82 FR 35153 - Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; North Dakota; Revisions to Air Pollution Control Rules

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

Federal Register Volume 82, Issue 144 (July 28, 2017)

Page Range		35153-35155
FR Document		2017-15978

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing approval of State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions received from the State of North Dakota on January 28, 2013, and April 22, 2014. The revisions are to Article 33-15 ``Air Pollution Control'' rules of the North Dakota Administrative Code. The revisions include amendments to add EPA Reference Method 22 to determine compliance with a visible emissions limit, add significance levels for PM<INF>2.5</INF>, modify existing significance levels for NO<INF>2</INF> and SO<INF>2</INF> and remove the significance level for PM<INF>10</INF>. This action is being taken under section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

Federal Register, Volume 82 Issue 144 (Friday, July 28, 2017)

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 144 (Friday, July 28, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35153-35155]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2017-15978]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R08-OAR-2017-0019; FRL-9965-37-Region 8]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
North Dakota; Revisions to Air Pollution Control Rules

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing 
approval of State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions received from the 
State of North Dakota on January 28, 2013, and April 22, 2014. The 
revisions are to Article 33-15 ``Air Pollution Control'' rules of the 
North Dakota Administrative Code. The revisions include amendments to 
add EPA Reference Method 22 to determine compliance with a visible 
emissions limit, add significance levels for PM2.5, modify 
existing significance levels for NO2 and SO2 and 
remove the significance level for PM10. This action is being 
taken under section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 28, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2017-0019 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot 
be edited or removed from www.regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any 
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any 
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) 
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment 
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA 
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located 
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, cloud, or other 
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA 
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, 
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jaslyn Dobrahner, Air Program, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595 
Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, (303) 312-6252, 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. General Information

    What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
    1. Submitting Confidential Business Information (CBI). Do not 
submit CBI to the EPA through http://www.regulations.gov or email. 
Clearly mark the part or all of the information that you claim to be 
CBI. For CBI information on a disk or CD-ROM that you mail to the EPA, 
mark the outside of the disk or CD-ROM as CBI and then identify 
electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific information that 
is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version of the comment 
that

[[Page 35154]]

includes information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does 
not contain the information claimed as CBI must be submitted for 
inclusion in the public docket. Information so marked will not be 
disclosed except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 
2.
    2. Tips for preparing your comments. When submitting comments, 
remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other 
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register, date, and 
page number);
     Follow directions and organize your comments;
     Explain why you agree or disagree;
     Suggest alternatives and substitute language for your 
requested changes;
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical 
information and/or data that you used;
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how 
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be 
reproduced;
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and 
suggest alternatives;
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the 
use of profanity or personal threats; and
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period 
deadline identified.

II. Background

    On January 28, 2013, the State of North Dakota submitted a SIP 
revision containing amendments to Article 33-15 Air Pollution Control 
rules. We approved some of these revisions on October 21, 2016 (81 FR 
72716). The remaining amendments include the following: A new rule that 
would give the State authority to issue general permits, revisions to 
significance levels and a revision to the prevention of significant 
deterioration (PSD) rules. This action addresses the revisions to 
significance levels. We will address the new general permit rule and 
the revision to the PSD rules in a separate action. The North Dakota 
State Health Council adopted the amendments on August 14, 2012 
(effective January 1, 2013).
    On April 22, 2014, the State of North Dakota submitted a SIP 
revision containing amendments to Article 33-15 Air Pollution Control 
rules. We approved some of these revisions on October 21, 2016 (81 FR 
72716). The remaining amendment adds EPA Reference Method 22 for 
determining opacity for limits expressed as zero percent opacity. The 
North Dakota State Health Council adopted the amendments on February 
11, 2014 (effective April 1, 2014).

III. EPA's Review of the State of North Dakota's January 28, 2013 and 
April 22, 2014 Submittals

    We evaluated North Dakota's January 28, 2013, and April 22, 2014 
submittals regarding revisions to the State's Air Pollution Control 
rules as described in section II. We propose to approve all of the 
revisions under consideration in this proposed rulemaking.

A. January 28, 2013 SIP Submittal

    We propose to approve PM2.5 concentration levels (0.3 
[mu]g/m\3\ annual and 1.2 [mu]g/m\3\ 24-hour averaging time) the State 
added to 33-15-14-02.5.a in their January 2013 submittal. These 
PM2.5 values are the same as those in 40 CFR 51.165(b)(2) 
and are used in the same manner, i.e., a source ``will be considered to 
cause or contribute to a violation of an ambient air quality standard'' 
when such source ``would, at a minimum, exceed the [listed] 
significance levels at any locality that does not or would not meet the 
applicable ambient standard.'' We also propose to approve revised 
significance levels for SO2 and NO2 (one-hour 
averaging time) contained in the State's January 2013 revisions to 33-
15-14-02.5.a (SO2 one-hour significance level revised from 
25 to 7.8 [mu]g/m\3\ and NO2 one-hour significance level 
revised from 25 to 7.5 [mu]g/m\3\). These revised SO2 and 
NO2 one-hour significance levels, although not listed in 40 
CFR 51.165(b)(2), are consistent with our recommendations in guidance 
documents ^{1 2} and strengthen the SIP. We note that the state 
regulation does not provide that a source with an impact below any of 
these significance levels is deemed to have demonstrated that it does 
not cause or contribute to a violation of the NAAQS. Thus, the rules 
that the EPA proposes to approve do not have an effect like those in 40 
CFR 51.166(k)(2) and 52.21(k)(2) that were vacated and remanded by the 
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (Sierra Club v. EPA, 705 F.3d 458, 466 
(D.C. Cir. 2013)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ U.S. EPA Memo, General Guidance for Implementing the 1-hour 
SO2 National Ambient Air Quality Standard in Prevention of 
Significant Deterioration Permits, Including an Interim 1-hour SO2 
Significant Impact Level, August 23, 2010.
    \2\ U.S. EPA Memo, General Guidance for Implementing the 1-hour 
NO2 National Ambient Air Quality Standard in Prevention of 
Significant Deterioration Permits, Including an Interim 1-hour NO2 
Significant Impact Level, June 28, 2010.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Our proposed approval of the revisions to the State's significance 
levels at 33-15-14-02.5.a extends only to the use of these significance 
levels for the purpose stated in 40 CFR 51.165(b)(2). That is to 
determine that a major source or major modification will be considered 
to cause or contribute to a violation of a NAAQS when such source or 
modification would, at a minimum, exceed a significance level at any 
locality that does not or would not meet the applicable national 
standard.
    In this same section, the State also removed the annual 
PM10 significance level in 33-15-14-02.5.a. The annual 
PM10 NAAQS was revoked in 2006 (71 FR 61144). North Dakota 
does not currently have any nonattainment areas for the annual 
PM10 NAAQS. Thus, we propose to approve this revision.

B. April 22, 2014 SIP Submittal

    The State's April 22, 2014 SIP submittal explains that the State 
added the EPA Reference Method 22 to the SIP,\3\ which the State will 
use to determine compliance with a visible emissions limit specified in 
a permit issued as zero percent opacity except for a certain frequency.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ State of North Dakota SIP Submittal Package (April 22, 
2014), at PDF page 10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 33-15-03-05, Method of Measurement, the State added EPA 
Reference Method 22 of Appendix A (``Visual Determination of Fugitive 
Emissions from Material Sources and Smoke Emissions from Flares'') 
adopted by reference in chapter 33-15-12, Standards of Performance for 
New Stationary Sources. This test method is used to determine the 
frequency of fugitive emissions from stationary sources and the 
frequency of visible smoke emissions from flares. Chapter 33-15-12 of 
the State's rules incorporates by reference 40 CFR part 60, appendix A, 
Test Methods as of July 1, 2015. The State's new rule specifies that 
Method 22 is applicable when ``a visible emission limit is specified in 
a permit issued in accordance with this article as zero percent opacity 
except for certain frequency''. 33-15-03-05.2. The ``frequency'' of 
fugitive emissions refers to the length of time that fugitive emissions 
will be visible over a specified time interval (i.e., one minute every 
30 minutes, five minutes in two hours, etc.). Thus, a permit may 
specify zero percent opacity except for a certain frequency or length 
of time fugitive emissions may be observed over a specified time 
interval. The State's SIP rule does not make any substantive changes to 
Method 22, it merely incorporates the method into the SIP and allows it 
to be used to demonstrate compliance for sources that are subject to 
Article 15, ``Air Pollution Control Rules.'' We propose to approve of 
the State's incorporation of Method 22 from

[[Page 35155]]

40 CFR part 60, appendix A into the SIP because this allows for use of 
an EPA test method when specified in a permit issued in Article 15. 
Method 22 can be used for a variety of purposes, including 
determination of fugitive (non-stack) emissions and visible emissions 
from stationary sources (stacks) depending on the applicable emission 
standards \4\ and State permit requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ U.S. EPA Question and Answer Document. EPA Method 22--Visual 
Determination of Fugitive Emissions. https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/atw/area/method22qa.doc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. What action is the EPA taking?

