Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 177 / Monday, September 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 55055 

Force personnel will not have any 

authority to enforce federal, local or 

state laws on the water. 

(3) Due to the nature of security 

threats, restricted area activation may 

occur with little advance notice. 

Activation will be based on local or 

national intelligence information related 

to threats against military installations 

and/or resources common to Tyndall 

AFB in concert with evaluations 

conducted by the Tyndall AFB Threat 

Working Group and upon direction of 

the Installation Commander, Tyndall 

AFB. The Installation Commander 

activates only those portions of the 

restricted area identified in paragraphs 

(a)(4)(i) through (xxiii) of this section 

necessary to provide the level of 

security required in response to the 

specific and credible threat(s) triggering 

the activation. The duration of 

activation for any portion(s) of the 

restricted area defined in paragraph (a) 

of this section, singularly or in 

combination, will be limited to those 

periods where it is warranted or 

required by security threats. Activated 

portions of the restricted area will be 

reevaluated every 48 hours to determine 

if the threat(s) triggering the activation 

or related threats warrant continued 

activation. The activated portion(s) of 

the restricted area expire if no 

reevaluation occurs or if the Installation 

Commander determines that activation 

is no longer warranted. 

(4) Public notification of a temporary 

restricted area activation will be made 

via marine VHF broadcasts (channels 13 

and 16), local notices to mariners, local 

news media through Air Force Public 

Affairs notifications and by on-scene 

installation personnel. On-scene 

installation personnel will notify 

boaters in the restricted area of the 

restriction and tell them that if they 

refuse to leave the area they will be 

trespassing and could be subject to 

prosecution. 

(5) During times when the Installation 

Commander activates any portion(s) of 

the temporary restricted area defined in 

paragraph (a) of this section all entry, 

transit, drifting, anchoring or attaching 

any object to the submerged sea-bottom 

within the activated portion(s) of the 

restricted area is not allowed without 

the written permission of the 

Installation Commander, Tyndall AFB, 

Florida or his/her authorized 

representative. Previously affixed 

mooring balls established to support 

watercraft during intense weather 

conditions (i.e., tropical storms, 

hurricanes, etc.) may remain within the 

activated portion(s) of the restricted 

area, however watercraft should not be 

anchored to the mooring balls without 

the permission of the Installation 

Commander, Tyndall AFB, Florida or 

his/her authorized representative. 

(c) Enforcement. The regulations in 

this section shall be enforced by the 

Installation Commander, Tyndall AFB 

and/or such persons or agencies as he/ 

she may designate. 

Dated: September 4, 2015. 

Edward E. Belk, Jr., 

Chief, Operations and Regulatory Division, 

Directorate of Civil Works. 

[FR Doc. 2015–23030 Filed 9–11–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3710–58–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2015–0493; FRL–9933–90– 

Region 8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Colorado; Revisions to Common 

Provisions and Regulation Number 3; 

Correction 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing approval of 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revisions submitted by the State of 

Colorado on March 31, 2010, May 16, 

2012, and May 13, 2013. The revisions 

are to Colorado Air Quality Control 

Commission (Commission) Regulation 

Number 3, Parts A, B, and D and 

Common Provisions Regulation. The 

revisions include administrative 

changes to permitting requirements for 

stationary sources, updates to the fine 

particulate matter less than 2.5 microns 

in diameter (PM2.5) implementation 

rules related to the federal New Source 

Review (NSR) Program, changes to 

address previous revisions to Air 

Pollutant Emission Notice (APEN) 

regulations that EPA disapproved or 

provided comments on, revisions to 

definitions, and minor editorial 

changes. Also in this action, EPA is 

proposing to correct a final rule 

pertaining to Colorado’s SIP published 

on April 24, 2014. In our April 24, 2014 

action, regulatory text and 

corresponding ‘‘incorporation by 

reference’’ (IBR) materials were 

inadvertently excluded for (1) 

greenhouse gas permitting revisions to 

the Common Provisions Regulation, and 

(2) minor editorial changes to the 

Common Provisions Regulation and 

Parts A, B, and D of Regulation Number 

3 (adopted October 10, 2010). This 

action is being taken under section 110 

of the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before October 14, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08– 

OAR–2015–0493, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: dobrahner.jaslyn@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (303) 312–6064 (please alert 

the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing 

comments). 

• Mail: Director, Air Program, 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P–AR, 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129. 

• Hand Delivery: Director, Air 

Program, Environmental Protection 

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

AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, 

Colorado 80202–1129. Such deliveries 

are only accepted Monday through 

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

federal holidays. Special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R08–OAR–2015– 

0493. 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. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
55056 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 177 / Monday, September 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

1Refer to docket #EPA–R08–OAR–2015–0493 for 

documentation. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http://

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

For additional instructions on 

submitting comments, go to section I, 

General Information, of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Program, Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129. EPA requests that if at all 

possible, you contact the individual 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section to view the hard copy 

of the docket. You may view the hard 

copy of the docket Monday through 

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

federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Jaslyn Dobrahner, Air Program, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA), Region 8, Mail Code 8P–AR, 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129, (303) 312–6252, 

dobrahner.jaslyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

What should I consider as I prepare my 

comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting Confidential Business 

Information (CBI). Do not submit CBI to 

EPA through http://www.regulations.gov 

or email. Clearly mark the part or all of 

the information that you claim to be 

CBI. For CBI information on a disk or 

CD ROM that you mail to EPA, mark the 

outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI 

and then identify electronically within 

the disk or CD ROM the specific 

information that is claimed as CBI. In 

addition to one complete version of the 

comment that includes information 

claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment 

that does not contain the information 

claimed as CBI must be submitted for 

inclusion in the public docket. 

Information so marked will not be 

disclosed except in accordance with 

procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for preparing your comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

• Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register, date, and page number); 

• Follow directions and organize your 

comments; 

• Explain why you agree or disagree; 

• Suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes; 

• Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used; 

• If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced; 

• Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives; 

• Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats; and 

• Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

II. Background 

A. On March 31, 2010 the State of 

Colorado submitted a SIP revision 

containing amendments to the Common 

Provisions Regulation sections I.A., I.B., 

I.C., I.D., I.E., I.F., I.G., II.B., II.C., II.E., 

II.H. and II.J. The amendments update 

the definition of ‘‘negligibly reactive 

volatile organic compound,’’ add 

clarification to the definition of 

‘‘volatile organic compound,’’ and make 

minor editorial changes. The 

Commission adopted the amendments 

on December 17, 2009 (effective January 

30, 2010). 

B. On May 16, 2012 the State 

submitted a SIP revision containing 

amendments to Regulation Number 3, 

Parts A, B and D. The amendments 

modify the permitting requirements for 

stationary sources in Colorado by: (1) 

Incorporating into state regulations 

changes to the federal NSR Program 

related to the PM2.5 National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards (NAAQS); (2) 

revising state regulations to address past 

rule revisions that were disapproved or 

commented on by EPA; (3) deferring 

permitting requirements for biogenic 

sources of carbon dioxide emissions to 

ensure consistency with federal 

greenhouse gas permitting requirements; 

and (4) making miscellaneous revisions 

and minor editorial changes. The 

Commission adopted the amendments 

on October 20, 2011 (effective December 

15, 2011). 

C. On May 13, 2013 Colorado 

submitted a SIP revision containing 

amendments to Regulation Number 3, 

Parts A, B and D. The amendments 

make administrative revisions to the 

permitting requirements for stationary 

sources in Colorado and make minor 

editorial changes. The Commission 

adopted the amendments on December 

20, 2012 (effective February 15, 2013). 

D. On April 24, 2014 EPA published 

a final rule (79 FR 22772) in the Federal 

Register approving Colorado’s May 25, 

2011 SIP revisions to the Common 

Provisions Regulation related to 

greenhouse gas and minor editorial 

changes to the Common Provisions 

Regulation and Regulation Number 3 

Parts A, B and D (adopted October 10, 

2010). This action includes regulatory 

text and IBR material intended to be a 

part of EPA’s April 24, 2014 final rule 

but inadvertently excluded. 

III. EPA’s Review of the State of 

Colorado’s March 31, 2010; May 16, 

2012; and May 13, 2013 Submittals, and 

Regulatory Text/IBR Correction 

We evaluated Colorado’s March 31, 

2010, May 16, 2012 and May 13, 2013 

submittals regarding revisions to the 

State’s Common Provisions Regulation 

and Regulation Number 3, Parts A, B 

and D. We propose to approve some of 

the revisions and not act on others. 

A. March 31, 2010 SIP Submittal 

The State’s March 31, 2010 SIP 

submittal contained amendments to the 

Common Provisions Regulation and 

includes the following types of 

amendments to the State’s air quality 

rules: Adding compounds to the 

definition of ‘‘negligibly reactive 

volatile compounds’’ (NRVOC) and 

clarifying NRVOC and volatile organic 

compound (VOC) testing methodologies 

within the definition of ‘‘volatile 

organic compound.’’ In addition, the 

State subsequently requested 1 a 

revision to the definition of 

‘‘incinerator.’’ The revisions also make 

minor editorial changes. 

EPA’s policy is that compounds of 

carbon with a negligible level of 

reactivity need not be regulated to 

reduce ozone (42 FR 35314). EPA 

determines whether a given carbon 

compound has ‘‘negligible’’ reactivity by 

comparing the compound’s reactivity to 

the reactivity of ethane. EPA lists these 

compounds in its regulations at 40 CFR 

51.100(s), and excludes them from the 

definition of a ‘‘VOC.’’ The chemicals 

on this list are often called ‘‘negligibly 

reactive.’’ EPA may periodically revise 

the list of negligibly reactive volatile 

compounds or NRVOCs to add or delete 

compounds from the list. In its March 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 177 / Monday, September 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 55057 

2 In 78 FR 9823, EPA amended its definition of 

VOC at 40 CFR 51.100(s) to make for clarity 

technical corrections to the current list of exempt 

compounds at 40 CFR 51.100(s)(1) by removing the 

erroneous ‘‘(1)’’ notation in ‘‘(1) 1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5- 

decafluoro-3-methoxy-4-trifluoromethyl-pentane 

(HFE–7300)’’ so that it reads ‘‘1,1,1,2,2,3,4,5,5,5- 

decafluoro-3-methoxy-4-trifluoromethyl-pentane 

(HFE–7300).’’ 

