67596 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 219 / Tuesday, November 13, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

comfort of other participants (see 

www.access-board.gov/about/policies/ 

fragrance.htm for more information). 

Also, persons wishing to provide 

handouts or other written information to 

the committee are requested to provide 

electronic formats to Rex Pace via email 

prior to the meetings so that alternate 

formats can be distributed to committee 

members. 

David M. Capozzi, 

Executive Director. 

[FR Doc. 2012–27516 Filed 11–9–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8150–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2012–0846; FRL-9751–5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Montana; Revisions to the 

Administrative Rules of Montana—Air 

Quality, Subchapter 7, Subchapter 16 

and Subchapter 17 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

new rules and revisions as submitted by 

the State of Montana on September 23, 

2011, as revisions to Montana’s State 

Implementation Plan. Montana adopted 

these rules on December 2, 2005, and 

March 23, 2006. The new rules adopted 

on December 2, 2005, became stateeffective on January 1, 2006; the new 

rules and revisions adopted on March 

23, 2006, became state-effective on April 

7, 2006. These new rules and revisions 

meet the requirements of the Clean Air 

Act and EPA’s minor new source review 

regulations. The intended effect of this 

action is to propose to approve these 

rules as they are consistent with the 

Clean Air Act. This action is being taken 

under section 110 of the Clean Air Act. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 13, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08– 

OAR–2012–0846, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: daly.carl@epa.gov and 

leone.kevin@epa.gov 

• Fax: (303) 312–6064 (please alert 

the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing 

comments). 

• Mail: Carl Daly, Director, Air 

Program, Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P– 

AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, 

Colorado 80202–1129. 

• Hand Delivery: Carl Daly, Director, 

Air Program, Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 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–2012– 

0846. 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. Publiclyavailable 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: 

Kevin Leone, Air Program, Mailcode 

8P–AR, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop 

Street, Denver, Colorado 80202–1129, 

(303) 312–6227, or leone.kevin@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. General Information 

II. What is being addressed in this proposed 

action? 

III. What Authorities Apply to EPA’s 

Proposed Action 

IV. EPA’s Review and Proposed Action on 

SIP Revisions 

V. Summary of EPA’s Proposed Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

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 ARM mean or refer to 

the Administrative Rule of Montana. 

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

mean or refer to the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency. 

(iv) The initials MACT mean 

Maximum Achievable Control 

Technology. 

(v) The initials MAQP mean Montana 

Air Quality Permit. 

(vi) The initials MRR mean 

Monitoring, Reporting and 

Recordkeeping. 

(vii) The initials NAAQS mean 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards. 

(viii) The initials NESHAP mean 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants. 

(ix) The initials NSR mean or refer to 

new source review, a phrase intended to 

encompass the stationary source 

regulatory programs that regulate the 

construction and modification of 

stationary sources as provided under 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(C), CAA Title I, 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 219 / Tuesday, November 13, 2012 / Proposed Rules 67597 

parts C and D, and 40 CFR 51.160 

through 51.166, which includes new 

source review for both major and minor 

sources. 

(x) The word Program mean or refer 

to the Montana Oil and Gas Registration 

Program, unless the context indicates 

otherwise. 

(xi) The initials SIP mean or refer to 

State Implementation Plan. 

(xii) The words State or Montana 

mean the State of Montana, unless the 

context indicates otherwise. 

I. General Information 

A. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through 

www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly 

mark the part or all of the information 

that you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in 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: 

a. Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

b. Follow directions—The agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

c. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

d. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

e. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

f. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

g. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

h. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

II. What is being addressed in this 

proposed action? 

On September 23, 2011 the State of 

Montana submitted new rules and 

revisions to revise the Montana SIP. The 

submission contains new rules I–VI, 

codified as Administrative Rule of 

Montana (ARM) 17.8.1601, 17.8.1602, 

17.8.1603, 17.8.1604, 17.8.1605, and 

17.8.1606, pertaining to the regulation 

of oil and gas well facilities. EPA is 

proposing to approve these new rules in 

this notice. The Montana Board of 

Environmental Review (Board) adopted 

these new rules to the existing SIP on 

December 2, 2005. 

This submission also contains new 

rules I–IX, codified as ARM 17.8.1701, 

17.8.1702, 17.8.1703, 17.8.1704, 

17.8.1705,17.8.1710, 17.8.1711, 

17.8.1712 and 17.8.1713 pertaining to 

the regulation of oil and gas well 

facilities. EPA is proposing to approve 

these rule submissions in this action. 

The Board adopted these new rules to 

the existing SIP on March 23, 2006. 

This submission contains revisions to 

ARM 17.8.744 which were adopted on 

March 23, 2006. The proposed revisions 

to ARM 17.8.744 are a conforming 

change because of the addition of new 

rules. 

The proposed approval of the revised 

and new rules listed above would 

establish a registration system for oil 

and gas well facilities that presently 

require a Montana minor NSR air 

quality permit under the SIP 

regulations. The proposed new rules 

would allow the owner or operator of an 

oil or gas well facility to register with 

the Montana Department of 

Environmental Quality (MDEQ) in lieu 

of submitting a permit application and 

obtaining a permit to construct or 

modify the source before commencing 

construction or modification. Currently, 

with specific exemptions, the 

administrative rules adopted under the 

Montana Clean Air Act and approved by 

the EPA into the SIP, require the owner 

or operator of sources of air pollution to 

obtain a permit prior to construction or 

modification. 

Montana originally submitted these 

rules on October 16, 2006 and 

November 1, 2006, to EPA for inclusion 

into the SIP. EPA proposed to 

disapprove these submittals on January 

6, 2011 (76 FR 758). EPA had several 

concerns with the Program, as was 

explained in 76 FR 758. In March of 

2011, the State withdrew the October 

16, 2006, and November 1, 2006, 

submittals and, after several discussions 

between EPA and the State, Montana 

resubmitted the oil and gas rules on 

September 23, 2011. The State’s 

September 2011 submittal included a 

revised CAA section 110(l) 

demonstration and other supplemental 

data, which addressed the concerns we 

raised in our 76 FR 758 proposed action. 

III. What Authorities Apply to EPA’s 

Proposed Action 

Section 110(l) of the CAA states, 

‘‘[e]ach revision to an implementation 

plan submitted by a State under this Act 

shall be adopted by such State after 

reasonable notice and public hearing. 

The Administrator shall not approve a 

revision to a plan if the revision would 

interfere with any applicable 

requirement concerning attainment and 

reasonable further progress (as defined 

in section 171), or any other applicable 

requirement of this Act.’’ 

A demonstration is necessary to show 

that this revision will not interfere with 

attainment or maintenance of the 

NAAQS, including those for ozone, 

particulate matter, carbon monoxide, 

sulfur dioxide, lead, nitrogen oxides or 

any other requirement of the Act. 

Therefore, EPA will approve a SIP 

revision only after a state has 

demonstrated that such a revision will 

not interfere (‘‘noninterference’’) with 

attainment of the NAAQS, rate of 

progress, reasonable further progress or 

any other applicable requirement of the 

CAA. 

The CAA at section 110(a)(2)(C) 

requires states to include a minor NSR 

program in their SIP to regulate 

modifications and new construction of 

stationary sources within the area as 

necessary to assure the NAAQS are 

achieved. EPA’s implementing 

regulations at 40 CFR 51.160–164 are 

intended to ensure that new source 

growth is consistent with maintenance 

of the NAAQS and 40 CFR 51.160(e) 

requires states to identify types and 

sizes of facilities which will be subject 

to review under their minor NSR 

program. For sources identified under 

40 CFR 51.160(e), section 51.160(a) 

requires that the SIP include legally 

enforceable procedures that enable a 

state or local agency to determine 

whether construction or modification of 

a facility, building, structure or 

installation, or combination of these 

will result in a violation of applicable 

portions of the control strategy; or 

interference with attainment or 

maintenance of a national standard in 

the state in which the proposed source 

(or modification) is located or in a 

neighboring state. Section 110(i) of the 

CAA specifically precludes states from 

changing the requirements of the SIP 

except through SIP revisions approved 

by EPA. SIP revisions will be approved 

by EPA only if they meet all 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with 
67598 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 219 / Tuesday, November 13, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

requirements of section 110 of the CAA 

and the implementing regulations at 40 

CFR part 51. See CAA section 110(l); 40 

CFR 51.104. 

EPA has also issued several guidance 

memoranda that explain the Agency’s 

requirements for practicable 

enforceability for purposes of effectively 

limiting a source’s potential to emit (See 

docket). 

EPA recognizes that, under the 

applicable federal regulations, states 

have broad discretion to determine the 

scope of their minor NSR programs as 

needed to attain and maintain the 

NAAQS. A state may tailor its minor 

NSR requirements as long as they are 

consistent with the requirements of 40 

CFR part 51. States may also provide a 

rationale for why the rules are at least 

as stringent as the 40 CFR part 51 

requirements where the revisions are 

different from those in 40 CFR part 51. 

Since there are no ambient air quality 

standards for air toxics, the area’s 

compliance with any applicable 

maximum achievable control 

technology (MACT) standards, as well 

as, any federal mobile source control 

requirements under CAA sections 112 

or 202(l) would constitute an acceptable 

demonstration of noninterference for air 

toxics. 

Section 110(l) does not require a 

demonstration of noninterference for 

changes to federal requirements that are 

not included in the SIP. A revision to 

the SIP, however, cannot interfere with 

any federally mandated program such as 

a MACT standard (or related section 112 

requirements). 

IV. EPA’s Review and Proposed Action 

on SIP Revisions 

EPA is proposing to approve the new 

and revised rules as submitted by 

Montana on September 23, 2011, as 

identified above. 

As discussed above, any minor NSR 

SIP revision submittal must meet 

section 110(l) of the CAA. Section 110(l) 

of the Act indicates that EPA cannot 

approve a revision of a plan if the 

revision would interfere with any 

applicable requirement concerning 

attainment and reasonable further 

progress (as defined in Section 171), or 

any other applicable requirement of the 

Act. In a memo from Richard R. Long, 

Director, Region 8 Air and Radiation 

Program, to the Montana Board of 

Environmental Review on January 30, 

2006 (see docket) we stated that MDEQ 

should provide an appropriate analysis 

showing that the proposed new rules 

will not impact the NAAQS or 

prevention of significant deterioration 

(PSD) increments. One of the concerns 

EPA expressed in 76 FR 758 related to 

the cumulative effect of numerous 

registration sources. We recommended 

that MDEQ perform a screening 

cumulative impact analysis showing 

what effect oil and gas well facilities 

would have on the ozone, NO2, SO2 and 

PM NAAQS and PSD increments. 

MDEQ performed such an analysis. (See 

docket, demonstration of 

noninterference pages 1–42 and 

attachments 1–11.) MDEQ’s analysis 

went back prior to 2006, when Montana 

began implementing the Oil and Gas 

Registration Program as a state-approved 

rule, and provided data on the amount 

of oil and gas registration applications 

received. Monitoring and modeling data 

for all NAAQS pollutants from 2006 to 

present shows that the Oil and Gas 

Registration Program has not interfered 

with attainment or maintenance of any 

NAAQS, PSD increment, or any other 

requirement of the Act. Therefore, EPA 

has sufficient information to determine 

that the proposed new and revised rules 

would not interfere with any applicable 

requirement concerning attainment and 

maintenance of the NAAQS, PSD 

increments, or any other requirement of 

the Act. 

EPA expressed concerns in 76 FR 758 

that the new rules do not meet the 

requirements of CAA Section 

110(a)(2)(A) and 40 CFR 51.160(a)(1), 

which require that SIP revision 

submittals be enforceable. The 

September 23, 1987, Memorandum from 

J. Craig Potter, Assistant Administrator 

for Air and Radiation, and Thomas L. 

Adams Jr., Assistant Administrator for 

Enforcement and Compliance 

Monitoring, entitled ‘‘Review of State 

Implementation Plans and Revisions for 

Enforceability and Legal Sufficiency’’ 

provides EPA’s guidance for 

interpreting this provision in the Act. 

EPA initially viewed the new rules as 

a stand-alone program, which was not 

subject to provisions in the other parts 

of ARM 17.8. As such, we were 

concerned that the new and revised 

rules did not set forth legally 

enforceable procedures that would 

enable the State or local agency to 

determine whether construction of a 

minor source facility would result in 

interference with attainment or 

maintenance of the NAAQS (40 CFR 

51.160(a)) and that such procedures did 

not include a means by which the State 

or local agency to prevent construction 

of a minor source facility if it would 

result in interference with attainment or 

maintenance of the NAAQS (40 

CFR51.160(b)). In 76 FR 758, EPA did 

not consider other requirements in ARM 

17.8 as being applicable to the Program. 

However, after reviewing the State’s 

110(l) demonstration and the 

requirements in ARM 17.8, it is clear 

that the rules in ARM 17.8 subchapters 

1–6 and portions of subchapter 7 apply 

to the State’s new rules for oil and gas 

facilities registration. (See 110(l) 

demonstration pages 2–9 and 

attachments 2 and 3 of the state’s 110(l) 

analysis.) These subchapters provide, 

for example, testing requirements, 

source testing protocol, malfunction 

procedures, enforcement procedures, 

and specific ambient air monitoring 

requirements for criteria pollutants. 

Therefore, the new and revised rules 

which we are proposing for approval in 

this notice are in compliance with CAA 

Section 110(a)(2)(A), 40 CFR 51.160(a) 

and 40 CFR 51.160(b). 

EPA also had concerns that a source 

did not need to provide notice to the 

State before construction begins. The 

new and revised rules allow sources to 

operate and emit criteria pollutants up 

to 60 days before submitting a 

registration or permit application; 

therefore there is no requirement that 

the State be notified before construction 

begins. However, the new rules in ARM 

17.8.16 contain numerous safeguards 

that facilities must operate under until 

the MDEQ approves the registration or 

permit application. These safeguards 

include: limiting production; limiting 

hours of operation and/or fuel 

consumption to ensure that the facility’s 

potential to emit is below major source 

thresholds (17.8.1604); emission control 

requirements (17.8.1605); inspection 

and repair requirements (17.8.1608); 

and reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements (17.8.1609). Sources must 

also comply with requirements in ARM 

17.8.1 (general requirements), ARM 

17.8.2 (ambient standards), and ARM 

17.8.3 (emission standards), in addition 

to all other applicable requirements in 

ARM 17.8. Therefore, EPA concludes 

that the new and revised rules do not 

violate 40 CFR 51.160(a) and 40 CFR 

160(b). 

EPA also had concerns that the 

Program did not include the necessary 

monitoring, reporting and 

recordkeeping (MRR) requirements 

required for an oil and gas registration 

program to ensure accountability and 

provide a means to determine 

compliance. However, EPA did not 

consider the requirements of other 

subchapters of chapter 8 when 

considering MRR requirements. As 

described in the State’s submittal (110(l) 

demonstration, Table 1 (pages 3–15) and 

Table 2 (pages 18–21), the MRR 

requirements in ARM 17.8.1 (General 

Requirements), ARM 17.8.2 (Ambient 

Air Quality), ARM 17.8.3 (Emission 

Standards) are all applicable to 

registered sources, in addition to the 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 219 / Tuesday, November 13, 2012 / Proposed Rules 67599 

MRR requirements in ARM 17.8.1605 

and ARM 17.8.1713. Therefore, EPA 

proposes to find that the MRR 

requirements for a registered oil and gas 

facility are at least as stringent as what 

would be required for an oil and gas 

facility that would operate under a 

Montana Air Quality Permit (MAQP). 

The SIP approved MAQP rules contain 

no specific MRR requirements. Instead, 

a permitted facility is given MRR 

requirements through the actual permit. 

In existing MAQP regulations (ARM 

17.8.7), the MRR requirements are 

specified in the facility permit pursuant 

to a case-by-case best available control 

technology analysis rather than uniform 

rule conditions. 

EPA also finds that the regulatory 

provisions in 40 CFR 51.160(c), 40 CFR 

51.160(d), 40 CFR 51.160(e) and 40 CFR 

51.160(f), are met by the requirements in 

ARM 17.8.1703 (Registration Process 

and Information), ARM 17.8.1705 

(Operating Requirements: Facility-Wide) 

and the requirements in ARM 17.8.1. 

The MDEQ issued a Notice of Public 

Hearing and allowed for public 

comment (see submittal, tabs 19 and 

20), which meets the requirements in 40 

CFR 51.161 (public availability of 

information). The requirements in 40 

CFR 51.164 (stack height procedures) 

are met in ARM 17.8.4 (stack heights 

and dispersion techniques). 

EPA also expressed concerns in 76 FR 

758 with new rule ARM 17.8.1703(7), 

which provides that ‘‘The owner or 

operator of a registration eligible facility 

for which a valid MAQP has been 

issued may register with the department 

and request a revocation of the MAQP.’’ 

In 76 FR 758, EPA concluded this was 

a relaxation under CAA section 110(l), 

because it provides an exemption from 

SIP requirements not previously 

available to sources. This SIP relaxation 

would create a risk of interference with 

attainment and maintenance of the 

NAAQS and control strategy. EPA 

lacked sufficient information to 

determine that 17.8.1703(7) would not 

interfere with attainment and 

maintenance of the NAAQS, PSD 

increment, or any other requirement of 

the Act. 

Montana issued approximately 30 

MAQPs to oil and gas well facilities 

prior to implementing the oil and gas 

registration program. A comparison of 

MAQP requirements and registration 

requirements (see the state’s110(l) 

analysis, pages 19–21) show comparable 

requirements. 

EPA also expressed concerns in 76 FR 

758 with new rule ARM 17.8.1712(1), 

which provides that, ‘‘[l]eak detection 

methods may incorporate the use of 

sight, sound, or smell.’’ After further 

review, we propose to find that this 

language is approvable because ARM 

17.8.1712(1) is similar to EPA regulatory 

requirements in 40 CFR part 63, subpart 

BBBBBB and will not interfere with any 

applicable requirements of the Act. EPA 

notes that 40 CFR part 63, subpart 

BBBBBB provides similar leak detection 

methods using sight, sound, and smell. 

This regulation applies to area sources 

under the National Emission Standards 

for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

(NESHAPs) for Source Category: 

Gasoline Distribution Bulk Terminals, 

Bulk Plants, and Pipeline Facilities. 

EPA determined for this source category 

it was appropriate to allow leak 

detection methods using sight, sound, 

and smell. 

V. Summary of Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve revisions 

to ARM 17.8.744 and new rules I–VI, 

codified as ARM 17.8.1601, 17.8.1602, 

17.8.1603, 17.8.1604, 17.8.1605, and 

17.8.1606, pertaining to the regulation 

of oil and gas well facilities, and new 

rules I–IX, codified as ARM 17.8.1701, 

17.8.1702, 17.8.1703, 17.8.1704, 

17.8.1705,17.8.1710, 17.8.1711, 

17.8.1712 and 17.8.1713 pertaining to 

the regulation of oil and gas well 

facilities, as submitted by the State of 

Montana on September 23, 2011. 

EPA is proposing to approve the new 

and revised rules as identified in this 

action and EPA is proposing approval 

based upon sufficient information to 

determine that the requested revision to 

add the new oil and gas registration 

program to the Montana SIP will not 

interfere with any applicable 

requirement concerning attainment and 

reasonable further progress as required 

by CAA Section 110(l), or any other 

requirement of the Act. The new and 

revised rules comply with section 

110(a)(2)(C), which requires states to 

include a minor NSR program in their 

SIP to regulate modifications and new 

construction of stationary sources 

within the area as necessary to assure 

the NAAQS are achieved. EPA also 

finds the new and revised rules comply 

with 40 CFR 51.160–40 CFR 51.164 and 

meet the requirements for appropriate 

MRR. EPA is also proposing to approve 

ARM 17.8.744 as these revisions are 

conforming changes to the addition of 

new rules. 

VI. 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 CAA. Accordingly, 

this proposed 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 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. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with 
67600 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 219 / Tuesday, November 13, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds, New Source 

Review, Minor New Source Review, 

Permitting, Incorporation by reference. 

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

Dated: October 19, 2012. 

James B. Martin, 

Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2012–27566 Filed 11–9–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2012–0792;9750–9] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans and Designation 

of Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; State of Nevada; 

Redesignation of Clark County to 

Attainment for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone 

Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve, 

as a revision of the Nevada state 

implementation plan, the State’s plan 

for maintaining the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard in Clark County for ten years 

beyond redesignation, and the related 

motor vehicle emissions budgets, 

because they meet the applicable 

requirements for such plans and 

budgets. EPA is also proposing to 

approve a request from the Nevada 

Division of Environmental Protection to 

redesignate the Clark County ozone 

nonattainment area to attainment of the 

1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient 

Air Quality Standard because the 

request meets the statutory requirements 

for redesignation under the Clean Air 

Act. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before December 13, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R09–OAR–2012–0792, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: r9_airplanning@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: 415–947–3579. 

4. Mail or Deliver: Ginger Vagenas 

(AIR–2), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 

Street, San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. 

Instructions: All comments will be 

included in the public docket without 

change and may be made available 

online at http://www.regulations.gov, 

including any personal information 

provided, unless the comment includes 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such and 

should not be submitted through 

http://www.regulations.gov or email. 

http://www.regulations.gov is an 

anonymous access system, and EPA will 

not know your identity or contact 

information unless you provide it in the 

body of your comment. If you send 

email directly to EPA, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the public 

comment. 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. 

Docket: Generally, documents in the 

docket for this action are available 

electronically at www.regulations.gov 

and in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, 

California. While all documents in the 

docket are listed at 

www.regulations.gov, some information 

may be publicly available only at the 

hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 

material, large maps), and some may not 

be publicly available in either location 

(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy 

materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Ginger Vagenas, Air Planning Office 

(AIR–2), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region IX, (415) 972–3964, 

vagenas.ginger@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: 

Table of Contents 

I. Summary of Today’s Proposed Action 

II. Background 

III. Procedural Requirements for Adoption 

and Submittal of SIP Revisions 

IV. Substantive Requirements for 

Redesignation 

V. Evaluation of the State’s Redesignation 

Request for the Clark County 8-Hour 

Ozone Nonattainment Area 

A. Determination That the Area Has 

Attained the Applicable NAAQS 

B. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved 

SIP Meeting Requirements Applicable 

for Purposes of Redesignation Under 

Section 110 and Part D 

1. Basic SIP Requirements Under CAA 

Section 110 

2. Part D Requirements 

a. Introduction 

b. Emissions Inventory 

c. Permits for New and Modified Major 

Stationary Sources 

d. Compliance With Section 110(a)(2) 

e. Conformity Requirements 

C. The Area Must Show the Improvement 

in Air Quality Is Due to Permanent and 

Enforceable Emissions Reductions 

D. The Area Must Have a Fully Approved 

Maintenance Plan Under CAA Section 

175A 

1. Attainment Inventory 

2. Maintenance Demonstration 

3. Monitoring Network 

4. Verification of Continued Attainment 

5. Contingency Provisions 

6. Subsequent Maintenance Plan Revisions 

7. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets 

VI. Proposed Action and Request for Public 

Comment 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Summary of Today’s Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to take several 

related actions. First, under Clean Air 

Act (CAA or ‘‘Act’’) section 110(k)(3), 

EPA is proposing to approve a submittal 

from the Nevada Division of 

Environmental Protection (NDEP) dated 

April 11, 2011 of Clark County’s Ozone 

Redesignation Request and 

Maintenance Plan (March 2011) (‘‘Clark 

County Ozone Maintenance Plan’’ or 

‘‘Ozone Maintenance Plan’’) as a 

revision to the Nevada state 

implementation plan (SIP). 

In connection with the Clark County 

Ozone Maintenance Plan, EPA finds 

that the maintenance demonstration 

showing how the area will continue to 

attain the 1997 8-hour ozone national 

ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) 

for 10 years beyond redesignation (i.e., 

through 2022) and the contingency 

provisions describing the actions that 

Clark County will take in the event of 

a future monitored violation meet all 

applicable requirements for 

maintenance plans and related 

contingency provisions in CAA section 

175A. EPA is also proposing to approve 

the motor vehicle emissions budgets 

(MVEBs) in the Clark County Ozone 

Maintenance Plan because we find they 

meet the applicable transportation 

conformity requirements under 40 CFR 

93.118(e). 

Second, under CAA section 

107(d)(3)(D), EPA is proposing to 

approve NDEP’s request that 

accompanied the submittal of the 

maintenance plan to redesignate the 

Clark County 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area to attainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. We are 

doing so based on our conclusion that 

the area has met the five criteria for 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with