    For the reasons expressed in III.A and III.B, the EPA is proposing 
to approve the following revisions, shown in Table 1, to the State's 
Air Pollution Control rules.

  Table 1--List of North Dakota Revisions that the EPA is Proposing to
                                 Approve
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Revised sections in January 28, 2013 and April 22, 2014 submissions
                          proposed for approval
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
January 28, 2013 submittal: 33-15-14-02.5.a
April 22, 2014 submittal: 33-15-03-05.2
------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. 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 North Dakota Administrative Code as described in section IV. 
of this preamble. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these 
materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and/or at the 
EPA Region 8 Office (please contact the person identified in the ``For 
Further Information Contact'' section of this preamble for more 
information).

VI. Statutory and Executive Orders Review

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable 
federal regulations (42 U.S.C. 7410(k), 40 CFR 52.02(a)). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
proposed action merely approves some state law as meeting federal 
requirements; this proposed action does not impose additional 
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this 
proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     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 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 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: July 13, 2017.
Debra H. Thomas,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2017-15978 Filed 7-27-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 144 / Friday, July 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules 35153

Mobile Equipment Coating Operations; • Is not a significant regulatory action Administrative Code. The revisions
and Rule 1171, Solvent Cleaning subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR include amendments to add EPA
Operations. Simultaneously, EPA 28355, May 22, 2001); Reference Method 22 to determine
proposes to fully approve the remainder • Is not subject to requirements of compliance with a visible emissions
of the 2006 and 2015 RACT SIPs, and section 12(d) of the National limit, add significance levels for PM2.5,
to fully approve AVAQMD’s negative Technology Transfer and Advancement modify existing significance levels for
declarations submitted on October 23, Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because NO2 and SO2 and remove the
2015 and June 7, 2017. We are application of those requirements would significance level for PM10. This action
simultaneously withdrawing our be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; is being taken under section 110 of the
December 15, 2016 proposal to partially and Clean Air Act (CAA).
approve and partially disapprove • Does not provide the EPA with the DATES: Written comments must be
AVAQMD’s 2006 and 2015 RACT SIPs discretionary authority to address received on or before August 28, 2017.
because the AVAQMD has committed to disproportionate human health or ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
address the identified deficiencies environmental effects with practical, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08–
within one year of the effective date of appropriate, and legally permissible OAR–2017–0019 at http://
our final action for today’s proposed methods under Executive Order 12898 www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
rulemaking. (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). instructions for submitting comments.
We will accept comments from the In addition, the SIP is not approved Once submitted, comments cannot be
public on this proposal until August 28, to apply on any Indian reservation land edited or removed from
2017. If we take final action to approve or in any other area where the EPA or www.regulations.gov. The EPA may
the submitted documents, our final an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a publish any comment received to its
action will incorporate these documents tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of public docket. Do not submit
into the federally-enforceable SIP. Indian country, the rule does not have electronically any information you
III. Statutory and Executive Order tribal implications and will not impose consider to be Confidential Business
Reviews substantial direct costs on tribal Information (CBI) or other information
governments or preempt tribal law as whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Under the Clean Air Act, the specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
Administrator is required to approve a Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). etc.) must be accompanied by a written
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 comment. The written comment is
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); considered the official comment and
Environmental protection, Air should include discussion of all points
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP pollution control, Incorporation by
submissions, the EPA’s role is to you wish to make. The EPA will
reference, Intergovernmental relations, generally not consider comments or
approve state choices, provided that Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
they meet the criteria of the Clean Air comment contents located outside of the
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile primary submission (i.e., on the Web,
Act. Accordingly, this proposed action organic compounds.
merely proposes to approve state law as cloud, or other file sharing system). For
meeting federal requirements and does
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. additional submission methods, the full
not impose additional requirements Dated: July 14, 2017. EPA public comment policy,
beyond those imposed by state law. For Deborah Jordan, information about CBI or multimedia
that reason, this proposed action: submissions, and general guidance on
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory making effective comments, please visit
[FR Doc. 2017–15982 Filed 7–27–17; 8:45 am]
action’’ subject to review by the Office http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
of Management and Budget under commenting-epa-dockets.
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION Jaslyn Dobrahner, Air Program, U.S.
January 21, 2011); AGENCY Environmental Protection Agency
• Does not impose an information (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P–AR,
collection burden under the provisions 40 CFR Part 52 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 80202–1129, (303) 312–6252,
[EPA–R08–OAR–2017–0019; FRL–9965–37– dobrahner.jaslyn@epa.gov.
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); Region 8]
• Is certified as not having a SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
significant economic impact on a Approval and Promulgation of Air I. General Information
substantial number of small entities Quality Implementation Plans; North
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 Dakota; Revisions to Air Pollution What should I consider as I prepare
U.S.C. 601 et seq.); Control Rules my comments for EPA?
• Does not contain any unfunded 1. Submitting Confidential Business
mandate or significantly or uniquely AGENCY: Environmental Protection Information (CBI). Do not submit CBI to
affect small governments, as described Agency. the EPA through http://
www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act ACTION: Proposed rule.
of 1995 (Public Law 104–4); mark the part or all of the information
• Does not have Federalism SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection that you claim to be CBI. For CBI
implications as specified in Executive Agency (EPA) is proposing approval of information on a disk or CD–ROM that
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, State Implementation Plan (SIP) you mail to the EPA, mark the outside
1999); revisions received from the State of of the disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then
• Is not an economically significant North Dakota on January 28, 2013, and identify electronically within the disk or
regulatory action based on health or April 22, 2014. The revisions are to CD–ROM the specific information that
safety risks subject to Executive Order Article 33–15 ‘‘Air Pollution Control’’ is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); rules of the North Dakota complete version of the comment that

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:10 Jul 27, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28JYP1.SGM 28JYP1

35154 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 144 / Friday, July 28, 2017 / Proposed Rules

includes information claimed as CBI, a amendments on February 11, 2014 51.165(b)(2). That is to determine that a
copy of the comment that does not (effective April 1, 2014). major source or major modification will
contain the information claimed as CBI be considered to cause or contribute to
III. EPA’s Review of the State of North
must be submitted for inclusion in the a violation of a NAAQS when such
Dakota’s January 28, 2013 and April
public docket. Information so marked source or modification would, at a
22, 2014 Submittals
will not be disclosed except in minimum, exceed a significance level at
accordance with procedures set forth in We evaluated North Dakota’s January any locality that does not or would not
40 CFR part 2. 28, 2013, and April 22, 2014 submittals meet the applicable national standard.
2. Tips for preparing your comments. regarding revisions to the State’s Air In this same section, the State also
When submitting comments, remember Pollution Control rules as described in removed the annual PM10 significance
to: section II. We propose to approve all of level in 33–15–14–02.5.a. The annual
• Identify the rulemaking by docket the revisions under consideration in this PM10 NAAQS was revoked in 2006 (71
number and other identifying proposed rulemaking. FR 61144). North Dakota does not
information (subject heading, Federal A. January 28, 2013 SIP Submittal currently have any nonattainment areas
Register, date, and page number); for the annual PM10 NAAQS. Thus, we
• Follow directions and organize your We propose to approve PM2.5 propose to approve this revision.
comments; concentration levels (0.3 mg/m3 annual
and 1.2 mg/m3 24-hour averaging time) B. April 22, 2014 SIP Submittal
• Explain why you agree or disagree;
• Suggest alternatives and substitute the State added to 33–15–14–02.5.a in The State’s April 22, 2014 SIP
language for your requested changes; their January 2013 submittal. These submittal explains that the State added
• Describe any assumptions and PM2.5 values are the same as those in 40 the EPA Reference Method 22 to the
provide any technical information and/ CFR 51.165(b)(2) and are used in the SIP,3 which the State will use to
or data that you used; same manner, i.e., a source ‘‘will be determine compliance with a visible
• If you estimate potential costs or considered to cause or contribute to a emissions limit specified in a permit
burdens, explain how you arrived at violation of an ambient air quality issued as zero percent opacity except for
your estimate in sufficient detail to standard’’ when such source ‘‘would, at a certain frequency.
allow for it to be reproduced; a minimum, exceed the [listed] In 33–15–03–05, Method of
• Provide specific examples to significance levels at any locality that Measurement, the State added EPA
illustrate your concerns, and suggest does not or would not meet the Reference Method 22 of Appendix A
alternatives; applicable ambient standard.’’ We also (‘‘Visual Determination of Fugitive
• Explain your views as clearly as propose to approve revised significance Emissions from Material Sources and
possible, avoiding the use of profanity levels for SO2 and NO2 (one-hour Smoke Emissions from Flares’’) adopted
or personal threats; and averaging time) contained in the State’s by reference in chapter 33–15–12,
• Make sure to submit your January 2013 revisions to 33–15–14– Standards of Performance for New
comments by the comment period 02.5.a (SO2 one-hour significance level Stationary Sources. This test method is
deadline identified. revised from 25 to 7.8 mg/m3 and NO2 used to determine the frequency of
one-hour significance level revised from fugitive emissions from stationary
II. Background 25 to 7.5 mg/m3). These revised SO2 and sources and the frequency of visible
On January 28, 2013, the State of NO2 one-hour significance levels, smoke emissions from flares. Chapter
North Dakota submitted a SIP revision although not listed in 40 CFR 33–15–12 of the State’s rules
containing amendments to Article 33– 51.165(b)(2), are consistent with our incorporates by reference 40 CFR part
15 Air Pollution Control rules. We recommendations in guidance 60, appendix A, Test Methods as of July
approved some of these revisions on documents 1 2 and strengthen the SIP. 1, 2015. The State’s new rule specifies
October 21, 2016 (81 FR 72716). The We note that the state regulation does that Method 22 is applicable when ‘‘a
remaining amendments include the not provide that a source with an impact visible emission limit is specified in a
following: A new rule that would give below any of these significance levels is permit issued in accordance with this
the State authority to issue general deemed to have demonstrated that it article as zero percent opacity except for
permits, revisions to significance levels does not cause or contribute to a certain frequency’’. 33–15–03–05.2. The
and a revision to the prevention of violation of the NAAQS. Thus, the rules ‘‘frequency’’ of fugitive emissions refers
significant deterioration (PSD) rules. that the EPA proposes to approve do not to the length of time that fugitive
This action addresses the revisions to have an effect like those in 40 CFR emissions will be visible over a
significance levels. We will address the 51.166(k)(2) and 52.21(k)(2) that were specified time interval (i.e., one minute
new general permit rule and the vacated and remanded by the U.S. every 30 minutes, five minutes in two
revision to the PSD rules in a separate Circuit Court of Appeals (Sierra Club v. hours, etc.). Thus, a permit may specify
action. The North Dakota State Health EPA, 705 F.3d 458, 466 (D.C. Cir. 2013)). zero percent opacity except for a certain
Council adopted the amendments on Our proposed approval of the frequency or length of time fugitive
August 14, 2012 (effective January 1, revisions to the State’s significance emissions may be observed over a
2013). levels at 33–15–14–02.5.a extends only specified time interval. The State’s SIP
On April 22, 2014, the State of North to the use of these significance levels for rule does not make any substantive
Dakota submitted a SIP revision the purpose stated in 40 CFR
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with PROPOSALS

changes to Method 22, it merely
containing amendments to Article 33– incorporates the method into the SIP
1 U.S. EPA Memo, General Guidance for
15 Air Pollution Control rules. We and allows it to be used to demonstrate
Implementing the 1-hour SO2 National Ambient Air
approved some of these revisions on Quality Standard in Prevention of Significant compliance for sources that are subject
October 21, 2016 (81 FR 72716). The Deterioration Permits, Including an Interim 1-hour to Article 15, ‘‘Air Pollution Control
remaining amendment adds EPA SO2 Significant Impact Level, August 23, 2010. Rules.’’ We propose to approve of the
2 U.S. EPA Memo, General Guidance for
Reference Method 22 for determining State’s incorporation of Method 22 from
Implementing the 1-hour NO2 National Ambient Air
opacity for limits expressed as zero Quality Standard in Prevention of Significant
percent opacity. The North Dakota State Deterioration Permits, Including an Interim 1-hour 3 State of North Dakota SIP Submittal Package

Health Council adopted the NO2 Significant Impact Level, June 28, 2010. (April 22, 2014), at PDF page 10.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:10 Jul 27, 2017 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28JYP1.SGM 28JYP1

Document Created: 2017-07-28 03:09:43
Document Modified: 2017-07-28 03:09:43

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 must be received on or before August 28, 2017.
Contact		Jaslyn Dobrahner, Air Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, (303) 312-6252, [email protected]
FR Citation		82 FR 35153
CFR Associated		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 and Volatile Organic Compounds