Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 146 / Tuesday, July 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 45869 

(ii) Is subject to 40 CFR 52.21 and 

would be constructed in the same state 

as the state proposing the redesignation. 

(d) Ambient air increments. (1) In 

areas designated as Class I, II or III, 

increases in pollutant concentration 

over the baseline concentration shall be 

limited to the following: 

Pollutant 

Maximum 

allowable 

increase 

(micrograms 

per cubic 

meter) 

Class I Area 

PM2.5: 

Annual arithmetic mean .. 1 

24-hr maximum ............... 2 

PM10: 

Annual arithmetic mean .. 4 

24-hr maximum ............... 8 

Sulfur dioxide: 

Annual arithmetic mean .. 2 

24-hr maximum ............... 5 

3-hr maximum ................. 25 

Nitrogen dioxide: 

Annual arithmetic mean .. 2 .5 

Class II Area 

PM2.5: 

Annual arithmetic mean .. 4 

24-hr maximum ............... 9 

PM10: 

Annual arithmetic mean .. 17 

24-hr maximum ............... 30 

Sulfur dioxide: 

Annual arithmetic mean .. 20 

24-hr maximum ............... 91 

3-hr maximum ................. 512 

Nitrogen dioxide: 

Annual arithmetic mean .. 25 

Class III Area 

PM2.5: 

Annual arithmetic mean .. 8 

24-hr maximum ............... 18 

PM10: 

Annual arithmetic mean .. 34 

24-hr maximum ............... 60 

Sulfur dioxide: 

Annual arithmetic mean .. 40 

24-hr maximum ............... 182 

3-hr maximum ................. 700 

Nitrogen dioxide: 

Annual arithmetic mean .. 50 

(2) For any period other than an 

annual period, the applicable maximum 

allowable increase may be exceeded 

during one such period per year at any 

one location. 

■ 4. Section 52.1833 is amended by 

adding paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 52.1833 Section 110(a)(2) infrastructure 

requirements. 

* * * * * 

(c) EPA is approving the following 

infrastructure elements for the 1997 and 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS: CAA section 

110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C) with respect to 

minor NSR and PSD requirements, 

(D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and 

(M). EPA is approving (D)(i)(II) with 

respect to PSD requirements for the 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

[FR Doc. 2013–18039 Filed 7–29–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2012–0347; FRL–9839–1] 

Approval and Promulgation of State 

Implementation Plans; State of 

Montana; Interstate Transport of 

Pollution for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is taking final action to 

partially approve and partially 

disapprove portions of a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submission 

from the State of Montana that are 

intended to demonstrate that its SIP 

meets certain interstate transport 

requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(‘‘Act’’ or ‘‘CAA’’) for the 2006 fine 

particulate matter (‘‘PM2.5’’) National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(‘‘NAAQS’’). Specifically, EPA is 

partially approving and partially 

disapproving the portion of the Montana 

SIP submission that addresses the CAA 

requirement prohibiting emissions from 

Montana sources from significantly 

contributing to nonattainment of the 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS in any other state or 

interfering with maintenance of the 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS by any other state. 

EPA is also partially approving and 

partially disapproving the portion of 

Montana’s submission that addresses 

the CAA requirement that SIPs contain 

provisions to insure compliance with 

specific other CAA requirements 

relating to interstate and international 

pollution abatement. These partial 

disapprovals will not trigger an 

obligation for EPA to promulgate a 

Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to 

address these interstate transport 

requirements as EPA is determining that 

the existing SIP is adequate to meet the 

specific CAA requirements. 

DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is 

effective August 29, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R08–OAR–2012–0347. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

e.g., Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

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: 

Adam Clark, Air Program, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 

Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202– 

1129, (303) 312–7104, 

clark.adam@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 words EPA, we, us or our mean or 

refer to the United States Environmental 

Protection Agency. 

(iii) The initials NAAQS mean or refer to 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards. 

(iv) The initials SIP mean or refer to State 

Implementation Plan. 

(v) The initials MDEQ mean or refer to the 

Montana Department of Environmental 

Quality. 

