59090 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

meeting Federal requirements and 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 proposed rule, 

pertaining to Delaware’s offset 

lithographic printing and letterpress 

printing, 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, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: September 6, 2011. 

James W. Newsom, 

Acting, Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2011–24521 Filed 9–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2011–0767, FRL–9470–6] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Oregon: New 

Source Review/Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration Rule 

Revisions and Air Quality Permit 

Streamlining Rule Revisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

a portion of the State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the 

State of Oregon for the purpose of 

addressing the third element of the 

interstate transport provisions of Clean 

Air Act (CAA or the Act) section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS or standards) and 

the 1997 and 2006 fine particulate 

matter (PM2.5) NAAQS. The third 

element of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requires that a State 

not interfere with any other State’s 

required measures to prevent significant 

deterioration (PSD) of its air quality. 

EPA is also proposing to approve 

numerous revisions to the Oregon SIP 

that were submitted to EPA by the State 

of Oregon on October 8, 2008; October 

10, 2008; March 17, 2009; June 23, 2010; 

December 22, 2010 and May 5, 2011. 

The revisions include updating 

Oregon’s new source review (NSR) rules 

to be consistent with current Federal 

regulations and streamlining Oregon’s 

air quality rules by clarifying 

requirements, removing duplicative 

rules, and correcting errors. The 

revisions were submitted in accordance 

with the requirements of section 110 

and part D of the Act). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 24, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– 

OAR–2011–0767, by any of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: R10-Public_Comments@

epa.gov. 

• Mail: Scott Hedges, EPA Region 10, 

Office of Air, Waste and Toxics (AWT– 

107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, 

Seattle, WA 98101. 

• Hand Delivery/Courier: EPA Region 

10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, 

Seattle WA, 98101. Attention: Scott 

Hedges, Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, 

AWT–107. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during normal hours of 

operation, and special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R10–OAR–2011– 

0767. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received 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 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 http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

http://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 e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

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, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy 

during normal business hours at the 

Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, EPA 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules 59091 

1See transmittal letters dated June 23, 2010, from 

Joni Hammond, Deputy Director, ODEQ, and 

December 22, 2010, from Dick Pedersen, Director, 

ODEQ, to Dennis McLerran, Regional 

Administrator, EPA Region 10. 

2EPA is not proposing to take action on each of 

the regulatory provisions that were included in the 

five SIP submissions identified in Table 1. Only the 

SIP revisions and implementing regulations 

specifically identified in Table 2 are being proposed 

for action in today’s notice. 

Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, 

WA 98101. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Scott Hedges at telephone number: (206) 

553–0296, e-mail address: 

hedges.scott@epa.gov, or the above EPA, 

Region 10 address. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document wherever 

‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’ or ‘‘our’’ are used, we mean 

EPA. Information is organized as 

follows: 

Table of Contents 

I. Purpose of Proposed Action 

II. Oregon SIP Revisions 

A. Third PSD Element of Oregon’s 

Interstate Transport SIP for the 1997 

Ozone and 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS 

B. How Oregon’s NSR/PSD Permitting 

Program Meets Federal Requirements 

1. Oregon’s NSR/PSD Rule Revisions 

2. Analysis of Oregon’s NSR/PSD Revisions 

C. Agricultural Operations (as Specified in 

Oregon Revised Statute 468A.020) 

D. Permitting Rule Corrections, 

Clarifications and Streamlining 

1. Rule Revisions in the October 10, 2008 

SIP Submittal 

2. Rule Revisions in the March 17, 2009 

SIP Submittal 

3. Rule Revisions in the June 23, 2010 SIP 

Submittal 

E. Significant Changes to Oregon’s SIP 

III. EPA’s Proposed Action 

A. Rules to Approve Into SIP 

B. Rules on Which No Action Is Taken 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Purpose of Proposed Action 

EPA proposes to approve a portion of 

Oregon’s Interstate Transport SIP 

revision for the 1997 8-hour ozone and 

1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS submitted 

by the Oregon Department of Quality 

(ODEQ) on June 23, 2010, and December 

22, 2010.1 Specifically, we are 

proposing to approve the portion of the 

plan that addresses the third element of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), interference with 

any other State’s required measures to 

PSD of its air quality with respect to 

these NAAQS. On June 9, 2011, EPA 

approved elements one and two of CAA 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i): (1) Significant 

contribution to nonattainment of these 

NAAQS in any other State, and (2) 

interference with maintenance of these 

NAAQS by any other State (76 FR 

33650). In addition, on July 5, 2011, 

EPA approved the SIP for the fourth 

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

found the SIP to be adequate for element 

four: interference with any other State’s 

required measures to protect visibility 

(76 FR 38997). 

EPA is also proposing to approve 

multiple revisions to Oregon’s SIP that 

were submitted to EPA by ODEQ on 

October 8, 2008, October 10, 2008, 

March 17, 2009, June 23, 2010, 

December 22, 2010, and May 5, 2011. 

The revisions update Oregon’s NSR 

rules to be consistent with Federal 

requirements by regulating PM2.5 and 

precursor pollutants, as well as adding 

greenhouse gases (GHGs) to the list of 

pollutants whose emissions are subject 

to control under the State’s NSR 

permitting process and establishes a 

threshold for such regulation. Approval 

of the State’s GHG permitting 

regulations is proposed to be 

accompanied by a simultaneous 

withdrawal of the Federal 

Implementation Plan (FIP) that EPA 

promulgated on December 9, 2010 (75 

FR 82246). EPA also proposes to 

approve changes to Oregon’s Plant Site 

Emissions Limit (PSEL) program which 

address the method for establishing 

baseline emissions and adopt a 

threshold or significant emission rate of 

10 tons per year of PM2.5 as a significant 

change at an existing facility. Other SIP 

rule changes that are proposed for 

approval in this action streamline and 

clarify the State’s air quality rules that 

are unrelated to NSR and remove 

duplicative or outdated requirements 

(such as the removal of unused basic 

permit categories that are covered under 

the general permitting provisions of the 

Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR). 

The SIP submittals, described in greater 

detail in this Notice, revise and amend 

OAR, chapter 340, divisions 200, 202, 

204, 206, 209, 210, 214, 216, 222, 224, 

225, 228, 234, and 236, currently in the 

Federally approved Oregon SIP (CFR 

part 52, subpart MM), and add portions 

of OAR chapter 340, division 208 to the 

Federal approved Oregon SIP. The 

proposed SIP revisions are explained in 

more detail below along with our 

evaluation of how these rules comply 

with the requirements for SIPs and the 

basis for our proposed action. 

II. Oregon SIP Revisions 

Table 1 provides a list of each SIP 

submittals by ODEQ (by submittal date, 

and subject) evaluated in this proposed 

action. The paragraphs that follow Table 

1 include further information for each 

SIP submittal including a summary of 

the submittal with relevant background 

information and analysis to support our 

action. 

TABLE 1—ODEQ SIP SUBMITTALS ADDRESSED IN THIS ACTION 2

Date of submittal Subject 

10/08/2008 ............................................................................................................................. Statutory Agricultural Operations Exemption. 

10/10/2008 ............................................................................................................................. Permit Streamlining Rules. 

(Repealed Rules in Italics). 

03/17/2009 ............................................................................................................................. Plant Site Emission Limit (PSEL) Rule. 

06/23/2010 (Report on interstate transport of PM2.5 and ozone added to submittal on 12/ 

22/2010).

Infrastructure SIP Rule Changes. 

05/05/2011 ............................................................................................................................. NSR, PM2.5, and GHG Permitting Rule Updates. 

Title I of the CAA, as amended by 

Congress in 1990, specifies the general 

requirements for States to submit SIPs to 

attain and/or maintain the NAAQS and 

EPA’s actions regarding approval of 

those SIPs. With this action we are 

proposing approval of the third element 

of Oregon’s Interstate Transport SIP 

revision for the 1997 8-hour ozone and 

1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS related to 

PSD. 

EPA last approved the Oregon major 

NSR rules (which encompass PSD and 

part D NSR) on December 17, 2002 

(published January 22, 2003, 68 FR 

2891). That approval acted on a July 1, 

2001, comprehensive version of 

Oregon’s NSR rules submitted to EPA 

on June 26, 2001, prior to the 2002 NSR 

Reform Rules (published on December 

31, 2002, effective date March 3, 2003). 

Since the approval of the State’s July 

2001 rules, ODEQ has submitted several 

NSR/PSD rule revisions for 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
59092 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

3See 62 FR 38856. The level of the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS is 0.08 parts per million (ppm). 40 

CFR 50.10. The 8-hour ozone standard is met when 

the 3-year average of the annual 4th highest daily 

maximum 8-hour ozone concentrations is 0.08 ppm 

or less (i.e., less than 0.085 ppm based on the 

rounding convention in 40 CFR part 50, appendix 

I). This 3-year average is referred to as the ‘‘design 

value.’’ 

4See 62 FR 38652. The level of the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS are 15.0 μg/m3 (annual arithmetic mean 

concentration) and 65 μg/m3 (24-hour average 

concentration). 40 CFR 50.7. The annual standard 

is met when the 3-year average of the annual mean 

concentrations is 15.0 μg/m3 or less (i.e., less than 

15.05 μg/m3 based on the rounding convention in 

40 CFR part 50, appendix N section 4.3). The 24- 

hour standard is met when the 3-year average 

annual 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations is 

65 μg/m3 or less (i.e., less than 65.5 μg/m3 based 

on the rounding convention in 40 CFR part 40 

appendix N section 4.3). Id. These 3-year averages 

are referred to as the annual PM2.5 and 24-hour 

PM2.5 ‘‘design values,’’ respectively. 

5See 71 FR 61144. In 2006, the 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS standard was changed from 65 μg/m3 to 35 

μg/m3 (24-hour average concentration). The annual 

PM2.5 standard was not changed. 40 CFR 50.13. 

6Memorandum from William T. Harnett entitled 

‘‘Guidance for State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Submissions to Meet Current Outstanding 

Obligations Under Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 8- 

hour ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards,’’ August 15, 2006. 

7Memorandum from William T. Harnett entitled 

‘‘Guidance SIP Elements Required Under Sections 

110(a)(1) and (2) for the 24-hour Particle (PM2.5) 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS),’’ September 25, 2009. 

8This interstate transport report was 

inadvertently left out of the original June 23, 2010, 

SIP submittal. 

incorporation into the Federally 

approved SIP including, most recently, 

the changes needed for the permitting of 

PM2.5 and GHGs under ODEQ’s major 

NSR program. The regulations which 

are proposed for approval in this action 

accordingly include PSD permitting of 

PM2.5 and GHGs and nonattainment 

NSR permitting of PM2.5. 

Finally, EPA is also proposing to 

approve multiple SIP submittals 

containing ODEQ rule revisions that 

effectuate structural reorganizations of 

the Oregon code. These rules have been 

clarified and streamlined with 

duplicative and outdated requirements 

removed. Further background for each 

one is provided in the section below. 

A. Third PSD Element of Oregon’s 

Interstate Transport SIP for the 1997 

Ozone and 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS 

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated 

the 1997 8-hour ozone 3 NAAQS and the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.4 Additionally on 

December 18, 2006, EPA revised the 

1997 24-hour PM2.5 standard.5 Today’s 

proposed actions relate to these revised 

standards (the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS and the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS). 

Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA requires 

States to submit SIPs to address a new 

or revised NAAQS within three years 

after promulgation of such standards, or 

within such shorter period as EPA may 

prescribe. Section 110(a)(2) lists the 

elements that such new SIPs must 

address, as applicable, including section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) which pertains to 

interstate transport of certain emissions. 

On August 15, 2006, and September 25, 

2009, respectively, EPA issued guidance 

for States making submissions to meet 

the requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

and 1997 PM2.5 standards (2006 

Guidance) 6 and for the 2006 PM2.5

standards (2009 Guidance).7

The interstate transport SIP 

provisions in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) 

(also called ‘‘good neighbor’’ provisions) 

require each State to submit a SIP that 

contains provisions that prohibit 

emissions that adversely affect another 

State in the ways contemplated in the 

statute. Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) identifies 

four distinct elements related to the 

evaluation of impacts of interstate 

transport of air pollutants. In this 

rulemaking EPA is addressing the third 

element in this subsection. The third 

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

requires a SIP to contain adequate 

provisions prohibiting emissions that 

interfere with any other State’s required 

measures to prevent significant 

deterioration of its air quality. 

As a part of its SIP submittal 

addressing interstate transport, ODEQ 

submitted an analysis entitled ‘‘Oregon 

SIP Infrastructure for Addressing the 

Interstate Transport of Ozone and Fine 

Particulate Matter’’, dated November 5, 

2009, to EPA on December 22, 2010.8

EPA believes that ODEQ’s submission is 

consistent with EPA’s recommendations 

in both the 2006 and 2009 Guidance, 

when evaluated in conjunction with the 

NSR/PSD rule revisions that EPA 

proposes to approve in today’s action. 

EPA’s proposed approval of Oregon’s 

SIP submission for purposes of meeting 

the requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) is contingent upon the 

final approval of the NSR/PSD rule 

revisions also included in this proposed 

action. (In addition to this section, see 

sections II. C through E of this action for 

a discussion of the rule revisions 

proposed for approval.) 

EPA proposes to find that the Oregon 

SIP (40 CFR part 52 subpart MM), as 

amended by today’s proposed action, 

includes the requirements under the 

CAA necessary to avoid interference 

with another State’s SIP measures for 

preventing significant deterioration of 

air quality. 

Oregon has no EPA designated 8-hour 

ozone nonattainment areas, and has two 

designated 24-hour PM2.5 nonattainment 

areas (Klamath Falls and Oakridge). For 

most of the State, ODEQ permits new 

major industrial sources through the 

PSD program for these pollutants. 

ODEQ’s major NSR rules (division 

224—which includes both 

nonattainment NSR and PSD rule 

provisions), as reflected in the rules 

proposed for incorporation into the SIP 

in today’s action, ensure that the 

programs for PSD in other States are not 

jeopardized by new or expanding 

industrial sources. Specifically, all new 

industrial sources and major 

modifications to existing industrial 

sources in attainment areas are subject 

to ODEQ PSD rules requiring preconstruction review, air quality 

analysis, the application of any required 

emission control technology, and air 

permitting. All new sources and major 

modifications in nonattainment areas 

are subject to the nonattainment New 

Source Review provisions of these rules, 

including LAER, offsets, and net air 

quality benefit. ODEQ’s PSD program 

directly regulates PM2.5 meeting the 

requirements of NSR/PSD and also 

includes procedures to address Phase-II 

requirements of the final rule to 

implement the 8–Hour Ozone NAAQS. 

EPA believes that Oregon’s regulatory 

and SIP revision for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS that makes NOX a 

precursor for ozone for PSD purposes 

and the PSD revision for the 1997 and 

2006 PM2.5 NAAQS that makes SO2 and 

NOX precursors for PM2.5 for PSD 

purposes, taken together with the other 

revised PSD rule revisions that EPA 

proposes to approve in this action, 

satisfy the requirements of the third 

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

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and the 

1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. That is, 

these provisions ensure that there will 

be no interference with any other State’s 

required PSD measures because 

Oregon’s SIP, as proposed for approval 

in this action, will meet current CAA 

requirements for PSD. 

B. How Oregon’s NSR/PSD Permitting 

Program Meets Federal Requirements 

Parts C and D of title I of the CAA, 

42 U.S.C. 7470–7515, set forth 

preconstruction review and permitting 

programs applicable to new and 

modified stationary sources of air 

pollutants regulated under the CAA, 

known as ‘‘major New Source Review’’ 

or ‘‘major NSR.’’ The major NSR 

programs of the CAA include a 

combination of air quality planning and 

air pollution control technology 

program requirements. States adopt 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules 59093 

9Carbon dioxide equivalent or CO2e is a unit of 

measurement that allows the effect of different 

GHGs to be compared using carbon dioxide as a 

standard unit for reference. 

10Oregon’s rules use the terms ‘‘significant 

emission threshold’’ or ‘‘significant emission rate 

(SER)’’ for GHG PSD permitting purposes. However, 

these terms do not have the same meaning as 

‘‘significant’’ as used in the context of EPA’s PSD 

regulation at 40 CFR 51.166. EPA has not 

established a significant emission rate for GHGs 

under 40 CFR 51.166(b)(23)(i). Oregon’s PSEL PSD 

permitting program establishes a GHG threshold of 

75,000 CO2e to tailor the application of its PSD 

permitting program in a manner similar to EPA’s 

GHG Tailoring Rule. 

major NSR programs as part of their SIP. 

Part C is the ‘‘Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration’’ or ‘‘PSD’’ program, 

which applies in areas that meet the 

NAAQS (i.e., ‘‘attainment’’ areas) as 

well as in areas for which there is 

insufficient information to determine 

whether the area meets the NAAQS (i.e., 

‘‘unclassifiable’’ areas). Part D is the 

‘‘Nonattainment New Source Review’’ 

or the ‘‘NNSR’’ program, which applies 

in areas that are not in attainment of the 

NAAQS (i.e., ‘‘nonattainment areas’’). 

EPA regulations implementing these 

programs are contained in 40 CFR 

51.165, 51.166, 52.21, 52.24, and part 

51, appendix S. 

On December 31, 2002, EPA 

published final rule changes to the PSD 

and NNSR programs (67 FR 80186) and 

on November 7, 2003, EPA published a 

notice of final action on the 

reconsideration of the December 31, 

2002 final rule changes (68 FR 63021). 

In the November 7, 2003 final action, 

EPA added a definition of ‘‘replacement 

unit,’’ and clarified an issue regarding 

plantwide applicability limitations 

(PALs). The December 31, 2002 and the 

November 7, 2003, final actions, are 

collectively referred to as the ‘‘2002 

NSR Reform Rules.’’ 

The 2002 NSR Reform Rules made 

changes to five areas of the major NSR 

programs related to physical and 

operational changes at existing major 

stationary sources. In summary, the 

2002 rules: (1) Provide a new method 

for determining baseline actual 

emissions; (2) adopt an actual-toprojected-actual methodology for 

determining whether a major 

modification has occurred; (3) allow 

major stationary sources to comply with 

PALs to avoid having a significant 

emissions increase that triggers the 

requirements of the major NSR program; 

(4) provide a new applicability 

provision for emissions units that are 

designated clean units; and (5) exclude 

pollution control projects (PCPs) from 

the definition of ‘‘physical change or 

change in the method of operation.’’ 

After the 2002 NSR Reform Rules 

were finalized and effective (March 3, 

2003), various petitioners challenged 

numerous aspects of the 2002 NSR 

Reform Rules, along with portions of 

EPA’s 1980 NSR rules (45 FR 5276, 

August 7, 1980). On June 24, 2005, the 

DC Circuit Court issued a decision on 

the challenges to the 2002 NSR Reform 

Rules. See New York v. United States, 

413 F.3d 3 (DC Cir. 2005). In summary, 

the DC Circuit Court vacated portions of 

the 2002 NSR Reform Rules pertaining 

to clean units and PCPs, remanded a 

portion of the rules regarding 

recordkeeping (40 CFR 52.21(r)(6) and 

40 CFR 51.166(r)(6)), and either upheld 

or did not comment on the other 

provisions included as part of the 2002 

NSR Reform Rules. On June 13, 2007 (72 

FR 32526), EPA took final action to 

revise the 2002 NSR Reform Rules to 

remove from Federal law all provisions 

pertaining to clean units and the PCP 

exemption that were vacated by the DC 

Circuit Court. 

The 2002 NSR Reform Rules require 

that State agencies adopt and submit 

revisions to their SIP permitting 

programs implementing the minimum 

program elements of the 2002 NSR 

Reform Rules no later than January 2, 

2006. To meet this requirement, ODEQ 

submitted an NSR reform equivalency 

demonstration report on December 22, 

2005. 

1. Oregon’s NSR/PSD Rule Revisions 

EPA last approved the Oregon major 

NSR rules addressing part D NSR and 

PSD on December 17, 2002 (published 

January 22, 2003, 68 FR 2891). This 

approval acted on a July 1, 2001, 

comprehensive version of Oregon’s NSR 

rules submitted to EPA on June 26, 

2001. 

On May 5, 2011, ODEQ submitted a 

series of rule changes as revisions to the 

Oregon SIP. These rule changes are 

necessary to align its rules with 

significant changes made to EPA’s air 

quality permitting regulations, 

including the 2002 NSR Reform Rules 

(published on December 31, 2002, 

effective date March 3, 2003), and the 

permitting of PM2.5 and GHG emissions. 

The SIP submittal covers revisions to 

OAR chapter 340, divisions 200, 202, 

216, 224, 225, and 228. 

The rule revisions include the 

adoption of a threshold or significant 

emission rate of 10 tons per year of 

PM2.5 as a significant change at an 

existing facility. Facilities would trigger 

NSR/PSD permitting only if a physical 

or operational change increased 

emissions above this threshold. The rule 

revisions also include the adoption of 

levels to determine if additional 

ambient air quality analysis is required, 

track the cumulative impact of 

emissions growth in areas that meet air 

quality standards, and determine if 

preconstruction monitoring is required 

for PM2.5. 

The May 5, 2011, SIP submittal also 

includes rules to allow the permitting of 

GHG emissions under Oregon’s NSR/ 

PSD program. Oregon’s definition of 

‘‘federal major source’’ is almost 

identical to EPA’s definition of ‘‘major 

stationary source’’ and as such, Oregon 

has tailored its PSD rules in a manner 

identical to EPA’s with respect to major 

sources of GHG emissions. That is, for 

a ‘‘federal major source’’ to be ‘‘major’’ 

for GHGs under the Oregon PSD 

program, it must have the potential to 

emit GHGs equal to or greater than 

100,000 tons per year on a carbon 

dioxide equivalent (CO2e) basis and a 

potential to emit GHGs equal to or 

greater than 100/250 tons per year on a 

mass basis.9 However, as discussed 

above, Oregon’s definition of ‘‘major 

modification’’ is substantially different 

than (but equivalent to) EPA’s definition 

of ‘‘major modification’’ so Oregon has 

tailored its PSD rule in a different 

manner in order to produce the same 

outcome with respect to major 

modifications for GHGs as EPA’s 

Tailoring Rule. 

In order for Oregon’s PSEL-based 

definition to have the same effect as 

EPA’s definition of ‘‘major 

modification’’ with respect to GHG 

emissions (i.e., an increase greater than 

75,000 tons per year on a CO2e basis 

and an increase greater than ‘‘zero’’ on 

a mass basis), Oregon’s rule requires the 

establishment of PSELs on a CO2e basis 

and an increase in the PSEL of more 

than 75,000 tons per year on a CO2e 

basis, before a ‘‘major modification’’ 

under the Oregon rules will have 

occurred.10 This approach is consistent 

with how the Oregon program defines 

major modifications for all other NSR 

regulated pollutants and results in the 

same outcome as EPA’s Tailoring Rule 

with respect to major modifications for 

GHG emissions. 

EPA proposes to find that these 

provisions are consistent with EPA’s 

GHG Tailoring Rule and is proposing to 

approve this GHG PSD permitting 

revision into the Oregon SIP providing 

Oregon with the authority to issue PSD 

permits addressing GHG emissions. In 

addition, EPA will rescind the FIP 

codified in 40 CFR 52.1987(d) that 

ensures the availability of a PSDpermitting authority for GHG-emitting 

sources in Oregon once this proposed 

action has been approved into the 

Oregon SIP. 

Additionally the May 5, 2011, SIP 

submittal includes rule changes 

providing small-scale local energy 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
59094 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

11 67 FR 80221 (December 31, 2002). 

12 67 FR 80241. 

projects more flexibility in obtaining 

reductions to offset proposed emission 

increases. 

EPA has reviewed these amendments 

to the ODEQ rules and, as discussed 

below, has determined that they meet 

EPA’s requirements under sections 110, 

part C and part D of title I of the CAA. 

EPA is therefore proposing to approve 

them as revisions to the Oregon SIP. 

2. Analysis of Oregon’s NSR/PSD 

Revisions 

In 1982, EPA approved Oregon’s 

Major NSR/PSD program as equivalent 

to, or more stringent than, EPA’s NSR/ 

PSD regulations (47 FR 35191, August 

13, 1982). Oregon’s program includes a 

Major NSR rule that covers nonattainment NSR and PSD applicability 

provisions as well as a separate but 

related PSEL (plant-wide cap) rule. The 

PSEL rule employs a similar, though not 

identical, approach to EPA’s PAL 

program and was in fact identified as an 

example of a State program successfully 

using a PAL concept during EPA’s 

development of its PAL regulations. 

In the December 31, 2002, preamble to 

its 2002 NSR Reform Rules, EPA 

discussed potential state PAL regulatory 

programs that could differ from the 

Federal rules while still affording 

equivalent effectiveness as an NSR/PSD 

program. The 2002 NSR Reform rules 

did not include specific requirements 

for an area-wide PAL program. 

However, the Agency did provide that 

‘‘[i]f a State currently has or wants to 

pursue an area-wide PAL program, then 

it must demonstrate that its program is 

equivalent to or more stringent than our 

final [PAL] rules.’’ 11 Later on, EPA 

affirmed that ‘‘[e]ver since our current 

NSR regulations were adopted in 1980, 

we have taken the position that States 

may meet the requirements of part 51 

‘with different but equivalent 

regulations.’ 45 FR 52676. Several states 

have, indeed, implemented programs 

that work every bit as well as our own 

base programs, yet depart substantially 

from the basic framework established in 

our rules. A good example is Oregon, 

where the SIP-approved program 

requires all major sources to obtain 

plantwide permits not unlike the PALs 

that we are finalizing today * * *’’ 12

Oregon’s NSR/PSD program differs 

from the Federal program in several 

ways. It doesn’t subject the same 

sources and modifications to major NSR 

as would EPA’s rules. The program has 

lower major source thresholds for 

sources in nonattainment areas and 

maintenance areas, so smaller new 

sources and changes to smaller existing 

sources are subject to review. The 

program also requires fugitive emissions 

to be included in the applicability 

determination for all new sources and 

modifications to existing sources. 

However, as mentioned, the program 

also utilizes a PSEL approach to 

defining major modifications rather than 

a contemporaneous net emissions 

increase approach as does EPA’s main 

(non PAL alternative) NSR reform 

approach. 

The effect of Oregon’s PSEL approach 

is that, generally, changes which would 

be subject to review under the PAL 

provisions in the 2002 NSR Reform 

Rules are subject under Oregon’s rules. 

However, there are some differences 

between the Oregon rules and EPA’s 

rules that, generally, result in Oregon’s 

program being more protective. For 

example, when a major modification is 

permitted, BACT and/or LAER is 

required for more new and modified 

emission units than under EPA’s PAL 

rules. Oregon’s rules require BACT/ 

LAER for all new and modified units, 

not just significant and major units, as 

well as defining what constitutes a 

modified unit more broadly than EPA’s 

rules. In addition, changes which would 

result in increased emissions, but would 

not be considered modifications under 

either the Oregon rules or EPA’s reform 

rules are still reviewed for compliance 

with ambient standards and PSD 

increments under Oregon’s PSEL 

program. 

Overall, EPA has determined that 

Oregon’s PSD program for reviewing 

and controlling emissions from new and 

modified sources is at least as strict as 

EPA’s program. We have reviewed 

Oregon’s NSR/PSD program and 

ODEQ’s recent rule revisions included 

in today’s proposed action, and have 

determined that the NSR/PSD program 

meets the current requirements in 40 

CFR 51.165 and 51.166. Accordingly, 

EPA proposes in this action to approve 

the specified changes into the Federally 

approved SIP. 

C. Agricultural Operations (as Specified 

in Oregon Revised Statute 468A.020) 

The CAA does not provide an 

exemption for agricultural operations 

while, prior to 2007, Oregon’s State law 

exempted most agricultural operations 

from air quality regulations. To address 

this discrepancy, the 2007 Oregon 

Legislature (in accordance with Oregon 

Senate Bill 235) updated Oregon’s air 

quality law (Oregon Revised Statute 

(ORS) 468.020 and 468A.020) to be 

consistent with the Federal CAA 

enabling the regulation of air emissions 

from agricultural sources if necessary to 

implement the Federal CAA. The 

Oregon Environmental Quality 

Commission in turn adopted rule 

amendments to OAR 340–200–0030, 

340–210–0205, and 340–264–0040 to 

align these rules with ORS 468A.020 

and to make revisions to Oregon’s SIP 

and the Oregon title V operating permit 

program. The revisions to OAR 340– 

200–0030, 340–210–0205, and 340–264– 

0040 were submitted to EPA by ODEQ 

on October 8, 2008. OAR rules now 

allow agricultural air quality pollution 

sources to be regulated in Oregon as 

necessary to meet CAA requirements. 

EPA believes that the revised ORS 

468A.020 (in conjunction with the 

corresponding revisions to the OAR 

340–200–0030, 340–210–0205, and 340– 

264–0040) meet CAA requirements and, 

therefore, we propose to incorporate 

these revised OAR provisions into the 

Federally approved Oregon SIP. 

D. Permitting Rule Corrections, 

Clarifications and Streamlining 

EPA is proposing to take action on 

portions of the following three SIP 

submittals by ODEQ that correct 

previous errors, provide clarification 

and streamline air quality permitting 

rules in the State of Oregon. These rules 

are described with additional specificity 

in section E of this notice. 

1. Rule Revisions in the October 10, 

2008, SIP Submittal 

In 2001, ODEQ streamlined the Air 

Quality Program’s permitting program 

which was previously approved by EPA. 

In 2007, ODEQ’s rulemaking further 

streamlined and updated the permitting 

process by clarifying requirements, 

eliminating duplicative and conflicting 

standards; keeping rules in line with 

Federal requirements, and correcting 

errors. This rulemaking package was 

submitted by ODEQ to EPA as a SIP 

revision on October 10, 2008. The SIP 

submittal covers revisions to OAR 

chapter 340, divisions 200, 208, 209, 

214, 216, 218, 228, 232, 234 and 236 

and EPA is proposing to approve 

incorporation of these provisions into 

the Federally approved SIP. The rule 

revisions in the October 10, 2008 SIP 

submittal: 

(1) Add the chemical HFE–7300 to a 

list of compounds exempt from the 

definition of volatile organic 

compounds (VOC), or ground-level 

ozone precursors to be consistent with 

Federal regulations; 

(2) Revise Excess Emissions rules to 

address the factors which ODEQ will 

take into consideration to determine 

how it will exercise its enforcement 

discretion with respect to excess 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules 59095 

13See 40 CFR 51.100(s). 

emissions incidents meeting specified 

criteria; 

(3) Delete unused Basic Permit 

categories in the Air Contaminant 

Discharge Permit (ACDP) rules that have 

been replaced by other permit 

categories; 

(4) Update, correct errors, and clarify 

general permits for asphalt plants, 

boilers, concrete plants, rock crushers, 

and wood products facilities (These 

changes clarify monitoring, reporting 

and compliance procedures in division 

216 (ACDPs) and include a provision 

that facilities with ACDPs may not be 

operated if the permit expires or is 

terminated, unless a timely renewal 

application has been submitted or 

another type of permit has been issued. 

The revisions also clarify that for 

facilities with title V or ACDPs, 

requirements established in preceding 

permits remain in effect unless 

specifically modified or terminated.); 

(5) Change the averaging time in the 

sulfur dioxide standards for fuelburning equipment from two hours to 

three hours to align with Federal 

standards (refer to section D, division 

228 of this proposal—Requirements for 

Fuel Burning Equipment and Fuel 

Sulfur Content—for a complete 

discussion of the revised averaging time 

of the sulfur dioxide emission 

standards); 

(6) Add a requirement for prior 

notification for those seeking to avail 

themselves of the exemption allowing a 

higher (currently SIP-approved) 

emission rate for burning salt laden 

wood waste; 

(7) SIP-strengthening measures that 

replace outdated regulations governing 

wigwam burners with a state-wide 

prohibition on their use; 

(8) Streamline the kraft pulp mill 

rules (in division 234) by clarifying 

permitting and compliance 

determinations, and eliminating 

unnecessary reporting, which includes 

removing a Director’s discretion 

reference in the definition of ‘‘Daily 

Arithmetic Average’’ allowing 

alternatives to emission limits, testing or 

monitoring methods without prior EPA 

approval, removing a section on 

submission of plans for construction 

and modification because general 

permitting regulations in division 210 

address these requirements, removing a 

section requiring use of obsolete sodium 

ion probe, as well as clarifying Federal 

New Source Performance Standards 

requirements that apply to kraft pulp 

mills; 

(9) Specifies average hourly emission 

rate calculation procedures and 

measurement methods for board 

products manufacturing. 

These changes clarify, correct and 

update Oregon’s existing rules to be 

consistent with Federal regulations as 

well as streamline the permitting 

process and are proposed for approval 

into the SIP. 

It should also be noted that on 

November 5, 1999, ODEQ submitted a 

complete rule renumbering to EPA for 

approval. On January 22, 2003 (68 FR 

2891), we approved most of these new 

divisions but at that time did not take 

action on division 208 (Visible 

Emissions and Nuisance Requirements). 

We are now proposing to approve rules 

0010 (Definitions), 0100 (Visible 

Emissions, Applicability), 0110 (Visible 

Emissions,Visible Air Contaminant 

Limitations), 0200 (Fugitive Emissions 

Requirements, Applicability) and 0210 

(Fugitive Emissions Requirements) of 

division 208 into the Oregon SIP which 

will replace division 21, rules 015, 050, 

055, and 060. 

Additionally, we are proposing to 

approve Oregon’s current excess 

emission rules (division 214, rules 0300 

through 0360) into the Oregon SIP. 

Upon approval, these division 214 rules 

will replace the Federally-approved 

division 28 which will be removed from 

the SIP. EPA finds that the division 214 

rules included in the October 10, 2008, 

SIP submittal conform to Federal 

guidance related to excess emissions, 

and proposes to incorporate these rules 

into the SIP. Oregon’s excess emission 

provisions specify the factors that the 

State will take into account regarding 

the exercise of its enforcement 

discretion in response to excess 

emissions. 

Finally, on January 18, 2007, EPA 

added 1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5-decafluoro-3- 

methoxy-4-trifluoromethyl-pentane 

(also known as HFE–7300) to the list of 

compounds 13 which are excluded from 

the definition of VOC on the basis that 

these compounds make a negligible 

contribution to tropospheric ozone 

formation (72 FR 2193—2196). 

Exempting HFE–7300 from the 

definition of VOC in OAR 340–200– 

0020 is consistent with Federal 

regulations. 

2. Rule Revisions in the March 17, 2009, 

SIP Submittal 

The Stationary Source PSEL rule 

(OAR chapter 340, division 222) sets 

limits on emissions of specified 

regulated air pollutants. The primary 

purpose of establishing a PSEL is to 

assure compliance with ambient air 

standards and PSD increments, which 

regulate criteria pollutants (i.e., 

particulate matter, ground-level ozone, 

carbon monoxide, sulfur oxides, 

nitrogen oxides, and lead). 

The March 17, 2009, SIP submittal 

exempts pollutants regulated by the 

Accidental Release Prevention rules and 

the Early Reduction High Risk Pollutant 

rules from regulation under the PSEL 

rule. These pollutants were erroneously 

included in ODEQ’s previous rule and 

have subsequently been removed. The 

Accidental Release Prevention rule 

(OAR–244–0230) was established to 

require businesses storing large 

quantities of hazardous materials to 

have a Risk Management Plan to prevent 

the accidental release of those regulated 

substances. The Early Reduction High 

Risk Pollutants rules (OAR 340–244– 

0120) are used to allow a source to make 

early voluntary emission reductions of 

listed chemicals in order to be allowed 

greater flexibility later when complying 

with new Federal regulations. These 

programs are not implemented through 

the PSEL rule and do not depend on 

that rule for implementation. 

3. Rule Revisions in the June 23, 2010, 

SIP Submittal 

Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the 

Federal CAA requires States to submit 

changes to SIP interstate transport 

provisions to EPA for approval. The rule 

revisions submitted to EPA on June 23, 

2010, are needed to update Oregon’s SIP 

and meet EPA infrastructure 

requirements. The SIP submittal covers 

revisions to OAR chapter 340, divisions 

200, 202, 204, and 206. 

These rule revisions include 

provisions necessary to address changes 

to the NAAQS for PM2.5, ozone and 

lead. Specifically these revisions add 

PM2.5 to the list of regulated air 

pollutants so that Oregon no longer 

needs to rely on a surrogacy policy; 

include PM2.5 thresholds for significant 

harm, PM2.5 levels for triggering alerts, 

warnings, and emergencies (developed 

by ODEQ pursuant to the requirements 

of 40 CFR 51.151); include PM2.5 nonattainment area boundary descriptions 

for the cities of Klamath Falls and 

Oakridge; and, in accordance with EPA 

regulations, exempt dimethyl carbonate 

and propylene carbonate from the 

definition of VOC. On February 20, 

2009, EPA added dimethyl carbonate 

and propylene carbonate to the list of 

compounds (40 CFR 51.100(s)) which 

are excluded from the definition of VOC 

on the basis that these compounds make 

a negligible contribution to tropospheric 

ozone formation (74 FR 3437–3441). 

Exempting dimethyl carbonate and 

propylene carbonate from the definition 

of VOC in OAR 340–200–0020 will 

make Oregon rule consistent with 

Federal regulations. 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
59096 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

E. Significant Changes to Oregon’s SIP 

The docket to today’s proposed action 

includes a technical support document 

which describes in more detail the 

substantive changes to the Oregon rules 

that have been submitted by ODEQ as 

revisions to the SIP, EPA’s evaluation of 

the changes, and the basis for EPA’s 

action. 

A summary of significant regulatory 

changes proposed for incorporation into 

the SIP under today’s proposal are 

provided below. 

Division 200 General Air Pollution 

Procedures and Definitions 

This division includes ODEQ’s 

general air quality definitions (rule 

0020), a list of abbreviations and 

acronyms (rule 0025), general 

exceptions (rule 0030), provisions for 

compliance schedules (rule 0050), and 

rules for conflicts of interest and 

makeup of boards (rules 0100 to 0120). 

ODEQ has revised the method of 

setting the starting emission level, or 

netting basis, for counting emission 

changes for new and expanding 

facilities when they are initially 

permitted. Under the current SIP, to 

ensure that Oregon’s NSR/PSD program 

is protective, companies are required to 

evaluate the air quality effects that 

would occur if a new or expanded 

facility operated at its capacity. Once 

this level is approved, it is added to a 

facility’s netting basis even though the 

facility may never actually operate at 

that level. This unrealistically high 

starting emission level could allow a 

future expansion to avoid NSR/PSD. To 

prevent this, ODEQ has added a process 

to reset the netting basis once a new or 

expanded facility has been operating for 

up to 10 or 15 years to establish a 

realistic level. This applies to major 

GHG sources that were permitted but 

not yet operating before the GHG rules 

were adopted and to future NSR/PSD 

sources. The process will not limit the 

ability of a facility to operate permitted 

equipment, but will prevent use of the 

added netting basis until the level is 

reset. 

General Definitions 340–200–0020 

Actual emissions—The rule revision 

adds provisions in definition of actual 

emissions for sources that had not 

begun normal operation during the 

baseline period but were approved or 

permitted to construct and operate. 

Oregon revised its major source 

permitting program by reducing the 

netting basis from potential to emit 

(PTE) down to the highest actual 

emissions at the end of the baseline 

period for sources approved under 

division 224. This will be required 

before any future netting can take place 

and will prevent sources from netting 

out of NSR/PSD. Sources that reduce 

actual emissions because of voluntary 

controls will not lose that portion of the 

netting basis. This reduction will not 

affect the PSEL so sources with NSR/ 

PSD permits will be able to utilize 

permitted emission units up to their 

permitted PTE without going through 

NSR/PSD again. ODEQ also revised its 

major source permitting program by 

reducing the netting basis from PTE 

down to the highest actual emissions in 

the last 10 years since the date of permit 

issuance for sources permitted under 

division 224 (Major NSR which 

includes PSD). 

The revision to the definition of 

actual emissions also adds (1) a 

provision for sources that had not begun 

normal operation but were permitted 

under division 224 to reset actual 

emissions, (2) a provision to reduce PTE 

to actual emissions for sources that had 

not begun normal operations but were 

permitted to construct and operate 

under division 224, (3) a provision to 

reduce PTE to actual emissions for 

sources permitted under division 224 or 

approved under division 210 (Stationary 

Source Notification Requirements) after 

the baseline period, and (4) adds 

aggregate insignificant emissions 

threshold for PM2.5 in PM2.5

nonattainment areas. This makes PM2.5

consistent with the PM10 threshold, 

which is 5% of the significant emission 

rate (SER) of 5 tons in Medford and 

other nonattainment areas in older 

rules. 

Aggregate insignificant emissions— 

The revision to the definition of 

aggregate insignificant emissions adds 

an emissions threshold for GHG. The de 

minimis level for GHG is set at the State 

of Oregon GHG reporting threshold 

(2,756 tons CO2e). 

Baseline Emission Rate—The revised 

definition for baseline emission rate 

does not include a specific rate for PM2.5

because PM2.5 will be ratioed to PM10 for 

both netting basis and PSEL. The 

revised definition includes a baseline 

emission rate for GHG with the first 

permit action after July 1, 2011, since 

that is when GHG sources are required 

to get permits for GHGs alone. 

The revised definition further adds a 

provision for recalculating the baseline 

emission rate if actual emissions are 

reset in accordance with the definition 

of actual emissions. The revised 

definition also adds a provision for 

freezing only the production basis used 

to establish the baseline emission rate, 

not the entire baseline emission rate. 

Biomass—The revised rule adds a 

definition of biomass and defers carbon 

dioxide (CO2) emissions from biomass 

in accordance with EPA’s July 2011 

deferral. The application of the PSD and 

title V permitting requirements to CO2

emissions from bioenergy and other 

biogenic stationary sources has been 

deferred for a period of 3 years. 

Criteria Pollutant—The revised rule 

adds PM2.5 to the definition of criteria 

pollutant. 

Federal Major Source—The revised 

rule adds a GHG threshold of 100,000 

tons CO2e per year to definition of 

Federal Major Source consistent with 

EPA’s GHG Tailoring Rule and includes 

fugitive emissions in the definition of 

major modification. This inclusion 

clarifies that fugitive emissions must be 

included in the major NSR applicability. 

The GHG threshold in 340–200– 

0020(55) is consistent with the 

requirements in the GHG Tailoring Rule. 

Major Modification—The definition of 

major modification has been revised. 

The revised definition adds a provision 

stating that major modifications for 

precursors are also major modifications 

for ozone and PM2.5. This revision aligns 

the definition with EPA rules. The 

revised definition also specifies (1) that 

a major modification is triggered if the 

PSEL exceeds the netting basis, (2) the 

type of accumulation of physical 

changes and changes in operation that 

trigger a major modification, (3) that 

fugitive emissions must be included in 

the major NSR applicability, (4) that 

emissions increases from the increased 

use of equipment permitted or approved 

to construct are not included in major 

modification applicability, and (5) when 

sources would trigger NSR with only a 

1 ton/year increase. 

The revised definition of major 

modification also states that the portion 

of the netting basis and PSEL that was 

based on PTE because the source had 

not begun normal operations must be 

excluded from major modification 

applicability until it is reset and deletes 

the exception for PCPs that has been 

removed from Federal regulations. 

Major Source—The revised major 

source definition states that fugitive 

emissions must be included in 

determining whether or not a source is 

considered major. The revised 

definition also indicates that PTE 

calculations must include emissions 

increases due to the new or modified 

source. 

Netting Basis—The revised netting 

basis definition states that the initial 

netting basis and PSEL for PM2.5 and 

GHG will be established with the first 

permitting action issued after July 1, 

2011, provided the permitting action 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules 59097 

involved a public notice period that 

began after July 1, 2011 (i.e., when major 

GHG sources will be required to obtain 

permits). 

The revised definition also adds a 

provision that the initial netting basis 

and PSEL for PM2.5 will be the PM2.5

fraction of the PM10 netting basis and 

PSEL. ODEQ treats PM2.5 and PM10 in a 

comparable manner since PM2.5 is a 

subset of PM10, which is a pollutant 

already addressed by the existing 

permitting rules. As a result, a facility’s 

PM2.5 fraction will be determined and 

used to calculate permitted levels for 

PM2.5. This approach incorporates PM2.5

at this time as if it had been part of the 

program all along; allowing previously 

approved expansions to continue to 

operate and new expansions to be 

reviewed consistent with State and 

Federal requirements. It also avoids the 

need to select a unique baseline period 

for counting changes in PM2.5 emissions 

towards triggering NSR/PSD. Because 

the PM10 SER is 15 tons/year and the 

PM2.5 SER is 10 tons/year, sources could 

retroactively trigger the PM2.5 SER 

because of past approved increases in 

PM10. As a result, ODEQ may conduct 

a one time 5 ton true up to eliminate 

this possibility. 

The revised definition also sets the 

initial source-specific PSEL for a source 

with a PTE greater than or equal to the 

SER to be equal to the PM2.5 fraction of 

the PM10 PSEL. The revision further 

clarifies when the netting basis is zero 

and when changes to the netting basis 

are effective and adds a provision to 

reduce the netting basis from PTE for 

sources permitted under OAR 340–224 

(Major NSR) after the baseline period. 

Opacity and Source Test—The 

reference to Director’s discretion to 

allow alternatives to emission limits, 

testing or monitoring methods in 

Federal rules or the SIP without prior 

EPA approval has been deleted from the 

definitions of opacity and source test. 

PM2.5—The revised PM2.5 definition 

adds EPA’s new reference test methods 

and adds a provision for PM2.5

precursors. This definition is consistent 

with EPA’s rules for purposes of title V 

and NSR. 

Regulated Pollutant—The revised 

definition for regulated pollutant 

includes precursors and GHGs and 

clarifies that only regulated pollutants 

with significant emissions are subject to 

NSR. 

The revised definitions discussed 

above are consistent with the EPA 

definition in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1) and 

51.166(b). 

Exceptions 340–200–0030 

The rule was revised to clarify that 

the statutory exemption for agricultural 

operations and equipment do not apply 

to the extent necessary to implement the 

CAA. This allows agricultural 

operations and equipment to be 

regulated as necessary in Oregon to 

meet CAA requirements. 

Division 200 Tables 

The Significant Air Quality Impact, 

Significant Emission Rates, De minimis 

Emission Levels, and Generic PSEL 

tables (Tables 1 through 5) in division 

have also been revised. The tables add: 

(1) EPA-adopted PM2.5 significant 

impact levels; (2) EPA-adopted SERs for 

GHG, direct PM2.5, PM2.5 precursors and 

VOC precursors; (3) de minimis levels 

for GHG, for PM2.5 in the Medford 

AQMA, and for direct PM2.5; and (4) a 

generic PSEL for PM2.5 and GHG. The de 

minimis level for GHG has been set at 

the State of Oregon GHG reporting 

threshold. The de minimis levels for 

PM2.5 are consistent with PM10 and the 

generic PSEL for GHG is based on 

proposed SER minus 1000 tpy. In 

addition, the generic PSEL for PM2.5 is 

based on the proposed SER minus 1 tpy, 

consistent with other criteria pollutants. 

Division 202 Ambient Air Quality 

Standards and PSD Increments 

This division contains the State 

ambient air quality standards and the 

PSD increments. 

Definitions 340–202–0010 

Baseline Calculation—The revised 

definition clarifies that actual emission 

increases from any source or 

modification (not just major sources and 

major modifications) on which 

construction commenced after January 

6, 1975, cannot be included in the 

baseline calculation. It also adds the 

baseline concentration for PM10 in the 

Medford-Ashland AQMA from the 

definition in division 225 (Air Quality 

Analysis Requirements) and the 

baseline concentration year for PM2.5

that is set on the year when ambient 

monitoring was done and when the 

increment was proposed. 

Ambient Air Quality Standards for 

Suspended Particulate Matter 340–202– 

0060, Ozone 340–202–0090 and Lead 

340–202–0130 

The revised rules update the Oregon’s 

ambient air quality standards to be 

consistent with Federal NAAQS by 

adding the 2006 annual average and 24- 

hour Federal standards for PM2.5, the 

2008 8-hour Federal standard for ozone 

and the 2010 one-hour Federal standard 

for lead. 

Division 204 Designation of Air 

Quality Areas 

This division identifies the carbon 

monoxide, PM10, and ozone 

nonattainment areas in the State of 

Oregon. 

Designation of Nonattainment Areas 

340–204–0030 

The rule was revised to add two PM2.5

nonattainment areas, Klamath Falls and 

Oakridge, that were designated by EPA 

to not be in attainment of the 2006 24- 

hour PM2.5 NAAQS (74 FR 58688, 

November 13, 2009). 

Division 206 Air Pollution 

Emergencies 

This division establishes criteria for 

identifying and declaring air pollution 

episodes at levels below the level of 

significant harm. The division was 

revised to add a significant harm level 

for PM2.5 of 350.5 μg/m3 (24-hour 

average), an air pollutant alert level for 

PM2.5 of 140.5 μg/m3 (24-hour average), 

an air pollution warning level of 210.5 

μg/m3 (24-hour average) for PM2.5, and 

an air pollutant emergency level of 

280.5 μg/m3 (2-hour average) for PM2.5. 

Division 214 Stationary Source 

Reporting Requirements 

This division contains ODEQ’s 

provisions for reporting and 

recordkeeping, information requests 

(section 114 authority), credible 

evidence, business confidentiality, 

emission statements, and excess 

emissions. 

Excess Emissions and Emergency 

Provisions 340–214–0300 Through 0360 

(Formally in Division 28) 

The applicability of the Excess 

Emissions and Emergency Provisions 

rule has been revised to align with EPA 

policy regarding applicability, planned 

start-up and shutdown, schedule 

maintenance, other excess emissions, 

enforcement action criteria, and 

affirmative defense by clarifying that the 

affirmative defense of emergency does 

not take away ODEQ’s enforcement 

discretion, but is relevant when 

evaluating a violation to determine the 

level of penalty. It also clarifies that 

excess emission reports must include 

whether a source followed approved 

procedures for startup, shutdown or 

maintenance activity when applicable 

and consolidates and further describes 

criteria for demonstrating emergency as 

an affirmative defense. The rule 

revisions are consistent with EPA policy 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
59098 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

14Memorandum from Steven A. Herman entitled 

‘‘State Implementation Plans: Policy Regarding 

Excess Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup, 

and Shutdown, September 20, 1999. 

as specified in 1999 memorandum by 

EPA.14

Division 216 Air Contaminant 

Discharge Permits 

This division is the ODEQ Federallyenforceable State Operating Permit 

program, and is also the administrative 

permit mechanism used to implement 

the notice of construction and major 

NSR programs. 

The revisions to the rules in division 

216 clarify that facilities with ACDPs 

may not be operated if the permit 

expires or is terminated, unless a timely 

renewal application has been submitted 

or another type of permit has been 

issued. The revisions also clarify that for 

facilities with title V or ACDPs, 

requirements established in preceding 

permits remain in effect unless 

specifically modified or terminated. 

In addition, the following unused 

Basic Permit categories currently in the 

Oregon SIP have been deleted from this 

rule and, following this action, are 

proposed to be removed from the SIP: 

(1) Wood Furniture and Fixtures more 

than 5,000 but less than 25,000 board 

feet/maximum 8 hour input. 

(2) Flour, Blended and/or Prepared 

and Associated Grain Elevators more 

than 2,000 but less than 10,000 tons per 

year throughput. 

(3) Grain Elevators used for 

intermediate storage more than 1,000 

but less than 10,000 tons/year 

throughput. 

(4) Millwork (including kitchen 

cabinets and structural wood members) 

more than 5,000 but less than 25,000 bd. 

ft./maximum 8 hour input. 

(5) Non-Ferrous Metal Foundries 

more than one ton/yr. but less than 100 

tons/yr. of metal charged. 

(6) Pesticide Manufacturing more than 

1,000 tons/yr. but less than 5,000 tons/ 

yr. 

(7) Sawmills and/or Planing Mills 

more than 5,000 but less than 25,000 

board feet/maximum 8 hour finished 

product. 

(8) Seed Cleaning and Associated 

Grain Elevators more than 1,000 but less 

than 5,000 tons per year throughput. 

(9) Bakeries, Commercial baking more 

than 500 tons of dough per year. 

(10) Cereal Preparations and 

Associated Grain Elevators more than 

2,000 but less than 10,000 tons per year 

throughput. 

(11) Coffee Roasters roasting more 

than 6 tons coffee beans in a year, but 

less than 30 tons/yr. 

In 2001, ODEQ instituted 19 Basic 

Permit categories to track small air 

emission sources. ODEQ intended that 

basic permits function as a registration, 

or means to track sources with potential 

to grow or require a different type of 

permit and to trigger control 

requirements. The purpose was to 

anticipate emission increases and 

reduce potential for source violations. 

Because no basic permits have been 

issued in the above categories, removing 

these categories does not result in 

termination of any existing permits. A 

general provision in the ODEQ’s ACDP 

rules (division 216) ensures that any 

facility with significant emissions is 

regulated through a permit. 

The rule revision also delegates 

authority to Lane Regional Air 

Protection Agency to implement ACDP 

and Oregon title V operating permit 

programs for regulation of PM2.5 and 

GHG within its area of jurisdiction. It 

also adds: (1) PM2.5 and GHGs to 

pollutant-based source categories 

requiring ACDPs, (2) a 5 ton PM2.5

threshold for requiring a permit in 

nonattainment areas to provide more 

protection for the area through source 

surveillance, and (3) a 100,000 ton GHG 

CO2e threshold for GHG permitting, 

consistent with the GHG tailoring rule. 

These rule revisions are proposed for 

approval into the SIP. 

Division 224 Major New Source 

Review 

This division contains the ODEQ 

major source permit to construct 

programs as required by title I, parts C 

and D of the Act. It requires an ACDP 

prior to beginning construction on a 

new major source or major modification. 

This division applies to new major 

sources and major modifications and 

requires that no owner or operator begin 

actual construction without first having 

received an ACDP and having satisfied 

the requirements of division 224. 

The division includes the procedural 

requirements for the NSR program, 

including specifying the information 

that must be submitted in a permit 

application, the time period for which 

the approval to construct is valid, the 

obligation to comply with all applicable 

requirements, and the time period that 

the new or modified source can operate 

without applying for a title V operating 

permit, and when a title V operating 

permit must be revised before 

commencing construction or operation. 

The division also includes the 

procedures for processing permit 

applications. 

The division also includes the 

substantive requirements which must be 

met for approval of a new major source 

or major modification. These include 

the requirement that the owner or 

operator must demonstrate the ability of 

the source to comply with all applicable 

requirements. 

ODEQ’s major source permit to 

construct program as revised in division 

224 complies with EPA’s requirements 

in 40 CFR 51.165 through 51.166 and 

ensures that new and modified major 

sources will not cause or contribute to 

violations of any NAAQS. Therefore, 

EPA proposes to approve these 

provisions into the Oregon SIP. 

Applicability and General Prohibitions 

340–224–0010 

The rule revision clarifies that 

division 224 (Major NSR) applies to the 

regulated pollutant for which the area is 

designated nonattainment or 

maintenance within nonattainment and 

maintenance areas, as well as to the 

regulated pollutant for which the area is 

designated attainment or unclassified 

within attainment and unclassifiable 

areas. It also adds applicability 

requirements for GHG PSD permitting of 

sources that have already triggered NSR/ 

PSD for other pollutants and that are 

major for GHGs and trigger PSD. This is 

consistent with EPA’s Tailoring Rule for 

purposes of title V and PSD. 

Requirements for Sources in 

Nonattainment Areas 340–224–0050 

The rule revision adds requirements 

for PM2.5 precursors to sources in 

designated PM2.5 nonattainment areas 

(i.e., Oakridge and Klamath Falls). It 

also clarifies that LAER applies to each 

emissions unit that emits the 

nonattainment pollutant or precursor 

not included in the most recent netting 

basis or included in the most recent 

netting basis but has been modified to 

increase actual emissions. 

Requirements for Sources in 

Maintenance Areas 340–224–0060 

The rule revision adds precursors to 

the list of pollutants subject to BACT in 

maintenance areas. It clarifies that 

BACT applies to each emissions unit 

that emits the maintenance pollutant or 

precursor not included in the most 

recent netting basis or included in the 

most recent netting basis but has been 

modified to increase actual emissions. 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

Requirements in Attainment or 

Unclassified Areas 340–224–0070 

The rule revision: (1) Adds precursors 

to the BACT requirement, (2) clarifies 

that BACT applies to each emissions 

unit that emits the nonattainment 

pollutant or precursor not included in 

the most recent netting basis, or is 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules 59099 

15 In a memorandum from Gina McCarthy, EPA 

Assistant Administrator, entitled ‘‘Revised Policy to 

Address Reconsideration of Interpollutant Trading 

Provisions for Fine Particles (PM2.5),’’ July, 21, 

2011, EPA revised its policy originally set forth in 

the 2008 PM2.5 New Source Review 

Implementations Rule (the 2008 final rule, 73 FR 

28321) concerning the development and adoption 

of interpollutant trading (offset) provisions for PM2.5

under state nonattainment area NSR programs for 

PM2.5. As a result of our reconsideration of the 

policy, EPA no longer supports the ratios provided 

in the preamble to the 2008 final rule as 

presumptively approvable ratios for adoption in 

SIPs containing nonattainment NSR programs for 

PM2.5. This revised policy does not affect the EPA 

rule provisions that allow states to adopt as part of 

their nonattainment NSR programs for PM2.5

appropriately supported interpollutant offset 

provisions involving PM2.5 precursors. 

included in the most recent netting 

basis but has been modified to increase 

actual emissions, (3) indicates that the 

required air quality analysis is for the 

pollutant with increases above the SER 

over the netting basis, and (4) adds a 

provision that increases above the SER 

for direct PM2.5 or PM2.5 precursors also 

trigger an analysis of PM2.5. 

Division 225 Air Quality Analysis 

Requirements 

This division contains all of the 

modeling, monitoring, impact analysis, 

and net air quality benefit requirements 

that are necessary to ensure ambient air 

quality requirements are met in the 

permitting process. The division also 

includes provisions which specify the 

technical information and processes to 

be used in air quality impact analyses. 

The provisions for demonstrating net 

air quality benefit in the revisions to 

division 225 comply with the CAA and 

EPA’s requirements for emission offsets 

(section 173 of the Act, 40 CFR 

51.165(a) and 40 CFR part 51, appendix 

S, Emission Offset Interpretative 

Ruling). EPA is therefore proposing to 

approve these provisions as complying 

with part D of the CAA. 

Definitions 340–225–0020 

Baseline Concentration—The revised 

baseline concentration definition adds a 

baseline concentration year of 2007 for 

PM2.5 consistent with EPA regulations. 

The definition of baseline concentration 

is consistent with EPA’s definitions in 

40 CFR 51.165(a) and 51.166(b). 

Requirements for Analysis and 

Demonstrating Compliance in 

Maintenance Areas 340–225–0045 and 

PSD Class I, II and III Areas 340–225– 

0050 and 0060 

The rule revisions clarify that a single 

source impact analysis is sufficient to 

show compliance with standards and 

increments for only the pollutants that 

trigger PSD, and that a single source 

impact analysis is for emission increases 

equal to or greater than a significant 

emission rate above the netting basis 

due to the proposed source or 

modification. The revisions also add a 

PM2.5 significant monitoring 

concentration of 4 μg/m3 as specified in 

EPA’s PM2.5 NSR/PSD implementing 

rule for use in determining the need for 

preconstruction monitoring of a 

proposed source or modification in a 

PSD Class II and III area. 

Requirements for Demonstrating a Net 

Air Quality Benefit 340–225–0090 

The rule revision adds PM2.5 to the 

list of pollutants for non-ozone areas 

and adds PM2.5 precursor, SO2 and NOX

offset ratios for non-ozone areas. These 

offset ratios are based on levels 

established by EPA. The revision also 

indicates that precursor emissions can 

be used to offset direct PM2.5 and vice 

versa. We are taking no action on these 

interpollutant offset ratios for PM2.5 at 

this time to give Oregon time to provide 

a demonstration that these 

interpollutant offset ratios are NAAQS 

protective in Oregon or alternatively 

revise these ratios in accordance with 

the July 21, 2011, memorandum by EPA 

that revises the Federal interpollutant 

offset policy.15

The rule revision further adds an 

alternative provision for small scale 

local energy projects (and related 

infrastructure) located in nonattainment 

and maintenance areas indicating that 

the net air quality benefit requirement is 

satisfied if the nonattainment or 

maintenance pollutant emissions are 

offset using the offset ratios specified in 

this rule, provided that the proposed 

major source or major modification does 

not cause or contribute to a violation of 

the NAAQS or otherwise pose a material 

threat to compliance with air quality 

standards in the nonattainment area. 

The State of Oregon House Bill 2952 

amended ORS 468A.040 to add an 

exception for small scale local energy 

projects regarding net air quality benefit. 

Division 228 Requirements for Fuel 

Burning Equipment and Fuel Sulfur 

Content 

This division provides sulfur content 

of fuel requirements and general 

emission standards for fuel burning 

equipment. 

Sulfur Dioxide Standards 340–228–0200 

To be consistent with Federal 

emission standards and the reference 

source test method, the averaging time 

for sulfur dioxide emission standards 

for fuel-burning equipment in this rule 

has been changed from two hours to 

three hours. As part of their June 23, 

2010, SIP submittal, ODEQ provided a 

demonstration that this rule change will 

have no discernable effect on the air 

quality or on the stringency of their 

revised emission standard. EPA has 

reviewed ODEQ’s demonstration and 

has determined that the revised rule 

will not interfere with the attainment or 

maintenance of the NAAQS for sulfur 

dioxide. Therefore, EPA proposes to 

approve these regulations. 

Division 234 Emission Standards for 

Wood Products Industries 

The division establishes emission 

standards and monitoring and reporting 

requirements for wigwam waste 

burners, kraft pulp mills, neutral sulfite 

semi-chemical (NSSC) pulp mills, 

sulfite pulp mills, and board products 

industries (veneer, plywood, 

particleboard, hardboard). 

Definitions 340–234–0010 

Wigwam Waste Burner—The 

definition of wigwam waste burner has 

been revised. The outdated regulations 

governing the use of wigwam waste 

burners have been deleted and a 

prohibition statewide has been added. 

III. EPA’s Proposed Action 

Consistent with the discussion above, 

EPA proposes to approve most of the 

submitted SIP provisions and to take no 

action on certain other provisions, as 

discussed below. This action will result 

in proposed changes to the Oregon SIP 

in 40 CFR part 52, subpart MM. 

A. Rules To Approve Into SIP 

EPA proposes to approve into the 

Oregon SIP at 40 CFR part 52, subpart 

MM, the following revisions to chapter 

340 of the OAR listed in Table 2. It is 

important to note that in those instances 

where ODEQ submitted multiple 

revisions to a single rule of chapter 340 

of the OAR, the most recent version of 

that rule (based on State effective date) 

is proposed to be incorporated into the 

SIP since it supersedes all previous 

revisions. 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
59100 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 2—ODEQ REGULATIONS FOR PROPOSED APPROVAL

State citation Title/subject State effective 

date Explanation 

OAR 340–200—General Air Pollution Procedures and Definition 

0010 ................................................... Purpose and Applicability ..................................... 11/8/2007 

0020 ................................................... General Air Quality Definitions ............................. 5/1/2011 

0025 ................................................... Abbreviations and Acronyms ............................... 5/1/2011 

0030 ................................................... Exceptions ............................................................ 9/17/2008 

OAR 340–202—Ambient Air Quality Standards and PSD Increments 

0010 ................................................... Definitions ............................................................. 5/1/2011 

0060 ................................................... Suspended Particulate Matter .............................. 5/1/2011 

0090 ................................................... Ozone ................................................................... 5/21/2010 

0130 ................................................... Ambient Air Quality Standard for Lead ................ 5/21/2010 

0210 ................................................... Ambient Air Increments ........................................ 5/1/2011 

OAR 340–204—Designation of Air Quality Areas 

0010 ................................................... Definitions ............................................................. 5/21/2010 

0030 ................................................... Designation of Nonattainment Areas ................... 5/21/2010 

OAR 340–206—Air Pollution Emergencies 

0010 ................................................... Introduction ........................................................... 5/21/2010 

0030 ................................................... Episode Stage Criteria for Air Pollution Emergencies.5/21/2010 

OAR 340–208—Visible Emissions and Nuisance Requirements 

0010 ................................................... Definitions ............................................................. 11/8/2007 

0100 ................................................... Visible Emissions, Applicability ............................ 11/8/2007 

0110 ................................................... Visible Air Contaminant Limitations ..................... 11/8/2007 

0200 ................................................... Fugitive Emission Requirements, Applicability .... 11/8/2007 

0210 ................................................... Fugitive Emission Requirements, Requirements 11/8/2007 

OAR 340–209—Public Participation 

0040 ................................................... Public Notice Information ..................................... 11/8/2007 

0070 ................................................... Hearings and Meeting Procedures ...................... 11/8/2007 

0080 ................................................... Issuance or Denial of a Permit ............................ 11/8/2007 

OAR 340–210—Notice of Construction and Approval of Plans 

0205 ................................................... Applicability ........................................................... 9/17/2008 

OAR 340–214—Stationary Source Reporting Requirements 

0010 ................................................... Definitions ............................................................. 11/8/2007 

0300 (Formally OAR–340–28–1400) Purpose and Applicability ..................................... 11/8/2007 

0310 (Formally OAR–340–28–1410) Planned Startup and Shutdown ........................... 11/8/2007 

0320 (Formally OAR–340–28–1420) Scheduled Maintenance ....................................... 11/8/2007 

0330 (Formally OAR–340–28–1430) Upsets and Breakdowns ...................................... 11/8/2007 

0340 (Formally OAR–340–28–1440) Reporting Requirements ...................................... 11/8/2007 

0350 (Formally OAR–340–28–1450) Enforcement Action Criteria ................................. 11/8/2007 

0360 ................................................... Emergency as an Affirmative Defense ................ 11/8/2007 

OAR 340–216—Air Contaminant Discharge Permits 

0020 and Table 1 .............................. Applicability ........................................................... 5/1/2011 

0040 ................................................... Application Requirements .................................... 5/1/2011 

0060 ................................................... General ACDPs .................................................... 5/1/2011 

0064 ................................................... Simple ACDPs ...................................................... 5/1/2011 

0082 ................................................... Termination or Revocation of an ACDP .............. 11/8/2007 

OAR 340–222—Stationary Source Plant Site Emission Limits 

0020 ................................................... Applicability ........................................................... 8/29/2008 

OAR 340–224—Major New Source Review 

0010 ................................................... Applicability and General Prohibitions ................. 5/1/2011 

0050 ................................................... Requirements for Sources in Nonattainment 

Areas.

5/1/2011 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules 59101 

TABLE 2—ODEQ REGULATIONS FOR PROPOSED APPROVAL—Continued 

State citation Title/subject State effective 

date Explanation 

0060 ................................................... Requirements for Sources in Maintenance Areas 5/1/2011 

0070 ................................................... Prevention of Significant Deterioration Requirements for Sources in Attainment or Unclassified Areas.5/1/2011 

OAR 340–225—Air Quality Analysis Requirements 

0020 ................................................... Definitions ............................................................. 5/1/2011 

0030 ................................................... Procedural Requirements ..................................... 5/1/2011 

0045 ................................................... Requirements for Analysis in Maintenance Areas 5/1/2011 

0050 ................................................... Requirements for Analysis in PSD Class II and 

Class III Areas.

5/1/2011 

0060 ................................................... Requirements for Demonstrating Compliance 

with Standards and Increments in PSD Class I 

Areas.

5/1/2011 

0090 ................................................... Requirements for Demonstrating a Net Air Quality Benefit.5/1/2011 EPA is not taking action on the interpollutant offset ratios provided in 

0090(2)(a)(C). 

OAR 340–228—Requirements for Fuel Burning Equipment and Fuel Sulfur Content 

0020 ................................................... Definitions ............................................................. 11/8/2007 

0200 ................................................... Sulfur Dioxide Standards ..................................... 11/8/2007 

0210 ................................................... Grain Loading Standards ..................................... 11/8/2007 

OAR 340–232—Emission Standards for VOC Sources 

0010 ................................................... Introduction ........................................................... 11/8/2007 

OAR 340–234—Emission Standards for Wood Products Industries 

0010 ................................................... Definitions ............................................................. 11/8/2007 

0100 ................................................... Wigwam Waste Burners—Statement of Policy 

and Applicability.

11/8/2007 

0110 ................................................... Wigwam Waste Burners—Authorization to Operate a Wigwam Burner.11/8/2007 Rule repealed, remove from SIP. 

0120 ................................................... Wigwam Waste Burners—Emission and Operation Standards for Wigwam Waste Burners.11/8/2007 Rule repealed, remove from SIP. 

0130 ................................................... Wigwam Waste Burners—Monitoring and Reporting.11/8/2007 Rule repealed, remove from SIP. 

0140 ................................................... Wigwam Waste Burners—Existing Administrative 

Agency Orders.

11/8/2007 

0210 ................................................... Kraft Pulp Mills—Emission Limitations ................. 11/8/2007 

0230 ................................................... Kraft Pulp Mills—Plans and Specifications .......... 11/8/2007 Rule repealed, remove from SIP. 

0240 ................................................... Kraft Pulp Mills—Monitoring ................................. 11/8/2007 

0250 ................................................... Kraft Pulp Mills—Reporting .................................. 11/8/2007 

0260 ................................................... Kraft Pulp Mills—Upset Conditions ...................... 11/8/2007 Rule repealed, remove from SIP. 

0500 ................................................... Board Product Industries—Applicability and General Provisions.11/8/2007 

0510 ................................................... Board Product Industries—Veneer and Plywood 

Manufacturing Operations.

11/8/2007 

0520 ................................................... Board Product Industries—Particleboard and 

Manufacturing Operations.

11/8/2007 

0530 ................................................... Board Product Industries—Hardboard Manufacturing Operations.11/8/2007 

OAR 340–236—Emission Standards for Specific Sources 

0010 ................................................... Definitions ............................................................. 11/8/2007 

0410 ................................................... Hot Asphalt Plants—Control Facilities Required 11/8/2007 

OAR 340–264—Rules for Open Burning 

0040 ................................................... Exemptions, Statewide ......................................... 9/17/2008 

B. Rules on Which No Action Is Taken 

The following provisions were 

included in the SIP submittals 

discussed above. However, EPA is not 

proposing to approve these provisions. 

OAR 340–200–0040—State of Oregon 

Clean Air Act Implementation Plan. 

OAR 340–215—Greenhouse Gas 

Reporting Requirements. 

OAR 340–218 (0010, 0020, 0040, 

0050, 0120, 0150, 0180, 0190 and 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
59102 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules 

0250)—Oregon Title V Operating 

Permits. 

OAR 340–228—Requirements for Fuel 

Burning Equipment and Fuel Sulfur 

Content, Mercury Rules (0672 Emission 

Caps, 0673 Monitoring Requirements for 

the Hg Emission Standards, 0676 Heat 

Input Determinations 0674, 0676 Coal 

Sampling and Analysis, and 0678 Hg 

Mass Emissions Measurement Prior to 

Any Control Devices 0678). 

OAR 340–228—Requirements for Fuel 

Burning Equipment and Fuel Sulfur 

Content Federal Acid Rain Program 

(0300). 

OAR 340–230—Incinerator 

Regulations. 

OAR 340–234–0010—Standards for 

Wood Products Industries—EPA is not 

acting on references to total reduced 

sulfur from smelt dissolving tanks, 

sewers, drains, categorically 

insignificant activities, and wastewater 

treatment facilities in the revised 

definition of other sources. 

IV. 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 state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and 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, Intergovernmental 

relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, 

Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

oxides, Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: September 15, 2011. 

Michelle L. Pirzadeh, 

Acting, Regional Administrator, Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2011–24525 Filed 9–22–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Parts 622 and 640 

[Docket No. 100305126–1558–03] 

RIN 0648–AY72 

Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of 

Mexico, and South Atlantic; Spiny 

Lobster Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico 

and South Atlantic; Amendment 10 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations to 

implement Amendment 10 to the 

Fishery Management Plan for the Spiny 

Lobster Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico 

and South Atlantic (FMP), as prepared 

and submitted by the Gulf of Mexico 

and South Atlantic Fishery Management 

Councils (Councils). If implemented, 

this rule would revise the lobster 

species contained within the fishery 

management unit, establish an annual 

catch limit (ACL) for spiny lobster, 

revise the Federal spiny lobster tailseparation permitting requirements, 

revise the regulations specifying the 

condition of spiny lobster landed during 

a fishing trip, modify the undersized 

attractant regulations, modify the 

framework procedures, and incorporate 

the state of Florida’s derelict trap 

removal program into the Federal 

regulations that apply to the exclusive 

economic zone (EEZ) off Florida. 

Additionally, this rule would revise 

codified text to reflect updated contact 

information for the state of Florida and 

regulatory references for the Florida 

Administrative Code. The intent of this 

proposed rule is to specify ACLs for 

spiny lobster while maintaining catch 

levels consistent with achieving 

optimum yield (OY) for the resource. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before October 24, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on the proposed rule identified by 

NOAA–NMFS–2011–0106 by any of the 

following methods: 

• Electronic submissions: Submit 

electronic comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.

regulations.gov. Follow the instructions 

for submitting comments. 

• Mail: Susan Gerhart, Southeast 

Regional Office, NMFS, 263 13th 

Avenue South, St. Petersburg, FL 33701. 

Instructions: All comments received 

are a part of the public record and will 

generally be posted to http://www.

regulations.gov without change. All 

Personal Identifying Information (for 

example, name, address, etc.) 

voluntarily submitted by the commenter 

may be publicly accessible. Do not 

submit Confidential Business 

Information or otherwise sensitive or 

protected information. 

To submit comments through the 

Federal e-rulemaking portal: http://

www.regulations.gov, click on ‘‘submit a 

comment,’’ then enter ‘‘NOAA–NMFS– 

2011–0106’’ in the keyword search and 

click on ‘‘search.’’ To view posted 

comments during the comment period, 

enter ‘‘NOAA–NMFS–2011–0106’’ in 

the keyword search and click on 

‘‘search.’’ NMFS will accept anonymous 

comments (enter N/A in the required 

field if you wish to remain anonymous). 

You may submit attachments to 

electronic comments in Microsoft Word, 

Excel, WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file 

formats only. 


erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1