Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 24 / Thursday, February 5, 2015 / Proposed Rules 6491 

2008 Lead NAAQS for the Hillsborough 

Area by no later than five years after the 

Area was designated nonattainment. 

The modeling indicates that the 

Hillsborough Area will have attaining 

data for the 2008 Lead NAAQS by 

December 31, 2015. While there were 

violations of the 2008 lead NAAQS in 

2013, they occurred during the limited 

time frame in which the facility was 

undergoing construction to modernize 

the facility which included building an 

enclosure that is expected to reduce 

emissions of lead significantly. 

Notwithstanding the violations, EPA 

believes that these violations, which 

occurred as part of enclosure and 

modernization of the facility in order to 

achieve a significant permanent 

reduction in lead emissions, do not 

render Florida’s attainment 

demonstration unapprovable. There 

have been no violations of the 2008 

Lead NAAQS since the last quarter of 

2013 which directly corresponds with 

the installation of the final set of 

controls for the modernization. EPA 

does not believe that the facility could 

have achieved the 2008 Lead NAAQS 

more expeditiously than the current 

schedule. Therefore, EPA is proposing 

to approve the State’s submission 

related to achievement of the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable. 

V. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve Florida’s 

lead attainment plan for the 

Hillsborough Area. EPA has 

preliminarily determined that the SIP 

meets the applicable requirements of the 

CAA. Specifically, EPA is proposing to 

approve Florida’s June 29, 2012 

submittal, as amended on June 27, 2013, 

which includes the attainment 

demonstration, base year emissions 

inventory, RACM/RACT analysis, 

contingency measures and RFP plan. 

The requirement for a RFP plan is 

satisfied because the State of Florida 

demonstrated that the Area will attain 

the 2008 Lead NAAQS as expeditiously 

as practicable, and could not implement 

any additional measures to attain the 

NAAQS any sooner. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submittal 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) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• 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, October 7, 

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, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where EPA or an 

Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

tribal implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Lead, Reporting and Recordkeeping 

requirements. 

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

Dated: January 26, 2015. 

Heather McTeer Toney, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2015–02335 Filed 2–4–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0792; FRL–9922–51– 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; West 

Virginia; Permits for Construction and 

Major Modification of Major Stationary 

Sources Which Cause or Contribute to 

Nonattainment Areas 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to grant 

approval to four State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the 

West Virginia Department of 

Environmental Protection for the State 

of West Virginia on June 29, 2010, July 

8, 2011, July 6, 2012, and July 1, 2014 

with the exception of certain revisions 

related to ethanol production facilities 

on which EPA is taking no action at this 

time. These revisions proposed for 

approval pertain to West Virginia’s 

nonattainment New Source Review 

(NSR) program, notably provisions for 

preconstruction permitting 

requirements for major sources of fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) and NSR 

reform. This action is being taken under 

the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before March 9, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2014–0792 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Email: kreider.andrew@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0792, 

Andrew Kreider, Acting Associate 

Director, Office of Permits and Air 

Toxics, Mailcode 3AP10, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
6492 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 24 / Thursday, February 5, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

1EPA, however, is proposing to act on all four SIP 

submittals in this document because each submittal 

contains necessary procedural information related 

to West Virginia’s revisions to its nonattainment 

NSR regulations and development of its SIP 

submittals, which are required for SIP revisions by 

40 CFR parts 51 and 52. 

2See ‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) and Non-Attainment New Source Review 

(NSR): Reconsideration.’’ 68 FR 63021. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2014– 

0792. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change, and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy during normal business 

hours at the Air Protection Division, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the West Virginia 

