54602 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 172 / Thursday, September 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

remain within the regulated area by 

contacting the Captain of the Port Miami 

by telephone at 305–535–4472, or a 

designated representative via VHF radio 

on channel 16. If authorization is 

granted by the Captain of the Port 

Miami or a designated representative, 

all persons and vessels receiving such 

authorization must comply with the 

instructions of the Captain of the Port 

Miami or a designated representative. 

(2) The Coast Guard will provide 

notice of the safety zone by Local Notice 

to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to 

Mariners, and on-scene designated 

representatives. 

(d) Effective Date. This rule will be 

enforced from 6:30 a.m. until 10 a.m. on 

October 27, 2013. 

Dated: August 9, 2013. 

A.J. Gould, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Miami. 

[FR Doc. 2013–21624 Filed 9–4–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2012–0300; FRL–9900–66– 

Region8] 

Approval and Promulgation of State 

Implementation Plans; Utah: 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration; 

Greenhouse Gas Permitting Authority 

and Tailoring Rule 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to partially 

approve and partially disapprove 

revisions to the Utah State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) relating to 

regulation of Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) 

under Utah’s Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) program and other 

SIP provisions. These revisions were 

submitted to EPA on April 14, 2011 by 

the Governor. The GHG-related SIP 

revisions are designed to align Utah’s 

regulations with the GHG emission 

thresholds established in EPA’s ‘‘PSD 

and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring 

Final Rule,’’ which EPA issued by 

notice dated June 3, 2010. In today’s 

action, EPA is proposing to approve the 

GHG (as it relates to the PSD program) 

revisions because the Agency has 

determined that this SIP revision, which 

is already adopted by Utah as a final 

effective rule, is in accordance with the 

Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and EPA 

regulations regarding PSD permitting for 

GHGs. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 26, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08– 

OAR–2012–0300, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line 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–2011– 

0300. 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 

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 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 ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ 

or ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. What action is EPA taking in this proposed 

rule? 

II. Background for Our Proposed Action 

III. Utah’s Actions 

IV. EPA’s Analysis of Utah’s Proposed SIP 

Revisions 

V. Proposed Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What action is EPA taking in this 

proposed rule? 

In a letter dated April 14, 2011, the 

Governor of Utah submitted a request to 

EPA to approve revisions to the State’s 

SIP and Title V program to incorporate 

recent rule amendments adopted by the 

Utah Air Quality Board on December 1, 

2010. These adopted rules became 

effective in the Utah Administrative 

Code on January 1, 2011. These 

amendments establish thresholds for 

GHG emissions in Utah’s PSD and Title 

V regulations at the same emissions 

thresholds and in the same time-frames 

as those specified by EPA in the ‘‘PSD 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 172 / Thursday, September 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules 54603 

1Specifically, by action dated December 13, 2010, 

EPA finalized a ‘‘SIP Call’’ that would require those 

states with SIPs that have approved PSD programs 

but do not authorize PSD permitting for GHGs to 

submit a SIP revision providing such authority. 

‘‘Action To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits 

Under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

Program to Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: 

Finding of Substantial Inadequacy and SIP Call,’’ 75 

FR 77698 (December 13, 2010). EPA made findings 

of failure to submit in some states which were 

unable to submit the required SIP revision by their 

deadlines, and finalized FIPs for such states. See, 

e.g. ‘‘Action To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits 

Under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

Program to Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: 

Finding of Failure To Submit State Implementation 

Plan Revisions Required for Greenhouse Gases,’’ 75 

FR 81874 (December 29, 2010); ‘‘Action To Ensure 

Authority To Issue Permits Under the Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration Program to Sources of 

Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Federal Implementation 

Plan,’’ 75 FR 82246 (December 30, 2010). Because 

Utah’s SIP already authorizes Utah to regulate 

GHGs once GHGs became subject to PSD 

requirements on January 2, 2011, Utah is not subject 

to the SIP Call or FIP. 

2 ‘‘Limitation of Approval of Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration Provisions Concerning 

Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in State 

Implementation Plans; Final Rule.’’ 75 FR 82536 

(December 30, 2010). 

and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring; 

Final Rule’’ (75 FR 31514 (June 3, 

2010)), hereinafter referred to as the 

‘‘Tailoring Rule,’’ ensuring that smaller 

GHG sources emitting less than these 

thresholds will not be subject to 

permitting requirements for GHGs that 

they emit. The requested amendments 

to the SIP will clarify the applicable 

thresholds in the Utah SIP, address the 

flaw discussed in the ‘‘Limitation of 

Approval of Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration Provisions Concerning 

Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in 

State Implementation Plans Final Rule,’’ 

75 FR 82536 (December 30, 2010) (the 

‘‘PSD SIP Narrowing Rule’’), and 

incorporate state rule changes adopted 

at the state level into the federallyapproved SIP. 

We are proposing to approve 

amendments to the following rules: 

R307–405–3 (Permits: Major Sources in 

Attainment or Unclassified Areas (PSD), 

Definitions); and R307–401–9 (Permit: 

New and Modified Sources, Small 

Source Exemption). We are not acting 

on the changes to R307–415–3 (Permits: 

Operating Permit Requirements, 

Definitions) and related definitions in 

R307–405–3 in this notice because 

approval of Title V program revisions is 

handled separately and because Title V 

is not part of the SIP. Additionally, 

consistent with our June 12, 2013 

proposal (78 FR 35181), we are 

proposing to disapprove the changes to 

the following: R307–401–7 (Public 

Notice), which was effective in the Utah 

Administrative Code on December 1, 

2010; and change to R307–401–9(b) and 

portions of (c) (Small Source 

Exemption), which were effective in the 

Utah Administrative Code on January 1, 

2011. Finally, consistent with our final 

action on July 15, 2011 (76 FR 41712), 

we are proposing to disapprove R307– 

405–3(2)(a)(i) because it defines ‘‘Minor 

Source Baseline Date’’ in a manner 

inconsistent with the federal definition 

found at 40 CFR 52.21(b)(14). 

II. Background for Our Proposed 

Action 

Clean Air Act (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: Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD), 

Nonattainment New Source Review 

(NNSR), and Minor NSR. The PSD 

program is established in part 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. 

PSD is implemented through the SIP 

system. In December 2010, EPA 

promulgated several rules to implement 

the new GHG PSD SIP program. 

Recognizing that some states had 

approved SIP PSD programs that did not 

apply PSD to GHGs, EPA issued a SIP 

Call and, for some of these states, a 

Federal Implementation Plan (FIP).1

Recognizing that other 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, EPA issued the PSD SIP 

Narrowing Rule. Under that rule, EPA 

converted its previous full approval of 

the affected SIPs to a partial approval 

and partial disapproval, including 

Utah’s, 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 partial 

disapprovals. 

III. Utah’s Actions 

On April 14, 2011, Utah submitted a 

letter to EPA, in accordance with a 

request to all states from EPA in the 

Tailoring Rule, with confirmation that 

the State of Utah has the authority to 

regulate GHGs in its PSD program. The 

letter also confirmed Utah’s intent to 

amend its air quality rules for the PSD 

program for GHGs to match the 

thresholds set in the Tailoring Rule. See 

the docket for this proposed rulemaking 

for a copy of Utah’s letter. Utah has a 

current SIP-approved PSD program, and 

has most recently been approved by 

EPA to incorporate the 2002 NSR 

Reform revisions for PSD into its SIP. 

See 76 FR 41712 (July 15, 2011). As 

described in our July 15, 2011 notice of 

approval (with the exceptions noted in 

that notice and, as applicable, also 

explained in this notice), Utah’s PSD 

program at that date met the general 

requirements of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(C). 

In the PSD SIP Narrowing Rule, 

published on December 30, 2010, EPA 

withdrew its approval of Utah’s SIP 

(among other states’ SIPs) to the extent 

that the SIP applies PSD permitting 

requirements to GHG emissions from 

sources emitting at levels below those 

set in the Tailoring Rule.2 As a result, 

Utah’s current approved SIP provides 

the state with authority to regulate 

GHGs, but only at and above the 

Tailoring Rule thresholds; and requires 

new and modified sources to receive a 

federal PSD permit based on GHG 

emissions only if they emit or have 

potential to emit at or above the 

Tailoring Rule thresholds. 

The basis for proposing approval of 

this SIP revision is that limiting PSD 

applicability to GHG sources with the 

higher thresholds in the Tailoring Rule 

is consistent with the SIP provisions 

that require assurances of adequate 

resources. This revision addresses the 

flaw in the Utah SIP that led to the PSD 

SIP Narrowing Rule. Specifically, CAA 

section 110(a)(2)(E) includes as a 

requirement for SIP approval that states 

provide ‘‘necessary assurances that the 

state . . . will have adequate personnel 

[and] funding . . . to carry out such 

[SIP].’’ In the Tailoring Rule, EPA 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
54604 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 172 / Thursday, September 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

3Tailoring Rule, 75 FR at 31517. 

4PSD SIP Narrowing Rule, 75 FR at 82540. 

5 Id. at 82542. 

6 Id. at 82544. 

7 Id. at 82540. 

8As we explained in our June 12, 2013 notice, 

R307–401–7 revised Utah’s public notice 

procedures to allow for a 10-day public comment 

period for an approval or disapproval order issued 

under R307–401–8. The rule allows for the public 

comment period to be increased to 30 days under 

certain conditions. We note that the public 

comment period for an approval or disapproval 

order currently in Utah’s federally approved SIP is 

30 days. (See R307–1–3.1.3) Federal regulations for 

Public Availability of Information found at 40 CFR 

51.161(b)(2) require at a minimum a 30-day public 

comment period for the permitting of a source, 

including minor source permits. In addition, the 30- 

day comment period is important to allow adequate 

opportunity for comment by other affected states, 

federal agencies, and the public. 

established higher thresholds for PSD 

applicability to GHG-emitting sources, 

in part, because the states generally did 

not have adequate resources to apply 

PSD to GHG-emitting sources below the 

Tailoring Rule thresholds,3 and no state, 

including Utah, asserted that it did have 

adequate resources to do so.4 In the PSD 

SIP Narrowing Rule, EPA found that the 

affected states, including Utah, had a 

flaw in their SIP at the time they 

submitted their PSD programs, which 

was that the applicability of the PSD 

programs was potentially broader than 

the resources available to them under 

their SIP.5 Accordingly, for each 

affected state, including Utah, EPA 

concluded that EPA’s action in 

approving the SIP was in error, under 

CAA section 110(k)(6), and EPA 

rescinded its approval to the extent the 

PSD program applies to GHG-emitting 

sources below the Tailoring Rule 

thresholds.6 EPA recommended that 

states adopt a SIP revision to 

incorporate the Tailoring Rule 

thresholds, thereby (i) assuring that 

under state law, only sources at or above 

the Tailoring Rule thresholds would be 

subject to PSD; and (ii) avoiding 

confusion under the federally approved 

SIP by clarifying that the SIP applies 

only to sources at or above the Tailoring 

Rule thresholds.7

Utah’s April 14, 2011, SIP submission 

establishes thresholds for determining 

which stationary sources and 

modification projects become subject to 

permitting requirements for GHG 

emissions under Utah’s PSD program. 

Specifically, the SIP revision includes 

changes—which are already effective in 

Utah’s Administrative Code—revising 

R307–405–3 and R307–415–3 to 

incorporate changes to Title 40 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations that 

address GHG emissions from stationary 

sources, required by the May 13, 2010 

EPA final rule. The amendments to 

R307–401–9 exclude sources from the 

requirement to obtain an Approval 

Order if their GHG emissions are below 

the thresholds established by EPA. 

The changes to Utah’s PSD program 

regulations are substantively the same 

as the federal provisions amended in 

EPA’s Tailoring Rule. 

IV. EPA’s Analysis of Utah’s Proposed 

SIP Revisions 

Utah has adopted and submitted 

regulations that are substantively 

similar to the federal requirements for 

the permitting of GHG-emitting sources 

subject to PSD. 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 

Utah’s SIP. 

R307–401–9 (Small Source 

Exemption), was revised to exclude 

sources from the requirement to obtain 

an approval order if their GHG 

emissions are below the thresholds 

established by EPA, and adopted into 

the State rules (R307–401–9(5)). 

Therefore, preconstruction permits for 

GHGs are only required under the PSD 

permitting program, thus exempting 

minor sources from GHG permitting. 

R307–405–3 (Definitions), was revised 

to amend the definition of ‘‘subject to 

regulation’’ to include ‘‘greenhouse 

gases (GHGs)’’ as defined in 40 CFR 

86.1818–12(a). R307–405–3 was 

modified to establish thresholds for 

permitting of GHGs under the PSD 

program. Definitions for the terms 

‘‘GHGs’’, ‘‘emissions increase’’ and ‘‘tpy 

CO2 equivalent emissions (CO2e)’’, were 

added to this rule. Applicability 

thresholds for several different types of 

permitting scenarios were also added. 

Therefore, we are proposing to approve 

the state’s additions to R307–405–3(9) 

as they are consistent with the federal 

rule provisions in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48). 

We are proposing to approve R307– 

405–3(2)(e). This is a new rule that is 

not currently in the SIP. The rule 

explains that ‘‘certain definitions or 

portions of definitions that apply to the 

equipment repair and replacement 

provisions are not incorporated into the 

SIP because these provisions were 

vacated by the D.C. Circuit Court of 

Appeals’’. We are proposing to approve 

this rule as it is consistent with the 

federal definitions. 

We are also proposing to approve 

R307–405–3(2)(f). This is a new rule and 

makes changes to the definition of 

‘‘Regulated NSR Pollutant’’ in 40 CFR 

52.21(b)(50). We are proposing to 

approve this rule, as the State’s rule is 

consistent with the federal definition, 

which is now at 40 CFR 52.21(b)(49) 

and 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49). 

There are six provisions in the R307– 

405–3 in the State submittal that are 

identical in rule number and language 

to the definitions we approved in our 

July 15, 2011 approval (76 FR 41712) 

and we are proposing to approve these 

definitions as resubmitted. These 

provisions include: R307–405–3(1) 

(adopting by reference the definitions in 

40 CFR 52.21(b) with exceptions as 

noted in the rules); R307–405–3(2)(c) 

(definition of ‘‘Reviewing Authority’’); 

R307–405–3(2)(d) (definition of 

‘‘Administrator’’); R307–405–3(4) 

(definition of ‘‘Heat Input’’); R307–405– 

3(7) (definition of ‘‘Good Engineering 

Practice’’); R307–405–3(8) (definition of 

‘‘Dispersion Technique’’); 

There are two definitions in the State 

submittal where the definition is the 

same as in the current SIP, but the 

current submittal contains a new rule 

number. We are proposing to approve 

the following definitions and rule 

numbers: R307–405–3(2)(a)(ii) 

(definition of ‘‘Minor Source Baseline 

Date’’), which is located in the current 

SIP at R307–405–3(3)(a)(ii); and R307– 

405–3(3) /(definition of ‘‘Air Quality 

Related Values’’), which is located in 

the current SIP at R307–405–3(2). 

We are not acting on rule provisions 

related to the Title V program. There are 

two specific definitions we are not 

acting on: R307–405–3(5) (definition of 

‘‘Title V Permit’’) and R307–405–3(6) 

(definition of ‘‘Title V Operating Permit 

Program’’). The State also submitted 

R307–415–3 (all the definitions for the 

Operating Permit Program). We are not 

acting on these definitions in this notice 

because approval of the Title V program 

revisions is handled separately and Title 

V is not part of the SIP. 

Additionally, consistent with our June 

12, 2013 proposal (78 FR 35181), we are 

proposing to disapprove the State’s 

submittal of R307–401–7 (Permit: New 

and Modified Sources, Public Notice), 

which was effective in the Utah 

Administrative Code on December 1, 

2010.8

Also consistent with our June 2013 

proposal we are proposing to partially 

approve and partially disapprove R307– 

401–9 (Permit: New and Modified 

Sources, Small Source Exemption). We 

are proposing to approve R307–401– 

9(5), which excludes sources whose 

GHG emission are below established 

EPA thresholds for GHG from the 

requirement to obtain an Approval 

Order. However, we are proposing to 

disapprove paragraph (b) and the 

portions of paragraph (c) that reference 

paragraph (b). We are proposing to 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 172 / Thursday, September 5, 2013 / Proposed Rules 54605 

9As we explained in our 2011 notice, ‘‘Utah has 

adopted a specific definition of ‘‘Major Source 

Baseline Date,’’ found at R307–405–3(3)(a)(i), in its 

revised PSD rule. This definition deviates from the 

definition found in 40 CFR 52.21(b)(14) and the 

corresponding requirement for state PSD programs 

at 51.166(b)(14). Utah’s definition specifies that the 

major source baseline date for particulate matter 10 

microns in diameter or less (PM[10]) is the ‘‘date 

that EPA approves the PM[10] maintenance plan 

that was adopted by the Board on July 6, 2005’’ for 

Davis, Salt Lake, Utah, and Weber Counties. The 

requirement for State programs at 40 CFR 

51.166(b)(14) specifies January 6, 1975 as the major 

source baseline date for particulate matter, and the 

current EPA-approved SIP for Utah also specifies 

January 6, 1975 as the major source baseline date 

for PM–10 for the entire State (refer to Utah’s SIPapproved rule R307–101–2 ‘‘Definitions’’). EPA is 

not aware of any authority for it to approve into a 

SIP a different major source baseline date other than 

January 6, 1975. Further, we note there is no 

provision in the CAA for using a different date if 

an area was in a legally designated non-attainment 

status on January 6, 1975. EPA is taking final action 

to disapprove Utah’s definition of ‘‘Major Source 

Baseline Date,’’ and therefore, the current federallyapproved definition found in R307–101–2 would 

continue to apply as a federally enforceable 

provision in lieu of the State-adopted version.’’ 76 

FR 41716 

disapprove R307–401–9(b) and the 

phrase ‘‘or (b)’’ in paragraph (c) because 

EPA lacks authority in an action on a 

SIP revision under CAA section 110 to 

approve provisions addressing 

hazardous air pollutants. Thus we are 

proposing to disapprove these specific 

provisions. 

Finally, consistent with our final 

action on July 15, 2011 (76 FR 41712), 

we are proposing to disapprove R307– 

405–3(2)(a)(i) because it defines ‘‘Minor 

Source Baseline Date’’ in a manner 

inconsistent with the federal definition 

found at 40 CFR 52.21(b)(14).9

V. Proposed Action 

Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, 

EPA is proposing to approve Utah’s 

April 14, 2011 revisions to the Utah SIP, 

relating to PSD requirements for GHGemitting sources. Specifically, Utah’s 

proposed SIP revisions establishes 

appropriate emission thresholds for 

determining PSD applicability to new 

and modified GHG-emitting sources in 

accordance with EPA’s Tailoring Rule. 

EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that these rules that are 

included in the SIP submittal are 

approvable because they are in 

accordance with the CAA and EPA 

regulations regarding PSD permitting for 

GHGs. 

We are proposing to approve changes 

to the following rules: R307–401–9(5) 

(Small Source Exemption), R307–405– 

3(9) (Definitions), R307–405–3(2)(e) and 

R307–405–3(2)(f). We are proposing to 

approve the following definitions and 

new rule numbers: R307–405–3(2)(a)(ii) 

(definition of ‘‘Minor Source Baseline 

Date’’), which is located in the current 

SIP at R307–405–3(3)(a)(ii); and R307– 

405–3(3) (definition of ‘‘Air Quality 

Related Values’’), which is located in 

the current SIP at R307–405–3(2). 

For the reasons stated above, we are 

proposing to disapprove the State’s 

submittal of R307–401–7 (New and 

Modified Sources, Public Notice), R307– 

401–9(b) and the phrase ‘‘or (b)’’ in 

paragraph (c) (Small Source Exemption, 

exemption for certain hazardous air 

pollutant sources), and R307–405– 

3(2)(a)(i) (Definition of ‘‘Major Source 

Baseline Date’’). 

Finally, as stated above, we are not 

acting on rule provisions related to the 

Title V program because Title V is not 

part of the SIP (R307–405–3(5) 

(definition of ‘‘Title V Permit’’, R307– 

405–3(6) (definition of ‘‘Title V 

Operating Permit Program’’), R307–415– 

3 (Operating Permit Requirements, 

Definitions). 

Once EPA finalizes approval of Utah’s 

changes to its air quality regulations to 

incorporate appropriate thresholds for 

GHG permitting applicability into 

Utah’s SIP, section 52.2323 of 40 CFR 

part 52, added in EPA’s PSD SIP 

Narrowing Rule to codify the limitation 

of its approval of Utah’s PSD SIP to 

exclude the applicability of PSD to 

GHG-emitting sources below the 

Tailoring Rule thresholds, will no 

longer be necessary. In this action, EPA 

is also proposing to amend section 

52.2323 of 40 CFR part 52 to remove 

this unnecessary regulatory language. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable federal regulations 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed 

action merely approves some state law 

as meeting federal requirements and 

disapproves other state law because it 

does not meet 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 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and, 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

Tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on Tribal governments or preempt 

Tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

and Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

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

Dated: August 28, 2013. 

Shaun L. McGrath, 

Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2013–21611 Filed 9–4–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1