Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio; PSD Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2008 Lead, 2008 Ozone, 2010 NO2, 10591-10596 [2015-04011]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 39 / Friday, February 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
fields, and governmental jurisdictions
with populations of less than 50,000.
The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C.
605(b) that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This rule will have no effect on small
entities since this drawbridge has been
converted to a fixed bridge and the
regulation governing draw operations
for this bridge is no longer applicable.
There is no new restriction or regulation
being imposed by this rule; therefore,
the Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C.
605(b) that this final rule will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
3. Collection of Information
This rule calls for no new collection
of information under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3520).
4. Federalism
A rule has implications for federalism
under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct
effect on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. We have
analyzed this rule under that Order and
have determined that it does not have
implications for federalism.
5. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the
person listed in the ‘‘For Further
Information Contact’’ section to
coordinate protest activities so that your
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places or vessels.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
6. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their discretionary regulatory actions. In
particular, the Act addresses actions
that may result in the expenditure by a
State, local, or tribal government, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or
more in any one year. Though this rule
will not result in such an expenditure,
we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
7. Taking of Private Property
This rule will not cause a taking of
private property or otherwise have
taking implications under Executive
Order 12630, Governmental Actions and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:12 Feb 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
10591
Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights.
exclusion determination are not
required for this rule.
8. Civil Justice Reform
This rule meets applicable standards
in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive
Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to
minimize litigation, eliminate
ambiguity, and reduce burden.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 117
Bridges.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 117 as follows:
9. Protection of Children
We have analyzed this rule under
Executive Order 13045, Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not
an economically significant rule and
does not create an environmental risk to
health or risk to safety that might
disproportionately affect children.
10. Indian Tribal Governments
This rule does not have tribal
implications under Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments,
because it does not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes.
11. Energy Effects
This action is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ under Executive Order
13211, Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use.
12. Technical Standards
This rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
We have analyzed this rule under
Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023–01 and
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
which guides the Coast Guard in
complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have concluded that this action is one
of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves the
removal of a drawbridge operation
regulation that is no longer necessary.
This rule is categorically excluded,
under figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of
the Instruction.
Under figure 2–1, paragraph (32)(e), of
the Instruction, an environmental
analysis checklist and a categorical
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
1. The authority citation for part 117
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 499; 33 CFR 1.05–1;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
§ 117.739
[Amended]
2. In § 117.739, remove paragraph (n)
and redesignate paragraphs (o) through
(t) as paragraphs (n) through (s).
■
Dated: January 29, 2015.
L.L. Fagan,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2015–04152 Filed 2–26–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0888; EPA–R05–
OAR–2011–0969; EPA–R05–OAR–2012–
0991; EPA–R05–OAR–2013–0435; FRL–
9923–48–Region 5]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio;
PSD Infrastructure SIP Requirements
for the 2008 Lead, 2008 Ozone, 2010
NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
13. Environment
PO 00000
PART 117—DRAWBRIDGE
OPERATION REGULATIONS
Sfmt 4700
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving elements of
state implementation plan (SIP)
submissions from Ohio regarding the
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD) infrastructure requirements of
section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA)
for the 2008 lead (Pb), 2008 ozone, 2010
nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and 2010 sulfur
dioxide (SO2) National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS). The
infrastructure requirements are designed
to ensure that the structural components
of each state’s air quality management
program are adequate to meet the state’s
responsibilities under the CAA.
DATES: This direct final rule will be
effective April 28, 2015, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by March
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
10592
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 39 / Friday, February 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
30, 2015. If adverse comments are
received, EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the
Federal Register informing the public
that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2011–0888 (2008 Pb infrastructure
elements), EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0969
(2008 ozone infrastructure elements),
EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0991 (2010 NO2
infrastructure elements), or EPA–R05–
OAR–2013–0435 (2010 SO2
infrastructure elements) by one of the
following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: aburano.douglas@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (312) 408–2279.
4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano,
Chief, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Regional Office normal hours
of operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Regional Office official
hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID. EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0888
(2008 Pb infrastructure elements), EPA–
R05–OAR–2011–0969 (2008 ozone
infrastructure elements), EPA–R05–
OAR–2012–0991 (2010 NO2
infrastructure elements), or EPA–R05–
OAR–2013–0435 (2010 SO2
infrastructure elements). EPA’s policy is
that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without
change and may be made available
online at www.regulations.gov,
including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes
information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected through
www.regulations.gov or email. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an email comment directly
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:12 Feb 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov your email address
will be automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made
available on the Internet. If you submit
an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the www.regulations.gov
index. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604. This facility is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We
recommend that you telephone Sarah
Arra, Environmental Scientist, at (312)
886–9401 before visiting the Region 5
office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sarah Arra, Environmental Scientist,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–9401,
arra.sarah@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section is arranged as follows:
I. What is the background of these SIP
submissions?
II. What is EPA’s review of these SIP
submissions?
III. What action is EPA taking?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is the background of these SIP
submissions?
This rulemaking addresses
submissions from the Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio
EPA). The state submitted its
infrastructure SIP for each NAAQS on
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
the following dates: 2008 Pb—October
12, 2011, and supplemented on June 7,
2013; 2008 ozone—December 27, 2012,
and supplemented on June 7, 2013;
2010 NO2—February 8, 2013, and
supplemented on February 25, 2013,
and June 7, 2013; and, 2010 SO2—June
7, 2013.
The requirement for states to make a
SIP submission of this type arises out of
CAA section 110(a)(1). Pursuant to
section 110(a)(1), states must make SIP
submissions ‘‘within 3 years (or such
shorter period as the Administrator may
prescribe) after the promulgation of a
national primary ambient air quality
standard (or any revision thereof),’’ and
these SIP submissions are to provide for
the ‘‘implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement’’ of such NAAQS. The
statute directly imposes on states the
duty to make these SIP submissions,
and the requirement to make the
submissions is not conditioned upon
EPA’s taking any action other than
promulgating a new or revised NAAQS.
Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of
specific elements that ‘‘[e]ach such
plan’’ submission must address.
This specific rule making is only
taking action on the PSD elements of
these submittals. The majority of the
other infrastructure elements were
addressed in proposed rulemaking
published July 25, 2014 (79 FR 43338).
Final action was taken on those
elements on October 6, 2014, for 2008
Pb and 2010 NO2 (79 FR 60075),1 and
on October 16, 2014, for 2008 ozone (79
FR 62019).2 The infrastructure elements
for PSD are found in CAA 110(a)(2)(C),
110(a)(2)(D), and 110(a)(2)(J) and will be
discussed in detail below. For further
discussion on the background of
infrastructure submittals, see 79 FR
43338.
II. What is EPA’s review of these SIP
submissions?
A. Section 110(a)(2)(C)—Program for
Enforcement of Control Measures; PSD
States are required to include a
program providing for enforcement of
all SIP measures and the regulation of
construction of new or modified
stationary sources to meet new source
review (NSR) requirements under PSD
and nonattainment new source review
1 Specifically, sections 110(a)(2)(A) through (H),
and (J) through (M) for the 2008 lead and 2010 NO2
NAAQS except the prevention of significant
deterioration requirements in sections 110(a)(2)(C),
(D)(i)(II), and (J), the visibility portion of (J).
2 Specifically, sections 110(a)(2)(A) through (H),
and (J) through (M) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
except the prevention of significant deterioration
requirements in sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and
(J), the visibility portion of (J) and the interstate
transport portion of 110(a)(2)(D)(i).
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 39 / Friday, February 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
(NNSR) programs. Part C of the CAA
(sections 160–169B) addresses PSD,
while part D of the CAA (sections 171–
193) addresses NNSR requirements.
The evaluation of each state’s
submission addressing the
infrastructure SIP requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(C) covers: (i)
Enforcement of SIP measures; (ii) PSD
provisions that explicitly identify
oxides of nitrogen (NOX) as a precursor
to ozone in the PSD program; (iii)
identification of precursors to fine
particulates (PM2.5) and the
identification of PM2.5 and PM10 3
condensables in the PSD program; (iv)
PM2.5 increments in the PSD program;
and, (v) GHG permitting and the
‘‘Tailoring Rule.’’ 4
Sub-element 1: Enforcement of SIP
Measures
This element was proposed for the
2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and
2010 SO2 NAAQS in the July 25, 2014,
rulemaking (79 FR 43338) and was
finalized for the 2008 lead and 2010
NO2 NAAQS in the October 6, 2014,
rulemaking (79 FR 60075) and for the
2008 ozone NAAQS in the October 16,
2014, rulemaking (79 FR 62019). This
element will be finalized for the 2010
SO2 NAAQS in a separate rulemaking.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Sub-element 2: PSD Provisions That
Explicitly Identify NOX as a Precursor to
Ozone in the PSD Program
EPA’s ‘‘Final Rule to Implement the 8Hour Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standard—Phase 2; Final Rule
to Implement Certain Aspects of the
1990 Amendments Relating to New
Source Review and Prevention of
Significant Deterioration as They Apply
in Carbon Monoxide, Particulate Matter,
and Ozone NAAQS; Final Rule for
Reformulated Gasoline’’ (Phase 2 Rule)
was published on November 29, 2005
(see 70 FR 71612). Among other
requirements, the Phase 2 Rule
obligated states to revise their PSD
3 PM
10 refers to particles with diameters between
2.5 and 10 microns, oftentimes referred to as
‘‘coarse’’ particles.
4 In EPA’s April 28, 2011, proposed rulemaking
for infrastructure SIPS for the 1997 ozone and PM2.5
NAAQS, we stated that each state’s PSD program
must meet applicable requirements for evaluation of
all regulated NSR pollutants in PSD permits (see 76
FR 23757 at 23760). This view was reiterated in
EPA’s August 2, 2012, proposed rulemaking for
infrastructure SIPs for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (see
77 FR 45992 at 45998). In other words, if a state
lacks provisions needed to adequately address NOX
as a precursor to ozone, PM2.5 precursors, PM2.5 and
PM10 condensables, PM2.5 increments, or the
Federal GHG permitting thresholds, the provisions
of section 110(a)(2)(C) requiring a suitable PSD
permitting program must be considered not to be
met irrespective of the NAAQS that triggered the
requirement to submit an infrastructure SIP,
including the 2010 NO2 NAAQS.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:12 Feb 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
programs to explicitly identify NOX as
a precursor to ozone (70 FR 71612 at
71679, 71699–71700). This requirement
was codified in 40 CFR 51.166.5
The Phase 2 Rule required that states
submit SIP revisions incorporating the
requirements of the rule, including the
specification of NOX as a precursor to
ozone provisions, by June 15, 2007 (70
FR 71612 at 71683).
EPA approved revisions to Ohio’s
PSD SIP reflecting these requirements
on October 28, 2014 (79 FR 64119), and
therefore, Ohio has met this set of
infrastructure SIP requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the
2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and
2010 SO2 NAAQS.
Sub-element 3: Identification of
Precursors to PM2.5 and the
Identification of PM2.5 and PM10
Condensables in the PSD Program
On May 16, 2008 (see 73 FR 28321),
EPA issued the Final Rule on the
‘‘Implementation of the New Source
Review (NSR) Program for Particulate
Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers
(PM2.5)’’ (2008 NSR Rule). The 2008
NSR Rule finalized several new
requirements for SIPs to address sources
that emit direct PM2.5 and other
pollutants that contribute to secondary
PM2.5 formation. One of these
requirements is for NSR permits to
address pollutants responsible for the
secondary formation of PM2.5, otherwise
known as precursors. In the 2008 rule,
EPA identified precursors to PM2.5 for
the PSD program to be sulfur dioxide
(SO2) and NOX (unless the state
demonstrates to the Administrator’s
satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that
NOX emissions in an area are not a
significant contributor to that area’s
ambient PM2.5 concentrations). The
2008 NSR Rule also specifies that VOCs
are not considered to be precursors to
PM2.5 in the PSD program unless the
state demonstrates to the
Administrator’s satisfaction or EPA
demonstrates that emissions of VOCs in
an area are significant contributors to
that area’s ambient PM2.5
concentrations.
The explicit references to SO2, NOX,
and VOCs as they pertain to secondary
PM2.5 formation are codified at 40 CFR
51.166(b)(49)(i)(b) and 40 CFR
52.21(b)(50)(i)(b). As part of identifying
pollutants that are precursors to PM2.5,
the 2008 NSR Rule also required states
to revise the definition of ‘‘significant’’
as it relates to a net emissions increase
or the potential of a source to emit
pollutants. Specifically, 40 CFR
51.166(b)(23)(i) and 40 CFR
5 Similar
PO 00000
changes were codified in 40 CFR 52.21.
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
10593
52.21(b)(23)(i) define ‘‘significant’’ for
PM2.5 to mean the following emissions
rates: 10 tpy of direct PM2.5; 40 tpy of
SO2; and 40 tpy of NOX (unless the state
demonstrates to the Administrator’s
satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that
NOX emissions in an area are not a
significant contributor to that area’s
ambient PM2.5 concentrations). The
deadline for states to submit SIP
revisions to their PSD programs
incorporating these changes was May
16, 2011 (see 73 FR 28321 at 28341).6
The 2008 NSR Rule did not require
states to immediately account for gases
that could condense to form particulate
matter, known as condensables, in PM2.5
and PM10 emission limits in NSR
permits. Instead, EPA determined that
states had to account for PM2.5 and PM10
condensables for applicability
determinations and in establishing
emissions limitations for PM2.5 and
PM10 in PSD permits beginning on or
after January 1, 2011. This requirement
is codified in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i)(a)
and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)(i)(a). Revisions
to states’ PSD programs incorporating
the inclusion of condensables were
required be submitted to EPA by May
16, 2011 (see 73 FR 28321 at 28341).
EPA approved revisions to Ohio’s
PSD SIP reflecting these requirements
on October 28, 2014 (79 FR 64119), and
therefore Ohio has met this set of
infrastructure SIP requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the
6 EPA notes that on January 4, 2013, the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, in Natural
Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428
(D.C. Cir.), held that EPA should have issued the
2008 NSR Rule in accordance with the CAA’s
requirements for PM10 nonattainment areas (Title I,
Part D, subpart 4), and not the general requirements
for nonattainment areas under subpart 1 (Natural
Resources Defense Council v. EPA, No. 08–1250).
As the subpart 4 provisions apply only to
nonattainment areas, EPA does not consider the
portions of the 2008 rule that address requirements
for PM2.5 attainment and unclassifiable areas to be
affected by the court’s opinion. Moreover, EPA does
not anticipate the need to revise any PSD
requirements promulgated by the 2008 NSR rule in
order to comply with the court’s decision.
Accordingly, EPA’s approval of Ohio’s
infrastructure SIP as to elements (C), (D)(i)(II), or (J)
with respect to the PSD requirements promulgated
by the 2008 implementation rule does not conflict
with the court’s opinion.
The Court’s decision with respect to the
nonattainment NSR requirements promulgated by
the 2008 implementation rule also does not affect
EPA’s action on the present infrastructure action.
EPA interprets the CAA to exclude nonattainment
area requirements, including requirements
associated with a nonattainment NSR program,
from infrastructure SIP submissions due three years
after adoption or revision of a NAAQS. Instead,
these elements are typically referred to as
nonattainment SIP or attainment plan elements,
which would be due by the dates statutorily
prescribed under subpart 2 through 5 under part D,
extending as far as 10 years following designations
for some elements.
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
10594
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 39 / Friday, February 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
also be satisfied by demonstrating the
air agency has a complete PSD
permitting program correctly addressing
Sub-element 4: PM2.5 Increments in the
all regulated NSR pollutants. Ohio has
PSD Program
shown that it currently has a PSD
On October 20, 2010, EPA issued the
program in place that covers all
final rule on the ‘‘Prevention of
regulated NSR pollutants, including
Significant Deterioration (PSD) for
greenhouse gases (GHGs).
Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5
On June 23, 2014, the United States
Micrometers (PM2.5)—Increments,
Supreme Court issued a decision
Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and
addressing the application of PSD
Significant Monitoring Concentration
permitting requirements to GHG
(SMC)’’ (2010 NSR Rule). This rule
emissions. Utility Air Regulatory Group
established several components for
v. Environmental Protection Agency,
making PSD permitting determinations
134 S.Ct. 2427. The Supreme Court said
for PM2.5, including a system of
that EPA may not treat GHGs as an air
‘‘increments’’ which is the mechanism
pollutant for purposes of determining
used to estimate significant
whether a source is a major source
deterioration of ambient air quality for
required to obtain a PSD permit. The
a pollutant. These increments are
Court also found that EPA could
codified in 40 CFR 51.166(c) and 40
continue to require that PSD permits,
CFR 52.21(c), and are included in the
otherwise required based on emissions
table below.
of pollutants other than GHGs, contain
limitations on GHG emissions based on
TABLE 1—PM2.5 INCREMENTS ESTAB- the application of Best Available
LISHED BY THE 2010 NSR RULE IN Control Technology (BACT).
In order to act consistently with its
MICROGRAMS PER CUBIC METER
understanding of the Court’s decision
pending further judicial action to
Annual
24-hour
arithmetic
effectuate the decision, EPA is no longer
max
mean
applying EPA regulations that would
require that SIPs include permitting
Class I ...............
1
2
Class II ..............
4
9 requirements that the Supreme Court
Class III .............
8
18 found impermissible. Specifically, EPA
is not applying the requirement that a
The 2010 NSR Rule also established a state’s SIP-approved PSD program
require that sources obtain PSD permits
new ‘‘major source baseline date’’ for
when GHGs are the only pollutant: (i)
PM2.5 as October 20, 2010, and a new
That the source emits or has the
trigger date for PM2.5 as October 20,
2011. These revisions are codified in 40 potential to emit above the major source
CFR 51.166(b)(14)(i)(c) and (b)(14)(ii)(c), thresholds, or (ii) for which there is a
significant emissions increase and a
and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(14)(i)(c) and
significant net emissions increase from
(b)(14)(ii)(c). Lastly, the 2010 NSR Rule
revised the definition of ‘‘baseline area’’ a modification (see 40 CFR
51.166(b)(48)(v)).
to include a level of significance of 0.3
EPA anticipates a need to revise
micrograms per cubic meter, annual
Federal PSD rules in light of the
average, for PM2.5. This change is
Supreme Court opinion. In addition,
codified in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(15)(i) and
EPA anticipates that many states will
40 CFR 52.21(b)(15)(i).
revise their existing SIP-approved PSD
On October 28, 2014 (79 FR 64119),
EPA finalized approval of the applicable programs in light of the Supreme
Court’s decision. The timing and
infrastructure SIP PSD revisions for
content of subsequent EPA actions with
Ohio, therefore Ohio has met this set of
respect to EPA regulations and state
infrastructure SIP requirements of
PSD program approvals are expected to
section 110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the
be informed by additional legal process
2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and
before the United States Court of
2010 SO2 NAAQS.
Appeals for the District of Columbia
Sub-element 5: GHG Permitting and the Circuit. At this juncture, EPA is not
‘‘Tailoring Rule’’
expecting states to have revised their
With respect to Elements C, and J,
PSD programs for purposes of
EPA interprets the CAA to require each
infrastructure SIP submissions and is
state to make an infrastructure SIP
only evaluating such submissions to
submission for a new or revised NAAQS assure that the state’s program correctly
that demonstrates that the air agency
addresses GHGs consistent with the
has a complete PSD permitting program Supreme Court’s decision.
meeting the current requirements for all
At present, Ohio’s SIP is sufficient to
regulated NSR pollutants. The
satisfy Elements C, D(i)(II), and J with
requirements of Element D(i)(II) may
respect to GHGs because the PSD
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and
210 SO2 NAAQS.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:12 Feb 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
permitting program previously
approved by EPA into the SIP continues
to require that PSD permits (otherwise
required based on emissions of
pollutants other than GHGs) contain
limitations on GHG emissions based on
the application of BACT. Although the
approved Ohio PSD permitting program
may currently contain provisions that
are no longer necessary in light of the
Supreme Court decision, this does not
render the infrastructure SIP submission
inadequate to satisfy Elements C,
(D)(i)(II), and J. The SIP contains the
necessary PSD requirements at this
time, and the application of those
requirements is not impeded by the
presence of other previously-approved
provisions regarding the permitting of
sources of GHGs that EPA does not
consider necessary at this time in light
of the Supreme Court decision.
For the purposes of the 2008 lead,
2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2
NAAQS infrastructure SIPs, EPA
reiterates that NSR reform regulations
are not within the scope of these
actions. Therefore, we are not taking
action on existing NSR reform
regulations for Ohio. EPA approved
Ohio’s minor NSR program on January
22, 2003 (68 FR 2909), and since that
date, OEPA and EPA have relied on the
existing minor NSR program to ensure
that new and modified sources not
captured by the major NSR permitting
programs do not interfere with
attainment and maintenance of the 2008
lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010
SO2 NAAQS.
Certain sub-elements in this section
overlap with elements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) and section 110(a)(2)(J).
These links will be discussed in the
appropriate areas below.
B. Section 110(a)(2)(D)—Interstate
Transport
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requires
SIPs to include provisions prohibiting
any source or other type of emissions
activity in one state from interfering
with measures required to prevent
significant deterioration of air quality or
to protect visibility in another state.
EPA notes that Ohio’s satisfaction of
the applicable infrastructure SIP PSD
requirements for the 2008 lead, 2008
ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS
has been detailed in the section
addressing section 110(a)(2)(C). EPA
notes that the actions in that section
related to PSD are consistent with the
actions related to PSD for section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and they are reiterated
below.
EPA has previously approved
revisions to Ohio’s SIP that meet certain
requirements obligated by the Phase 2
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 39 / Friday, February 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
Rule and the 2008 NSR Rule. These
revisions included provisions that: (1)
Explicitly identify NOX as a precursor to
ozone, (2) explicitly identify SO2 and
NOX as precursors to PM2.5, and (3)
regulate condensable PM2.5 and PM10 in
applicability determinations and
establishing emissions limits. EPA has
also previously approved revisions to
Ohio’s SIP that incorporate the PM2.5
increments and the associated
implementation regulations including
the major source baseline date, trigger
date, and level of significance for PM2.5
per the 2010 NSR Rule. Ohio’s SIP
contains provisions that adequately
address the 2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010
NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
C. Section 110(a)(2)(J)—Consultation
With Government Officials; Public
Notifications; PSD; Visibility Protection
Sub-element 3: PSD
States must meet applicable
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C)
related to PSD. Ohio’s PSD program in
the context of infrastructure SIPs has
already been discussed in the
paragraphs addressing section
110(a)(2)(C) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and
EPA notes that the actions for those
sections are consistent with the actions
for this portion of section 110(a)(2)(J).
10595
Therefore, Ohio has met all of the
infrastructure SIP requirements for PSD
associated with section 110(a)(2)(D)(J)
for the 2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010
NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
III. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is approving the PSD related
infrastructure requirements for Ohio’s
2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and
2010 SO2 NAAQS submittals under
sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA.
EPA’s actions for the state’s satisfaction
of infrastructure SIP requirements, by
element of section 110(a)(2) are
contained in the table below.
Element
2008
Lead
2008
Ozone
2010
NO2
2010
SO2
(A): Emission limits and other control measures .............................................
(B): Ambient air quality monitoring and data system ......................................
(C)1: Enforcement of SIP measures ...............................................................
(C)2: PSD ........................................................................................................
(D)1: Contribute to nonattainment/interfere with maintenance of NAAQS ......
(D)2: PSD ........................................................................................................
(D)3: Visibility Protection .................................................................................
(D)4: Interstate Pollution Abatement ...............................................................
(D)5: International Pollution Abatement ..........................................................
(E): Adequate resources ..................................................................................
(E): State boards .............................................................................................
(F): Stationary source monitoring system ........................................................
(G): Emergency power ....................................................................................
(H): Future SIP revisions .................................................................................
(I): Nonattainment area plan or plan revisions under part D ..........................
(J)1: Consultation with government officials ....................................................
(J)2: Public notification ....................................................................................
(J)3: PSD .........................................................................................................
(J)4: Visibility protection ...................................................................................
(K): Air quality modeling and data ...................................................................
(L): Permitting fees ..........................................................................................
(M): Consultation and participation by affected local entities ..........................
a
a
a
A
a
A
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
+
a
a
A
+
a
a
a
a
a
a
A
NA
A
NA
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
+
a
a
A
+
a
a
a
a
a
a
A
a
A
NA
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
+
a
a
A
+
a
a
a
p
p
p
A
NA
A
NA
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
+
p
p
A
+
p
p
p
In the above table, the key is as
follows:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
A .......
a .......
p .......
NA ....
+ .......
Approved in today’s action.
Approved in a previous rulemaking.
Proposed in a previous rulemaking.
No Action/Separate Rulemaking.
Not germane to infrastructure SIPs.
We are publishing this action without
prior proposal because we view this as
a noncontroversial amendment and
anticipate no adverse comments.
However, in the proposed rules section
of this Federal Register publication, we
are publishing a separate document that
will serve as the proposal to approve the
state plan if relevant adverse written
comments are filed. This rule will be
effective April 28, 2015 without further
notice unless we receive relevant
adverse written comments by March 30,
2015. If we receive such comments, we
will withdraw this action before the
effective date by publishing a
subsequent document that will
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:12 Feb 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
withdraw the final action. All public
comments received will then be
addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed action. EPA will
not institute a second comment period.
Any parties interested in commenting
on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse
comment on an amendment, paragraph,
or section of this rule and if that
provision may be severed from the
remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
as final those provisions of the rule that
are not the subject of an adverse
comment. If we do not receive any
comments, this action will be effective
April 28, 2015.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by 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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• 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.);
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
10596
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 39 / Friday, February 27, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
• 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, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where EPA or an
Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by April 28, 2015. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:12 Feb 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
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. Parties with
objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in
response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action
published in the proposed rules section
of today’s Federal Register, rather than
file an immediate petition for judicial
review of this direct final rule, so that
EPA can withdraw this direct final rule
and address the comment in the
proposed rulemaking. This action may
not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
through (H), and (J) through (M) for the
2008 Ozone NAAQS. We are not
finalizing action on section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)—Interstate transport
prongs 1 and 2 or visibility portions of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) and
110(a)(2)(J).
(h) Approval—In a June 7, 2013,
submittal, Ohio certified that the State
has satisfied the infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A)
through (H), and (J) through (M) for the
2010 SO2 NAAQS. We are only taking
action on the PSD portions 110(a)(2)(C),
(D)(i), and (J).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
Dated: February 17, 2015.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
40 CFR part 52 is amended 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.
2. Section 52.1891 is amended by
revising paragraphs (e) through (g) and
adding paragraph (h) to read as follows:
■
§ 52.1891 Section 110(a)(2) infrastructure
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(e) Approval—In a October 12, 2011,
submittal, supplemented on June 7,
2013, Ohio certified that the State has
satisfied the infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A)
through (H), and (J) through (M) for the
2008 Lead NAAQS.
(f) Approval—In a February 8, 2013,
submittal, supplemented on February
25, 2013, and June 7, 2013, Ohio
certified that the State has satisfied the
infrastructure SIP requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(A) through (H), and (J)
through (M) for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS.
We are not finalizing action on the
visibility protection requirements of
(D)(i)(II).
(g) Approval—In a December 27,
2012, submittal, supplemented on June
7, 2013, Ohio certified that the State has
satisfied the infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A)
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
[FR Doc. 2015–04011 Filed 2–26–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
40 CFR Parts 60, 61, and 63
[EPA–R07–OAR–2015–0016; FRL–9923–69–
Region–7]
Delegation of Authority to the States of
Iowa; Kansas; Missouri; Nebraska;
Lincoln-Lancaster County, NE; and
City of Omaha, NE., for New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS),
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP)
Including Maximum Achievable
Control Technology (MACT) Standards
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Delegation of authority.
AGENCY:
The States of Iowa, Kansas,
Missouri, and Nebraska and the local
agencies of Lincoln-Lancaster County,
Nebraska, and the city of Omaha,
Nebraska, have submitted updated
regulations for delegation of EPA
authority for implementation and
enforcement of NSPS, NESHAP, and
MACT standards. The submissions
cover new EPA standards and, in some
instances, revisions to standards
previously delegated. EPA’s review of
the pertinent regulations shows that
they contain adequate and effective
procedures for the implementation and
enforcement of these Federal standards.
This action informs the public of
delegations to the above-mentioned
agencies.
SUMMARY:
This document is effective on
February 27, 2015. The dates of
delegation can be found in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
ADDRESSES: Copies of documents
relative to this action are available for
public inspection during normal
business hours at the Environmental
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\27FER1.SGM
27FER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 39 (Friday, February 27, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10591-10596]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-04011]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2011-0888; EPA-R05-OAR-2011-0969; EPA-R05-OAR-2012-0991;
EPA-R05-OAR-2013-0435; FRL-9923-48-Region 5]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Ohio; PSD Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2008 Lead, 2008
Ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving
elements of state implementation plan (SIP) submissions from Ohio
regarding the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
infrastructure requirements of section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA)
for the 2008 lead (Pb), 2008 ozone, 2010 nitrogen dioxide
(NO2), and 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The infrastructure requirements
are designed to ensure that the structural components of each state's
air quality management program are adequate to meet the state's
responsibilities under the CAA.
DATES: This direct final rule will be effective April 28, 2015, unless
EPA receives adverse comments by March
[[Page 10592]]
30, 2015. If adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing
the public that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2011-0888 (2008 Pb infrastructure elements), EPA-R05-OAR-2011-0969
(2008 ozone infrastructure elements), EPA-R05-OAR-2012-0991 (2010
NO2 infrastructure elements), or EPA-R05-OAR-2013-0435 (2010
SO2 infrastructure elements) by one of the following
methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. Email: aburano.douglas@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (312) 408-2279.
4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano, Chief, Attainment Planning and
Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal
hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID. EPA-R05-OAR-2011-
0888 (2008 Pb infrastructure elements), EPA-R05-OAR-2011-0969 (2008
ozone infrastructure elements), EPA-R05-OAR-2012-0991 (2010
NO2 infrastructure elements), or EPA-R05-OAR-2013-0435 (2010
SO2 infrastructure elements). EPA's policy is that all
comments received will be included in the public docket without change
and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit
information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through
www.regulations.gov or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without
going through www.regulations.gov your email address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays.
We recommend that you telephone Sarah Arra, Environmental Scientist, at
(312) 886-9401 before visiting the Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sarah Arra, Environmental Scientist,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-9401, arra.sarah@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section is arranged as follows:
I. What is the background of these SIP submissions?
II. What is EPA's review of these SIP submissions?
III. What action is EPA taking?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is the background of these SIP submissions?
This rulemaking addresses submissions from the Ohio Environmental
Protection Agency (Ohio EPA). The state submitted its infrastructure
SIP for each NAAQS on the following dates: 2008 Pb--October 12, 2011,
and supplemented on June 7, 2013; 2008 ozone--December 27, 2012, and
supplemented on June 7, 2013; 2010 NO2--February 8, 2013,
and supplemented on February 25, 2013, and June 7, 2013; and, 2010
SO2--June 7, 2013.
The requirement for states to make a SIP submission of this type
arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1),
states must make SIP submissions ``within 3 years (or such shorter
period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a
national primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision
thereof),'' and these SIP submissions are to provide for the
``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement'' of such NAAQS. The
statute directly imposes on states the duty to make these SIP
submissions, and the requirement to make the submissions is not
conditioned upon EPA's taking any action other than promulgating a new
or revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific
elements that ``[e]ach such plan'' submission must address.
This specific rule making is only taking action on the PSD elements
of these submittals. The majority of the other infrastructure elements
were addressed in proposed rulemaking published July 25, 2014 (79 FR
43338). Final action was taken on those elements on October 6, 2014,
for 2008 Pb and 2010 NO2 (79 FR 60075),\1\ and on October
16, 2014, for 2008 ozone (79 FR 62019).\2\ The infrastructure elements
for PSD are found in CAA 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D), and 110(a)(2)(J)
and will be discussed in detail below. For further discussion on the
background of infrastructure submittals, see 79 FR 43338.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Specifically, sections 110(a)(2)(A) through (H), and (J)
through (M) for the 2008 lead and 2010 NO2 NAAQS except
the prevention of significant deterioration requirements in sections
110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J), the visibility portion of (J).
\2\ Specifically, sections 110(a)(2)(A) through (H), and (J)
through (M) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS except the prevention of
significant deterioration requirements in sections 110(a)(2)(C),
(D)(i)(II), and (J), the visibility portion of (J) and the
interstate transport portion of 110(a)(2)(D)(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. What is EPA's review of these SIP submissions?
A. Section 110(a)(2)(C)--Program for Enforcement of Control Measures;
PSD
States are required to include a program providing for enforcement
of all SIP measures and the regulation of construction of new or
modified stationary sources to meet new source review (NSR)
requirements under PSD and nonattainment new source review
[[Page 10593]]
(NNSR) programs. Part C of the CAA (sections 160-169B) addresses PSD,
while part D of the CAA (sections 171-193) addresses NNSR requirements.
The evaluation of each state's submission addressing the
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) covers: (i)
Enforcement of SIP measures; (ii) PSD provisions that explicitly
identify oxides of nitrogen (NOX) as a precursor to ozone in
the PSD program; (iii) identification of precursors to fine
particulates (PM2.5) and the identification of
PM2.5 and PM10 \3\ condensables in the PSD
program; (iv) PM2.5 increments in the PSD program; and, (v)
GHG permitting and the ``Tailoring Rule.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ PM10 refers to particles with diameters between
2.5 and 10 microns, oftentimes referred to as ``coarse'' particles.
\4\ In EPA's April 28, 2011, proposed rulemaking for
infrastructure SIPS for the 1997 ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS,
we stated that each state's PSD program must meet applicable
requirements for evaluation of all regulated NSR pollutants in PSD
permits (see 76 FR 23757 at 23760). This view was reiterated in
EPA's August 2, 2012, proposed rulemaking for infrastructure SIPs
for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (see 77 FR 45992 at 45998). In
other words, if a state lacks provisions needed to adequately
address NOX as a precursor to ozone, PM2.5
precursors, PM2.5 and PM10 condensables,
PM2.5 increments, or the Federal GHG permitting
thresholds, the provisions of section 110(a)(2)(C) requiring a
suitable PSD permitting program must be considered not to be met
irrespective of the NAAQS that triggered the requirement to submit
an infrastructure SIP, including the 2010 NO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub-element 1: Enforcement of SIP Measures
This element was proposed for the 2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010
NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS in the July 25, 2014,
rulemaking (79 FR 43338) and was finalized for the 2008 lead and 2010
NO2 NAAQS in the October 6, 2014, rulemaking (79 FR 60075)
and for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the October 16, 2014, rulemaking (79 FR
62019). This element will be finalized for the 2010 SO2
NAAQS in a separate rulemaking.
Sub-element 2: PSD Provisions That Explicitly Identify NOX
as a Precursor to Ozone in the PSD Program
EPA's ``Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standard--Phase 2; Final Rule to Implement Certain Aspects
of the 1990 Amendments Relating to New Source Review and Prevention of
Significant Deterioration as They Apply in Carbon Monoxide, Particulate
Matter, and Ozone NAAQS; Final Rule for Reformulated Gasoline'' (Phase
2 Rule) was published on November 29, 2005 (see 70 FR 71612). Among
other requirements, the Phase 2 Rule obligated states to revise their
PSD programs to explicitly identify NOX as a precursor to
ozone (70 FR 71612 at 71679, 71699-71700). This requirement was
codified in 40 CFR 51.166.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Similar changes were codified in 40 CFR 52.21.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Phase 2 Rule required that states submit SIP revisions
incorporating the requirements of the rule, including the specification
of NOX as a precursor to ozone provisions, by June 15, 2007
(70 FR 71612 at 71683).
EPA approved revisions to Ohio's PSD SIP reflecting these
requirements on October 28, 2014 (79 FR 64119), and therefore, Ohio has
met this set of infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C)
with respect to the 2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and
2010 SO2 NAAQS.
Sub-element 3: Identification of Precursors to PM2.5 and the
Identification of PM2.5 and PM10 Condensables in
the PSD Program
On May 16, 2008 (see 73 FR 28321), EPA issued the Final Rule on the
``Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate
Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)'' (2008 NSR Rule).
The 2008 NSR Rule finalized several new requirements for SIPs to
address sources that emit direct PM2.5 and other pollutants
that contribute to secondary PM2.5 formation. One of these
requirements is for NSR permits to address pollutants responsible for
the secondary formation of PM2.5, otherwise known as
precursors. In the 2008 rule, EPA identified precursors to
PM2.5 for the PSD program to be sulfur dioxide
(SO2) and NOX (unless the state demonstrates to
the Administrator's satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that
NOX emissions in an area are not a significant contributor
to that area's ambient PM2.5 concentrations). The 2008 NSR
Rule also specifies that VOCs are not considered to be precursors to
PM2.5 in the PSD program unless the state demonstrates to
the Administrator's satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that emissions of
VOCs in an area are significant contributors to that area's ambient
PM2.5 concentrations.
The explicit references to SO2, NOX, and VOCs
as they pertain to secondary PM2.5 formation are codified at
40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i)(b) and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)(i)(b). As part of
identifying pollutants that are precursors to PM2.5, the
2008 NSR Rule also required states to revise the definition of
``significant'' as it relates to a net emissions increase or the
potential of a source to emit pollutants. Specifically, 40 CFR
51.166(b)(23)(i) and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(23)(i) define ``significant'' for
PM2.5 to mean the following emissions rates: 10 tpy of
direct PM2.5; 40 tpy of SO2; and 40 tpy of
NOX (unless the state demonstrates to the Administrator's
satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that NOX emissions in an
area are not a significant contributor to that area's ambient
PM2.5 concentrations). The deadline for states to submit SIP
revisions to their PSD programs incorporating these changes was May 16,
2011 (see 73 FR 28321 at 28341).\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ EPA notes that on January 4, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the D.C. Circuit, in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA,
706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir.), held that EPA should have issued the 2008
NSR Rule in accordance with the CAA's requirements for
PM10 nonattainment areas (Title I, Part D, subpart 4),
and not the general requirements for nonattainment areas under
subpart 1 (Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, No. 08-1250).
As the subpart 4 provisions apply only to nonattainment areas, EPA
does not consider the portions of the 2008 rule that address
requirements for PM2.5 attainment and unclassifiable
areas to be affected by the court's opinion. Moreover, EPA does not
anticipate the need to revise any PSD requirements promulgated by
the 2008 NSR rule in order to comply with the court's decision.
Accordingly, EPA's approval of Ohio's infrastructure SIP as to
elements (C), (D)(i)(II), or (J) with respect to the PSD
requirements promulgated by the 2008 implementation rule does not
conflict with the court's opinion.
The Court's decision with respect to the nonattainment NSR
requirements promulgated by the 2008 implementation rule also does
not affect EPA's action on the present infrastructure action. EPA
interprets the CAA to exclude nonattainment area requirements,
including requirements associated with a nonattainment NSR program,
from infrastructure SIP submissions due three years after adoption
or revision of a NAAQS. Instead, these elements are typically
referred to as nonattainment SIP or attainment plan elements, which
would be due by the dates statutorily prescribed under subpart 2
through 5 under part D, extending as far as 10 years following
designations for some elements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2008 NSR Rule did not require states to immediately account for
gases that could condense to form particulate matter, known as
condensables, in PM2.5 and PM10 emission limits
in NSR permits. Instead, EPA determined that states had to account for
PM2.5 and PM10 condensables for applicability
determinations and in establishing emissions limitations for
PM2.5 and PM10 in PSD permits beginning on or
after January 1, 2011. This requirement is codified in 40 CFR
51.166(b)(49)(i)(a) and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)(i)(a). Revisions to states'
PSD programs incorporating the inclusion of condensables were required
be submitted to EPA by May 16, 2011 (see 73 FR 28321 at 28341).
EPA approved revisions to Ohio's PSD SIP reflecting these
requirements on October 28, 2014 (79 FR 64119), and therefore Ohio has
met this set of infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C)
with respect to the
[[Page 10594]]
2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 210 SO2
NAAQS.
Sub-element 4: PM2.5 Increments in the PSD Program
On October 20, 2010, EPA issued the final rule on the ``Prevention
of Significant Deterioration (PSD) for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5
Micrometers (PM2.5)--Increments, Significant Impact Levels
(SILs) and Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC)'' (2010 NSR
Rule). This rule established several components for making PSD
permitting determinations for PM2.5, including a system of
``increments'' which is the mechanism used to estimate significant
deterioration of ambient air quality for a pollutant. These increments
are codified in 40 CFR 51.166(c) and 40 CFR 52.21(c), and are included
in the table below.
Table 1--PM2.5 Increments Established by the 2010 NSR Rule in Micrograms
per Cubic Meter
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual
arithmetic 24-hour max
mean
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class I....................................... 1 2
Class II...................................... 4 9
Class III..................................... 8 18
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2010 NSR Rule also established a new ``major source baseline
date'' for PM2.5 as October 20, 2010, and a new trigger date
for PM2.5 as October 20, 2011. These revisions are codified
in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(14)(i)(c) and (b)(14)(ii)(c), and 40 CFR
52.21(b)(14)(i)(c) and (b)(14)(ii)(c). Lastly, the 2010 NSR Rule
revised the definition of ``baseline area'' to include a level of
significance of 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter, annual average, for
PM2.5. This change is codified in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(15)(i)
and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(15)(i).
On October 28, 2014 (79 FR 64119), EPA finalized approval of the
applicable infrastructure SIP PSD revisions for Ohio, therefore Ohio
has met this set of infrastructure SIP requirements of section
110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the 2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010
NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
Sub-element 5: GHG Permitting and the ``Tailoring Rule''
With respect to Elements C, and J, EPA interprets the CAA to
require each state to make an infrastructure SIP submission for a new
or revised NAAQS that demonstrates that the air agency has a complete
PSD permitting program meeting the current requirements for all
regulated NSR pollutants. The requirements of Element D(i)(II) may also
be satisfied by demonstrating the air agency has a complete PSD
permitting program correctly addressing all regulated NSR pollutants.
Ohio has shown that it currently has a PSD program in place that covers
all regulated NSR pollutants, including greenhouse gases (GHGs).
On June 23, 2014, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision
addressing the application of PSD permitting requirements to GHG
emissions. Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection
Agency, 134 S.Ct. 2427. The Supreme Court said that EPA may not treat
GHGs as an air pollutant for purposes of determining whether a source
is a major source required to obtain a PSD permit. The Court also found
that EPA could continue to require that PSD permits, otherwise required
based on emissions of pollutants other than GHGs, contain limitations
on GHG emissions based on the application of Best Available Control
Technology (BACT).
In order to act consistently with its understanding of the Court's
decision pending further judicial action to effectuate the decision,
EPA is no longer applying EPA regulations that would require that SIPs
include permitting requirements that the Supreme Court found
impermissible. Specifically, EPA is not applying the requirement that a
state's SIP-approved PSD program require that sources obtain PSD
permits when GHGs are the only pollutant: (i) That the source emits or
has the potential to emit above the major source thresholds, or (ii)
for which there is a significant emissions increase and a significant
net emissions increase from a modification (see 40 CFR
51.166(b)(48)(v)).
EPA anticipates a need to revise Federal PSD rules in light of the
Supreme Court opinion. In addition, EPA anticipates that many states
will revise their existing SIP-approved PSD programs in light of the
Supreme Court's decision. The timing and content of subsequent EPA
actions with respect to EPA regulations and state PSD program approvals
are expected to be informed by additional legal process before the
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. At
this juncture, EPA is not expecting states to have revised their PSD
programs for purposes of infrastructure SIP submissions and is only
evaluating such submissions to assure that the state's program
correctly addresses GHGs consistent with the Supreme Court's decision.
At present, Ohio's SIP is sufficient to satisfy Elements C,
D(i)(II), and J with respect to GHGs because the PSD permitting program
previously approved by EPA into the SIP continues to require that PSD
permits (otherwise required based on emissions of pollutants other than
GHGs) contain limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of
BACT. Although the approved Ohio PSD permitting program may currently
contain provisions that are no longer necessary in light of the Supreme
Court decision, this does not render the infrastructure SIP submission
inadequate to satisfy Elements C, (D)(i)(II), and J. The SIP contains
the necessary PSD requirements at this time, and the application of
those requirements is not impeded by the presence of other previously-
approved provisions regarding the permitting of sources of GHGs that
EPA does not consider necessary at this time in light of the Supreme
Court decision.
For the purposes of the 2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2,
and 2010 SO2 NAAQS infrastructure SIPs, EPA reiterates that
NSR reform regulations are not within the scope of these actions.
Therefore, we are not taking action on existing NSR reform regulations
for Ohio. EPA approved Ohio's minor NSR program on January 22, 2003 (68
FR 2909), and since that date, OEPA and EPA have relied on the existing
minor NSR program to ensure that new and modified sources not captured
by the major NSR permitting programs do not interfere with attainment
and maintenance of the 2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and
2010 SO2 NAAQS.
Certain sub-elements in this section overlap with elements of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and section 110(a)(2)(J). These links will be
discussed in the appropriate areas below.
B. Section 110(a)(2)(D)--Interstate Transport
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requires SIPs to include provisions
prohibiting any source or other type of emissions activity in one state
from interfering with measures required to prevent significant
deterioration of air quality or to protect visibility in another state.
EPA notes that Ohio's satisfaction of the applicable infrastructure
SIP PSD requirements for the 2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010
NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS has been detailed in the
section addressing section 110(a)(2)(C). EPA notes that the actions in
that section related to PSD are consistent with the actions related to
PSD for section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and they are reiterated below.
EPA has previously approved revisions to Ohio's SIP that meet
certain requirements obligated by the Phase 2
[[Page 10595]]
Rule and the 2008 NSR Rule. These revisions included provisions that:
(1) Explicitly identify NOX as a precursor to ozone, (2)
explicitly identify SO2 and NOX as precursors to
PM2.5, and (3) regulate condensable PM2.5 and
PM10 in applicability determinations and establishing
emissions limits. EPA has also previously approved revisions to Ohio's
SIP that incorporate the PM2.5 increments and the associated
implementation regulations including the major source baseline date,
trigger date, and level of significance for PM2.5 per the
2010 NSR Rule. Ohio's SIP contains provisions that adequately address
the 2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2
NAAQS.
C. Section 110(a)(2)(J)--Consultation With Government Officials; Public
Notifications; PSD; Visibility Protection
Sub-element 3: PSD
States must meet applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C)
related to PSD. Ohio's PSD program in the context of infrastructure
SIPs has already been discussed in the paragraphs addressing section
110(a)(2)(C) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), and EPA notes that the actions
for those sections are consistent with the actions for this portion of
section 110(a)(2)(J).
Therefore, Ohio has met all of the infrastructure SIP requirements
for PSD associated with section 110(a)(2)(D)(J) for the 2008 lead, 2008
ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS.
III. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is approving the PSD related infrastructure requirements for
Ohio's 2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010
SO2 NAAQS submittals under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the
CAA. EPA's actions for the state's satisfaction of infrastructure SIP
requirements, by element of section 110(a)(2) are contained in the
table below.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Element 2008 Lead 2008 Ozone 2010 NO2 2010 SO2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A): Emission limits and other control a a a p
measures...................................
(B): Ambient air quality monitoring and data a a a p
system.....................................
(C)1: Enforcement of SIP measures........... a a a p
(C)2: PSD................................... A A A A
(D)1: Contribute to nonattainment/interfere a NA a NA
with maintenance of NAAQS..................
(D)2: PSD................................... A A A A
(D)3: Visibility Protection................. a NA NA NA
(D)4: Interstate Pollution Abatement........ a a a p
(D)5: International Pollution Abatement..... a a a p
(E): Adequate resources..................... a a a p
(E): State boards........................... a a a p
(F): Stationary source monitoring system.... a a a p
(G): Emergency power........................ a a a p
(H): Future SIP revisions................... a a a p
(I): Nonattainment area plan or plan + + + +
revisions under part D.....................
(J)1: Consultation with government officials a a a p
(J)2: Public notification................... a a a p
(J)3: PSD................................... A A A A
(J)4: Visibility protection................. + + + +
(K): Air quality modeling and data.......... a a a p
(L): Permitting fees........................ a a a p
(M): Consultation and participation by a a a p
affected local entities....................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the above table, the key is as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A............................ Approved in today's action.
a............................ Approved in a previous rulemaking.
p............................ Proposed in a previous rulemaking.
NA........................... No Action/Separate Rulemaking.
+............................ Not germane to infrastructure SIPs.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse
written comments are filed. This rule will be effective April 28, 2015
without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written
comments by March 30, 2015. If we receive such comments, we will
withdraw this action before the effective date by publishing a
subsequent document that will withdraw the final action. All public
comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment
period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do
so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an
amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may
be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those
provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
If we do not receive any comments, this action will be effective April
28, 2015.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by 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 Orders
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
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.);
[[Page 10596]]
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, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by April 28, 2015. 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. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed
rulemaking. 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, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: February 17, 2015.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
40 CFR part 52 is amended 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.
0
2. Section 52.1891 is amended by revising paragraphs (e) through (g)
and adding paragraph (h) to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1891 Section 110(a)(2) infrastructure requirements.
* * * * *
(e) Approval--In a October 12, 2011, submittal, supplemented on
June 7, 2013, Ohio certified that the State has satisfied the
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) through (H),
and (J) through (M) for the 2008 Lead NAAQS.
(f) Approval--In a February 8, 2013, submittal, supplemented on
February 25, 2013, and June 7, 2013, Ohio certified that the State has
satisfied the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A)
through (H), and (J) through (M) for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. We
are not finalizing action on the visibility protection requirements of
(D)(i)(II).
(g) Approval--In a December 27, 2012, submittal, supplemented on
June 7, 2013, Ohio certified that the State has satisfied the
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) through (H),
and (J) through (M) for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS. We are not finalizing
action on section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)--Interstate transport prongs 1 and
2 or visibility portions of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) and
110(a)(2)(J).
(h) Approval--In a June 7, 2013, submittal, Ohio certified that the
State has satisfied the infrastructure SIP requirements of section
110(a)(2)(A) through (H), and (J) through (M) for the 2010
SO2 NAAQS. We are only taking action on the PSD portions
110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i), and (J).
[FR Doc. 2015-04011 Filed 2-26-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