3Refer to docket #EPA–R08–OAR–2015–0493 for 

documentation. 

4Refer to docket #EPA–R08–OAR–2015–0493 for 

documentation. 

5Refer to docket #EPA–R08–OAR–2015–0493 for 

documentation. 

6EPA inadvertently approved a previous version 

in 79 FR 8632. 

31, 2010 submission, the State adds the 

following compounds: ‘‘(1)1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 

3, 4, 5, 5, 5, -decafluoro-3-methoxy-4- 

trifluoromethyl-pentane’’ 2; ‘‘Propylene 

carbonate’’; and ‘‘Dimethyl carbonate,’’ 

as well as the common names or 

chemical structure: ‘‘n-C3F7OCH3, HFE– 

7000’’; ‘‘HFE–7500’’; ‘‘HFC 227ea’’; 

‘‘HCOOCH3’’; and ‘‘HFE–7300’’ to the 

list of NRVOCs. Subsequent to the 

March 31, 2010 submission, the State 

also requested 3 to add ‘‘1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 

3, -heptafluoro-3-methoxy-propane’’; ‘‘3- 

ethoxy-1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6, 6- 

dodecafluoro2(trifluoromethyl)hexane’’; ‘‘1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 

3, 3-heptafluoropropane’’; and ‘‘Methyl 

formate’’ to the list of NRVOCs 4 in 

section I.G. EPA is proposing to approve 

these additions to the State’s Common 

Provisions Regulation list of NRVOCs 

per our earlier actions (72 FR 2193; 74 

FR 3437; 78 FR 9823) updating EPA’s 

listing of organic compounds 

determined to have negligible 

photochemical reactivity at 40 CFR 

51.100(s)(1). 

The March 31, 2010 revision to the 

Common Provisions Regulation also 

revises the definition of ‘‘VOC’’ to 

include test methods specified in the 

State’s SIP, a Title V Permit, 40 CFR part 

51, subpart I or appendix S, and 40 CFR 

part 52. In accordance with 40 CFR 

51.100(s)(2) and (4), EPA proposes to 

approve revisions to the definition of 

‘‘VOC’’ in section I.G. of the Common 

Provisions Regulation. 

In addition to modifying the 

definitions of NRVOC and VOC, the 

State also subsequently requested 

revisions to the definition of 

‘‘incinerator’’ in section I.G. The 

revisions exclude from the definition of 

‘‘incinerator’’ devices commonly called 

Air Curtain Destructors used to burn 

100% wood waste, clean lumber, or 

yard waste generated as a result of 

projects to reduce the risk of wildfire 

and not operated at a commercial or 

industrial facility. The revisions also 

state that any air curtain destructor (also 

called air curtain incinerator in the 

federal rule) subject to 40 CFR part 60 

incinerator requirements are also 

considered incinerators under the 

State’s revised Common Provisions 

Regulation definition of ‘‘incinerator’’ 

per EPA’s final rule (70 FR 74870) for 

New Source Performance Standards 

(NSPS) for new and existing ‘‘other’’ 

solid waste incineration units. We 

propose to approve these revisions. 

The March 2010 submittal also makes 

minor editorial revisions to the 

Common Provisions Regulation. We are 

proposing to approve the minor 

editorial revisions in sections I.A., I.B., 

I.C., I.D., I.E., I.F., I.G., II.B., II.C., II.E.2. 

and II.H as shown in Table 1. We are not 

acting on the minor editorial revisions 

in II.J. as they are either already in the 

approved SIP or in sections that EPA 

previously disapproved (Table 2). Also, 

we note that the March 31, 2010 

submittal is missing a quotation mark in 

Section I.B. and contains the incorrect 

abbreviation for ‘‘microgram’’ in Section 

I.F. The State is aware of these errors 

and will make the necessary corrections 

in a future submittal.5

Finally, the March 31, 2010 

submission contains text not currently 

in the Common Provisions section of the 

SIP yet also not identified by the State 

as a revision. This text includes the 

addition of ‘‘Tertiary Butyl Acetate (2- 

Butanone)’’ to the list of NRVOCs in 

section I.G. as well as the last sentence 

in the definition of ‘‘VOC’’ regarding 

tertiary butyl acetate as a VOC for the 

purposes of photochemical dispersion 

monitoring. On November 29, 2004 (69 

FR 69298), EPA revised its definition of 

VOC to exclude tertiary butyl acetate for 

purposes of VOC emissions limitations 

or VOC content requirements; however, 

tertiary butyl acetate continues to be a 

VOC for purposes of all recordkeeping, 

emissions reporting, and inventory 

purposes as reflected in 40 CFR 

51.100(s)(1) and (s)(5). Therefore, EPA is 

not including these State additions with 

our proposed approval of IBR material. 

B. May 16, 2012 SIP Submittal 

The State’s May 16, 2012 SIP 

submittal includes the following types 

of amendments to Regulation Number 3, 

Parts A, B and D: Revisions to State 

permitting requirements for stationary 

sources to incorporate changes to the 

federal NSR Program related to PM2.5; 

revisions to address past rule revisions 

that were disapproved or commented on 

by EPA; and deferral of the permitting 

requirements for biogenic sources of 

carbon dioxide emissions to ensure 

consistency with federal greenhouse gas 

permitting requirements. The revisions 

also make several miscellaneous 

changes along with minor editorial 

changes. 

The May 16, 2012 submittal 

incorporates into Regulation Number 3, 

Parts A, B and D changes to the federal 

NSR Program related to the PM2.5

NAAQS. Specifically, the State revised 

the definition of ‘‘criteria pollutants’’ to 

address PM2.5 precursors in Part A 

(I.B.17.) and revised the definition of 

‘‘significant’’ to address PM2.5 in Part D 

(II.A.42.). We are proposing to approve 

both of these revisions to definitions to 

address PM2.5. In addition, the State 

incorporated portions of 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(9)(i)–(iv) into the State’s 

Requirements Applicable to 

Nonattainment Areas for Major Sources 

in Part D of Regulation Number 3 

(V.A.3.). This section describes the 

emissions offsets and emissions offset 

ratios required prior to the date of 

commencement of operations. We are 

proposing to approve this revision. We 

are also proposing to approve the State’s 

revision to the Table of Significance 

Levels for nonattainment areas in 

section VI.D.2. of Part D to address 

PM2.5. Finally, the State added PM2.5

increments to their ambient air 

increments in section X.A.1. of Part D 

and added PM2.5 increments to their 

Class I variances maximum allowable 

increases in section XIII.D. of Part D. 

These revisions align with 40 CFR 

52.21(b)(58)(c) and 52.21(p)(5), 

respectively, and we therefore propose 

to approve these revisions. 

The State also revised the definition 

of ‘‘Subject to Regulation’’ in Part A of 

Regulation Number 3 in their May 16, 

2012 submittal. In section I.B.44.b.(i) the 

State added language to instruct how to 

compute greenhouse gas emissions to 

exclude carbon dioxide emissions 

resulting from the combustion or 

decomposition of non-fossilized and 

biodegradable organic material 

originating from plants, animals, or 

micro-organisms. This addition is 

consistent with EPA’s biogenic deferral 

regulation found at 40 CFR 

52.21(b)(49)(a)(ii); therefore, we are 

proposing to approve the revision. 

The May 16, 2012 submission also 

makes revisions to Regulation Number 

3, Part B based on EPA’s comments on 

previous actions (76 FR 6331; 79 FR 

8632). These revisions include reverting 

back to previously approved SIP 

exemption language for stationary 

internal combustion engines that have 

uncontrolled actual emissions of less 

than five tons per year for construction 

permit requirements (II.D.1.c.) 6 and 

clarifying exemptions associated with 

oil and gas produced wastewater 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
55058 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 177 / Monday, September 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

7Refer to January 2011 letter from state_

Colorado’s Position on the Use of PM10 as a 

Surrogate for PM2.5, Relevant to Both the PM2.5

Implementation Rules and Interstate Transport in 

docket #EPA–R08–OAR–2015–0493 for 

documentation. 

8EPA inadvertently approved a previous version 

in 79 FR 8632. 

9EPA inadvertently approved a previous version 

in 79 FR 8632. 

10Refer to docket #EPA–R08–OAR–2015–0493 for 

documentation. 

impoundments (II.D.1.m). We are 

proposing to approve these revisions. 

Within section VI.B.3. of Part D of the 

May 16, 2012 submittal, the State 

revised the PM10 surrogate policy for 

PM2.5 based on EPA’s previous 

conclusions that PM2.5 implementation 

issues had been resolved to a degree 

sufficient for all federal Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) permit 

reviews to begin direct PM2.5 based 

assessments as of July 15, 2008. In a 

letter 7 dated January 13, 2011 the State 

clarified their position on the use of 

PM10 as a surrogate for PM2.5 ‘‘. . . 

(CDPHE) now commits to implement 

PM2.5 standards consistent with EPA’s 

latest interpretation of federal case law 

relevant to the use of the PM10 Surrogate 

Policy . . .’’ We are proposing to 

approve this revision, and in doing so, 

note that as announced in our May 2008 

rulemaking to implement 

preconstruction review provisions for 

the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in both 

attainment and nonattainment areas (73 

FR 28321), the 1997 PM10 Surrogate 

Policy ended on May 16, 2011 and can 

no longer be used for any pending or 

future State PSD permits. 

Also regarding the May 16, 2012 

submittal, we are proposing to take no 

action on several of the State’s revisions 

related to PM2.5 implementation in Part 

D of Regulation Number 3, including 

section II.A.26.d. describing net 

emissions increases for PM2.5, the 

introductory paragraph of VI.A.2. and 

VI.A.2.c. that provide impact levels for 

PM2.5, and VI.B.3.a.(iii) PM2.5

monitoring exemption of 4 micrograms/ 

cubic meter over a 24-hour average. We 

are proposing to not act on these 

revisions in part due to the January 22, 

2013 United States Court of Appeals for 

the District of Columbia Circuit vacatur 

of the significant impact levels for PM2.5

for attainment areas. Since we are 

proposing to not take action on the 

PM2.5 monitoring exemption level found 

at VI.B.3.a.(iii), we also propose to not 

take action on VI.B.3.d. In absence of a 

revision to include a PM2.5 monitoring 

exemption level in VI.B.3.a.(iii), PM2.5

would be removed from the list of 

pollutants with monitoring exemption 

levels contained in VI.B.3.a., therefore 

exempting PM2.5 from monitoring levels 

completely if we approved VI.B.3.d. 

We are also proposing to take no 

action on several revisions contained in 

the May 16, 2012 submittal to 

Definitions in Part D of Regulation 

Number 3 to address PM2.5 in the 

Baseline Area (II.A.5.a.), Major Source 

Baseline Date (II.A.23.), Minor Source 

Baseline Date (II.A.25.) and Regulated 

NSR Pollutant (II.A.38.) definitions 

because we already approved these 

revisions in our September 23, 2013 (78 

FR 58186) action. In section II.A.23.c. of 

Part D, the State also revised the major 

source baseline date for PM2.5 to October 

20, 2011. This date is incorrect; the 

correct major source baseline date for 

PM2.5 is October 20, 2010. In the May 

13, 2013 submittal, also part of this 

action, the State revises the date back to 

October 20, 2010. The May 13, 2013 

submittal supersedes the May 16, 2012 

submittal; however, since the current 

approved SIP already contains the 

correct date, we are proposing to take no 

action on either revision. 

Additionally, the May 16, 2012 

submission addresses EPA’s final action 

on October 3, 2011 (76 FR 61054) 

partially approving and partially 

disapproving Colorado’s SIP revisions 

in Regulation Number 3, Part A to Air 

Pollutant Emission Notice (APEN) and 

permitting exemptions submitted to 

EPA in September 1997, June 2003, July 

2005, August 2006, and August 2007. In 

the October 3, 2011 action, EPA 

partially disapproved APEN exemptions 

for open burning,8 mobile sources, 

stationary internal combustion engines, 

emergency generators, deaerator/

vacuum pump exhaust, and air curtain 

destructors. In today’s action, we are 

proposing to approve revisions to the 

open burning APEN requirements 

(II.D.1.q.) in Regulation Number 3, Part 

A changing the reference regulation 

from ‘‘9,’’ which is not part of 

Colorado’s SIP, to ‘‘1,’’ which is part of 

Colorado’s SIP and clarifying the mobile 

source APEN (II.D.1.ppp.). Additionally, 

we are proposing to approve revisions 

made to the surface water impoundment 

APEN exemption (II.D.1.uuu.) to 

include gas production wastewater in 

addition to oil production wastewater. 

We are proposing no action on the 

State’s removal of APENs related to 

stationary internal combustion engines 

(II.D.1.sss.), emergency power 

generators (II.D.1.ttt.), deaerator/vacuum 

pump exhaust (II.D.1.xxx.), and air 

curtain destructors (II.D.1.ffff.) as these 

provisions were not approved into the 

SIP. Finally, we are proposing no action 

on revisions to identify sections 

I.B.31.c,9 and I.B.31.d. as ‘‘State-only 

Requirements’’ since these are also not 

part of the SIP. 

Finally, the May 16, 2012 submission 

contains miscellaneous revisions to 

Parts A, B and D of Regulation Number 

3. In Part A, the State clarified the 

significance level for VOC and NOX for 

APEN reporting purposes (II.C.2.b.(ii)). 

In Part B, section III.G.1., the State 

changed the timing an applicant must 

provide notice to the State upon 

commencement of operation of a source 

from 30 days prior to startup to 15 days 

following startup. This revision aligns 

with 40 CFR 60.7(a)(3) Standards of 

Performance for New Stationary 

Sources, Notification and Record 

Keeping. In Part D, revisions include a 

correction 10 to move the creditable 

emissions documentation from 

II.A.26.d. to II.A.26.c.(iii), remove ‘‘total 

suspended particulate matter’’ and add 

NOX as a precursor to ozone for 

consistency with federal significant 

monitoring concentrations requirements 

in VI.B.3.a.(iii) and VI.B.3.c., 

respectively. We propose to approve 

these revisions in addition to minor 

editorial changes found throughout 

Parts A, B and D of Regulation Number 

3 with exceptions noted in Table 2 

because the revisions the State is 

requesting are already in the SIP. 

C. May 13, 2013 SIP Submittal 

The State’s May 13, 2013 SIP 

submittal contains amendments to 

Regulation Number 3 Parts A, B and D 

and includes administrative revisions to 

permitting requirements for stationary 

sources in Colorado and minor editorial 

changes. The State also updated where 

materials incorporated by reference are 

available for public inspection by 

adding an online web address and 

deleting reference to the State 

Publications Depository and 

Distribution Center in section I.A. 

Revisions to section VI.B.5. in Part A 

of the May 13, 2013 submittal allow the 

State to issue construction permits prior 

to receipt of permit processing fees and 

provide for the option to revoke the 

permit or assess late fees if such fees are 

not paid within 90 days of the written 

request for fees. The purpose of the 

revisions are to allow applicants to 

commence construction during the 

invoicing and payment process; the 

revisions will not negatively impact 

permit applicants who pay their permit 

processing fees on time. A revision to 

section III.C.1.a. in Part B of the May 13, 

2013 submittal clarifies the inclusion of 

sources in attainment/maintenance 

areas in the determination of sources 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 177 / Monday, September 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 55059 

11EPA inadvertently approved this language in 

79 FR 22772. 

12Refer to docket #EPA–R08–OAR–2015–0493 for 

additional documentation. 

subject to public comment. Finally, 

revisions to Part D of the May 13, 2013 

submittal include deleting language 

EPA previously disapproved (79 FR 

8632) in the introductory text for Major 

Modifications in section II.A.22.11 and 

Representative Actual Annual 

Emissions sections II.A.40.5 and 

II.A.40.5(a) as well as deleting the 

associated II.A.40.5(b).12

EPA is proposing to approve the 

revisions in the May 13, 2013 submittal 

to Parts A, B and D of Regulation 

Number 3 as well as the minor editorial 

changes contained throughout, except 

for sections II.A.22., II.A.40.5 

(introductory paragraph), and 

II.A.40.5(a) in Part D because these are 

not in the current SIP and the other 

exceptions noted in Table 2. We are not 

acting on some of the provisions as 

listed in Table 2, because they are Stateonly provisions or because they are not 

applicable to the current SIP. 

Proposed Correction 

In our final rule published in the 

Federal Register on April 24, 2014 (79 

FR 22772) we inadvertently did not 

include regulatory text and 

corresponding IBR materials for our 

approvals to (1) greenhouse gas 

permitting revisions to Common 

Provisions Regulation, and (2) minor 

editorial changes to the Common 

Provisions Regulation and Parts A, B 

and D of Regulation Number 3 (adopted 

October 10, 2010). EPA is proposing to 

correct this error with today’s action. 

The IBR material for our April 24, 2014 

action is contained within this docket. 

IV. What action is EPA taking? 

For the reasons expressed above, EPA 

is proposing to approve revisions to 

sections I.A., I.B., I.C., I.D., I.E., I.F., I.G., 

II.B., II.C., II.E.2. and II.H of the State’s 

Common Provisions Regulation from the 

March 31, 2010 submittal as shown in 

Table 1 below. We also propose to 

approve revisions to Parts A, B and D 

of the State’s Regulation Number 3 from 

the May 16, 2012 and May 13, 2013 

submittals (Table 1), except for those 

revisions we are not taking action on as 

represented in Table 2 below. Finally, 

EPA proposes to correct regulatory text 

and IBR published in the Federal 

Register on April 24, 2014 (79 FR 

22772). 

A comprehensive summary of the 

revisions in Colorado’s Common 

Provisions Regulation and Regulation 

Number 3 Parts A, B and D organized 

by EPA’s proposed rule action, reason 

for proposed ‘‘no action’’ and submittal 

date are provided in Table 1 and Table 

2 below. 

TABLE 1—LIST OF COLORADO REVISIONS THAT EPA IS PROPOSING TO APPROVE

Revised Sections in March 31, 2010; May 16, 2012; and May 13, 2013 Submissions Proposed for Approval 

March 31, 2010 submittal—Common Provisions Regulation: 

I.A., I.B., I.C., I.D., I.E., I.F., I.G., II.B., II.C., II.E.2., II.H. 

May 16, 2012 submittal—Regulation Number 3, Part A: 

I.B.17., I.B.28.c., I.B.44.b.(i), I.B.44.e.(ii)(B), II.C.2.b.(ii), II.D.1.q., II.D.1.ppp., II.D.1.uuu., II.D.1.dddd. 

May 13, 2013 submittal—Regulation Number 3, Part A: 

I.A., I.B.7., I.B.28., I.B.43., II.D.1., II.D.1.dddd., V.I.2., VI.B.5., Appendix B. 

May 16, 2012 submittal—Regulation Number 3, Part B: 

II.D.1.c., II.D.1.m., III.G.1. 

May 13, 2013 submittal—Regulation Number 3, Part B: 

III.C.1.a. 

May 16, 2012 submittal—Regulation Number 3, Part D: 

II.A.24.f., II.A.26.c., II.A.26.e.–II.A.26.k. (re-numbering), II.A.42., III.B., V.A., V.A.3., V.A.4., VI.A.2.a., VI.A.4., VI.B.3.a.(ii) and (iv)–(ix), 

VI.B.3.a.(iii) in reference to removal of total suspended particulate matter monitoring exemption, VI.B.3.c., VI.B.3.e., VI.D.2., X.A.1., 

X.A.2., XIII.B., XIII.D. 

May 13, 2013 submittal—Regulation Number 3, Part D: 

I.B.2., I.B.4., I.C., II.A.4.c., II.A.17., II.A.22.d.(ix)(B), II.A.40.5.(b)., V.A.3.b., V.A.6., VI.B.3.d., VI.B.3.e. 

TABLE 2—LIST OF COLORADO REVISIONS THAT EPA IS PROPOSING TO TAKE NO ACTION ON

[Revised sections in March 31, 2010; May 16, 2012; and May 13, 2013 submissions proposed for no action] 

Revised Section 

Reason for Proposed ‘‘No Action’’ 

Revision in 

State-only 

section of 

SIP 

Revision in 

current 

section of 

SIP 

Revision in 

disapproved 

section of 

SIP 

Revision 

superseded 

by revision 

in February 

20, 2015 

State 

submittal 

(will be 

reconciled 

in future 

rulemaking) 

Revision to be 

made in future 

State submittal 

March 31, 2010 submittal—Common Provisions Regulation: 

II.J. ................................................................................ ........................ X X ........................ ........................

May 16, 2012 submittal—Regulation Number 3, Part A: 

I.B.31.c. ......................................................................... X ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................

I.B.31.d. ......................................................................... X ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................

II.D.1.sss. ...................................................................... ........................ ........................ X ........................ ........................

II.D.1.ttt. ........................................................................ ........................ ........................ X ........................ ........................


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
55060 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 177 / Monday, September 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 2—LIST OF COLORADO REVISIONS THAT EPA IS PROPOSING TO TAKE NO ACTION ON—Continued 

[Revised sections in March 31, 2010; May 16, 2012; and May 13, 2013 submissions proposed for no action] 

Revised Section 

Reason for Proposed ‘‘No Action’’ 

Revision in 

State-only 

section of 

SIP 

Revision in 

current 

section of 

SIP 

Revision in 

disapproved 

section of 

SIP 

Revision 

superseded 

by revision 

in February 

20, 2015 

State 

submittal 

(will be 

reconciled 

in future 

rulemaking) 

Revision to be 

made in future 

State submittal 

II.D.1.xxx. ...................................................................... ........................ ........................ X ........................ ........................

II.D.1.ffff. ....................................................................... ........................ ........................ X ........................ ........................

May 13, 2013 submittal—Regulation Number 3, Part A: 

I.B.31.d. ......................................................................... X ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................

May 16, 2012 submittal—Regulation Number 3, Part D: 

II.A.5.a. .......................................................................... ........................ X ........................ ........................ ........................

II.A.5.b. .......................................................................... ........................ X ........................ ........................ ........................

II.A.23. ........................................................................... ........................ X ........................ ........................ ........................

II.A.25. ........................................................................... ........................ X ........................ ........................ ........................

II.A.26.d. revision to PM2.5 net emission increase ....... ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ X 

II.A.38. ........................................................................... ........................ X ........................ ........................ ........................

VI.A.2. introductory paragraph ...................................... ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ X 

VI.A.2.c. ........................................................................ ........................ ........................ ........................ X ........................

VI.B.3.a.(iii) in reference to PM2.5 monitoring exemption ............................................................................. ........................ ........................ ........................ X ........................

VI.B.3.d. ........................................................................ ........................ ........................ ........................ X ........................

May 13, 2013 submittal—Regulation Number 3, Part D: 

II.A.1.a. .......................................................................... ........................ ........................ X ........................ ........................

II.A.1.c. .......................................................................... ........................ ........................ X ........................ ........................

II.A.1.e. .......................................................................... ........................ ........................ X ........................ ........................

II.A.20.b. ........................................................................ ........................ ........................ X ........................ ........................

II.A.22. ........................................................................... ........................ ........................ X ........................ ........................

II.A.23.c. ........................................................................ ........................ X ........................ ........................ ........................

II.A.26.a.(i) .................................................................... ........................ ........................ X ........................ ........................

II.A.26.f.iii. ..................................................................... ........................ ........................ X ........................ ........................

II.A.38.g. ........................................................................ ........................ ........................ X ........................ ........................

II.A.40.5. introductory paragraph .................................. ........................ ........................ X ........................ ........................

II.A.40.5.(a) ................................................................... ........................ ........................ X ........................ ........................

VI.A.1.c. ........................................................................ ........................ ........................ X ........................ ........................

V. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rulemaking, the EPA is 

proposing to include in a final EPA rule 

regulatory text that includes 

incorporation by reference. In 

accordance with requirements of 1 CFR 

51.5, the EPA is proposing to 

incorporate by reference Colorado Air 

Quality Control Commission regulations 

discussed in section III, EPA’s Review of 

the State of Colorado’s March 31, 2010; 

May 16, 2012; and May 13, 2013 

Submittals, and Regulatory Text/IBR 

Correction of this preamble. The EPA 

has made, and will continue to make, 

these documents generally available 

electronically through 

www.regulations.gov and/or in hard 

copy at the appropriate EPA office (see 

the ADDRESSES section of this preamble 

for more information). 

VI. Statutory and Executive Orders 

Review 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable federal regulations 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed 

action merely approves some state law 

as meeting federal requirements; this 

proposed action does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by state law. For that reason, 

this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

section 12(d) of the National 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 177 / Monday, September 14, 2015 / Proposed Rules 55061 

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). 

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, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, 

Greenhouse gases, Lead, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: September 1, 2015. 

Debra H. Thomas, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2015–23075 Filed 9–11–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 70 

[Regional Docket No. II–2012–01; FRL– 

9933–81–Region 2] 

Petition for Objection to State 

Operating Permit; NY; Seneca Energy 

II, LLC 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of final action. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to Clean Air Act 

(CAA) Section 505(b)(2) and 40 CFR 

70.8(d), the Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) Administrator signed an 

Order, dated June 29, 2015, granting in 

part and denying in part a petition filed 

by Gary A. Abraham on behalf of Finger 

Lakes Zero Waste Coalition, Inc. (dated 

December 22, 2012) asking the EPA to 

object to the Title V operating permit 

(Permit No. 8–3244–00040/00002) 

issued by the New York State 

Department of Environmental 

Conservation (DEC) to Seneca Energy II, 

LLC (Seneca) relating to the Ontario 

County Landfill Gas-to-Energy Facility 

(Facility) in western New York. Sections 

307(b) and 505(b)(2) of the CAA provide 

that the petitioner may ask for judicial 

review by the United States Court of 

Appeals for the appropriate circuit of 

those portions of the Order that deny 

objections raised in the petition. 

DATES: Any such petition for review of 

this Order must be received by 

November 13, 2015 pursuant to section 

307(b) of the CAA. 

ADDRESSES: You may review copies of 

the final Order, the petitions, and other 

supporting information during normal 

business hours at EPA Region 2, 290 

Broadway, New York, New York. If you 

wish to examine these documents, you 

should make an appointment at least 24 

hours before the visiting day. 

Additionally, the final Order is available 

electronically at: http://www.epa.gov/

region7/air/title5/petitiondb/petitions/

seneca_response2012.pdf. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steven Riva, Chief, Permitting Section, 

Air Programs Branch, Clean Air and 

Sustainability Division, EPA, Region 2, 

290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, 

New York 10007, telephone (212) 637– 

4074, email address: Riva.Steven@

epa.gov, or the above EPA Region 2 

address. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The CAA 

affords the EPA a 45-day period to 

review, and object to, as appropriate, a 

title V operating permit proposed by a 

state permitting authority. Section 

505(b)(2) of the CAA authorizes any 

person to petition the EPA 

Administrator, within 60 days after the 

expiration of this review period, to 

object to a Title V operating permit if 

the EPA has not done so. Petitions must 

be based only on objections to the 

permit that were raised with reasonable 

specificity during the public comment 

period provided by the state, unless the 

petitioner demonstrates that it was 

impracticable to raise these issues 

during the comment period or that the 

grounds for the objection or other issues 

arose after this period. The claims are 

described in detail in Section IV of the 

Order. In summary, the issues raised are 

that: (1) The Title V permit does not 

consider the Ontario County Landfill 

(Landfill) and the Facility a single 

source even though they together meet 

the 3-factor source determination test; 

and (2) the Facility’s Title V permit is 

a ‘‘sham permit.’’ The EPA’s rationale 

for partially granting and partially 

denying the claims raised in the petition 

are described in the Order. 

Dated: August 26, 2015. 

Catherine McCabe, 

Deputy Regional Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2015–23076 Filed 9–11–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[FRL–9933–86–OAR] 

40 CFR Part 97 

Allocations of Cross-State Air 

Pollution Rule Allowances From New 

Unit Set-Asides for 2015 Control 

Periods 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of data availability 

(NODA). 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is providing notice of the 

availability of preliminary lists of units 

eligible for allocations of emission 

allowances under the Cross-State Air 

Pollution Rule (CSAPR). Under the 

CSAPR federal implementation plans 

(FIPs), portions of each covered state’s 

annual emissions budgets for each of the 

four CSAPR emissions trading programs 

are reserved for allocation to electricity 

generating units that commenced 

commercial operation on or after 

January 1, 2010 (new units) and certain 

other units not otherwise obtaining 

allowance allocations under the FIPs. 

The quantities of allowances allocated 

to eligible units from each new unit setaside (NUSA) under the FIPs are 

calculated in an annual one- or tworound allocation process. EPA 

previously completed the first round of 

NUSA allowance allocations for the 

2015 control periods for all four CSAPR 

trading programs and is now making 

available preliminary lists of units 

eligible for allocations in the second 

round of the NUSA allocation process 

for the CSAPR NOX Ozone Season 

Trading Program. EPA has posted a 

spreadsheet containing the preliminary 

lists on EPA’s Web site. EPA will 

consider timely objections to the lists of 

eligible units contained in the 

spreadsheet and will promulgate a 

document responding to any such 

objections no later than November 15, 

2015, the deadline for recording the 

second-round allocations of CSAPR 

NOX Ozone Season allowances in 

sources’ Allowance Management 

System accounts. This notice of 

availability may concern CSAPRaffected units in the following states: 

Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, 

Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS