Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Montana; Revisions to Administrative Rules of Montana, 32361-32363 [2019-14243]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 130 / Monday, July 8, 2019 / Proposed Rules wording, punctuation and formatting changes. EPA is proposing to approve the changes to rule .2003 because these changes do not alter transportation conformity requirements for any applicable area in North Carolina and these changes are consistent with the federal transportation conformity requirements. Section .2005 Memorandum of Agreement is amended to provide a more general reference to rule .2001 instead of referencing specific subsections in rule .2001, and to make non-substantive wording, punctuation and formatting changes. EPA is proposing to approve the changes to rule .2005 because these changes do not alter transportation conformity requirements for any applicable area in North Carolina and these changes are consistent with the federal transportation conformity requirements. In summary, EPA views the amendments described above as consistent with the federal transportation conformity requirements and the Clean Air Act, and is proposing to approve these rules, as amended, into the North Carolina SIP. jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS III. Incorporation by Reference In this rule, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with the requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference the following air quality rules in 15A NCAC subchapter 2D.: Section .2001 Purpose, Scope and Applicability, Section .2002 Definitions, Section .2003 Transportation Conformity Determination, and Section .2005 Memorandum of Agreement, stateeffective January 1, 2018. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 4 office (please contact the person identified in the ‘‘For Further Information Contact’’ section of this preamble for more information). IV. Proposed Action For the reasons explained above, EPA is proposing to approve North Carolina’s March 21, 2018, SIP revision, which amends and readopts rules 15A NCAC subchapter 2D.: .2001, .2002, .2003, and .2005, for inclusion into North Carolina’s SIP. 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 Act and applicable Federal regulations. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:54 Jul 05, 2019 Jkt 247001 See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, if they meet the criteria of the CAA. These actions merely propose to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, these proposed actions: • Are not significant regulatory actions 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); • Are not Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory actions because SIP approvals are exempted under Executive Order 12866; • Do not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); • Are 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.); • Do not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4); • Do not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); • Are not economically significant regulatory actions based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); • Are not significant regulatory actions subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); • Are 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 • Do 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). 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 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. PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 32361 List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: May 28, 2019. Mary S. Walker, Regional Administrator, Region 4. [FR Doc. 2019–14143 Filed 7–5–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R08–OAR–2019–0326; FRL–9995–94– Region 8] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Montana; Revisions to Administrative Rules of Montana Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the State of Montana on February 23, 2017. The revisions are to the Administrative Rules of Montana (ARM) open burning and permitting regulations to align the ARM with the current Montana Code Annotated (MCA) procedures for appealing a permit and requesting a hearing. The EPA is taking this action pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA). DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 7, 2019. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08– OAR–2019–0326, to the Federal Rulemaking Portal: 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 SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\08JYP1.SGM 08JYP1 32362 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 130 / Monday, July 8, 2019 / Proposed Rules 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. 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 and Radiation Division, 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: Jaslyn Dobrahner, Air and Radiation Division, EPA, Region 8, Mailcode 8ARD–QP, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202–1129, (303) 312–6252, dobrahner.jaslyn@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS I. Background On February 23, 2017, the State of Montana submitted a SIP revision containing amendments to open burning and permitting regulations in the ARM at 17.8.610, Major Open Burning Source Restrictions; 17.8.612, Conditional Air Quality Open Burning Permits; 17.8.613, Christmas Tree Waste Open Burning Permits; 17.8.614, Commercial Film Production Open Burning Permits; 17.8.615, Firefighter Training; and 17.8.749, Conditions for Issuance or Denial of Permit.1 The amendments: (1) Add references to sections 75–2–211, Permits for Construction, Installation, Alteration, or Use and 75–2–213, Energy Development Project—Hearing and 1 The February 23, 2017, submittal also included revisions to 17.8.1210, General Requirements for Air Quality Operating Permit Content. However, the state does not want us to act on 17.8.1210, because it is not part of the federal SIP. (Memorandum from State of Montana to the EPA (June 26, 2019)). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:54 Jul 05, 2019 Jkt 247001 Procedures of the MCA pertaining to the process for appealing air quality permits, including requesting a hearing; (2) remove duplicative language in the ARM; and (3) and make minor editorial changes. The Montana Board of Environmental Review adopted the amendments on June 3, 2016 (effective July 9, 2016). II. Analysis of State Submittal We evaluated Montana’s February 23, 2017, submittal regarding amendments to the State’s ARM. The amendments to ARM 17.8.610(3), 17.8.612(10) and (11), 17.8.613(8) and (9), 17.8.614(8) and (9), and 17.8.615(6) and (7) incorporate by reference section 75–2–211 of the MCA pertaining to the permit appeals process, including requesting a hearing. These statutes provide as follows: • That a person who is directly and adversely affected by the issuance or denial of a permit may request a hearing within 15 days after the state renders a decision; • that a request for hearing does not stay the state’s decision on an application unless the board orders a stay; and • an affidavit supporting the request for hearing must be filed within 30 days after the issuance or denial of a permit. The revisions also remove corresponding duplicative language between the ARM and MCA and make editorial changes. The language in the revisions to 17.8.610, 17.8.612, 17.8.613, 17.8.614, and 17.8.615 referencing 75–2–211, MCA, is equivalent to the language being removed from these sections of the ARM except for 17.8.610. According to the State,2 17.8.610 had not been updated during the last State revision in 2011, whereas 17.8.612, 17.8.613, 17.8.614, and 17.8.615 had been amended by the State and subsequently approved into the SIP on August 20, 2015.3 The revisions to 17.8.610 in the February 23, 2017, submittal are identical to the revisions we approved in our August 20, 2015 rulemaking to 17.8.612, 17.8.613, 17.8.614, and 17.8.615 in that they require a hearing request affidavit to be filed within 30 days after the department renders a decision, remove an automatic stay of the department’s decision to issue a permit upon a permit appeal, and add conditions and procedures for when the board may order a stay. We are proposing to approve the revisions in ARM 17.8.610(3), 17.8.612(10) and (11), 17.8.613(8) and 2 Email from State of Montana to the EPA (September 30, 2016). 3 80 FR 50582 (August 20, 2015). PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 (9), 17.8.614(8) and (9), and 17.8.615(6) and (7) because these revisions are either equivalent to the current federally-approved SIP (for 17.8.612, 17.8.613, 17.8.614, 17.8.615) or have been previously approved into the SIP in similar sections (for 17.8.610). In both instances, we previously determined that the revisions do not conflict with the CAA.4 The amendments to ARM 17.8.749(7) incorporate by reference section 75–2– 213 of the MCA pertaining to the hearing and appeals procedures for permit applicants of energy development projects. The permit appeals procedures in 75–2–213 pertain to air quality permit decisions on energy development projects that differ from the general procedures described in 75– 2–211, MCA. Specifically, the statutes proposed for approval within 75–2–213, MCA allow a permit applicant the following hearing procedures: • The applicant may request a hearing within 30 days after the department renders a decision; • a request for hearing must be limited to those issues presented to the state during the public comment period unless the issue is related to a material change in federal or state law made during the public comment period, to a judicial decision issued after the comment period, or to a material change to the draft permit finalized after an opportunity for comment; • an affidavit supporting the request must be filed with the request for a hearing; and • the applicant may, by filing a written election to the board within 15 days of receipt of request for hearing, elect a hearing before the board or have the matter submitted directly to the district court for judicial review. The revisions also make a minor editorial change. An important consideration before the EPA approves programs under the CAA is that the state must provide the same opportunity for judicial review of the air permitting actions in state court as would be available in federal court. The proposed revisions to 17.8.749, to incorporate the applicable statutes in 75–2–213, MCA, are in accordance with CAA sections 307(b) and 307(d)(7)(B) which provide for the judicial review of an air quality action and limits objections to an action to those that were raised with reasonable specificity during the public comment period, respectively. Additionally, if the Administrator refuses to convene a proceeding, a person may seek review in 4 80 E:\FR\FM\08JYP1.SGM FR 30987 (June 1, 2015). 08JYP1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 130 / Monday, July 8, 2019 / Proposed Rules the United States court of appeals.5 Similarly, 75–2–213, MCA provides permit applicants with the election to have the matter proceed to hearing before the state board or to have the matter submitted directly to the district court for judicial review. We therefore conclude that the revisions do not conflict with CAA requirements for judicial review of air permitting actions and propose to approve the revisions to 17.8.749. 32363 III. The EPA’s Proposed Action In this action, the EPA is proposing to approve SIP amendments to Administrative Rules of Montana, shown in Table 1, submitted by the State of Montana on February 23, 2017. TABLE 1—LIST OF MONTANA AMENDMENTS THAT THE EPA IS PROPOSING TO APPROVE Amended Sections in the February 23, 2017 Submittal Proposed for Approval 17.8.610(3), 17.8.612(10) and (11), 17.8.613(8) and (9), 17.8.614(8) and (9), 17.8.615(6) and (7), 17.8.749(7). IV. Incorporation by Reference In this document, the EPA is proposing to include regulatory text in a final EPA rule that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference the amendments described in section III. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 8 Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more information). jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with PROPOSALS 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 Act 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 proposes to approve 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.); • 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.); 5 CAA • Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 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 proposed 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, 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: June 28, 2019. Gregory Sopkin, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 8. [FR Doc. 2019–14243 Filed 7–5–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 62 [EPA–R09–OAR–2019–0344; FRL–9995–98– Region 9] Approval and Promulgation of State Plans for Designated Facilities and Pollutants; Arizona; Control of Emissions From Existing Municipal Solid Waste Landfills Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a state plan submitted by the State of Arizona. This state plan submittal pertains to the regulation of landfill gas and its components, including methane, from existing municipal solid waste (MSW) landfills. Arizona’s state plan was submitted in response to the EPA’s promulgation of Emissions Guidelines and Compliance Times for MSW landfills. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA). DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 7, 2019. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– OAR–2019–03440344 at https:// www.regulations.gov, or via email to buss.jeffrey@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be SUMMARY: 307(d)(7)(B). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:54 Jul 05, 2019 Jkt 247001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08JYP1.SGM 08JYP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 130 (Monday, July 8, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 32361-32363]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14243]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R08-OAR-2019-0326; FRL-9995-94-Region 8]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Montana; Revisions to Administrative Rules of Montana

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the 
State of Montana on February 23, 2017. The revisions are to the 
Administrative Rules of Montana (ARM) open burning and permitting 
regulations to align the ARM with the current Montana Code Annotated 
(MCA) procedures for appealing a permit and requesting a hearing. The 
EPA is taking this action pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 7, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2019-0326, to the Federal Rulemaking Portal: 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

[[Page 32362]]

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.
    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 and Radiation 
Division, 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: Jaslyn Dobrahner, Air and Radiation 
Division, EPA, Region 8, Mailcode 8ARD-QP, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, 
Colorado 80202-1129, (303) 312-6252, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background

    On February 23, 2017, the State of Montana submitted a SIP revision 
containing amendments to open burning and permitting regulations in the 
ARM at 17.8.610, Major Open Burning Source Restrictions; 17.8.612, 
Conditional Air Quality Open Burning Permits; 17.8.613, Christmas Tree 
Waste Open Burning Permits; 17.8.614, Commercial Film Production Open 
Burning Permits; 17.8.615, Firefighter Training; and 17.8.749, 
Conditions for Issuance or Denial of Permit.\1\ The amendments: (1) Add 
references to sections 75-2-211, Permits for Construction, 
Installation, Alteration, or Use and 75-2-213, Energy Development 
Project--Hearing and Procedures of the MCA pertaining to the process 
for appealing air quality permits, including requesting a hearing; (2) 
remove duplicative language in the ARM; and (3) and make minor 
editorial changes. The Montana Board of Environmental Review adopted 
the amendments on June 3, 2016 (effective July 9, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The February 23, 2017, submittal also included revisions to 
17.8.1210, General Requirements for Air Quality Operating Permit 
Content. However, the state does not want us to act on 17.8.1210, 
because it is not part of the federal SIP. (Memorandum from State of 
Montana to the EPA (June 26, 2019)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Analysis of State Submittal

    We evaluated Montana's February 23, 2017, submittal regarding 
amendments to the State's ARM. The amendments to ARM 17.8.610(3), 
17.8.612(10) and (11), 17.8.613(8) and (9), 17.8.614(8) and (9), and 
17.8.615(6) and (7) incorporate by reference section 75-2-211 of the 
MCA pertaining to the permit appeals process, including requesting a 
hearing. These statutes provide as follows:
     That a person who is directly and adversely affected by 
the issuance or denial of a permit may request a hearing within 15 days 
after the state renders a decision;
     that a request for hearing does not stay the state's 
decision on an application unless the board orders a stay; and
     an affidavit supporting the request for hearing must be 
filed within 30 days after the issuance or denial of a permit.
    The revisions also remove corresponding duplicative language 
between the ARM and MCA and make editorial changes.
    The language in the revisions to 17.8.610, 17.8.612, 17.8.613, 
17.8.614, and 17.8.615 referencing 75-2-211, MCA, is equivalent to the 
language being removed from these sections of the ARM except for 
17.8.610. According to the State,\2\ 17.8.610 had not been updated 
during the last State revision in 2011, whereas 17.8.612, 17.8.613, 
17.8.614, and 17.8.615 had been amended by the State and subsequently 
approved into the SIP on August 20, 2015.\3\ The revisions to 17.8.610 
in the February 23, 2017, submittal are identical to the revisions we 
approved in our August 20, 2015 rulemaking to 17.8.612, 17.8.613, 
17.8.614, and 17.8.615 in that they require a hearing request affidavit 
to be filed within 30 days after the department renders a decision, 
remove an automatic stay of the department's decision to issue a permit 
upon a permit appeal, and add conditions and procedures for when the 
board may order a stay.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Email from State of Montana to the EPA (September 30, 2016).
    \3\ 80 FR 50582 (August 20, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We are proposing to approve the revisions in ARM 17.8.610(3), 
17.8.612(10) and (11), 17.8.613(8) and (9), 17.8.614(8) and (9), and 
17.8.615(6) and (7) because these revisions are either equivalent to 
the current federally-approved SIP (for 17.8.612, 17.8.613, 17.8.614, 
17.8.615) or have been previously approved into the SIP in similar 
sections (for 17.8.610). In both instances, we previously determined 
that the revisions do not conflict with the CAA.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 80 FR 30987 (June 1, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The amendments to ARM 17.8.749(7) incorporate by reference section 
75-2-213 of the MCA pertaining to the hearing and appeals procedures 
for permit applicants of energy development projects. The permit 
appeals procedures in 75-2-213 pertain to air quality permit decisions 
on energy development projects that differ from the general procedures 
described in 75-2-211, MCA. Specifically, the statutes proposed for 
approval within 75-2-213, MCA allow a permit applicant the following 
hearing procedures:
     The applicant may request a hearing within 30 days after 
the department renders a decision;
     a request for hearing must be limited to those issues 
presented to the state during the public comment period unless the 
issue is related to a material change in federal or state law made 
during the public comment period, to a judicial decision issued after 
the comment period, or to a material change to the draft permit 
finalized after an opportunity for comment;
     an affidavit supporting the request must be filed with the 
request for a hearing; and
     the applicant may, by filing a written election to the 
board within 15 days of receipt of request for hearing, elect a hearing 
before the board or have the matter submitted directly to the district 
court for judicial review.
    The revisions also make a minor editorial change.
    An important consideration before the EPA approves programs under 
the CAA is that the state must provide the same opportunity for 
judicial review of the air permitting actions in state court as would 
be available in federal court. The proposed revisions to 17.8.749, to 
incorporate the applicable statutes in 75-2-213, MCA, are in accordance 
with CAA sections 307(b) and 307(d)(7)(B) which provide for the 
judicial review of an air quality action and limits objections to an 
action to those that were raised with reasonable specificity during the 
public comment period, respectively. Additionally, if the Administrator 
refuses to convene a proceeding, a person may seek review in

[[Page 32363]]

the United States court of appeals.\5\ Similarly, 75-2-213, MCA 
provides permit applicants with the election to have the matter proceed 
to hearing before the state board or to have the matter submitted 
directly to the district court for judicial review. We therefore 
conclude that the revisions do not conflict with CAA requirements for 
judicial review of air permitting actions and propose to approve the 
revisions to 17.8.749.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ CAA 307(d)(7)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. The EPA's Proposed Action

    In this action, the EPA is proposing to approve SIP amendments to 
Administrative Rules of Montana, shown in Table 1, submitted by the 
State of Montana on February 23, 2017.

Table 1--List of Montana Amendments That the EPA Is Proposing To Approve
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Amended Sections in the February 23, 2017 Submittal Proposed for
                                Approval
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
17.8.610(3), 17.8.612(10) and (11), 17.8.613(8) and (9), 17.8.614(8) and
 (9), 17.8.615(6) and (7), 17.8.749(7).
------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this document, the EPA is proposing to include regulatory text 
in a final EPA rule that includes incorporation by reference. In 
accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to 
incorporate by reference the amendments described in section III. The 
EPA has made, and will continue to make, these materials generally 
available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 8 Office 
(please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).

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 Act 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 proposes to approve 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.);
     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 (Public Law 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 proposed 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, 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: June 28, 2019.
Gregory Sopkin,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2019-14243 Filed 7-5-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.