Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 188 / Monday, September 29, 2014 / Proposed Rules 58309 

19 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

comments from the FLMs; and provide 

procedures for continuing consultation 

between the State and FLMs. 

VI. EPA’s Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

California Regional Haze Plan 2014 

Progress Report submitted to EPA on 

June 16, 2014, as meeting the applicable 

RHR requirements as set forth in 40 CFR 

51.308(g), (h), and (i). 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal 

regulations.19 Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, EPA’s role is to approve 

state decisions, provided that they meet 

the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, 

this proposed action is to approve state 

law as meeting Federal requirements, 

and does not impose additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. For that reason, this proposed 

action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state. 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, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen oxides, Organic carbon, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

oxides, Visibility, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: September 17, 2014. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2014–23101 Filed 9–26–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2014–0713; FRL–9917–20– 

Region–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; 

Montana; Revisions to Administrative 

Rules of Montana—Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revisions submitted by the State of 

Montana on June 4, 2013. This SIP 

revision revises the Administrative 

Rules of Montana that pertain to the 

issuance of Montana air quality permits. 

The June 4, 2013 revisions contain 

amended and renumbered rules. In this 

proposed rulemaking, we are taking 

action on portions of the June 4, 2013 

submittal. This action is being taken 

under section 110 of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 29, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08– 

OAR–2014–0713, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: leone.kevin@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (303) 312–6064 (please alert 

the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT if you are faxing 

comments). 

• Mail: Carl Daly, Director, Air 

Program, Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P– 

AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, 

Colorado 80202–1129. 

• Hand Delivery: Carl Daly, Director, 

Air Program, Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P– 

AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, 

Colorado 80202–1129. Such deliveries 

are only accepted Monday through 

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

federal holidays. Special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R08–OAR–2014– 

0713. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA, without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http://

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

For additional instructions on 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
58310 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 188 / Monday, September 29, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

1See 40 CFR 51.166(b)(1)(ii), (b)(2)(ii), (b)(23), 

and (b)(49). See also 40 CFR 52.21(b)(1)(ii), 

(b)(2)(ii), (b)(23), and (b)(50). EPA also amended the 

footnote to 40 CFR 51.166(i)(5)(i)(e) (40 CFR 

51.166(i)(5)(i)(f) in the current CFR) and 40 CFR 

52.21(i)(5)(i) to require sources with a net increase 

of 100 tons per year or more of NOX to perform an 

ambient impact analysis. 

submitting comments, go to section I. 

General Information of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this document. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publiclyavailable docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Air Program, Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129. EPA requests that if at all 

possible, you contact the individual 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section to view the hard copy 

of the docket. You may view the hard 

copy of the docket Monday through 

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

federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kevin Leone, Air Program, Mailcode 

8P–AR, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 8, 1595 Wynkoop 

Street, Denver, Colorado 80202–1129, 

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. General Information 

II. What is being addressed in this document? 

III. What is the state process to submit these 

materials to EPA? 

IV. What are the changes that EPA is 

proposing to approve? 

V. What action is EPA taking today? 

VI. Statutory and Executive Orders Review 

Definitions 

For the purpose of this document, we 

are giving meaning to certain words or 

initials as follows: 

(i) The words or initials Act or CAA 

mean or refer to the Clean Air Act, 

unless the context indicates otherwise. 

(ii) The initials ARM mean or refer to 

the Administrative Rules of Montana. 

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

mean or refer to the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency. 

(iv) The initials MDEQ mean or refer 

to the Montana Department of 

Environmental Quality. 

(v) The initials NOX mean or refer to 

nitrogen oxides. 

(vi) The initials NSR mean or refer to 

New Source Review. 

(vii) The initials PSD mean or refer to 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration. 

(viii) The initials SIP mean or refer to 

State Implementation Plan. 

(ix) The initials SO2 mean or refer to 

sulfur dioxide. 

(x) The words State or Montana mean 

the State of Montana, unless the context 

indicates otherwise. 

I. General Information 

A. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this 

information to EPA through 

www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly 

mark the part or all of the information 

that you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD ROM that 

you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the 

disk or CD ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD ROM the specific information that is 

claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

a. Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

b. Follow directions—The agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

c. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

d. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

e. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

f. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

g. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

h. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

II. What is being addressed in this 

document? 

EPA is proposing to approve (with 

one exception) the revisions to Title 17, 

Chapter 8, subchapter 8 of the 

Administrative Rules of Montana (ARM) 

submitted by the State on June 4, 2013, 

that relate to the State’s prevention of 

significant deterioration (PSD) program. 

The revisions to the State PSD SIP were 

adopted by the Montana Department of 

Environmental Quality (MDEQ) on 

September 27, 2012, and became 

effective October 12, 2012. 

Specifically, the submittal contains 

revisions to ARM 17.8.801 (Definitions) 

and 17.8.818 (Review of Major Source 

and Major Modifications—Source 

Applicability and Exemptions) to 

include nitrogen oxides (NOX) as an 

ozone precursor pollutant for reviewing 

major stationary sources of air 

pollutants and to amend portions of the 

SIP for consistency of language when 

referring to sulfur dioxide (SO2) and 

NOX. The submittal also corrected an 

error in an August 15, 2012 submittal 

regarding the treatment of fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5). We have not 

acted on the August 15, 2012 submittal; 

EPA will act on the correction in the 

June 4, 2013 submittal in tandem with 

our future action on the August 15, 2012 

submittal. 

On November 29, 2005, EPA 

published the ‘‘Final Rule to Implement 

the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards—Phase 2’’ in 70 FR 

71612 (‘‘Phase 2 Ozone Implementation 

Rule’’). This regulation required 

revisions to state programs for major 

source permitting. One of the 

requirements in EPA regulations was to 

address ozone formation by regulating 

precursor pollutants (see 40 CFR 

51.166(b)(49)(i) and 52.21(b)(50)(i)). 

‘‘Precursor pollutants’’ are pollutants 

that combine to form another pollutant; 

NOX reacts with volatile organic 

compounds to form ozone. In the Phase 

2 Ozone Implementation Rule, EPA 

identified NOX as an ozone precursor 

pollutant in attainment and 

unclassifiable areas. Accordingly, the 

Phase 2 Ozone Implementation Rule 

amended the definition of ‘‘major 

stationary source,’’ ‘‘major 

modification,’’ ‘‘significant,’’ and 

‘‘regulated NSR pollutant’’ to include 

NOX as an ozone precursor 1. 

In a November 29, 2005, final rule 

(Approval and Disapproval and 

Promulgation of State Implementation 

Plan Revisions; Infrastructure 

Requirements for the 1997 8-Hour 

Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards; Montana), EPA disapproved 

a Montana SIP revision because we 

found Montana’s PSD rules for ozone 

inadequate because the rules did not 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 188 / Monday, September 29, 2014 / Proposed Rules 58311 

address NOX as an ozone precursor 

pollutant as required by the Phase 2 

Ozone Implementation Rule. 76 FR 

28934. This disapproval started a FIP 

clock, and as we are now proposing to 

approve Montana’s June 4, 2013, 

submittal, this would cure the 

deficiency identified in our prior 

disapproval and extinguish our FIP 

obligations because the proposed 

amendments in this notice would 

address EPA’s concerns and make 

Montana’s rules for PSD permitting 

adequate to implement the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. 

III. What is the state process to submit 

these materials to EPA? 

Section 110(k) of the CAA addresses 

EPA’s actions on submissions of 

revisions to a SIP. The CAA requires 

states to observe certain procedural 

requirements in developing SIP 

revisions for submittal to EPA. Section 

110(a)(2) of the CAA requires that each 

SIP revision be adopted after reasonable 

notice and public hearing. This must 

occur prior to the revision being 

submitted by a state to EPA. The MDEQ 

held a public hearing on July 12, 2012 

to propose revisions consistent with the 

Phase 2 Ozone Implementation Rule at 

70 FR 71612 in its regulations at ARM 

17.8. The Governor submitted these SIP 

revisions to EPA on June 4, 2013. 

We have evaluated the Governor’s 

submittal of the PSD SIP revisions and 

have determined that the State met the 

requirements for reasonable notice and 

public hearing under Section 110(a)(2) 

of the CAA. 

IV. What are the changes that EPA is 

proposing to approve? 

EPA is proposing to approve revisions 

to the Montana SIP that would bring the 

State PSD program provisions into 

conformance with the requirements of 

the Phase 2 Ozone Implementation 

Rule. 

Generally, the proposed amendments 

to the Montana SIP would add NOX as 

a regulated ozone precursor pollutant 

for purposes of PSD. The MDEQ and 

applicants for permits to construct or 

modify major sources would be required 

to analyze the applicability of PSD 

requirements for ozone based on a 

source’s NOX emissions. The following 

are descriptions of the proposed 

amendments: 

ARM 17.8.801(20)(a) would be 

amended by modifying the definition of 

‘‘major modification,’’ adding NOX as an 

ozone precursor pollutant when NOX

emissions exceed a significance 

threshold. This revision is consistent 

with the federal definition of ‘‘major 

modification’’ in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(2)(ii). 

ARM 17.8.801(22)(b) would be 

amended by modifying the definition of 

‘‘major stationary source,’’ adding NOX

as an ozone precursor pollutant thereby 

triggering consideration of a source as 

‘‘major’’ for ozone when the source 

emits or has the potential to emit 100 

tons per year of NOX. This revision is 

consistent with the federal definition of 

‘‘major stationary source’’ in 40 CFR 

51.166(b)(1)(ii). 

ARM 17.8.801(25) would be amended 

by adding a definition of the term 

‘‘nitrogen oxides or NOx,’’ defining it as 

the sum of nitric oxide and nitrogen 

dioxide in the flu gas or emission point. 

ARM 17.8.801(27)(a) would be 

amended by modifying the definition of 

‘‘significant.’’ The SIP revision would 

add a significance level of 40 tons per 

year of NOX as a precursor for ozone. 

We propose to find that these revisions 

are consistent with the federal 

definition of ‘‘significant’’ in 40 CFR 

51.166(b)(23)(i). The State also proposed 

to amend this definition by substituting 

the term ‘‘nitrogen oxides’’ for ‘‘nitrogen 

dioxide (NO2)’’ as a precursor for PM2.5

formation. The use of ‘‘nitrogen dioxide 

(NO2)’’ was a mistake when the 

definition was adopted in September 

2011. The State intended to use the term 

‘‘nitrogen oxides,’’ which include the 

sum of nitric oxide and nitrogen dioxide 

in the flue gas or emission point because 

they are precursors to the formation of 

PM2.5, and the State is proposing to 

correct that mistake. The State is also 

proposing to delete the symbol ‘‘SO2’’ 

from the definition so that it is 

consistent with the Federal definition. 

EPA will act on the changes with 

respect to PM2.5 when we act on the 

August 15, 2012 submittal. 

ARM 17.8.818(7)(a)(vi) would be 

amended to add that a net increase of 

100 tons per year of NOX, as an ozone 

precursor pollutant, triggers an ambient 

impact analysis. This revision is 

consistent with the footnote related to 

40 CFR 51.166(i)(5)(i)(f) in the federal 

regulations. 

The State has not adopted a definition 

of ‘‘regulated NSR pollutant,’’ but 

instead continues to use the prior 

phrase ‘‘pollutant subject to regulation 

under the CAA’’ in its regulations to 

identify pollutants subject to PSD 

requirements. In support thereto, the 

State has provided a statement of basis 

indicating that it understands that ‘‘EPA 

found Montana’s PSD rules for ozone 

inadequate because the rules do not 

address NOX as a precursor pollutant for 

ozone,’’ and asserting that the 

‘‘proposed amendments in this notice 

would address EPA’s concerns and 

make Montana’s rules for PSD permits 

adequate to implementing the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS.’’ The State further 

explains that: 

Generally, the proposed amendments to 

the rules would add NOX as a precursor 

pollutant that contributes to the formation of 

ozone. The department and applicants for 

permits to construct or modify major sources 

would be required to analyze the 

applicability of PSD requirements based on 

NOX as a precursor to ozone. 

Thus, we understand this to mean 

that the State interprets the phrase 

‘‘pollutant subject to regulation under 

the CAA’’ to include NOX as a precursor 

to ozone, consistent with the 

application of Regulated NSR Pollutant 

in the federal regulations. Based on this 

explanation and Montana’s proper 

revision of the other relevant PSD 

provisions described above, we 

therefore propose to find that Montana’s 

regulations appropriately regulate NOX

as an ozone precursor by requiring 

sources to analyze PSD applicability as 

to ozone based on the sources’ NOX

emissions. 

The requirements included in 

Montana’s PSD program, as specified in 

ARM 17.8.801 and 17.8.818, are 

substantively the same as the federal 

provisions. As part of EPA’s review of 

the Montana submittal, EPA performed 

a line-by-line review of the proposed 

revisions and has determined that they 

are consistent with the program 

requirements for the preparation, 

adoption and submittal of 

implementation plans for the Prevention 

of Significant Deterioration of Air 

Quality, as set forth at 40 CFR 51.166. 

V. What action is EPA taking today? 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

revisions to the ARM 17.8.801 and 

17.8.818 as outlined in Section IV of 

this rulemaking and as submitted to 

EPA by the State of Montana on June 4, 

2013. 

VI. 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 proposed action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
58312 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 188 / Monday, September 29, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

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 in a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: September 19, 2014. 

Shaun L. McGrath, 

Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2014–23108 Filed 9–26–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS