Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Kentucky; Approval of Revisions to the Jefferson County Portion of the Kentucky SIP; New Source Review; Prevention of Significant Deterioration, 62150-62158 [2012-24096]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
62150
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
whether the area attained the standard.
EPA also determined that the
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley PM2.5
nonattainment area is not subject to the
consequences of failing to attain
pursuant to section 179(d).
■ 3. Section 52.2059 is amended by
adding paragraph (g) to read as follows:
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by December 11, 2012. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action, in
which EPA determines that the
Pittsburgh Area has attained the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS and attained the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by its
attainment date, may not be challenged
later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
*
List of Subjects in 40 CFR part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Shawn M. Garvin,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
§ 52.2059
matter.
Control strategy: Particulate
*
*
*
*
(g) Determination of Attainment. EPA
has determined, as of October 12, 2012,
that based on 2008 to 2010 and 2009 to
2011 ambient air quality data, the
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley fine particle
(PM2.5) nonattainment area has attained
the 1997 annual PM2.5 national ambient
air quality standards (NAAQS). This
determination, in accordance with 40
CFR 52.1004(c), suspends the
requirements for the Pittsburgh-Beaver
Valley PM2.5 nonattainment area to
submit an attainment demonstration,
associated reasonably available control
measures, a reasonable further progress
plan, contingency measures, and other
planning SIPs related to attainment of
the standard for as long as this area
continues to meet the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS.
[FR Doc. 2012–24782 Filed 10–11–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
[EPA–R04–OAR–2011–0227; FRL–9734–7]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Kentucky;
Approval of Revisions to the Jefferson
County Portion of the Kentucky SIP;
New Source Review; Prevention of
Significant Deterioration
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart NN—Pennsylvania
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
2. Section 52.2056 is amended by
adding paragraph (h) to read as follows:
SUMMARY:
AGENCY:
■
§ 52.2056
Determinations of Attainment.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
*
(h) Based upon EPA’s review of the
air quality data for the 3-year period
2007 to 2009, EPA determined that the
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley fine particle
(PM2.5) nonattainment area attained the
1997 annual PM2.5 National Ambient
Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) by the
applicable attainment date of April 5,
2010. Therefore, EPA has met the
requirement pursuant to CAA section
179(c) to determine, based on the area’s
air quality as of the attainment date,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:54 Oct 11, 2012
Jkt 229001
EPA is taking final action to
approve multiple changes to the
Jefferson County portion of the
Kentucky State Implementation Plan
(SIP), submitted by the Commonwealth
of Kentucky, through the Kentucky
Division for Air Quality (KDAQ), to EPA
in two submittals dated June 1, 2009,
and February 8, 2011. These revisions
were submitted by KDAQ on behalf of
the Louisville Metro Air Pollution
Control District (LMAPCD) (also
referred to as Jefferson County) and
modify the LMAPCD New Source
Review (NSR) Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) permitting
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
regulations. EPA is approving Jefferson
County’s June 1, 2009, and February 8,
2011, SIP revisions because the Agency
has determined that these SIP revisions
are consistent with the Clean Air Act
(CAA or Act) and EPA regulations
regarding the PSD permitting program.
DATES: This rule is effective November
13, 2012.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR–
2011–0227. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov
Web site. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Regulatory Development Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30,
excluding federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
information regarding the Jefferson
County portion of the Kentucky SIP,
contact Ms. Twunjala Bradley,
Regulatory Development Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Ms.
Bradley’s telephone number is (404)
562–9352; email address:
bradley.twunjala@epa.gov. For
information regarding the GHG
Tailoring Rule, 2002 NSR Reform and
NSR PM2.5 Rule, contact Yolanda
Adams, Air Permits Section, at the same
address above. Ms. Adams’ telephone
number is (404) 562–9214; email
address: adams.yolanda@epa.gov. For
information regarding the Phase II Rule
and ozone NAAQS, contact Jane Spann,
Regulatory Development Section, at the
same address above. Ms. Spann’s
telephone number is (404) 562–9029;
email address: spann.jane@epa.gov. For
information regarding the PM2.5
NAAQS, contact Mr. Joel Huey,
Regulatory Development Section, at the
E:\FR\FM\12OCR1.SGM
12OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
same address above. Mr. Huey’s
telephone number is (404) 562–9104;
email address: huey.joel@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. EPA’s Action on Jefferson County’s SIP
Revision to Adopt the GHG Tailoring
Rule
III. EPA’s Action on Jefferson County’s SIP
Revision to Adopt the NSR PM2.5 PSD
Permitting Requirements
IV. EPA’s Action on Jefferson County’s SIP
Revisions to Adopt the Phase II Rule
V. EPA’s Action on Jefferson County’s SIP
Revision to Adopt the Federal NSR
Reform and Reasonable Possibility
Provisions
VI. EPA’s Action on Jefferson County’s
Automatic Rescission Clause
VII. Final Action
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
On June 1, 2009, and February 8,
2011, the Commonwealth of Kentucky
through KDAQ (and on behalf of
LMAPCD) submitted two SIP revisions
to EPA for approval into the Jefferson
County portion of the Kentucky SIP to
adopt federal NSR PSD permitting
requirements. The SIP revisions consist
of changes to the LMAPCD Air Quality
Regulations, Regulation 2 Permit
Requirements: Regulation 2.05—
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
of Air Quality, and incorporate by
reference (IBR) 1 several NSR PSD
permitting requirements promulgated at
40 CFR 52.21. Specifically, the June 1,
2009, SIP revision: (1) Incorporates
provisions for implementing the PSD
program for the PM2.5 NAAQS as
promulgated in the NSR PM2.5 Rule,2 73
FR 28321 (May 16, 2008); (2) adopts
PSD provisions related to the
implementation of the 1997 8-hour
ozone Phase II Rule (Phase II Rule),
including nitrogen oxides (NOX) as a
precursor to ozone, 70 FR 71612
(November 29, 2005); and (3) adopts
federal PSD regulations established in
the 2002 NSR Reform Rules, 67 FR
80186 (December 31, 2002), and the
NSR Reasonable Possibility Rule, 72 FR
72607 (December 21, 2007). These PSD
permitting provisions became effective
in Jefferson County on May 20, 2009.
The February 8, 2011, SIP revision
provides Jefferson County with the
1 Throughout this document IBR means
incorporate or incorporates by reference.
2 With respect to the NSR PM
2.5 Rule, Phase II
Rule and NSR Reform, Jefferson County’s SIP
revisions only address PSD requirements at
Regulation 2.05. The nonattainment NSR provisions
for Jefferson County (Regulation 2.04) for these
provisions are still under development by
LMAPCD.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:54 Oct 11, 2012
Jkt 229001
authority to regulate greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions under its PSD program
and establishes appropriate emission
thresholds for determining which new
stationary sources and modification
projects become subject to LMAPCD’s
PSD permitting requirements for their
GHG emissions as promulgated in the
GHG Tailoring Rule, 75 FR 31514 (June
3, 2010). These GHG PSD applicability
provisions became effective in Jefferson
County on November 17, 2010. In
addition, the February 8, 2011,
submittal adopts a provision that would
automatically render Jefferson County’s
Regulation 2.05 or a portion thereof
invalid in the wake of certain court
decisions or other events (the
‘‘automatic rescission clause’’).
Approval of Jefferson County’s GHG
permitting regulations also includes a
proposal to simultaneously rescind the
federal implementation plan (FIP) that
EPA promulgated on January 14, 2011.
See 76 FR 2581.
On June 6, 2012, EPA published a
proposed rulemaking to approve the
aforementioned changes to Jefferson
County’s NSR PSD program. See 77 FR
33363. Comments on the proposed
rulemaking were due on or before July
6, 2012. No comments, adverse or
otherwise, were received on EPA’s June
6, 2012, proposed rulemaking. Pursuant
to section 110 of the CAA, EPA is now
taking final action to approve the
changes to Jefferson County’s NSR PSD
program as provided in EPA’s June 6,
2012, proposed rulemaking. A summary
of the background for today’s final
action is provided below. EPA’s June 6,
2012, proposed rulemaking contains
more detailed information regarding the
Jefferson County SIP revisions being
approved today. Please refer to the
relevant sections in the proposed
rulemaking for EPA’s rationale for this
final action. See 77 FR 33363.
In addition to incorporating the
changes discussed above, Jefferson
County’s proposed SIP revisions include
PSD permitting provisions that: (1)
Exclude facilities that produce ethanol
through a natural fermentation process
from the definition of ‘‘chemical process
plants’’ in the major NSR source
permitting program as amended in the
Ethanol Rule, 72 FR 24060 (May 1,
2007); and (2) IBR changes pursuant to
EPA’s Fugitive Emissions Rule, 73 FR
77882 (December 19, 2008).3 In today’s
3 On March 31, 2010, EPA stayed the Fugitive
Emissions Rule (73 FR 77882) for 18 months to
October 3, 2011, to allow the Agency time to
propose, take comment and issue a final action
regarding the inclusion of fugitive emissions in NSR
applicability determinations. This stay was
established as a result of EPA granting the Natural
Resource Defense Council’s petition for
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
62151
rulemaking, EPA is not taking action on
LMAPCD’s changes to its PSD
regulations to adopt provisions
promulgated in the Ethanol Rule nor is
EPA taking action on LMAPCD’s
changes to incorporate the provisions of
the Fugitive Emissions Rule.
Jefferson County’s practice for
revising its PSD regulations is to IBR
into its SIP the version of the Code of
Federal Regulations (at 40 CFR 52.21)
that is in effect as of a specified date.
LMAPCD’s Regulation 2.05 contains the
preconstruction review program that
provides for the prevention of
significant deterioration of ambient air
quality as required under part C of title
I of the CAA (the PSD program).
Jefferson County’s June 1, 2009, SIP
revision, which provided version 9 of
LMAPCD’s Regulation 2.05, IBR the
federal PSD regulations as set forth at 40
CFR 52.21, and as amended as of July
1, 2008. Subsequently, the February 8,
2011, SIP revision, which provided
version 10 of LMAPCD’s Regulation
2.05, IBR federal PSD regulations as set
forth at 40 CFR 52.21, and as amended
as of July 1, 2010, thereby superseding
version 9 of Regulation 2.05.
Throughout this rulemaking, EPA will
refer to the June 1, 2009, and February
8, 2011, SIP revisions as ‘‘Jefferson
County’s SIP revisions.’’ In effect, the
Jefferson County SIP revisions change
the LMAPCD’s IBR date for Regulation
2.05 to July 1, 2010.
II. EPA’s Action on Jefferson County’s
SIP Revision To Adopt the GHG
Tailoring Rule
As mentioned above, on February 8,
2011, KDAQ, on behalf of LMAPCD,
submitted to EPA a revision to the
Jefferson County portion of Kentucky’s
SIP to IBR NSR PSD requirements for
GHG. Specifically, the February 8, 2011,
SIP revision includes changes to
LMAPCD’s Regulation 2.05—Prevention
of Significant Deterioration of Air
Quality (version 10) to provide authority
to LMAPCD to regulate GHG under the
PSD program, and establishes
appropriate PSD applicability
thresholds for GHGs, consistent with
EPA’s Tailoring Rule.
reconsideration on the original Fugitive Emissions
Rule. See 73 FR 77882 (December 19, 2008). On
March 30, 2011 (76 FR 17548), EPA proposed an
interim rule which superseded the March 31, 2010,
stay and clarified and extended the stay of the
Fugitive Emission Rule until EPA completes its
reconsideration. The interim rule simply reverts the
CFR text back to the language that existed prior to
the Fugitive Emissions Rule changes in the
December 19, 2008, rulemaking. EPA plans to issue
a final rule affirming the interim rule as final. The
final rule will remain in effect until EPA completes
its reconsideration.
E:\FR\FM\12OCR1.SGM
12OCR1
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
62152
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
LMAPCD is currently the SIPapproved permitting authority for the
PSD program in Jefferson County,
Kentucky, and does not interpret its
current SIP-approved PSD regulations at
Regulation 2.05 (i.e., version 9), which
IBR the federal PSD regulations, to be
applicable to GHG. In letters dated
October 4, 2010, and October 19, 2010,
LMAPCD notified EPA that it did not
have the authority to regulate GHG
under the PSD program, and thus was
in the process of revising its regulations
(the subject of this final action) to
provide LMAPCD with this authority.
The February 8, 2011, SIP revision IBR
the federal PSD regulations at 40 CFR
52.21 as of July 2010 into Jefferson
County Regulation 2.05 to include the
relevant federal GHG Tailoring Rule
changes that provide LMAPCD with the
authority to regulate GHG under the
PSD program and establish the
thresholds for GHG permitting
applicability. The GHG Tailoring Rule
changes that this final action
incorporates into the Jefferson County
portion of Kentucky’s SIP define the
term ‘‘subject to regulation’’ for the PSD
program and define ‘‘greenhouse gases’’
and ‘‘tons per year (tpy) carbon dioxide
equivalent emissions’’ (CO2e).
Additionally, the changes specify the
methodology for calculating an
emissions increase for GHG, the
applicable thresholds for GHG
emissions subject to PSD, and the
schedule for when the applicability
thresholds take effect. See 75 FR at
31606–31607. EPA has determined that
these provisions, which provide
LMAPCD with the authority to regulate
GHG under the PSD program and
establish the thresholds for GHG
permitting applicability, are consistent
with EPA’s PSD regulations for GHG
emitting sources as promulgated in the
GHG Tailoring Rule and section 110 of
the CAA. Therefore, EPA is approving
the GHG PSD permitting revision into
the Jefferson County portion of
Kentucky’s SIP. In addition, EPA is
rescinding the FIP promulgated January
14, 2011, codified in 40 CFR 52.37(b)(7),
that ensures the availability of a PSDpermitting authority for GHG-emitting
sources in Jefferson County, Kentucky.
This FIP is no longer necessary since the
GHG PSD permitting revision is being
approved into the Jefferson County
portion of Kentucky’s SIP. Therefore,
this final action removes Jefferson
County from the list at 40 CFR section
52.37.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:54 Oct 11, 2012
Jkt 229001
III. EPA’s Action on Jefferson County’s
SIP Revision To Adopt the NSR PM2.5
PSD Permitting Requirements
Jefferson County’s Regulation 2.05—
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
of Air Quality IBR the provisions at 40
CFR 52.21, as amended in the NSR
PM2.5 Rule for PSD. Specifically,
Jefferson County’s June 1, 2009, and
February 8, 2011, SIP revisions IBR the
following NSR PM2.5 provisions for PSD:
(1) Requirement for NSR permits to
address directly emitted PM2.5 and
precursor pollutants; (2) significant
emission rates for direct PM2.5 and
precursor pollutants (SO2 and NOX); (3)
PSD and NNSR requirement of states to
address condensable PM in establishing
enforceable emission limits for PM10 or
PM2.5; and (4) PM2.5 emission offsets
regarding the PM10 ‘‘grandfathering’’
provision. In the February 8, 2011, SIP
revision, LMAPCD elected to IBR the
grandfathering provision at 40 CFR
52.21(i)(1)(xi) in its PSD regulations at
Regulation 2.05. EPA took final action to
repeal the PM10 grandfathering
provision on May 18, 2011. See 76 FR
28646. Therefore, EPA is not taking
action to approve this provision into the
Jefferson County portion of the
Kentucky SIP. Jefferson County will
need to update its PSD provisions to
reflect the repeal of the PM10
grandfathering provision in federal
regulations at 40 CFR 52.21. At this time
Jefferson County’s PSD regulations are
approvable because they are at least as
stringent as the current federal
regulations and are consistent with
section 110 of the CAA.
Jefferson County’s February 11, 2011,
SIP revision also IBR, into the Jefferson
County portion of the Kentucky SIP,
PSD regulations regarding the
requirement to address condensable PM
in applicability determinations and in
establishing enforceable emission limits
in PSD and nonattainment NSR permits,
as established in the NSR PM2.5 Rule. As
discussed above in Section III.B, under
a separate action, EPA has proposed to
correct the inadvertent inclusion of
‘‘particulate matter emissions’’ in the
definition of ‘‘regulated NSR pollutant’’
as an indicator for which condensable
emissions must be addressed. See 77 FR
75656 (March 16, 2012). Further, on
May 14, 2012, the Commonwealth of
Kentucky, on behalf of LMAPCD,
provided a letter to EPA with
clarification of Jefferson County’s intent
in light of EPA’s March 12, 2012,
proposed rulemaking. Specifically, in
the letter Kentucky requested that EPA
not approve (into the Jefferson County
portion of the SIP) the term ‘‘particulate
matter emissions’’ (at Regulation 2.05)
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
as part of the definition for ‘‘regulated
NSR pollutant’’ that condensable
emissions be accounted for in
applicability determinations and in
establishing emissions limitations for
PM. Therefore, given the
Commonwealth’s and LMAPCD’s
request and EPA’s intention to amend
the definition of ‘‘regulated NSR
pollutant,’’ EPA is not taking action to
approve the terminology ‘‘particulate
matter emissions’’ into the Jefferson
County portion of the Kentucky SIP (at
Regulation 2.05) for the condensable
provision at the definition of ‘‘regulated
NSR pollutant.’’ EPA is, however,
approving into the SIP at Regulation
2.05 the remaining condensable
requirement at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(vi)
that condensable emissions be
accounted for in applicability
determinations and in establishing
emissions limitations for PM2.5 and
PM10. EPA has determined that Jefferson
County’s June 1, 2009, and February 8,
2011, SIP revisions are consistent with
the NSR PM2.5 Rule for PSD and with
section 110 of the CAA. See NSR PM2.5
Rule, 75 FR 31514.
IV. EPA’s Analysis of Jefferson County’s
SIP Revisions To Adopt the Phase II
Rule
Jefferson County’s June 1, 2009, SIP
revision updated LMAPCD’s PSD
program to include NOX as an ozone
precursor for PSD permitting, consistent
with changes to the federal regulations
set forth in the Phase II Rule at 40 CFR
52.21. Subsequently, on February 8,
2011, KDAQ submitted a SIP revision
which included the June 1, 2009,
changes in addition to other federal PSD
permitting updates to the Jefferson
County portion of the Kentucky SIP.
Jefferson County’s SIP revisions IBR the
federal PSD regulations (at 40 CFR
52.21) to include the NOX as a precursor
PSD-only permitting provisions
promulgated in the Phase II Rule into
the Jefferson County portion of the
Kentucky SIP at Regulation 2.05—
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
of Air Quality (version 10) as of July 1,
2010. EPA has determined that Jefferson
County’s SIP revisions are consistent
with the PSD Phase II Rule permitting
requirements and section 110 of the
CAA.
V. EPA’s Action on Jefferson County’s
SIP Revision To Adopt the Federal NSR
Reform and Reasonable Possibility
Provisions
As mentioned in Section I, LMAPCD’s
PSD Program at Regulation 2.05—
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
for Air Quality establishes the
preconstruction review program as
E:\FR\FM\12OCR1.SGM
12OCR1
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
required under part C of title I of the
CAA. The changes to LMAPCD’s PSD
rules, which EPA is now approving into
the Jefferson County portion of the
Kentucky SIP, were established to
update the existing PSD Program to
meet the requirements of the 2002 NSR
Reform Rules. Jefferson County’s SIP
revisions IBR the 2002 NSR Reform PSD
changes regarding baseline actual
emissions, actual-to-projected-actual
applicability tests, and plantwide
applicability limit provisions. Jefferson
County’s June 1, 2009, and February 8,
2011, SIP revisions both address the
federal PSD requirements promulgated
in the 2002 NSR Reform Rules. The
proposed revisions explicitly exclude
the pollution control projects and clean
unit portions of the 2002 NSR Reform
Rules that were vacated by the D.C.
Circuit Court. See New York v. EPA, 413
F.3d 3 (D.C. Cir. 2005).
With regard to the remanded portions
of the 2002 NSR Reform Rules related to
recordkeeping and EPA’s December 21,
2007, clarification of the term
‘‘reasonable possibility’’ (72 FR 72607),
Jefferson County’s SIP revisions IBR the
federal revised ‘‘reasonable possibility’’
provisions at 40 CFR 52.21(r)(6). Thus,
LMAPCD’s recordkeeping and reporting
provisions are the same as the federal
requirements promulgated in EPA’s
December 21, 2007, final action.
In addition to incorporating the
federal PSD regulations, Jefferson
County’s February 8, 2011, SIP revision
includes a technical support document
(TSD), which assesses the impact of
adopting the 2002 NSR Reform
provisions into Jefferson County’s PSD
permitting program and the air quality
impacts. As mentioned above, LMAPCD
has a SIP-approved PSD program.
However, due to the limited number of
sources in Jefferson County, the
permitting program does not assess
many major PSD permits. In fact, in
nearly ten years, LMAPCD has only
analyzed two projects under PSD. Most
sources in Jefferson County are
permitted through LMAPCD’s minor
source program, which allows sources
to take emission limits to avoid PSD
permitting. Additionally, regarding
criteria pollutants, the TSD explains
that sources typically subject to PSD
permitting (i.e., point sources) have not
been the primary driver for past or
current nonattainment NAAQS
designations in Jefferson County. See
the TSD in the Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OAR–2011–0227.
LMAPCD’s TSD concluded that
adoption of the 2002 NSR Reform
improvements would not impede the
LMAPCD’s ability to comply with the
NAAQS or any reasonable progress
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:54 Oct 11, 2012
Jkt 229001
towards continued maintenance. After
evaluating Jefferson County’s SIP
revision and the TSD provided with the
February 8, 2011, SIP revision, EPA has
determined that the SIP revisions to
adopt NSR Reform and reasonable
possibility provisions are consistent
with the requirements for the
preparation, adoption and submittal of
implementation plans for the federal
PSD program at 40 CFR 52.21 and the
2002 NSR Reform Rule.
VI. EPA’s Action for Jefferson County’s
Automatic Rescission Clause
Jefferson County’s February 8, 2011,
SIP revision adds a new section to
Regulation 2.05, Section 2 ‘‘Effect of
Stay, Vacatur, or Withdrawal,’’ also
known as an automatic rescission
clause. This clause provides that in the
event that EPA or a federal court stays,
vacates, or withdraws any section or
subsection of 40 CFR 52.21, that section
or subsection shall automatically be
deemed stayed, vacated or withdrawn
from Jefferson County’s SIP-approved
PSD program at Regulation 2.05. The
period of delay resulting from a stay
would begin and end for purposes of
Jefferson County’s SIP on the date
specified by EPA in a Federal Register
notice announcing the stay. Likewise,
any provision that is vacated or
withdrawn shall be null and void for
purposes of Jefferson County’s SIP as of
the date specified in the notice of
vacatur or withdrawal published by
EPA in a Federal Register notice.
EPA has determined that Jefferson
County’s automatic rescission clause is
approvable. In assessing the
approvability of this provision, EPA
considered two key factors: (1) Whether
the public will be given reasonable
notice of any change to the SIP that
occurs as a result of the automatic
rescission clause, and (2) whether any
future change to the SIP that occurs as
a result of the automatic rescission
clause would be consistent with EPA’s
interpretation of the effect of the
triggering EPA or federal court action
(e.g., the extent of an administrative or
judicial stay). These criteria are derived
from the SIP revision procedures set
forth in the CAA and federal
regulations.
Regarding public notice, CAA section
110(l) provides that any revision to a
SIP submitted by a state to EPA for
approval ‘‘shall be adopted by such
State after reasonable notice and public
hearing.’’ In accordance with CAA
section 110(l), the LMAPCD followed
applicable notice-and-comment
procedures prior to adopting the
automatic rescission clause. Thus, the
public is on notice that the Jefferson
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
62153
County portion of the Kentucky SIP will
automatically update to reflect any EPA
or federal action that stays, withdraws,
or vacates any portion of 40 CFR 52.21.
In addition, the automatic rescission
clause provides that no change to the
SIP will occur until EPA publishes a
Federal Register notice announcing that
a portion of 40 CFR 52.21 has been
stayed, vacated, or withdrawn. Thus,
the timing and extent of any future SIP
change resulting from the automatic
rescission clause will be clear to both
the regulated community and the
general public.
EPA’s consideration of whether any
SIP change resulting from the proposed
automatic rescission clause would be
consistent with EPA’s interpretation of
the effect of the triggering action on
federal regulations is based on 40 CFR
51.105. Under 40 CFR 51.105,
‘‘[r]evisions of a plan, or any portion
thereof, will not be considered part of
an applicable plan until such revisions
have been approved by the
Administrator in accordance with this
part.’’ See 40 CFR 51.105. While EPA is
approving the automatic updating of the
Jefferson County portion of the
Kentucky SIP to reflect the stay,
withdrawal or vacatur of any section or
subsection of 40 CFR 52.21, there could
be varying interpretations of the timing
and extent of changes to 40 CFR 52.21
resulting from a given EPA or federal
court action. By tying the automatic
updating of the SIP to EPA’s publication
of a Federal Register notice announcing
the change to 40 CFR 52.21, the
automatic rescission clause ensures that
any change to the SIP will be consistent
with EPA’s interpretation of the
triggering action.
VII. Final Action
Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA,
EPA is taking final action to approve
Jefferson County’s June 1, 2009, and
February 8, 2011, SIP revisions which
IBR (into the Jefferson County portion of
the Kentucky SIP) federal requirements
for NSR PSD permitting. Jefferson
County’s SIP revisions consist of
changes to the LMAPCD Air Quality
Regulation 2.05—Prevention of
Significant Deterioration of Air Quality
and address several NSR PSD permitting
requirements promulgated at 40 CFR
52.21. Specifically, Jefferson County’s
June 1, 2009, SIP revision adopts federal
regulations relating to PSD requirements
for the NSR PM2.5 Rule, the Phase II
Rule, the 2002 NSR Reform Rule, and
the NSR Reasonable Possibility Rule
into the Jefferson County portion of the
Kentucky SIP. Jefferson County’s
February 8, 2011, SIP revision includes
all of the aforementioned updates to
E:\FR\FM\12OCR1.SGM
12OCR1
62154
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
LMAPCD’s PSD regulations but also
provides Jefferson County with the
authority to regulate GHG emissions
under its PSD program, establishes
appropriate emissions thresholds for
determining PSD applicability with
respect to new and modified GHGemitting sources (in accordance with
EPA’s Tailoring Rule), and incorporates
an automatic rescission clause for 40
CFR 52.21 regulations. EPA has
determined that these SIP revisions are
approvable because they are consistent
with the CAA and EPA regulations
regarding PSD permitting. In addition,
EPA is rescinding the FIP promulgated
on January 14, 2011, at 40 CFR
52.37(b)(7); therefore, this final rule
removes Jefferson County from the PSD
GHG FIP listing at 40 CFR section 52.37.
VIII. 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 action
merely approves state law as meeting
federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by Commonwealth 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
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.
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by December 11, 2012. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section
307(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Greenhouse gases,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Particulate
matter, Nitrogen Oxides, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements and
Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: September 12, 2012.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42.U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart A—General Provisions
§ 52.37
[Amended]
2. Section 52.37 is amended by
removing and reserving paragraph
(b)(7).
■
Subpart S—Kentucky
3. Section 52.920(c) Table 2 is revised
to read as follows:
■
§ 52.920
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
TABLE 2—EPA-APPROVED JEFFERSON COUNTY REGULATIONS FOR KENTUCKY
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Reg
EPA approval
date
Title/subject
Federal
Register
notice
District
effective date
Explanation
Reg 1—General Provisions
1.01 ..............
1.02
1.03
1.04
1.05
..............
..............
..............
..............
VerDate Mar<15>2010
General Application of Regulations
and Standards.
Definitions ..........................................
Abbreviations and Acronyms .............
Performance Tests ............................
Compliance with Emission Standards
and Maintenance Requirements.
13:54 Oct 11, 2012
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
03/17/99
11/19/02
11/19/02
10/23/01
10/23/01
67
67
66
66
12/19/01
05/15/02
11/19/97
11/18/92
Fmt 4700
FR
FR
FR
FR
Sfmt 4700
69688
69688
53660
53660
E:\FR\FM\12OCR1.SGM
12OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
62155
TABLE 2—EPA-APPROVED JEFFERSON COUNTY REGULATIONS FOR KENTUCKY—Continued
EPA approval
date
Reg
Title/subject
1.06 ..............
Source Self-Monitoring and Reporting.
Emissions During Startups, Shutdowns, Malfunctions and Emergencies.
Administrative Procedures .................
Prohibition of Air Pollution .................
Circumvention ....................................
Control of Open Burning ...................
Control of Fugitive Particulate Emissions.
Rule Effectiveness .............................
Administrative Hearings .....................
1.07 ..............
1.08
1.09
1.10
1.11
1.14
..............
..............
..............
..............
..............
1.18 ..............
1.19 ..............
Federal
Register
notice
District
effective date
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
12/15/93
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
01/17/96
11/03/03
10/23/01
10/23/01
10/23/01
10/23/01
68
66
66
66
66
62236
53660
53660
53660
53660
06/19/02
11/16/83
04/19/72
02/22/90
01/20/88
10/23/01
11/19/02
66 FR 53689
67 FR 69688
Explanation
09/21/94
05/15/02
FR
FR
FR
FR
FR
Reg 2—Permit Requirements
2.01 ..............
2.02 ..............
2.03 ..............
2.04 ..............
2.05 ..............
2.06 ..............
2.07 ..............
2.09
2.10
2.11
2.17
..............
..............
..............
..............
General Application ...........................
Air Pollution Regulation Requirements and Exemptions.
Permit Requirements—Non-Title V
Construction and Operating Permits and Demolition/Renovation
Permits.
Construction or Modification of Major
Sources in or Impacting Upon
Non-Attainment Areas (Emission
Offset Requirements).
Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality.
10/23/01
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
66 FR 53660
04/21/82
06/21/95
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
12/15/93
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
03/17/93
10/12/12
[Insert citation
of publication]
11/17/10
Permit
Requirements—Other
Sources.
Public Notification for Title V, PSD,
and Offset Permits; SIP Revisions;
and Use of Emission Reduction
Credits.
Causes for Permit Suspension ..........
Stack Height Considerations .............
Air Quality Model Usage ...................
Federally Enforceable District Origin
Operating Permits.
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
11/16/83
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
06/21/95
11/03/03
10/23/01
10/23/01
11/03/03
68
66
66
68
06/19/02
07/19/89
05/19/99
06/19/02
FR
FR
FR
FR
62236
53660
53660
62236
This approval does not include Jefferson County’s revisions to incorporate by reference the Ethanol
Rule (72 FR 24060, May 1, 2007),
Fugitives Emissions Rule (73 FR
77882, December 19, 2008), the
PM10 Grandfathering Provision and
the term ‘‘particulate matter emissions’’ (at 40 CFR 52.21(i)(1)(xi)
and 51.166(b)(49)(vi) respectively
in the NSR PM2.5 Rule (73 FR
28321, May 16, 2008).
Reg 3—Ambient Air Quality Standards
3.01 ..............
3.02 ..............
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
3.03 ..............
3.04 ..............
3.05 ..............
Purpose of Standards and Expression of Non-Degradation Intention.
Applicability of Ambient Air Quality
Standards.
Definitions ..........................................
Ambient Air Quality Standards ..........
Methods of Measurement ..................
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
06/13/79
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
06/13/79
10/23/01
10/23/01
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
66 FR 53660
66 FR 53660
06/13/79
04/20/88
04/20/88
Reg 4—Emergency Episodes
4.01 ..............
4.02 ..............
4.03 ..............
4.04 ..............
VerDate Mar<15>2010
General Provisions for Emergency
Episodes.
Episode Criteria .................................
General Abatement Requirements ....
Particulate and Sulfur Dioxide Reduction Requirements.
13:54 Oct 11, 2012
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00009
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
06/13/79
10/23/01
10/23/01
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
66 FR 53660
66 FR 53660
04/20/88
02/16/83
04/19/72
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\12OCR1.SGM
12OCR1
62156
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 2—EPA-APPROVED JEFFERSON COUNTY REGULATIONS FOR KENTUCKY—Continued
EPA approval
date
Reg
Title/subject
4.05 ..............
Hydrocarbon and Nitrogen Oxides
Reduction Requirements.
Carbon Monoxide Reduction Requirements.
Episode Reporting Requirements .....
4.06 ..............
4.07 ..............
Federal
Register
notice
District
effective date
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
02/16/83
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
02/16/83
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
Explanation
06/13/79
Reg 6—Standards of Performance for Existing Affected Facilities
6.01 ..............
6.02 ..............
6.07 ..............
6.08 ..............
6.09 ..............
6.10 ..............
6.12 ..............
6.13 ..............
6.14 ..............
6.15 ..............
6.16 ..............
6.17 ..............
6.18 ..............
6.19 ..............
6.20 ..............
6.21 ..............
6.22 ..............
6.24 ..............
6.26 ..............
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
6.27 ..............
6.28 ..............
6.29 ..............
6.30 ..............
VerDate Mar<15>2010
General Provisions ............................
Emission Monitoring for Existing
Sources.
Standards of Performance for Existing Indirect Heat Exchangers.
Standard of Performance for Existing
Incinerators.
Standards of Performance for Existing Process Operations.
Standard of Performance for Existing
Process Gas Streams.
Standard of Performance for Existing
Asphalt Paving Operations.
Standard of Performance for Existing
Storage Vessels for Volatile Organic Compounds.
Standard of Performance for Selected Existing Petroleum Refining
Processes and Equipment.
Standard of Performance for Gasoline Transfer to Existing Service
Station Storage Tanks (Stage I
Vapor Recovery).
Standard of Performance for Existing
Large Appliance Surface Coating
Operations.
Standard of Performance for Existing
Automobile and Truck Surface
Coating Operations.
Standards of Performance for Existing Solvent Metal Cleaning Equipment.
Standard of Performance for Existing
Metal Furniture Surface Coating
Operations.
Standard of Performance for Existing
Bulk Gasoline Plants.
Standard of Performance for Existing
Gasoline Loading Facilities at Bulk
Terminals.
Standard of Performance for Existing
Volatile Organic Materials Loading
Facilities.
Standard of Performance for Existing
Sources Using Organic Materials.
Standards of Performance for Existing Volatile Organic Compound
Water Separators.
Standards of Performance for Existing Liquid Waste Incinerators.
Standard of Performance for Existing
Hot Air Aluminum Atomization
Processes.
Standard of Performance for Existing
Graphic Arts Facilities Using Rotogravure and Flexography.
Standard of Performance for Existing
Factory Surface Coating Operations of Flat Wood Paneling.
13:54 Oct 11, 2012
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00010
10/23/01
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
66 FR 53660
11/16/83
11/16/83
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
06/13/79
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
06/13/79
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
03/17/99
10/23/01
66 FR 53660
11/16/83
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
05/15/91
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
05/15/91
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
04/21/82
01/25/80
45 FR 6092
06/13/79
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
05/15/91
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
11/18/92
11/19/02
67 FR 69688
05/15/02
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
05/15/91
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
11/16/83
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
11/16/83
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
03/17/93
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
03/17/93
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
06/13/79
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
06/13/79
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
03/18/81
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
05/15/91
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
05/15/91
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\12OCR1.SGM
12OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 2—EPA-APPROVED JEFFERSON COUNTY REGULATIONS FOR KENTUCKY—Continued
EPA approval
date
Reg
Title/subject
6.31 ..............
Standard of Performance for Existing
Miscellaneous Metal Parts and
Products Surface-Coating Operations.
Standard of Performance for Leaks
from Existing Petroleum Refinery
Equipment.
Standard of Performance for Existing
Synthesized Pharmaceutical Product Manufacturing Operations.
Standard of Performance for Existing
Pneumatic Rubber Tire Manufacturing Plants.
Standard of Performance for Existing
Fabric, Vinyl and Paper Surface
Coating Operations.
Standard of Performance for Existing
Air Oxidation Processes in Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industries.
Standard of Performance for Equipment Leaks of Volatile Organic
Compounds in Existing Synthetic
Organic Chemical and Polymer
Manufacturing Plants.
Standards of Performance for Gasoline Transfer to Motor Vehicles
(Stage II Vapor Recovery and
Control).
Reasonably Available Control Technology Requirements for Major
Volatile Organic Compound- and
Nitrogen Oxides-Emitting Facilities.
Volatile Organic Compound Reduction Requirements.
Standards of Performance for Existing Solid Waste Landfills.
Standards of Performance for Existing Commercial Motor Vehicle and
Mobile Equipment Refinishing Operations.
Standards of Performance for Existing Ferroalloy and Calcium Carbide Production Facilities.
Standard of Performance for Existing
Bakery Oven Operations.
Standards of Performance for Reactor Processes and Distillation Operations Processes in the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry.
NOX Requirements for Portland Cement Kilns.
6.32 ..............
6.33 ..............
6.34 ..............
6.35 ..............
6.38 ..............
6.39 ..............
6.40 ..............
6.42 ..............
6.43 ..............
6.45 ..............
6.44 ..............
6.46 ..............
6.48 ..............
6.49 ..............
6.50 ..............
Federal
Register
notice
District
effective date
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
04/23/96
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
05/15/91
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
05/15/91
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
05/15/91
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
05/15/91
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
12/17/86
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
07/17/96
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
08/18/93
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
03/17/99
10/23/01
66 FR 53689
05/21/97
10/23/01
66 FR 53689
02/02/94
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
09/20/95
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
12/21/94
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
07/19/95
10/23/01
66 FR 53664
06/20/01
11/19/02
67 FR 69688
Explanation
03/20/02
Reg 7—Standards of Performance for New Affected Facilities
7.01 ..............
7.06 ..............
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
7.07 ..............
7.08 ..............
7.09 ..............
7.11 ..............
7.12 ..............
VerDate Mar<15>2010
General Provisions ............................
Standards of Performance for New
Indirect Heat Exchangers.
Standard of Performance for New Incinerators.
Standards of Performance for New
Process Operations.
Standards of Performance for New
Process Gas Streams.
Standard of Performance for New
Asphalt Paving Operations.
Standard of Performance for New
Storage Vessels for Volatile Organic Compounds.
13:54 Oct 11, 2012
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00011
10/23/01
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
66 FR 53661
05/17/00
04/21/82
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
09/15/93
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
03/17/99
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
06/18/97
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
05/15/91
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
05/15/91
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\12OCR1.SGM
12OCR1
62157
62158
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 198 / Friday, October 12, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 2—EPA-APPROVED JEFFERSON COUNTY REGULATIONS FOR KENTUCKY—Continued
EPA approval
date
Reg
Title/subject
7.14 ..............
Standard of Performance for Selected New Petroleum Refining
Processes and Equipment.
Standards of Performance for Gasoline Transfer to New Service Station Storage Tanks (Stage I Vapor
Recovery).
Standards of Performance for New
Solvent Metal Cleaning Equipment.
Standard of Performance for New
Gasoline Loading Facilities at Bulk
Plants.
Standard of Performance for New
Volatile Organic Materials Loading
Facilities.
Standard of Performance for New
Sources Using Volatile Organic
Compounds.
Standard of Performance for New
Sulfite Pulp Mills.
Standard of Performance for New
Ethylene Producing Plants.
Standard of Performance for New
Volatile Organic Compound Water
Separators.
Standard of Performance for New
Liquid Waste Incinerators.
Standard of Performance for New
Fabric, Vinyl, and Paper Surface
Coating Operations.
Standard of Performance for New Insulation of Magnet Wire.
Standard of Performance for Leaks
from New Petroleum Refinery
Equipment.
Standard of Performance for New
Graphic Arts Facilities Using Rotogravure and Flexography.
Standard of Performance for New
Factory Surface Coating Operations of Flat Wood Paneling.
Standard of Performance for New
Miscellaneous Metal Parts and
Products Surface Coating Operations.
Standard of Performance for New
Synthesized Pharmaceutical Product Manufacturing Operations.
Standards of Performance for New
Blast Furnace Casthouses.
Standards of Performance for New
Commercial Motor Vehicles and
Mobile Equipment Refinishing Operations.
Standard of Performance for New or
Modified Bakery Oven Operations.
7.15 ..............
7.18 ..............
7.20 ..............
7.22 ..............
7.25 ..............
7.34 ..............
7.35 ..............
7.36 ..............
7.51 ..............
7.52 ..............
7.55 ..............
7.56 ..............
7.57 ..............
7.58 ..............
7.59 ..............
7.60 ..............
7.77 ..............
7.79 ..............
7.81 ..............
Federal
Register
notice
District
effective date
10/23/01
66 FR 53661
06/13/79
10/23/01
66 FR 53662
04/20/88
10/23/01
66 FR 53662
05/15/91
10/23/01
66 FR 53662
11/16/83
10/23/01
66 FR 53662
03/17/93
10/23/01
66 FR 53662
03/17/93
10/23/01
66 FR 53662
06/13/79
10/23/01
66 FR 53662
06/13/79
10/23/01
66 FR 53662
06/13/79
10/23/01
66 FR 53662
01/20/88
10/23/01
66 FR 53662
05/15/91
10/23/01
66 FR 53662
03/17/93
10/23/01
66 FR 53662
05/15/91
10/23/01
66 FR 53662
05/15/91
10/23/01
66 FR 53662
05/15/91
10/23/01
66 FR 53662
04/23/96
10/23/01
66 FR 53662
05/15/91
10/23/01
66 FR 53662
10/20/93
10/23/01
66 FR 53690
02/02/94
10/23/01
66 FR 53662
Explanation
05/17/00
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Reg 8—Mobile Source Emissions Control
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2012–24096 Filed 10–11–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:54 Oct 11, 2012
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\12OCR1.SGM
12OCR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 198 (Friday, October 12, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62150-62158]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-24096]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2011-0227; FRL-9734-7]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Kentucky;
Approval of Revisions to the Jefferson County Portion of the Kentucky
SIP; New Source Review; Prevention of Significant Deterioration
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to approve multiple changes to the
Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky State Implementation Plan
(SIP), submitted by the Commonwealth of Kentucky, through the Kentucky
Division for Air Quality (KDAQ), to EPA in two submittals dated June 1,
2009, and February 8, 2011. These revisions were submitted by KDAQ on
behalf of the Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control District (LMAPCD)
(also referred to as Jefferson County) and modify the LMAPCD New Source
Review (NSR) Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permitting
regulations. EPA is approving Jefferson County's June 1, 2009, and
February 8, 2011, SIP revisions because the Agency has determined that
these SIP revisions are consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act)
and EPA regulations regarding the PSD permitting program.
DATES: This rule is effective November 13, 2012.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2011-0227. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential
Business Information or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information regarding the
Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP, contact Ms. Twunjala
Bradley, Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Ms. Bradley's telephone number is (404) 562-9352; email
address: bradley.twunjala@epa.gov. For information regarding the GHG
Tailoring Rule, 2002 NSR Reform and NSR PM2.5 Rule, contact
Yolanda Adams, Air Permits Section, at the same address above. Ms.
Adams' telephone number is (404) 562-9214; email address:
adams.yolanda@epa.gov. For information regarding the Phase II Rule and
ozone NAAQS, contact Jane Spann, Regulatory Development Section, at the
same address above. Ms. Spann's telephone number is (404) 562-9029;
email address: spann.jane@epa.gov. For information regarding the
PM2.5 NAAQS, contact Mr. Joel Huey, Regulatory Development
Section, at the
[[Page 62151]]
same address above. Mr. Huey's telephone number is (404) 562-9104;
email address: huey.joel@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. EPA's Action on Jefferson County's SIP Revision to Adopt the GHG
Tailoring Rule
III. EPA's Action on Jefferson County's SIP Revision to Adopt the
NSR PM2.5 PSD Permitting Requirements
IV. EPA's Action on Jefferson County's SIP Revisions to Adopt the
Phase II Rule
V. EPA's Action on Jefferson County's SIP Revision to Adopt the
Federal NSR Reform and Reasonable Possibility Provisions
VI. EPA's Action on Jefferson County's Automatic Rescission Clause
VII. Final Action
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
On June 1, 2009, and February 8, 2011, the Commonwealth of Kentucky
through KDAQ (and on behalf of LMAPCD) submitted two SIP revisions to
EPA for approval into the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP
to adopt federal NSR PSD permitting requirements. The SIP revisions
consist of changes to the LMAPCD Air Quality Regulations, Regulation 2
Permit Requirements: Regulation 2.05--Prevention of Significant
Deterioration of Air Quality, and incorporate by reference (IBR) \1\
several NSR PSD permitting requirements promulgated at 40 CFR 52.21.
Specifically, the June 1, 2009, SIP revision: (1) Incorporates
provisions for implementing the PSD program for the PM2.5
NAAQS as promulgated in the NSR PM2.5 Rule,\2\ 73 FR 28321
(May 16, 2008); (2) adopts PSD provisions related to the implementation
of the 1997 8-hour ozone Phase II Rule (Phase II Rule), including
nitrogen oxides (NOX) as a precursor to ozone, 70 FR 71612
(November 29, 2005); and (3) adopts federal PSD regulations established
in the 2002 NSR Reform Rules, 67 FR 80186 (December 31, 2002), and the
NSR Reasonable Possibility Rule, 72 FR 72607 (December 21, 2007). These
PSD permitting provisions became effective in Jefferson County on May
20, 2009. The February 8, 2011, SIP revision provides Jefferson County
with the authority to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions under its
PSD program and establishes appropriate emission thresholds for
determining which new stationary sources and modification projects
become subject to LMAPCD's PSD permitting requirements for their GHG
emissions as promulgated in the GHG Tailoring Rule, 75 FR 31514 (June
3, 2010). These GHG PSD applicability provisions became effective in
Jefferson County on November 17, 2010. In addition, the February 8,
2011, submittal adopts a provision that would automatically render
Jefferson County's Regulation 2.05 or a portion thereof invalid in the
wake of certain court decisions or other events (the ``automatic
rescission clause''). Approval of Jefferson County's GHG permitting
regulations also includes a proposal to simultaneously rescind the
federal implementation plan (FIP) that EPA promulgated on January 14,
2011. See 76 FR 2581.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Throughout this document IBR means incorporate or
incorporates by reference.
\2\ With respect to the NSR PM2.5 Rule, Phase II Rule
and NSR Reform, Jefferson County's SIP revisions only address PSD
requirements at Regulation 2.05. The nonattainment NSR provisions
for Jefferson County (Regulation 2.04) for these provisions are
still under development by LMAPCD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 6, 2012, EPA published a proposed rulemaking to approve the
aforementioned changes to Jefferson County's NSR PSD program. See 77 FR
33363. Comments on the proposed rulemaking were due on or before July
6, 2012. No comments, adverse or otherwise, were received on EPA's June
6, 2012, proposed rulemaking. Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, EPA
is now taking final action to approve the changes to Jefferson County's
NSR PSD program as provided in EPA's June 6, 2012, proposed rulemaking.
A summary of the background for today's final action is provided below.
EPA's June 6, 2012, proposed rulemaking contains more detailed
information regarding the Jefferson County SIP revisions being approved
today. Please refer to the relevant sections in the proposed rulemaking
for EPA's rationale for this final action. See 77 FR 33363.
In addition to incorporating the changes discussed above, Jefferson
County's proposed SIP revisions include PSD permitting provisions that:
(1) Exclude facilities that produce ethanol through a natural
fermentation process from the definition of ``chemical process plants''
in the major NSR source permitting program as amended in the Ethanol
Rule, 72 FR 24060 (May 1, 2007); and (2) IBR changes pursuant to EPA's
Fugitive Emissions Rule, 73 FR 77882 (December 19, 2008).\3\ In today's
rulemaking, EPA is not taking action on LMAPCD's changes to its PSD
regulations to adopt provisions promulgated in the Ethanol Rule nor is
EPA taking action on LMAPCD's changes to incorporate the provisions of
the Fugitive Emissions Rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ On March 31, 2010, EPA stayed the Fugitive Emissions Rule
(73 FR 77882) for 18 months to October 3, 2011, to allow the Agency
time to propose, take comment and issue a final action regarding the
inclusion of fugitive emissions in NSR applicability determinations.
This stay was established as a result of EPA granting the Natural
Resource Defense Council's petition for reconsideration on the
original Fugitive Emissions Rule. See 73 FR 77882 (December 19,
2008). On March 30, 2011 (76 FR 17548), EPA proposed an interim rule
which superseded the March 31, 2010, stay and clarified and extended
the stay of the Fugitive Emission Rule until EPA completes its
reconsideration. The interim rule simply reverts the CFR text back
to the language that existed prior to the Fugitive Emissions Rule
changes in the December 19, 2008, rulemaking. EPA plans to issue a
final rule affirming the interim rule as final. The final rule will
remain in effect until EPA completes its reconsideration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jefferson County's practice for revising its PSD regulations is to
IBR into its SIP the version of the Code of Federal Regulations (at 40
CFR 52.21) that is in effect as of a specified date. LMAPCD's
Regulation 2.05 contains the preconstruction review program that
provides for the prevention of significant deterioration of ambient air
quality as required under part C of title I of the CAA (the PSD
program). Jefferson County's June 1, 2009, SIP revision, which provided
version 9 of LMAPCD's Regulation 2.05, IBR the federal PSD regulations
as set forth at 40 CFR 52.21, and as amended as of July 1, 2008.
Subsequently, the February 8, 2011, SIP revision, which provided
version 10 of LMAPCD's Regulation 2.05, IBR federal PSD regulations as
set forth at 40 CFR 52.21, and as amended as of July 1, 2010, thereby
superseding version 9 of Regulation 2.05. Throughout this rulemaking,
EPA will refer to the June 1, 2009, and February 8, 2011, SIP revisions
as ``Jefferson County's SIP revisions.'' In effect, the Jefferson
County SIP revisions change the LMAPCD's IBR date for Regulation 2.05
to July 1, 2010.
II. EPA's Action on Jefferson County's SIP Revision To Adopt the GHG
Tailoring Rule
As mentioned above, on February 8, 2011, KDAQ, on behalf of LMAPCD,
submitted to EPA a revision to the Jefferson County portion of
Kentucky's SIP to IBR NSR PSD requirements for GHG. Specifically, the
February 8, 2011, SIP revision includes changes to LMAPCD's Regulation
2.05--Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality (version
10) to provide authority to LMAPCD to regulate GHG under the PSD
program, and establishes appropriate PSD applicability thresholds for
GHGs, consistent with EPA's Tailoring Rule.
[[Page 62152]]
LMAPCD is currently the SIP-approved permitting authority for the
PSD program in Jefferson County, Kentucky, and does not interpret its
current SIP-approved PSD regulations at Regulation 2.05 (i.e., version
9), which IBR the federal PSD regulations, to be applicable to GHG. In
letters dated October 4, 2010, and October 19, 2010, LMAPCD notified
EPA that it did not have the authority to regulate GHG under the PSD
program, and thus was in the process of revising its regulations (the
subject of this final action) to provide LMAPCD with this authority.
The February 8, 2011, SIP revision IBR the federal PSD regulations at
40 CFR 52.21 as of July 2010 into Jefferson County Regulation 2.05 to
include the relevant federal GHG Tailoring Rule changes that provide
LMAPCD with the authority to regulate GHG under the PSD program and
establish the thresholds for GHG permitting applicability. The GHG
Tailoring Rule changes that this final action incorporates into the
Jefferson County portion of Kentucky's SIP define the term ``subject to
regulation'' for the PSD program and define ``greenhouse gases'' and
``tons per year (tpy) carbon dioxide equivalent emissions''
(CO2e). Additionally, the changes specify the methodology
for calculating an emissions increase for GHG, the applicable
thresholds for GHG emissions subject to PSD, and the schedule for when
the applicability thresholds take effect. See 75 FR at 31606-31607. EPA
has determined that these provisions, which provide LMAPCD with the
authority to regulate GHG under the PSD program and establish the
thresholds for GHG permitting applicability, are consistent with EPA's
PSD regulations for GHG emitting sources as promulgated in the GHG
Tailoring Rule and section 110 of the CAA. Therefore, EPA is approving
the GHG PSD permitting revision into the Jefferson County portion of
Kentucky's SIP. In addition, EPA is rescinding the FIP promulgated
January 14, 2011, codified in 40 CFR 52.37(b)(7), that ensures the
availability of a PSD-permitting authority for GHG-emitting sources in
Jefferson County, Kentucky. This FIP is no longer necessary since the
GHG PSD permitting revision is being approved into the Jefferson County
portion of Kentucky's SIP. Therefore, this final action removes
Jefferson County from the list at 40 CFR section 52.37.
III. EPA's Action on Jefferson County's SIP Revision To Adopt the NSR
PM2.5 PSD Permitting Requirements
Jefferson County's Regulation 2.05--Prevention of Significant
Deterioration of Air Quality IBR the provisions at 40 CFR 52.21, as
amended in the NSR PM2.5 Rule for PSD. Specifically,
Jefferson County's June 1, 2009, and February 8, 2011, SIP revisions
IBR the following NSR PM2.5 provisions for PSD: (1)
Requirement for NSR permits to address directly emitted
PM2.5 and precursor pollutants; (2) significant emission
rates for direct PM2.5 and precursor pollutants
(SO2 and NOX); (3) PSD and NNSR requirement of
states to address condensable PM in establishing enforceable emission
limits for PM10 or PM2.5; and (4)
PM2.5 emission offsets regarding the PM10
``grandfathering'' provision. In the February 8, 2011, SIP revision,
LMAPCD elected to IBR the grandfathering provision at 40 CFR
52.21(i)(1)(xi) in its PSD regulations at Regulation 2.05. EPA took
final action to repeal the PM10 grandfathering provision on
May 18, 2011. See 76 FR 28646. Therefore, EPA is not taking action to
approve this provision into the Jefferson County portion of the
Kentucky SIP. Jefferson County will need to update its PSD provisions
to reflect the repeal of the PM10 grandfathering provision
in federal regulations at 40 CFR 52.21. At this time Jefferson County's
PSD regulations are approvable because they are at least as stringent
as the current federal regulations and are consistent with section 110
of the CAA.
Jefferson County's February 11, 2011, SIP revision also IBR, into
the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP, PSD regulations
regarding the requirement to address condensable PM in applicability
determinations and in establishing enforceable emission limits in PSD
and nonattainment NSR permits, as established in the NSR
PM2.5 Rule. As discussed above in Section III.B, under a
separate action, EPA has proposed to correct the inadvertent inclusion
of ``particulate matter emissions'' in the definition of ``regulated
NSR pollutant'' as an indicator for which condensable emissions must be
addressed. See 77 FR 75656 (March 16, 2012). Further, on May 14, 2012,
the Commonwealth of Kentucky, on behalf of LMAPCD, provided a letter to
EPA with clarification of Jefferson County's intent in light of EPA's
March 12, 2012, proposed rulemaking. Specifically, in the letter
Kentucky requested that EPA not approve (into the Jefferson County
portion of the SIP) the term ``particulate matter emissions'' (at
Regulation 2.05) as part of the definition for ``regulated NSR
pollutant'' that condensable emissions be accounted for in
applicability determinations and in establishing emissions limitations
for PM. Therefore, given the Commonwealth's and LMAPCD's request and
EPA's intention to amend the definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant,''
EPA is not taking action to approve the terminology ``particulate
matter emissions'' into the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky
SIP (at Regulation 2.05) for the condensable provision at the
definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant.'' EPA is, however, approving
into the SIP at Regulation 2.05 the remaining condensable requirement
at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(vi) that condensable emissions be accounted for
in applicability determinations and in establishing emissions
limitations for PM2.5 and PM10. EPA has
determined that Jefferson County's June 1, 2009, and February 8, 2011,
SIP revisions are consistent with the NSR PM2.5 Rule for PSD
and with section 110 of the CAA. See NSR PM2.5 Rule, 75 FR
31514.
IV. EPA's Analysis of Jefferson County's SIP Revisions To Adopt the
Phase II Rule
Jefferson County's June 1, 2009, SIP revision updated LMAPCD's PSD
program to include NOX as an ozone precursor for PSD
permitting, consistent with changes to the federal regulations set
forth in the Phase II Rule at 40 CFR 52.21. Subsequently, on February
8, 2011, KDAQ submitted a SIP revision which included the June 1, 2009,
changes in addition to other federal PSD permitting updates to the
Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP. Jefferson County's SIP
revisions IBR the federal PSD regulations (at 40 CFR 52.21) to include
the NOX as a precursor PSD-only permitting provisions
promulgated in the Phase II Rule into the Jefferson County portion of
the Kentucky SIP at Regulation 2.05--Prevention of Significant
Deterioration of Air Quality (version 10) as of July 1, 2010. EPA has
determined that Jefferson County's SIP revisions are consistent with
the PSD Phase II Rule permitting requirements and section 110 of the
CAA.
V. EPA's Action on Jefferson County's SIP Revision To Adopt the Federal
NSR Reform and Reasonable Possibility Provisions
As mentioned in Section I, LMAPCD's PSD Program at Regulation
2.05--Prevention of Significant Deterioration for Air Quality
establishes the preconstruction review program as
[[Page 62153]]
required under part C of title I of the CAA. The changes to LMAPCD's
PSD rules, which EPA is now approving into the Jefferson County portion
of the Kentucky SIP, were established to update the existing PSD
Program to meet the requirements of the 2002 NSR Reform Rules.
Jefferson County's SIP revisions IBR the 2002 NSR Reform PSD changes
regarding baseline actual emissions, actual-to-projected-actual
applicability tests, and plantwide applicability limit provisions.
Jefferson County's June 1, 2009, and February 8, 2011, SIP revisions
both address the federal PSD requirements promulgated in the 2002 NSR
Reform Rules. The proposed revisions explicitly exclude the pollution
control projects and clean unit portions of the 2002 NSR Reform Rules
that were vacated by the D.C. Circuit Court. See New York v. EPA, 413
F.3d 3 (D.C. Cir. 2005).
With regard to the remanded portions of the 2002 NSR Reform Rules
related to recordkeeping and EPA's December 21, 2007, clarification of
the term ``reasonable possibility'' (72 FR 72607), Jefferson County's
SIP revisions IBR the federal revised ``reasonable possibility''
provisions at 40 CFR 52.21(r)(6). Thus, LMAPCD's recordkeeping and
reporting provisions are the same as the federal requirements
promulgated in EPA's December 21, 2007, final action.
In addition to incorporating the federal PSD regulations, Jefferson
County's February 8, 2011, SIP revision includes a technical support
document (TSD), which assesses the impact of adopting the 2002 NSR
Reform provisions into Jefferson County's PSD permitting program and
the air quality impacts. As mentioned above, LMAPCD has a SIP-approved
PSD program. However, due to the limited number of sources in Jefferson
County, the permitting program does not assess many major PSD permits.
In fact, in nearly ten years, LMAPCD has only analyzed two projects
under PSD. Most sources in Jefferson County are permitted through
LMAPCD's minor source program, which allows sources to take emission
limits to avoid PSD permitting. Additionally, regarding criteria
pollutants, the TSD explains that sources typically subject to PSD
permitting (i.e., point sources) have not been the primary driver for
past or current nonattainment NAAQS designations in Jefferson County.
See the TSD in the Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2011-0227.
LMAPCD's TSD concluded that adoption of the 2002 NSR Reform
improvements would not impede the LMAPCD's ability to comply with the
NAAQS or any reasonable progress towards continued maintenance. After
evaluating Jefferson County's SIP revision and the TSD provided with
the February 8, 2011, SIP revision, EPA has determined that the SIP
revisions to adopt NSR Reform and reasonable possibility provisions are
consistent with the requirements for the preparation, adoption and
submittal of implementation plans for the federal PSD program at 40 CFR
52.21 and the 2002 NSR Reform Rule.
VI. EPA's Action for Jefferson County's Automatic Rescission Clause
Jefferson County's February 8, 2011, SIP revision adds a new
section to Regulation 2.05, Section 2 ``Effect of Stay, Vacatur, or
Withdrawal,'' also known as an automatic rescission clause. This clause
provides that in the event that EPA or a federal court stays, vacates,
or withdraws any section or subsection of 40 CFR 52.21, that section or
subsection shall automatically be deemed stayed, vacated or withdrawn
from Jefferson County's SIP-approved PSD program at Regulation 2.05.
The period of delay resulting from a stay would begin and end for
purposes of Jefferson County's SIP on the date specified by EPA in a
Federal Register notice announcing the stay. Likewise, any provision
that is vacated or withdrawn shall be null and void for purposes of
Jefferson County's SIP as of the date specified in the notice of
vacatur or withdrawal published by EPA in a Federal Register notice.
EPA has determined that Jefferson County's automatic rescission
clause is approvable. In assessing the approvability of this provision,
EPA considered two key factors: (1) Whether the public will be given
reasonable notice of any change to the SIP that occurs as a result of
the automatic rescission clause, and (2) whether any future change to
the SIP that occurs as a result of the automatic rescission clause
would be consistent with EPA's interpretation of the effect of the
triggering EPA or federal court action (e.g., the extent of an
administrative or judicial stay). These criteria are derived from the
SIP revision procedures set forth in the CAA and federal regulations.
Regarding public notice, CAA section 110(l) provides that any
revision to a SIP submitted by a state to EPA for approval ``shall be
adopted by such State after reasonable notice and public hearing.'' In
accordance with CAA section 110(l), the LMAPCD followed applicable
notice-and-comment procedures prior to adopting the automatic
rescission clause. Thus, the public is on notice that the Jefferson
County portion of the Kentucky SIP will automatically update to reflect
any EPA or federal action that stays, withdraws, or vacates any portion
of 40 CFR 52.21. In addition, the automatic rescission clause provides
that no change to the SIP will occur until EPA publishes a Federal
Register notice announcing that a portion of 40 CFR 52.21 has been
stayed, vacated, or withdrawn. Thus, the timing and extent of any
future SIP change resulting from the automatic rescission clause will
be clear to both the regulated community and the general public.
EPA's consideration of whether any SIP change resulting from the
proposed automatic rescission clause would be consistent with EPA's
interpretation of the effect of the triggering action on federal
regulations is based on 40 CFR 51.105. Under 40 CFR 51.105,
``[r]evisions of a plan, or any portion thereof, will not be considered
part of an applicable plan until such revisions have been approved by
the Administrator in accordance with this part.'' See 40 CFR 51.105.
While EPA is approving the automatic updating of the Jefferson County
portion of the Kentucky SIP to reflect the stay, withdrawal or vacatur
of any section or subsection of 40 CFR 52.21, there could be varying
interpretations of the timing and extent of changes to 40 CFR 52.21
resulting from a given EPA or federal court action. By tying the
automatic updating of the SIP to EPA's publication of a Federal
Register notice announcing the change to 40 CFR 52.21, the automatic
rescission clause ensures that any change to the SIP will be consistent
with EPA's interpretation of the triggering action.
VII. Final Action
Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, EPA is taking final action to
approve Jefferson County's June 1, 2009, and February 8, 2011, SIP
revisions which IBR (into the Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky
SIP) federal requirements for NSR PSD permitting. Jefferson County's
SIP revisions consist of changes to the LMAPCD Air Quality Regulation
2.05--Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality and
address several NSR PSD permitting requirements promulgated at 40 CFR
52.21. Specifically, Jefferson County's June 1, 2009, SIP revision
adopts federal regulations relating to PSD requirements for the NSR
PM2.5 Rule, the Phase II Rule, the 2002 NSR Reform Rule, and
the NSR Reasonable Possibility Rule into the Jefferson County portion
of the Kentucky SIP. Jefferson County's February 8, 2011, SIP revision
includes all of the aforementioned updates to
[[Page 62154]]
LMAPCD's PSD regulations but also provides Jefferson County with the
authority to regulate GHG emissions under its PSD program, establishes
appropriate emissions thresholds for determining PSD applicability with
respect to new and modified GHG-emitting sources (in accordance with
EPA's Tailoring Rule), and incorporates an automatic rescission clause
for 40 CFR 52.21 regulations. EPA has determined that these SIP
revisions are approvable because they are consistent with the CAA and
EPA regulations regarding PSD permitting. In addition, EPA is
rescinding the FIP promulgated on January 14, 2011, at 40 CFR
52.37(b)(7); therefore, this final rule removes Jefferson County from
the PSD GHG FIP listing at 40 CFR section 52.37.
VIII. 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
action merely approves state law as meeting federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by
Commonwealth 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 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.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by December 11, 2012. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Greenhouse gases,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate
matter, Nitrogen Oxides, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements and
Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: September 12, 2012.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42.U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart A--General Provisions
Sec. 52.37 [Amended]
0
2. Section 52.37 is amended by removing and reserving paragraph (b)(7).
Subpart S--Kentucky
0
3. Section 52.920(c) Table 2 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 52.920 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
Table 2--EPA-Approved Jefferson County Regulations for Kentucky
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal
Reg Title/subject EPA approval Register District Explanation
date notice effective date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reg 1--General Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.01................. General Application 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 03/17/99 ...................
of Regulations and
Standards.
1.02................. Definitions......... 11/19/02 67 FR 69688 12/19/01 ...................
1.03................. Abbreviations and 11/19/02 67 FR 69688 05/15/02 ...................
Acronyms.
1.04................. Performance Tests... 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 11/19/97 ...................
1.05................. Compliance with 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 11/18/92 ...................
Emission Standards
and Maintenance
Requirements.
[[Page 62155]]
1.06................. Source Self- 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 12/15/93 ...................
Monitoring and
Reporting.
1.07................. Emissions During 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 01/17/96 ...................
Startups,
Shutdowns,
Malfunctions and
Emergencies.
1.08................. Administrative 11/03/03 68 FR 62236 06/19/02 ...................
Procedures.
1.09................. Prohibition of Air 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 11/16/83 ...................
Pollution.
1.10................. Circumvention....... 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 04/19/72 ...................
1.11................. Control of Open 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 02/22/90 ...................
Burning.
1.14................. Control of Fugitive 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 01/20/88 ...................
Particulate
Emissions.
1.18................. Rule Effectiveness.. 10/23/01 66 FR 53689 09/21/94 ...................
1.19................. Administrative 11/19/02 67 FR 69688 05/15/02 ...................
Hearings.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reg 2--Permit Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.01................. General Application. 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 04/21/82 ...................
2.02................. Air Pollution 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 06/21/95 ...................
Regulation
Requirements and
Exemptions.
2.03................. Permit Requirements-- 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 12/15/93 ...................
Non-Title V
Construction and
Operating Permits
and Demolition/
Renovation Permits.
2.04................. Construction or 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 03/17/93 ...................
Modification of
Major Sources in or
Impacting Upon Non-
Attainment Areas
(Emission Offset
Requirements).
2.05................. Prevention of 10/12/12 [Insert 11/17/10 This approval does
Significant citation of not include
Deterioration of publication] Jefferson County's
Air Quality. revisions to
incorporate by
reference the
Ethanol Rule (72
FR 24060, May 1,
2007), Fugitives
Emissions Rule (73
FR 77882, December
19, 2008), the
PM10
Grandfathering
Provision and the
term ``particulate
matter emissions''
(at 40 CFR
52.21(i)(1)(xi)
and
51.166(b)(49)(vi)
respectively in
the NSR PM2.5 Rule
(73 FR 28321, May
16, 2008).
2.06................. Permit Requirements-- 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 11/16/83 ...................
Other Sources.
2.07................. Public Notification 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 06/21/95 ...................
for Title V, PSD,
and Offset Permits;
SIP Revisions; and
Use of Emission
Reduction Credits.
2.09................. Causes for Permit 11/03/03 68 FR 62236 06/19/02 ...................
Suspension.
2.10................. Stack Height 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 07/19/89 ...................
Considerations.
2.11................. Air Quality Model 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 05/19/99 ...................
Usage.
2.17................. Federally 11/03/03 68 FR 62236 06/19/02 ...................
Enforceable
District Origin
Operating Permits.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reg 3--Ambient Air Quality Standards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.01................. Purpose of Standards 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 06/13/79 ...................
and Expression of
Non-Degradation
Intention.
3.02................. Applicability of 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 06/13/79 ...................
Ambient Air Quality
Standards.
3.03................. Definitions......... 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 06/13/79 ...................
3.04................. Ambient Air Quality 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 04/20/88 ...................
Standards.
3.05................. Methods of 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 04/20/88 ...................
Measurement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reg 4--Emergency Episodes
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.01................. General Provisions 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 06/13/79 ...................
for Emergency
Episodes.
4.02................. Episode Criteria.... 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 04/20/88 ...................
4.03................. General Abatement 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 02/16/83 ...................
Requirements.
4.04................. Particulate and 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 04/19/72 ...................
Sulfur Dioxide
Reduction
Requirements.
[[Page 62156]]
4.05................. Hydrocarbon and 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 02/16/83 ...................
Nitrogen Oxides
Reduction
Requirements.
4.06................. Carbon Monoxide 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 02/16/83 ...................
Reduction
Requirements.
4.07................. Episode Reporting 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 06/13/79 ...................
Requirements.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reg 6--Standards of Performance for Existing Affected Facilities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6.01................. General Provisions.. 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 11/16/83 ...................
6.02................. Emission Monitoring 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 11/16/83 ...................
for Existing
Sources.
6.07................. Standards of 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 06/13/79 ...................
Performance for
Existing Indirect
Heat Exchangers.
6.08................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 06/13/79 ...................
Performance for
Existing
Incinerators.
6.09................. Standards of 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 03/17/99 ...................
Performance for
Existing Process
Operations.
6.10................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53660 11/16/83 ...................
Performance for
Existing Process
Gas Streams.
6.12................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 ...................
Performance for
Existing Asphalt
Paving Operations.
6.13................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 ...................
Performance for
Existing Storage
Vessels for
Volatile Organic
Compounds.
6.14................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 04/21/82 ...................
Performance for
Selected Existing
Petroleum Refining
Processes and
Equipment.
6.15................. Standard of 01/25/80 45 FR 6092 06/13/79 ...................
Performance for
Gasoline Transfer
to Existing Service
Station Storage
Tanks (Stage I
Vapor Recovery).
6.16................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 ...................
Performance for
Existing Large
Appliance Surface
Coating Operations.
6.17................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 11/18/92 ...................
Performance for
Existing Automobile
and Truck Surface
Coating Operations.
6.18................. Standards of 11/19/02 67 FR 69688 05/15/02 ...................
Performance for
Existing Solvent
Metal Cleaning
Equipment.
6.19................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 ...................
Performance for
Existing Metal
Furniture Surface
Coating Operations.
6.20................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 11/16/83 ...................
Performance for
Existing Bulk
Gasoline Plants.
6.21................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 11/16/83 ...................
Performance for
Existing Gasoline
Loading Facilities
at Bulk Terminals.
6.22................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 03/17/93 ...................
Performance for
Existing Volatile
Organic Materials
Loading Facilities.
6.24................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 03/17/93 ...................
Performance for
Existing Sources
Using Organic
Materials.
6.26................. Standards of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 06/13/79 ...................
Performance for
Existing Volatile
Organic Compound
Water Separators.
6.27................. Standards of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 06/13/79 ...................
Performance for
Existing Liquid
Waste Incinerators.
6.28................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 03/18/81 ...................
Performance for
Existing Hot Air
Aluminum
Atomization
Processes.
6.29................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 ...................
Performance for
Existing Graphic
Arts Facilities
Using Rotogravure
and Flexography.
6.30................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 ...................
Performance for
Existing Factory
Surface Coating
Operations of Flat
Wood Paneling.
[[Page 62157]]
6.31................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 04/23/96 ...................
Performance for
Existing
Miscellaneous Metal
Parts and Products
Surface-Coating
Operations.
6.32................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 ...................
Performance for
Leaks from Existing
Petroleum Refinery
Equipment.
6.33................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 ...................
Performance for
Existing
Synthesized
Pharmaceutical
Product
Manufacturing
Operations.
6.34................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 ...................
Performance for
Existing Pneumatic
Rubber Tire
Manufacturing
Plants.
6.35................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 ...................
Performance for
Existing Fabric,
Vinyl and Paper
Surface Coating
Operations.
6.38................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 12/17/86 ...................
Performance for
Existing Air
Oxidation Processes
in Synthetic
Organic Chemical
Manufacturing
Industries.
6.39................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 07/17/96 ...................
Performance for
Equipment Leaks of
Volatile Organic
Compounds in
Existing Synthetic
Organic Chemical
and Polymer
Manufacturing
Plants.
6.40................. Standards of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 08/18/93 ...................
Performance for
Gasoline Transfer
to Motor Vehicles
(Stage II Vapor
Recovery and
Control).
6.42................. Reasonably Available 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 03/17/99 ...................
Control Technology
Requirements for
Major Volatile
Organic Compound-
and Nitrogen Oxides-
Emitting Facilities.
6.43................. Volatile Organic 10/23/01 66 FR 53689 05/21/97 ...................
Compound Reduction
Requirements.
6.45................. Standards of 10/23/01 66 FR 53689 02/02/94 ...................
Performance for
Existing Solid
Waste Landfills.
6.44................. Standards of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 09/20/95 ...................
Performance for
Existing Commercial
Motor Vehicle and
Mobile Equipment
Refinishing
Operations.
6.46................. Standards of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 12/21/94 ...................
Performance for
Existing Ferroalloy
and Calcium Carbide
Production
Facilities.
6.48................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 07/19/95 ...................
Performance for
Existing Bakery
Oven Operations.
6.49................. Standards of 10/23/01 66 FR 53664 06/20/01 ...................
Performance for
Reactor Processes
and Distillation
Operations
Processes in the
Synthetic Organic
Chemical
Manufacturing
Industry.
6.50................. NOX Requirements for 11/19/02 67 FR 69688 03/20/02 ...................
Portland Cement
Kilns.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reg 7--Standards of Performance for New Affected Facilities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
7.01................. General Provisions.. 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/17/00 ...................
7.06................. Standards of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 04/21/82 ...................
Performance for New
Indirect Heat
Exchangers.
7.07................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 09/15/93 ...................
Performance for New
Incinerators.
7.08................. Standards of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 03/17/99 ...................
Performance for New
Process Operations.
7.09................. Standards of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 06/18/97 ...................
Performance for New
Process Gas Streams.
7.11................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 ...................
Performance for New
Asphalt Paving
Operations.
7.12................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 05/15/91 ...................
Performance for New
Storage Vessels for
Volatile Organic
Compounds.
[[Page 62158]]
7.14................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53661 06/13/79 ...................
Performance for
Selected New
Petroleum Refining
Processes and
Equipment.
7.15................. Standards of 10/23/01 66 FR 53662 04/20/88 ...................
Performance for
Gasoline Transfer
to New Service
Station Storage
Tanks (Stage I
Vapor Recovery).
7.18................. Standards of 10/23/01 66 FR 53662 05/15/91 ...................
Performance for New
Solvent Metal
Cleaning Equipment.
7.20................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53662 11/16/83 ...................
Performance for New
Gasoline Loading
Facilities at Bulk
Plants.
7.22................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53662 03/17/93 ...................
Performance for New
Volatile Organic
Materials Loading
Facilities.
7.25................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53662 03/17/93 ...................
Performance for New
Sources Using
Volatile Organic
Compounds.
7.34................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53662 06/13/79 ...................
Performance for New
Sulfite Pulp Mills.
7.35................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53662 06/13/79 ...................
Performance for New
Ethylene Producing
Plants.
7.36................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53662 06/13/79 ...................
Performance for New
Volatile Organic
Compound Water
Separators.
7.51................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53662 01/20/88 ...................
Performance for New
Liquid Waste
Incinerators.
7.52................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53662 05/15/91 ...................
Performance for New
Fabric, Vinyl, and
Paper Surface
Coating Operations.
7.55................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53662 03/17/93 ...................
Performance for New
Insulation of
Magnet Wire.
7.56................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53662 05/15/91 ...................
Performance for
Leaks from New
Petroleum Refinery
Equipment.
7.57................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53662 05/15/91 ...................
Performance for New
Graphic Arts
Facilities Using
Rotogravure and
Flexography.
7.58................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53662 05/15/91 ...................
Performance for New
Factory Surface
Coating Operations
of Flat Wood
Paneling.
7.59................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53662 04/23/96 ...................
Performance for New
Miscellaneous Metal
Parts and Products
Surface Coating
Operations.
7.60................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53662 05/15/91 ...................
Performance for New
Synthesized
Pharmaceutical
Product
Manufacturing
Operations.
7.77................. Standards of 10/23/01 66 FR 53662 10/20/93 ...................
Performance for New
Blast Furnace
Casthouses.
7.79................. Standards of 10/23/01 66 FR 53690 02/02/94 ...................
Performance for New
Commercial Motor
Vehicles and Mobile
Equipment
Refinishing
Operations.
7.81................. Standard of 10/23/01 66 FR 53662 05/17/00 ...................
Performance for New
or Modified Bakery
Oven Operations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reg 8--Mobile Source Emissions Control
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-24096 Filed 10-11-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
