Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Montana; Revisions to the Administrative Rules of Montana-Air Quality, Subchapter 7, Subchapter 16 and Subchapter 17, 67596-67600 [2012-27566]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
67596
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 219 / Tuesday, November 13, 2012 / Proposed Rules
comfort of other participants (see
www.access-board.gov/about/policies/
fragrance.htm for more information).
Also, persons wishing to provide
handouts or other written information to
the committee are requested to provide
electronic formats to Rex Pace via email
prior to the meetings so that alternate
formats can be distributed to committee
members.
David M. Capozzi,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 2012–27516 Filed 11–9–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8150–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R08–OAR–2012–0846; FRL-9751–5]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans;
Montana; Revisions to the
Administrative Rules of Montana—Air
Quality, Subchapter 7, Subchapter 16
and Subchapter 17
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve
new rules and revisions as submitted by
the State of Montana on September 23,
2011, as revisions to Montana’s State
Implementation Plan. Montana adopted
these rules on December 2, 2005, and
March 23, 2006. The new rules adopted
on December 2, 2005, became stateeffective on January 1, 2006; the new
rules and revisions adopted on March
23, 2006, became state-effective on April
7, 2006. These new rules and revisions
meet the requirements of the Clean Air
Act and EPA’s minor new source review
regulations. The intended effect of this
action is to propose to approve these
rules as they are consistent with the
Clean Air Act. This action is being taken
under section 110 of the Clean Air Act.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before December 13, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08–
OAR–2012–0846, by one of the
following methods:
• www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Email: daly.carl@epa.gov and
leone.kevin@epa.gov
• Fax: (303) 312–6064 (please alert
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing
comments).
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:23 Nov 09, 2012
Jkt 229001
• Mail: Carl Daly, Director, Air
Program, Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P–
AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver,
Colorado 80202–1129.
• Hand Delivery: Carl Daly, Director,
Air Program, Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P–
AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver,
Colorado 80202–1129. Such deliveries
are only accepted Monday through
Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays. Special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R08–OAR–2012–
0846. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or email. The www.regulations.gov web
site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an email
comment directly to EPA, without going
through www.regulations.gov, your
email address will be automatically
captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public
docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact
information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
For additional instructions on
submitting comments, go to Section I.
General Information of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the www.regulations.gov
index. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publiclyavailable docket materials are available
either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Program, Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8,
1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado
80202–1129. EPA requests that if at all
possible, you contact the individual
listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section to view the hard copy
of the docket. You may view the hard
copy of the docket Monday through
Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kevin Leone, Air Program, Mailcode
8P–AR, Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop
Street, Denver, Colorado 80202–1129,
(303) 312–6227, or leone.kevin@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. General Information
II. What is being addressed in this proposed
action?
III. What Authorities Apply to EPA’s
Proposed Action
IV. EPA’s Review and Proposed Action on
SIP Revisions
V. Summary of EPA’s Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Definitions
For the purpose of this document, we
are giving meaning to certain words or
initials as follows:
(i) The words or initials Act or CAA
mean or refer to the Clean Air Act,
unless the context indicates otherwise.
(ii) The initials ARM mean or refer to
the Administrative Rule of Montana.
(iii) The words EPA, we, us or our
mean or refer to the United States
Environmental Protection Agency.
(iv) The initials MACT mean
Maximum Achievable Control
Technology.
(v) The initials MAQP mean Montana
Air Quality Permit.
(vi) The initials MRR mean
Monitoring, Reporting and
Recordkeeping.
(vii) The initials NAAQS mean
National Ambient Air Quality
Standards.
(viii) The initials NESHAP mean
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants.
(ix) The initials NSR mean or refer to
new source review, a phrase intended to
encompass the stationary source
regulatory programs that regulate the
construction and modification of
stationary sources as provided under
CAA section 110(a)(2)(C), CAA Title I,
E:\FR\FM\13NOP1.SGM
13NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 219 / Tuesday, November 13, 2012 / Proposed Rules
parts C and D, and 40 CFR 51.160
through 51.166, which includes new
source review for both major and minor
sources.
(x) The word Program mean or refer
to the Montana Oil and Gas Registration
Program, unless the context indicates
otherwise.
(xi) The initials SIP mean or refer to
State Implementation Plan.
(xii) The words State or Montana
mean the State of Montana, unless the
context indicates otherwise.
I. General Information
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with
A. What should I consider as I prepare
my comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this
information to EPA through
www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly
mark the part or all of the information
that you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information in a disk or CD ROM that
you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the
disk or CD ROM as CBI and then
identify electronically within the disk or
CD ROM the specific information that is
claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that
includes information claimed as CBI, a
copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked
will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments.
When submitting comments, remember
to:
a. Identify the rulemaking by docket
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date and page number).
b. Follow directions—The agency may
ask you to respond to specific questions
or organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.
c. Explain why you agree or disagree;
suggest alternatives and substitute
language for your requested changes.
d. Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information and/
or data that you used.
e. If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
f. Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns, and suggest
alternatives.
g. Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats.
h. Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:23 Nov 09, 2012
Jkt 229001
II. What is being addressed in this
proposed action?
On September 23, 2011 the State of
Montana submitted new rules and
revisions to revise the Montana SIP. The
submission contains new rules I–VI,
codified as Administrative Rule of
Montana (ARM) 17.8.1601, 17.8.1602,
17.8.1603, 17.8.1604, 17.8.1605, and
17.8.1606, pertaining to the regulation
of oil and gas well facilities. EPA is
proposing to approve these new rules in
this notice. The Montana Board of
Environmental Review (Board) adopted
these new rules to the existing SIP on
December 2, 2005.
This submission also contains new
rules I–IX, codified as ARM 17.8.1701,
17.8.1702, 17.8.1703, 17.8.1704,
17.8.1705,17.8.1710, 17.8.1711,
17.8.1712 and 17.8.1713 pertaining to
the regulation of oil and gas well
facilities. EPA is proposing to approve
these rule submissions in this action.
The Board adopted these new rules to
the existing SIP on March 23, 2006.
This submission contains revisions to
ARM 17.8.744 which were adopted on
March 23, 2006. The proposed revisions
to ARM 17.8.744 are a conforming
change because of the addition of new
rules.
The proposed approval of the revised
and new rules listed above would
establish a registration system for oil
and gas well facilities that presently
require a Montana minor NSR air
quality permit under the SIP
regulations. The proposed new rules
would allow the owner or operator of an
oil or gas well facility to register with
the Montana Department of
Environmental Quality (MDEQ) in lieu
of submitting a permit application and
obtaining a permit to construct or
modify the source before commencing
construction or modification. Currently,
with specific exemptions, the
administrative rules adopted under the
Montana Clean Air Act and approved by
the EPA into the SIP, require the owner
or operator of sources of air pollution to
obtain a permit prior to construction or
modification.
Montana originally submitted these
rules on October 16, 2006 and
November 1, 2006, to EPA for inclusion
into the SIP. EPA proposed to
disapprove these submittals on January
6, 2011 (76 FR 758). EPA had several
concerns with the Program, as was
explained in 76 FR 758. In March of
2011, the State withdrew the October
16, 2006, and November 1, 2006,
submittals and, after several discussions
between EPA and the State, Montana
resubmitted the oil and gas rules on
September 23, 2011. The State’s
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
67597
September 2011 submittal included a
revised CAA section 110(l)
demonstration and other supplemental
data, which addressed the concerns we
raised in our 76 FR 758 proposed action.
III. What Authorities Apply to EPA’s
Proposed Action
Section 110(l) of the CAA states,
‘‘[e]ach revision to an implementation
plan submitted by a State under this Act
shall be adopted by such State after
reasonable notice and public hearing.
The Administrator shall not approve a
revision to a plan if the revision would
interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress (as defined
in section 171), or any other applicable
requirement of this Act.’’
A demonstration is necessary to show
that this revision will not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of the
NAAQS, including those for ozone,
particulate matter, carbon monoxide,
sulfur dioxide, lead, nitrogen oxides or
any other requirement of the Act.
Therefore, EPA will approve a SIP
revision only after a state has
demonstrated that such a revision will
not interfere (‘‘noninterference’’) with
attainment of the NAAQS, rate of
progress, reasonable further progress or
any other applicable requirement of the
CAA.
The CAA at section 110(a)(2)(C)
requires states to include a minor NSR
program in their SIP to regulate
modifications and new construction of
stationary sources within the area as
necessary to assure the NAAQS are
achieved. EPA’s implementing
regulations at 40 CFR 51.160–164 are
intended to ensure that new source
growth is consistent with maintenance
of the NAAQS and 40 CFR 51.160(e)
requires states to identify types and
sizes of facilities which will be subject
to review under their minor NSR
program. For sources identified under
40 CFR 51.160(e), section 51.160(a)
requires that the SIP include legally
enforceable procedures that enable a
state or local agency to determine
whether construction or modification of
a facility, building, structure or
installation, or combination of these
will result in a violation of applicable
portions of the control strategy; or
interference with attainment or
maintenance of a national standard in
the state in which the proposed source
(or modification) is located or in a
neighboring state. Section 110(i) of the
CAA specifically precludes states from
changing the requirements of the SIP
except through SIP revisions approved
by EPA. SIP revisions will be approved
by EPA only if they meet all
E:\FR\FM\13NOP1.SGM
13NOP1
67598
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 219 / Tuesday, November 13, 2012 / Proposed Rules
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with
requirements of section 110 of the CAA
and the implementing regulations at 40
CFR part 51. See CAA section 110(l); 40
CFR 51.104.
EPA has also issued several guidance
memoranda that explain the Agency’s
requirements for practicable
enforceability for purposes of effectively
limiting a source’s potential to emit (See
docket).
EPA recognizes that, under the
applicable federal regulations, states
have broad discretion to determine the
scope of their minor NSR programs as
needed to attain and maintain the
NAAQS. A state may tailor its minor
NSR requirements as long as they are
consistent with the requirements of 40
CFR part 51. States may also provide a
rationale for why the rules are at least
as stringent as the 40 CFR part 51
requirements where the revisions are
different from those in 40 CFR part 51.
Since there are no ambient air quality
standards for air toxics, the area’s
compliance with any applicable
maximum achievable control
technology (MACT) standards, as well
as, any federal mobile source control
requirements under CAA sections 112
or 202(l) would constitute an acceptable
demonstration of noninterference for air
toxics.
Section 110(l) does not require a
demonstration of noninterference for
changes to federal requirements that are
not included in the SIP. A revision to
the SIP, however, cannot interfere with
any federally mandated program such as
a MACT standard (or related section 112
requirements).
IV. EPA’s Review and Proposed Action
on SIP Revisions
EPA is proposing to approve the new
and revised rules as submitted by
Montana on September 23, 2011, as
identified above.
As discussed above, any minor NSR
SIP revision submittal must meet
section 110(l) of the CAA. Section 110(l)
of the Act indicates that EPA cannot
approve a revision of a plan if the
revision would interfere with any
applicable requirement concerning
attainment and reasonable further
progress (as defined in Section 171), or
any other applicable requirement of the
Act. In a memo from Richard R. Long,
Director, Region 8 Air and Radiation
Program, to the Montana Board of
Environmental Review on January 30,
2006 (see docket) we stated that MDEQ
should provide an appropriate analysis
showing that the proposed new rules
will not impact the NAAQS or
prevention of significant deterioration
(PSD) increments. One of the concerns
EPA expressed in 76 FR 758 related to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:23 Nov 09, 2012
Jkt 229001
the cumulative effect of numerous
registration sources. We recommended
that MDEQ perform a screening
cumulative impact analysis showing
what effect oil and gas well facilities
would have on the ozone, NO2, SO2 and
PM NAAQS and PSD increments.
MDEQ performed such an analysis. (See
docket, demonstration of
noninterference pages 1–42 and
attachments 1–11.) MDEQ’s analysis
went back prior to 2006, when Montana
began implementing the Oil and Gas
Registration Program as a state-approved
rule, and provided data on the amount
of oil and gas registration applications
received. Monitoring and modeling data
for all NAAQS pollutants from 2006 to
present shows that the Oil and Gas
Registration Program has not interfered
with attainment or maintenance of any
NAAQS, PSD increment, or any other
requirement of the Act. Therefore, EPA
has sufficient information to determine
that the proposed new and revised rules
would not interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment and
maintenance of the NAAQS, PSD
increments, or any other requirement of
the Act.
EPA expressed concerns in 76 FR 758
that the new rules do not meet the
requirements of CAA Section
110(a)(2)(A) and 40 CFR 51.160(a)(1),
which require that SIP revision
submittals be enforceable. The
September 23, 1987, Memorandum from
J. Craig Potter, Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation, and Thomas L.
Adams Jr., Assistant Administrator for
Enforcement and Compliance
Monitoring, entitled ‘‘Review of State
Implementation Plans and Revisions for
Enforceability and Legal Sufficiency’’
provides EPA’s guidance for
interpreting this provision in the Act.
EPA initially viewed the new rules as
a stand-alone program, which was not
subject to provisions in the other parts
of ARM 17.8. As such, we were
concerned that the new and revised
rules did not set forth legally
enforceable procedures that would
enable the State or local agency to
determine whether construction of a
minor source facility would result in
interference with attainment or
maintenance of the NAAQS (40 CFR
51.160(a)) and that such procedures did
not include a means by which the State
or local agency to prevent construction
of a minor source facility if it would
result in interference with attainment or
maintenance of the NAAQS (40
CFR51.160(b)). In 76 FR 758, EPA did
not consider other requirements in ARM
17.8 as being applicable to the Program.
However, after reviewing the State’s
110(l) demonstration and the
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
requirements in ARM 17.8, it is clear
that the rules in ARM 17.8 subchapters
1–6 and portions of subchapter 7 apply
to the State’s new rules for oil and gas
facilities registration. (See 110(l)
demonstration pages 2–9 and
attachments 2 and 3 of the state’s 110(l)
analysis.) These subchapters provide,
for example, testing requirements,
source testing protocol, malfunction
procedures, enforcement procedures,
and specific ambient air monitoring
requirements for criteria pollutants.
Therefore, the new and revised rules
which we are proposing for approval in
this notice are in compliance with CAA
Section 110(a)(2)(A), 40 CFR 51.160(a)
and 40 CFR 51.160(b).
EPA also had concerns that a source
did not need to provide notice to the
State before construction begins. The
new and revised rules allow sources to
operate and emit criteria pollutants up
to 60 days before submitting a
registration or permit application;
therefore there is no requirement that
the State be notified before construction
begins. However, the new rules in ARM
17.8.16 contain numerous safeguards
that facilities must operate under until
the MDEQ approves the registration or
permit application. These safeguards
include: limiting production; limiting
hours of operation and/or fuel
consumption to ensure that the facility’s
potential to emit is below major source
thresholds (17.8.1604); emission control
requirements (17.8.1605); inspection
and repair requirements (17.8.1608);
and reporting and recordkeeping
requirements (17.8.1609). Sources must
also comply with requirements in ARM
17.8.1 (general requirements), ARM
17.8.2 (ambient standards), and ARM
17.8.3 (emission standards), in addition
to all other applicable requirements in
ARM 17.8. Therefore, EPA concludes
that the new and revised rules do not
violate 40 CFR 51.160(a) and 40 CFR
160(b).
EPA also had concerns that the
Program did not include the necessary
monitoring, reporting and
recordkeeping (MRR) requirements
required for an oil and gas registration
program to ensure accountability and
provide a means to determine
compliance. However, EPA did not
consider the requirements of other
subchapters of chapter 8 when
considering MRR requirements. As
described in the State’s submittal (110(l)
demonstration, Table 1 (pages 3–15) and
Table 2 (pages 18–21), the MRR
requirements in ARM 17.8.1 (General
Requirements), ARM 17.8.2 (Ambient
Air Quality), ARM 17.8.3 (Emission
Standards) are all applicable to
registered sources, in addition to the
E:\FR\FM\13NOP1.SGM
13NOP1
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 219 / Tuesday, November 13, 2012 / Proposed Rules
MRR requirements in ARM 17.8.1605
and ARM 17.8.1713. Therefore, EPA
proposes to find that the MRR
requirements for a registered oil and gas
facility are at least as stringent as what
would be required for an oil and gas
facility that would operate under a
Montana Air Quality Permit (MAQP).
The SIP approved MAQP rules contain
no specific MRR requirements. Instead,
a permitted facility is given MRR
requirements through the actual permit.
In existing MAQP regulations (ARM
17.8.7), the MRR requirements are
specified in the facility permit pursuant
to a case-by-case best available control
technology analysis rather than uniform
rule conditions.
EPA also finds that the regulatory
provisions in 40 CFR 51.160(c), 40 CFR
51.160(d), 40 CFR 51.160(e) and 40 CFR
51.160(f), are met by the requirements in
ARM 17.8.1703 (Registration Process
and Information), ARM 17.8.1705
(Operating Requirements: Facility-Wide)
and the requirements in ARM 17.8.1.
The MDEQ issued a Notice of Public
Hearing and allowed for public
comment (see submittal, tabs 19 and
20), which meets the requirements in 40
CFR 51.161 (public availability of
information). The requirements in 40
CFR 51.164 (stack height procedures)
are met in ARM 17.8.4 (stack heights
and dispersion techniques).
EPA also expressed concerns in 76 FR
758 with new rule ARM 17.8.1703(7),
which provides that ‘‘The owner or
operator of a registration eligible facility
for which a valid MAQP has been
issued may register with the department
and request a revocation of the MAQP.’’
In 76 FR 758, EPA concluded this was
a relaxation under CAA section 110(l),
because it provides an exemption from
SIP requirements not previously
available to sources. This SIP relaxation
would create a risk of interference with
attainment and maintenance of the
NAAQS and control strategy. EPA
lacked sufficient information to
determine that 17.8.1703(7) would not
interfere with attainment and
maintenance of the NAAQS, PSD
increment, or any other requirement of
the Act.
Montana issued approximately 30
MAQPs to oil and gas well facilities
prior to implementing the oil and gas
registration program. A comparison of
MAQP requirements and registration
requirements (see the state’s110(l)
analysis, pages 19–21) show comparable
requirements.
EPA also expressed concerns in 76 FR
758 with new rule ARM 17.8.1712(1),
which provides that, ‘‘[l]eak detection
methods may incorporate the use of
sight, sound, or smell.’’ After further
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:23 Nov 09, 2012
Jkt 229001
review, we propose to find that this
language is approvable because ARM
17.8.1712(1) is similar to EPA regulatory
requirements in 40 CFR part 63, subpart
BBBBBB and will not interfere with any
applicable requirements of the Act. EPA
notes that 40 CFR part 63, subpart
BBBBBB provides similar leak detection
methods using sight, sound, and smell.
This regulation applies to area sources
under the National Emission Standards
for Hazardous Air Pollutants
(NESHAPs) for Source Category:
Gasoline Distribution Bulk Terminals,
Bulk Plants, and Pipeline Facilities.
EPA determined for this source category
it was appropriate to allow leak
detection methods using sight, sound,
and smell.
V. Summary of Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve revisions
to ARM 17.8.744 and new rules I–VI,
codified as ARM 17.8.1601, 17.8.1602,
17.8.1603, 17.8.1604, 17.8.1605, and
17.8.1606, pertaining to the regulation
of oil and gas well facilities, and new
rules I–IX, codified as ARM 17.8.1701,
17.8.1702, 17.8.1703, 17.8.1704,
17.8.1705,17.8.1710, 17.8.1711,
17.8.1712 and 17.8.1713 pertaining to
the regulation of oil and gas well
facilities, as submitted by the State of
Montana on September 23, 2011.
EPA is proposing to approve the new
and revised rules as identified in this
action and EPA is proposing approval
based upon sufficient information to
determine that the requested revision to
add the new oil and gas registration
program to the Montana SIP will not
interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress as required
by CAA Section 110(l), or any other
requirement of the Act. The new and
revised rules comply with section
110(a)(2)(C), which requires states to
include a minor NSR program in their
SIP to regulate modifications and new
construction of stationary sources
within the area as necessary to assure
the NAAQS are achieved. EPA also
finds the new and revised rules comply
with 40 CFR 51.160–40 CFR 51.164 and
meet the requirements for appropriate
MRR. EPA is also proposing to approve
ARM 17.8.744 as these revisions are
conforming changes to the addition of
new rules.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
67599
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve
state choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly,
this proposed action merely approves
state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
this action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have
tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the State, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
E:\FR\FM\13NOP1.SGM
13NOP1
67600
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 219 / Tuesday, November 13, 2012 / Proposed Rules
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds, New Source
Review, Minor New Source Review,
Permitting, Incorporation by reference.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq
Dated: October 19, 2012.
James B. Martin,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2012–27566 Filed 11–9–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0792;9750–9]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans and Designation
of Areas for Air Quality Planning
Purposes; State of Nevada;
Redesignation of Clark County to
Attainment for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone
Standard
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to approve,
as a revision of the Nevada state
implementation plan, the State’s plan
for maintaining the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard in Clark County for ten years
beyond redesignation, and the related
motor vehicle emissions budgets,
because they meet the applicable
requirements for such plans and
budgets. EPA is also proposing to
approve a request from the Nevada
Division of Environmental Protection to
redesignate the Clark County ozone
nonattainment area to attainment of the
1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standard because the
request meets the statutory requirements
for redesignation under the Clean Air
Act.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before December 13, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R09–OAR–2012–0792, by one of the
following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: r9_airplanning@epa.gov.
3. Fax: 415–947–3579.
4. Mail or Deliver: Ginger Vagenas
(AIR–2), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne
Street, San Francisco, CA 94105–3901.
Deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office’s normal hours of
operation.
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:23 Nov 09, 2012
Jkt 229001
Instructions: All comments will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
online at https://www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Information that
you consider CBI or otherwise protected
should be clearly identified as such and
should not be submitted through
https://www.regulations.gov or email.
https://www.regulations.gov is an
anonymous access system, and EPA will
not know your identity or contact
information unless you provide it in the
body of your comment. If you send
email directly to EPA, your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the public
comment. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment.
Docket: Generally, documents in the
docket for this action are available
electronically at www.regulations.gov
and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75
Hawthorne Street, San Francisco,
California. While all documents in the
docket are listed at
www.regulations.gov, some information
may be publicly available only at the
hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted
material, large maps), and some may not
be publicly available in either location
(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy
materials, please schedule an
appointment during normal business
hours with the contact listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ginger Vagenas, Air Planning Office
(AIR–2), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region IX, (415) 972–3964,
vagenas.ginger@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
Table of Contents
I. Summary of Today’s Proposed Action
II. Background
III. Procedural Requirements for Adoption
and Submittal of SIP Revisions
IV. Substantive Requirements for
Redesignation
V. Evaluation of the State’s Redesignation
Request for the Clark County 8-Hour
Ozone Nonattainment Area
A. Determination That the Area Has
Attained the Applicable NAAQS
B. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved
SIP Meeting Requirements Applicable
for Purposes of Redesignation Under
Section 110 and Part D
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1. Basic SIP Requirements Under CAA
Section 110
2. Part D Requirements
a. Introduction
b. Emissions Inventory
c. Permits for New and Modified Major
Stationary Sources
d. Compliance With Section 110(a)(2)
e. Conformity Requirements
C. The Area Must Show the Improvement
in Air Quality Is Due to Permanent and
Enforceable Emissions Reductions
D. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved
Maintenance Plan Under CAA Section
175A
1. Attainment Inventory
2. Maintenance Demonstration
3. Monitoring Network
4. Verification of Continued Attainment
5. Contingency Provisions
6. Subsequent Maintenance Plan Revisions
7. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
VI. Proposed Action and Request for Public
Comment
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Summary of Today’s Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to take several
related actions. First, under Clean Air
Act (CAA or ‘‘Act’’) section 110(k)(3),
EPA is proposing to approve a submittal
from the Nevada Division of
Environmental Protection (NDEP) dated
April 11, 2011 of Clark County’s Ozone
Redesignation Request and
Maintenance Plan (March 2011) (‘‘Clark
County Ozone Maintenance Plan’’ or
‘‘Ozone Maintenance Plan’’) as a
revision to the Nevada state
implementation plan (SIP).
In connection with the Clark County
Ozone Maintenance Plan, EPA finds
that the maintenance demonstration
showing how the area will continue to
attain the 1997 8-hour ozone national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS)
for 10 years beyond redesignation (i.e.,
through 2022) and the contingency
provisions describing the actions that
Clark County will take in the event of
a future monitored violation meet all
applicable requirements for
maintenance plans and related
contingency provisions in CAA section
175A. EPA is also proposing to approve
the motor vehicle emissions budgets
(MVEBs) in the Clark County Ozone
Maintenance Plan because we find they
meet the applicable transportation
conformity requirements under 40 CFR
93.118(e).
Second, under CAA section
107(d)(3)(D), EPA is proposing to
approve NDEP’s request that
accompanied the submittal of the
maintenance plan to redesignate the
Clark County 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area to attainment for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. We are
doing so based on our conclusion that
the area has met the five criteria for
E:\FR\FM\13NOP1.SGM
13NOP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 219 (Tuesday, November 13, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 67596-67600]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-27566]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R08-OAR-2012-0846; FRL-9751-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Montana; Revisions to the Administrative Rules of Montana--Air Quality,
Subchapter 7, Subchapter 16 and Subchapter 17
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve new rules and revisions as
submitted by the State of Montana on September 23, 2011, as revisions
to Montana's State Implementation Plan. Montana adopted these rules on
December 2, 2005, and March 23, 2006. The new rules adopted on December
2, 2005, became state-effective on January 1, 2006; the new rules and
revisions adopted on March 23, 2006, became state-effective on April 7,
2006. These new rules and revisions meet the requirements of the Clean
Air Act and EPA's minor new source review regulations. The intended
effect of this action is to propose to approve these rules as they are
consistent with the Clean Air Act. This action is being taken under
section 110 of the Clean Air Act.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 13, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2012-0846, by one of the following methods:
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
Email: daly.carl@epa.gov and leone.kevin@epa.gov
Fax: (303) 312-6064 (please alert the individual listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing comments).
Mail: Carl Daly, Director, Air Program, Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street,
Denver, Colorado 80202-1129.
Hand Delivery: Carl Daly, Director, Air Program,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. Such deliveries are only
accepted Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays. Special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R08-OAR-
2012-0846. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to EPA, without going through www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. For additional
instructions on submitting comments, go to Section I. General
Information of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly-available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Program,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street,
Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to view the hard copy of the docket. You may view the hard copy
of the docket Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin Leone, Air Program, Mailcode 8P-
AR, Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street,
Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, (303) 312-6227, or leone.kevin@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. General Information
II. What is being addressed in this proposed action?
III. What Authorities Apply to EPA's Proposed Action
IV. EPA's Review and Proposed Action on SIP Revisions
V. Summary of EPA's Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Definitions
For the purpose of this document, we are giving meaning to certain
words or initials as follows:
(i) The words or initials Act or CAA mean or refer to the Clean Air
Act, unless the context indicates otherwise.
(ii) The initials ARM mean or refer to the Administrative Rule of
Montana.
(iii) The words EPA, we, us or our mean or refer to the United
States Environmental Protection Agency.
(iv) The initials MACT mean Maximum Achievable Control Technology.
(v) The initials MAQP mean Montana Air Quality Permit.
(vi) The initials MRR mean Monitoring, Reporting and Recordkeeping.
(vii) The initials NAAQS mean National Ambient Air Quality
Standards.
(viii) The initials NESHAP mean National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants.
(ix) The initials NSR mean or refer to new source review, a phrase
intended to encompass the stationary source regulatory programs that
regulate the construction and modification of stationary sources as
provided under CAA section 110(a)(2)(C), CAA Title I,
[[Page 67597]]
parts C and D, and 40 CFR 51.160 through 51.166, which includes new
source review for both major and minor sources.
(x) The word Program mean or refer to the Montana Oil and Gas
Registration Program, unless the context indicates otherwise.
(xi) The initials SIP mean or refer to State Implementation Plan.
(xii) The words State or Montana mean the State of Montana, unless
the context indicates otherwise.
I. General Information
A. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this information to EPA through
www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM as
CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
a. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
b. Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
c. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
d. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
e. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
f. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
g. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
h. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.
II. What is being addressed in this proposed action?
On September 23, 2011 the State of Montana submitted new rules and
revisions to revise the Montana SIP. The submission contains new rules
I-VI, codified as Administrative Rule of Montana (ARM) 17.8.1601,
17.8.1602, 17.8.1603, 17.8.1604, 17.8.1605, and 17.8.1606, pertaining
to the regulation of oil and gas well facilities. EPA is proposing to
approve these new rules in this notice. The Montana Board of
Environmental Review (Board) adopted these new rules to the existing
SIP on December 2, 2005.
This submission also contains new rules I-IX, codified as ARM
17.8.1701, 17.8.1702, 17.8.1703, 17.8.1704, 17.8.1705,17.8.1710,
17.8.1711, 17.8.1712 and 17.8.1713 pertaining to the regulation of oil
and gas well facilities. EPA is proposing to approve these rule
submissions in this action. The Board adopted these new rules to the
existing SIP on March 23, 2006.
This submission contains revisions to ARM 17.8.744 which were
adopted on March 23, 2006. The proposed revisions to ARM 17.8.744 are a
conforming change because of the addition of new rules.
The proposed approval of the revised and new rules listed above
would establish a registration system for oil and gas well facilities
that presently require a Montana minor NSR air quality permit under the
SIP regulations. The proposed new rules would allow the owner or
operator of an oil or gas well facility to register with the Montana
Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) in lieu of submitting a
permit application and obtaining a permit to construct or modify the
source before commencing construction or modification. Currently, with
specific exemptions, the administrative rules adopted under the Montana
Clean Air Act and approved by the EPA into the SIP, require the owner
or operator of sources of air pollution to obtain a permit prior to
construction or modification.
Montana originally submitted these rules on October 16, 2006 and
November 1, 2006, to EPA for inclusion into the SIP. EPA proposed to
disapprove these submittals on January 6, 2011 (76 FR 758). EPA had
several concerns with the Program, as was explained in 76 FR 758. In
March of 2011, the State withdrew the October 16, 2006, and November 1,
2006, submittals and, after several discussions between EPA and the
State, Montana resubmitted the oil and gas rules on September 23, 2011.
The State's September 2011 submittal included a revised CAA section
110(l) demonstration and other supplemental data, which addressed the
concerns we raised in our 76 FR 758 proposed action.
III. What Authorities Apply to EPA's Proposed Action
Section 110(l) of the CAA states, ``[e]ach revision to an
implementation plan submitted by a State under this Act shall be
adopted by such State after reasonable notice and public hearing. The
Administrator shall not approve a revision to a plan if the revision
would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment
and reasonable further progress (as defined in section 171), or any
other applicable requirement of this Act.''
A demonstration is necessary to show that this revision will not
interfere with attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS, including those
for ozone, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, lead,
nitrogen oxides or any other requirement of the Act. Therefore, EPA
will approve a SIP revision only after a state has demonstrated that
such a revision will not interfere (``noninterference'') with
attainment of the NAAQS, rate of progress, reasonable further progress
or any other applicable requirement of the CAA.
The CAA at section 110(a)(2)(C) requires states to include a minor
NSR program in their SIP to regulate modifications and new construction
of stationary sources within the area as necessary to assure the NAAQS
are achieved. EPA's implementing regulations at 40 CFR 51.160-164 are
intended to ensure that new source growth is consistent with
maintenance of the NAAQS and 40 CFR 51.160(e) requires states to
identify types and sizes of facilities which will be subject to review
under their minor NSR program. For sources identified under 40 CFR
51.160(e), section 51.160(a) requires that the SIP include legally
enforceable procedures that enable a state or local agency to determine
whether construction or modification of a facility, building, structure
or installation, or combination of these will result in a violation of
applicable portions of the control strategy; or interference with
attainment or maintenance of a national standard in the state in which
the proposed source (or modification) is located or in a neighboring
state. Section 110(i) of the CAA specifically precludes states from
changing the requirements of the SIP except through SIP revisions
approved by EPA. SIP revisions will be approved by EPA only if they
meet all
[[Page 67598]]
requirements of section 110 of the CAA and the implementing regulations
at 40 CFR part 51. See CAA section 110(l); 40 CFR 51.104.
EPA has also issued several guidance memoranda that explain the
Agency's requirements for practicable enforceability for purposes of
effectively limiting a source's potential to emit (See docket).
EPA recognizes that, under the applicable federal regulations,
states have broad discretion to determine the scope of their minor NSR
programs as needed to attain and maintain the NAAQS. A state may tailor
its minor NSR requirements as long as they are consistent with the
requirements of 40 CFR part 51. States may also provide a rationale for
why the rules are at least as stringent as the 40 CFR part 51
requirements where the revisions are different from those in 40 CFR
part 51.
Since there are no ambient air quality standards for air toxics,
the area's compliance with any applicable maximum achievable control
technology (MACT) standards, as well as, any federal mobile source
control requirements under CAA sections 112 or 202(l) would constitute
an acceptable demonstration of noninterference for air toxics.
Section 110(l) does not require a demonstration of noninterference
for changes to federal requirements that are not included in the SIP. A
revision to the SIP, however, cannot interfere with any federally
mandated program such as a MACT standard (or related section 112
requirements).
IV. EPA's Review and Proposed Action on SIP Revisions
EPA is proposing to approve the new and revised rules as submitted
by Montana on September 23, 2011, as identified above.
As discussed above, any minor NSR SIP revision submittal must meet
section 110(l) of the CAA. Section 110(l) of the Act indicates that EPA
cannot approve a revision of a plan if the revision would interfere
with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable
further progress (as defined in Section 171), or any other applicable
requirement of the Act. In a memo from Richard R. Long, Director,
Region 8 Air and Radiation Program, to the Montana Board of
Environmental Review on January 30, 2006 (see docket) we stated that
MDEQ should provide an appropriate analysis showing that the proposed
new rules will not impact the NAAQS or prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) increments. One of the concerns EPA expressed in 76
FR 758 related to the cumulative effect of numerous registration
sources. We recommended that MDEQ perform a screening cumulative impact
analysis showing what effect oil and gas well facilities would have on
the ozone, NO2, SO2 and PM NAAQS and PSD
increments. MDEQ performed such an analysis. (See docket, demonstration
of noninterference pages 1-42 and attachments 1-11.) MDEQ's analysis
went back prior to 2006, when Montana began implementing the Oil and
Gas Registration Program as a state-approved rule, and provided data on
the amount of oil and gas registration applications received.
Monitoring and modeling data for all NAAQS pollutants from 2006 to
present shows that the Oil and Gas Registration Program has not
interfered with attainment or maintenance of any NAAQS, PSD increment,
or any other requirement of the Act. Therefore, EPA has sufficient
information to determine that the proposed new and revised rules would
not interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and
maintenance of the NAAQS, PSD increments, or any other requirement of
the Act.
EPA expressed concerns in 76 FR 758 that the new rules do not meet
the requirements of CAA Section 110(a)(2)(A) and 40 CFR 51.160(a)(1),
which require that SIP revision submittals be enforceable. The
September 23, 1987, Memorandum from J. Craig Potter, Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation, and Thomas L. Adams Jr., Assistant
Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring, entitled
``Review of State Implementation Plans and Revisions for Enforceability
and Legal Sufficiency'' provides EPA's guidance for interpreting this
provision in the Act.
EPA initially viewed the new rules as a stand-alone program, which
was not subject to provisions in the other parts of ARM 17.8. As such,
we were concerned that the new and revised rules did not set forth
legally enforceable procedures that would enable the State or local
agency to determine whether construction of a minor source facility
would result in interference with attainment or maintenance of the
NAAQS (40 CFR 51.160(a)) and that such procedures did not include a
means by which the State or local agency to prevent construction of a
minor source facility if it would result in interference with
attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS (40 CFR51.160(b)). In 76 FR 758,
EPA did not consider other requirements in ARM 17.8 as being applicable
to the Program. However, after reviewing the State's 110(l)
demonstration and the requirements in ARM 17.8, it is clear that the
rules in ARM 17.8 subchapters 1-6 and portions of subchapter 7 apply to
the State's new rules for oil and gas facilities registration. (See
110(l) demonstration pages 2-9 and attachments 2 and 3 of the state's
110(l) analysis.) These subchapters provide, for example, testing
requirements, source testing protocol, malfunction procedures,
enforcement procedures, and specific ambient air monitoring
requirements for criteria pollutants. Therefore, the new and revised
rules which we are proposing for approval in this notice are in
compliance with CAA Section 110(a)(2)(A), 40 CFR 51.160(a) and 40 CFR
51.160(b).
EPA also had concerns that a source did not need to provide notice
to the State before construction begins. The new and revised rules
allow sources to operate and emit criteria pollutants up to 60 days
before submitting a registration or permit application; therefore there
is no requirement that the State be notified before construction
begins. However, the new rules in ARM 17.8.16 contain numerous
safeguards that facilities must operate under until the MDEQ approves
the registration or permit application. These safeguards include:
limiting production; limiting hours of operation and/or fuel
consumption to ensure that the facility's potential to emit is below
major source thresholds (17.8.1604); emission control requirements
(17.8.1605); inspection and repair requirements (17.8.1608); and
reporting and recordkeeping requirements (17.8.1609). Sources must also
comply with requirements in ARM 17.8.1 (general requirements), ARM
17.8.2 (ambient standards), and ARM 17.8.3 (emission standards), in
addition to all other applicable requirements in ARM 17.8. Therefore,
EPA concludes that the new and revised rules do not violate 40 CFR
51.160(a) and 40 CFR 160(b).
EPA also had concerns that the Program did not include the
necessary monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping (MRR) requirements
required for an oil and gas registration program to ensure
accountability and provide a means to determine compliance. However,
EPA did not consider the requirements of other subchapters of chapter 8
when considering MRR requirements. As described in the State's
submittal (110(l) demonstration, Table 1 (pages 3-15) and Table 2
(pages 18-21), the MRR requirements in ARM 17.8.1 (General
Requirements), ARM 17.8.2 (Ambient Air Quality), ARM 17.8.3 (Emission
Standards) are all applicable to registered sources, in addition to the
[[Page 67599]]
MRR requirements in ARM 17.8.1605 and ARM 17.8.1713. Therefore, EPA
proposes to find that the MRR requirements for a registered oil and gas
facility are at least as stringent as what would be required for an oil
and gas facility that would operate under a Montana Air Quality Permit
(MAQP). The SIP approved MAQP rules contain no specific MRR
requirements. Instead, a permitted facility is given MRR requirements
through the actual permit. In existing MAQP regulations (ARM 17.8.7),
the MRR requirements are specified in the facility permit pursuant to a
case-by-case best available control technology analysis rather than
uniform rule conditions.
EPA also finds that the regulatory provisions in 40 CFR 51.160(c),
40 CFR 51.160(d), 40 CFR 51.160(e) and 40 CFR 51.160(f), are met by the
requirements in ARM 17.8.1703 (Registration Process and Information),
ARM 17.8.1705 (Operating Requirements: Facility-Wide) and the
requirements in ARM 17.8.1. The MDEQ issued a Notice of Public Hearing
and allowed for public comment (see submittal, tabs 19 and 20), which
meets the requirements in 40 CFR 51.161 (public availability of
information). The requirements in 40 CFR 51.164 (stack height
procedures) are met in ARM 17.8.4 (stack heights and dispersion
techniques).
EPA also expressed concerns in 76 FR 758 with new rule ARM
17.8.1703(7), which provides that ``The owner or operator of a
registration eligible facility for which a valid MAQP has been issued
may register with the department and request a revocation of the
MAQP.'' In 76 FR 758, EPA concluded this was a relaxation under CAA
section 110(l), because it provides an exemption from SIP requirements
not previously available to sources. This SIP relaxation would create a
risk of interference with attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS and
control strategy. EPA lacked sufficient information to determine that
17.8.1703(7) would not interfere with attainment and maintenance of the
NAAQS, PSD increment, or any other requirement of the Act.
Montana issued approximately 30 MAQPs to oil and gas well
facilities prior to implementing the oil and gas registration program.
A comparison of MAQP requirements and registration requirements (see
the state's110(l) analysis, pages 19-21) show comparable requirements.
EPA also expressed concerns in 76 FR 758 with new rule ARM
17.8.1712(1), which provides that, ``[l]eak detection methods may
incorporate the use of sight, sound, or smell.'' After further review,
we propose to find that this language is approvable because ARM
17.8.1712(1) is similar to EPA regulatory requirements in 40 CFR part
63, subpart BBBBBB and will not interfere with any applicable
requirements of the Act. EPA notes that 40 CFR part 63, subpart BBBBBB
provides similar leak detection methods using sight, sound, and smell.
This regulation applies to area sources under the National Emission
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) for Source Category:
Gasoline Distribution Bulk Terminals, Bulk Plants, and Pipeline
Facilities. EPA determined for this source category it was appropriate
to allow leak detection methods using sight, sound, and smell.
V. Summary of Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve revisions to ARM 17.8.744 and new rules
I-VI, codified as ARM 17.8.1601, 17.8.1602, 17.8.1603, 17.8.1604,
17.8.1605, and 17.8.1606, pertaining to the regulation of oil and gas
well facilities, and new rules I-IX, codified as ARM 17.8.1701,
17.8.1702, 17.8.1703, 17.8.1704, 17.8.1705,17.8.1710, 17.8.1711,
17.8.1712 and 17.8.1713 pertaining to the regulation of oil and gas
well facilities, as submitted by the State of Montana on September 23,
2011.
EPA is proposing to approve the new and revised rules as identified
in this action and EPA is proposing approval based upon sufficient
information to determine that the requested revision to add the new oil
and gas registration program to the Montana SIP will not interfere with
any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further
progress as required by CAA Section 110(l), or any other requirement of
the Act. The new and revised rules comply with section 110(a)(2)(C),
which requires states to include a minor NSR program in their SIP to
regulate modifications and new construction of stationary sources
within the area as necessary to assure the NAAQS are achieved. EPA also
finds the new and revised rules comply with 40 CFR 51.160-40 CFR 51.164
and meet the requirements for appropriate MRR. EPA is also proposing to
approve ARM 17.8.744 as these revisions are conforming changes to the
addition of new rules.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly,
this proposed action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the
SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the State,
and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on
tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
[[Page 67600]]
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides,
Volatile organic compounds, New Source Review, Minor New Source Review,
Permitting, Incorporation by reference.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq
Dated: October 19, 2012.
James B. Martin,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2012-27566 Filed 11-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
