This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

2144 

Vol. 79, No. 8 

Monday, January 13, 2014 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2013–0801; FRL–9905–24- 

Region 8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Colorado; Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration; Greenhouse Gas 

Tailoring Rule Revisions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

revisions and additions to the Colorado 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

submitted by the Colorado Department 

of Public Health and the Environment 

(CDPHE) to EPA on May 25, 2011. The 

proposed SIP revision to Colorado 

Regulation Number 3 and the Common 

Provisions Regulation addresses the 

permitting of sources of greenhouse 

gases (GHGs). Specifically, we propose 

to approve revisions to Portions of Parts 

A, B and D of Regulation Number 3 to 

incorporate the provisions of the 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) and Title V Greenhouse Gas 

Tailoring Rule. The proposed SIP 

revisions establish emission thresholds 

for determining which new stationary 

sources and modifications to existing 

stationary sources become subject to 

Colorado’s PSD permitting requirements 

for their GHG emissions. EPA is 

proposing to approve the May 25, 2011 

SIP revision to the Colorado PSD 

permitting program as being consistent 

with federal requirements for PSD 

permitting. EPA also proposes to 

approve several grammar and 

punctuation changes to Regulation 

Number 3 made by the State and 

included in the May 25, 2011 submittal. 

EPA is proposing this action under the 

Clean Air Act (the Act or CAA). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before February 12, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08– 

OAR–2013–0801, by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal Rulemaking Portal: http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Email: ostendorf.jody@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (303) 312–6064 (please alert 

the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing 

comments). 

• Mail: Carl Daly, Director, Air 

Program, Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P– 

AR, 1595 Wynkoop St., Denver, 

Colorado 80202–1129. 

• Hand Delivery: Carl Daly, Director, 

Air Program, Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P– 

AR, 1595 Wynkoop St., 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–2013– 

0801. 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 

the disclosure of which is restricted by 

statute. Do not submit information 

through http://www.regulations.gov or 

email, if you believe that it is CBI or 

otherwise protected from disclosure. 

The http://www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means that 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 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, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment along with any disk or CD– 

ROM submitted. 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 and any form of encryption 

and should 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. 

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 St., 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: Jody 

Ostendorf, Air Program, Mailcode 8P– 

AR, Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA), Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop St., 

Denver, Colorado 80202–1129, (303) 

312–7814, ostendorf.jody@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. Information is organized as 

follows: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background for Our Proposed Action 

II. History of EPA’s GHG-Related Actions 

III. EPA’s Analysis of the State’s Submittal 

IV. Proposed Action 

V. Statutory and Executive Orders Review 

I. Background for Our Proposed Action 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(C) requires 

states to develop and submit to EPA for 

approval into the state SIP 

preconstruction review and permitting 

programs applicable to certain new and 

modified stationary sources of air 

pollutants. There are three separate 

programs: PSD, Nonattainment New 

Source Review (NNSR), and Minor NSR. 

The PSD program is established in part 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 8 / Monday, January 13, 2014 / Proposed Rules 2145 

1 ‘‘Endangerment and Cause or Contribute 

Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section 

202(a) of the Clean Air Act.’’ 74 FR 66496 

(December 15, 2009). 

2 ‘‘Interpretation of Regulations that Determine 

Pollutants Covered by Clean Air Act Permitting 

Programs.’’ 75 FR 17004 (April 2, 2010). 

3 ‘‘Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emission 

Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy 

Standards; Final Rule.’’ 75 FR 25324 (May 7, 2010). 

4Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title 

V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule; Final Rule.’’ 75 

FR 31514 (June 3, 2010). 

5 ‘‘Limitation of Approval of Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration Provisions Concerning 

Greenhouse Gas Emitting Sources in State 

Implementation Plans,’’ 75 FR 82536 (December 30, 

2010). 

C of title I of the CAA and applies in 

areas that meet the National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)— 

‘‘attainment areas’’—as well as areas 

where there is insufficient information 

to determine if the area meets the 

NAAQS—‘‘unclassifiable areas.’’ The 

NNSR program is established in part D 

of title I of the CAA and applies in areas 

that are not in attainment of the 

NAAQS—‘‘nonattainment areas.’’ The 

Minor NSR program (1) addresses 

construction or modification activities 

that do not emit, or have the potential 

to emit, beyond certain major source 

thresholds and thus do not qualify as 

‘‘major,’’ and (2) applies regardless of 

the designation of the area in which a 

source is located. EPA regulations 

governing the criteria that states must 

satisfy for EPA approval of the NSR 

programs as part of the SIP are 

contained in 40 CFR 51.160–51.166. 

On May 25, 2011, Colorado submitted 

revisions for approval by EPA into the 

Colorado SIP, including some 

regulations specific to the Colorado NSR 

PSD permitting program. For Part A, 

General Provisions Applicable to 

Reporting and Permitting, the State 

added new definitions of GHGs and 

carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e), 

incorporating by reference EPA’s global 

warming potential (GWP) codified via 

the GHG Mandatory Reporting Rule 

(Sections I.B.10 and I.B. 23); revise the 

major source definition so that it applies 

to regulated NSR pollutants (which 

includes GHGs) as well as to air 

pollutants (which does not include 

GHG), so that GHG is addressed and the 

definition may be used to establish the 

mass-based GHG threshold (Section 

I.B.25.b); and revise annual emission 

fees to exclude GHGs (Section VI.D). 

The submittal also adds to Part A a new 

definition of Subject to Regulation 

consistent with the ‘‘PSD and Title V 

Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Final Rule’’ 

(75 FR 31514, June 3, 2010) hereafter 

referred to as the ‘‘Tailoring Rule’’ 

(Section I.B.44). The new definition of 

Subject to Regulation includes a 

rescission clause which states, ‘‘If there 

is a change in federal law or the District 

of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals or 

the United States Supreme Court directs 

or issues an order, which limits or 

renders ineffective the regulation of 

GHG emissions at stationary sources 

under the NSR PSD or Title V 

provisions of the Federal Act, the 

regulation of GHG emissions under the 

corresponding programs in this 

Regulation Number 3 shall be limited or 

rendered ineffective to the same extent’’ 

(Section I.B.44.f). EPA interprets this 

clause to mean, 1) Colorado will wait for 

EPA’s timely interpretation of a Court 

action; and, 2) Colorado will provide 

public notice of any rescission, based on 

a letter of clarification submitted to EPA 

on December 12, 2013. 

In Part B, Construction Permits, the 

SIP revises the general permitting 

requirements to authorize the issuance 

of synthetic minor permits for GHGs if 

stationary sources choose to seek 

federally enforceable limits for GHGs, if 

they would otherwise be subject to PSD 

or Title V permitting programs (Section 

II.A.4 and II.A.7). In Part D, Major 

Stationary Source New Source Review 

(NSR) and Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD), the SIP revises the 

Definitions of ‘‘best available control 

technology’’ (BACT), ‘‘major 

modification’’ and ‘‘major stationary 

source’’ to use the term ‘‘regulated NSR 

pollutant’’ for consistency with the 

Tailoring Rule (Sections II.A.8, II.A.22, 

II.A.24.a, II.A.24.a.(ii) and II.A.24.b); 

and revise ‘‘NSR Pollutant’’ to be 

consistent with EPA’s Tailoring Rule 

(Section II.A.38.e and II.A.38.f). 

The SIP also added definitions to 

Section I.G. of the Common Provisions 

Regulation to include ‘‘greenhouse gas’’ 

and ‘‘CO2e,’’ to be consistent with the 

federal definitions. Grammatical and 

punctuation changes to Regulation 

Number 3 were made by the State 

throughout Regulation Number 3 as 

documented in the May 25, 2011 

submittal. 

These revisions (1) establish that GHG 

is a regulated pollutant under 

Colorado’s NSR PSD program, and (2) 

establish emission thresholds for 

determining which new stationary 

sources and modification projects 

become subject to Colorado’s NSR PSD 

permitting requirements for their GHG 

emissions consistent with the Tailoring 

Rule. Today’s proposed action presents 

our rationale for approving these 

regulations as meeting the minimum 

federal requirements for the adoption 

and implementation of NSR PSD SIP 

permitting programs. 

II. History of EPA’s GHG-Related 

Actions 

This section briefly summarizes EPA’s 

recent GHG-related actions that provide 

the background for this action. Please 

see the preambles for the identified 

GHG-related rulemakings for more 

information. 

Beginning in 2010, EPA undertook a 

series of actions pertaining to the 

regulation of GHGs that established the 

overall framework for today’s proposed 

action on the Colorado SIP. These 

actions include, as they are commonly 

called, the ‘‘Endangerment Finding’’ 

and ‘‘Cause or Contribute Finding,’’ 

which EPA issued in a single final 

action,1 the ‘‘Johnson Memo 

Reconsideration,’’ 2 the ‘‘Light-Duty 

Vehicle Rule,’’ 3 and the ‘‘Tailoring 

Rule.’’ 4 Taken together and in 

conjunction with the CAA, these actions 

established regulatory requirements for 

GHGs emitted from new motor vehicles 

and new motor vehicle engines; 

determined that such regulations, when 

they took effect on January 2, 2011, 

subjected GHGs emitted from stationary 

sources to PSD requirements; and 

limited the applicability of PSD 

requirements to GHG sources on a 

phased-in basis. EPA took this last 

action in the Tailoring Rule, which, 

more specifically, established 

appropriate GHG emission thresholds 

for determining the applicability of PSD 

requirements to GHG-emitting sources. 

At the same time, EPA recognized that 

many states had approved SIP PSD 

programs that do apply PSD to GHGs, 

but that do so for sources that emit as 

little as 100 or 250 tons per year (tpy) 

of GHG, and that do not limit PSD 

applicability to GHGs to the higher 

thresholds in the Tailoring Rule. 

Therefore, EPA issued the GHG PSD SIP 

Narrowing Rule,5 under which, EPA 

converted its previous full approval of 

the affected SIPs, including Colorado’s, 

to a partial approval and partial 

disapproval, to the extent those SIPs 

covered GHG-emitting sources below 

the Tailoring Rule thresholds. EPA 

based its action primarily on the ‘‘error 

correction’’ provisions of CAA section 

110(k)(6). Many of those states have 

since submitted SIP revisions that have 

established the Tailoring Rule 

thresholds, and EPA has approved those 

SIP revisions and rescinded the partial 

disapprovals. 

III. EPA’s Analysis of the State’s 

Submittal 

These revisions to Colorado’s SIP are 

necessary because without them, and 

notwithstanding the GHG PSD SIP 

Narrowing Rule, PSD requirements 

would apply, as of January 2, 2011, at 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
2146 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 8 / Monday, January 13, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

the 100- or 250-tpy levels provided 

under the CAA. This would greatly 

increase the number of required 

permits, impose undue costs on small 

sources and overwhelm Colorado’s 

permitting program. The May 25, 2011 

proposed revisions establish thresholds 

for determining which stationary 

sources and modification projects 

become subject to permitting 

requirements for GHG emissions under 

Colorado’s NSR PSD program. Colorado 

is currently a SIP-approved state for the 

PSD program, and has incorporated 

EPA’s 2002 NSR reform revisions for 

PSD into its SIP. 

Colorado has adopted and submitted 

regulations that are substantively 

similar to the federal requirements for 

the permitting of GHG-emitting sources 

subject to PSD. The revisions 

incorporate the Tailoring Rule into 

Colorado’s PSD Permitting Programs, 

and support synthetic minor permitting 

at stationary sources seeking federally 

enforceable limits to avoid major source 

or major stationary source applicability 

thresholds specific to GHG. The State 

revisions add the definitions of GHG, 

CO2e and subject to regulation, revise 

the definitions of major source and 

regulated pollutant, allow for synthetic 

minor source permitting and make the 

Tailoring Rule effective January 2, 2011. 

We propose to conclude that the 

revisions are consistent with the 

requirements of 40 CFR 51.166, in 

particular requirements set out in EPA’s 

final GHG Tailoring Rule, and that the 

revisions should be approved into 

Colorado’s SIP. 

The cover letter to Colorado’s May 25, 

2011 submittal identified the specific 

regulations the State requested that EPA 

approve into the SIP including 

grammatical and capitalization changes. 

The State made these minor changes to 

Parts A, B, and D of Regulation Number 

3. These Parts of Colorado’s Regulation 

Number 3 address the State’s permitting 

and PSD program. However, 

grammatical changes were also made to 

Part C of the regulation. Part C is the 

State’s Title V permitting program that 

is not part of the SIP. Since the State 

included these non-SIP regulatory 

changes, EPA is taking no action on 

changes made to Part C. 

IV. Proposed Action 

EPA proposes to approve the May 25, 

2011 submittal for incorporation into 

the SIP. Specifically, EPA proposes to 

approve revisions to Regulation Number 

3 Parts A, B and D and the Common 

Provisions Regulation. EPA has made 

the preliminary determination that these 

May 25, 2011 revisions are approvable 

because they were adopted and 

submitted in accordance with the CAA 

and EPA regulations regarding PSD 

permitting for GHGs. 

Minor grammatical and capitalization 

changes made throughout the May 25, 

2011 revisions are proposed for 

approval. These include minor changes 

to all sections to the following 

provisions in Regulation Number 3, Part 

A, Part B, and Part D. The changes do 

not revise the regulatory language in 

Regulation Number 3 and are, therefore, 

proposed for approval without 

reference. We are not acting on 

grammatical revisions to Part C of 

Regulation Number 3 since this is the 

State’s Title V operating permit program 

and it is not part of the SIP. 

V. Statutory and Executive Orders 

Review 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, EPA’s role is to approve 

state choices, provided that they meet 

the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

approves state law that meets federal 

requirements and disapproves state law 

that does not meet federal requirements; 

when finalized, this action would not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In 

addition, this rule does not have tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), because the SIP is not approved 

to apply in Indian country located in the 

state, and EPA notes that it will not 

impose substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, and 

Volatile organic compounds. 

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

Dated: December 20, 2013. 

Howard M. Cantor, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2014–00397 Filed 1–10–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1