Department of Environmental 

Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 

57th Street SE., Charleston, West 

Virginia 25304. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Mike Gordon, (215) 814–2039, or by 

email at gordon.mike@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

The WVDEP submitted four SIP 

revisions to EPA on June 29, 2010 (the 

2010 submittal), July 8, 2011 (the 2011 

submittal), July 6, 2012 (the 2012 

submittal) and July 1, 2014 (the 2014 

submittal). While each of the SIP 

revisions was submitted individually, 

EPA is acting on these submittals as a 

whole. There are some instances where 

specific language was added in a West 

Virginia regulation included in one of 

the earlier SIP submittals but the 

language was subsequently removed 

from that same regulation included in a 

later SIP submittal such that EPA 

therefore only assessed the 

approvability of that portion of the 

regulation included in the later SIP 

submittal. It should be noted that the 

most recent version of West Virginia’s 

nonattainment NSR regulations is the 

version included for SIP approval in the 

2014 submittal, and this submittal 

reflects the sum of the changes made 

from the 2010, 2011, and 2012 

submittals as well.1 A summary of the 

changes made in each of the four 

submittals has been included in the 

docket for this action under ‘‘Summary 

of West Virginia NSR Changes.’’ These 

SIP revision requests, if approved, 

would revise West Virginia’s currently 

approved nonattainment NSR program 

by amending Series 19 under Title 45 of 

West Virginia Code of State Rules 

(45CSR19). Generally, the revisions 

incorporate provisions related to the 

2008 ‘‘Implementation of the New 

Source Review (NSR) Program for 

Particulate Matter Less than 2.5 

Micrometers (PM2.5)’’ (2008 NSR PM2.5

Rule; 73 FR 28321), the 2007 

‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration, 

Nonattainment New Source Review, and 

Title V: Treatment of Certain Ethanol 

Production Facilities Under the ‘Major 

Emitting Facility’ Definition’’ (2007 

Ethanol Rule; 72 FR 24060), as well as 

updates as a result of the 2002 rule 

‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) and Nonattainment NSR (NSR): 

Baseline Emissions Determination, 

Actual-to-Future-Actual Methodology, 

Plantwide Applicability Limitations, 

Clean Units, Pollution Control Projects’’ 

(2002 NSR Reform Rules; 67 FR 80186). 

The 2002 NSR Reform Rules made 

changes to five areas of the NSR 

programs. In summary, the 2002 Rules: 

(1) Provided a new method for 

determining baseline actual emissions; 

(2) adopted an actual-to-projected-actual 

methodology for determining whether a 

major modification has occurred; (3) 

allowed major stationary sources to 

comply with a Plantwide Applicability 

Limit (PAL) to avoid having a 

significant emissions increase that 

triggers the requirements of the major 

NSR program; (4) provided a new 

applicability provision for emissions 

units that are designated clean units; 

and (5) excluded pollution control 

projects (PCPs) from the definition of 

‘‘physical change or change in the 

method of operation.’’ On November 7, 

2003, EPA published a notice of final 

action on its reconsideration of the 2002 

NSR Reform Rules,2 which added a 

definition for ‘‘replacement unit’’ and 

clarified an issue regarding PALs. For 

additional information on the 2002 NSR 

Reform Rules, see EPA’s December 31, 

2002 final rulemaking action entitled: 

‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) and Nonattainment NSR (NSR): 

Baseline Emissions Determination, 

Actual-to-Future-Actual Methodology, 

Plantwide Applicability Limitations, 

Clean Units, Pollution Control Projects’’ 

(67 FR 80186), the 2003 final 

reconsideration: ‘‘Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) and 

Non-Attainment New Source Review 

(NSR): Reconsideration’’ (68 FR 63021), 

and http://www.epa.gov/nsr. 

After the 2002 NSR Reform Rules 

were finalized, industry, state, and 

environmental petitioners challenged 

numerous aspects of the 2002 NSR 

Reform Rules, along with portions of 

EPA’s 1980 NSR Rules (45 FR 52676, 

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

United States Court of Appeals for the 

District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit) 

issued a decision on the challenges to 

the 2002 NSR Reform Rules. New York 

v. United States, 413 F.3d 3 (D.C. Cir. 

2005) (New York I). 

In summary, the D.C. Circuit vacated 

portions of the rules pertaining to clean 

units and PCPs, remanded a portion of 

the rules regarding recordkeeping and 

the term ‘‘reasonable possibility’’ found 

in 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 D.C. 

Circuit. 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 24 / Thursday, February 5, 2015 / Proposed Rules 6493 

3 72 FR 20586 (April 25, 2007). 

4 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013). 

5The court’s opinion did not specifically address 

the point that implementation under subpart 4 

requirements would still require consideration of 

subpart 1 requirements, to the extent that subpart 

4 did not override subpart 1. 

6 Id. at 437. 

The 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule (as well as 

the 2007 ‘‘Final Clean Air Fine Particle 

Implementation Rule’’ (2007 PM2.5

Implementation Rule) 3), was also the 

subject of litigation before the D.C. 

Circuit in Natural Resources Defense 

Council v. EPA.4 On January 4, 2013, 

the court remanded to EPA both the 

2007 PM2.5 Implementation Rule and 

the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule. The court 

found that in both rules EPA erred in 

implementing the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS 

solely pursuant to the general 

implementation provisions of subpart 1 

of part D of title I of the CAA (subpart 

1), rather than pursuant to the 

additional implementation provisions 

specific to particulate matter in subpart 

4 of part D of title I (subpart 4).5 As a 

result, the court remanded both rules 

and instructed EPA ‘‘to re-promulgate 

these rules pursuant to subpart 4 

consistent with this opinion.’’ 6

Although the D.C. Circuit declined to 

establish a deadline for EPA’s response, 

EPA intends to respond promptly to the 

court’s remand and to promulgate new 

generally applicable implementation 

regulations for the PM2.5 NAAQS in 

accordance with the requirements of 

subpart 4. In the interim, however, 

states and EPA still need to proceed 

with implementation of the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS in a timely and effective 

fashion in order to meet statutory 

obligations under the CAA and to assure 

the protection of public health intended 

by those NAAQS. 

On April 25, 2014, the Administrator 

signed a final rulemaking that begins to 

address the remand (see http://

www.epa.gov/airquality/

particlepollution/actions.html). Upon 

its effective date, the final rule classifies 

all existing PM2.5 nonattainment areas as 

‘‘Moderate’’ nonattainment areas and 

sets a deadline of December 31, 2014, 

for states to submit any SIP 

submissions, including nonattainment 

NSR SIPs, that may be necessary to 

satisfy the requirements of subpart 4 

with respect to PM2.5 nonattainment 

areas. 

In a separate rulemaking process that 

will follow the April 2014 rule, EPA is 

evaluating the requirements of subpart 4 

as they pertain to, among other things, 

nonattainment NSR for PM2.5 emissions. 

With respect to nonattainment NSR in 

particular, subpart 4 includes section 

189(e) of the CAA, which requires the 

control of major stationary sources of 

coarse particulate matter (PM10) 

precursors ‘‘except where the 

Administrator determines that such 

sources do not contribute significantly 

to PM10 levels which exceed the 

standard in the area.’’ Under the D.C. 

Circuit’s decision in NRDC, section 

189(e) of the CAA also applies to PM2.5.

Additionally, the 2008 NSR PM2.5

Rule authorized states to adopt 

provisions in their nonattainment NSR 

rules that would allow major stationary 

sources and major modifications 

locating in areas designated 

nonattainment for PM2.5 to offset 

emissions increases of direct PM2.5

emissions or PM2.5 precursors with 

reductions of either direct PM2.5

emissions or PM2.5 precursors in 

accordance with offset ratios contained 

in the approved SIP for the applicable 

nonattainment area. The inclusion, in 

whole or in part, of the interpollutant 

offset provisions for PM2.5 is 

discretionary on the part of the states. In 

the preamble to the 2008 NSR PM2.5

Rule, EPA included preferred or 

presumptive offset ratios, applicable to 

specific PM2.5 precursors that states may 

adopt in conjunction with the new 

interpollutant offset provisions for 

PM2.5, and for which the state could rely 

on the EPA’s technical work to 

demonstrate the adequacy of the ratios 

for use in any PM2.5 nonattainment area. 

Alternatively, the preamble indicated 

that states may adopt their own ratios, 

subject to the EPA’s approval, that 

would have to be substantiated by 

modeling or other technical 

demonstrations of the net air quality 

benefit for ambient PM2.5

concentrations. The preferred ratios 

were subsequently the subject of a 

petition for reconsideration, which the 

EPA Administrator granted. EPA 

continues to support the basic policy 

that sources may offset increases in 

emissions of direct PM2.5 or of any PM2.5

precursor in a PM2.5 nonattainment area 

with actual emissions reductions in 

direct PM2.5 or PM2.5 precursors in 

accordance with offset ratios as 

approved in the SIP for the applicable 

nonattainment area. However, we no 

longer consider the preferred ratios set 

forth in the preamble to the 2008 NSR 

PM2.5 Rule to be presumptively 

approvable. Instead, any ratio involving 

PM2.5 precursors adopted by the state for 

use in the interpollutant offset program 

for PM2.5 nonattainment areas must be 

accompanied by a technical 

demonstration that shows the net air 

quality benefits of such ratio for the 

PM2.5 nonattainment area in which it 

will be applied. 

II. Summary of SIP Revision 

Specifically, the revisions submitted 

by WVDEP involve amendments to 

45CSR19 (Permits for Construction and 

Major Modification of Major Stationary 

Sources Which Cause or Contribute to 

Nonattainment Areas) as a result of 

Federal regulatory actions previously 

discussed. A summary of the changes 

made in the 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2014 

submittals are available in the docket 

under ‘‘Summary of West Virginia NSR 

Changes.’’ Additionally, several nonsubstantive, clarifying and 

organizational revisions were submitted. 

WVDEP has included redline/strikeout 

versions of the submittals so that all 

revisions to 45CSR19 can be seen. 

Following is EPA’s rationale for the 

proposed approval. 

A. NSR Reform 

EPA finds West Virginia’s regulations 

dealing with NSR reform closely mirror 

the Federal counterpart regulations in 

40 CFR parts 51 and 52. Several aspects 

of NSR reform, including a new method 

for determining baseline actual 

emissions, adoption of actual-toprojected-actual methodology for 

determining whether a major 

modification has occurred, and the 

allowance of PALs were submitted to 

EPA by WVDEP in prior SIP 

submissions and subsequently approved 

by EPA on November 2, 2006 (71 FR 

64468). However, in this prior 

submission, WVDEP specifically 

requested that EPA exclude from its SIP 

approval the provisions of 45CSR19 

pertaining to ‘‘Clean Units’’ and 

‘‘Pollution Control Project’’ in order to 

ensure that their Federally-approved 

regulations are consistent with the D.C. 

Circuit’s June 24, 2005 ruling in New 

York I. West Virginia subsequently 

removed provisions relating to 

‘‘pollution control projects’’ and ‘‘clean 

unit’’ from 45CSR19 at the state level 

and updated language relating to 

‘‘reasonable possibility’’ provisions, as 

is reflected in the 2010 submittal. Thus, 

EPA finds the SIP revisions including 

the revised 45CSR19 meet requirements 

of NSR Reform for a nonattainment NSR 

permitting program in 40 CFR parts 51 

and 52, and is proposing to fully 

approve revisions relating to NSR 

reform. 

B. Ethanol Rule 

West Virginia’s proposed SIP 

revisions include provisions that 

exclude facilities that produce ethanol 

through a natural fermentation process 

from the definition of ‘‘chemical process 

plants’’ in the major NSR source 

permitting program as amended in the 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
6494 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 24 / Thursday, February 5, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

7To the extent that any area is designated 

nonattainment for PM2.5 in the future in West 

Virginia, the State will have to make a submission 

within the timeframe provided by section 189(a)(2) 

of the CAA addressing how its NNSR permitting 

program satisfies the CAA statutory requirements as 

to PM2.5, including subpart 4 and any applicable 

PM2.5 federal implementation rules. 

2007 Ethanol Rule. The 2010 submittal 

added provisions at 45CSR19–2.35.e.20 

and 3.7.a.20 that remove certain ethanol 

production facilities from the definition 

of ‘‘chemical process plants.’’ These 

provisions are also included in the 

subsequent 2011, 2012, and 2014 

submittals. In this rulemaking, we are 

not at this time proposing to take action 

on any of the SIP submittals concerning 

West Virginia’s submitted regulation 

revisions at 45CSR19–2.35.e.20 and 

3.7.a.20 addressing the 2007 Ethanol 

Rule. 

C. PM2.5

EPA finds the revisions to 45CSR19 

submitted by WVDEP for approval that 

relate to PM2.5 mirror the 2008 NSR 

PM2.5 Rule, which: (1) Required NSR 

permits to address directly emitted 

PM2.5 and precursor pollutants; (2) 

established significant emission rates for 

direct PM2.5 and precursor pollutants 

(including sulfur dioxide (SO2) and 

oxides of nitrogen (NOX)); (3) 

established PM2.5 emission offsets; and 

(4) required states to account for gases 

that condense to form particles 

(condensables) in PM2.5 emission limits. 

Additionally, WVDEP’s 2010 

submittal includes provisions allowing 

sources to offset emissions increases of 

direct PM2.5 emissions or PM2.5

precursors with reductions of either 

direct PM2.5 emissions or PM2.5

precursors in accordance with offset 

ratios contained in the approved SIP for 

the applicable nonattainment area, 

including the default interpollutant 

trading ratios that were included in 

EPA’s 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule. EPA 

continues to support the policy of 

allowing an interpollutant offset 

program, provided that a state develops 

a technical demonstration justifying the 

ratios to be used, and showing the net 

air quality benefits of such ratios for the 

PM2.5 nonattainment area in which it 

will be applied. WVDEP did not provide 

a technical justification or describe a net 

air quality benefit of the interpollutant 

trading ratios in its 2010 submittal. 

However, in the subsequent 2014 

submittal, WVDEP removed the 

provisions that would have allowed 

interpollutant trading for PM2.5. As 

previously stated, inclusion of 

interpollutant trading ratios is 

discretionary on the part of the states, 

and only permitted upon approval by 

EPA. West Virginia’s inclusion of these 

interpollutant trading ratios in the 2010 

SIP without proper justification has no 

bearing on EPA’s action in this 

proposed rule, since the most recent SIP 

submitted and current regulations in 

effect in West Virginia (i.e. the NSR 

regulations at 45CSR19 included in the 

2014 submittal) do not include these 

provisions. 

In light of the D.C. Circuit’s remand 

of the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule, EPA is in 

the process of evaluating the 

requirements of subpart 4 as they 

pertain to nonattainment NSR. In 

particular, subpart 4 includes section 

189(e) of the CAA, which requires the 

control of major stationary sources of 

PM10 precursors (and hence under the 

court decision, PM2.5 precursors) 

‘‘except where the Administrator 

determines that such sources do not 

contribute significantly to PM10 levels 

which exceed the standard in the area.’’ 

The evaluation of which precursors 

need to be controlled to achieve the 

standard in a particular area is typically 

conducted in the context of the state’s 

preparing and the EPA’s reviewing an 

area’s attainment plan SIP. 

West Virginia’s nonattainment NSR 

regulations at 45CSR19 do not fully 

address all potential precursors to PM2.5. 

The West Virginia SIP submissions 

included revisions to the definition of 

‘‘regulated NSR pollutant’’ at 45CSR19– 

2.61.c which identifies precursors to 

both ozone and PM2.5 in nonattainment 

areas. With respect to PM2.5, the revised 

definition of ‘‘regulated NSR pollutant’’ 

at 45CSR19–2.61.c identifies SO2 and 

NOX as regulated PM2.5 precursors 

while volatile organic compounds 

(VOCs) and ammonia are not identified 

as regulated PM2.5 precursors in PM2.5

nonattainment areas in the State. These 

revisions, although consistent with the 

2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule as developed 

consistent with subpart 1, may not 

contain the elements necessary to satisfy 

the CAA requirements when evaluated 

under the subpart 4 CAA statutory 

requirements. In particular, West 

Virginia’s submission does not include 

regulation of VOCs and ammonia as 

PM2.5 precursors, nor does it include a 

demonstration consistent with section 

189(e) showing that major sources of 

those precursor pollutants would not 

contribute significantly to PM2.5 levels 

exceeding the standard in the area. 

However, while West Virginia’s 

submittals do not yet contain all of the 

elements necessary to satisfy the CAA 

requirements when evaluated under 

subpart 4, there are currently no 

designated PM2.5 nonattainment areas in 

West Virginia for any PM2.5 NAAQS 

since the Martinsburg-Hagerstown 

nonattainment area in West Virginia 

was redesignated to attainment on 

November 25, 2014 (79 FR 70099). As a 

result, West Virginia is no longer 

obligated to submit an NNSR SIP 

revision under section 189 of the CAA 

addressing PM2.5 NNSR permitting 

requirements, which include the 

subpart 4 requirements.7 Therefore, EPA 

is proposing to grant approval to the 

nonattainment NSR provisions in West 

Virginia’s 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2014 

SIP submittals for revisions to 45CSR19 

for nonattainment NSR requirements for 

PM2.5. 

III. Proposed Action 

EPA’s review of this material 

indicates that the 2010, 2011, 2012 and 

2014 SIP submittals collectively meet 

the federal counterpart requirements in 

40 CFR parts 51 and 52 for a 

nonattainment NSR permitting program. 

For the reasons stated previously, EPA 

is proposing to grant approval to these 

WV SIP submissions with the exception 

of the revisions to 45CSR19–2.35.e.20 

and 3.7.a.20. EPA is taking no action on 

45CSR19 regulations relating to the 

definition of ‘‘chemical process plants’’ 

which are at 45CSR19–2.35.e.20 and 

3.7.a.20. EPA is soliciting public 

comments on the issues discussed in 

this document. These comments will be 

considered before taking final action. 

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 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this 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 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 24 / Thursday, February 5, 2015 / Proposed Rules 6495 

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, relating 

to West Virginia’s nonattainment NSR 

program, does not have tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), because the SIP is not approved 

to apply in Indian country located in the 

state, and EPA notes that it will not 

impose substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: January 23, 2015. 

William C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2015–02304 Filed 2–4–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0831; FRL–9922–44– 

OAR] 

40 CFR Part 98 

RIN 2060–AS37 

Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule: 2015 

Revisions and Confidentiality 

Determinations for Petroleum and 

Natural Gas Systems; Extension of 

Comment Period 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is announcing an 

extension of the public comment period 

for the proposed rule titled ‘‘Greenhouse 

Gas Reporting Program: 2015 Revision 

and Confidentiality Determinations for 

Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems’’. 

The public comment period for this 

proposal began on December 9, 2014. 

This document announces the extension 

of the deadline for public comment from 

February 9, 2015 to February 24, 2015. 

DATES: The comment period for the 

proposed rule published on December 9, 

2014 (79 FR 73147) has been extended. 

Comments must be received on or 

before February 24, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit your 

comments, identified by Docket ID No. 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0831 by any of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Email: A-and-R-Docket@epa.gov. 

Include Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2014–0831 or RIN No. 2060–AS37 in the 

subject line of the message. 

• Fax: (202) 566–9744. 

• Mail: Environmental Protection 

Agency, EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), 

Mailcode 28221T, Attention Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014–0831, 1200 

Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington, 

DC 20460. In addition, please mail a 

copy of your comments on the 

information collection provisions to the 

Office of Information and Regulatory 

Affairs, Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB), Attn: Desk Officer for 

EPA, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, 

DC 20503. 

• Hand/Courier Delivery: EPA Docket 

Center, Room 3334, EPA WJC West 

Building, 1301 Constitution Avenue 

NW., Washington, DC 20004. Such 

deliveries are accepted only during the 

normal hours of operation of the Docket 

Center, and special arrangements should 

be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2014– 

0831. 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 email. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means the EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to the EPA without 

going through http://

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, the EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If the EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, the 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, 

will be publicly available for viewing at 

the EPA Docket Center. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Docket, EPA/DC, WJC West 

Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 

Ave. NW., Washington, DC. This Docket 

Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 

p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 

legal holidays. The telephone number 

for the Public Reading Room is (202) 

566–1744, and the telephone number for 

the Air Docket is (202) 566–1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Carole Cook, Climate Change Division, 

Office of Atmospheric Programs (MC– 

6207A), Environmental Protection 


rljohnson on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS