Environmental Protection Agency November 5, 2010 – Federal Register Recent Federal Regulation Documents

EPA is taking direct final action to stay the numeric effluent limitation of 280 NTU and associated monitoring requirements for the Construction and Development Point Source Category. This action is necessary so that EPA can reconsider the record basis for calculating the numeric effluent limitation. EPA expects to move expeditiously with its reconsideration, and will remove the stay when such reconsideration is completed.

EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). These revisions concern oxides of nitrogen (NOX), carbon monoxide (CO), oxides of sulfur (SO2) and particulate matter emissions from boilers, steam generators and process heaters greater than 5.0 MMbtu/hour. We are approving a local rule that regulates these emission sources under the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA or the Act). We are taking comments on this proposal and plan to follow with a final action.

EPA is proposing to approve a draft revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted by Kentucky's Energy and Environment Cabinet, through the Kentucky Division for Air Quality (KDAQ), to EPA on August 5, 2010, for parallel processing. The proposed SIP revision makes two changes impacting the Commonwealth of Kentucky's New Source Review (NSR) Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program. First, the proposed revision provides the Commonwealth of Kentucky with authority to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) under its PSD program. Second, the proposed SIP revision establishes appropriate emission thresholds for determining which new stationary sources and modification projects become subject to Kentucky's PSD permitting requirements for their GHG emissions. The first component of the proposed revision is necessary because the Commonwealth of Kentucky is required to apply its PSD program to GHG-emitting sources, and unless it does so (or unless EPA promulgates a Federal implementation plan (FIP) to do so), such sources will be unable to receive preconstruction permits and therefore may not be able to construct or modify. The second component is necessary because without it, on January 2, 2011, PSD requirements would apply at the 100 or 250 tons per year (tpy) levels provided under the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), which would overwhelm Kentucky's permitting resources. EPA is proposing approval of the Commonwealth of Kentucky's August 5, 2010, SIP revision relating to PSD requirements for GHG-emitting sources because the Agency has made the preliminary determination that this SIP revision is in accordance with the CAA and EPA regulations regarding PSD permitting for GHGs.

EPA is withdrawing our proposed limited approval and limited disapproval of revisions to the Texas state implementation plan (SIP), which relate to public participation for air permits for new and modified sources, because the subject SIP revisions are no longer before us for review. On November 26, 2008 (73 FR 72003) EPA proposed limited approval and limited disapproval. In response to our proposed limited approval and limited disapproval, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ or the Commission) adopted new regulations governing public participation for air permits and submitted these regulations to EPA as revisions to the SIP in a letter dated July 2, 2010. Also at this time, TCEQ withdrew from consideration the previously submitted revisions to the Texas SIP concerning public participation for air permits that were the subject of our November 26, 2008, proposed limited approval and limited disapproval. Consequently, the State's July 2, 2010 action also withdraws from EPA's review the public participation component of the May 21, 2009, Settlement Agreement (as modified on February 12, 2010) between EPA and the BCCA Appeal Group, Texas Association of Business, and Texas Oil and Gas Association (Settlement Agreement).

EPA is proposing to approve a draft revision to the State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted by Tennessee, through the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), Air Pollution Control Division, to EPA on August 30, 2010, for parallel processing. The proposed SIP revision modifies Tennessee's New Source Review (NSR) Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program. Specifically, the proposed SIP revision establishes appropriate emission thresholds for determining which new stationary sources and modification projects become subject to Tennessee's PSD permitting requirements for their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Tennessee's August 30, 2010, SIP revision is necessary because without it, on January 2, 2011, PSD requirements would apply at the 100 or 250 tons per year (tpy) levels provided under the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), which would overwhelm Tennessee's permitting resources. EPA is proposing approval of Tennessee's August 30, 2010, SIP revision relating to PSD requirements for GHG-emitting sources because the Agency has made the preliminary determination that this SIP revision is in accordance with the CAA and EPA regulations regarding PSD permitting for GHGs.

EPA is proposing to approve a portion of a draft revision to the Mississippi State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted by the State of Mississippi, through the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ), to EPA on September 14, 2010, for parallel processing. The proposed SIP revision modifies Mississippi's New Source Review (NSR) Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program. Specifically, the proposed SIP revision establishes appropriate emission thresholds for determining which new stationary sources and modification projects become subject to Mississippi's PSD permitting requirements for their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Mississippi's September 14, 2010, SIP revision is necessary because without it, on January 2, 2011, PSD requirements would apply at the 100 or 250 tons per year (tpy) levels provided under the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), which would overwhelm Mississippi's permitting resources. EPA is proposing approval of Mississippi's September 14, 2010, SIP revision relating to PSD requirements for GHG-emitting sources because the Agency has made the preliminary determination that this SIP revision is in accordance with the CAA and EPA regulations regarding PSD permitting for GHGs.

EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Pennsylvania State Implementation Plan (SIP) to meet the 2002 base year emissions inventory, the reasonable further progress (RFP) plan, RFP contingency measure, and reasonably available control measure (RACM) requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE moderate 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. EPA is also proposing to approve the 2008 transportation conformity motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) associated with the reasonable further progress portion of these revisions. EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revisions because they satisfy the emission inventory, RFP, RACM, RFP contingency measures, and transportation conformity requirements for areas classified as moderate nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) and demonstrates further progress in reducing ozone precursors. EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision, pursuant to section 110 and part D of the CAA and EPA's regulations.

EPA proposes to revise its regulations governing procedures for the satisfaction of data requirements under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). These provisions include, among other things, procedures for the protection of exclusive use and data compensation rights of data submitters. The proposed revisions would update the regulations, which have not been revised since issuance in 1984, to accommodate statutory and procedural changes that have occurred since that time. The revisions would also make minor changes to clarify the regulations. The revisions would simplify the procedures and reduce burdens for certain data submitters.