(vi) The words Montana and State mean 

the State of Montana. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Response to Comments 

III. Final Action 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On October 17, 2006 EPA 

promulgated a new NAAQS for PM2.5, 

revising 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. (71 FR 61144). By statute, SIPs 

meeting the ‘‘infrastructure’’ 

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. Among the 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
45870 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 146 / Tuesday, July 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

1This action does not address the two elements 

of the transport SIP provision (in CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)) regarding interference with 

measures required to prevent significant 

deterioration of air quality or to protect visibility in 

another state. We will act on these elements in a 

separate rulemaking. 

2MDEQ’s certification letter, dated February 10, 

2010, is included in the docket for this action. 

infrastructure requirements of section 

110(a)(2) are the ‘‘interstate transport’’ 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D). 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) identifies 

four distinct elements related to the 

evaluation of impacts of interstate 

transport of air pollutants. In this action 

for the state of Montana, EPA is 

addressing the first two elements of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) with respect to 

the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.1 The first 

element of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) 

requires that each SIP for a new or 

revised NAAQS contain adequate 

provisions to prohibit any source or 

other type of emissions activity within 

the state from emitting air pollutants 

that will ‘‘contribute significantly to 

nonattainment’’ of the NAAQS in 

another state. The second element of 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) requires that 

each SIP for a new or revised NAAQS 

contain adequate provisions to prohibit 

any source or other type of emissions 

activity in the state from emitting 

pollutants that will ‘‘interfere with 

maintenance’’ of the applicable NAAQS 

in any other state. 

EPA is also addressing the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) 

with respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires each 

SIP to contain adequate provisions to 

insure compliance with the applicable 

requirements of sections 126 and 115 of 

the Act. Section 126 pertains to 

notification to nearby states and 

petitions from states to EPA regarding 

interstate transport of pollution. Section 

115 pertains to international transport of 

pollution. 

On February 10, 2010, the Montana 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(MDEQ) provided a submission to EPA 

certifying that Montana’s SIP is 

adequate to implement the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS for all the infrastructure 

requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2). 

This submission included a brief 

analysis to support the conclusion that 

Montana’s SIP meets the interstate 

transport requirements of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for this NAAQS.2

On May 13, 2013 (78 FR 27883), EPA 

proposed to partially approve and 

partially disapprove MDEQ’s February 

2010 submission with regard to the 

infrastructure requirements of CAA 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and 

110(a)(2)(D)(ii). As explained in that 

action, we proposed to partially 

disapprove these elements of Montana’s 

submission because the submission did 

not include any technical analysis to 

support its conclusion regarding section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), and did not to address 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii). (78 FR 27885) 

However, we also proposed to partially 

approve elements 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and 

110(a)(2)(D)(ii) of Montana’s submission 

based on our supplemental analysis, 

through which we concluded that the 

existing SIP for the State of Montana is 

adequate to satisfy the requirements of 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and 

110(a)(2)(D)(ii). The details of our 

supplemental analysis are provided in 

our notice of proposed rulemaking. 

II. Response to Comments 

EPA received one anonymous public 

comment on the proposed action. The 

commenter expressed concern about the 

potential for particulate matter pollution 

from what the commenter called the 

‘‘slash and burn policies’’ of the U.S. 

Forest Service (USFS). The commenter 

alleged that the USFS had created an air 

pollution violation, but did not identify 

any particular provision of the Act or 

the Montana SIP that the USFS had 

violated. 

As discussed in our proposal notice, 

the scope of our action was to evaluate 

Montana’s submission that the Montana 

SIP is adequate to prevent sources in 

Montana from significantly contributing 

to nonattainment or interfering with 

maintenance of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in any other state. To the extent that the 

commenter is concerned that the SIP is 

inadequate with respect to interstate 

transport impacts of PM2.5 created by 

intentional burns by the USFS, EPA 

disagrees with that concern. Our 

technical analysis confirmed that 

emissions from Montana in total, 

including emissions from prescribed 

burns, do not significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in any other state. The commenter did 

not identify any issues with this 

analysis. 

The commenter also expressed 

concern that the Regulations.gov site 

was inaccessible on a particular day. In 

our notice, we provided alternative 

means of commenting: email, fax, postal 

mail, and hand delivery. We also 

provided an address, phone number, 

and email contact for further 

information. However, the commenter 

did not attempt to use any of these 

alternative means to comment or to 

inform us of the problem. While we 

acknowledge the commenter’s concerns, 

we find that the public had adequate 

opportunity to comment on our action. 

III. Final Action 

EPA is partially approving and 

partially disapproving the 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) 

portions of Montana’s February 10, 2010 

submission. We are partially 

disapproving the 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 

portion of the submission because it 

relies on irrelevant factors and lacks any 

technical analysis to support the State’s 

conclusion with respect to interstate 

transport. However, we are also partially 

approving this portion of the 

submission based on EPA’s 

supplemental evaluation of relevant 

technical information, which supports a 

finding that emissions from Montana do 

not significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS in any other state and that the 

existing Montana SIP is, therefore, 

adequate to meet the requirements of 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. We 

conclude that any FIP obligation 

resulting from this partial disapproval is 

satisfied by our determination that there 

is no deficiency in the SIP to correct. 

This disapproval also does not require 

any further action on Montana’s part 

given EPA’s conclusion that the SIP is 

adequate to meet the requirements of 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Similarly, EPA is partially 

disapproving the 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) portion 

of Montana’s submission because it fails 

to address or discuss this CAA 

requirement. However, we are partially 

approving this portion of the 

submission based on the conclusion that 

the State’s existing SIP is adequate to 

meet the requirements of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(ii) for the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS. For similar reasons to 

those noted above for the 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirement, the partial 

disapproval of the submission for the 

110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requirement does not 

require any further action from Montana 

or create any additional FIP obligation 

for EPA. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, 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 Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

approves state law that meets Federal 

requirements and disapproves state law 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 146 / Tuesday, July 30, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 45871 

that does not meet Federal 

requirements; this action 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 Clean Air Act; 

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. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by September 30, 

2013. Filing a petition for 

reconsideration by the Administrator of 

this final rule does not affect the finality 

of this action for the purposes of judicial 

review nor does it extend the time 

within which a petition for judicial 

review may be filed, and shall not 

postpone the effectiveness of such rule 

or action. This action may not be 

challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2)). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: July 12, 2013. 

Shaun L. McGrath, 

Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended to read as 

follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for Part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Subpart BB—Montana 

■ 2. Section 52.1393 is amended by 

revising section heading, designating 

existing paragraph as (a) and adding 

paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 52.1393 Interstate transport 

requirements. 

* * * * * 

(b) On February 10, 2010, Montana 

Governor Brian Schweitzer submitted a 

letter certifying, in part, that Montana’s 

SIP is adequate to meet the interstate 

transport requirements of CAA section 

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

NAAQS. 

[FR Doc. 2013–18156 Filed 7–29–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1983–0002; FRL–9840–3] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Deletion 

of the Craig Farm Drum Superfund Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct Final Rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Region III is publishing a 

direct final Notice of Deletion for the 

Craig Farm Drum Superfund Site (Site) 

located in Perry Township, Armstrong 

County, Pennsylvania, from the 

National Priorities List (NPL). The NPL, 

promulgated pursuant to Section 105 of 

the Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act (CERCLA) of 1980, as amended, is 

an appendix of the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (NCP). This direct 

final deletion is being published by EPA 

with the concurrence of the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 

through the Pennsylvania Department of 

Environmental Protection (PADEP), 

because EPA has determined that all 

appropriate response actions under 

CERCLA, other than operation, 

maintenance, and Five Year Reviews, 

have been completed. However, this 

deletion does not preclude future 

actions under Superfund. 

DATES: This direct final deletion is 

effective September 30, 2013 unless 

EPA receives adverse comments by 

August 29, 2013. If adverse comments 

are received, EPA will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the direct final deletion 

in the Federal Register informing the 

public that the deletion will not take 

effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID no. EPA–HQ– 

SFUND–1983–0002, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: Epps.John@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (215) 814–3002. 

• Mail: John Epps, 1650 Arch Street, 

Mail Code 3HS22, Philadelphia, PA 

19103. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES