Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions; Revision to Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program; Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 and 2006 PM2., 63883-63887 [2013-24889]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 207 / Friday, October 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: September 24, 2013.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
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.
2. Section 52.2056 is amended by
adding paragraph (j) to read as follows:
■
Determinations of attainment.
*
*
*
*
*
(j) EPA has determined, based on
quality-assured air monitoring data for
2009–2011, that the Liberty-Clairton, PA
fine particle (PM2.5) nonattainment area
attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS)
by the applicable attainment date of
December 31, 2011. Therefore, EPA has
met the requirement of CAA section
188(b)(2) to determine, based on the
area’s air quality as of the attainment
date, whether the area attained the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
■ 3. Section 52.2059 is amended by
adding paragraph (i) to read as follows:
Control strategy: Particulate
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
*
(i) Determination of Attainment. EPA
has determined, as of October 25, 2013,
based on quality-assured ambient air
quality data for 2009 to 2011 and 2010
to 2012 ambient air quality data, that the
Liberty-Clairton, PA nonattainment area
has attained the 1997 annual fine
particle (PM2.5) national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS). This
determination suspends the
requirements for this area to submit an
attainment demonstration, associated
reasonably available control measures, a
reasonable further progress plan,
contingency measures, and other
planning SIPs related to attainment of
the standard for as long as this area
continues to meet the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS. If EPA determines, after noticeand-comment rulemaking, that this area
no longer meets the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS, the corresponding
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:00 Oct 24, 2013
Jkt 232001
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–R08–OAR–2011–0727, FRL–9901–92–
Region 8]
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
Subpart NN—Pennsylvania
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Promulgation of State Implementation
Plan Revisions; Revision to Prevention
of Significant Deterioration Program;
Infrastructure Requirements for the
1997 and 2006 PM2.5 National Ambient
Air Quality Standards; Utah
■
§ 52.2059
matter.
[FR Doc. 2013–25040 Filed 10–24–13; 8:45 am]
40 CFR Part 52
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
§ 52.2056
determination of attainment for that area
shall be withdrawn.
EPA is partially approving
and partially disapproving State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submissions
from the State of Utah to demonstrate
that the SIP meets the infrastructure
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA)
for the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) promulgated for
fine particulate matter (PM2.5) on July
18, 1997 and on October 17, 2006. The
CAA requires that each state, after a new
or revised NAAQS is promulgated,
review their SIPs to ensure that they
meet infrastructure requirements. The
State of Utah provided infrastructure
SIP submissions on April 17, 2008 for
the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS and September
21, 2010 for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. In
addition, EPA is approving portions of
SIP revisions submitted by the State of
Utah on March 14, 2012. This
submission revises Utah’s Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) program
to incorporate the required elements of
the 2008 PM2.5 New Source Review
(NSR) Implementation Rule and the
2010 PM2.5 Increment Rule.
DATES: This final rule is effective
November 25, 2013.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No.EPA–R08–OAR–2011–0727. 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
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
63883
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:
Kathy Ayala, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P–AR,
1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado
80202–1129, (303) 312–6142,
ayala.kathy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Definitions
For the purpose of this document, we
are giving meaning to certain words or
initials as follows:
(i) The words or initials Act or CAA
mean or refer to the Clean Air Act,
unless the context indicates otherwise.
(ii) The initials CBI mean or refer to
confidential business information.
(iii) The words EPA, we, us or our
mean or refer to the United States
Environmental Protection Agency.
(iv) The initials NAAQS mean or refer
to national ambient air quality
standards.
(v) The initials PM mean or refer to
particulate matter.
(vi) The initials PM2.5 mean or refer to
particulate matter with an aerodynamic
diameter of less than 2.5 micrometers
(fine particulate matter).
(vii) The initials PSD mean or refer to
Prevention of Significant Deterioration.
(viii) The initials SIP mean or refer to
State Implementation Plan.
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
Infrastructure requirements for SIPs
are provided in section 110(a)(1) and (2)
of the CAA. Section 110(a)(2) lists the
specific infrastructure elements that a
SIP must contain or satisfy. The
elements that are the subject of this
action are described in detail in our
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) of
May 23, 2013 (78 FR 30830).
In our NPR, we proposed to act on
submissions from the State of Utah to
address infrastructure requirements for
the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. The
NPR proposed approval of the
submissions with respect to the
E:\FR\FM\25OCR1.SGM
25OCR1
63884
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 207 / Friday, October 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
following infrastructure elements for the
1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS: CAA
Sections 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C) with
respect to minor NSR requirements, (E),
(F), (G), (H), (J) with respect to the
requirements of sections 121 and 127 of
the Act, (K), (L), and (M). The reasons
for our approval are provided in detail
in the NPR.
For reasons explained in the NPR,
EPA also proposed to approve the
submissions for infrastructure elements
(C) and (J) with respect to PSD
requirements for the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS. Concurrently, EPA
proposed to approve revisions to the
Utah SIP submitted by the State on
March 14, 2012 which incorporate the
requirements of the 2008 PM2.5 NSR
Implementation Rule and the 2010
PM2.5 Increment Rule; specifically,
approval of the text of 40 CFR 52.21,
paragraphs (b)(14)(i), (ii), and (iii);
(b)(15)(i) and (ii); (b)(23)(i); (b)(50); and,
paragraph (c) as they existed on July 1,
2011. EPA is taking no action at this
time on infrastructure element (D) for
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
EPA also proposed to correct, under
section 110(k)(6) of the CAA, an
erroneous statement made in a previous
action on Utah’s infrastructure SIP
submission for the 1997 ozone NAAQS.
As explained in more detail in our
proposal, in EPA’s action on the 1997
ozone infrastructure submittal, EPA
erroneously stated that the CAA made
no requirements for state judicial review
of PSD permits.
II. Response to Comments
Comment: Three trade associations
opposed our proposed disapproval of
Utah’s infrastructure SIP with respect to
element 110(a)(2)(E)(ii). The
commenters acknowledge that Utah’s
state law governing the Utah Air Quality
Board (Board) was amended by Senate
Bill 21 in 2011 to remove the provision
in Utah Code section 19–2–203
requiring members of the Board to
adequately disclose potential conflicts
of interest. However, the commenters
cite another provision, added in Senate
Bill 21 to Utah Code section 19–1–201,
requiring the Utah Department of
Environmental Quality (Department) to
promulgate rules regarding conflict of
interest procedures for the Board. The
commenters therefore disagree with our
statement that Utah Code section 19–2–
203 does not address disclosure of
potential conflicts of interest by
members of the Board, and our
statement that the 2008 and 2010
infrastructure submittals no longer
reflect state law. The commenters cite
conflict of interest rules promulgated by
the Department in Utah Administrative
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:42 Oct 24, 2013
Jkt 232001
Code (UAC) sections R305–9–101 to
–106 and note that the Director is a
member of the Board and is thus subject
to these rules. As a result, the
commenters also take exception to our
statement that Utah Code section 19–2–
203 does not address disclosure of
conflicts of interest by the Director, and
state that they have ‘‘no idea’’ why EPA
did not take the rules promulgated in
UAC sections R305–9–101 to –106 into
account in our proposal. The
commenters conclude, based on the
revisions to Utah Code section 19–1–
203 and the rules in Utah
Administrative Code section R305–9,
that the infrastructure SIP should be
approved for CAA element
110(a)(2)(E)(ii).
Response: EPA disagrees with this
comment. First, we stated a general
principle in our proposed action:
section 128 must be satisfied through
federally enforceable provisions that are
approved into the SIP. See 78 FR at
52842 n.5 (citing 78 FR 32613 (May 31,
2013)). The language of section 128
compels this. It mandates that each SIP
‘‘contain requirements’’ meeting the
terms of subsections 128(a)(1) and (a)(2).
In turn, section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires
section 128 to be satisfied. The
commenters do not dispute any of this.
EPA correctly stated that the
infrastructure SIP submittals no longer
reflect state law. As stated in our
proposal, the submittals were made on
April 17, 2008 and September 21, 2010,
for the 1997 PM2.5 and 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS, respectively. Also stated in our
proposal, S.B. 21 was enacted in 2011,
after the submittals were made. In other
words, state law changed after the
submittals were made.
EPA also correctly stated that revised
Utah Code section 19–2–203 does not
address disclosure of potential conflicts
of interest. To the extent that EPA
should have considered the revisions to
Utah Code section 19–1–201 (which
were not referenced in the infrastructure
SIP submittals nor separately submitted
for inclusion in the SIP), a general
requirement such as that in section 19–
1–203 to promulgate conflict of interest
rules nonetheless does not address how
potential conflicts of interest will be
disclosed. Furthermore, as noted in our
proposed action, the Utah SIP contains
only a reference to Utah Code section
19–2–104. See 78 FR at 52842 n.5. Thus,
even to the extent that a general
provision requiring promulgation of
conflict of interest rules can be said to
‘‘address’’ the specific disclosure
requirements in CAA section 128(a)(2),
Utah Code section 19–1–201 cannot be
used for that purpose, as it is not
approved into the SIP.
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
We turn to the rules in UAC sections
R305–9–101 to –106 cited by the
commenters. These rules have not been
submitted to EPA by the State of Utah
for inclusion in the SIP. If and when
they and any other provisions are
submitted by the State, EPA will
evaluate them for compliance with
section 128 and act accordingly. Until
such provisions are approved into the
SIP, they cannot be relied on to satisfy
the requirements of section 128 for
purposes of an infrastructure SIP
submission. Thus, it was not necessary
for EPA to assess these unsubmitted
provisions (which also were not cited in
the infrastructure SIP submittals) in
proposing disapproval of Utah’s
infrastructure SIP submissions for
element 110(a)(2)(E)(ii).
Aside from the requirement that
provisions to meet section 128 must be
approved into the SIP, the commenters
do not explain how the new rules in
UAC sections R305–9–101 to –106
would meet the requirements for section
128(a)(2) when, for example, the
Director, acting alone and not as a
member of the Board, approves a
permit. As explained in our notice—and
again undisputed by the commenters—
the Board no longer has authority to
approve permits that the State issues
under the Act. By their own terms, the
disclosure rules promulgated by the
Department apply only to ‘‘matters
before the Board.’’ See UAC R305–9–
104, –105. Because the Board no longer
has authority to approve permits, the
disclosure rules do not apply to permit
actions. In those actions, the Director
acts alone and not as a member of the
Board. The rules on their face thus do
not appear to apply to the Director’s
decisions on permits or to satisfy the
requirements of section 128(a)(2) as
applied to the Director.
As mentioned above, when the State
does submit provisions to meet the
requirements of section 128, we will act
on them. However, the comment
provides no basis for us to change our
proposed disapproval of the Utah
infrastructure SIPs for element
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS.
Comment: One commenter questioned
our approval of Utah’s SIP as to the
October 20, 2010 major source baseline
date for the PM2.5 increments. The
commenter contends that the court
decision in NRDC v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428
(D.C. Cir. 2013), requires that EPA treat
PM2.5 in the same manner as PM10 with
respect to establishing baseline dates.
The commenter contends that, because
the court held that the statutory
definition of PM10 includes PM2.5, EPA
must interpret CAA sections 166(f) and
E:\FR\FM\25OCR1.SGM
25OCR1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 207 / Friday, October 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
169(4) as applying the statutory major
source baseline date of January 6, 1975,
to the regulation of PM2.5 increments in
the same manner that it applies to the
regulation of PM10.
Response: EPA does not agree with
the commenter’s contention, and is
approving this element of the Utah SIP
because it is consistent with applicable
EPA regulations implementing the CAA.
EPA’s regulations are not altered by the
court decision cited by the commenter.
As discussed in the proposal, the court
in NRDC v. EPA addressed whether EPA
acted appropriately in establishing SIP
requirements in the 2007 and 2008
PM2.5 NAAQS implementation rules via
only subpart 1 of Part D, title I, of the
CAA, which establishes plan
requirements for nonattainment areas in
general, instead of subpart 4 of Part D,
which establishes additional provisions
for particulate matter nonattainment
areas. The court concluded that because
the Act defines the term PM10 to include
PM2.5, the requirements of subpart 4 that
pertain to PM10 nonattainment areas
also apply to PM2.5 nonattainment areas.
As subpart 4 pertains exclusively to
particulate matter nonattainment areas,
the court’s decision does not address the
part C PSD program requirements for
PM2.5, which apply to attainment and
unclassifiable areas.
EPA adopted the PM2.5 increments
and the associated baseline dates in a
2010 rule that was not before the court
in NRDC v. EPA. The D.C. Circuit issued
a separate decision on January 22, 2013,
in Sierra Club v. EPA, 705 F.3d 458, that
vacated the SILs and SMC for PM2.5 that
were also promulgated by EPA in the
2010 rule. Because no party raised the
issue in that case, the January 2013
decision did not address any of the
PM2.5 increment provisions (including
the baseline dates) adopted in that rule.
The PM2.5 increments and baseline
dates promulgated in the 2010 rule thus
remain in effect and are unchanged by
recent court decisions. EPA established
the PM2.5 increments as additional
increments under section 166(a) of the
CAA rather than substitute increments
under section 166(f). See 75 FR 64864,
64871–2 (Oct. 20, 2010). A complete
discussion of how the rule implements
the requirements of the CAA is
contained in the preamble to the 2010
rule. An opportunity to raise concerns
with EPA’s decision to set the PM2.5
major source baseline date in 2010 was
available during the comment period on
the 2010 rulemaking and court
challenge that produced the January
2013 decision. EPA may not rewrite
those rules in the context of this action,
but rather EPA is bound to apply them
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:42 Oct 24, 2013
Jkt 232001
in their present form to the Utah SIP
submission.
The 2010 rule amended EPA’s
regulations at 40 CFR 51.166, which
establishes the minimum requirements
that a state must meet in order to obtain
EPA approval of the PSD program
elements of a state implementation plan.
Section 51.166(b) specifies that ‘‘[a]ll
state plans shall use the following
definitions for the purposes of this
section.’’ Within this provision, section
51.166(b)(14)(i) establishes separate and
distinct major source baseline dates for
PM10 and PM2.5. Furthermore, the
definition of minor source baseline date
in section 51.166(b)(14)(ii) contains
separate and distinct trigger dates for
PM10 and PM2.5. Utah’s plan is
approvable because it uses these
definitions and thus meets the criteria
EPA has established by rule as sufficient
to satisfy the relevant requirements of
title I, Part C of the CAA. The Utah plan
incorporates by reference the definitions
of major source baseline date and minor
source baseline date in section 40 CFR
52.21(b)(14), which are the same as
those in section 51.166(b)(14).
III. Final Action
EPA is approving Utah’s April 17,
2008 and March 14, 2012 submissions
with respect to the following CAA
section 110(a)(2) infrastructure elements
for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS:
(A), (B), (C) with respect to minor NSR
and PSD requirements, (D)(i)(II) with
respect to PSD requirements, (E)(i),
(E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M).
EPA disapproves Utah’s submissions
with respect to the section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) infrastructure element
for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
We are approving the following
portions of the State’s March 14, 2012
submission to address the 2008 PM2.5
NSR Implementation Rule and the 2010
PM2.5 Increment Rule; specifically we
approve the adoption of the text of 40
CFR 52.21, paragraphs (b)(14)(i),(ii),(iii);
(b)(15)(i),(ii); (b)(23)(i); (b)(50) and
paragraph (c) as they existed on July 1,
2011.
EPA is taking no action on
infrastructure elements (D)(i)(I),
interstate transport of pollutants which
contribute significantly to
nonattainment in, or interfere with
maintenance by, any other state, and
(D)(i)(II), with respect to visibility
requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
as EPA is acting separately on these
elements. Finally, EPA is correcting an
erroneous statement made in a previous
action regarding requirements for state
judicial review of PSD permits.
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
63885
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 some state law as meeting
Federal requirements and disapproves
other state law as not meeting Federal
requirements; it 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
E:\FR\FM\25OCR1.SGM
25OCR1
63886
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 207 / Friday, October 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
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 December 24,
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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: September 30, 2013.
Shaun L. McGrath,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
40 CFR part 52 is amended to read as
follows:
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
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 TT—Utah
2. Section 52.2346 is amended by
adding paragraph (d) to read as follows:
■
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:42 Oct 24, 2013
Jkt 232001
§ 52.2346
quality.
Significant deterioration of air
*
*
*
*
*
(d) On March 14, 2012 the State of
Utah submitted revisions to the State
Implementation Plan that incorporated
the required elements of the 2008 PM2.5
NSR Implementation Rule and the 2010
PM2.5 Increment Rule. The following
provisions are approved into the State
Implementation Plan.
(1) Major source baseline date means:
(i) In the case of PM10 and sulfur
dioxide, January 6, 1975;
(ii) In the case of nitrogen dioxide,
February 8, 1988; and
(iii) In the case of PM2.5, October 20,
2010.
(2) Minor source baseline date means
the earliest date after the trigger date on
which a major stationary source or a
major modification subject to 40 CFR
52.21 or to regulations approved
pursuant to 40 CFR 51.166 submits a
complete application under the relevant
regulations. The trigger date is:
(i) In the case of PM10 and sulfur
dioxide, August 7, 1977;
(ii) In the case of nitrogen dioxide,
February 8, 1988; and
(iii) In the case of PM2.5, October 20,
2011.
(3) The baseline date is established for
each pollutant for which increments or
other equivalent measures have been
established if:
(i) The area in which the proposed
source or modification would construct
is designated as attainment or
unclassifiable under section
107(d)(1)(A)(ii) or (iii) of the Act for the
pollutant on the date of its complete
application under 40 CFR 52.21 or
under regulations approved pursuant to
40 CFR 51.166; and
(ii) In the case of a major stationary
source, the pollutant would be emitted
in significant amounts, or in the case of
a major modification, there would be a
significant net emissions increase of the
pollutant.
(4) Baseline area means any intrastate
area (and every part thereof) designated
as attainment or unclassifiable under
section 107(d)(1)(A)(ii) or (iii) of the Act
in which the major source or major
modification establishing the minor
source baseline date would construct or
would have an air quality impact for the
pollutant for which the baseline date is
established, as follows: equal to or
greater than 1 mg/m3 (annual average)
for SO2, NO2, or PM10; or equal or
greater than 0.3 mg/m3 (annual average)
for PM2.5.
(5) Area redesignations under section
107(d)(1)(A)(ii) or (iii) of the Act cannot
intersect or be smaller than the area of
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
impact of any major stationary source or
major modification which:
(i) Establishes a minor source baseline
date; or
(ii) Is subject to 40 CFR 52.21 or [Utah
Administrative Code (UAC)] R307–405
and would be constructed in the same
state as the state proposing the
redesignation.
(6) Significant means, in reference to
a net emissions increase or the potential
of a source to emit any of the following
pollutants, a rate of emissions that
would equal or exceed any of the
following rates:
(i) Carbon monoxide: 100 tons per
year (tpy).
(ii) Nitrogen oxides: 40 tpy.
(iii) Sulfur dioxide: 40 tpy.
(iv) Particulate matter: 25 tpy of
particulate matter emissions.
(v) PM10: 15 tpy.
(vi) PM2.5: 10 tpy of direct PM2.5
emissions; 40 tpy of sulfur dioxide
emissions; 40 tpy of nitrogen oxide
emissions unless demonstrated not to be
a PM2.5 precursor under 40 CFR
52.21(b)(50).
(vii) Ozone: 40 tpy of volatile organic
compounds or nitrogen oxides.
(viii) Lead: 0.6 tpy.
(ix) Fluorides: 3 tpy.
(x) Sulfuric acid mist: 7 tpy.
(xi) Hydrogen sulfide (H2S): 10 tpy.
(xii) Total reduced sulfur (including
H2S): 10 tpy.
(xiii) Reduced sulfur compounds
(including H2S): 10 tpy.
(xiv) Municipal waste combustor
organics (measured as total tetrathrough octa-chlorinated diebenzo-pdioxins and dibenzofurans): 3.2 × 10M6
megagrams per year (3.5 × 10M6 tons per
year).
(xv) Municipal waste combustor
metals (measured as particulate matter):
14 megagrams per year (15 tons per
year).
(xvi) Municipal waste combustor acid
gases (measured as sulfur dioxide and
hydrogen chloride): 36 megagrams per
year (40 tons per year).
(xvii) Municipal solid waste landfills
emissions (measured as nonmethane
organic compounds): 45 megagrams per
year (50 tons per year).
(7) Regulated NSR pollutant, for
purposes of this section means the
following:
(i) Any pollutant for which a national
ambient air quality standard has been
promulgated and any pollutant
identified under 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)(i)
as a constituent or precursor for such
pollutant. Precursors identified by the
EPA Administrator for purposes of NSR
are the following:
(A) Volatile organic compounds and
nitrogen oxides are precursors to ozone
E:\FR\FM\25OCR1.SGM
25OCR1
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 207 / Friday, October 25, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
in all attainment and unclassifiable
areas.
(B) Sulfur dioxide is a precursor to
PM2.5 in all attainment and
unclassifiable areas.
(C) Nitrogen oxides are presumed to
be precursors to PM2.5 in all attainment
and unclassifiable areas, unless the
State demonstrates to the EPA
Administrator’s satisfaction or EPA
demonstrates that emissions of nitrogen
oxides from sources in a specific area
are not a significant contributor to that
area’s ambient PM2.5 concentrations.
(D) Volatile organic compounds are
presumed not to be precursors to PM2.5
in any attainment or unclassifiable area,
unless the State demonstrates to the
EPA Administrator’s satisfaction or EPA
demonstrates that emissions of volatile
organic compounds from sources in a
specific area are a significant
contributor to that area’s ambient PM2.5
concentrations.
(ii) Any pollutant that is subject to
any standard promulgated under section
111 of the Act;
(iii) Any Class I or II substance subject
to a standard promulgated under or
established by title VI of the Act;
(iv) Any pollutant that otherwise is
subject to regulation under the Act.
(v) Notwithstanding 40 CFR
52.21(b)(50)(i) through (iv), the term
regulated NSR pollutant shall not
include any or all hazardous air
pollutant either listed in section 112 of
the Act, or added to the list pursuant to
section 112(b)(2) of the Act, and which
have not been delisted pursuant to
section 122(b)(3) of the Act, unless the
listed hazardous air pollutant is also
regulated as a constituent or precursor
of a general pollutant listed under
section 108 of the Act.
(vi) Participate matter (PM) emissions,
PM2.5 emissions and PM10 emissions
shall include gaseous emissions from a
source or activity which condense to
form particulate matter at ambient
temperatures. On or after January 1,
2011 (or any earlier date established in
the upcoming rulemaking codifying test
methods), such condensable particulate
matter shall be accounted for in
applicability determinations and in
establishing emissions limitations for
PM, PM2.5 and PM10 in PSD permits.
Compliance with emissions limitations
for PM, PM2.5 and PM10 issued prior to
this date shall not be based on
condensable particular matter unless
required by the terms and conditions of
the permit or the applicable
implementation plan. Applicability
determinations made prior to this date
without accounting for condensable
particular matter shall not be considered
in violation of this section unless the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:42 Oct 24, 2013
Jkt 232001
applicable implementation plan
required condensable particular matter
to be included.
(8) Ambient air increments. (i) In
areas designated as Class I, II, or III,
increases in pollutant concentration
over the baseline concentration shall be
limited to the following:
Maximum allowable increase
(micrograms
per cubic
meter)
Pollutant
Class I 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 ..............
1
2
4
8
2
5
25
63887
provided a submission to meet the
infrastructure requirements for the State
of Utah for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. On
April 17, 2008, M. Cheryl Heying,
Director, Utah Department of
Environmental Quality, provided a
second submission to meet the
infrastructure requirements for the State
of Utah for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. On
September 21, 2010, M. Cheryl Heying,
Director, Utah Department of
Environmental Quality, provided a
submission to meet the infrastructure
requirements for the State of Utah for
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. The State’s
Infrastructure SIP is approved with
respect to the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS with respect to CAA section
110(a)(1) and the following elements of
section 110(a)(2): (A), (B), (C) with
respect to PSD and minor NSR
requirements, (D)(i)(II) with respect to
PSD requirements, (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G),
(H), (J), (K), (L), and (M).
[FR Doc. 2013–24889 Filed 10–24–13; 8:45 am]
2.5
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
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
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
(ii) 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.
■ 3. Section 52.2355 is amended by
designating the existing paragraph as
paragraph (a) and adding paragraph (b)
to read as follows:
§ 52.2355 Section 110(a)(2) infrastructure
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) On December 3, 2007, Jon L.
Huntsman, Jr. Governor, State of Utah,
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52, 62, and 70
[EPA–R07–OAR–2012–0410; FRL 9901–65–
Region 7]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Approval and
Promulgation of State Air Quality Plans
for Designated Facilities and
Pollutants, State of Iowa; Control of
Emissions From Existing Hospital/
Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerator
Units, Negative Declaration and 111(d)
Plan Rescission; Approval and
Promulgation of Operating Permits
Program, State of Iowa
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is approving, through
direct final rulemaking, revisions to the
State of Iowa’s State Implementation
Plan (SIP), Title V program, and Clean
Air Act (CAA) section 111(d) plan. The
purpose of these revisions is to make
general updates to existing state air
quality rules, approve an exemption
from constructing permitting for engines
used in periodic pipeline testing,
approve changes to state rules regarding
regional haze requirements, and to
approve adoption of Federal regulations
including the National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) for 2008
Ozone, 2008 Lead, and 2010 Nitrogen
Dioxide. EPA is approving the SIP
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\25OCR1.SGM
25OCR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 207 (Friday, October 25, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 63883-63887]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-24889]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R08-OAR-2011-0727, FRL-9901-92-Region 8]
Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions; Revision to
Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program; Infrastructure
Requirements for the 1997 and 2006 PM[bdi2].[bdi5] National
Ambient Air Quality Standards; Utah
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is partially approving and partially disapproving State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submissions from the State of Utah to
demonstrate that the SIP meets the infrastructure requirements of the
Clean Air Act (CAA) for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) promulgated for fine particulate matter (PM2.5) on
July 18, 1997 and on October 17, 2006. The CAA requires that each
state, after a new or revised NAAQS is promulgated, review their SIPs
to ensure that they meet infrastructure requirements. The State of Utah
provided infrastructure SIP submissions on April 17, 2008 for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS and September 21, 2010 for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS. In addition, EPA is approving portions of SIP
revisions submitted by the State of Utah on March 14, 2012. This
submission revises Utah's Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
program to incorporate the required elements of the 2008
PM2.5 New Source Review (NSR) Implementation Rule and the
2010 PM2.5 Increment Rule.
DATES: This final rule is effective November 25, 2013.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No.EPA-R08-OAR-2011-0727. 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: Kathy Ayala, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, (303) 312-6142,
ayala.kathy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Definitions
For the purpose of this document, we are giving meaning to certain
words or initials as follows:
(i) The words or initials Act or CAA mean or refer to the Clean Air
Act, unless the context indicates otherwise.
(ii) The initials CBI mean or refer to confidential business
information.
(iii) The words EPA, we, us or our mean or refer to the United
States Environmental Protection Agency.
(iv) The initials NAAQS mean or refer to national ambient air
quality standards.
(v) The initials PM mean or refer to particulate matter.
(vi) The initials PM2.5 mean or refer to particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter of less than 2.5 micrometers (fine particulate
matter).
(vii) The initials PSD mean or refer to Prevention of Significant
Deterioration.
(viii) The initials SIP mean or refer to State Implementation Plan.
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
Infrastructure requirements for SIPs are provided in section
110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA. Section 110(a)(2) lists the specific
infrastructure elements that a SIP must contain or satisfy. The
elements that are the subject of this action are described in detail in
our notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) of May 23, 2013 (78 FR 30830).
In our NPR, we proposed to act on submissions from the State of
Utah to address infrastructure requirements for the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS. The NPR proposed approval of the submissions
with respect to the
[[Page 63884]]
following infrastructure elements for the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS: CAA Sections 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C) with
respect to minor NSR requirements, (E), (F), (G), (H), (J) with respect
to the requirements of sections 121 and 127 of the Act, (K), (L), and
(M). The reasons for our approval are provided in detail in the NPR.
For reasons explained in the NPR, EPA also proposed to approve the
submissions for infrastructure elements (C) and (J) with respect to PSD
requirements for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Concurrently, EPA proposed to approve revisions to the Utah SIP
submitted by the State on March 14, 2012 which incorporate the
requirements of the 2008 PM2.5 NSR Implementation Rule and
the 2010 PM2.5 Increment Rule; specifically, approval of the
text of 40 CFR 52.21, paragraphs (b)(14)(i), (ii), and (iii);
(b)(15)(i) and (ii); (b)(23)(i); (b)(50); and, paragraph (c) as they
existed on July 1, 2011. EPA is taking no action at this time on
infrastructure element (D) for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
EPA also proposed to correct, under section 110(k)(6) of the CAA,
an erroneous statement made in a previous action on Utah's
infrastructure SIP submission for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. As explained in
more detail in our proposal, in EPA's action on the 1997 ozone
infrastructure submittal, EPA erroneously stated that the CAA made no
requirements for state judicial review of PSD permits.
II. Response to Comments
Comment: Three trade associations opposed our proposed disapproval
of Utah's infrastructure SIP with respect to element 110(a)(2)(E)(ii).
The commenters acknowledge that Utah's state law governing the Utah Air
Quality Board (Board) was amended by Senate Bill 21 in 2011 to remove
the provision in Utah Code section 19-2-203 requiring members of the
Board to adequately disclose potential conflicts of interest. However,
the commenters cite another provision, added in Senate Bill 21 to Utah
Code section 19-1-201, requiring the Utah Department of Environmental
Quality (Department) to promulgate rules regarding conflict of interest
procedures for the Board. The commenters therefore disagree with our
statement that Utah Code section 19-2-203 does not address disclosure
of potential conflicts of interest by members of the Board, and our
statement that the 2008 and 2010 infrastructure submittals no longer
reflect state law. The commenters cite conflict of interest rules
promulgated by the Department in Utah Administrative Code (UAC)
sections R305-9-101 to -106 and note that the Director is a member of
the Board and is thus subject to these rules. As a result, the
commenters also take exception to our statement that Utah Code section
19-2-203 does not address disclosure of conflicts of interest by the
Director, and state that they have ``no idea'' why EPA did not take the
rules promulgated in UAC sections R305-9-101 to -106 into account in
our proposal. The commenters conclude, based on the revisions to Utah
Code section 19-1-203 and the rules in Utah Administrative Code section
R305-9, that the infrastructure SIP should be approved for CAA element
110(a)(2)(E)(ii).
Response: EPA disagrees with this comment. First, we stated a
general principle in our proposed action: section 128 must be satisfied
through federally enforceable provisions that are approved into the
SIP. See 78 FR at 52842 n.5 (citing 78 FR 32613 (May 31, 2013)). The
language of section 128 compels this. It mandates that each SIP
``contain requirements'' meeting the terms of subsections 128(a)(1) and
(a)(2). In turn, section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires section 128 to be
satisfied. The commenters do not dispute any of this.
EPA correctly stated that the infrastructure SIP submittals no
longer reflect state law. As stated in our proposal, the submittals
were made on April 17, 2008 and September 21, 2010, for the 1997
PM2.5 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, respectively. Also
stated in our proposal, S.B. 21 was enacted in 2011, after the
submittals were made. In other words, state law changed after the
submittals were made.
EPA also correctly stated that revised Utah Code section 19-2-203
does not address disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. To the
extent that EPA should have considered the revisions to Utah Code
section 19-1-201 (which were not referenced in the infrastructure SIP
submittals nor separately submitted for inclusion in the SIP), a
general requirement such as that in section 19-1-203 to promulgate
conflict of interest rules nonetheless does not address how potential
conflicts of interest will be disclosed. Furthermore, as noted in our
proposed action, the Utah SIP contains only a reference to Utah Code
section 19-2-104. See 78 FR at 52842 n.5. Thus, even to the extent that
a general provision requiring promulgation of conflict of interest
rules can be said to ``address'' the specific disclosure requirements
in CAA section 128(a)(2), Utah Code section 19-1-201 cannot be used for
that purpose, as it is not approved into the SIP.
We turn to the rules in UAC sections R305-9-101 to -106 cited by
the commenters. These rules have not been submitted to EPA by the State
of Utah for inclusion in the SIP. If and when they and any other
provisions are submitted by the State, EPA will evaluate them for
compliance with section 128 and act accordingly. Until such provisions
are approved into the SIP, they cannot be relied on to satisfy the
requirements of section 128 for purposes of an infrastructure SIP
submission. Thus, it was not necessary for EPA to assess these
unsubmitted provisions (which also were not cited in the infrastructure
SIP submittals) in proposing disapproval of Utah's infrastructure SIP
submissions for element 110(a)(2)(E)(ii).
Aside from the requirement that provisions to meet section 128 must
be approved into the SIP, the commenters do not explain how the new
rules in UAC sections R305-9-101 to -106 would meet the requirements
for section 128(a)(2) when, for example, the Director, acting alone and
not as a member of the Board, approves a permit. As explained in our
notice--and again undisputed by the commenters--the Board no longer has
authority to approve permits that the State issues under the Act. By
their own terms, the disclosure rules promulgated by the Department
apply only to ``matters before the Board.'' See UAC R305-9-104, -105.
Because the Board no longer has authority to approve permits, the
disclosure rules do not apply to permit actions. In those actions, the
Director acts alone and not as a member of the Board. The rules on
their face thus do not appear to apply to the Director's decisions on
permits or to satisfy the requirements of section 128(a)(2) as applied
to the Director.
As mentioned above, when the State does submit provisions to meet
the requirements of section 128, we will act on them. However, the
comment provides no basis for us to change our proposed disapproval of
the Utah infrastructure SIPs for element 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) for the 1997
and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Comment: One commenter questioned our approval of Utah's SIP as to
the October 20, 2010 major source baseline date for the
PM2.5 increments. The commenter contends that the court
decision in NRDC v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013), requires that
EPA treat PM2.5 in the same manner as PM10 with
respect to establishing baseline dates. The commenter contends that,
because the court held that the statutory definition of PM10
includes PM2.5, EPA must interpret CAA sections 166(f) and
[[Page 63885]]
169(4) as applying the statutory major source baseline date of January
6, 1975, to the regulation of PM2.5 increments in the same
manner that it applies to the regulation of PM10.
Response: EPA does not agree with the commenter's contention, and
is approving this element of the Utah SIP because it is consistent with
applicable EPA regulations implementing the CAA. EPA's regulations are
not altered by the court decision cited by the commenter. As discussed
in the proposal, the court in NRDC v. EPA addressed whether EPA acted
appropriately in establishing SIP requirements in the 2007 and 2008
PM2.5 NAAQS implementation rules via only subpart 1 of Part
D, title I, of the CAA, which establishes plan requirements for
nonattainment areas in general, instead of subpart 4 of Part D, which
establishes additional provisions for particulate matter nonattainment
areas. The court concluded that because the Act defines the term
PM10 to include PM2.5, the requirements of
subpart 4 that pertain to PM10 nonattainment areas also
apply to PM2.5 nonattainment areas. As subpart 4 pertains
exclusively to particulate matter nonattainment areas, the court's
decision does not address the part C PSD program requirements for
PM2.5, which apply to attainment and unclassifiable areas.
EPA adopted the PM2.5 increments and the associated
baseline dates in a 2010 rule that was not before the court in NRDC v.
EPA. The D.C. Circuit issued a separate decision on January 22, 2013,
in Sierra Club v. EPA, 705 F.3d 458, that vacated the SILs and SMC for
PM2.5 that were also promulgated by EPA in the 2010 rule.
Because no party raised the issue in that case, the January 2013
decision did not address any of the PM2.5 increment
provisions (including the baseline dates) adopted in that rule.
The PM2.5 increments and baseline dates promulgated in
the 2010 rule thus remain in effect and are unchanged by recent court
decisions. EPA established the PM2.5 increments as
additional increments under section 166(a) of the CAA rather than
substitute increments under section 166(f). See 75 FR 64864, 64871-2
(Oct. 20, 2010). A complete discussion of how the rule implements the
requirements of the CAA is contained in the preamble to the 2010 rule.
An opportunity to raise concerns with EPA's decision to set the
PM2.5 major source baseline date in 2010 was available
during the comment period on the 2010 rulemaking and court challenge
that produced the January 2013 decision. EPA may not rewrite those
rules in the context of this action, but rather EPA is bound to apply
them in their present form to the Utah SIP submission.
The 2010 rule amended EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 51.166, which
establishes the minimum requirements that a state must meet in order to
obtain EPA approval of the PSD program elements of a state
implementation plan. Section 51.166(b) specifies that ``[a]ll state
plans shall use the following definitions for the purposes of this
section.'' Within this provision, section 51.166(b)(14)(i) establishes
separate and distinct major source baseline dates for PM10
and PM2.5. Furthermore, the definition of minor source
baseline date in section 51.166(b)(14)(ii) contains separate and
distinct trigger dates for PM10 and PM2.5. Utah's
plan is approvable because it uses these definitions and thus meets the
criteria EPA has established by rule as sufficient to satisfy the
relevant requirements of title I, Part C of the CAA. The Utah plan
incorporates by reference the definitions of major source baseline date
and minor source baseline date in section 40 CFR 52.21(b)(14), which
are the same as those in section 51.166(b)(14).
III. Final Action
EPA is approving Utah's April 17, 2008 and March 14, 2012
submissions with respect to the following CAA section 110(a)(2)
infrastructure elements for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS:
(A), (B), (C) with respect to minor NSR and PSD requirements,
(D)(i)(II) with respect to PSD requirements, (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F),
(G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M).
EPA disapproves Utah's submissions with respect to the section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) infrastructure element for the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS.
We are approving the following portions of the State's March 14,
2012 submission to address the 2008 PM2.5 NSR Implementation
Rule and the 2010 PM2.5 Increment Rule; specifically we
approve the adoption of the text of 40 CFR 52.21, paragraphs
(b)(14)(i),(ii),(iii); (b)(15)(i),(ii); (b)(23)(i); (b)(50) and
paragraph (c) as they existed on July 1, 2011.
EPA is taking no action on infrastructure elements (D)(i)(I),
interstate transport of pollutants which contribute significantly to
nonattainment in, or interfere with maintenance by, any other state,
and (D)(i)(II), with respect to visibility requirements for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS as EPA is acting separately on these elements.
Finally, EPA is correcting an erroneous statement made in a previous
action regarding requirements for state judicial review of PSD permits.
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 some state law as meeting
Federal requirements and disapproves other state law as not meeting
Federal requirements; it 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
[[Page 63886]]
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 December 24, 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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: September 30, 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 TT--Utah
0
2. Section 52.2346 is amended by adding paragraph (d) to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.2346 Significant deterioration of air quality.
* * * * *
(d) On March 14, 2012 the State of Utah submitted revisions to the
State Implementation Plan that incorporated the required elements of
the 2008 PM2.5 NSR Implementation Rule and the 2010
PM2.5 Increment Rule. The following provisions are approved
into the State Implementation Plan.
(1) Major source baseline date means:
(i) In the case of PM10 and sulfur dioxide, January 6,
1975;
(ii) In the case of nitrogen dioxide, February 8, 1988; and
(iii) In the case of PM2.5, October 20, 2010.
(2) Minor source baseline date means the earliest date after the
trigger date on which a major stationary source or a major modification
subject to 40 CFR 52.21 or to regulations approved pursuant to 40 CFR
51.166 submits a complete application under the relevant regulations.
The trigger date is:
(i) In the case of PM10 and sulfur dioxide, August 7,
1977;
(ii) In the case of nitrogen dioxide, February 8, 1988; and
(iii) In the case of PM2.5, October 20, 2011.
(3) The baseline date is established for each pollutant for which
increments or other equivalent measures have been established if:
(i) The area in which the proposed source or modification would
construct is designated as attainment or unclassifiable under section
107(d)(1)(A)(ii) or (iii) of the Act for the pollutant on the date of
its complete application under 40 CFR 52.21 or under regulations
approved pursuant to 40 CFR 51.166; and
(ii) In the case of a major stationary source, the pollutant would
be emitted in significant amounts, or in the case of a major
modification, there would be a significant net emissions increase of
the pollutant.
(4) Baseline area means any intrastate area (and every part
thereof) designated as attainment or unclassifiable under section
107(d)(1)(A)(ii) or (iii) of the Act in which the major source or major
modification establishing the minor source baseline date would
construct or would have an air quality impact for the pollutant for
which the baseline date is established, as follows: equal to or greater
than 1 [mu]g/m\3\ (annual average) for SO2, NO2,
or PM10; or equal or greater than 0.3 [mu]g/m\3\ (annual
average) for PM2.5.
(5) Area redesignations under section 107(d)(1)(A)(ii) or (iii) of
the Act cannot intersect or be smaller than the area of impact of any
major stationary source or major modification which:
(i) Establishes a minor source baseline date; or
(ii) Is subject to 40 CFR 52.21 or [Utah Administrative Code (UAC)]
R307-405 and would be constructed in the same state as the state
proposing the redesignation.
(6) Significant means, in reference to a net emissions increase or
the potential of a source to emit any of the following pollutants, a
rate of emissions that would equal or exceed any of the following
rates:
(i) Carbon monoxide: 100 tons per year (tpy).
(ii) Nitrogen oxides: 40 tpy.
(iii) Sulfur dioxide: 40 tpy.
(iv) Particulate matter: 25 tpy of particulate matter emissions.
(v) PM10: 15 tpy.
(vi) PM2.5: 10 tpy of direct PM2.5 emissions;
40 tpy of sulfur dioxide emissions; 40 tpy of nitrogen oxide emissions
unless demonstrated not to be a PM2.5 precursor under 40 CFR
52.21(b)(50).
(vii) Ozone: 40 tpy of volatile organic compounds or nitrogen
oxides.
(viii) Lead: 0.6 tpy.
(ix) Fluorides: 3 tpy.
(x) Sulfuric acid mist: 7 tpy.
(xi) Hydrogen sulfide (H2S): 10 tpy.
(xii) Total reduced sulfur (including H2S): 10 tpy.
(xiii) Reduced sulfur compounds (including H2S): 10 tpy.
(xiv) Municipal waste combustor organics (measured as total tetra-
through octa-chlorinated diebenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans): 3.2 x
10\M6\ megagrams per year (3.5 x 10\M6\ tons per year).
(xv) Municipal waste combustor metals (measured as particulate
matter): 14 megagrams per year (15 tons per year).
(xvi) Municipal waste combustor acid gases (measured as sulfur
dioxide and hydrogen chloride): 36 megagrams per year (40 tons per
year).
(xvii) Municipal solid waste landfills emissions (measured as
nonmethane organic compounds): 45 megagrams per year (50 tons per
year).
(7) Regulated NSR pollutant, for purposes of this section means the
following:
(i) Any pollutant for which a national ambient air quality standard
has been promulgated and any pollutant identified under 40 CFR
52.21(b)(50)(i) as a constituent or precursor for such pollutant.
Precursors identified by the EPA Administrator for purposes of NSR are
the following:
(A) Volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides are precursors
to ozone
[[Page 63887]]
in all attainment and unclassifiable areas.
(B) Sulfur dioxide is a precursor to PM2.5 in all
attainment and unclassifiable areas.
(C) Nitrogen oxides are presumed to be precursors to
PM2.5 in all attainment and unclassifiable areas, unless the
State demonstrates to the EPA Administrator's satisfaction or EPA
demonstrates that emissions of nitrogen oxides from sources in a
specific area are not a significant contributor to that area's ambient
PM2.5 concentrations.
(D) Volatile organic compounds are presumed not to be precursors to
PM2.5 in any attainment or unclassifiable area, unless the
State demonstrates to the EPA Administrator's satisfaction or EPA
demonstrates that emissions of volatile organic compounds from sources
in a specific area are a significant contributor to that area's ambient
PM2.5 concentrations.
(ii) Any pollutant that is subject to any standard promulgated
under section 111 of the Act;
(iii) Any Class I or II substance subject to a standard promulgated
under or established by title VI of the Act;
(iv) Any pollutant that otherwise is subject to regulation under
the Act.
(v) Notwithstanding 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)(i) through (iv), the term
regulated NSR pollutant shall not include any or all hazardous air
pollutant either listed in section 112 of the Act, or added to the list
pursuant to section 112(b)(2) of the Act, and which have not been
delisted pursuant to section 122(b)(3) of the Act, unless the listed
hazardous air pollutant is also regulated as a constituent or precursor
of a general pollutant listed under section 108 of the Act.
(vi) Participate matter (PM) emissions, PM2.5 emissions
and PM10 emissions shall include gaseous emissions from a
source or activity which condense to form particulate matter at ambient
temperatures. On or after January 1, 2011 (or any earlier date
established in the upcoming rulemaking codifying test methods), such
condensable particulate matter shall be accounted for in applicability
determinations and in establishing emissions limitations for PM,
PM2.5 and PM10 in PSD permits. Compliance with
emissions limitations for PM, PM2.5 and PM10
issued prior to this date shall not be based on condensable particular
matter unless required by the terms and conditions of the permit or the
applicable implementation plan. Applicability determinations made prior
to this date without accounting for condensable particular matter shall
not be considered in violation of this section unless the applicable
implementation plan required condensable particular matter to be
included.
(8) Ambient air increments. (i) In areas designated as Class I, II,
or III, increases in pollutant concentration over the baseline
concentration shall be limited to the following:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum
allowable
Pollutant increase
(micrograms per
cubic meter)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class I Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5:
Annual arithmetic mean............................... 1
24-hr maximum........................................ 2
PM10:
Annual arithmetic mean............................... 4
24-hr maximum........................................ 8
Sulfur dioxide:
Annual arithmetic mean............................... 2
24-hr maximum........................................ 5
3-hr maximum......................................... 25
Nitrogen dioxide Annual arithmetic mean................ 2.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class II Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5:
Annual arithmetic mean............................... 4
24-hr maximum........................................ 9
PM10:
Annual arithmetic mean............................... 17
24-hr maximum........................................ 30
Sulfur dioxide:
Annual arithmetic mean............................... 20
24-hr maximum........................................ 91
3-hr maximum......................................... 512
Nitrogen dioxide Annual arithmetic mean................ 25
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class III Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5:
Annual arithmetic mean............................... 8
24-hr maximum........................................ 18
PM10:
Annual arithmetic mean............................... 34
24-hr maximum........................................ 60
Sulfur dioxide:
Annual arithmetic mean............................... 40
24-hr maximum........................................ 182
3-hr maximum......................................... 700
Nitrogen dioxide Annual arithmetic mean................ 50
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(ii) 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.
0
3. Section 52.2355 is amended by designating the existing paragraph as
paragraph (a) and adding paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.2355 Section 110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements.
* * * * *
(b) On December 3, 2007, Jon L. Huntsman, Jr. Governor, State of
Utah, provided a submission to meet the infrastructure requirements for
the State of Utah for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. On April 17,
2008, M. Cheryl Heying, Director, Utah Department of Environmental
Quality, provided a second submission to meet the infrastructure
requirements for the State of Utah for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.
On September 21, 2010, M. Cheryl Heying, Director, Utah Department of
Environmental Quality, provided a submission to meet the infrastructure
requirements for the State of Utah for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.
The State's Infrastructure SIP is approved with respect to the 1997 and
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS with respect to CAA section 110(a)(1) and
the following elements of section 110(a)(2): (A), (B), (C) with respect
to PSD and minor NSR requirements, (D)(i)(II) with respect to PSD
requirements, (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M).
[FR Doc. 2013-24889 Filed 10-24-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P