Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions; Infrastructure Monitoring Requirements for the 2008 Pb, 2010 SO2, 34816-34819 [2018-15480]
Download as PDF
34816
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2018 / Proposed Rules
sections 110(a)(2)(D) and 126. While the
tribes do not operate an ozone monitor,
the nearest ozone monitors to Fort Hall
Reservation are in Ada County, Idaho;
Boise area (AQS site IDs 160010010 and
160010017) and Butte County, Idaho;
Idaho Falls (AQS site ID 160230101).
Past and present design values for ozone
are complete, valid and below the
current standard. The EPA’s modeled
2023 average and maximum design
values suggest these ozone
concentrations will continue to decline.
We therefore propose to find that it is
reasonable to conclude that emissions
from Washington will not contribute
significantly to nonattainment or
interfere with maintenance of the 2015
ozone NAAQS at the Fort Hall
Reservation. A memorandum
summarizing our evaluation can be
found in the docket for this action.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
IV. Proposed Action
As discussed in Section II,
Washington concluded that emissions
from the state will not significantly
contribute to nonattainment or interfere
with maintenance of the 2015 ozone
NAAQS in any other state. The EPA’s
updated modeling, discussed in Section
III confirms this finding. We are
proposing to approve the Washington
SIP as meeting CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirements for the
2015 ozone NAAQS. The EPA is
requesting comments on the proposed
approval.
V. 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, the
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);
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
action because SIP approvals are
exempted under Executive Order 12866;
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:31 Jul 20, 2018
Jkt 244001
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Does not provide the 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 the 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).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: July 11, 2018.
Chris Hladick,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2018–15625 Filed 7–20–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R08–OAR–2018–0388, FRL–9980–
67—Region 8]
Approval and Promulgation of State
Implementation Plan Revisions;
Infrastructure Monitoring
Requirements for the 2008 Pb, 2010
SO2, 2010 NO2 and 2012 PM2.5 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards; Utah
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
elements of State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revisions from the State of Utah to
demonstrate the State meets
infrastructure monitoring requirements
of the Clean Air Act (Act or CAA) for
the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS) promulgated for
lead (Pb) on October 15, 2008, nitrogen
dioxide (NO2) on January 22, 2010,
sulfur dioxide (SO2) on June 2, 2010,
and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) on
December 14, 2012. Section 110(a) of
the CAA requires that each state submit
a SIP for the implementation,
maintenance and enforcement of each
NAAQS promulgated by the EPA.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before August 22, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08–
OAR–2018–0388 at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from
www.regulations.gov. The EPA may
publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points
you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or
comment contents located outside of the
primary submission (i.e., on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\23JYP1.SGM
23JYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2018 / Proposed Rules
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the www.regulations.gov
index. Although listed in the index,
some information is not publicly
available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Program, Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8,
1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado
80202–1129. The 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: Kate
Gregory, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P–AR,
1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado
80202–1129, (303) 312–6175,
gregory.kate@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, wherever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, it is
intended to refer to the EPA.
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
I. Background
On October 15, 2008, the EPA revised
the level of the primary and secondary
Pb NAAQS from 1.5 micrograms per
cubic meter (mg/m3) to 0.15 mg/m3 (73
FR 66964, Nov. 12, 2008). On January
22, 2010, the EPA promulgated a new
1-hour primary NAAQS for NO2 at a
level of 100 parts per billion (ppb),
based on a 3-year average of 98th
percentile 1-hour daily maximum
concentrations, while retaining the
annual primary standard of 53 ppb. The
secondary annual NO2 NAAQS remains
unchanged at 53 ppb (75 FR 6474, Feb.
9, 2010). On June 2, 2010, the EPA
promulgated a revised primary SO2
standard at 75 ppb, based on a 3-year
average of the annual 99th percentile of
1-hour daily maximum concentrations
(75 FR 35520, June 22, 2010). Finally,
on December 14, 2012, the EPA
promulgated a revised annual PM2.5
standard by lowering the level to 12.0
mg/m3 and retaining the 24-hour PM2.5
standard at a level of 35 mg/m3 (78 FR
3086, Jan. 15, 2013).
Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the
CAA, states are required to submit
infrastructure SIPs to ensure their SIPs
provide for implementation,
maintenance and enforcement of the
NAAQS. These submissions must
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:31 Jul 20, 2018
Jkt 244001
contain any revisions needed for
meeting the applicable SIP requirements
of section 110(a)(2), or certifications that
their existing SIPs for PM2.5, Pb, NO2
and SO2 already meet those
requirements. The EPA highlighted this
statutory requirement in an October 2,
2007, guidance document entitled
‘‘Guidance on SIP Elements Required
Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the
1997 8-hour Ozone and PM2.5 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards’’ (2007
Memo). On September 25, 2009, the
EPA issued an additional guidance
document pertaining to the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS entitled ‘‘Guidance on SIP
Elements Required Under Sections
110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour
Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)’’ (2009
Memo), followed by the October 14,
2011, ‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure SIP
Elements Required Under Sections
110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2008 Lead (Pb)
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS)’’ (2011 Memo). Most recently,
the EPA issued ‘‘Guidance on
Infrastructure State Implementation
Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act
Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)’’ on
September 13, 2013 (2013 Memo).
II. What is the scope of this
rulemaking?
The EPA is acting upon the SIP
submissions from Utah that address the
infrastructure monitoring requirements
of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)
for the 2008 Pb, 2010 SO2, 2010 NO2
and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 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
the EPA 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.
The EPA has historically referred to
these SIP submissions made for the
purpose of satisfying the requirements
of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)
as ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ submissions.
Although the term ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’
does not appear in the CAA, the EPA
uses the term to distinguish this
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
34817
particular type of SIP submission from
submissions that are intended to satisfy
other SIP requirements under the CAA,
such as ‘‘nonattainment SIP’’ or
‘‘attainment plan SIP’’ submissions to
address the nonattainment planning
requirements of part D of title I of the
CAA; ‘‘regional haze SIP’’ submissions
required by the EPA rule to address the
visibility protection requirements of
CAA section 169A; and nonattainment
new source review (NSR) permit
program submissions to address the
permit requirements of CAA, title I, part
D.
Section 110(a)(1) addresses the timing
and general requirements for
infrastructure SIP submissions, and
section 110(a)(2) provides more details
concerning the required contents of
these submissions. The list of required
elements provided in section 110(a)(2)
contains a wide variety of disparate
provisions, some of which pertain to
required legal authority, some of which
pertain to required substantive program
provisions, and some of which pertain
to requirements for both authority and
substantive program provisions.1 The
EPA therefore believes that while the
timing requirement in section 110(a)(1)
is unambiguous, some of the other
statutory provisions are ambiguous. In
particular, the EPA believes that the list
of required elements for infrastructure
SIP submissions provided in section
110(a)(2) contains ambiguities
concerning what is required for
inclusion in an infrastructure SIP
submission.
Examples of some of these
ambiguities and the context in which
the EPA interprets the ambiguous
portions of section 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2) are discussed at length in our
notice of proposed rulemaking:
Promulgation of State Implementation
Plan Revisions; Infrastructure
Requirements for the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5, 2008 Lead, 2008 Ozone, and 2010
NO2 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards; South Dakota (79 FR 71040,
Dec. 1, 2014) under ‘‘III. What is the
Scope of this Rulemaking?’’
With respect to certain other issues,
the EPA does not believe that an action
on a state’s infrastructure SIP
submission is necessarily the
appropriate type of action in which to
address possible deficiencies in a state’s
1 For example: Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) provides
that states must provide assurances that they have
adequate legal authority under state and local law
to carry out the SIP; section 110(a)(2)(C) provides
that states must have a SIP-approved program to
address certain sources as required by part C of title
I of the CAA; and section 110(a)(2)(G) provides that
states must have legal authority to address
emergencies as well as contingency plans that are
triggered in the event of such emergencies.
E:\FR\FM\23JYP1.SGM
23JYP1
34818
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2018 / Proposed Rules
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
existing SIP. These issues include: (i)
Existing provisions related to excess
emissions from sources during periods
of startup, shutdown, or malfunction
(SSM) that may be contrary to the CAA
and the EPA’s policies addressing such
excess emissions; (ii) existing provisions
related to ‘‘director’s variance’’ or
‘‘director’s discretion’’ that may be
contrary to the CAA because they
purport to allow revisions to SIPapproved emissions limits while
limiting public process or not requiring
further approval by the EPA; and (iii)
existing provisions for Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD)
programs that may be inconsistent with
current requirements of the EPA’s
‘‘Final NSR Improvement Rule,’’ 67 FR
80186, Dec. 31, 2002, as amended by 72
FR 32526, June 13, 2007 (‘‘NSR
Reform’’).
III. What infrastructure elements are
required under sections 110(a)(1) and
(2)?
CAA section 110(a)(1) provides the
procedural and timing requirements for
SIP submissions after a new or revised
NAAQS is promulgated. Section
110(a)(2) lists specific elements the SIP
must contain or satisfy. These
infrastructure elements (listed below)
include requirements such as modeling,
monitoring and emissions inventories,
which are designed to assure attainment
and maintenance of the NAAQS.
• 110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and
other control measures.
• 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality
monitoring/data system.
• 110(a)(2)(C): Program for
enforcement of control measures.
• 110(a)(2)(D): Interstate transport.
• 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate resources
and authority, conflict of interest, and
oversight of local governments and
regional agencies.
• 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source
monitoring and reporting.
• 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency powers.
• 110(a)(2)(H): Future SIP revisions.
• 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with
government officials; public
notification; and PSD and visibility
protection.
• 110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling/
data.
• 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees.
• 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/
participation by affected local entities.
Of these infrastructure elements,
element B is the subject of this action,
as all other elements were acted on in
the EPA rulemaking titled Promulgation
of State Implementation Plan Revisions;
Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008
Lead, 2008 Ozone, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2,
and 2012 PM2.5 National Ambient Air
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:31 Jul 20, 2018
Jkt 244001
Quality Standards; Utah.2 A detailed
discussion of element 110(a)(2)(B) is
contained in the next section.
EPA. Additionally, the State of Utah
submits data to the EPA’s Air Quality
System database in accordance with 40
CFR 58.16. Finally, Utah’s 2017 AMNP
was approved by the EPA through a
letter dated October 27, 2017 (available
within the docket). The State provides
the EPA with prior notification when
changes to its monitoring network or
plan are being considered. This action
proposes to approve the State’s
submittal in reference to element B:
Ambient air quality monitoring/data
system. Previous action was not taken in
the final EPA ruling titled Promulgation
of State Implementation Plan Revisions;
Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008
Lead, 2008 Ozone, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2,
and 2012 PM2.5 National Ambient Air
Quality Standards; Utah.3
We find that Utah’s SIP and practices
are adequate for the ambient air quality
monitoring and data system
requirements and therefore propose to
approve the infrastructure SIP for the
2008 Pb, 2010 SO2, 2010 NO2 and 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS for this element.
Approval of element B will satisfy any
outstanding requirements under Section
110(a)(2).
IV. How did Utah address the
infrastructure elements of sections
110(a)(1) and (2)?
The Utah Department of
Environmental Quality (Department or
UDEQ) submitted certification of Utah’s
infrastructure SIP for the 2008 Pb
NAAQS on January 19, 2012; 2010 NO2
NAAQS on January 31, 2013; 2010 SO2
NAAQS on June 2, 2013; and 2012 PM2.5
on December 4, 2015. Utah’s
infrastructure certifications demonstrate
how the State, where applicable, has
plans in place that meet the
requirements of section 110 for the 2008
Pb, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2 and 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS. These plans reference the Utah
Code Annotated (UCA) and the Utah
SIP. These submittals are available
within the electronic docket for today’s
proposed action at www.regulations.gov.
The UCA and the Utah SIP referenced
in the submittals are publicly available
at https://le.utah.gov/xcode/code.html
and https://deq.utah.gov/legacy/lawsand-rules/air-quality/sip/. Air pollution
control regulations and statutes that
VI. What proposed action is the EPA
have been previously approved by the
EPA and incorporated into the Utah SIP taking?
can be found at 40 CFR 52.2320.
In this action, the EPA is proposing to
approve infrastructure element B for the
V. Analysis of the State Submittals
2008 Pb, 2010 SO2, 2010 NO2 and 2012
Ambient air quality monitoring/data
PM2.5 NAAQS from the State’s
system: Section 110(a)(2)(B) requires
certifications as shown in Table 1.
SIPs to ‘‘provide for establishment and
operation of appropriate devices,
TABLE 1—LIST OF UTAH INFRASTRUCmethods, systems, and procedures
TURE ELEMENTS THAT THE EPA IS
necessary’’ to ‘‘(i) monitor, compile, and
PROPOSING TO APPROVE
analyze data on ambient air quality, and
(ii) upon request, make such data
Proposed for approval
Element
available to the Administrator.’’
The State’s submissions cite UAC rule January 19, 2012 submittal—2008
R307–110–5, which incorporates by
Pb NAAQS ..................................
(B)
reference SIP Section IV (Ambient Air
January 31, 2013 submittal—2010
NO2 NAAQS ................................
(B)
Monitoring Program), and provides a
June 2, 2013 submittal—2010 SO2
brief description of the purposes of the
NAAQS ........................................
(B)
air monitoring program approved by the
December 4, 2015 submittal—2012
EPA in the early 1980s and most
PM2.5 NAAQS .............................
(B)
recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744).
Pursuant to its Quality Assurance
VII. Statutory and Executive Orders
Project Plan (QAPP), the Department
Review
makes arrangements to operate and
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
maintain federal reference monitors and
establishes federally-approved protocols required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
for sample collection, handling and
Act and applicable federal regulations.
analysis. The State’s QAPP was most
See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
recently approved on November 28,
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the
2016, with an annual update in
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
November of 2017.
provided that they meet the criteria of
Utah’s annual monitoring network
the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed
plan (AMNP), is made available by the
action merely proposes to approve state
Department for public review and
law as meeting federal requirements and
comment prior to submission to the
PO 00000
2 81
FR 50626 (August 2, 2016).
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
3 81
E:\FR\FM\23JYP1.SGM
FR 50626 (August 2, 2016).
23JYP1
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 141 / Monday, July 23, 2018 / Proposed Rules
does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by
state law. For that reason, this proposed
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);
• Is not an Executive Order 13771
regulatory action because this action is
not significant under Executive Order
12866;
• 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
this action does not involve technical
standards; and
• Does not provide the 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).
The SIP is not approved to apply on
any Indian reservation land or in any
other area where the 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 as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), nor will it impose substantial
direct costs on tribal governments or
preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:31 Jul 20, 2018
Jkt 244001
Greenhouse gases, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: July 13, 2018.
Debra Thomas,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2018–15480 Filed 7–20–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 721
[EPA–HQ–OPPT–2011–0941; FRL–9979–23]
Proposed Modification of Significant
New Uses of a Certain Chemical
Substance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
This action is a notification
that additional data has been added to
the docket for the proposal to amend the
significant new use rule (SNUR) under
section 5(a)(2) of the Toxic Substances
Control Act (TSCA) for oxazolidine,
3,3′-methylenebis [5-methyl-. This
action also reopens the comment period
for an additional 30 days for public
comments based on the additional data
added to the docket. The proposal
would amend the SNUR to allow certain
new uses reported in the significant new
use notice (SNUN) without requiring
additional SNUNs and make the lack of
certain worker protections a new use.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 22, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPPT–2011–0941, by
one of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: Document Control Office
(7407M), Office of Pollution Prevention
and Toxics (OPPT), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
34819
Additional instructions on
commenting or visiting the docket,
along with more information about
dockets generally, is available at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets.
For
technical information contact: Kenneth
Moss, Chemical Control Division, Office
of Pollution Prevention and Toxics,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460–0001; telephone number: (202)
564–9232; email address:
moss.kenneth@epa.gov.
For general information contact: The
TSCA-Hotline, ABVI-Goodwill, 422
South Clinton Ave., Rochester, NY
14620; telephone number: (202) 554–
1404; email address: TSCAHotline@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you manufacture, process,
or use the chemical substance contained
in this rule. The following list of North
American Industrial Classification
System (NAICS) codes is not intended
to be exhaustive, but rather provides a
guide to help readers determine whether
this document applies to them.
Potentially affected entities may
include:
• Manufacturers or processors of the
chemical substance (NAICS codes 325
and 324110), e.g., chemical
manufacturing and petroleum refineries.
This action may also affect certain
entities through pre-existing import
certification and export notification
rules under TSCA. Chemical importers
are subject to the TSCA section 13 (15
U.S.C. 2612) import certification
requirements promulgated at 19 CFR
12.118 through 12.127 and 19 CFR
127.28. Chemical importers must certify
that the shipment of the chemical
substance complies with all applicable
rules and orders under TSCA. Importers
of chemicals subject to a SNUR must
certify their compliance with the SNUR
requirements. The EPA policy in
support of import certification appears
at 40 CFR part 707, subpart B. In
addition, any persons who export or
intend to export a chemical substance
that is the subject of a proposed or final
SNUR are subject to the export
notification provisions of TSCA section
12(b) (15 U.S.C. 2611(b)) (see § 721.20),
and must comply with the export
notification requirements in 40 CFR part
707, subpart D.
E:\FR\FM\23JYP1.SGM
23JYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 141 (Monday, July 23, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34816-34819]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-15480]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R08-OAR-2018-0388, FRL-9980-67--Region 8]
Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions;
Infrastructure Monitoring Requirements for the 2008 Pb, 2010 SO2, 2010
NO2 and 2012 PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Utah
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve elements of State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions from the
State of Utah to demonstrate the State meets infrastructure monitoring
requirements of the Clean Air Act (Act or CAA) for the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) promulgated for lead (Pb) on October 15,
2008, nitrogen dioxide (NO2) on January 22, 2010, sulfur
dioxide (SO2) on June 2, 2010, and fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) on December 14, 2012. Section 110(a) of the CAA
requires that each state submit a SIP for the implementation,
maintenance and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated by the EPA.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 22, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2018-0388 at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from www.regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
[[Page 34817]]
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Program,
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop Street,
Denver, Colorado 80202-1129. The 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: Kate Gregory, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, (303) 312-6175,
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, wherever ``we,''
``us'' or ``our'' is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA.
I. Background
On October 15, 2008, the EPA revised the level of the primary and
secondary Pb NAAQS from 1.5 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\) to
0.15 [mu]g/m\3\ (73 FR 66964, Nov. 12, 2008). On January 22, 2010, the
EPA promulgated a new 1-hour primary NAAQS for NO2 at a
level of 100 parts per billion (ppb), based on a 3-year average of 98th
percentile 1-hour daily maximum concentrations, while retaining the
annual primary standard of 53 ppb. The secondary annual NO2
NAAQS remains unchanged at 53 ppb (75 FR 6474, Feb. 9, 2010). On June
2, 2010, the EPA promulgated a revised primary SO2 standard
at 75 ppb, based on a 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of
1-hour daily maximum concentrations (75 FR 35520, June 22, 2010).
Finally, on December 14, 2012, the EPA promulgated a revised annual
PM2.5 standard by lowering the level to 12.0 [mu]g/m\3\ and
retaining the 24-hour PM2.5 standard at a level of 35 [mu]g/
m\3\ (78 FR 3086, Jan. 15, 2013).
Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA, states are required to
submit infrastructure SIPs to ensure their SIPs provide for
implementation, maintenance and enforcement of the NAAQS. These
submissions must contain any revisions needed for meeting the
applicable SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2), or certifications
that their existing SIPs for PM2.5, Pb, NO2 and
SO2 already meet those requirements. The EPA highlighted
this statutory requirement in an October 2, 2007, guidance document
entitled ``Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1)
and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient
Air Quality Standards'' (2007 Memo). On September 25, 2009, the EPA
issued an additional guidance document pertaining to the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS entitled ``Guidance on SIP Elements Required
Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)''
(2009 Memo), followed by the October 14, 2011, ``Guidance on
Infrastructure SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)
for the 2008 Lead (Pb) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)''
(2011 Memo). Most recently, the EPA issued ``Guidance on Infrastructure
State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections
110(a)(1) and (2)'' on September 13, 2013 (2013 Memo).
II. What is the scope of this rulemaking?
The EPA is acting upon the SIP submissions from Utah that address
the infrastructure monitoring requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1)
and 110(a)(2) for the 2008 Pb, 2010 SO2, 2010 NO2
and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 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 the EPA 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.
The EPA has historically referred to these SIP submissions made for
the purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1)
and 110(a)(2) as ``infrastructure SIP'' submissions. Although the term
``infrastructure SIP'' does not appear in the CAA, the EPA uses the
term to distinguish this particular type of SIP submission from
submissions that are intended to satisfy other SIP requirements under
the CAA, such as ``nonattainment SIP'' or ``attainment plan SIP''
submissions to address the nonattainment planning requirements of part
D of title I of the CAA; ``regional haze SIP'' submissions required by
the EPA rule to address the visibility protection requirements of CAA
section 169A; and nonattainment new source review (NSR) permit program
submissions to address the permit requirements of CAA, title I, part D.
Section 110(a)(1) addresses the timing and general requirements for
infrastructure SIP submissions, and section 110(a)(2) provides more
details concerning the required contents of these submissions. The list
of required elements provided in section 110(a)(2) contains a wide
variety of disparate provisions, some of which pertain to required
legal authority, some of which pertain to required substantive program
provisions, and some of which pertain to requirements for both
authority and substantive program provisions.\1\ The EPA therefore
believes that while the timing requirement in section 110(a)(1) is
unambiguous, some of the other statutory provisions are ambiguous. In
particular, the EPA believes that the list of required elements for
infrastructure SIP submissions provided in section 110(a)(2) contains
ambiguities concerning what is required for inclusion in an
infrastructure SIP submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For example: Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) provides that states
must provide assurances that they have adequate legal authority
under state and local law to carry out the SIP; section 110(a)(2)(C)
provides that states must have a SIP-approved program to address
certain sources as required by part C of title I of the CAA; and
section 110(a)(2)(G) provides that states must have legal authority
to address emergencies as well as contingency plans that are
triggered in the event of such emergencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of some of these ambiguities and the context in which the
EPA interprets the ambiguous portions of section 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2) are discussed at length in our notice of proposed rulemaking:
Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions; Infrastructure
Requirements for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5, 2008 Lead, 2008
Ozone, and 2010 NO2 National Ambient Air Quality Standards;
South Dakota (79 FR 71040, Dec. 1, 2014) under ``III. What is the Scope
of this Rulemaking?''
With respect to certain other issues, the EPA does not believe that
an action on a state's infrastructure SIP submission is necessarily the
appropriate type of action in which to address possible deficiencies in
a state's
[[Page 34818]]
existing SIP. These issues include: (i) Existing provisions related to
excess emissions from sources during periods of startup, shutdown, or
malfunction (SSM) that may be contrary to the CAA and the EPA's
policies addressing such excess emissions; (ii) existing provisions
related to ``director's variance'' or ``director's discretion'' that
may be contrary to the CAA because they purport to allow revisions to
SIP-approved emissions limits while limiting public process or not
requiring further approval by the EPA; and (iii) existing provisions
for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) programs that may be
inconsistent with current requirements of the EPA's ``Final NSR
Improvement Rule,'' 67 FR 80186, Dec. 31, 2002, as amended by 72 FR
32526, June 13, 2007 (``NSR Reform'').
III. What infrastructure elements are required under sections 110(a)(1)
and (2)?
CAA section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and timing
requirements for SIP submissions after a new or revised NAAQS is
promulgated. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements the SIP must
contain or satisfy. These infrastructure elements (listed below)
include requirements such as modeling, monitoring and emissions
inventories, which are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of
the NAAQS.
110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and other control measures.
110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality monitoring/data system.
110(a)(2)(C): Program for enforcement of control measures.
110(a)(2)(D): Interstate transport.
110(a)(2)(E): Adequate resources and authority, conflict
of interest, and oversight of local governments and regional agencies.
110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source monitoring and reporting.
110(a)(2)(G): Emergency powers.
110(a)(2)(H): Future SIP revisions.
110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with government officials;
public notification; and PSD and visibility protection.
110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling/data.
110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees.
110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/participation by affected local
entities.
Of these infrastructure elements, element B is the subject of this
action, as all other elements were acted on in the EPA rulemaking
titled Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions;
Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Lead, 2008 Ozone, 2010
NO2, 2010 SO2, and 2012 PM2.5 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards; Utah.\2\ A detailed discussion of
element 110(a)(2)(B) is contained in the next section.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 81 FR 50626 (August 2, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. How did Utah address the infrastructure elements of sections
110(a)(1) and (2)?
The Utah Department of Environmental Quality (Department or UDEQ)
submitted certification of Utah's infrastructure SIP for the 2008 Pb
NAAQS on January 19, 2012; 2010 NO2 NAAQS on January 31,
2013; 2010 SO2 NAAQS on June 2, 2013; and 2012
PM2.5 on December 4, 2015. Utah's infrastructure
certifications demonstrate how the State, where applicable, has plans
in place that meet the requirements of section 110 for the 2008 Pb,
2010 NO2, 2010 SO2 and 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS. These plans reference the Utah Code Annotated (UCA) and the Utah
SIP. These submittals are available within the electronic docket for
today's proposed action at www.regulations.gov. The UCA and the Utah
SIP referenced in the submittals are publicly available at https://le.utah.gov/xcode/code.html and https://deq.utah.gov/legacy/laws-and-rules/air-quality/sip/. Air pollution control regulations and statutes
that have been previously approved by the EPA and incorporated into the
Utah SIP can be found at 40 CFR 52.2320.
V. Analysis of the State Submittals
Ambient air quality monitoring/data system: Section 110(a)(2)(B)
requires SIPs to ``provide for establishment and operation of
appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary'' to
``(i) monitor, compile, and analyze data on ambient air quality, and
(ii) upon request, make such data available to the Administrator.''
The State's submissions cite UAC rule R307-110-5, which
incorporates by reference SIP Section IV (Ambient Air Monitoring
Program), and provides a brief description of the purposes of the air
monitoring program approved by the EPA in the early 1980s and most
recently on June 25, 2003 (68 FR 37744). Pursuant to its Quality
Assurance Project Plan (QAPP), the Department makes arrangements to
operate and maintain federal reference monitors and establishes
federally-approved protocols for sample collection, handling and
analysis. The State's QAPP was most recently approved on November 28,
2016, with an annual update in November of 2017.
Utah's annual monitoring network plan (AMNP), is made available by
the Department for public review and comment prior to submission to the
EPA. Additionally, the State of Utah submits data to the EPA's Air
Quality System database in accordance with 40 CFR 58.16. Finally,
Utah's 2017 AMNP was approved by the EPA through a letter dated October
27, 2017 (available within the docket). The State provides the EPA with
prior notification when changes to its monitoring network or plan are
being considered. This action proposes to approve the State's submittal
in reference to element B: Ambient air quality monitoring/data system.
Previous action was not taken in the final EPA ruling titled
Promulgation of State Implementation Plan Revisions; Infrastructure
Requirements for the 2008 Lead, 2008 Ozone, 2010 NO2, 2010
SO2, and 2012 PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality
Standards; Utah.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 81 FR 50626 (August 2, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We find that Utah's SIP and practices are adequate for the ambient
air quality monitoring and data system requirements and therefore
propose to approve the infrastructure SIP for the 2008 Pb, 2010
SO2, 2010 NO2 and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS for
this element. Approval of element B will satisfy any outstanding
requirements under Section 110(a)(2).
VI. What proposed action is the EPA taking?
In this action, the EPA is proposing to approve infrastructure
element B for the 2008 Pb, 2010 SO2, 2010 NO2 and
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS from the State's certifications as shown in
Table 1.
Table 1--List of Utah Infrastructure Elements That the EPA Is Proposing
To Approve
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed for approval Element
------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 19, 2012 submittal--2008 Pb NAAQS.................... (B)
January 31, 2013 submittal--2010 NO2 NAAQS................... (B)
June 2, 2013 submittal--2010 SO2 NAAQS....................... (B)
December 4, 2015 submittal--2012 PM2.5 NAAQS................. (B)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VII. Statutory and Executive Orders Review
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting federal
requirements and
[[Page 34819]]
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state
law. For that reason, this proposed 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);
Is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because
this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866;
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 this action does not involve technical standards; and
Does not provide the 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).
The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where the 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 as specified by Executive Order
13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial
direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Greenhouse
gases, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: July 13, 2018.
Debra Thomas,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2018-15480 Filed 7-20-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P