### 43338 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 143 / Friday, July 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules

vessel; Maine State Police, Maine Marine Patrol or other designated craft; or may be on shore and communicating
with vessels via VHF–FM radio or
loudhailer. Members of the Coast Guard Auxiliary may be present to inform vessel operators of this regulation.

(6) During periods of enforcement, upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel by siren, radio, flashing light or other means, the operator of the vessel must proceed as directed.

(7) All other relevant regulations, including but not limited to the Rules of the Road (33 CFR § 84—Subchapter E, Inland Navigational Rules) remain in effect within the regulated area and must be strictly followed at all times.

(c) Enforcement Period. This regulation is enforceable 24 hours a day from 12:01 a.m. on September 1, 2014 until 11:59 p.m. on April 30, 2017.

(1) Prior to commencing or suspending enforcement of this regulation, the COTP will give notice by appropriate means to inform the affected segments of the public, to
include dates and times. Such means of notification will include, but are not limited to, Broadcast Notice to Mariners
and Local Notice to Mariners.

(2) Violations of this RNA may be reported to the COTP at 207–767–0303
or on VHF-Channel 16.

Dated: July 15, 2014.
L. L. Fagan,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
First Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 2014–17599 Filed 7–24–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 9110–04–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION**
**AGENCY**

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0888; EPA–R05– OAR–2011–0969; EPA–R05–OAR–2012–**  **0991; EPA–R05–OAR–2013–0435; FRL– 9914–21–Region 5]** 

**Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio;**  **Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2008 Lead, 2008 Ozone, 2010 NO**  2 **, and 2010 SO**  2 **NAAQS**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve elements of state implementation plan (SIP) submissions from Ohio regarding the infrastructure requirements of section 110 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 2008 lead (Pb), 2008 ozone, 2010 nitrogen dioxide (NO 2), and 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO 2) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The infrastructure requirements are designed to ensure that the structural components of each state’s air quality management program are adequate to meet the state’s responsibilities under the CAA.

**DATES :**  Comments must be received on or before August 25, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– OAR–2011–0888 (2008 Pb infrastructure elements), EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0969 (2008 ozone infrastructure elements), EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0991 (2010 NO 2 infrastructure elements), or EPA–R05– OAR–2013–0435 (2010 SO 2 infrastructure elements) by one of the following methods:

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting

comments.

2. Email: aburano.douglas@epa.gov.

3. Fax: (312) 408–2279.

4. Mail: Douglas Aburano, Chief, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604.

5. Hand Delivery: Douglas Aburano, Chief, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.

Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID. EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0888 (2008 Pb infrastructure elements), EPA– R05–OAR–2011–0969 (2008 ozone infrastructure elements), EPA–R05– OAR–2012–0991 (2010 NO 2 infrastructure elements), or EPA–R05– OAR–2013–0435 (2010 SO 2 infrastructure elements). 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 whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which means 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 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, EPA recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or

viruses.

Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We recommend that you telephone Andy Chang, Environmental Engineer, at (312) 886– 0258 before visiting the Region 5 office.

**FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT :**  Andy Chang, Environmental Engineer, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–0258, chang.andy@epa.gov

.

**SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION :**  Throughout this document whenever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information section is arranged as follows:

I. What should I consider as I prepare my
comments for EPA? II. What is the background of these SIP
submissions?
A. What state SIP submissions does this

rulemaking address? B. Why did the state make these SIP

submissions? C. What is the scope of this rulemaking?


### 43339 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 143 / Friday, July 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules

1 PM 2.5 refers to particulate matter of 2.5 microns or less in diameter, oftentimes referred to as ‘‘fine’’ particles. III. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate
these SIP submissions?
IV. What is the result of EPA’s review of
these SIP submissions? A. Section 110(a)(2)(A)—Emission Limits

and Other Control Measures B. Section 110(a)(2)(B)—Ambient Air

Quality Monitoring/Data System C. Section 110(a)(2)(C)—Program for

Enforcement of Control Measures; PSD D. Section 110(a)(2)(D)—Interstate

Transport E. Section 110(a)(2)(E)—Adequate

Resources F. Section 110(a)(2)(F)—Stationary Source

Monitoring System G. Section 110(a)(2)(G)—Emergency

Powers H. Section 110(a)(2)(H)—Future SIP

Revisions I. Section 110(a)(2)(I)—Nonattainment Area

Plan or Plan Revisions under Part D J. Section 110(a)(2)(J)—Consultation With

Government Officials; Public Notifications; PSD; Visibility Protection K. Section 110(a)(2)(K)—Air Quality

Modeling/Data L. Section 110(a)(2)(L)—Permitting Fees M. Section 110(a)(2)(M)—Consultation/

Participation by Affected Local Entities V. What action is EPA taking? VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

When submitting comments,
remember to:

1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date, and page number).

2. Follow directions—EPA may ask you to respond to specific questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.

3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and substitute language for your requested changes.

4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information and/ or data that you used.

5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be reproduced.

6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and suggest
alternatives.

7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of profanity or personal threats.

8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period
deadline identified.

II. What is the background of these SIP
submissions?

A. What state SIP submissions does this rulemaking address?

This rulemaking addresses
submissions from the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA). The state submitted its infrastructure SIP for each NAAQS on the following dates: 2008 Pb—October 12, 2011, and supplemented on June 7, 2013; 2008 ozone—December 27, 2012, and supplemented on June 7, 2013;

2010 NO 2—February 8, 2013, and supplemented on February 25, 2013, and June 7, 2013; and, 2010 SO 2—June
7, 2013.

B. Why did the state make these SIP
submissions?

Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA, states are required to submit
infrastructure SIPs to ensure that their SIPs provide for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS, including the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 , and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS. These submissions must contain any revisions needed for meeting the applicable SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2), or certifications that their existing SIPs for the NAAQS already meet those requirements.

EPA highlighted this statutory requirement in an October 2, 2007, guidance document entitled ‘‘Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997
8-hour Ozone and PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards’’ (2007 Memo). On September 25, 2009, EPA issued an additional guidance document pertaining to the 2006 PM 2.5 1 NAAQS
entitled ‘‘Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle (PM 2.5 ) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)’’ (2009 Memo), followed by the October 14, 2011,
‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2008 Lead (Pb) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)’’ (2011 Memo). Most recently,
EPA issued ‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and (2)’’ on September 13, 2013 (2013 Memo).

The SIP submissions referenced in this rulemaking pertain to the applicable requirements of section 110(a)(1) and (2), and address the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 , and 2010

SO 2 NAAQS. To the extent that the prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) program is comprehensive and non-NAAQS specific, a narrow evaluation of other NAAQS, such as the
1997 8-hour ozone and 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS will be included in the appropriate sections.

C. What is the scope of this rulemaking?

EPA is acting upon the SIP
submissions from Ohio that address the infrastructure requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 , and

2010 SO 2 NAAQS. The requirement for
states to make a SIP submission of this type arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states
must make SIP submissions ‘‘within 3 years (or such shorter period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a national primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision thereof),’’ and these SIP submissions are to provide for the ‘‘implementation, maintenance, and enforcement’’ of such NAAQS. The statute directly imposes on states the duty to make these SIP submissions, and the requirement to make the submissions is not conditioned upon EPA’s taking any action other than promulgating a new or revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific elements that ‘‘[e]ach such plan’’ submission must address.

EPA has historically referred to these SIP submissions made for the purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) as
‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ submissions. Although the term ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses the term to distinguish this particular type of SIP submission from submissions that are intended to satisfy other SIP requirements under the CAA,
such as ‘‘nonattainment SIP’’ or ‘‘attainment plan SIP’’ submissions to address the nonattainment planning requirements of part D of title I of the CAA, ‘‘regional haze SIP’’ submissions required by EPA rule to address the visibility protection requirements of CAA section 169A, and nonattainment new source review (NNSR) permit program submissions to address the permit requirements of CAA, title I, part

D.This rulemaking will not cover three substantive areas that are not integral to acting on a state’s infrastructure SIP submission: (i) Existing provisions related to excess emissions during periods of start-up, shutdown, or malfunction at sources, that may be contrary to the CAA and EPA’s policies addressing such excess emissions (‘‘SSM’’); (ii) existing provisions related
to ‘‘director’s variance’’ or ‘‘director’s discretion’’ that purport to permit revisions to SIP approved emissions limits with limited public process or without requiring further approval by


### 43340 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 143 / Friday, July 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules

2 See, e.g., EPA’s 73 FR 66964 at 67034, final rule on ‘‘National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Lead.’’ 3 PM 10 refers to particles with diameters between 2.5 and 10 microns, oftentimes referred to as ‘‘coarse’’ particles.

4 In EPA’s April 28, 2011, proposed rulemaking
for infrastructure SIPS for the 1997 ozone and PM 2.5 NAAQS, we stated that each state’s PSD program must meet applicable requirements for evaluation of all regulated NSR pollutants in PSD permits ( see 76 FR 23757 at 23760). This view was reiterated in EPA’s August 2, 2012, proposed rulemaking for
infrastructure SIPs for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS ( see 77 FR 45992 at 45998). In other words, if a state lacks provisions needed to adequately address Pb,

NO X as a precursor to ozone, PM 2.5 precursors, PM 2.5 and PM 10 condensables, PM 2.5 increments, or the Federal GHG permitting thresholds, the provisions of section 110(a)(2)(C) requiring a suitable PSD permitting program must be considered not to be met irrespective of the NAAQS that triggered the requirement to submit an infrastructure SIP, including the 2008 Pb NAAQS. EPA, that may be contrary to the CAA (collectively referenced as ‘‘director’s discretion’’); and, (iii) existing provisions for PSD programs that may
be inconsistent with current requirements of EPA’s ‘‘Final NSR Improvement Rule,’’ 67 FR 80186 (December 31, 2002), as amended by 72 FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (‘‘NSR Reform’’). Instead, EPA has the authority to address each one of these substantive areas in separate rulemaking. A detailed history, interpretation, and rationale related to infrastructure SIP requirements can be found in EPA’s May 13, 2014, proposed rule entitled, ‘‘Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 2008 Lead NAAQS’’ in the section, ‘‘What is the scope of this rulemaking?’’ ( see 79 FR 27241 at 27242–27245).

III. What guidance is EPA using to
evaluate these SIP submissions?

EPA’s guidance for these
infrastructure SIP submissions is
embodied in the 2007 Memo. Specifically, attachment A of the 2007 Memo (Required Section 110 SIP Elements) identifies the statutory
elements that states need to submit in order to satisfy the requirements for an
infrastructure SIP submission. The 2009 Memo was issued to provide additional guidance for certain elements to meet the requirements of section 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA, and the 2011 Memo provides guidance specific to the 2008 Pb NAAQS. Lastly, the 2013 Memo identifies and further clarifies aspects of infrastructure SIPs that are not NAAQS specific.

IV. What is the result of EPA’s review
of these SIP submissions?

As noted in the 2011 Memo and reiterated in the 2013 Memo, pursuant to section 110(a), states must provide reasonable notice and opportunity for public hearing for all infrastructure SIP submissions. Ohio EPA provided the opportunity for public comment for each NAAQS that ended on the following dates: 2008 Pb—October 11, 2011; 2008 ozone—December 21, 2012;

2010 NO 2—February 19, 2013; and,

2010 SO 2—June 5, 2013. The state did not receive any comments during the comment periods.

EPA is also soliciting comment on our
evaluation of the state’s infrastructure
SIP submissions in this notice of proposed rulemaking. Ohio provided detailed synopses of how various components of its SIP meet each of the requirements in section 110(a)(2) for the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 , and

2010 SO 2 NAAQS, as applicable. The following review evaluates the state’s
submissions.

A. Section 110(a)(2)(A)—Emission
Limits and Other Control Measures

This section requires SIPs to include
enforceable emission limits and other control measures, means or techniques, schedules for compliance, and other related matters. However, EPA has long interpreted emission limits and control measures for attaining the standards as being due when nonattainment planning requirements are due. 2 In the context of an infrastructure SIP, EPA is not evaluating the existing SIP provisions for this purpose. Instead, EPA is only evaluating whether the
state’s SIP has basic structural provisions for the implementation of the NAAQS.

Ohio Revised Code (ORC) 3704.03 provides the Director of Ohio EPA with the authority to develop rules and regulations necessary to meet state and Federal ambient air quality standards. Ohio also has SIP approved provisions for specific pollutants. For example, Ohio Administrative Code (OAC) 3745– 71 regulates provides for the direct regulation of Pb emissions, and OAC 3745–18 provides for the direct regulation of SO 2 emissions. EPA proposes that Ohio has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) with respect to the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 , and

2010 SO 2 NAAQS.

As previously noted, EPA is not proposing at this time to approve or disapprove any existing state provisions
or rules related to SSM or director’s
discretion in the context of section 110(a)(2)(A).

B. Section 110(a)(2)(B)—Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System

This section requires SIPs to include provisions to provide for establishing and operating ambient air quality monitors, collecting and analyzing ambient air quality data, and making these data available to EPA upon request. This review of the annual monitoring plan includes EPA’s determination that the state: (i) Monitors air quality at appropriate locationsthroughout the state using EPAapproved Federal Reference Methods or Federal Equivalent Method monitors; (ii) submits data to EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS) in a timely manner; and, (iii) provides EPA Regional Offices with prior notification of any planned changes to monitoring sites or the network plan.

Ohio EPA continues to operate a monitoring network, and EPA approved the state’s 2014 Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan for Pb, ozone, NO 2 , and

SO 2 on October 30, 2013. Furthermore, Ohio EPA populates AQS with air quality monitoring data in a timely manner, and provides EPA with prior notification when considering a change to its monitoring network or plan. EPA proposes that Ohio has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(B) with respect to the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 , and

2010 SO 2 NAAQS.

C. Section 110(a)(2)(C)—Program for Enforcement of Control Measures; PSD

States are required to include a program providing for enforcement of all SIP measures and the regulation of
construction of new or modified stationary sources to meet NSR requirements under PSD and NNSR programs. Part C of the CAA (sections 160–169B) addresses PSD, while part D of the CAA (sections 171–193) addresses NNSR requirements.

The evaluation of each state’s submission addressing the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) covers: (i) Enforcement of SIP measures; (ii) PSD program for the 2008 Pb NAAQS; (iii) PSD provisions that explicitly identify oxides of nitrogen (NO X) as a precursor to ozone in the PSD program; (iv) identification of precursors to PM 2.5 and
the identification of PM 2.5 and PM 10 3 condensables in the PSD program; (v)

PM 2.5 increments in the PSD program; and (vi) greenhouse gas (GHG) permitting and the ‘‘Tailoring Rule.’’ 4

In this rulemaking, we are evaluating Ohio EPA’s submissions with respect to
the enforcement of SIP measures. However, we are not taking action on
the state’s satisfaction of the various PSD and GHG permitting requirements.


### 43341 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 143 / Friday, July 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules

5 The level of the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS for is 100 parts per billion (ppb) and the form is the 3-year average of the annual 98th percentile of the daily 1-hour maximum. For the most recent design values, see http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/
values.html

. Instead, EPA will evaluate Ohio’s compliance with each of these requirements in a separate rulemaking.

Ohio EPA staffs and implements an enforcement program. ORC 3704.03 provides the Director of Ohio EPA with the authority to implement the enforcement program as well as NSR provisions within OAC 3745–31. Ohio EPA compiles all air pollution control enforcement settlements in the state, and makes them available for public review on its Web site. EPA proposes
that Ohio has met the enforcement of SIP measures requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 , and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS.

For the purposes of the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 , and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS infrastructure SIPs, EPA reiterates that NSR reform regulations are not in the scope of these actions. Therefore, we are not taking action on existing NSR reform regulations for Ohio. To address the pre-construction regulation of the
modification and construction of minor stationary sources and minor modifications of major stationary sources, an infrastructure SIP submission should identify the existing EPA-approved SIP provisions and/or include new provisions that govern the minor source pre-construction program that regulates emissions of the relevant NAAQS pollutants. EPA approved Ohio’s minor NSR program on January 22, 2003 (68 FR 2909). Since this date,
Ohio EPA and EPA have relied on the existing minor NSR program to ensure
that new and modified sources not captured by the major NSR permitting programs do not interfere with
attainment and maintenance of the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 , and 2010

SO 2 NAAQS.

Certain sub-elements in this section overlap with elements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and section 110(a)(2)(J).
These links will be discussed in the appropriate areas below.

D. Section 110(a)(2)(D)—Interstate Transport

Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires SIPs to include provisions prohibiting any source or other type of emissions activity in one state from contributing significantly to nonattainment, or interfering with maintenance, of the NAAQS in another state.

With respect to the 2008 Pb NAAQS, the 2011 Memo notes that the physical properties of Pb prevent it from experiencing the same travel or formation phenomena as PM 2.5 or ozone. Specifically, there is a sharp
decrease in Pb concentrations as the
distance from a Pb source increases. Accordingly, it may be possible for a
source in a state to emit Pb at a location and in such quantities that contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interference with maintenance by, any other state. However, EPA anticipates that this would be a rare situation, e.g., sources emitting large quantities of Pb are in close proximity to state boundaries. The 2011 Memo suggests that the applicable interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) can be met through a state’s assessment
as to whether or not emissions from Pb sources located in close proximity to its borders have emissions that impact a neighboring state such that they contribute significantly to
nonattainment or interfere with maintenance in that state. One way that a state’s conclusion could be supported is by the technical support documents used for initial area designations for Pb.

Ohio’s infrastructure SIP submission for the 2008 Pb NAAQS notes that there are three areas designated as nonattainment for the 2008 Pb NAAQS located in portions of Cuyahoga County, Fulton County, and Logan County ( see 75 FR 71033). None of these areas are located in close proximity to any of Ohio’s border, and Ohio EPA provided a map of Pb-emitting sources in the state showing that sources emitting 0.5 tpy or above are not in close proximity to any
state borders. EPA’s final technical support documents for the
nonattainment areas located in Ohio support the conclusion that the ambient concentration of Pb are not expected to exceed the NAAQS outside of the
nonattainment boundaries. Furthermore, EPA does not believe that
the elevated levels of ambient Pb concentrations in Cuyahoga County, Fulton County, or Logan County (or emissions from any other county) would
cause or contribute to a violation of the 2008 Pb NAAQS in a neighboring state or create a situation in a neighboring
state where maintenance of the 2008 Pb NAAQS was not possible. Therefore, EPA proposes that Ohio has met this set of requirements related to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2008 Pb NAAQS.

On February 17, 2012, EPA promulgated designations for the 2010

NO 2 NAAQS, stating, ‘‘The EPA is designating areas as ‘‘unclassifiable/
attainment’’ to mean that available
information does not indicate that the air quality in these areas exceeds the

2010 NO 2 NAAQS’’ ( see 77 FR 9532). For comparison purposes, EPA examined the design values 5 from NO 2 monitors in Ohio and surrounding states. The highest design value based
on data collected between 2010 and 2012 was 65 ppb at a monitor in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. EPA
believes that with the continuedimplementation of the state’s SIPapproved PSD and NNSR regulations found in OAC 3745–31, these low
monitored values of NO 2 will continue in and around Ohio. In other words, the

NO 2 emissions from Ohio are not expected to cause or contribute to a
violation of the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS in another state, and these emissions not likely to interfere with the maintenance
of the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS in another state. Therefore, EPA proposes that Ohio has met this set of requirements related to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2010

NO 2 NAAQS.

In this rulemaking, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove Ohio’s compliance with section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the
2008 ozone and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS. Instead, we will address the state’s satisfaction of these requirements with respect to these two NAAQS in a separate rulemaking.

Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requires SIPs to include provisions prohibiting any source or other type of emissions activity in one state from interfering with measures required to prevent significant deterioration of air quality or to protect visibility in another state. As previously noted, EPA will evaluate Ohio’s compliance with the various PSD
and GHG infrastructure SIP requirements in a separate rulemaking.

States also have an obligation to
ensure that sources located in
nonattainment areas do not interfere with a neighboring state’s PSD program. One way that this requirement can be satisfied is through an NNSR program
consistent with the CAA that addresses any pollutants for which there is a designated nonattainment area within
the state.

Ohio’s EPA-approved NNSR regulations can be found in OAC 3745– 31–21; these regulations contain provisions for how the state must treat
and control sources in nonattainment areas, consistent with 40 CFR 51.165, or appendix S to 40 CFR 51. In this rulemaking, EPA is taking no action on this set of requirements under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Instead, we will
address Ohio’s satisfaction of these provisions in a separate rulemaking.

With regard to the applicable requirements for visibility protection of


### 43342 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 143 / Friday, July 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), states are subject to visibility and regional haze program requirements under part C of the CAA (which includes sections 169A and 169B). The 2009 Memo, the 2011 Memo, and 2013 Memo state that these requirements can be satisfied by an approved SIP addressing reasonably attributable visibility impairment, if required, or an approved SIP addressing regional haze.

Alternatively, the 2011 Memo states that most, if not all, Pb stationary
sources are located at distances from Class I areas such that visibility impacts would be negligible. Although Pb can be a component of coarse and fine particles, it generally comprises a small
fraction. When EPA evaluated the extentthat Pb could impact visibility, Pbrelated visibility impacts were found to be insignificant (e.g., less than 0.10%). Therefore, EPA anticipates that Pb emissions will contribute only negligibly to visibility impairment at Class I areas, and states can include an assessment as to this assumption in
their submissions. The closest Class I area (Otter Creek Wilderness, West Virginia) is located approximately 150 miles from the Ohio-West Virginia border, and EPA anticipates that this area (or any other Class I area) would experience less than 0.10% of adverse visibility impact from any Pb-emitting source in Ohio. As previously noted, EPA’s final technical support
documents for the nonattainment areas located in Ohio support the conclusion
that the ambient concentration of Pb are not expected to exceed the NAAQS
outside of the nonattainment boundaries. EPA proposes that Ohio has
met this set of infrastructure SIP requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 2008 Pb NAAQS.

In this rulemaking, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove Ohio’s satisfaction of the visibility protection requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 2008 ozone,

2010 NO 2 , and 2010 SO 2 NAAQs. Instead, EPA will evaluate Ohio’s compliance with these requirements in a separate rulemaking.

Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires each SIP to contain adequate provisions requiring compliance with the applicable requirements of section 126 and section 115 (relating to interstate and international pollution abatement, respectively).

Section 126(a) requires new or modified sources to notify neighboring states of potential impacts from the source. The statute does not specify the method by which the source should provide the notification. States with SIP-approved PSD programs must have a provision requiring such notification by new or modified sources. A lack of such a requirement in state rules would be grounds for disapproval of this
element.

Ohio has provisions in its EPAapproved PSD program that require new or modified sources to notify neighboring states of potential negative air quality impacts. The state’s submissions reference these provisions as being adequate to meet the requirements of section 126(a). EPA proposes that Ohio has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 126(a) with respect to the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 , and 2010

SO 2 NAAQS. Ohio has no obligations under any other section of section 126.

The infrastructure SIP submissions
from Ohio affirm that it does not have pending obligations under section 115. Therefore, EPA is proposing that Ohio has the applicable infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii)
related to section 115 of the CAA (international pollution abatement) for the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 , and

2010 SO 2 NAAQS.

E. Section 110(a)(2)(E)—Adequate

Resources

This section requires each state to provide for adequate personnel, funding, and legal authority under state law to carry out its SIP, and related issues. Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) also requires each state to comply with the requirements respecting state boards
under section 128.

Sub-element 1: Adequate personnel, funding, and legal authority under state law to carry out its SIP, and related

issues. At the time of each of its submissions, Ohio EPA included its most recent biennial budget with its submittal, which details the funding sources and program priorities addressing the required SIP programs. Ohio EPA has routinely demonstrated that it retains adequate personnel to administer its air quality management program, and Ohio’s environmental performance partnership agreement with EPA documents certain funding and personnel levels at Ohio EPA. As discussed in previous sections, ORC 3704.03 provides the legal authority under state law to carry out the SIP. EPA proposes that Ohio has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(E) with respect to the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010

NO 2, and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS.

Sub-element 2: State board requirements under section 128 of the

CAA. Section 110(a)(2)(E) also requires each SIP to contain provisions that comply with the state board requirements of section 128 of the CAA. That provision contains two explicit requirements: (i) That any board or body which approves permits or enforcement orders under this chapter shall have at least a majority of members who represent the public interest and do not derive any significant portion of their income from persons subject to permits
and enforcement orders under this chapter, and (ii) that any potential conflicts of interest by members of such board or body or the head of an executive agency with similar powers be adequately disclosed.

On June 7, 2013, Ohio EPA provided a supplemental submission to its 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, and 2010 NO 2 as part of its infrastructure SIP submission for
the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS clarifying that the
state does not have a board that has the authority to approve enforcement orders or permitting actions as outlined in section 128(a)(1) of the CAA; instead, this authority rests with the Director of Ohio EPA. Therefore, section 128(a)(1) of the CAA is not applicable in Ohio.

Under section 128(a)(2), the head of the executive agency with the power to approve enforcement orders or permits must adequately disclose any potential conflicts of interest. In its June 7, 2013, submission, Ohio EPA notes that EPA has previously approved provisions into Ohio’s SIP addressing these requirements ( see 46 FR 57490). Notably, ORC 102: Public Officers— Ethics contains provisions that require the Director of Ohio EPA (and his/her delegate) to file an annual statement with the ethics committee including potential conflicts of interest; furthermore, this annual filing is subject to public inspection. Therefore, EPA proposes that Ohio has met the applicable infrastructure SIP requirements for this section of 110(a)(2)(E) for the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone,

2010 NO 2, and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS.

F. Section 110(a)(2)(F)—Stationary Source Monitoring System

States must establish a system to monitor emissions from stationary sources and submit periodic emissions reports. Each plan shall also require the installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment, and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or operators of stationary sources to monitor emissions from such sources. The state plan shall also require periodic reports on the
nature and amounts of emissions and
emissions-related data from such sources, and correlation of such reports by each state agency with any emission
limitations or standards established pursuant to this chapter. Lastly, the


### 43343 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 143 / Friday, July 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules

6 See appendix R to 40 CFR part 50 for data handling conventions and computations necessary for determining when the NAAQS are met. 7 See http://www.epa.ohio.gov/dapc/sip/sip.aspx. reports shall be available at reasonable times for public inspection.

Ohio EPA district offices and local air agencies are currently required to witness 50% of all source testing and review 100% of all tests. EPA-approved
rules in OAC 3745–15 contain provisions for the submission of emissions reports, and OAC 3745–77 and OAC 3745–31 provide requirements for recordkeeping by sources. EPA recognizes that Ohio has routinely submitted quality assured analyses and data for publication, and therefore proposes that Ohio has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F) with respect to the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 , and

2010 SO 2 NAAQS.

G. Section 110(a)(2)(G)—Emergency

Powers

This section requires that a plan provide for authority that is analogous to what is provided in section 303 of the CAA, and adequate contingency plans to implement such authority. The 2013
Memo states that infrastructure SIP submissions should specify authority, rested in an appropriate official, to restrain any source from causing or contributing to emissions which present
an imminent and substantial endangerment to public health or welfare, or the environment.

The regulations at OAC 3745–25 contain provisions which allow the
Director of Ohio EPA to determine the conditions that comprise air pollution alerts, warnings, and emergencies. Moreover, the rules contained in OAC 3745–25 provide the requirement to implement emergency action plans in the event of an air quality alert or higher. EPA proposes that Ohio has met the applicable infrastructure SIP requirements for this portion of section 110(a)(2)(G) with respect to the 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 , and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS.

Specific to Pb as indicated in the 2011 Memo, EPA believes that the central components of a contingency plan for the 2008 Pb NAAQS would be to reduce
emissions from the source at issue and to communicate with the public as needed. Where a state believes, based on its inventory of Pb sources and historic monitoring data that it does not need a more specific contingency plan beyond having authority to restrain any source from causing or contributing to an
imminent and substantial endangerment, then the state could provide such a detailed rationale in place of a specific contingency plan.

EPA has reviewed historic data at Pb monitoring sites throughout Ohio, and believes that a specific contingency plan beyond having authority to restrain any source from causing or contributing to
an imminent and substantial endangerment is not necessary at this time. For example, one way to quantify the possibility of imminent and substantial endangerment in this context would be a daily monitored value for Pb that could by itself cause a violation of the 2008 Pb NAAQS. 6 EPA has reviewed data from 2011–2013 (the most recent three calendar year block of complete data) and observes that no such daily monitored value

exists.

As described in the section detailing interstate transport of Pb, EPA does not anticipate other areas in Ohio needing specific contingency measures due to low Pb emissions. In conjunction with OAC 3745–25 as described above, EPA proposes that Ohio has met the applicable infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(G) related to contingency measures for the 2008 Pb NAAQS.

H. Section 110(a)(2)(H)—Future SIP

Revisions

This section requires states to have the authority to revise their SIPs in response to changes in the NAAQS, availability of improved methods for attaining the NAAQS, or to an EPA finding that the SIP is substantially inadequate.

As previously mentioned, ORC 3704.03 provides the Director of Ohio EPA with the authority to develop rules and regulations necessary to meet ambient air quality standards in all areas in the state as expeditiously as practicable, but not later than any deadlines applicable under the CAA. ORC 3704.03 also provides the Director of Ohio EPA with the authority to develop programs for the prevention, and abatement of air pollution. EPA proposes that Ohio has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(H) with respect to the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 , and

2010 SO 2 NAAQS.

I. Section 110(a)(2)(I)—Nonattainment
Area Plan or Plan Revisions Under Part

D
The CAA requires that each plan or plan revision for an area designated as
a nonattainment area meet the applicable requirements of part D of the
CAA. Part D relates to nonattainment

areas.

EPA has determined that section 110(a)(2)(I) is not applicable to the infrastructure SIP process. Instead, EPA takes action on part D attainment plans through separate processes.

J. Section 110(a)(2)(J)—Consultation With Government Officials; Public Notifications; PSD; Visibility Protection

The evaluation of the submissions from Ohio with respect to the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(J) are
described below.

Sub-element 1: Consultation with government officials. States must provide a process for consultation with local governments and Federal Land Managers (FLMs) carrying out NAAQS implementation requirements.

Ohio EPA actively participates in the regional planning efforts that include both the state rule developers as well as representatives from the FLMs and other
affected stakeholders. The FLMs are also included in Ohio EPA’s interested party lists which provide announcements of draft and proposed rule packages. OAC 3745–31–06 is a SIP-approved rule which requires notification and the availability of public participation related to NSR actions; notification is provided to the general public, executives of the city or county where the source is located, other state or local air pollution control agencies, regional land use planning agencies, and FLMs. OAC 3704.03(K) is a SIP-approved rule that which requires giving reasonable public notice and conducting public hearings on any plans for the prevention, control, and abatement of air pollution that the Director of Ohio EPA is required to submit to EPA. Additionally, Ohio is an active member of the Lake Michigan Air Director’s Consortium (LADCO). Therefore, EPA proposes that Ohio has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(J) with respect to the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010

NO 2 , and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS.

Sub-element 2: Public notification. Section 110(a)(2)(J) also requires states to notify the public if NAAQS are
exceeded in an area and must enhance public awareness of measures that can be taken to prevent exceedances.

Ohio EPA maintains portions of its Web site specifically for issues related to the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 , and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS. 7 The information contained in these pages includes background on the health effects of each of these pollutants, the areas of most concern, and the strategies that the state has been taking to address the elevated levels, if any, of the pollutants. Ohio EPA also actively populates EPA’s AIRNOW program, and


### 43344 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 143 / Friday, July 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules

prepares annual data reports from its complete monitoring network. EPA proposes that Ohio has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(J) with respect to the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010

NO 2 , and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS.

Sub-element 3: PSD. States must meet applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) related to PSD. Ohio’s PSD program in the context of infrastructure SIPs has already been discussed in the paragraphs addressing section 110(a)(2)(C) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). EPA will evaluate Ohio’s compliance with
the various PSD and GHG infrastructure SIP requirements in a separate rulemaking.

Sub-element 4: Visibility protection. With regard to the applicable requirements for visibility protection, states are subject to visibility and regional haze program requirements under part C of the CAA (which includes sections 169A and 169B). In
the event of the establishment of a new NAAQS, however, the visibility and regional haze program requirements under part C do not change. Thus, we find that there is no new visibility obligation ‘‘triggered’’ under section 110(a)(2)(J) when a new NAAQS becomes effective. In other words, the visibility protection requirements of section 110(a)(2)(J) are not germane to infrastructure SIPs for the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2, and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS.

K. Section 110(a)(2)(K)—Air Quality Modeling/Data

SIPs must provide for performing air quality modeling for predicting effects on air quality of emissions from any NAAQS pollutant and submission of such data to EPA upon request.

Ohio EPA reviews the potential impact of major and some minor new sources, consistent with 40 CFR part 51, appendix W, ‘‘Guidelines on Air Quality Models,’’ as well as Ohio EPA Engineering Guide 69. These modeling data are available to EPA upon request. The regulatory requirements related toPSD modeling can be found in SIPapproved rule OAC 3745–31–18, and Ohio’s authority to require modeling conducted by other entities, e.g., applicants, and the state’s authority to perform modeling for attainment
demonstrations can be found in SIPapproved ORC 3704.03. The state also
collaborates with LADCO and EPA in order to perform modeling. EPA proposes that Ohio has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(K) with respect to the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 , and

2010 SO 2 NAAQS.

L. Section 110(a)(2)(L)—Permitting Fees

This section requires SIPs to mandate each major stationary source to pay permitting fees to cover the cost of reviewing, approving, implementing, and enforcing a permit.

Ohio EPA implements and operates the title V permit program, which EPA approved on August 15, 1995 (60 FR 42045); revisions to the program were approved on November 20, 2003 (68 FR 65401). Additional rules that contain the provisions, requirements, and
structures associated with the costs for reviewing, approving, implementing, and enforcing various types of permits can be found in ORC 3745.11. EPA proposes that Ohio has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(L) for the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 , and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS.

M. Section 110(a)(2)(M)—Consultation/ Participation by Affected Local Entities

States must consult with and allow participation from local political subdivisions affected by the SIP.

Ohio EPA follows approved procedures for allowing public participation, consistent with OAC 3745–47, which is part of the approved
SIP. Consultation with local governments is authorized through ORC 3704.03(B). Ohio EPA provides a public participation process for all
stakeholders that includes a minimum of a 30-day comment period and a public hearing for all SIP related actions. EPA proposes that Ohio has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(M) with respect to the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 , and

2010 SO 2 NAAQS.

V. What action is EPA taking?

EPA is proposing to approve most
elements of submissions from Ohio EPA certifying that its current SIP is sufficient to meet the required
infrastructure elements under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2008 Pb, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO 2 , and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS. EPA’s proposed actions for the
state’s satisfaction of infrastructure SIP requirements, by element of section 110(a)(2) and NAAQS, are contained in
the table below.

Element 2008 Pb 2008 Ozone 2010 NO 2 2010 SO 2

(A): Emission limits and other control measures ............................................................................ A A A A (B): Ambient air quality monitoring and data system ...................................................................... A A A A (C)1: Enforcement of SIP measures .............................................................................................. . A A A A (C)2: PSD program for Pb ....................................................................................................... ........ NA NA NA NA (C)3: NO X as a precursor to ozone for PSD ................................................................................... NA NA NA NA (C)4: PM 2.5 Precursors/PM 2.5 and PM 10 condensables for PSD ..................................................... NA NA NA NA (C)5: PM 2.5 Increments .................................................................................................................... N A NA NA NA (C)5: GHG permitting thresholds in PSD regulations ...................................................................... NA NA N A NA (D)1: Contribute to nonattainment/interfere with maintenance of NAAQS ..................................... A NA A NA (D)2: PSD ...................................................................................................................... .................. NA NA NA NA (D)3: Visibility Protection .................................................................................................... ............. A NA NA NA (D)4: Interstate Pollution Abatement ........................................................................................... .... A A A A (D)5: International Pollution Abatement ........................................................................................ .. A A A A (E): Adequate resources ........................................................................................................ .......... A A A A (E): State boards .............................................................................................................. ............... A A A A (F): Stationary source monitoring system ....................................................................................... A A A A (G): Emergency power ........................................................................................................... ......... A A A A (H): Future SIP revisions ...................................................................................................... ........... A A A A (I): Nonattainment area plan or plan revisions under part D .......................................................... NA NA NA N A (J)1: Consultation with government officials ................................................................................... . A A A A (J)2: Public notification ...................................................................................................... .............. A A A A (J)3: PSD ...................................................................................................................... ................... NA NA NA NA (J)4: Visibility protection .................................................................................................... ............... + + + + (K): Air quality modeling and data ............................................................................................. ...... A A A A (L): Permitting fees ........................................................................................................... ............... A A A A


### 43345 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 143 / Friday, July 25, 2014 / Proposed Rules

Element 2008 Pb 2008 Ozone 2010 NO 2 2010 SO 2

(M): Consultation and participation by affected local entities ......................................................... A A A A

In the above table, the key is as
follows: A Approve NA No Action/Separate Rulemaking + Not germane to infrastructure SIPs

VI. Statutory and Executive Order

Reviews

Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s role is to approve State choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this action merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. For that reason, this action:

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive 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).

In addition, this rule does not have Tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on Tribal governments or preempt
Tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Ozone, Nitrogen dioxide, Sulfur dioxide, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Dated: July 14, 2014.
Susan Hedman, Regional Administrator, Region 5.

[FR Doc. 2014–17591 Filed 7–24–14; 8:45 am]

**BILLING CODE 6560–50–P**

**ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION**
**AGENCY**

**40 CFR Part 52**

**[EPA–R10–OAR–2014–0343: FRL -9914–34- Region 10]** 

**Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Washington:** 
**Nonattainment New Source Review**

**AGENCY :**  Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

**ACTION :**  Proposed rule.

**SUMMARY :**  The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve revisions to the Washington State Implementation Plan (SIP) that were submitted by the Department of Ecology (Ecology) on January 27, 2014. These revisions update the preconstruction permitting regulations for large industrial (major source) facilities located in designated nonattainment areas, referred to as the Nonattainment New Source Review (major nonattainment NSR or major NNSR) program. While these revisions update Ecology’s major NNSR program generally, the most significant change is the incorporation of regulations to implement major NNSR for fine particulate matter, particles with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5 ). The major NNSR program is designed to ensure that major stationary sources of air pollution are constructed or
modified in a manner that is consistent
with attainment and maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).

**DATES :**  Comments must be received on or before August 25, 2014.

**ADDRESSES :**  Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– OAR–2014–0343, by any of the following methods:

A. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting

comments.

B. Mail: Jeff Hunt, EPA Region 10, Office of Air, Waste and Toxics (AWT– 107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101.

C. Email: R10-Public

_ Comments@

epa.gov.

D. Hand Delivery: EPA Region 10 Mailroom, 9th Floor, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101. Attention: Jeff Hunt, Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, AWT—107. Such deliveries are only accepted during normal hours of operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.

Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R10–OAR–2014– 0343. 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 that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov
or email. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
which means 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 and with any disk or CD–ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read your