
II. Background
On September 20, 1999, the State of Utah submitted a renumbering
and recodification of its Utah Administrative Code (UAC) rules within
the Utah SIP. EPA took final action to approve portions of this
submittal on February 13, 2006 (71 FR 7670). In that action EPA
approved the recodification of R307-413-7 (Exemption from Notice of
Intent Requirements for Used Oil Burned for Energy Recovery, previously
found under R307-7-2 and 3). On September 15, 2006, the State of Utah
again submitted a renumbering and recodification of its UAC rules
within the Utah SIP which renumbered R307-413-7 to R307-401-14 (Used
Oil Burned for Energy Recovery). We are proposing to approve this
renumbering in this action.
On April 17, 2008, the State of Utah submitted a revision to R307-
401-14 which changed the definition of ``Boiler.'' We are proposing to
approve this definition change in this action.
On October 1, 1990, R307-6 (De minimis Emissions from Air Strippers
and Soil Venting Projects) was approved into the Utah SIP. On August
14, 1998, EPA approved revisions to R307-6 (63 FR 43624). On January 8,
1999, Utah submitted substantive revisions to R307-6, which also
renumbered R307-6 to R307-413-8 and R307-413-9. EPA did not act on this
submittal. On September 15, 2006, Utah submitted revisions which moved
R307-413-8 and R307-413-9 to R307-401-15 (Air Strippers and Soil
Venting Projects) and R307-401-16 (De minimis Emissions from Soil
Aeration Projects). Utah's January 8, 1999, submittal is superceded by
the September 15, 2006, submittal. EPA is proposing to conditionally
approve R307-401-15 and approve R307-401-16 as submitted on September
15, 2006, in this action.
All other portions of the September 15, 2006, submittal not
addressed in this action will be addressed at a later date.
III. What Authorities Apply to EPA's Proposed Action
Section 110(l) of the CAA states, ``Each revision to an
implementation plan submitted by a State under this Act shall be
adopted by such State after reasonable notice and public hearing. The
Administrator shall not approve a revision to a plan if the revision
would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment
and reasonable further progress (as defined in section 171), or any
other applicable requirement of this Act.''
The states' obligation to comply with each of the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) is considered as ``any applicable
requirement(s) concerning attainment.'' A demonstration is necessary to
show that this revision will not interfere with attainment or
maintenance of the NAAQS, including those for ozone, particulate
matter, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, lead, nitrogen oxides or any
other requirement of the Act.
The CAA at section 110(a)(2)(C) requires states to include a minor
New Source Review (NSR) program in their SIP to regulate modifications
and new construction of stationary sources within the area as necessary
to assure the NAAQS are achieved. EPA's implementing regulations at 40
CFR 51.160-164 are intended to ensure that new source growth is
consistent with maintenance of the NAAQS and 40 CFR 51.160(e) requires
states to identify types and sizes of facilities which will be subject
to review under their minor NSR program. For sources identified under
40 CFR 51.160(e), section 51.160(a) requires that the SIP include
legally enforceable procedures that enable a state or local agency to
determine whether construction or modification of a facility, building,
structure or installation, or combination of these will result in a
violation of applicable portions of the control strategy; or
interference with attainment or maintenance of a national standard in
the state in which the proposed source (or modification) is located or
in a
[[Page 37861]]
neighboring state. Section 110(i) of the CAA specifically precludes
states from changing the requirements of the SIP except through SIP
revisions approved by EPA. SIP revisions will be approved by EPA only
if they meet all requirements of section 110 of the CAA and the
implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 51. See CAA section 110(l); 40
CFR 51.104.
EPA recognizes that, under the applicable Federal regulations,
states have broad discretion to determine the scope of their minor NSR
programs as needed to attain and maintain the NAAQS. The states have
significant discretion to tailor minor NSR requirements that are
consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR part 51. States may also
provide a rationale for why the rules are at least as stringent as the
40 CFR part 51 requirements where the revisions are different from
those in 40 CFR part 51. For example, states may exempt from minor new
source review certain categories of changes based on de minimis or
administrative necessity grounds in accordance with the criteria set
out in Alabama Power Co. v. Costle, 636 F.2d 323, 360-361 (D.C. Cir.
1979). De minimis sources are presumed not to have an impact and their
emissions would not prevent or interfere with attainment of the NAAQS,
even within nonattainment areas.
Since there are no ambient air quality standards for air toxics,
the area's compliance with any applicable maximum achievable control
technology (MACT) standards, as well as any Federal mobile source
control requirements under CAA sections 112 or 202(l) would constitute
an acceptable demonstration of noninterference for air toxics. A
revision to the SIP cannot interfere with any federally mandated
program such as a MACT standard (or related section 112 requirements).
IV. EPA's Analysis and Proposed Action on SIP Revisions
In this proposed rulemaking, we are proposing to approve the
renumbering of R307-413-7 to R307-401-14 (Used Oil Burned for Energy
Recovery) as submitted by the State of Utah on September 15, 2006,
because this provision had been previously approved into the Utah SIP
(71 FR 7670) and the revision does not contain substantive changes to
the rule. We are also clarifying that R307-401-14(3) refers to the
owner or operator of a boiler as described in R307-401-14(1).
We are proposing to approve changes to the definition of ``Boiler''
in R307-401-14(1) as submitted by the State of Utah on April 17, 2008,
in this action. The current federally approved definition of ``Boiler''
in R307-413-7 references Utah's solid and hazardous waste definition of
``Boiler'' in R315-1-1 as it was defined in 40 CFR 260.10, as amended
on July 1, 2002. Utah's current federally approved version of R315-1-1
incorporates by reference 40 CFR 260.10, as amended on July 1, 2008.
Since there is no substantive difference between 40 CFR 260.10, as
amended on July 1, 2002, and 40 CFR 260.10, as amended on July 1, 2008,
we are proposing to approve this definition change in R307-401-14.
We are proposing to conditionally approve R307-401-15 and approve
R307-401-16 as submitted on September 15, 2006, in this action. We are
proposing to conditionally approve R307-401-15 because R307-401-15(3)
allows for ``test or monitoring method approved by the executive
secretary,'' which is director's discretion. Utah submitted a letter to
EPA on February 24, 2012, committing to revise R307-401-15(3) to remove
the executive secretary's discretion to approve alternate test or
monitoring methods (see docket). Utah must submit a SIP revision to
change or remove this language not later than one year after the date
of final publication of this rulemaking. If, however, Utah does not
submit such a revision within this timeframe, EPA's conditional
approval of R307-401-15(3) will revert to a disapproval.
R307-401-15 and R307-401-16 allows all air stripper, soil venting
and soil aeration projects to be exempt from notice of intent and
approval order requirements if the estimated actual air emissions from
volatile organic compounds from a given project are less than 5 tons
per year (R307-401-9(1)(a)) and the level of any one hazardous air
pollutant (HAP) or combination of HAPs is less than the levels listed
in R307-410-4(1)(d) (Toxic Screening Levels and Averaging Periods). EPA
has approved similar de minimis thresholds for criteria pollutants in
past rulemakings: The State of Idaho's permit to construct regulations,
which were approved final on January 16, 2003 (68 FR 2217); and the
State of Montana's exclusion for de minimis changes, which were
approved final on February 13, 2012 (77 FR 7531). R307-401-15 and R307-
401-16 contain provisions which are smaller in nature and scope than
the previously approved rulemakings, as they generally only apply to
the remediation of underground storage tanks. EPA finds the revisions
would not interfere with any applicable requirement concerning
attainment of the NAAQS, rate of progress and reasonable further
progress (as defined in section 171), or any other applicable
requirement of this Act.
A review of air stripper, soil venting and soil aeration projects
from 2008-2010 which were exempted from notice of intent and approval
order requirements under R307-401-15 and R307-401-16 show negligible
criteria pollutant emissions (see docket). In addition, data from the
Utah leaking underground storage tank program shows a significant
decrease in the number of new cleanups initiated over the last 10 years
(see docket). These provisions meet the requirements of 40 CFR 51.160
because they require prior written approval (R307-401-15(2), R307-401-
16(1)) of the State and have testing requirements (R307-401-15(3)) to
ensure that exempted projects do not exceed the de minimis thresholds
as described in R307-401-9.
V. Summary of Proposed Actions
Based on the above discussion, EPA finds that the revisions are
consistent with all CAA requirements. We are proposing to approve the
renumbering of R307-413-7 to R307-401-14 (Used Oil Burned for Energy
Recovery) as submitted by the State of Utah on September 15, 2006;
changes to the definition of ``Boiler'' in R307-401-14(1), as submitted
by the State of Utah on April 17, 2008; and conditionally approve R307-
401-15 and approve R307-401-16 as submitted on September 15, 2006.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, 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 Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
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
[[Page 37862]]
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 Clean Air Act; 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 6, 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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,
Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: June 7, 2012.
Howard M. Cantor,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2012-15476 Filed 6-22-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P