80 FR 28901 - Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Mexico; Revisions to the New Source Review (NSR) State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Albuquerque-Bernalillo County; Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Permitting
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 97 (May 20, 2015)
Federal Register Volume 80, Issue 97 (May 20, 2015)
| Page Range | 28901-28906 | |
| FR Document | 2015-11780 |
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 97 (Wednesday, May 20, 2015)] [Proposed Rules] [Pages 28901-28906] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2015-11780] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA-R06-OAR-2013-0616; FRL-9927-23-Region 6] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Mexico; Revisions to the New Source Review (NSR) State Implementation Plan (SIP) for Albuquerque-Bernalillo County; Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Permitting AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve two revisions to the New Mexico State Implementation Plan (SIP) to update the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) SIP permitting program consistent with federal requirements. New Mexico submitted the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County PSD SIP permitting revisions on July 26, 2013, and March 4, 2015, which included a request for parallel processing of the submitted 2015 revisions. These submittals contain revisions to address the requirements of the EPA's May 2008, July 2010, and October 2012 PM2.5 PSD Implementation Rules and to incorporate revisions consistent with the EPA's March 2011 Fugitives Interim Rule, July 2011 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Biomass Deferral Rule, and July 2012 GHG Tailoring Rule Step 3 and GHG PALs Rule. The EPA is proposing to find that these revisions to the New Mexico SIP meet the Federal Clean Air Act (the Act or CAA) and EPA regulations, and are consistent with EPA policies. We are proposing this action under section 110 and part C of title I of the Act. The EPA is not approving these rules within the exterior boundaries of a reservation or other areas within any Tribal Nation's jurisdiction. DATES: Written comments should be received on or before June 19, 2015. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket No. EPA-R06-OAR- 2013-0616, by one of the following methods:www.regulations.gov: Follow the online instructions. Email: Ms. Ashley Mohr at [email protected]. Mail or delivery: Ms. Ashley Mohr, Air Permits Section (6PD-R), Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR- 2013-0616. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Do not submit information through www.regulations.gov or email, if you believe that it is CBI or otherwise protected from disclosure. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means that the EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment along with any disk or CD-ROM submitted. If the EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters and any form of encryption and should be free of any defects or viruses. Docket: The index to the docket for this action is available electronically at www.regulations.gov and in hard copy at EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. While all documents in the docket are listed in the index, some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material), and some may not be publicly available at either location (e.g., CBI). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Ashley Mohr, (214) 665-7289, [email protected]. To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment with Ms. Ashley Mohr or Mr. Bill Deese at (214) 665-7253. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean the EPA. Table of Contents I. Background A. New Mexico's SIP Submittals B. Relevant EPA Rulemakings II. The EPA's Evaluation III. Proposed Action IV. Incorporation by Reference V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background The Act at section 110(a)(2)(C) requires states to develop and submit to the EPA for approval into the State Implementation Plan (SIP), preconstruction review and permitting programs applicable to certain new and modified stationary sources of air pollutants for attainment and nonattainment areas that cover both major and minor new sources and modifications, collectively referred to as the New Source Review (NSR) SIP. The Clean Air Act (CAA) NSR SIP program is composed of three separate programs: Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD), Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR), and Minor NSR. PSD is established in part C of title I of the CAA and applies in areas that meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)--``attainment areas''--as well as areas where there is insufficient information to determine if the area meets the NAAQS--``unclassifiable [[Page 28902]] areas.'' The NNSR SIP program is established in part D of title I of the CAA and applies in areas that are not in attainment of the NAAQS-- ``nonattainment areas.'' The Minor NSR SIP program addresses construction or modification activities that do not emit, or have the potential to emit, beyond certain major source thresholds, and thus do not qualify as ``major'' and applies regardless of the designation of the area in which a source is located. The EPA regulations governing the criteria that states must satisfy for EPA approval of the NSR programs as part of the SIP are contained in 40 CFR 51.160--51.166. A. New Mexico's SIP Submittals Since the EPA's last SIP approval on September 19, 2012, of PSD SIP requirements for Albuquerque-Bernalillo County,\1\ the State of New Mexico has submitted two revisions to the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County PSD program: (1) A SIP revision submittal dated July 26, 2013, which affects sixteen sections under 20.11.61 NMAC; and (2) a request for parallel processing of a SIP revision dated March 4, 2015, which affects two sections under 20.11.61 NMAC. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ See 77 FR 58032. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- i. Summary of the January 26, 2013, SIP Submittal The July 26, 2013, SIP submittal contains revisions to adopt and implement: (1) the EPA's 2008 NSR PM 2.5 Rule, (2) the EPA's 2010 PM2.5 PSD Increment--Significant Impact Levels (SILs)-- Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC) Rule, (3) the EPA's 2012 PM2.5 NSR Implementation Rule, (4) the EPA's 2011 Fugitives Interim Rule, (5) the EPA's 2011 Biomass Deferral Rule, and (6) the EPA's 2012 GHG Tailoring Rule Step 3 and GHG PALs Rule. The July 2013 submittal from New Mexico also contains other non-substantive revisions to the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County PSD program that are not directly associated with the incorporation of the EPA Rules. As part of this proposed rulemaking, the EPA is addressing these non-substantive revisions and the substantive revisions to the New Mexico SIP that were submitted to adopt and implement the six aforementioned rulemakings by the EPA. ii. Summary of the March 4, 2015, SIP Submittal On March 4, 2015, New Mexico submitted a request for the parallel processing of additional SIP revisions to the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County PSD program. This means that the EPA is proposing approval of the submitted revisions at the same time that the public comment and rulemaking process is taking place at the state and local level. These proposed revisions to part 61 are being made in response to comments the EPA provided on the July 26, 2013, SIP submittal. Specifically, the March 2015 parallel processing request contains proposed revisions to Section 7--Definitions and Section 11--Applicability. New Mexico's parallel processing request was made in accordance with paragraph 2.3.1 of appendix V to 40 CFR part 51. As part of this proposed rulemaking, the EPA is addressing the proposed revisions to the New Mexico SIP contained in the March 4, 2015, parallel processing request. As required by paragraph 2.3.2 of appendix V to 40 CFR part 51, the EPA will not take final action on the proposed revisions contained in the March 4, 2015, submittal until the final SIP revision submittal containing these revisions to the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County PSD program as a final adoption is received from New Mexico. Therefore, the EPA is proposing to approve the SIP revision request after the completion of the state public process and final submittal. More information regarding the anticipated timeline of the state's rulemaking process is contained in the TSD accompanying this proposed action. B. Relevant EPA Rulemakings i. Summary of the EPA's 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule On May 8, 2008, the EPA finalized the NSR PM2.5 Rule to implement the PM2.5 NAAQS. See 73 FR 28321. As a result of the EPA's final NSR PM2.5 Rule, states were required to submit applicable SIP revisions to the EPA no later than May 16, 2011, to address this Rule's PSD and NNSR SIP requirements. With respect to PSD permitting, the SIP revision submittals are required to meet the following PSD SIP requirements to implement the PM2.5 NAAQS: (1) Require PSD permits to address directly emitted PM2.5 and precursor pollutants; (2) establish significant emission rates for direct PM2.5 and precursor pollutants (including SO2 and NOX ); and (3) account for gases that condense to form particles (condensables) in PM2.5 and PM10 emission limits in PSD permits. Prior to the adoption of the revisions included in the July 26, 2013, SIP submittal, the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County Air Board adopted revisions to 20.11.61 NMAC to incorporate all but one of the amendments consistent with the EPA's 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule. These revisions were approved by the EPA on September 19, 2012. See 77 FR 58032. New Mexico's July 26, 2013, SIP revision submittal incorporates the final remaining amendment to 20.11.61 NMAC to be consistent with the revisions to the federal rules at 40 CFR 51.166(i)(5) contained in the EPA's 2008 rulemaking. Specifically, the July 2013 SIP submittal amends 20.11.61 NMAC to include an additional exemption that gives the department discretion to exempt a stationary source from air monitoring requirements for a particular pollutant. The EPA finds that New Mexico's July 26, 2013, SIP revision submittal is consistent with the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule for PSD and meets the requirements of section 110 and part C of the CAA. ii. Summary of the EPA's 2010 PM2.5 PSD Increment--SILs--SMC Rule On October 20, 2010, the EPA finalized the PM2.5 PSD Increment--SILs--SMC Rule to provide additional regulatory requirements under the PSD SIP program regarding the implementation of the PM2.5 NAAQS for NSR. See 75 FR 64864. As a result, the PM2.5 PSD Increment--SILs--SMC Rule required states to submit SIP revisions to adopt the required PSD increments by July 20, 2012. Specifically, the SIP rule requires a state's submitted PSD SIP revision to adopt and submit for the EPA approval the PM2.5 increments pursuant to section 166(a) of the CAA to prevent significant deterioration of air quality in areas meeting the NAAQS. States could also discretionarily choose to adopt and submit for EPA approval SILs used as a screening tool (by a major source subject to PSD) to evaluate the impact a proposed major source or modification may have on the NAAQS or PSD increment and a SMC, (also a screening tool) used by a major source subject to PSD to determine the subsequent level of data gathering required for a PSD permit application for emissions of PM2.5 . More detail on the PM2.5 PSD Increment-- SILs--SMC Rule can be found in the EPA's October 20, 2010, final rule. See 75 FR 64864. (a) What are PSD increments? Under section 165(a)(3) of the CAA, a PSD permit applicant must demonstrate that emissions from the proposed construction and operation of a facility ``will not cause, or contribute to, air pollution in excess of any maximum allowable increase or allowable concentration for any pollutant.'' In other words, when a source applies for a PSD SIP permit to emit a regulated pollutant in an attainment or unclassifiable area, the permitting [[Page 28903]] authority implementing the PSD SIP must determine if emissions of the regulated pollutant from the source will cause significant deterioration in air quality. Significant deterioration occurs when the amount of the new pollution exceeds the applicable PSD increment, which is the ``maximum allowable increase'' of an air pollutant allowed to occur above the applicable baseline concentration \2\ for that pollutant. PSD increments prevent air quality in attainment and unclassifiable areas from deteriorating to the level set by the NAAQS. Therefore, an increment is the mechanism used to estimate ``significant deterioration'' of air quality for a pollutant in an area. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \2\ Section 169(4) of the CAA provides that the baseline concentration of a pollutant for a particular baseline area is generally the same air quality at the time of the first application for a PSD permit in the area. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- For PSD baseline purposes, a baseline area for a particular pollutant emitted from a source includes the attainment or unclassifiable/attainment area in which the source is located as well as any other attainment or unclassifiable/attainment area in which the source's emissions of that pollutant are projected (by air quality modeling) to result in an ambient pollutant increase of at least 1 [mu]g/m3 (annual average). See 40 CFR 51.166(b)(15)(i) and (ii). Under the EPA's existing regulations, the establishment of a baseline area for any PSD increment results from the submission of the first complete PSD permit application and is based on the location of the proposed source and its emissions impact on the area. Once the baseline area is established, subsequent PSD sources locating in that area need to consider that a portion of the available increment may have already been consumed by previous emissions increases. In general, the submittal date of the first complete PSD permit application in a particular area is the operative ``baseline date.'' \3\ On or before the date of the first complete PSD application, emissions generally are considered to be part of the baseline concentration, except for certain emissions from major stationary sources. Most emissions increases that occur after the baseline date will be counted toward the amount of increment consumed. Similarly, emissions decreases after the baseline date restore or expand the amount of increment that is available. See 75 FR 64864. As described in the PM2.5 PSD Increment--SILs-- SMC Rule, pursuant to the authority under section 166(a) of the CAA the EPA promulgated numerical increments for PM2.5 as a new pollutant \4\ for which the NAAQS were established after August 7, 1977,\5\ and derived 24-hour and annual PM2.5 increments for the three area classifications (Class I, II and III) using the ``contingent safe harbor'' approach. See 75 FR 64864 at 64869 and table at 40 CFR 51.166(c)(1). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \3\ Baseline dates are pollutant specific. That is, a complete PSD application establishes the baseline date only for those regulated NSR pollutants that are projected to be emitted in significant amounts (as defined in the regulations) by the applicant's new source or modification. Thus, an area may have different baseline dates for different pollutants. \4\ The EPA generally characterized the PM2.5 NAAQS as a NAAQS for a new indicator of PM. The EPA did not replace the PM10 NAAQS with the NAAQS for PM2.5 when the PM2.5 NAAQS were promulgated in 1997. The EPA rather retained the annual and 24-hour NAAQS for PM10 as if PM2.5 was a new pollutant even though the EPA had already developed air quality criteria for PM generally. See 75 FR 64864 (October 20, 2010). \5\ The EPA interprets 166(a) to authorize the EPA to promulgate pollutant-specific PSD regulations meeting the requirements of section 166(c) and 166(d) for any pollutant for which the EPA promulgates a NAAQS after 1977. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In addition to PSD increments for the PM2.5 NAAQS, the PM2.5 PSD Increment--SILs--SMC Rule amended the definition at 40 CFR 51.166 and 52.21 for ``major source baseline date'' and ``minor source baseline date'' to establish the PM2.5 NAAQS specific dates (including trigger dates) associated with the implementation of PM2.5 PSD increments. See 75 FR 64864. In accordance with section 166(b) of the CAA, the EPA required the states to submit revised implementation plans adopting the PM2.5 PSD increments to the EPA for approval within 21 months from promulgation of the final rule (by July 20, 2012). Each state was responsible for determining how increment consumption and the setting of the minor source baseline date for PM2.5 would occur under its own PSD program. Regardless of when a state begins to require PM2.5 increment analysis and how it chooses to set the PM2.5 minor source baseline date, the emissions from sources subject to PSD for PM2.5 for which construction commenced after October 20, 2010, (major source baseline date) consume the PM2.5 increment and therefore should be included in the increment analyses occurring after the minor source baseline date is established for an area under the state's revised PSD SIP program. (b) What are PSD SILs and SMC? The EPA's PM2.5 PSD Increment--SILs--SMC Rule also established SILs and SMC for the PM2.5 NAAQS to address air quality modeling and monitoring provisions for fine particle pollution in areas protected by the PSD program. The SILs and SMC are numerical values that represent thresholds of insignificant, i.e., de minimis, modeled source impacts or monitored (ambient) concentrations, respectively. The de minimis principle is grounded in a decision described by the court case Alabama Power Co. v. Costle, 636 F.2d 323, 360 (D.C. Cir. 1980). In this case reviewing the EPA's 1978 PSD regulations, the court recognized that ``there is likely a basis for an implication of de minimis authority to provide exemption when the burdens of regulation yield a gain of trivial or no value.'' 636 F.2d at 360. The EPA established such values for PM2.5 in the PM2.5 PSD Increment--SILs--SMC rule to be used as screening tools by a major source subject to PSD to determine the subsequent level of analysis and data gathering required for a PSD permit application for emissions of PM2.5 . See 75 FR 64864. As part of the response to comments in the PM2.5 PSD Increment-- SILs--SMC Rule final rulemaking, the EPA explained that the agency considers that the SILs and SMC used as de minimis thresholds for the various pollutants are useful tools that enable permitting authorities and PSD applicants to screen out ``insignificant'' activities; however, the fact remains that these values are not required by the Act as part of an approvable SIP program. (c) SILs-SMC Litigation The PM2.5 SILs and SMC were subject to litigation before the U.S. Court of Appeals. (Sierra Club v. EPA, Case No. 10-1413, D.C. Circuit). In response to the litigation, the EPA filed a brief on April 6, 2012, which contained a request that the Court vacate and remand to the EPA portions of two PSD PM2.5 rules (40 CFR 51.166 and 40 CFR 52.21) addressing the PM2.5 SILs so that the EPA could voluntarily correct errors in those provisions. On January 22, 2013, the Court granted the EPA's request for vacature and remand of the PM2.5 SILs provisions and also vacated parts of 40 CFR 51.166 and 40 CFR 52.21 that established the PM2.5 SMC, finding that the EPA was precluded from using the PM2.5 SMC to exempt permit applicants from the statutory requirement to compile preconstruction monitoring data. As a result of the Court's decision, States should avoid including language in SIP revision submittals that are the same as or have similar effects as the vacated PM2.5 SILs and SMC language in 40 CFR 51.166 and 52.21. As stated previously, neither the PM2.5 SILs nor the PM2.5 SMC are required elements of the PSD SIP for PM2.5 . [[Page 28904]] New Mexico's July 26, 2013, SIP revision submittal includes revisions to 20.11.61 NMAC that incorporate the amendments to the PSD regulations consistent with the changes in the 2010 PM2.5 PSD Increment--SILs--SMC Rule. Consistent with the January 2013 vacature and remand by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (the D.C. Circuit), the SIP revision submittal also correctly excludes those amendments from the EPA's 2010 Rule that established the PM2.5 SILs and SMC. Therefore, the EPA finds that these revisions in the July 2013 submittal are consistent with the 2010 rulemaking and subsequent Court decision and meet the requirements of section 110 and part C of the CAA. iii. Summary of the EPA's 2012 PM2.5 NSR Implementation Rule On October 12, 2012, the EPA finalized amendments to its rules for the CAA NSR permitting program regarding the definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant.'' This rulemaking clarified when condensable particulate matter should be measured. The final rule continued to require that condensable particulate matter be included as part of the emissions measurements for regulation of PM2.5 /PM10 . As a result of the EPA's final 2012 NSR PM2.5 Rule, the inadvertent requirement that measurements of condensable particulate matter emissions be included as part of the measurement and regulation of ``particulate matter emissions'' was removed. New Mexico's July 26, 2013, SIP revision submittal includes a revision to the definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant.'' Specifically, the SIP revision revises this definition found at 20.11.61.7(WW) NMAC to include the clarifying language related to the condensable particulate matter portion accounted for in PM2.5 and PM10 emissions. The EPA notes that as part of the July 2013 SIP revision submittal, New Mexico did not remove the requirement for condensable particulate matter emissions to be included in particulate matter emissions. Therefore, the definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant'' at 20.11.61.7(WW) NMAC is more stringent than the federal definition. See 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49). The EPA finds that the revisions to the definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant'' in the July 26, 2013, submittal meet the federal requirements in that the definition is more stringent than the federal definition. iv. Summary of the EPA's 2011 Fugitives Interim Rule On March 8, 2011, the EPA issued an interim rule to stay a December 2008 rule known as the Fugitives Emissions Rule. The 2008 Rule established new provisions for how fugitive emissions should be treated for NSR permitting. The EPA's 2011 interim rule replaced the stay issued by the EPA on March 31, 2010, which inadvertently covered portions of the NSR permitting requirements that should not have been stayed. The 2011 rulemaking stayed the 2008 Fugitive Emissions Rule as originally intended and reverted the regulatory text back to the language that existed prior to those amendments, which the EPA is reconsidering in response to a 2009 Natural Resources Defense Council petition for reconsideration of the 2008 Fugitive Emissions Rule. New Mexico's July 26, 2013, SIP revision submittal includes revisions to 20.11.61 NMAC that incorporate the amendments to the PSD regulations consistent with the changes in the 2011 Fugitives Interim Rule. The EPA finds that these revisions in the July 2013 submittal are consistent with the 2011 rulemaking and meet the requirements of section 110 and part C of the CAA. v. Summary of the the EPA's 2011 Biomass Deferral Rule On July 20, 2011, the EPA promulgated the Biomass Deferral Rule, which deferred, for a period of three years, the application of the PSD and title V permitting requirements to CO2 emissions from bioenergy and other biogenic stationary sources. See 76 FR 43490. On July 12, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued its decision to vacate the Biomass Deferral Rule. See Center for Biological Diversity v. EPA (D.C. Cir. No. 11-1101). New Mexico's July 26, 2013, SIP revision submittal includes revisions to 20.11.61 NMAC that incorporate the 2011 Biomass Deferral Rule into the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County PSD program. However, as discussed in this proposed rulemaking, New Mexico's March 4, 2015, SIP Submittal contains revisions to update the PSD program to remove the biomass deferral, which was vacated in 2013. The EPA finds that the combined revisions from the July 2013 and March 2015 submittals are consistent with current PSD regulations with respect to the vacated Biogas Referral Rule and meet the requirements of section 110 and part C of the CAA. vi. Summary of the the EPA's 2012 Tailoring Rule and GHG PALs Rule On June 3, 2010, the EPA issued a final rule, known as the Tailoring Rule, which phased in permitting requirements for GHG emissions from stationary sources under the CAA PSD and title V permitting programs (75 FR 31514). For Step 1 of the Tailoring Rule, which began on January 2, 2011, PSD or title V requirements applied to sources of GHG emissions only if the sources were subject to PSD or title V ``anyway'' due to their emissions of non-GHG pollutants. These sources are referred to as ``anyway sources.'' Step 2 of the Tailoring Rule, which began on July 1, 2011, applied the PSD and title V permitting requirements under the CAA to sources that were classified as major, and, thus, required to obtain a permit, based solely on their potential GHG emissions and to modifications of otherwise major sources that required a PSD permit because they increased only GHG above applicable levels in the EPA regulations. On July 12, 2012, the EPA promulgated the final ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule Step 3 and GHG Plantwide Applicability Limits'' (GHG Tailoring Rule Step 3 and GHG PALs).\6\ 77 FR 41051. In the Tailoring Rule Step 3 portion of this rule, the EPA decided against further phase in of the PSD and title V requirements to apply to sources emitting lower levels of greenhouse gas emissions. Thus, the thresholds for determining PSD applicability based on emission of greenhouse gases remained the same as established in Step 2 of the Tailoring Rule. The Step 3 portions of the EPA's July 12, 2012, final rule are not relevant to today's proposed action on the New Mexico SIP revision. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ For a complete history of the EPA's rulemakings related to GHG emissions please review the following final actions: ``Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act.'' 74 FR 66496 (December 15, 2009). ``Interpretation of Regulations that Determine Pollutants Covered by Clean Air Act Permitting Programs.'' 75 FR 17004 (April 2, 2010). ``Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards; Final Rule.'' 75 FR 25324 (May 7, 2010). ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule; Final Rule.'' 75 FR 31514 (June 3, 2010). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The GHG PALs portion of the July 12, 2012, final rule promulgated revisions to the EPA regulations under 40 CFR part 52 for establishing PALs for GHG emissions. For a full discussion of the EPA's rationale for the GHG PALs provisions, see the notice of final rulemaking at 77 FR 41051. A PAL [[Page 28905]] establishes a site-specific plantwide emission level for a pollutant that allows the source to make changes at the facility without triggering the requirements of the PSD program, provided that emissions do not exceed the PAL level. Under the EPA's interpretation of the federal PAL provisions, such PALs are already available under PSD for non-GHG pollutants and for GHGs on a mass basis, and the EPA revised the PAL regulations to allow for GHG PALs to be established on a carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2 e) basis as well. See 77 FR 41052. The EPA finalized these revisions in an effort to streamline federal and SIP PSD permitting programs by allowing sources and permitting authorities to address GHGs using a PAL in a manner similar to the use of PALs for non-GHG pollutants. See 77 FR 41051, 41052. II. The EPA's Evaluation New Mexico's July 26, 2013, and March 4, 2015, SIP revision submittals include amendments to the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County PSD program found in 20.11.61 NMAC to incorporate changes to federal PSD provisions resulting from the following EPA rulemakings: 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule, 2010 PM2.5 PSD Increment--SILs--SMC Rule, 2012 PM2.5 PSD Implementation Rule, 2011 Fugitives Interim Rule, 2011 Biomass Deferral Rule, and 2012 GHG Tailoring Rule Step 3 and GHG PALs Rule. The July 26, 2013, SIP revisions also contains additional non-substantive revisions to 20.11.61 NMAC including formatting revisions, inclusion of acronyms, and rewording of provisions to make this Part consistent with other provisions of the NMAC. On June 23, 2014, the United States Supreme Court, in Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection Agency,\7\ issued a decision addressing the application of PSD permitting requirements to GHG emissions. The Supreme Court said that the EPA may not treat GHGs as an air pollutant for purposes of determining whether a source is a major source (or modification thereof) required to obtain a PSD permit. The Court also said that the EPA could continue to require that PSD permits, otherwise required based on emissions of pollutants other than GHGs, contain limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of Best Available Control Technology (BACT). The Supreme Court decision effectively upheld PSD permitting requirements for GHG emissions under Step 1 of the Tailoring Rule for ``anyway sources'' and invalidated PSD permitting requirements for Step 2 sources. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\ 134 S.Ct. 2427 (2014). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In accordance with the Supreme Court decision, on April 10, 2015, the D.C. Circuit issued an amended judgment vacating the regulations that implemented Step 2 of the Tailoring Rule, but not the regulations that implement Step 1 of the Tailoring Rule. A copy of the judgment is included in the docket to this rulemaking.\8\ The amended judgment preserves, without the need for additional rulemaking by the EPA, the application of the Best Available Control Technology (BACT) requirement to GHG emissions from sources that are required to obtain a PSD permit based on emissions of pollutants other than GHGs (``anyway'' sources). The D.C. Circuit's judgment vacated the regulations at issue in the litigation, including 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v), ``to the extent they require a stationary source to obtain a PSD permit if greenhouse gases are the only pollutant (i) that the source emits or has the potential to emit above the applicable major source thresholds, or (ii) for which there is a significant emissions increase from a modification.'' --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ Original case is Coalition for Responsible Regulation v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 09-1322, 06/26/20, judgment entered for No. 09- 1322 on 04/10/2015. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The EPA may need to take additional steps to revise federal PSD rules in light of the Supreme Court decision and recent D.C. Circuit judgment. In addition, the EPA anticipates that many states will revise their existing SIP-approved PSD programs. The EPA is not expecting states to have revised their existing PSD program regulations at this juncture. However, the EPA is evaluating PSD program submissions to assure that the state's program correctly addresses GHGs consistent with both decisions. New Mexico's existing approved SIP for the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County PSD program contains the greenhouse gas permitting requirements required under 40 CFR 51.166, as amended in the Tailoring Rule. As a result, the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County's SIP-approved PSD permitting program continues to require that PSD permits (otherwise required based on emissions of pollutants other than GHGs) contain limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of BACT when sources emit or increase greenhouse gases in the amount of 75,000 tons per year (tpy), measured as carbon dioxide equivalent. Although the SIP-approved Albuquerque-Bernalillo County PSD permitting program may also currently contain provisions that are no longer necessary in light of the D.C. Circuit's judgment or the Supreme Court decision, this does not prevent the EPA from approving the submission addressed in this rule. New Mexico's July 26, 2013, and March 4, 2015, SIP submissions do not add any greenhouse gas permitting requirements that are inconsistent either decision. Likewise, this revision does add to the New Mexico SIP for the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County PSD program elements of the EPA's July 12, 2012, rule implementing Step 3 of the phase in of PSD permitting requirements for greenhouse gases described in the Tailoring Rule, which became effective on August 13, 2012. Specifically, the incorporation of the Step 3 rule provisions will allow GHG-emitting sources to obtain PALs for their GHG emissions on a CO2 e basis. The GHG PAL provisions, as currently written, include some provisions that may no longer be appropriate in light of both the D.C. Circuit's judgment and the Supreme Court decision. Since the Supreme Court has determined that sources and modifications may not be defined as ``major'' solely on the basis of the level of greenhouse gases emitted or increased, PALs for greenhouse gases may no longer have value in some situations where a source might have triggered PSD based on greenhouse gas emissions alone. However, PALs for GHGs may still have a role to play in determining whether a modification that triggers PSD for a pollutant other than greenhouse gases should also be subject to BACT for greenhouse gases. These provisions, like the other GHG provisions discussed previously, may be revised at some future time. However, these provisions do not add new requirements for sources or modifications that only emit or increase greenhouse gases above the major source threshold or the 75,000 tpy greenhouse gas level in section 52.21(b)(49)(iv). Rather, the PALs provisions provide increased flexibility to sources that wish to address their GHG emissions in a PAL. Since this flexibility may still be valuable to sources in at least one context described above, we believe that it is appropriate to approve these provisions into the New Mexico SIP at this juncture. As discussed in this rulemaking and the accompanying TSD, the EPA finds that the revisions to the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County PSD program contained in the July 26, 2013, and March 4, 2015, SIP revision submittals are consistent with the aforementioned the EPA rulemakings and meet the associated federal requirements. The [[Page 28906]] EPA therefore proposes to find the proposed SIP revisions to be fully approvable. III. Proposed Action The EPA is proposing to approve revisions to the Albuquerque- Bernalillo County PSD program that were submitted by New Mexico as a SIP revision on July 26, 2013, and March 4, 2015. We are proposing approval of the portions of the July 26, 2013, and March 4, 2015, submittals that revised the following sections under 20.11.61:20.11.61.2 NMAC--Scope, 20.11.61.5 NMAC--Effective Date, 20.11.61.6 NMAC--Objective, 20.11.61.7 NMAC--Definitions, 20.11.61.10 NMAC--Documents, 20.11.61.11 NMAC--Applicability, 20.11.61.12 NMAC--Obligations of Owners or Operators of Sources, 20.11.61.14 NMAC--Control Technology Review and Innovative Control Technology, 20.11.61.15 NMAC--Ambient Impact Requirements, 20.11.61.18 NMAC--Air Quality Analysis and Monitoring Requirements, 20.11.61.20 NMAC--Actuals Plantwide Applicability Limits (PALs), 20.11.61.23 NMAC--Exclusions from Increment Consumption, 20.11.61.24 NMAC--Sources Impacting Federal Class I Areas- Additional Requirements, 20.11.61.27 NMAC--Table 2-Significant Emission Rates, 20.11.61.29 NMAC--Table 4-Allowable PSD Increments, and 20.11.61.30 NMAC--Table 5-Maximum Allowable Increases for Class I Variances. The EPA has determined that these revisions to the New Mexico SIP's Albuquerque-Bernalillo County PSD program are approvable because the submitted rules are adopted and submitted in accordance with the CAA and are consistent with the EPA regulations regarding PSD permitting. The EPA is proposing this action under section 110 and part C of the Act. The EPA is severing from our proposed approval action the revisions to 20.11.60 NMAC submitted on July 26, 2013, which are revisions to the Albuquerque-Bernalillo County NNSR Program and will be addressed in a separate action. IV. Incorporation by Reference In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by reference the New Mexico regulations discussed in section III. of this preamble. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally available electronically through www.regulations.gov and/or in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see the ADDRESSES 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); Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4); Does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the 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, this rule is not proposed to apply on any Indian reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that 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, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: April 24, 2015. Ron Curry, Regional Administrator, Region 6. [FR Doc. 2015-11780 Filed 5-19-15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
![Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 97 / Wednesday, May 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules 28901
Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions included a request for parallel comment, the EPA recommends that
To Address Environmental Justice in processing of the submitted 2015 you include your name and other
Minority Populations and Low-Income revisions. These submittals contain contact information in the body of your
Population revisions to address the requirements of comment along with any disk or CD–
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 the EPA’s May 2008, July 2010, and ROM submitted. If the EPA cannot read
(Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal October 2012 PM2.5 PSD your comment due to technical
executive policy on environmental Implementation Rules and to difficulties and cannot contact you for
justice. Its main provision directs incorporate revisions consistent with clarification, the EPA may not be able to
federal agencies, to the greatest extent the EPA’s March 2011 Fugitives Interim consider your comment. Electronic files
practicable and permitted by law, to Rule, July 2011 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) should avoid the use of special
make environmental justice part of their Biomass Deferral Rule, and July 2012 characters and any form of encryption
mission by identifying and addressing, GHG Tailoring Rule Step 3 and GHG and should be free of any defects or
as appropriate, disproportionately high PALs Rule. The EPA is proposing to viruses.
find that these revisions to the New Docket: The index to the docket for
and adverse human health or
Mexico SIP meet the Federal Clean Air this action is available electronically at
environmental effects of their programs,
Act (the Act or CAA) and EPA www.regulations.gov and in hard copy
policies, and activities on minority
regulations, and are consistent with EPA at EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue,
populations and low-income
policies. We are proposing this action Suite 700, Dallas, Texas. While all
populations in the United States.
EPA lacks the discretionary authority under section 110 and part C of title I documents in the docket are listed in
to address environmental justice in this of the Act. The EPA is not approving the index, some information may be
proposed rulemaking. these rules within the exterior publicly available only at the hard copy
boundaries of a reservation or other location (e.g., copyrighted material), and
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 areas within any Tribal Nation’s some may not be publicly available at
Environmental protection, Air jurisdiction. either location (e.g., CBI).
pollution control, Approval and DATES: Written comments should be FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
promulgation of implementation plans, received on or before June 19, 2015. Ashley Mohr, (214) 665–7289,
Incorporation by reference, ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
mohr.ashley@epa.gov. To inspect the
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen identified by Docket No. EPA–R06– hard copy materials, please schedule an
dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and OAR–2013–0616, by one of the appointment with Ms. Ashley Mohr or
recordkeeping requirements, and Sulfur following methods: Mr. Bill Deese at (214) 665–7253.
dioxide. • www.regulations.gov: Follow the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: May 8, 2015. online instructions. Throughout this document wherever
Alexis Strauss, • Email: Ms. Ashley Mohr at ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
mohr.ashley@epa.gov. the EPA.
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
• Mail or delivery: Ms. Ashley Mohr, Table of Contents
[FR Doc. 2015–12243 Filed 5–19–15; 8:45 am]
Air Permits Section (6PD–R),
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Environmental Protection Agency, 1445 I. Background
Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas A. New Mexico’s SIP Submittals
B. Relevant EPA Rulemakings
75202–2733.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION II. The EPA’s Evaluation
Instructions: Direct your comments to III. Proposed Action
AGENCY Docket ID No. EPA–R06–OAR–2013– IV. Incorporation by Reference
40 CFR Part 52 0616. The EPA’s policy is that all V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
comments received will be included in
[EPA–R06–OAR–2013–0616; FRL–9927–23– the public docket without change and I. Background
Region 6] may be made available online at The Act at section 110(a)(2)(C)
www.regulations.gov, including any requires states to develop and submit to
Approval and Promulgation of
personal information provided, unless the EPA for approval into the State
Implementation Plans; New Mexico;
the comment includes information Implementation Plan (SIP),
Revisions to the New Source Review
claimed to be Confidential Business preconstruction review and permitting
(NSR) State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Information (CBI) or other information programs applicable to certain new and
for Albuquerque-Bernalillo County;
the disclosure of which is restricted by modified stationary sources of air
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
statute. Do not submit information pollutants for attainment and
(PSD) Permitting
through www.regulations.gov or email, nonattainment areas that cover both
AGENCY: Environmental Protection if you believe that it is CBI or otherwise major and minor new sources and
Agency (EPA). protected from disclosure. The modifications, collectively referred to as
ACTION: Proposed rule. www.regulations.gov Web site is an the New Source Review (NSR) SIP. The
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which Clean Air Act (CAA) NSR SIP program
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection means that the EPA will not know your is composed of three separate programs:
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve identity or contact information unless Prevention of Significant Deterioration
two revisions to the New Mexico State you provide it in the body of your (PSD), Nonattainment New Source
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Implementation Plan (SIP) to update the comment. If you send an email Review (NNSR), and Minor NSR. PSD is
Albuquerque-Bernalillo County comment directly to the EPA without established in part C of title I of the
Prevention of Significant Deterioration going through www.regulations.gov, CAA and applies in areas that meet the
(PSD) SIP permitting program consistent your email address will be National Ambient Air Quality Standards
with federal requirements. New Mexico automatically captured and included as (NAAQS)—‘‘attainment areas’’—as well
submitted the Albuquerque-Bernalillo part of the comment that is placed in the as areas where there is insufficient
County PSD SIP permitting revisions on public docket and made available on the information to determine if the area
July 26, 2013, and March 4, 2015, which Internet. If you submit an electronic meets the NAAQS—‘‘unclassifiable
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:24 May 19, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_28998/page/1.svg)
![28906 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 97 / Wednesday, May 20, 2015 / Proposed Rules
EPA therefore proposes to find the in section III. of this preamble. The EPA In addition, this rule is not proposed
proposed SIP revisions to be fully has made, and will continue to make, to apply on any Indian reservation land
approvable. these documents generally available or in any other area where the EPA or
electronically through an Indian tribe has demonstrated that
III. Proposed Action
www.regulations.gov and/or in hard tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
The EPA is proposing to approve copy at the appropriate EPA office (see Indian country, the proposed rule does
revisions to the Albuquerque-Bernalillo the ADDRESSES section of this preamble not have tribal implications and will not
County PSD program that were for more information). impose substantial direct costs on tribal
submitted by New Mexico as a SIP governments or preempt tribal law as
revision on July 26, 2013, and March 4, V. Statutory and Executive Order
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
2015. We are proposing approval of the Reviews
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
portions of the July 26, 2013, and March Under the CAA, the Administrator is
4, 2015, submittals that revised the required to approve a SIP submission List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
following sections under 20.11.61: that complies with the provisions of the Environmental protection, Air
• 20.11.61.2 NMAC—Scope, Act and applicable Federal regulations. pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
• 20.11.61.5 NMAC—Effective Date, 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Incorporation by reference,
• 20.11.61.6 NMAC—Objective, Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
• 20.11.61.7 NMAC—Definitions, EPA’s role is to approve state choices, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
• 20.11.61.10 NMAC—Documents, provided that they meet the criteria of matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
• 20.11.61.11 NMAC—Applicability, the CAA. Accordingly, this action requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
• 20.11.61.12 NMAC—Obligations of merely proposes to approve state law as organic compounds.
Owners or Operators of Sources, meeting Federal requirements and does Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
• 20.11.61.14 NMAC—Control not impose additional requirements
Technology Review and Innovative beyond those imposed by state law. For Dated: April 24, 2015.
Control Technology, that reason, this action: Ron Curry,
• 20.11.61.15 NMAC—Ambient • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory Regional Administrator, Region 6.
Impact Requirements, action’’ subject to review by the Office [FR Doc. 2015–11780 Filed 5–19–15; 8:45 am]
• 20.11.61.18 NMAC—Air Quality of Management and Budget under BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Analysis and Monitoring Requirements, Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
• 20.11.61.20 NMAC—Actuals October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
Plantwide Applicability Limits (PALs), January 21, 2011); ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
• 20.11.61.23 NMAC—Exclusions • Does not impose an information AGENCY
from Increment Consumption, collection burden under the provisions
• 20.11.61.24 NMAC—Sources of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
Impacting Federal Class I Areas- U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); [EPA–R03–OAR–2015–0029; FRL–9928–00–
Additional Requirements, • Is certified as not having a Region 3]
• 20.11.61.27 NMAC—Table 2- significant economic impact on a
Significant Emission Rates, substantial number of small entities Approval and Promulgation of Air
• 20.11.61.29 NMAC—Table 4- under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 Quality Implementation Plans;
Allowable PSD Increments, and U.S.C. 601 et seq.); Pennsylvania; Redesignation Request
• 20.11.61.30 NMAC—Table 5- • Does not contain any unfunded and Associated Maintenance Plan for
Maximum Allowable Increases for Class mandate or significantly or uniquely the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley
I Variances. affect small governments, as described Nonattainment Area for the 1997
The EPA has determined that these in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Annual and 2006 24-Hour Fine
revisions to the New Mexico SIP’s of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); Particulate Matter Standard
Albuquerque-Bernalillo County PSD • Does not have Federalism
program are approvable because the implications as specified in Executive AGENCY: Environmental Protection
submitted rules are adopted and Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, Agency (EPA).
submitted in accordance with the CAA 1999); ACTION: Proposed rule.
and are consistent with the EPA • Is not an economically significant
regulations regarding PSD permitting. regulatory action based on health or SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
The EPA is proposing this action under safety risks subject to Executive Order Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
section 110 and part C of the Act. 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania’s
The EPA is severing from our • Is not a significant regulatory action December 22, 2014 request to
proposed approval action the revisions subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR redesignate to attainment the Pittsburgh-
to 20.11.60 NMAC submitted on July 26, 28355, May 22, 2001); Beaver Valley nonattainment area
2013, which are revisions to the • Is not subject to requirements of (Pittsburgh Area or Area) for the 1997
Albuquerque-Bernalillo County NNSR section 12(d) of the National annual and 2006 24-hour fine
Program and will be addressed in a Technology Transfer and Advancement particulate matter (PM2.5) National
separate action. Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because Ambient Air Quality Standards
application of those requirements would (NAAQS or standards). EPA is also
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
IV. Incorporation by Reference be inconsistent with the CAA; and proposing to determine that the Area
In this rule, the EPA is proposing to • Does not provide the EPA with the continues to attain the 1997 annual and
include in a final EPA rule regulatory discretionary authority to address, as 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In
text that includes incorporation by appropriate, disproportionate human addition, EPA is proposing to approve
reference. In accordance with health or environmental effects, using as a revision to the Pennsylvania State
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is practicable and legally permissible Implementation Plan (SIP) the
proposing to incorporate by reference methods, under Executive Order 12898 associated maintenance plan that was
the New Mexico regulations discussed (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). submitted with the redesignation
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:24 May 19, 2015 Jkt 235001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20MYP1.SGM 20MYP1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/80_FR_28998/page/6.svg)
Document Created: 2018-02-21 10:29:59
Document Modified: 2018-02-21 10:29:59
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Proposed Rules | |
| Action | Proposed rule. | |
| Dates | Written comments should be received on or before June 19, 2015. | |
| Contact | Ms. Ashley Mohr, (214) 665-7289, [email protected] To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment with Ms. Ashley Mohr or Mr. Bill Deese at (214) 665-7253. | |
| FR Citation | 80 FR 28901 | |
| CFR Associated | Environmental Protection; Air Pollution Control; Carbon Monoxide; Incorporation by Reference; Intergovernmental Relations; Lead; Nitrogen Dioxide; Ozone; Particulate Matter; Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements; Sulfur Oxides and Volatile Organic Compounds |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR