Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; State of Montana; Interstate Transport of Pollution for the 2006 PM2.5, 45869-45871 [2013-18156]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 146 / Tuesday, July 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
(ii) Is subject to 40 CFR 52.21 and
would be constructed in the same state
as the state proposing the redesignation.
(d) Ambient air increments. (1) In
areas designated as Class I, II or III,
increases in pollutant concentration
over the baseline concentration shall be
limited to the following:
Pollutant
Maximum
allowable
increase
(micrograms
per cubic
meter)
PM2.5:
Annual arithmetic mean ..
24-hr maximum ...............
PM10:
Annual arithmetic mean ..
24-hr maximum ...............
Sulfur dioxide:
Annual arithmetic mean ..
24-hr maximum ...............
3-hr maximum .................
Nitrogen dioxide:
Annual arithmetic mean ..
1
2
4
8
2
5
25
2.5
Class II Area
PM2.5:
Annual arithmetic mean ..
24-hr maximum ...............
PM10:
Annual arithmetic mean ..
24-hr maximum ...............
Sulfur dioxide:
Annual arithmetic mean ..
24-hr maximum ...............
3-hr maximum .................
Nitrogen dioxide:
Annual arithmetic mean ..
4
9
17
30
20
91
512
25
Class III Area
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
PM2.5:
Annual arithmetic mean ..
24-hr maximum ...............
PM10:
Annual arithmetic mean ..
24-hr maximum ...............
Sulfur dioxide:
Annual arithmetic mean ..
24-hr maximum ...............
3-hr maximum .................
Nitrogen dioxide:
Annual arithmetic mean ..
8
18
34
60
40
182
700
50
(2) For any period other than an
annual period, the applicable maximum
allowable increase may be exceeded
during one such period per year at any
one location.
■ 4. Section 52.1833 is amended by
adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:
§ 52.1833 Section 110(a)(2) infrastructure
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) EPA is approving the following
infrastructure elements for the 1997 and
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS: CAA section
17:12 Jul 29, 2013
[FR Doc. 2013–18039 Filed 7–29–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R08–OAR–2012–0347; FRL–9839–1]
Class I Area
VerDate Mar<15>2010
110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C) with respect to
minor NSR and PSD requirements,
(D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and
(M). EPA is approving (D)(i)(II) with
respect to PSD requirements for the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Jkt 229001
Approval and Promulgation of State
Implementation Plans; State of
Montana; Interstate Transport of
Pollution for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is taking final action to
partially approve and partially
disapprove portions of a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submission
from the State of Montana that are
intended to demonstrate that its SIP
meets certain interstate transport
requirements of the Clean Air Act
(‘‘Act’’ or ‘‘CAA’’) for the 2006 fine
particulate matter (‘‘PM2.5’’) National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
(‘‘NAAQS’’). Specifically, EPA is
partially approving and partially
disapproving the portion of the Montana
SIP submission that addresses the CAA
requirement prohibiting emissions from
Montana sources from significantly
contributing to nonattainment of the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in any other state or
interfering with maintenance of the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS by any other state.
EPA is also partially approving and
partially disapproving the portion of
Montana’s submission that addresses
the CAA requirement that SIPs contain
provisions to insure compliance with
specific other CAA requirements
relating to interstate and international
pollution abatement. These partial
disapprovals will not trigger an
obligation for EPA to promulgate a
Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to
address these interstate transport
requirements as EPA is determining that
the existing SIP is adequate to meet the
specific CAA requirements.
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is
effective August 29, 2013.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R08–OAR–2012–0347. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45869
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., Confidential Business Information
(CBI) 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 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:
Adam Clark, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595
Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202–
1129, (303) 312–7104,
clark.adam@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Definitions
For the purpose of this document, we are
giving meaning to certain words or initials as
follows:
(i) The words or initials Act or CAA mean
or refer to the Clean Air Act, unless the
context indicates otherwise.
(ii) The words EPA, we, us or our mean or
refer to the United States Environmental
Protection Agency.
(iii) The initials NAAQS mean or refer to
National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
(iv) The initials SIP mean or refer to State
Implementation Plan.
(v) The initials MDEQ mean or refer to the
Montana Department of Environmental
Quality.
(vi) The words Montana and State mean
the State of Montana.
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
On October 17, 2006 EPA
promulgated a new NAAQS for PM2.5,
revising the level of the 24-hour PM2.5
standard to 35 mg/m3 and retaining the
level of the annual PM2.5 standard at 15
mg/m3. (71 FR 61144). By statute, SIPs
meeting the ‘‘infrastructure’’
requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1)
and (2) are to be submitted by states
within three years after promulgation of
a new or revised standard. Among the
E:\FR\FM\30JYR1.SGM
30JYR1
45870
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 146 / Tuesday, July 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
infrastructure requirements of section
110(a)(2) are the ‘‘interstate transport’’
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D).
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) identifies
four distinct elements related to the
evaluation of impacts of interstate
transport of air pollutants. In this action
for the state of Montana, EPA is
addressing the first two elements of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.1 The first
element of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)
requires that each SIP for a new or
revised NAAQS contain adequate
provisions to prohibit any source or
other type of emissions activity within
the state from emitting air pollutants
that will ‘‘contribute significantly to
nonattainment’’ of the NAAQS in
another state. The second element of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requires that
each SIP for a new or revised NAAQS
contain adequate provisions to prohibit
any source or other type of emissions
activity in the state from emitting
pollutants that will ‘‘interfere with
maintenance’’ of the applicable NAAQS
in any other state.
EPA is also addressing the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii)
with respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires each
SIP to contain adequate provisions to
insure compliance with the applicable
requirements of sections 126 and 115 of
the Act. Section 126 pertains to
notification to nearby states and
petitions from states to EPA regarding
interstate transport of pollution. Section
115 pertains to international transport of
pollution.
On February 10, 2010, the Montana
Department of Environmental Quality
(MDEQ) provided a submission to EPA
certifying that Montana’s SIP is
adequate to implement the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS for all the infrastructure
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2).
This submission included a brief
analysis to support the conclusion that
Montana’s SIP meets the interstate
transport requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for this NAAQS.2
On May 13, 2013 (78 FR 27883), EPA
proposed to partially approve and
partially disapprove MDEQ’s February
2010 submission with regard to the
infrastructure requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and
110(a)(2)(D)(ii). As explained in that
1 This action does not address the two elements
of the transport SIP provision (in CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)) regarding interference with
measures required to prevent significant
deterioration of air quality or to protect visibility in
another state. We will act on these elements in a
separate rulemaking.
2 MDEQ’s certification letter, dated February 10,
2010, is included in the docket for this action.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:12 Jul 29, 2013
Jkt 229001
action, we proposed to partially
disapprove these elements of Montana’s
submission because the submission did
not include any technical analysis to
support its conclusion regarding section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), and did not to address
section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii). (78 FR 27885)
However, we also proposed to partially
approve elements 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and
110(a)(2)(D)(ii) of Montana’s submission
based on our supplemental analysis,
through which we concluded that the
existing SIP for the State of Montana is
adequate to satisfy the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and
110(a)(2)(D)(ii). The details of our
supplemental analysis are provided in
our notice of proposed rulemaking.
II. Response to Comments
EPA received one anonymous public
comment on the proposed action. The
commenter expressed concern about the
potential for particulate matter pollution
from what the commenter called the
‘‘slash and burn policies’’ of the U.S.
Forest Service (USFS). The commenter
alleged that the USFS had created an air
pollution violation, but did not identify
any particular provision of the Act or
the Montana SIP that the USFS had
violated.
As discussed in our proposal notice,
the scope of our action was to evaluate
Montana’s submission that the Montana
SIP is adequate to prevent sources in
Montana from significantly contributing
to nonattainment or interfering with
maintenance of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
in any other state. To the extent that the
commenter is concerned that the SIP is
inadequate with respect to interstate
transport impacts of PM2.5 created by
intentional burns by the USFS, EPA
disagrees with that concern. Our
technical analysis confirmed that
emissions from Montana in total,
including emissions from prescribed
burns, do not significantly contribute to
nonattainment or interfere with
maintenance of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
in any other state. The commenter did
not identify any issues with this
analysis.
The commenter also expressed
concern that the Regulations.gov site
was inaccessible on a particular day. In
our notice, we provided alternative
means of commenting: email, fax, postal
mail, and hand delivery. We also
provided an address, phone number,
and email contact for further
information. However, the commenter
did not attempt to use any of these
alternative means to comment or to
inform us of the problem. While we
acknowledge the commenter’s concerns,
we find that the public had adequate
opportunity to comment on our action.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
III. Final Action
EPA is partially approving and
partially disapproving the
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and 110(a)(2)(D)(ii)
portions of Montana’s February 10, 2010
submission. We are partially
disapproving the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
portion of the submission because it
relies on irrelevant factors and lacks any
technical analysis to support the State’s
conclusion with respect to interstate
transport. However, we are also partially
approving this portion of the
submission based on EPA’s
supplemental evaluation of relevant
technical information, which supports a
finding that emissions from Montana do
not significantly contribute to
nonattainment or interfere with
maintenance of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS in any other state and that the
existing Montana SIP is, therefore,
adequate to meet the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. We
conclude that any FIP obligation
resulting from this partial disapproval is
satisfied by our determination that there
is no deficiency in the SIP to correct.
This disapproval also does not require
any further action on Montana’s part
given EPA’s conclusion that the SIP is
adequate to meet the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
Similarly, EPA is partially
disapproving the 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) portion
of Montana’s submission because it fails
to address or discuss this CAA
requirement. However, we are partially
approving this portion of the
submission based on the conclusion that
the State’s existing SIP is adequate to
meet the requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(ii) for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS. For similar reasons to
those noted above for the
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirement, the partial
disapproval of the submission for the
110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requirement does not
require any further action from Montana
or create any additional FIP obligation
for EPA.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve
state choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely
approves state law that meets Federal
requirements and disapproves state law
E:\FR\FM\30JYR1.SGM
30JYR1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 146 / Tuesday, July 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
that does not meet Federal
requirements; this action 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.
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:12 Jul 29, 2013
Jkt 229001
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 Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by September 30,
2013. 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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: July 12, 2013.
Shaun L. McGrath,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
40 CFR part 52 is amended to read as
follows:
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 BB—Montana
2. Section 52.1393 is amended by
revising section heading, designating
existing paragraph as (a) and adding
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
■
§ 52.1393 Interstate transport
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) On February 10, 2010, Montana
Governor Brian Schweitzer submitted a
letter certifying, in part, that Montana’s
SIP is adequate to meet the interstate
transport requirements of CAA section
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
45871
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS.
[FR Doc. 2013–18156 Filed 7–29–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 300
[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1983–0002; FRL–9840–3]
National Oil and Hazardous
Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion
of the Craig Farm Drum Superfund Site
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct Final Rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) Region III is publishing a
direct final Notice of Deletion for the
Craig Farm Drum Superfund Site (Site)
located in Perry Township, Armstrong
County, Pennsylvania, from the
National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL,
promulgated pursuant to Section 105 of
the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is
an appendix of the National Oil and
Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP). This direct
final deletion is being published by EPA
with the concurrence of the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,
through the Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Protection (PADEP),
because EPA has determined that all
appropriate response actions under
CERCLA, other than operation,
maintenance, and Five Year Reviews,
have been completed. However, this
deletion does not preclude future
actions under Superfund.
DATES: This direct final deletion is
effective September 30, 2013 unless
EPA receives adverse comments by
August 29, 2013. If adverse comments
are received, EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final deletion
in the Federal Register informing the
public that the deletion will not take
effect.
SUMMARY:
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID no. EPA–HQ–
SFUND–1983–0002, by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Email: Epps.John@epa.gov.
• Fax: (215) 814–3002.
• Mail: John Epps, 1650 Arch Street,
Mail Code 3HS22, Philadelphia, PA
19103.
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\30JYR1.SGM
30JYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 146 (Tuesday, July 30, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 45869-45871]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18156]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R08-OAR-2012-0347; FRL-9839-1]
Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; State of
Montana; Interstate Transport of Pollution for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to partially approve and partially
disapprove portions of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission
from the State of Montana that are intended to demonstrate that its SIP
meets certain interstate transport requirements of the Clean Air Act
(``Act'' or ``CAA'') for the 2006 fine particulate matter
(``PM2.5'') National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(``NAAQS''). Specifically, EPA is partially approving and partially
disapproving the portion of the Montana SIP submission that addresses
the CAA requirement prohibiting emissions from Montana sources from
significantly contributing to nonattainment of the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS in any other state or interfering with
maintenance of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS by any other state. EPA
is also partially approving and partially disapproving the portion of
Montana's submission that addresses the CAA requirement that SIPs
contain provisions to insure compliance with specific other CAA
requirements relating to interstate and international pollution
abatement. These partial disapprovals will not trigger an obligation
for EPA to promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to address
these interstate transport requirements as EPA is determining that the
existing SIP is adequate to meet the specific CAA requirements.
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective August 29, 2013.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R08-OAR-2012-0347. 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, e.g., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) 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 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: Adam Clark, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, (303) 312-7104,
clark.adam@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Definitions
For the purpose of this document, we are giving meaning to
certain words or initials as follows:
(i) The words or initials Act or CAA mean or refer to the Clean
Air Act, unless the context indicates otherwise.
(ii) The words EPA, we, us or our mean or refer to the United
States Environmental Protection Agency.
(iii) The initials NAAQS mean or refer to National Ambient Air
Quality Standards.
(iv) The initials SIP mean or refer to State Implementation
Plan.
(v) The initials MDEQ mean or refer to the Montana Department of
Environmental Quality.
(vi) The words Montana and State mean the State of Montana.
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
On October 17, 2006 EPA promulgated a new NAAQS for
PM2.5, revising the level of the 24-hour PM2.5
standard to 35 [mu]g/m\3\ and retaining the level of the annual
PM2.5 standard at 15 [mu]g/m\3\. (71 FR 61144). By statute,
SIPs meeting the ``infrastructure'' requirements of CAA sections
110(a)(1) and (2) are to be submitted by states within three years
after promulgation of a new or revised standard. Among the
[[Page 45870]]
infrastructure requirements of section 110(a)(2) are the ``interstate
transport'' requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D).
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) identifies four distinct elements
related to the evaluation of impacts of interstate transport of air
pollutants. In this action for the state of Montana, EPA is addressing
the first two elements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to the
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.\1\ The first element of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) requires that each SIP for a new or revised NAAQS
contain adequate provisions to prohibit any source or other type of
emissions activity within the state from emitting air pollutants that
will ``contribute significantly to nonattainment'' of the NAAQS in
another state. The second element of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)
requires that each SIP for a new or revised NAAQS contain adequate
provisions to prohibit any source or other type of emissions activity
in the state from emitting pollutants that will ``interfere with
maintenance'' of the applicable NAAQS in any other state.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This action does not address the two elements of the
transport SIP provision (in CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II))
regarding interference with measures required to prevent significant
deterioration of air quality or to protect visibility in another
state. We will act on these elements in a separate rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA is also addressing the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii)
with respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. Section
110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires each SIP to contain adequate provisions to
insure compliance with the applicable requirements of sections 126 and
115 of the Act. Section 126 pertains to notification to nearby states
and petitions from states to EPA regarding interstate transport of
pollution. Section 115 pertains to international transport of
pollution.
On February 10, 2010, the Montana Department of Environmental
Quality (MDEQ) provided a submission to EPA certifying that Montana's
SIP is adequate to implement the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS for all
the infrastructure requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2). This
submission included a brief analysis to support the conclusion that
Montana's SIP meets the interstate transport requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for this NAAQS.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ MDEQ's certification letter, dated February 10, 2010, is
included in the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 13, 2013 (78 FR 27883), EPA proposed to partially approve
and partially disapprove MDEQ's February 2010 submission with regard to
the infrastructure requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and
110(a)(2)(D)(ii). As explained in that action, we proposed to partially
disapprove these elements of Montana's submission because the
submission did not include any technical analysis to support its
conclusion regarding section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), and did not to address
section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii). (78 FR 27885) However, we also proposed to
partially approve elements 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) of
Montana's submission based on our supplemental analysis, through which
we concluded that the existing SIP for the State of Montana is adequate
to satisfy the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and
110(a)(2)(D)(ii). The details of our supplemental analysis are provided
in our notice of proposed rulemaking.
II. Response to Comments
EPA received one anonymous public comment on the proposed action.
The commenter expressed concern about the potential for particulate
matter pollution from what the commenter called the ``slash and burn
policies'' of the U.S. Forest Service (USFS). The commenter alleged
that the USFS had created an air pollution violation, but did not
identify any particular provision of the Act or the Montana SIP that
the USFS had violated.
As discussed in our proposal notice, the scope of our action was to
evaluate Montana's submission that the Montana SIP is adequate to
prevent sources in Montana from significantly contributing to
nonattainment or interfering with maintenance of the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS in any other state. To the extent that the
commenter is concerned that the SIP is inadequate with respect to
interstate transport impacts of PM2.5 created by intentional
burns by the USFS, EPA disagrees with that concern. Our technical
analysis confirmed that emissions from Montana in total, including
emissions from prescribed burns, do not significantly contribute to
nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS in any other state. The commenter did not
identify any issues with this analysis.
The commenter also expressed concern that the Regulations.gov site
was inaccessible on a particular day. In our notice, we provided
alternative means of commenting: email, fax, postal mail, and hand
delivery. We also provided an address, phone number, and email contact
for further information. However, the commenter did not attempt to use
any of these alternative means to comment or to inform us of the
problem. While we acknowledge the commenter's concerns, we find that
the public had adequate opportunity to comment on our action.
III. Final Action
EPA is partially approving and partially disapproving the
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) portions of Montana's February
10, 2010 submission. We are partially disapproving the
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) portion of the submission because it relies on
irrelevant factors and lacks any technical analysis to support the
State's conclusion with respect to interstate transport. However, we
are also partially approving this portion of the submission based on
EPA's supplemental evaluation of relevant technical information, which
supports a finding that emissions from Montana do not significantly
contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in any other state and that the existing
Montana SIP is, therefore, adequate to meet the requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
We conclude that any FIP obligation resulting from this partial
disapproval is satisfied by our determination that there is no
deficiency in the SIP to correct. This disapproval also does not
require any further action on Montana's part given EPA's conclusion
that the SIP is adequate to meet the requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS.
Similarly, EPA is partially disapproving the 110(a)(2)(D)(ii)
portion of Montana's submission because it fails to address or discuss
this CAA requirement. However, we are partially approving this portion
of the submission based on the conclusion that the State's existing SIP
is adequate to meet the requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii)
for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. For similar reasons to
those noted above for the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirement, the partial
disapproval of the submission for the 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requirement does
not require any further action from Montana or create any additional
FIP obligation for EPA.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law that meets Federal
requirements and disapproves state law
[[Page 45871]]
that does not meet Federal requirements; this action 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.
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 Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by September 30, 2013. 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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: July 12, 2013.
Shaun L. McGrath,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
40 CFR part 52 is amended to read as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart BB--Montana
0
2. Section 52.1393 is amended by revising section heading, designating
existing paragraph as (a) and adding paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1393 Interstate transport requirements.
* * * * *
(b) On February 10, 2010, Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer
submitted a letter certifying, in part, that Montana's SIP is adequate
to meet the interstate transport requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
[FR Doc. 2013-18156 Filed 7-29-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P