54828 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 173 / Friday, September 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

Dated: August 28, 2013. 

Ron Curry, 

Regional Administrator, Region 6. 

[FR Doc. 2013–21777 Filed 9–5–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2011–0728; FRL–9900–65– 

Region 8] 

Promulgation of State Implementation 

Plan Revisions; Infrastructure 

Requirements for the 1997 and 2006 

PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards; Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration; Wyoming 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to partially 

approve and partially disapprove State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submissions 

from the State of Wyoming to 

demonstrate that the SIP meets the 

infrastructure requirements of the Clean 

Air Act (CAA) for the National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) 

promulgated for particulate matter less 

than or equal to 2.5 micrometers (mm) in 

diameter (PM2.5) on July 18, 1997 and on 

October 17, 2006. The CAA requires that 

each state, after a new or revised 

NAAQS is promulgated, review their 

SIP to ensure that they meet the 

requirements of the ‘‘infrastructure 

elements’’ necessary to implement the 

new or revised NAAQS. Wyoming 

provided infrastructure submissions for 

the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS on 

March 26, 2008 and August 19, 2011, 

respectively. EPA does not propose to 

act on certain portions of the 

submissions for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS 

that are intended to meet requirements 

related to interstate transport of air 

pollution. EPA will act on the 

remainder of the submissions in a 

separate action. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before September 27, 

2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08– 

OAR–2011–0728, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: ayala.kathy@epa.gov 

• Fax: (303) 312–6064 (please alert 

the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing 

comments). 

• Mail: Director, Air Program, 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P–AR, 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129. 

• Hand Delivery: Director, Air 

Program, Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P– 

AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, 

Colorado 80202–1129. Such deliveries 

are only accepted Monday through 

Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

federal holidays. Special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R08–OAR–2011– 

0728. 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. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http://

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

For additional instructions on 

submitting comments, go to section I, 

General Information, of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Program, Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129. EPA requests that if at all 

possible, you contact the individual 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section to view the hard copy 

of the docket. You may view the hard 

copy of the docket Monday through 

Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding 

federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kathy Ayala, Air Program, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P–AR, 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129. 303–312–6142, 

ayala.kathy@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Definitions 

For the purpose of this document, we are 

giving meaning to certain words or initials as 

follows: 

(i) The words or initials Act or CAA mean 

or refer to the Clean Air Act, unless the 

context indicates otherwise. 

(ii) The initials CBI mean or refer to 

confidential business information. 

(iii) The words EPA, we, us or our mean 

or refer to the United States Environmental 

Protection Agency. 

(iv) The initials FIP mean or refer to a 

Federal Implementation Plan. 

(v) The initials GHG mean or refer to 

greenhouse gases. 

(vi) The initials NAAQS mean or refer to 

national ambient air quality standards. 

(vii) The initials NOX mean or refer to 

nitrogen oxides. 

(viii) The initials NSR mean or refer to new 

source review. 

(ix) The initials PM mean or refer to 

particulate matter. 

(x) The initials PM2.5 mean or refer to 

particulate matter with an aerodynamic 

diameter of less than 2.5 micrometers (fine 

particulate matter). 

(xi) The initials ppm mean or refer to parts 

per million. 

(xii) The initials PSD mean or refer to 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration. 

(xiii) The initials SIP mean or refer to State 

Implementation Plan. 

(xiv) The initials SSM mean or refer to 

start-up, shutdown, or malfunction. 

(xv) The initials WAQSR mean or refer to 

the Wyoming Air Quality Standards and 

Regulation. 

Table of Contents 

I. General Information 

II. Background 

III. What is the scope of this rulemaking? 

IV. What infrastructure elements are required 

under sections 110(a)(1) and (2)? 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 173 / Friday, September 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules 54829 

V. How did Wyoming address the 

infrastructure elements of sections 

110(a)(1) and (2)? 

VI. What action is EPA proposing? 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

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 

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 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 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 July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated 

new NAAQS for PM2.5. Two new PM2.5

standards were added, set at 15 mg/m3, 

based on the three-year average of 

annual arithmetic mean PM2.5

concentration from single or multiple 

community-oriented monitors, and 65 

mg/m3, based on the three-year average 

of the 98th percentile of 24-hour PM2.5

concentrations at each populationoriented monitor within an area (62 FR 

38652). 

On October 17, 2006, EPA 

promulgated a revised NAAQS for 

PM2.5, tightening the level of the 24- 

hour PM2.5 standard to 35 mg/m3 and 

retaining the level of the annual PM2.5

standard at 15 mg/m3. EPA also retained 

the 24-hour PM10 and revoked the 

annual PM10 standard (71 FR 61144). By 

statute, SIPs meeting the requirements 

of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and (2) are to 

be submitted by states within three 

years after promulgation of a new or 

revised standard. Section 110(a)(2) 

provides basic requirements for SIPs, 

including emissions inventories, 

monitoring, and modeling, to assure 

attainment and maintenance of the 

standards. These requirements are set 

out in several ‘‘infrastructure elements,’’ 

listed in section 110(a)(2). 

CAA section 110(a) imposes the 

obligation upon states to make a SIP 

submission to EPA for a new or revised 

NAAQS, and the contents of that 

submission may vary depending upon 

the facts and circumstances. In 

particular, the data and analytical tools 

available at the time the state develops 

and submits the SIP for a new or revised 

NAAQS affects the content of the 

submission. The contents of such SIP 

submissions may also vary depending 

upon what provisions the state’s 

existing SIP already contains. In the 

case of the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS, states typically have met the 

basic program elements required in 

section 110(a)(2) through earlier SIP 

submissions in connection with 

previous NAAQS. 

III. What is the scope of this 

rulemaking? 

This rulemaking will not cover four 

substantive issues that are not integral 

to acting on a state’s infrastructure SIP 

submission: (1) Existing provisions 

related to excess emissions during 

periods of start-up, shutdown, or 

malfunction (SSM) at sources, that may 

be contrary to the CAA and EPA’s 

policies addressing such excess 

emissions (‘‘SSM’’); (2) 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 EPA, that may be 

contrary to the CAA (‘‘director’s 

discretion’’); (3) existing provisions for 

minor source NSR programs that may be 

inconsistent with the requirements of 

the CAA and EPA’s regulations that 

pertain to such programs (‘‘minor source 

NSR’’); and (4) existing provisions for 

prevention of significant deterioration 

(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 indicated 

that it has other authority to address any 

such existing SIP defects in other 

rulemakings, as appropriate. A detailed 

rationale for why these four substantive 

issues are not part of the scope of 

infrastructure SIP rulemakings can be 

found in EPA’s July 13, 2011 final rule 

entitled, ‘‘Infrastructure SIP 

Requirements for the 1997 8-hour Ozone 

and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards’’ in the section entitled, 

‘‘What is the scope of this final 

rulemaking?’’ (see 76 FR 41075 at 

41076–41079). 

IV. What infrastructure elements are 

required under sections 110(a)(1) and 

(2)? 

Section 110(a)(1) provides the 

procedural and timing requirements for 

SIP submissions after a new or revised 

NAAQS is promulgated. Section 

110(a)(2) lists specific elements the SIP 

must contain or satisfy. These 

infrastructure elements include 

requirements such as modeling, 

monitoring, and emissions inventories, 

which are designed to assure attainment 

and maintenance of the NAAQS. The 

elements that are the subject of this 

action are listed below. 

• 110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and 

other control measures. 

• 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality 

monitoring/data system. 

• 110(a)(2)(C): Program for 

enforcement of control measures. 

• 110(a)(2)(D): Interstate transport. 

• 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate resources 

and authority, conflict of interest, and 

oversight of local governments and 

regional agencies. 

• 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source 

monitoring and reporting. 

• 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency powers. 

• 110(a)(2)(H): Future SIP revisions. 

• 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with 

government officials; public 

notification; and PSD and visibility 

protection. 

• 110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling/

data. 

• 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees. 

• 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/

participation by affected local entities. 

A detailed discussion of each of these 

elements is contained in the next 

section. 

Element 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), Interstate 

transport of pollutants which contribute 

significantly to nonattainment in, or 

interfere with maintenance by, any 

other state will be acted upon in a 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
54830 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 173 / Friday, September 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

1Steven Herman, Assistant Administrator for 

Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, and 

Robert Perciasepe, Assistant Administrator for Air 

and Radiation, Memorandum to EPA Air Division 

Directors, ‘‘State Implementation Plans (SIPs): 

Policy Regarding Emissions During Malfunctions, 

Startup, and Shutdown.’’ (September 20, 1999). 

separate action. EPA will also act on the 

visibility element of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) in a separate action. 

Two elements identified in section 

110(a)(2) are not governed by the three 

year submission deadline of section 

110(a)(1) and are therefore not 

addressed in this action. These elements 

relate to part D of Title I of the CAA, and 

submissions to satisfy them are not due 

within three years after promulgation of 

a new or revised NAAQS, but rather are 

due at the same time nonattainment area 

plan requirements are due under section 

172. The two elements are: (1) Section 

110(a)(2)(C) to the extent it refers to 

permit programs (known as 

‘‘nonattainment new source review 

(NSR)’’) required under part D, and (2) 

section 110(a)(2)(I), pertaining to the 

nonattainment planning requirements of 

part D. As a result, this action does not 

address infrastructure elements related 

to the nonattainment NSR portion of 

section 110(a)(2)(C) or related to 

110(a)(2)(I). 

V. How did Wyoming address the 

infrastructure elements of sections 

110(a)(1) and (2)? 

1. Emission limits and other control 

measures: Section 110(a)(2)(A) requires 

SIPs to include enforceable emission 

limitations and other control measures, 

means, or techniques (including 

economic incentives such as fees, 

marketable permits, and auctions of 

emissions rights), as well as schedules 

and timetables for compliance as may be 

necessary or appropriate to meet the 

applicable requirements of this Act. 

a. Wyoming’s response to this 

requirement: The State’s March 26, 2008 

submission for the 1997 PM2.5

infrastructure requirements and August 

19, 2011 submission for the 2006 PM2.5

infrastructure requirements cite three 

non-regulatory documents (e.g., Control 

Strategy, Source Surveillance, and 

Compliance Schedule) which were 

approved by EPA on May 31, 1972 (37 

FR 10842). The State’s submissions also 

cite regulatory documents included in 

the Wyoming Air Quality Standards and 

Regulation (WAQSR) included in 

Chapters 1, 3, 4, 8, 10 and 13. 

b. EPA analysis: Wyoming’s SIP meets 

the requirements of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(A) for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS, subject to the following 

clarifications. First, Wyoming has no 

areas designated as nonattainment for 

the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS and, 

therefore, is not required to establish 

enforceable emission limitations or 

other emission reduction measures to 

attain the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

The SIP provisions cited by Wyoming 

include emissions standards for 

particulate matter (WAQSR Chapter 2, 

Section 2). Wyoming also regulates 

emissions of PM2.5 and its precursors 

through the State’s approved PSD and 

minor NSR programs. This is sufficient 

to meet the requirements of 110(a)(2)(A) 

for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Second, in this action, EPA is not 

proposing to approve or disapprove any 

existing state rules with regard to 

director’s discretion or variance 

provisions. A number of states have 

such provisions which are contrary to 

the CAA and existing EPA guidance (52 

FR 45109, November 24, 1987), and the 

Agency plans to take action in the future 

to address such state regulations. In the 

meantime, EPA encourages any state 

having a director’s discretion or 

variance provision which is contrary to 

the CAA and EPA guidance to take steps 

to correct the deficiency as soon as 

possible. 

Finally, in this action, EPA is also not 

proposing to approve or disapprove any 

existing state provisions with regard to 

excess emissions during startup, 

shutdown, or malfunction (SSM) of 

operations at a facility. A number of 

states have SSM provisions which are 

contrary to the CAA and existing EPA 

guidance 1 and the Agency is addressing 

such state regulations separately (78 FR 

12460, February 22, 2013). 

2. Ambient air quality monitoring/

data system: Section 110(a)(2)(B) 

requires SIPs to provide for 

establishment and operation of 

appropriate devices, methods, systems, 

and procedures necessary to ‘‘(i) 

monitor, compile, and analyze data on 

ambient air quality, and (ii) upon 

request, make such data available to the 

Administrator.’’ 

a. Wyoming’s response to this 

requirement: The State’s submissions 

for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

infrastructure requirements cite three 

non-regulatory documents (e.g., Air 

Quality Surveillance, Air Quality 

Surveillance Network, and 

Implementation Plan for Lead). The 

State’s submissions also cite regulatory 

documents included in Chapters 1 and 

2 of the WAQSR. 

b. EPA analysis: Wyoming’s air 

monitoring program and data systems 

meet the requirements of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(B) for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. The Wyoming Ambient Air 

Monitoring Annual Network Plan for 

2011 was approved by EPA Region 8 on 

February 29, 2012. 

3. Program for enforcement of control 

measures: Section 110(a)(2)(C) requires 

SIPs to include a program to provide for 

the enforcement of the measures 

described in subparagraph (A), and 

regulation of the modification and 

construction of any stationary source 

within the areas covered by the plan as 

necessary to assure that NAAQS are 

achieved, including a permit program as 

required in parts C and D of the Act. 

a. Wyoming’s response to this 

requirement: The State’s submissions 

for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

infrastructure requirements cite four 

non-regulatory documents (e.g., Legal 

Authority, Source Surveillance, Review 

of New Sources and Modifications, and 

March 3, 2008 memorandum from 

Cynthia Cody [EPA Region 8, Air 

Quality Planning Unit Chief]). The 

State’s submissions also cite regulatory 

documents included in the WAQSR 

Chapter 6. 

b. EPA analysis: To generally meet the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C), the 

State is required to have SIP-approved 

PSD, nonattainment NSR, and minor 

NSR permitting programs adequate to 

implement the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. As explained above, in this 

action EPA is not evaluating 

nonattainment related provisions, such 

as the nonattainment NSR program 

required by part D of the Act. EPA is 

evaluating the State’s PSD program as 

required by part C of the Act, and the 

State’s minor NSR program as required 

by 110(a)(2)(C). 

PSD Requirements 

Wyoming has a SIP-approved PSD 

program that meets the general 

requirements of part C of the Act (44 FR 

51977, September 6, 1979). To satisfy 

the particular requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(C), states should have a PSD 

program that applies to all regulated 

NSR pollutants, including greenhouse 

gases (GHGs). See 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48) 

and (b)(49). The PSD program should 

reflect current requirements for these 

pollutants. In particular, for three 

pollutants—ozone, PM2.5 and GHGs— 

there are additional regulatory 

requirements (set out in portions of 40 

CFR 51.166) that we consider in 

evaluating Wyoming’s PSD program. 

On July 25, 2011 (76 FR 44265), we 

approved a revision to the Wyoming 

PSD program that addressed the PSD 

requirements of the Phase 2 Ozone 

Implementation Rule promulgated on 

November 29, 2005 (70 FR 71612). As a 

result, the approved Wyoming PSD 

program meets the current requirements 

for ozone. 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 173 / Friday, September 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules 54831 

With respect to GHGs, on June 24, 

2013 (78 FR 37752) EPA proposed to 

approve a submittal that revises 

Wyoming’s PSD program to regulate 

GHGs and to adopt the thresholds set 

out in EPA’s June 3, 2010 ‘‘PSD and 

Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Final 

Rule’’ (75 FR 31514). In that proposal, 

EPA accordingly also proposed to 

rescind the Federal Implementation 

Plan (FIP) for GHG permitting in 

Wyoming that EPA had promulgated on 

December 30, 2010 (75 FR 82246). With 

EPA’s proposed approval of the relevant 

portions of the revisions to Wyoming’s 

PSD program and rescission of the FIP, 

Wyoming’s PSD program will meet 

current requirements for GHGs. 

Finally, we evaluate the PSD program 

with respect to current requirements for 

PM2.5. In particular, on May 16, 2008, 

EPA promulgated the rule, 

‘‘Implementation of the New Source 

Review Program for Particulate Matter 

Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5) and 

on October 20, 2010 EPA promulgated 

the rule, ‘‘Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) for Particulate 

Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers 

(PM2.5)—Increments, Significant Impact 

Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring 

Concentration (SMC)’’ (75 FR 64864). 

EPA regards adoption of these PM2.5

rules as a necessary requirement when 

assessing a PSD program for the 

purposes of element (C). 

On January 4, 2013, the U.S. Court of 

Appeals, in Natural Resources Defense 

Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir.), 

issued a judgment that remanded EPA’s 

2007 and 2008 rules implementing the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. The Court ordered 

EPA to ‘‘repromulgate these rules 

pursuant to Subpart 4 consistent with 

this opinion.’’ Id. at 437. Subpart 4 of 

part D, Title 1 of the CAA establishes 

additional provisions for particulate 

matter nonattainment areas. 

The 2008 implementation rule 

addressed by the court decision, 

‘‘Implementation of New Source Review 

(NSR) Program for Particulate Matter 

Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5),’’ (73 

FR 28321, May 16, 2008), promulgated 

New Source Review (NSR) requirements 

for implementation of PM2.5 in 

nonattainment areas (nonattainment 

NSR) and attainment/unclassifiable 

areas (PSD). As the requirements of 

subpart 4 only pertain to nonattainment 

areas, EPA does not consider the 

portions of the 2008 Implementation 

rule that address requirements for PM2.5

attainment and unclassifiable areas to be 

affected by the Court’s opinion. 

Moreover, EPA does not anticipate the 

need to revise any PSD requirements 

promulgated in the 2008 

Implementation rule in order to comply 

with the Court’s decision. Accordingly, 

EPA’s approval of Wyoming’s 

infrastructure SIP as to elements (C) or 

(J) with respect to the PSD requirements 

promulgated by the 2008 

Implementation rule does not conflict 

with the Court’s opinion. 

The Court’s decision with respect to 

the nonattainment NSR requirements 

promulgated by the 2008 

Implementation rule also does not affect 

EPA’s action on the present 

infrastructure action. EPA interprets the 

Act to exclude nonattainment area 

requirements, including requirements 

associated with a nonattainment NSR 

program, from infrastructure SIP 

submissions due 3 years after adoption 

or revision of a NAAQS. Instead, these 

elements are typically referred to as 

nonattainment SIP or attainment plan 

elements, which would be due by the 

dates statutorily prescribed under 

subpart 2 through 5 under part D, 

extending as far as 10 years following 

designations for some elements. 

The second PSD requirement for 

PM2.5 is contained in EPA’s October 20, 

2010 rule, ‘‘Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) for Particulate 

Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers 

(PM2.5)—Increments, Significant Impact 

Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring 

Concentration (SMC)’’ (75 FR 64864). 

EPA regards adoption of the PM2.5

increments as a necessary requirement 

when assessing a PSD program for the 

purposes of element (C). 

On May 10, 2011, the State submitted 

revisions to Chapter 6, section 4 of the 

WAQSR that adopted all elements of the 

2008 Implementation Rule and on May 

24, 2012, the State submitted revisions 

to Chapter 6, Section 4 of the WAQSR 

that adopted all elements of the 2010 

Increment Rule. These submitted 

revisions make Wyoming’s PSD program 

up to date with respect to current 

requirements for PM2.5. The May 10, 

2011 submittal, which incorporated the 

2008 Implementation Rule, was 

approved in a previous action (see 76 

FR 44265). We propose to approve the 

necessary portions of Wyoming’s May 

24, 2012 submission to reflect the 2010 

PM2.5 Increment Rule; specifically 40 

CFR part 166, paragraphs (b)(14)(i), (ii), 

(b)(15)(i), and paragraph (c)(1). EPA is 

proposing to approve the following 

revisions to Chapter 6, Section 4: 

Chapter 6, Section 4(a) Definitions of 

‘‘Baseline area’’, ‘‘Major source baseline 

date’’, and ‘‘Minor source baseline 

date’’; Chapter 6, Section 4(b)(i)(A)(I) 

Table 1 and Table 1 (1), Chapter 6, 

Section 4(b)(J)(v)(viii), and Section 14, 

as submitted on May 24, 2012. We are 

not proposing to act on any other 

portions of the May 24, 2012 submittal, 

including the adoption of significant 

impact levels (SILs) and significant 

monitoring concentrations (SMCs) for 

PM2.5. 

With these revisions, Wyoming’s SIPapproved PSD program will meet 

current requirements for PM2.5. As a 

result, EPA is proposing to approve 

Wyoming’s infrastructure SIP for the 

1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS with 

respect to the requirement in section 

110(a)(2)(C) to include a permit program 

in the SIP as required by part C of the 

Act. 

Minor NSR 

With regard to minor NSR, in this 

action EPA is proposing to approve 

Wyoming’s infrastructure SIP for the 

1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS with 

respect to the general requirement in 

section 110(a)(2)(C) to include a 

program in the SIP that regulates the 

modification and construction of any 

stationary source as necessary to assure 

that the NAAQS are achieved. 

Wyoming’s approved minor NSR 

program is found in Chapter 6, section 

2 of the WAQSR. EPA previously 

approved Wyoming’s minor NSR 

program into the SIP (at that time as 

Chapter 1, section 21), and has 

subsequently approved revisions to the 

program, and at those times there were 

no objections to the provisions of this 

program. (See, for example, 47 FR 5892, 

February 9, 1982.) Since then, the State 

and EPA have relied on the State’s 

existing minor NSR program to assure 

that new and modified sources not 

captured by the major NSR permitting 

programs do not interfere with 

attainment and maintenance of the 

NAAQS. EPA is not proposing to 

approve or disapprove the State’s 

existing minor NSR program itself to the 

extent that it is inconsistent with EPA’s 

regulations governing this program. A 

number of states may have minor NSR 

provisions that are contrary to the 

existing EPA regulations for this 

program. EPA intends to work with 

states to reconcile state minor NSR 

programs with EPA’s regulatory 

provisions for the program. The 

statutory requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(C) provide for considerable 

flexibility in designing minor NSR 

programs, and it may be time to revisit 

the regulatory requirements for this 

program to give the states an 

appropriate level of flexibility to design 

a program that meets their particular air 

quality concerns, while assuring 

reasonable consistency across the 

country in protecting the NAAQS with 

respect to new and modified minor 

sources. 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
54832 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 173 / Friday, September 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

2Memorandum from David O. Bickart, Deputy 

General Counsel, to Regional Air Directors, 

Guidance to States for Meeting Conflict of Interest 

Requirements of Section 128 (Mar. 2, 1978). 

3H.R. Rep. 95–564 (1977), reprinted in 3 

Legislative History of the Clean Air Act 

Amendments of 1977, 526–27 (1978). 

4. Interstate Transport: Section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) is subdivided into four 

‘‘prongs,’’ two under 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 

and two under 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). The 

two prongs under 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 

require SIPs to contain adequate 

provisions to prohibit emissions that 

(prong 1) contribute significantly to 

nonattainment in any other state with 

respect to any such national primary or 

secondary NAAQS, and (prong 2) 

interfere with maintenance by any other 

state with respect to the same NAAQS. 

The two prongs under 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) 

require SIPs to contain adequate 

provisions to prohibit emissions that 

interfere with measure required to be 

included in the applicable implantation 

plan for any other state under part C 

(prong 3) to prevent significant 

deterioration of air quality or (prong 4) 

to protect visibility. As noted, we are 

not proposing to act on Wyoming’s 

submission to meet the requirements of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. On May 28, 2008 (73 FR 

26019), we approved Wyoming’s 

submission to meet the requirements of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS. 

5. Interstate and International 

transport provisions: Section 

110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires that each SIP 

shall contain adequate provisions 

insuring compliance with applicable 

requirements of sections 126 and 115 

(relating to interstate and international 

pollution abatement). 

a. Wyoming’s response to this 

requirement: The State’s submissions 

for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

infrastructure requirements cited 

regulatory requirements included in the 

WAQSR Chapter 6, Section 2, Permit 

requirements for construction 

modification and operation. 

b. EPA Analysis: Section 126(a) of the 

CAA requires notification to affected, 

nearby states of major proposed new (or 

modified) sources. Sections 126(b) and 

(c) pertain to petitions by affected states 

to the Administrator regarding sources 

violating the ‘‘interstate transport’’ 

provisions of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). 

Section 115 of the CAA similarly 

pertains to international transport of air 

pollution. 

WAQSR Chapter 6, Section 2, 

specifically paragraph (m) meets the 

requirements of CAA section 126(a) for 

the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. Final 

approval of this language became 

effective January 30, 1995 (59 FR 60902, 

Nov. 29, 1994). Final approval of the 

renumbering of this language became 

effective August 27, 2004 (See 69 FR 

44965, July 28, 2004). 

Wyoming has no pending obligations 

under sections 126(c) or 115(b); 

therefore, its SIP currently meets the 

requirements of those sections. The SIP 

therefore meets the requirements of 

110(a)(2)(D)(ii) for the 1997 and 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS. 

6. Adequate resources and authority: 

Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) requires states to 

provide necessary assurances that the 

state will have adequate personnel, 

funding, and authority under state law 

to carry out the SIP (and is not 

prohibited by any provision of federal or 

state law from carrying out the SIP or 

portion thereof). Section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii) 

requires states to ‘‘provide necessary 

assurances that, where the State has 

relied on a local or regional government, 

agency, or instrumentality for the 

implementation of any [SIP] provision, 

the State has responsibility for ensuring 

adequate implementation of such [SIP] 

provision.’’ 

a. Wyoming’s response to this 

requirement: The State’s submissions 

for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

infrastructure requirements cite two 

non-regulatory documents (e.g., 

Resources and Legal Authority), 

approved by EPA on May 31, 1972 (37 

FR 10842). The State’s submissions for 

1997 and 2006 PM2.5 infrastructure 

requirements cite regulatory 

requirements included in the WAQSR 

Chapter 1, Section 2, Authority and the 

Wyoming Environmental Quality Act 

Articles 1 and 2 (Chapter 11, Title 35 of 

the Wyoming Statutes). 

b. EPA Analysis: The provisions in 

Articles 1 and 2 of the Wyoming 

Environmental Quality Act (Chapter 11, 

Title 35 of the Wyoming Statutes) give 

the State adequate authority to carry out 

the SIP. The State receives sections 103 

and 105 grant funds through its 

Performance Partnership Grant along 

with required state matching funds to 

provide funding necessary to carry out 

Wyoming’s SIP requirements. The State 

does not rely upon any other local or 

regional government, agency or 

instrumentality for implementation of 

the SIP. 

7. State boards: Section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires that the state 

comply with the requirements 

respecting state boards under section 

128. 

a. Wyoming’s response to this 

requirement: The State’s submissions 

for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

infrastructure requirements cite two 

non-regulatory documents (e.g., 

Resources and Legal Authority), 

approved by EPA on May 31, 1972 (37 

FR 10842). The State’s submissions for 

1997 and 2006 PM2.5 infrastructure 

requirements cite regulatory 

requirements included in the WAQSR 

Chapter 1, Section 2, Authority and the 

Wyoming Environmental Quality Act 

Articles 1 and 2 (Chapter 11, Title 35 of 

the Wyoming Statutes). 

b. EPA Analysis: Section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) of the CAA requires that 

the State comply with section 128 of the 

CAA. Section 128 was added in the 

1977 amendments to the CAA as the 

result of a conference agreement. Titled 

‘‘State boards,’’ it provides in relevant 

part: 

(a) Not later than the date one year 

after August 7, 1977, each applicable 

implementation plan shall contain 

requirements that— 

(1) Any board or body which 

approves permits or enforcement orders 

under [this Act] 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 or 

enforcement orders under [this Act], 

and, 

(2) 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. 

In 1978, EPA issued a guidance 

memorandum recommending ways 

states could meet the requirements of 

section 128, including suggested 

interpretations of certain key terms in 

section 128.2 In this notice, we 

additionally discuss various relevant 

aspects of section 128. We first note 

that, in the conference report on the 

1977 amendments to the CAA, the 

conference committee stated, ‘‘It is the 

responsibility of each state to determine 

the specific requirements to meet the 

general requirements of [section 128].’’ 3

We find that this legislative history 

indicates that Congress intended states 

to have some latitude in the specifics of 

implementing section 128, so long as 

the implementation is consistent with 

the plain text of the section. We also 

note that Congress explicitly provided 

in section 128 that states could elect to 

adopt more stringent requirements, as 

long as the minimum requirements of 

section 128 are met. As a result, we note 

three considerations for implementing 

section 128. 

First, section 128 must be 

implemented through provisions that 

EPA approves into the SIP and are made 

federally enforceable. Section 128 

explicitly mandates that each SIP ‘‘shall 

contain requirements’’ that satisfy 

subsections 128(a)(1) and 128(a)(2). A 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 173 / Friday, September 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules 54833 

4See, for example, 78 FR 32613 (May 31, 2013), 

for a discussion of the phrase ‘‘board or body which 

approves permits or enforcement orders.’’ 

5Wyoming Statutes section 35–11–111(a) does 

require a member of the Council that receives more 

than ten percent of the member’s income from any 

permit applicant to not act on a permit application 

from that applicant. However, this provision is not 

in Wyoming’s SIP and does not address income 

from persons subject to enforcement orders or 

persons who already hold (are ‘‘subject to’’) a 

permit. Even if the provision were in Wyoming’s 

SIP, EPA does not interpret the requirement in 

section 128(a)(1) regarding significant income to be 

satisfied solely by this sort of recusal provision. See 

77 FR 66398 (Nov. 5, 2012). 

mere narrative description of state 

statutes or rules, or of a state’s current 

or past practice in constituting a board 

or body and in disclosing potential 

conflicts of interest, is not a requirement 

contained in the SIP and does not 

satisfy the plain text of section 128. 

Second, subsection 128(a)(1) applies 

only to states that have a board or body 

that is composed of multiple 

individuals and that, among its duties, 

approves permits or enforcement orders 

under the CAA. It does not apply in 

states that have no such multi-member 

board or body that performs these 

functions, and where instead a single 

head of an agency or other similar 

official approves permits or enforcement 

orders under the CAA. This flows from 

the text of section 128, for two reasons. 

First, as subsection 128(a)(1) refers to a 

majority of members in the plural, we 

think it reasonable to read subsection 

128(a)(1) as not creating any 

requirements for an individual with sole 

authority for approving permits or 

enforcement orders under the CAA. 

Second, subsection 128(a)(2) explicitly 

applies to the head of an executive 

agency with ‘‘similar powers’’ to a board 

or body that approves permits or 

enforcement orders under the CAA, 

while subsection 128(a)(1) omits any 

reference to heads of executive agencies. 

We infer that subsection 128(a)(1) 

should not apply to heads of executive 

agencies who approve permits or 

enforcement orders. 

Third, subsection 128(a)(2) applies to 

all states, regardless of whether the state 

has a multi-member board or body that 

approves permits or enforcement orders 

under the CAA. Although the title of 

section 128 is ‘‘State boards,’’ the 

language of subsection 128(a)(2) 

explicitly applies where the head of an 

executive agency, rather than a board or 

body, approves permits or enforcement 

orders. In instances where the head of 

an executive agency delegates his or her 

power to approve permits or 

enforcement orders, or where statutory 

authority to approve permits or 

enforcement orders is nominally vested 

in another state official, the requirement 

to adequately disclose potential 

conflicts of interest still applies. In other 

words, EPA thinks that SIPs for all 

states, regardless of whether a state 

board or body approves permits or 

enforcement orders under the CAA, 

must contain adequate provisions for 

disclosure of potential conflicts of 

interest in order to meet the 

requirements of subsection 128(a)(2). 

Wyoming’s Environmental Quality 

Act establishes the Environmental 

Quality Council, a separate government 

body. See Wyoming Statutes 35–11– 

111(a). The members of the Council are 

appointed by the Governor and serve at 

the Governor’s pleasure. Among the 

duties of the Council are conducting 

hearings in any case contesting the 

administration or enforcement of any 

law, rule, regulation, standard or order 

issued or administered by DEQ or by 

any division of DEQ. Id. 35–11– 

111(a)(iii). In particular, a person 

subject to a DEQ order may request a 

hearing before the Council. Id. 35–11– 

702(c)(ii)–(iv). The Council must also 

conduct hearings in any case contesting 

the grant, denial, suspension, revocation 

or renewal of any permit authorized or 

required by the Environmental Quality 

Act. Id. 35–11–111(a)(iv). Under Article 

2, Air Quality, and Article 8, Permits, of 

the Environmental Quality Act, any 

applicant for an air permit may petition 

the Council for a hearing to contest 

DEQ’s decision on the permit. See id. 

35–11–208, –802. Although Article 2 

does not explicitly provide for it, third 

parties may contest DEQ’s decision on 

an air permit under Wyoming Statutes 

section 35–11–111(a)(iv), mentioned 

above. E.g,. In the Matter of: Medicine 

Bow Fuel & Power, LLC, No. 09–2801, at 

2–3 (Wyo. Envtl. Quality Council, Feb. 

5, 2010). 

Given the duties and authorities of the 

Council, the Council appears to be a 

‘‘board or body which approves permits 

or enforcement orders’’ under the CAA.4

However, Wyoming’s approved SIP does 

not contain any enforceable provisions 

to satisfy the requirements of subsection 

128(a)(1) as applied to the Council.5 In 

addition, Wyoming’s SIP does not 

contain any enforceable provisions to 

satisfy the requirements of subsection 

128(a)(2), which applies in all states. As 

a result, Wyoming’s SIP does not satisfy 

the requirements of sections 128 and 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii), and EPA proposes to 

disapprove Wyoming’s submissions for 

element (E)(ii) for the 1997 and 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS. 

8. Stationary source monitoring 

system: Section 110(a)(2)(F) requires: 

(i) 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, 

(ii) periodic reports on the nature and 

amounts of emissions and emissionsrelated data from such sources, and 

(iii) correlation of such reports by the 

state agency with any emission 

limitations or standards established 

pursuant to the Act, which reports shall 

be available at reasonable times for 

public inspection. 

a. Wyoming’s response to this 

requirement: The State’s submissions 

for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

infrastructure requirements cite 

regulatory requirements included in the 

1979 WAQSR Chapter 6, Section 2, 

Permit requirements for construction, 

modification, and operation, and 

Chapter 7, Sections 2, and Section 23, 

Continuous monitoring requirements for 

existing sources. 

b. EPA Analysis: In addition to the 

specific monitoring provisions cited by 

Wyoming, the SIP provides for 

monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements for sources 

subject to minor and major source 

permitting. (See WAQSR Chapter 6, 

section 2.) Wyoming’s SIP therefore 

meets the requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(F) for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. 

9. Emergency powers: Section 

110(a)(2)(G) requires states to provide 

for authority to address activities 

causing imminent and substantial 

endangerment to public health, 

including contingency plans to 

implement the emergency episode 

provisions in their SIPs. 

a. Wyoming’s response to this 

requirement: The State’s submissions 

for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

infrastructure requirements cite three 

non-regulatory documents (e.g., 

Emergency Episode Plan, Emergency 

Episode Contingency Plan, and a March 

3, 2008 memorandum from Cynthia 

Cody, [EPA Region 8, Air Quality 

Planning Unit Chief]). The State’s 

submissions for 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

infrastructure requirements cite 

regulatory requirements included in the 

WAQSR Chapter 12, Section 2, Air 

pollution emergency episodes and the 

Wyoming Environmental Quality Act, 

Article 1, Power of the director to issue 

emergency orders, (Section 35–11–115 

of the Wyoming Statues). 

b. EPA analysis: Section 35–11–115 of 

the Wyoming Statutes gives the Director 

of the Wyoming Department of 

Environmental Quality (DEQ) 

comparable emergency powers to those 

in section 303 of the Act. In our 2009 

guidance for infrastructure requirements 

for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, we 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
54834 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 173 / Friday, September 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

suggested that states that had monitored 

and recorded 24-hour PM2.5 levels 

greater than 140.4 mg/m3, using the most 

recent three years of data, should 

develop emergency episode plans for 

the areas with the monitored values. We 

also suggested that, if these levels had 

not been exceeded, states could certify 

that they had adequate general 

emergency authority to address PM2.5

episodes. In this rulemaking, we view 

these suggestions as still appropriate in 

assessing Wyoming’s SIP for this 

element. Wyoming has not monitored 

any values above the 140.4 mg/m3 level 

for PM2.5 for the past three years. Since 

this level was not exceeded in any area 

of the state and the State has 

demonstrated that it has appropriate 

general emergency powers to address 

PM2.5 related episodes, the State is not 

required at this point to have a specific 

contingency plan for PM2.5. The SIP 

therefore meets the requirements of 

110(a)(2)(G) for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. 

10. Future SIP revisions: Section 

110(a)(2)(H) requires that SIPs provide 

for revision of such plan: 

(i) from time to time as may be 

necessary to take account of revisions of 

such national primary or secondary 

ambient air quality standard or the 

availability of improved or more 

expeditious methods of attaining such 

standard, and 

(ii), except as provided in paragraph 

(3)(C), whenever the Administrator 

finds on the basis of information 

available to the Administrator that the 

SIP is substantially inadequate to attain 

the NAAQS which it implements or to 

otherwise comply with any additional 

requirements under this [Act]. 

a. Wyoming’s response to this 

requirement: The State’s submissions 

for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

infrastructure requirements cite a nonregulatory document, Implementation 

Plan Reviews, approved by EPA on 

April 19, 1983 (48 FR 16682). 

b. EPA analysis: The general 

provisions in Article 1 of the Wyoming 

Environmental Quality Act (Article 1, 

Chapter 11, Title 35 of the Wyoming 

Statutes) and the particular provision in 

Article 2 at section 35–11–202 of the 

Wyoming Statutes give the State 

sufficient authority to revise the SIP as 

required by section 110(a)(2)(H). 

11. Consultation with government 

officials, public notification, PSD and 

visibility protection: Section 110(a)(2)(J) 

requires that each SIP ‘‘meet the 

applicable requirements of section 121 

of this title (relating to consultation), 

section 127 of this title (relating to 

public notification), and part C of this 

subchapter (relating to PSD of air 

quality and visibility protection).’’ 

a. Wyoming’s response to this 

requirement: The State’s submissions 

for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

infrastructure requirements cite one 

non-regulatory document relative to 

consultation with government officials 

(e.g., Consultation, approved by EPA 

July 2, 1979 (44 FR 38473)), one 

regulatory document relative to public 

notification (e.g., Public Notification of 

Air Quality, approved by EPA July 2, 

1979 (44 FR 38473)) and two nonregulatory documents relative to PSD 

and visibility protection (Wyoming 

State Implementation Plan for Class I 

Visibility Protection and a March 3, 

2008 memorandum from Cynthia Cody, 

[EPA Region 8, Air Quality Planning 

Unit Chief]). The State’s submissions for 

1997 and 2006 PM2.5 infrastructure 

requirements cite regulatory 

requirements relative to PSD and 

visibility protection included in the 

WAQSR, Chapter 6, Prevention of 

significant deterioration. 

b. EPA Analysis: The State has 

demonstrated that it has the authority 

and rules in place to provide a process 

of consultation with general purpose 

local governments, designated 

organizations of elected officials of local 

governments and any Federal Land 

Manager having authority over federal 

land to which the SIP applies, 

consistent with the requirements of 

CAA section 121. Furthermore, EPA 

previously approved portions of the 

Wyoming SIP meeting the requirements 

of CAA section 127. (44 FR 38473, July 

2, 1979.) 

Wyoming’s SIP regulations for its PSD 

program were first federally-approved 

and made part of the SIP on September 

6, 1979 (4 FR 51977). EPA has further 

evaluated the State’s SIP-approved PSD 

program in section V.3, element 

110(a)(2)(C) of this proposed action. As 

explained in that section, we propose to 

approve Wyoming’s infrastructure SIPs 

for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS 

with respect to the requirement in 

element (C) to have a permit program as 

required by Part C of the Act, 

concurrently with our proposed 

approval of Wyoming’s submittals to 

adopt the PM2.5 increments and to 

regulate GHGs under the PSD program. 

We correspondingly propose to approve 

the infrastructure SIPs for the 1997 and 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS with respect to the 

requirement in element (J) that the SIP 

meet the applicable requirements of Part 

C with respect to PSD. 

Finally, with regard to the applicable 

requirements for visibility protection, 

EPA recognizes that states are subject to 

visibility and regional haze program 

requirements under part C of the act. 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. 

12. Air quality and modeling/data: 

Section 110(a)(2)(K) requires that each 

SIP provide for: (i) the performance of 

such air quality modeling as the 

Administrator may prescribe for the 

purpose of predicting the effect on 

ambient air quality of any emissions of 

any air pollutant for which the 

Administrator has established a 

NAAQS, and (ii) the submission, upon 

request, of data related to such air 

quality modeling to the Administrator. 

a. Wyoming’s response to this 

requirement: The State’s submissions 

for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

infrastructure requirements cite 

regulatory requirements included in the 

WAQSR Chapter 6, Sections 2, 4, 21 and 

24. 

b. EPA Analysis: Wyoming’s SIP 

meets the requirements of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(K) for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. In particular, Wyoming’s PSD 

program requires that estimates of 

ambient air concentrations be based on 

applicable air quality models specified 

in Appendix W of 40 CFR part 51, and 

that modification or substitution of a 

model specified in Appendix W must be 

approved by the Administrator. (See 

WAQSR Chapter 6, section 4(b)(iv).) As 

a result, the SIP provides for such air 

quality modeling as the Administrator 

has prescribed. 

13. Permitting fees: Section 

110(a)(2)(L) requires SIPs to: require the 

owner or operator of each major 

stationary source to pay to the 

permitting authority, as a condition of 

any permit required under this act, a fee 

sufficient to cover (i) the reasonable 

costs of reviewing and acting upon any 

application for such a permit, and (ii) if 

the owner or operator receives a permit 

for such source, the reasonable costs of 

implementing and enforcing the terms 

and conditions of any such permit (not 

including any court costs or other costs 

associated with any enforcement 

action), until such fee requirement is 

superseded with respect to such sources 

by the Administrator’s approval of a fee 

program under [title] V. 

a. Wyoming’s response to this 

requirement: The State’s submissions 

for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

infrastructure requirements cite 

regulatory requirements included in the 

WAQSR Chapter 6, Permit requirements 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 173 / Friday, September 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules 54835 

for construction, modification, and 

operation. 

b. EPA Analysis: Final approval of 

Wyoming’s title V operating permit 

program became effective April 23, 1999 

(64 FR 8523, Feb. 22, 1990). Interim 

approval of the program became 

effective February 21, 1995 (60 FR 4563, 

January 19, 1995). As discussed in a 

previous direct final rule (which 

received comments) for interim 

approval of the title V program (59 FR 

48802, September 23, 1994), the State 

demonstrated that the fees collected 

were sufficient to administer the 

program. In addition, WAQSR chapter 

6, section 2, paragraph (o) requires 

applicants for construction permits to 

pay the costs for DEQ to review and act 

on the permit applications. Wyoming’s 

submission meets the requirements of 

section 110(a)(2)(L) for the 1997 and 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

14. Consultation/participation by 

affected local entities: Section 

110(a)(2)(M) requires states to provide 

for consultation and participation in SIP 

development by local political 

subdivisions affected by the SIP. 

a. Wyoming’s response to this 

requirement: The State’s submissions 

for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

infrastructure requirements cite a nonregulatory document (e.g., 

Intergovernmental Cooperation), 

approved by EPA on May 3, 1972 (37 FR 

10842). 

b. EPA Analysis: Wyoming’s submittal 

meets the requirements of CAA Section 

110(a)(2)(M) for the 1997 and 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS. 

VI. What action is EPA proposing? 

In this action, EPA is proposing to 

approve the following infrastructure 

elements for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS: (A), (B), (C) with respect to 

minor NSR and PSD requirements, 

(D)(ii), (E)(i), (E)(iii), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), 

(L), and (M). EPA is also proposing to 

approve revisions to Chapter 6, Section 

4, as submitted on May 24, 2012, which 

incorporate the requirements of the 

2010 PM2.5 Increment Rule; specifically, 

revisions to: Chapter 6, Section 4 (a) 

Definitions of ‘‘Baseline area’’, ‘‘Major 

source baseline date’’, and ‘‘Minor 

source baseline date’’; Chapter 6, 

Section 4 (b)(i)(A)(I) Table 1 and Table 

1 (1), Chapter 6, Section 4 (b)(J)(v)(viii), 

and Section 14. EPA proposes to 

disapprove the section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) 

infrastructure element, related to CAA 

128, state boards, for the 1997 and 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS. Finally, in this action, 

EPA is taking no action on 

infrastructure elements (D)(i) for the 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

VII. 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, 

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 and 

disapproves other state law because it 

does not meet 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). 

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, Carbon monoxide, 

Intergovernmental relations, 

Greenhouse gases, Lead, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated August 28, 2013. 

Shaun L. McGrath, 

Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2013–21613 Filed 9–5–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2013–0173; FRL–9900–62– 

Region 4] 

Air Quality Implementation Plan; 

Alabama; Attainment Plan for the Troy 

Area 2008 Lead Nonattainment Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA or Agency). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

a state implementation plan (SIP) 

revision, submitted by the State of 

Alabama through the Alabama 

Department of Environmental 

Management (ADEM), to EPA on 

November 9, 2012, for the purpose of 

providing for attainment of the 2008 

Lead National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS) in the Troy 2008 

Lead nonattainment area (hereafter 

referred to as the ‘‘Troy Area’’ or 

‘‘Area’’). The Troy Area is comprised of 

a portion of Pike County in Alabama 

surrounding the Sanders Lead Company 

(hereafter referred to as ‘‘Sanders 

Lead’’). EPA is proposing to approve 

Alabama’s November 9, 2012 SIP 

submittal regarding the attainment plan 

based on Alabama’s attainment 

demonstration for the Troy Area. The 

attainment plan includes the base year 

emissions inventory requirements, an 

analysis of the reasonably available 

control technology (RACT) and 

reasonably available control measures 

(RACM) requirements, reasonable 

further progress (RFP) plan, modeling 

demonstration of lead attainment and 

contingency measures for the Troy Area. 

This action is being taken in accordance 

with Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and 

EPA’s guidance related to lead 

attainment planning. 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1