Oklahoma State Implementation Plan Elements to Meet the Section 110(a)(2) Requ irements of the Clean Air Act for the following National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS):

2008 Lead (Pb), 2008 Ozone, 2010 Nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ), and 2010 Sulfur dioxide (SO 2 )

Docket ID EPA-R06-OAR-2012-0812 Technical Support Document August 2016

Table of Contents: I. Introduction and Background II. SIP elements required under Section 110( a)(2) for the 2008 Pb and ozone NAAQS and

the 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 NAAQS, the State submittals and EPA analysis

III. EPA’s Recommendation Appendix A Appendix B

I. Introduction and Background In this technical support document (TSD), th e Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is evaluating the submittals provided by the Stat e of Oklahoma (Oklahoma) to meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the 2008 Pb and ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or st andards) and the 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 NAAQS. More detail on these standards, section 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Act, and the submittals we are reviewing to satisfy the section 110(a)(2 ) requirements for Oklahoma are provided below. Throughout this TSD, “we,” “us,” and “our” means the EPA. Section I further provides additional background material on the NAAQS, State Implementation Plan (SIPs), and related

issues. Section II of this TSD provides a descripti on of each element required under section 110(a)(2) of the Act, the State’s response, and our analysis of such response. Copies of the State’s submittals are in the docket for this rulemaking.

Section III of the TSD includes our recomme ndation for action on each of the elements

reviewed herein.

A. The National Ambient Air Quality Standards Section 108 of the CAA requires EPA to es tablish NAAQS for po llutants that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public heal th and welfare and to develop a primary and secondary standard for each NAAQS. The primary st andard is designed to protect human health with an adequate margin of safety and the sec ondary standard is design ed to protect public welfare. EPA has set NAAQS for six common air pollutants, also refe rred to as criteria pollutants: carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen di oxide, ozone, particulat e matter, and sulfur dioxide. These standards present st ate and local governments with the minimum air quality levels they must meet to comply with the Act. Section 109 of the Act also requires EPA to complete a thorough review of the NAAQS and make such revi sions in such standards and promulgate such new standards as may be appropria te, at least every five years.2

B. Section 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean Air Act Under sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) of the C AA, states are required to submit plans to provide for the implementation, maintenance and enforcement of each NAAQS. Moreover, section 110(a)(1) requires that each state, with in 3 years after the pr omulgation of a national primary ambient air quality standard, submit a plan which provides for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of such primary (and secondary) standards within such state. Section 110(a)(2) lists the specific elements that must be included in these submissions, also known as “infrastructure” elements, which includ e for example, requirements for air pollution control measures and monitoring th at are designed to assure atta inment and maintenance of the NAAQS. The submittals described here are commonl y referred to as state implementation plans or SIPs and we use the term “i-SIP” to distingui sh the infrastructure submittal. A more detailed description of a SIP is provided in section C below. The statutor y language in sections 110(a)(1) and (2) is provided in Appendix A of this TSD. States typically have met many of the infr astructure elements required in section 110(a)(2) through earlier SIP submissions in conn ection with previous NAAQS. Nevertheless, pursuant to section 110(a)(1 ), Oklahoma must review and revi se, as appropriate, their existing SIP to ensure that it is adequate to address the revised NAAQSs. To assist states in meeting this statutory requirement, EPA issued guidance on October 14, 2011, to address the infrastructure elements required of the SIP under CAA secti ons 110(a)(1) and (2) fo r the 2008 Pb standard. 1 EPA issued additional guidance on September 13, 2013, addressing the infrastructure elements required under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the other five NAAQS. 2 On October 5, 2012, February 28, 2014, and January 28, 2015, the designee for Oklahoma provided submittals to EPA, 3 certifying that the Ok lahoma SIP meets the infrastructure obligations for the followi ng NAAQS: the 2008 Pb NAAQS (see the October 5, 2012 submittal); the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS (see the February 28, 2014 submittal); the 2008 ozone

and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS (see the two submittals dated January 28, 2015). This TSD evaluates the submittals provided to certify that the Oklahoma SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2) for th e 2008 lead and ozone NAAQS and the 2010 NO 2 and

SO 2 NAAQS.

C. The State Implementation Plan The SIP is an air quality plan. It can incl ude state statutes, ai r pollution regulations, control strategies, other means or techniques, an d technical analyses developed by the state, to ensure that the state meets the NAAQS. The SIP is required by section 1 10 and other provisions of the Act. The SIPs can be extensive, cont aining state regulations or other enforceable documents and supporting information such as em issions inventories, monitoring networks, and modeling demonstrations. Each state must submit these regulations and cont rol strategies to EPA

1 “Guidance on Infrastructure State Im plementation Plan (SIP) Elements Required under Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for the 2008 Lead (Pb) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS),” Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, October 14, 2011.

2 “Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2),” Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, September 13, 2013.

3 On March 30, 2011, the Governor of Oklahoma provided us with a letter naming the Secretary of Environment as designee for submittal of SIP revisions to the EPA. On September 24, 2013, after reorganization of State agencies, the Governor of Oklahoma provided us with a letter naming the Secretary of Energy and Environment as designee for submittal of SIP revisions to the EPA. Such design ation letters are in the docket for this rulemaking.3

for approval and once approved, the SIP is federa lly enforceable. Each federally approved SIP protects air quality primarily by a ddressing air pollution at its source.

D. Lead, Ozone, Nitrogen Di oxide and Sulfur Dioxide On April 30, 1971, we published the first NAAQS for NO 2 , Ozone, and SO 2 (36 FR 8186). The first NAAQS for Pb was published on October 5, 1978 (43 FR 46246). These standards are reviewed periodi cally, often becoming more stri ngent. For more information on these standards and the process for setting a nd reviewing the NAAQS, please visit EPA’s web site: https://www.epa.gov/ criteria-air- pollutants.

E. Additional Information

As indicated in the Federal Register action for this TSD, this proposed rulemaking will

not cover four substantive issues that are not in tegral to acting on a state’s infrastructure SIP submission: (i) existing provisions related to excess emissions during periods of start-up, shutdown, or malfunction at sources, that may be contrary to the CAA and EPA’s policies addressing such excess emissions (“SSM”); (ii) existing provisi ons related to “director's variance” or “director's discretion” that purport to permit revisions to SIP approved emissions limits with limited public process or without re quiring further approval by EPA, that may be contrary to the CAA (“director's discretion”); (iii) existing pr ovisions for minor source NSR programs that may be inconsistent with the requ irements of the CAA and EPA’s regulations that pertain to such programs (“minor source NSR”); and, (iv) existing provisions for PSD programs that may be inconsistent with current requireme nts of EPA’s “Final NSR Improvement Rule,” 67 FR 80186 (December 31, 2002), as amended by 72 FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (“NSR Reform”). Instead, EPA has indicated that it has other author ity to address any such existing SIP defects in other rulemakings, as appropriate. A detailed rationale for why thes e four substantive issues are not part of the scope of infrastructure SI P rulemakings can be found in EPA’s July 13, 2011, final rule entitled, “Infrastructure SIP Requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone and PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards” in the sect ion entitled, “What is the scope of this final rulemaking?” ( See 76 FR 41075 at 41076-41079).

II. SIP elements required under Section 110(a) (2) for the 2008 lead and ozone NAAQS and the

2010 NO 2 and SO 2 primary NAAQS, the State submittals and EPA analysis The Federally approved SIP for each state is liste d in Title 40, Part 52, of the US Code of Federal Regulations (denoted 40 CFR 52). The first section in this subpart for any state is often the “Identification of plan,” which lists the EP A-approved provisions of the SIP, as provided under section 110 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 7410, and 40 CFR 51 to meet the NAAQS. The status of the Oklahoma SIP is provided in 40 CFR Pa rt 52, Subpart LL, sections 1920 to 1960. The Identification of plan for Oklahoma is at 40 CFR Part 52.1920; this constitutes the applicable SIP for Oklahoma, for purposes of the Act.

Per the General Preamble to the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (April 16, 1992 at 57 FR 13498), section 110(a)(2) sets forth elements th at a SIP must contain in order to be fully approved. 4 Below we examine the elements required in section 110(a)(2) and the documentation provided by Oklahoma. Where useful, we include ta bles showing dates the applicable state rules were approved by EPA into the Oklahoma SIP.

4 The discussion of section 110(a)(2), subsections (A) through (M) begins on p. 13556 of the General Preamble.4

1. Enforceable emission limits and other control measures: Section 110(a )(2)(A) requires

SIPs to include enforceable emission limits and other control measures, means or techniques, as well as schedules and timetables for compliance, as necessary or appropriate to meet the requirements of the Act.

The State’s response: Oklahoma has an EPA-a pproved air permitting program for major sources (OAC 252:100-8) and minor facilities (OAC 252:100-7). 5 Oklahoma does not have

nonattainment or maintenance areas under th e 2008 Pb or ozone NAAQS, nor under the 2010

NO 2 or SO 2 NAAQS.

EPA analysis: Section 110(a)(2)(A) requires that all measures and other elements in the SIP be

enforceable. This subsection also authorizes SIPs to contain certain nontraditional techniques for reducing pollution – economic incen tives, marketable permits, and auctions of emissions rights. EPA reads this language to require even thes e other means of achieving reductions to be

enforceable. 6 We list the following from the Oklahoma Air Pollution Control Regulations as relevant in determining whether the Oklahoma SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A):

Regulation 1.4.1 General Permit Requirements Regulation 1.4.2 Construction Permit Regulation 1.4.3 Operating Permit Regulation 3.8 Control of Emissi on of Hazardous Air Contaminants

Regulation 1.4.1 provides for general permit requirements and fees. Regulation 1.4.2 provides for stack height limitations, construc tion permit applications and conditions, and relocation permits. Regulation 1.4.3 addresses op erating permit requirements and conditions. Regulation 3.8 provides for the emission st andards for hazardous air contaminants. We also believe the following from Chapters 4 and 100 within Title 252 of the Oklahoma Administrative Code (denoted OAC 252 or 252) are relevant in determining whether the Oklahoma SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A):

252:4 Rules of Practice and Procedure Subchapter 7: Environmental Permit Process Subchapter 9: Admi nistrative Proceedings Appendix C: Permitting process summary

252:100 Air Pollution Control Subchapter 1: General Provisions Subchapter 3: Air Qualit y Standards and Increments Subchapter 5: Registration, Emission s Inventory and Annual Operating Fees Subchapter 8: Permits for Part 70 Sources Subchapter 9: Excess Emission a nd Malfunction Reporting Requirements Subchapter 13: Open Burning Subchapter 17: Incinerators

5 The rules at OAC 252:100-7 (Permits for Minor Fac ilities) have not been submitted for approval into the Oklahoma SIP and, as described in section I.E. above, are not essential to our action on the infrastructure submittals.

6 See the General Preamble to the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments (57 FR 13498, p. 13556).5

Subchapter 31: Control of Emission of Sulfur Compounds Subchapter 33: Control of Emission of Nitrogen Oxides Subchapter 37: Control of Emission of Organic Materials Subchapter 39: Emission of Organi c Materials in Nonattainment Areas Subchapter 43: Sampling and Testing Requirements Subchapter 45: Monitoring of Emissions Appendix E: Primary Ambient Air Quality Standards Appendix F: Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards

Subchapter 7 of chapter 4 (denoted 252:4-7) provides information on the permitting process, including but not limited to compliance dates. 252:4-9 describes the administrative procedure for enforcement of the provisions se t forth in OAC 252, including determination of penalties. 252:100-1 provides definitions of words and phrases used in 252:100 and in the Oklahoma Clean Air Act (OCAA). 252:100-3 enumer ates the primary and secondary ambient air quality standards and the significant de terioration increments. 252:100-5 requires owners/operators of air pollution sources to provide the ODEQ with information on the emissions from each source. 252:100-8 includes the substantive requirements for permits for Part

70 sources. 7 252:100-9 establishes a system designed to provide timely and accurate data on excess air emissions in the State caused by malfunction, shutdown, startup, or regularly scheduled maintenance. 252:100-13 restricts ope n burning of refuse and other combustible

materials in order to reduce the emission of contaminants produced by these activities. 252:100- 17 defines requirements for incinerator design and places limits on incinerator output, which are based on opacity. 252:100-31 controls emissions of sulfur compounds from stationary sources by setting standards for industrial sources. 252:100- 33 restricts the emission of nitrogen oxides (NOx) from stationary sources by setting emission limits for fuel combustion operations and nitric acid plants. 252:100-37 limits the emissi on of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from stationary sources and prescribes standards and practices for stor age and loading of VOCs, use of organic solvents in cleaning a nd coating, and other processes wh ich could emit these pollutants.

252:100-39 controls the emissions of VOCs from stationary sour ces located in nonattainment areas, and specifies additional c ontrol measures needed in sour ces affecting those areas. 252:100- 43 provides requirements on air pollution sa mpling and testing. 252:100-45 outlines basic requirements for monitoring of emissions , and their record ing and testing. Appendices E and F show the State’s prim ary and secondary ambient air quality standards, including Pb, ozone, NO 2 and SO 2 . These ambient air quality standards are consistent with the 2008 NAAQS for Pb and oz one and the 2010 primary NAAQS for NO 2 and SO 2

. We also find Chapter 20 within OAC 595 as relevant in determining whether the Oklahoma SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A):

595:20 Inspection and Equipment for Motor Vehicles Subchapter 3: Emission and Mech anical Inspection of Vehicles Subchapter 9: Class AE Inspection Stati on, Vehicle Emission Anti-Tampering Inspection Subchapter 11: Annual Motor Vehicle Inspection and Emission Anti-Tampering Inspection Records and Reports

7 Part 70 sources are also known as Title V operating pe rmits, after Title V of the CAA, which addresses such permits. The Operating Permit Program en sures that air quality control requirem ents are in place and met. For more information on the Title V program, please visit http s://www.epa.gov/clean-air- act-overview/title-v-permits.6

595:20-3 and 595:20-9 describe the general instructions for vehicle mechanical equipment inspection, and explain when a vehi cle emission anti-tampering inspection is required. 595:20-11 describes the records and reports required to be completed by inspectors performing the annual vehicle inspection a nd the emission anti-tampering inspection.

The State's rules detailed above have alre ady been approved by EPA into the Oklahoma SIP and thus are enforceable by the state and EPA, and US citizens are offered legal recourse to

address violations as describe d in section 304 of the Act. S ee Table 1 below for EPA approval

dates and citations. The Oklahoma SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) for the 2008 Pb and ozone NAAQS and the 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 NAAQS.

Table 1: Oklahoma rules relevant to meeting section 110(a)(2)(A), as determined by EPA: Relevant Section of Oklahoma’s SIP EPA Approval citation(s) Regulation 1.4.1: General Permit Require ments 8/25/1983 at 48 FR 38635 and

7/23/1991 at 56 FR 33715 Regulation 1.4.2: Construction Perm it 48 FR 38635, 7/27/1984 at 49 FR 30184, 8/20/1990 at 55 FR 33905,

and 56 FR 33715 Regulation 1.4.3: Operating Permit 48 FR 38635 Regulation 3.8, Control of Emission of Hazardous Air

Contaminants 8/15/1983 at 48 FR 36819

252 OAC 4, Rules of Practice and Procedure Subchapter 7: Environmental Permit Process 11/26/2010 at 75 FR 72695

Subchapter 9: Administrative Proceedings 12/29/2008 at 73 FR 79400 Appendix C: Permitting process summary 75 FR 72695
252 OAC 100, Air Pollution Control Subchapter 1: General Provisions 11/3/1999 at 64 FR 59629

Subchapter 3: Air Quality Standards a nd Increments 64 FR 59629 and 73 FR 79400 Subchapter 5: Registration of Air Contaminant Sources 75 FR 72695 Subchapter 8: Permits for Pa rt 70 Sources 75 FR 72695 and

12/28/11 at 76 FR 81728 Subchapter 9: Excess Emissi on and Malfuncti on Reporting Requirements 64 FR 59629

Subchapter 13: Open Burning 73 FR 79400 Subchapter 17: Incinerators 11/3/2015 at 80 FR 67650 Subchapter 31: Control of Emission of Su lfur Compounds 64 FR 59629 and 73 FR 79400 Subchapter 33: Control of Emission of N itrogen Oxides 64 FR 59629 and 73 FR 79400 Subchapter 37: Control of Emission of Organic Materials 73 FR 79400 Subchapter 39: Emission of Organic Materials in Nonattainment

Areas 73 FR 79400

Subchapter 43: Sampling and Testing Methods 64 FR 59629 Subchapter 45: Monitoring of Emi ssions 64 FR 59629 and 73 FR 79400 Appendix E: Primary Ambient Air Quality Standards 80 FR 67650 Appendix F: Secondary Ambient Ai r Quality Standards 80 FR 67650 595 OAC 20, Inspection and Equipment for Motor Vehicles Subchapter 3: Emission and Mechanical Inspection of Vehicles 2/29/1996 at 61 FR 7709

Subchapter 9: Class AE Inspection Station, Vehicle Emission AntiTampering Inspection 61 FR 77097

Relevant Section of Oklahoma’s SIP EPA Approval citation(s) Subchapter 11: Annual Motor Vehicle Inspection and Emission Anti-Tampering Inspection Records and Reports 61 FR 7709

2. Ambient air quality monitoring and data analysis system : Section 110(a)(2)(B) requires SIPs to include provisions for establishment and operation of ambient air quality monitors, collecting and analyzing ambient air quality data, and making these data available to EPA upon
request.

The State’s response: Oklahoma ope rates an air quality monitoring network consistent with EPA regulations at 40 CFR Part 58 and regularly reports results to EP A. Each fiscal year, the DEQ posts an Annual Network Review on its websit e for public review. Following the 30-day public review period, the DEQ evaluate s and responds to any comments, and submits the Review to EPA Region 6 monitoring sta ff for their review. Monitoring results may also be accessed through the DEQ’s web site at: http://www.deq.s tate.ok.us/aqdnew/monitoring/index.htm

EPA analysis: In addition to the State’s re sponse, we add the following as relevant in determining whether the Oklahoma SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(B):

252:100-3: Air Quality Sta ndards and Increments Appendix E: Primary Ambient Air Quality Standards Appendix F: Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards

252:100-3 enumerates the primary and secondary ambient air quality standards and the PSD increments. Appendices E and F are tables showing the State’s primary and secondary ambient air quality standards. Appendices E and F are consistent with the 2008 Pb and ozone NAAQS and Appendix E is c onsistent with the 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 primary NAAQS. The OCAA provides the ODEQ with authority to establish and operate ambient air quality monitors and was approved into the Oklahoma SIP on June 23, 1994 (59 FR 32365). The OCAA is currently codified under Title 27A of the Oklahoma Statutes (O.S.). The current

version of the Oklahoma Statutes retains the enforcement author ity approved into the Oklahoma

SIP in 1994. EPA’s regulations in part 58 of the CFR indicat e the necessary data for States to collect and submit as part of their SIP. The existing regu lations remain in effect, pursuant to section 193,

until the EPA elects to amend them. 8 Oklahoma’s air quality surveillance system was approved by the EPA on May 31, 1972 (see 37 FR 10842, 10887). A revision to Oklahoma’s air quality

surveillance network was a pproved into the SIP on March 28, 1979 (44 FR 18490), which updated Oklahoma’s air quality surveillan ce network for particulate matter, SO 2 , and photochemical oxidants. On August 6, 1981, EPA a pproved Oklahoma’s air quality surveillance system that consists of a network of monitori ng stations designated as State and Local Air Monitoring Stations, which measure ambient c oncentrations of those pollutants for which

standards have been established in 40 CFR Part 50 (see 46 FR 40005). Until relatively recently, the State was not required to deploy monitors to measure the concentration of lead. However, the 2008 Pb rule established, among other things, new requirements for Pb monitoring networks, includi ng the requirement that new Pb monitors be

8 See the General Preamble to the Act’s 1990 Amendments (57 FR 13498, p. 13556).8

located in close proximity to the largest Pb emissions sources. 9 As the State air pollution control agency, the ODEQ maintains a network of air qu ality monitoring stations pursuant to 40 CFR 58.3(a). The ODEQ’s annual monitoring network plans for fiscal years (FYs) 2015 and 2016 were approved by the EPA in a letter dated September 15, 2015. 10 The network includes, but is not limited to, monitors measuring ambi ent concentrations of lead, ozone, NO 2 and SO 2 . These monitors meet the technical requirements of 40 CFR 58, Subpart B and those that have not been certified as meeting the federal requirements ar e identified as “non-regulatory” or “special purpose” monitors. The ODEQ website posts past and current concentrations of ozone and SO 2 and current concentrations of NO 2 measured in the ne twork of monitors. The State submits air monitoring data to EPA quarterly and certifies the data annually. The Oklahoma SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(B) for the 2008 Pb and ozone NAAQS, and for the 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 primary NAAQS.

Table 2: Oklahoma rules relevant to meeting section 110(a)(2)(B), as determined by EPA:

Relevant Section of Oklahoma’s SI P EPA Approval/Federal Register(s) Subchapter 3: Air Quality Standards and Increments 11/3/1999 at 64 FR 59629 and

12/29/2008 at 73 FR 79400 Appendix E: Primary Ambient Air Quality Standards 11/3/2015 at 80 FR 67650 Appendix F: Secondary Ambient Ai r Quality Standards 80 FR 67650

3. Program for enforcement of control measures : Section 110(a)(2)(C) requires states to include a program providing for enforcement of th e measures described in subparagraph (A), and the regulation of the modification and constructio n of any stationary source within the areas covered by the SIP as necessary to assure th at the NAAQS are achieved, including a permit program as required in parts C and D.

The State's response: Oklahoma’s approved air permitting program includes appropriate enforcement authority and permitting for modifica tion and construction of stationary sources. The DEQ’s powers and duties to implement ai r quality programs (including implementing Oklahoma’s SIP) are described in 27A OS 2-5-105, and include aut hority to “[e]nforce rules of the Board and orders of the Department and th e Council” (27A OS 2-5- 1-5(4)). Oklahoma’s PSD and Title V/Part 70 permitting program applie s to sources that emit greenhouse gases in accordance with EPA’s tailoring rule and subseq uent narrowing of EPA’s approval of the PSD

program.

EPA analysis: In addition to the State’s respons e, we add the following from the Oklahoma Air Pollution Control Regulations as relevant in determining th at the Oklahoma SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C):

Regulation 1.4.1 General Permit Requirements Regulation 1.4.2 Construction Permit Regulation 1.4.3 Operating Permit

9 See 75 FR 71033, November 22, 2010.

10 The State’s submittal and our approval letter are provided in the docket for this rulemaking action.9

Regulation 1.4.1 provides for general permit re quirements and permit fees. Regulation 1.4.2 provides for construction permit applicatio ns and conditions, and relocation permits. Regulation 1.4.3 addresses operating permit requirem ents and conditions. These regulations, as approved in the SIP, address minor sources only. 11 We also recognize the following from OAC 252 as relevant in determining that the Oklahoma SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C):

252:4 Rules of Practice and Procedure Subchapter 7: Environmental Permit Process Subchapter 9: Admi nistrative Proceedings Appendix C: Permitting process summary

252:100 Air Pollution Control Subchapter 3: Air Quality Standards and Increments Subchapter 5: Registration of Air Contaminant Sources Subchapter 9: Excess Emission a nd Malfunction Reporting Requirements Subchapter 13: Open Burning Subchapter 17: Incinerators Subchapter 31: Control of Emission of Sulfur Compounds Subchapter 33: Control of Emission of Nitrogen Oxides Subchapter 37: Control of Em ission of Organic Materials Subchapter 39: Emission of Organic Materials in Nonattainment Areas Subchapter 45: Monitoring of Emissions

We also find the following from OAC 595 as relevant in determining that the Oklahoma SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C):

595:20: Inspection and Equipment for Motor Vehicles Subchapter 3: Emission and Mech anical Inspection of Vehicle Subchapter 7: Inspection Stickers and Monthly Tab Inserts for Windshield and Trailer/Motorcycle Subchapter 11: Annual Motor Vehicle Inspection and Emission Anti-Tampering Inspection Records and Reports

The OCAA at 27A O.S. 2-5-105(4) provides the ODEQ with enforcement authority for the rules it has adopted. Furthermore, at 27A O.S. 2-5-105(14) the OCAA authorizes the ODEQ to bring appropriate court action and obtain injunctive or other prope r relief where such action is determined necessary. The OCAA was approved by EPA for incorporation into the SIP on June 23, 1994 (59 FR 32365). 12 In addition, the requirements at 40 CFR 52.1923, a ddressing Best Available Retrofit Technology (BAR T) to reduce emissions of SO 2 and NOx for Units 4 and 5 of the Oklahoma Gas and Electric (OG&E) Musk ogee plant, and Units 1 and 2 of the OG&E Sooner plant include enforcement. See 76 FR 81758 (December 28, 2011) and 79 FR 12944 (March 7, 2014). The administrative proceedings for enfor cement actions, including administrative compliance orders and determination of pena lty, are provided under 252:4-9. The Emission and

11 The EPA is reviewing revisions to these rules but has yet to complete its proposed action.

12 The current version of the Oklahoma Statutes retains the enforcement authority approved into the SIP in 1994.10

Mechanical Inspection of Vehicles recordkeep ing and reporting requirements are provided under 595:20, subchapters 3, 7, and 11. Among the issues addressed in 252:100, subchapters 3, 5, 8, 9, 13, 17, 31, 33, 37, 39, 43, 45, and Appendices E and F, we found allowable emission rates, permits for Part 70 sources, compliance, cont rol plan requirements, control schedules, monitoring and testing requirements, and reporti ng and recordkeeping requirements (see Table 3 below). These clarify the boundaries beyond which regulated entities in Oklahoma can expect

enforcement action. Part C of the Act requires prevention of signifi cant deterioration of air quality, denoted as PSD and codified at 40 CFR 51.166. The PSD progr am regulates the construction of any new stationary source or major modifications at exis ting stationary sources for pollutants where the

area the source is located is desi gnated as attainment/unclassif iable with the NAAQS. Regulation

1.4.1 of the Oklahoma Air Pollution Control Regulations provides for general permit requirements. Regulations 1.4.2 and 1.4.3 provide for construction and operating permits. The rules at 252 OAC chapter 100, subchapter 3, set fo rth the PSD increments, which are consistent

with EPA’s PSD increments in accordance w ith 40 CFR 51.166 (see Table 3 below). PSD increments limit increases in pollutant concen tration due to new sources. Permits for Part 70 Sources (at 252:100-8) includes but is not limite d to construction and operating permits, best available control technology, PSD for attainment areas, a nd major sources affecting

nonattainment areas. Oklahoma’s PSD program was initially approved into the SIP on August 25, 1983 (see 48 FR 38635), giving the State authority to issue PSD permits and enforce them. In response to the

new PM 10 NAAQS promulgated by EPA on July 1, 1987, Oklahoma revised its existing regulations for PSD to reflect the new NAAQS . These revisions were approved into the Oklahoma SIP on February 12, 1991 (56 FR 05653). Oklahoma revised its SIP again by adopting PSD nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ) increments and related requirements, and EPA approved such revisions on July 23, 1991 (56 FR 33715). On November 8, 1999, EPA approved additional

revisions to the PSD rules into the Oklahoma SIP, which brought the Oklahoma SIP regulations up-to-date with the Federal NSR requirements of 40 CFR part 51, subpart P, Visibility Protection (64 FR 60683). On March 10, 2003 and December 24, 2003, EPA revised the Oklahoma SIP by incorporating newly promulgated paragraphs of the Federal PSD rule into the Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) portion of the State’s SIP. 13 These revisions were made in order to ensure comprehensive and consistent implemen tation of the Federal PSD program by State, local, and tribal agencies where EPA determined th at they have the responsibility to implement the Federal PSD program. On December 29, 2008, EPA approved revisions to the Oklahoma values for particulate matter significant deterioration increments in accordance with 40 CFR

51.166. 14 On March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16205), EPA determined that Oklahoma failed to submit a SIP addressing changes to the part C PSD permit program required by the November 29, 2005 (70 FR 71612) final rule that made NOx a precurs or for ozone in the part C regulations at 40 CFR 51.166 and in 40 CFR 52.21. In response, the Stat e submitted revisions that identify NOx as a precursor for ozone, which were approved in to the SIP on November 26, 2010 (75 FR 72695). Additional revisions that update the State’s PSD permit program to be consistent with federal permitting requirements were proposed for approval on June 30, 2016 (81 FR 42587). The statutory and regulatory programs that address the constructi on and modification of stationary sources are termed new source review (NSR) and are provided under parts C and D of

13 Please see 68 FR 11316 (M arch 10, 2003) an d 68 FR 74483 (D ecember 24, 2003).

14 See 73 FR 79400.11

the Act, and 40 CFR 51.160 th rough 51.166. NSR is a permitting pr ogram that regulates the construction of new stationary sources of ai r pollution and major modifications to existing stationary sources. These sour ces are required by the CAA to obtain an air pollution permit before beginning constructi on. 252:100-8 includes requirement s for sources located in nonattainment areas. On May 18, 1983, EPA appr oved into the Oklahoma SIP nonattainment NSR provisions, which set forth legally enforceable procedures for the preconstruction review of

new sources and modifications which would locate to a nonattainment area. 15 In response to the

new PM 10 NAAQS promulgated by EPA on July 1, 1987, Oklahoma revised its NSR regulations to reflect the new NAAQS and such revisi ons were approved on Fe bruary 12, 1991 (56 FR 05653). The Oklahoma nonattainment NSR program addresses volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and NOx, as well as “any pollutant for wh ich a national ambient ai r quality standard has been promulgated.” The Oklahoma SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) for the 2008 ozone and Pb NAAQS and for the 2010 SO 2 and NO 2 NAAQS.

Table 3: Oklahoma rules relevant to meeting section 110(a)(2)(C), as determined by EPA: Relevant Section of Oklahoma’s SIP EPA Approval citation(s) Regulation 1.4.1: General Permit Requi rements Aug 25, 1983 at 48 FR 38635 and Jul 23, 1991 at 56 FR 33715 Regulation 1.4.2: Construction Perm it 48 FR 38635, Jul 27, 1984 at 49 FR 30184, Aug 20, 1990 at 55 FR 33905, and 56 FR 33715 Regulation 1.4.3: Operating Permit 48 FR 38635 Regulation 3.8, Control of Emission of Hazardous Air Contaminants Aug 15, 1983 at 48 FR 36819 OAC 252:4, Rules of Practice and Procedure Subchapter 7: Environmental Permit Process 75 FR 72695

Subchapter 9: Administrative Proceedings Dec 29, 2008 at 73 FR 79400 Appendix C: Permitting process summary 75 FR 72695
OAC 252:100, Air Pollution Control Subchapter 3: Air Quality Standards and Increments 64 FR 59629 and 73 FR 79400 81 FR 42587 (proposal) Subchapter 5: Registration of Air Contaminant Sources 64 FR 59629 81 FR 42587 (proposal) Subchapter 8: Permits for Part 70 Sources 75 FR 72695 81 FR 42587 (proposal) Subchapter 8, Part 11: Visibility Protection Standards Dec 28, 2011 at 76 FR 81728 Subchapter 9: Excess Emissi on and Malfuncti on Reporting Requirements 64 FR 59629

Subchapter 13: Open Burning 73 FR 79400 Subchapter 17: Incinerators 73 FR 79400 Subchapter 31: Control of Emission of Su lfur Compounds 64 FR 59629 and 73 FR 79400 Subchapter 33: Control of Emission of N itrogen Oxides 64 FR 59629 and 73 FR 79400 Subchapter 37: Control of Emission of Organic Materials 73 FR 79400 Subchapter 39: Emission of Organic Materials in Nonattainment

Areas 73 FR 79400

Subchapter 43: Sampling and Testing Methods 64 FR 59629 Subchapter 45: Monitoring of Emi ssions 64 FR 59629 and 73 FR 79400

15 See 48 FR 22297.12

Relevant Section of Oklahoma’s SIP EPA Approval citation(s) Appendix E: Primary Ambient Air Quality Standards 73 FR 79400 Appendix F: Secondary Ambient Ai r Quality Standards 73 FR 79400 OAC 595:20, Inspection and Equipment for Motor Vehicles Subchapter 3: Emission and Mechanical Inspection of Vehicles Feb 29, 1996 at 61 FR 7709

Subchapter 7: Inspection Sticke rs and Monthly Tab Inserts for Windshield and Trailer/Motorcycle 61 FR 7709

Subchapter 11: Annual Motor Vehicle Inspection and Emission AntiTampering Inspection Records and Reports 61 FR 7709

4. Interstate transport, and interstate and international pollution abatement : Section 110(a)(2)(D) has two components: 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and 110(a)(2)(D )(ii). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) also has two components: Section 110(a)(2)(D)( i)(I) requires SIPs to address any emissions activity in one state that cont ributes significantly to nonattai nment, or interferes with maintenance, of the NAAQS in another state; an d section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) requires SIPs to include provisions prohibiting any sources or other types of emissi ons activity in one state from interfering with measures require d of any other state to prevent significant deterioration of air quality or from interfering with measures requi red of any other state to protect visibility. Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires SIPs to include provisions ensu ring compliance with sections 115 and 126 of the Act, relating to in terstate and international pollution abatement. Section 126(a) requires new or modified sources to notify neighboring states of potential impacts

from the source. Section 115 relates to the international pollution abatement portion of 110(a)(2)(D)(ii).

The State's response: Concerning 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), prongs 1 and 2: Regarding the 2008 ozone and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS, Oklahoma does not assert that it meets all requirements of section 110(a )(2)(D)(i)(I), which relate to interstate pollutant transport affecting attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. Regarding the 2008 Pb and 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, Oklahoma does not contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere w ith maintenance by, any other state. Regarding

the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, EPA designated all areas of the United States as unclassifiable/attainment (see 77 FR 9532, Februa ry 17, 2012); therefore, sources in Oklahoma do not contribute signific antly to nonattainment in, or inte rfere with maintenance by, any other state with respect to the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS. Concerning 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I I), prong 3 (PSD): For the 2008 ozone and Pb NAAQS and the 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 NAAQS, Oklahoma's air quality control rule at OAC 252:100-8-35 requires major stationary sources to demonstrate that

the source’s emissions would not cause or contri bute to any increase in ambient concentrations that would exceed any NAAQS in any air quality control region. The State’s PSD program meets the basic requirements for implementing all NAAQS. SIP revisions submitted on July 23, 2010 and February 6, 2012, [which EPA proposed for approval June 30, 2016 (81 FR 42587)], contain

modifications to Oklahoma’s PSD rules. Concerning 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), prong 4 (visibility): For the 2008 Pb NAAQS, lead emissions ar e believed to contri bute to visibility impairment only to the extent that they contribute to the amount of particulate matter (PM) in the atmosphere. Oklahoma's Regional Haze (RH) Implementation Plan Revision (submitted in February 2010) demonstrated that Oklahoma's PM 2.5 emissions do not interfere with any other13

state's measures to protect visibility and was approved by EPA on December 29, 2011 (76 FR 81838). In addition, a memorandum from Mark Schmidt, (EPA), titled The Estimated Contribution of Ambient Lead (Pb) to Class I Area Visibility Impairment , dated 11/7/2011, states “In conclusion, it appears that the Pb-related visibility effects (i n Class I and other areas) are insignificant in comparison to those associated with sulfate, nitrate, and carbon PM.” For the 2008 ozone NAAQS, ozone from ozone precursor emissions is not believed to contribute significantly to visibility impairmen t. Oklahoma’s RH Implementation Plan Revision

demonstrates that Oklahoma’s PM 2.5 emissions do not interfere with any other state’s measures to protect visibility (s ee 76 FR 81838, December 29, 2011).

For the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS, Oklahoma’s RH Implementation Plan Revision includes

reductions in NOx emissions for certain faci lities, and demonstrates that Oklahoma’s PM 2.5 emissions do not interfere with any other state’ s measures to protect visibility (see 76 FR 81838, December 29, 2011).

For the 2010 SO 2 NAAQS, any contribution to visibil ity impairment or interference with any other state’s measures to prot ect visibility attributable to SO 2 emissions are addressed through Oklahoma’s RH Implementation Plan Re vision, as amended, and through EPA’s related actions. Although no visibility prot ection obligations are anticipated as a result of this NAAQS change, other program actions taken to assure maintenance of the revised SO 2 NAAQS will indirectly assist in avoiding in terference with any other state’s measures to protect visibility.

Concerning 110(a)(2)(D)(i i): For each of the 2008 Ozone, 2008 Pb, 2010 NO 2 , and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS, no source(s) within Oklahoma are the s ubject of an active finding under section 126 of the CAA with respect to these NAAQS. In additi on, there are no final findings under section 115 of the CAA against Oklahoma with respect to these NAAQS.

EPA analysis for 110(a)(2)(D)(i):

Lead (Pb) : Regarding section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), lead is a basic metal element, which means no complex chemistry is needed to form lead or Pb compounds in the ambient air. Lead is a dense metal and consequently, Pb emissions do not undergo the same transport episodes as ozone. Therefore, ambient concentrations of Pb are typically highest near Pb sources and more specifically, there is a sharp decrease in ambien t Pb concentrations as the distance from the source increases. According to EPA's report entitled Our Nation's Air: Status and Trends Through 2010 , Pb concentrations that ar e not near a source of Pb are approximately 8 times less than the typical concentr ations near the source. 16 Similarly, although Pb can be a component of coarse and fine particles, Pb ge nerally comprises only a small fraction of these particles. A recent EPA study conducted to evaluate the extent that Pb could impact visibility concluded that Pbrelated visibility impacts at Class I areas were found to be insignificant (e.g., less than 0.10% contribution). 17 There are no areas within Oklahoma th at are designated as nonattainment with respect to the 2008 lead NAAQS. Th ere are two significant sources of Pb emissions within the state that emit Pb in amounts equal to or exceedin g 0.5 tons per year and no sources within two

16 See the docket for this rulemaking. This report is al so available through the EPA’s National Service Center for Environmental Publications at https://www.epa.gov/nscep. 17 Analysis by Mark Schmidt, OAQPS, “Ambient Pb's Cont ribution to Class I Area Visibility Impairment,” June 17, 2011.14

miles of a neighboring state line. 18 In addition, review of Pb concentrations measured in Oklahoma (2013 – 2015) show no violations of the lead standard. 19 Regarding section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), Oklahoma has an approved PSD program, regulating all NSR pollutants, including greenhouse gas (GHG), which prevents significant deteriora tion in nearby states. Because significant impacts from Pb emissions from stationary sources are limited to short distances from such sources, visibility is not e ffected by lead emissions. We are proposing that the Oklahoma SIP meets sections 110(a )(2)(D)(i)(I) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for Pb.

Nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ): Regarding section 110(a)(2)(D) (i)(I), on February 17, 2012, EPA designated the entire country as “unclassifiable/attainment” for NO 2 , explaining that this designation means that available information does not indicate that the air quality in these areas

exceeds the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS. In other words, Oklahom a and all neighboring states are currently designated as “unclassif iable/ attainment” for the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS. As listed in our

NO 2 Design Values report, there are no NO2 nonattain ment or maintenance areas in states surrounding Oklahoma, thus Oklahoma does not si gnificantly contribute to nonattainment or

maintenance of the NO 2 NAAQS in any of the contiguous states. 20 Furthermore, during the three most recent design value periods (20 11 through 2013, 2012 through 2014, and 2013 through 2015) we found no monitors violating the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS in the US. Thus, NO 2 emissions from Oklahoma are not expected to cause or contribute to a vi olation of the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS in another state, and such emissions are not lik ely to interfere with the maintenance of the 2010

NO 2 NAAQS in another state. Regarding secti on 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), Okla homa has an approved PSD program, regulating all NSR pollutants, including GHG, which prevents significant deterioration in nearby states. In addition, on December 28, 2011 we fina lized a FIP that in combination with the controls required by the portion of the Oklahoma RH submittal approved in the same rulemaking, would serve to prevent so urces in Oklahoma from emitting pollutants in amounts that would interfere with efforts to pr otect visibility in other states (see 76 FR 81728). On March 7, 2014, we withdrew the FIP and fina lized our approval of the revised Oklahoma RH plan and interstate transport a ffecting visibility. Thus, the Okla homa SIP includes provisions that satisfy the CAA interstate pollution abatement requirements of sections 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS.

Ozone: In a separate action we will evaluate wh ether Oklahoma has met the requirements for Interstate transport specific to section 110(a )(2)(D)(i)(I), prongs 1 and 2. Regarding section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), Oklahoma has an approved PSD program, regulating all NSR pollutants, including GHG, which prevents si gnificant deterioration in near by states. In addition, on March 7, 2014, we finalized our determination that Ok lahoma’s RH Implementation Plan Revision meets the CAA provisions concerning non-interfer ence with programs to pr otect visibility in other states, consistent with section 110(a )(2)(D)(i)(II) of the CAA (see 79 FR 12944). Thus, the Oklahoma SIP satisfies prongs 3 and 4 of the CA A interstate pollution abatement requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)( II) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.

18 See the FY2016 Oklahoma annual network monitoring plan in the docket for this rulemaking. 19 See our 2015 Design Value Reports posted at https:// www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-design-values#report.

20 See https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-design- values#Design Value Reports and the docket for this rulemaking.15

Sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ): In a separate action we will eval uate whether Oklahoma has met the requirements for Interstate transport specific to section 110(a)(2)(D )(i)(I), prongs 1 and 2. Regarding section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), Oklahom a has an approved PSD program, regulating all NSR pollutants, including GHG, which prevents si gnificant deterioration in nearby states. In a separate action we will evaluate whether Okla homa has met the requirements for visibility protection specific to secti on 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), prong 4.

EPA analysis for 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Oklahoma’s SIP-approved PSD program includes notification of neighbor ing states of the issuance of PSD permits and therefore satisfie s the requirement for C AA section 126(a). There are no findings by EPA that air emissions originat ing in Oklahoma affect other countries and thereby addresses CAA section 115. Thus, we pr opose to approve the Oklahoma SIP as meeting the requirements of CAA sect ion 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) for the 2008 ozone and Pb NAAQS and the

2010 NO 2 and SO 2 NAAQS.

5. Adequate resources and authority : Section 110(a)(2)(E) requires states to provide for (i) adequate personnel, funding, and lega l authority; (ii) comply with requirements respecting state boards under CAA section 128; and (i ii) necessary assurances that, where the state has relied on a local or regional government, agency, or instru mentality for the implementation of any plan provision, the state has responsib ility for ensuring adequate implementation of such plan provisions.

The State’s response: (i) Oklahoma has previously demonstrated that it currently has and will continue to have adequate personnel and other resources to ca rry out its air quality programs. The powers and duties of the DEQ to implement air quality programs (including implementing Oklahoma’s SIP) are described in 27A O.S. § 2-5-105, and include authority to accept and expend funds necessary to carry them out. DEQ receives air quality program funds through state appropriations, permit applicati on fees, annual operating fees, and federal grants under CAA sections 103 & 105, among others. (ii) The Oklahoma Environmental Quality Code lays out the composition and powers & duties of the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) (27A O.S. § 2-2-101) and the Air Quality Advisory Council (27A O.S. §§ 2- 2-201(H) and 2-5-107). These powers & duties include their roles in promulgating DEQ rule s, but do not include approving permits or enforcement orders under the CAA. The powers & duties and conflict of interest provisions for DEQ staff and Executive Director are described in 27A O.S. § 2-3-101 and 27A O.S. § 2-3-201, respectively. (iii)Not applicable.

EPA analysis: Each SIP must show that the st ate has legal authority to carry out the plan (40 CFR 51.230). Oklahoma SIP revi sions include a discussion of its legal authority, provided by the OCAA. The Oklahoma Environmental Quality Act and the OCAA are both codified at Title

27A of the Oklahoma Statutes and these statutes both name the DEQ as the State air control agency, with principal authority in the State on matters relating to the quality of air resources. The 1992 OCAA was incorporated into the SIP at 59 FR 32365 and is now codified in Title 27A of the Oklahoma Statutes and charges the DEQ with preparing and developing the SIP. The 199216

OCAA also gives the DEQ the authority to: “Employ and compensate ... consultants and technical assistants and ... employees ... as ma y be necessary to carry out ... the OCAA ...; Accept and administer grants or other funds ... for the purpose of carrying out ... the OCAA;” and “Budget and receive duly appropriated m onies and all other monies available for expenditures to carry out the ... OCAA.” See 27A O.S. 2-5-105. In addition, Chapter 9 of the original Oklahoma SIP approved on May 31, 1972, tit led “Resources,” provides assurances that the State has the adequate resources, i.e., personn el and funding, to carry out their SIP (see 37 FR 10842, 10887). The DEQ also annually receives Federa l funds, authorized pursuant to sections 103 and 105 of the CAA. Section 103 supports sp ecific, non-recurring projects within the air program, thus the amount of funding can vary widely from year to year. Section 105 supports the foundation of the State’s air quality program, including the air monitoring network and annual air quality program activities. S ection 105 funding levels are rela tively consistent, varying not more than about 10% from year to year. Secti on 105 funds require a 40% match from the State, while section 103 funds do not require a match. Section 128 of the CAA requires that the SIP contain the following: “(1) any board or body which approves permits or enforcement orders under this chapter shall have at least a majority of members who represent the public inte rest and do not derive any significant portion of their income from persons subj ect to permits or enforcement orde rs under this chapter, and (2) any potential conflicts of intere st by members of such board or body or the head of an executive agency with similar powers be adequately disclosed. A State may adopt any requirements respecting conflicts of interest for such boards or bodies or head s of executive agencies, or any

other entities which are more stri ngent than the requirements of paragraph (1) and (2), and the Administrator shall approve any such more stri ngent requirements submitted as part of an implementation plan.” (See 42 U.S.C. section 7428.) The powers and dut ies and conflict of interest provisions for the DEQ staff and Executi ve Director are provid ed at 27A O.S. 2-3-101 (addressing staff) and 27A O.S. 2-3-201 (addressing the Executive Director). The State does not rely on a local or regional government, agency, or instrumentality for the implementation of any plan provision; the St ate has full responsibility for ensuring adequate implementation of its SIP provisions. The Oklahoma SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E) in its entirety for the 2008 Pb and ozone NAAQS and the 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 NAAQS.

6. Stationary source emissions monitoring and reporting : Section 110(a)(2)(F) requires states to establish a system to monitor emissions from stationary sources and submit periodic emission
reports.

The State's response: Source emissions monito ring requirements are addressed in OAC 252:100- 43, Sampling and Testing, and OAC 252:100-45, M onitoring of Emissions. Source emissions inventory requirements are addressed in OAC 252:100-5, Registration of Air Contaminant Sources. Area, mobile, and non-road data are re ported to EPA on a 3-year cycle. OAC 252:100, Air Pollution Control; OAC 252:4-1-5, Availability of a Record; 51 O.S. 24A.1 et seq. Oklahoma Open Records Act.

EPA analysis: In addition to the State submittals, we add the following as relevant in determining

whether the Oklahoma SIP meets the re quirements of section 110(a)(2)(F):17

From OAC 252:4, Subchapter 1. General Provisions

From OAC 252:100: Subchapter 5: Registration of Air Contaminant Sources Subchapter 9: Excess Emission a nd Malfunction Reporting Requirements Subchapter 17: Incinerators Subchapter 31: Control of Emission of Sulfur Compounds Subchapter 37. Control of Em ission of Organic Materials Subchapter 43: Sampli ng and Testing Methods Subchapter 45: Monitoring of Emissions

EPA promulgated monitoring regulations, codified at 40 CFR 51.210 (Subpart K) and Minimum Emission Monitoring Requirements in Appendix P to Part 51. Under section 193 of the Act, the existing regulations remain effective to the extent they are not inconsistent with the current law, until EPA elects to amend them. Un der Subpart K, each SIP must: a) provide for monitoring the status of compliance with any rule s and regulations that set forth any portion of the control strategy; b) provide for legally en forceable procedures fo r requiring owners or operators of stationary sources to maintain records of and pe riodically report to the State; c) contain procedures for obtaining and maintainin g data on actual emissions reductions achieved as a result of implementing transportation contro l measures; and d) requi re stationary sources subject to emission standards as part of an app licable plan to install, calibrate, maintain, and operate equipment for continuously monitoring and recording emissions. Chapter 8 of the original Oklahoma SIP approved on May 31, 1972, titled “Source Surveillance and Enforcement System,” provides fo r a stationary source surveillance system for

the State of Oklahoma. The 1992 OCAA 21 authorizes the ODEQ to ma intain and update at least annually an inventory of air emissions from stationary sources (see 27A O.S. 2-5-105). Requirements for stationary sources subject to emissi on standards as part of an applicable plan to install, calibrate, maintain, a nd operate equipment for continuously monitoring and recording emissions are provided under the Oklahoma SI P. These can be found at 252:4-1; and 252:100, subchapters 5, 9, 19, 25, 31, 37, 43, and 45 (See Table 4 below). 252:4-1-5 details the availability of a record required to be submitte d to the DEQ. 252:100-5 requires facilities that

emit air contaminants to file an emission i nventory and provide the ODEQ with information necessary to evaluate the s ource’s potential for causing air pollution. 252:100-9 includes the general requirements for reporting of excess em issions from a stati onary source. 252:100-19

includes allowable emission ra tes for specific units and pr ocesses. 252:100-25 requires continuous monitoring of opacity for fluid bed catalytic cracking unit catalyst generators at petroleum refineries and fossil fuel-fired steam generators. 25 2:100-31 provides for performance testing and monitoring of emissions from certa in stationary sources of sulfur compound

emissions. 252:100-37 addresses the submittal of annual emission inventory reports. 252:100-43 specifies the sampling and testing methods to be used in determining emissions from stationary sources. 252:100-45 provides the basic requirements for mon itoring, recording and reporting emissions. Also, the requirements at 40 CFR 52.1923, addressing BART for SO 2 and Interstate pollutant transport provisions for Units 4 a nd 5 of the Oklahoma Gas and Electric Muskogee plant, and Units 1 and 2 of the Oklahoma Gas and Electric Sooner plant affecting visibility, include testing, monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping. See 76 FR 81758 (December 28,

21 See 59 FR 32365.18

2011), and 79 FR 12956 (March 7, 2014). A list of the chapters and Federal Re gister citations are provided below. The ODEQ collects and analyzes emissions da ta from point, area, mobile, and biogenic (natural) sources. The DEQ uses this data to track progress towards maintaining the NAAQS, develop control and maintenance strategies, id entify sources and general emission levels, and determine compliance with State and EPA requireme nts. The State’s emissions data are available on the DEQ website (http://www.deq.state.ok.us/a qdnew/emissions/index.htm). Emissions data for 2008 through 2014 are posted on the website. The National Emissions Inventory (NEI) is EPA’s central repository for air emissions data. EPA published the Air Emissions Repor ting Rule (AERR) on December 4, 2008, which modified the requirements for collecting a nd reporting air emissions data (73 FR 76539, December 17, 2008). The AERR shortened the time st ates had to report emissions data from 17 to 12 months, giving states one calendar year to submit emissions data. All states are required to submit a comprehensive emissions inventory (EI) every three years and report emissions for certain larger sources annually through EPA’s on line Emissions Inventory System (EIS). States report emissions data for the six criteria pollutants and the prec ursors that form them – NOx,

SO 2 , NO 2 , ammonia, lead, carbon monoxide, PM, and VOCs. Many states, including Oklahoma, also voluntarily report emissions of hazardous air pollu tants. EPA compiles the emissions data, supplementing it where necessary, and releases it to the general public through the website http://www3.epa.gov/ttnchie1/trends/. Oklahoma does not have any areas designate d as nonattainment, so is not required to

submit nonattainment area emission inventories. The St ate submits its EI data to EPA in a timely

fashion. The Oklahoma SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F) for the 2008 Pb and ozone NAAQS and the 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 NAAQS.

Table 4: Oklahoma rules relevant to meeting section 110(a)(2)(F), as determined by EPA: Relevant Section of Oklahoma’s SIP EPA Approval citation

252:4-1. General Provisions Section 4-1-5: Availability of a Record 75 FR 72695

Subchapter 5: Registration of Ai r Contaminant Sources 64 FR 59629 Subchapter 9: Excess Emissi on and Malfuncti on Reporting Requirements 64 FR 59629

Subchapter 17: Incinerators

Section 17-4: Particulate Matter

Section 17-7: Test Methods 80 FR 67650

Subchapter 19. Control of Emission of Particulate Matter 73 FR 79400 Subchapter 23: Control of Emissions from Cotton Gins Section 23-3: Applicability, General Requirements 73 FR 79400

Subchapter 24: Particulate Matter Emissions from Grain, Feed, or Seed Operations Section 24-3: Applicability, General Requirements 73 FR 79400

Subchapter 25: Visible Emissions and Particulates Section 25-5: Continuous Emission Monitoring for Opacity 73 FR 79400

Subchapter 31: Control of Emission of Sulfur Compounds

Part 1: General Provisions Part 3: Existing Equipment Standards Part 5: New Equipment Standards 64 FR 59629

64 FR 59629

64 FR 59629 and 73 FR 7940019

Relevant Section of Oklahoma’s SIP EPA Approval citation Subchapter 37. Control of Emission of Organic Materials Section 37-42: Permit by Rule Requirements 73 FR 79400

Subchapter 43: Sampling and Testing Methods Section 43-1: Purpose

Section 43-2: Test Procedures

Section 43-3: Conduct of Tests 64 FR 59629

Subchapter 45: Monitoring of Emissions Section 45-1: Purpose Section 45-2: Monitoring Equipment Required Section 45-3: Records Required Section 45-4: Compliance Certifications Section 45-5: Enforceability 64 FR 59629

64 FR 59629

64 FR 59629

73 FR 79400

73 FR 79400

7. Emergency powers : Section 110(a)(2)(G) requires states to provide for authority to address activities causing imminent and substantial endangerment to public health, including contingency plans to implement the emerge ncy episode provisions in their SIPs.

The State's response: Chapter 6 of Oklahoma’s SIP sets forth the state’s Emergency Episode Plan (EEP), as required under CAA section 110(a)(2)(G) and 40 CFR Part 51, Subpart H – Prevention of Air Pollution Emergency Episode s and, along with the February 2002 SIP update, describes and implements State authority comparable to that in section 303 of the CAA. (For the purpose of EEPs, 40 CFR § 51.150 classifies regions separately with resp ect to the following pollutants: sulfur oxides, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen di oxide, and ozone.) As indicated in 40 CFR 52.1934, EPA approved the plans as submitted in 1972 and revised in 1988.

All areas in Oklahoma are classi fied as Priority III for NO 2

.

EPA analysis: We compared the State rules to 40 CFR 51 Subpart H – Prevention of Air Pollution Emergency Episodes and Appendix L to Part 51 - Example Regulations for Prevention of Air Pollution Emergency Episodes. Subpart H provides a classification system for episode plans. Each region in a state is classified separate ly with respect to each of the criteria pollutants except for lead (see 40 CFR 51.150). Please see Ta ble 5 below for the Priority I and other classification criteria for ozone, NO 2 and SO 2

. A Priority II Region means any area which is not a Priority I region and has ambient concentrations as specified in Table 5 below. The regulations do not establish Priority II regions

for ozone or NO 2 . A Priority IA Region is any area whic h is Priority I primarily because of emissions from a single point source. Areas that do not meet the criteria fo r Priority I or II are classified Priority III.20

Table 5: Classification of Regions for Episod e Plans: Ambient concentrations of Ozone,

NO 2 and SO 2 (40 CFR 51.150) Parameter Priority I Priority II Priority III Ozone Greater than 195 μg/m 3
(0.10 ppm)

1-hour maximum Not defined Areas which do not

meet the criteria for Priority I Nitrogen

dioxide Greater than 100 μg/m 3
(0.06 ppm) annual

arithmetic mean Not defined Areas which do not

meet the criteria for Priority I

Sulfur

dioxide Greater than 100 μg/m 3
(0.04 ppm) annual arithmetic mean; 455 μg/m 3 (0.17 ppm)

24-hour maximum 60-100 μg/m 3 (0.02-0.04 ppm) annual arithmetic mean; 260-455 μg/m 3 (0.10-0.17 ppm) 24-hour maximum; any concentration above 1,300 μg/m 3 (0.50 ppm) 3-hour average Areas which do not

meet the criteria for Priority I or II

The significant harm level for the each of the pollutants will remain unchanged since
amended at 52 FR 24713, Jul 1, 1987, and as in dicated in 40 CFR 51.151. EPA believes that 40 CFR Subpart H remains appropriate. Therefore, EP A expects that for purposes of the 2008 ozone

and 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 NAAQS, states need only to confir m that they have existing emergency episode plan provisions consistent with EPA’s existing regulatory requirements. Oklahoma’s Emergency Episode Control Plan (E ECP) was last revised on February 12, 1991 (56 FR 5653), and includes alert, warning, and emergency levels for ozone episode stages. The Oklahoma EECP provides for the polluta nts specified under 40 CFR 51.150. Using 2013 - 2015 data, areas within Oklahoma meet the classifica tion for Priority 1 for ozone and Priority III

for NO 2 and SO 2

. 22 Oklahoma’s EECP is consistent w ith the provisions of 40 CFR 51.151 and 152, and Appendix L to Part 51. The Oklahoma SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(G) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and for the 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 NAAQS.

8. Future SIP revisions : Section 110(a)(2)(H ) requires states to have th e authority to revise their SIPs in response to changes in the NAAQS, av ailability of improved methods for attaining NAAQS, or in response to an EPA finding th at the SIP is substantially inadequate.

The State’s response: “DEQ’s powers and duties to implement air quality programs (including implementing Oklahoma’s SIP) are described in 27A O.S. §2-5-105, and include authority to: 3. Prepare and develop a general plan for proper air quality management in the state in accordance with the OCAA; and 20. Carry out all other duties, requirements and responsibilities necessary and proper for the implementation of the OCAA and fulfilling th e requirements of the

Federal Clean Air Act. [27A O.S. §2-5-105(3) and (20)].

Any substantive changes to Oklahoma’s SIP, such as NAAQS updates and resulting program modifications, are initiated through the rulema king process, which includes agency, public,

22 AQI data for this period are provided in the docket for this rulemaking.21

gubernatorial, and legislative revi ew processes.... This process is followed regardless of whether it results from a NAAQS update or a finding by the Administrator.”

EPA analysis: The 1992 OCAA was incorporated into the SIP at 59 FR 32365. As described earlier in this TSD, the OCAA is now codifi ed under Title 27A, chapter 2, Article 5 of the

Oklahoma Statutes. Such revisions have not been submitted to the EPA for approval into the SIP,

but the current version of the Ok lahoma Statutes retains the enforcement authority approved into

the Oklahoma SIP in 1994. The Oklahoma SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(H) for the 2008 Pb and ozone NAAQS and 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 NAAQS.

9. Consultation, public notice, and PSD and visibility protection : Section 110(a)(2)(J) is divided into three components: consultation w ith government officials, public notification requirements, and provisions for PSD and visibility protection. With regards to consultation with government officials, this section requires states to provide a process fo r consultation with local governments and Federal Land Managers (F LMs) carrying out NAAQS implementation requirements pursuant to secti on 121 relating to consultation. Section 110(a)(2)(J) further requires states to notify the pub lic if NAAQS are exceeded in an area and to enhance public

awareness of measures that can be taken to prevent exceedances. Section 110(a)(2)(J) also requires States to meet applicable requirements of Part C related to Prevention of Significant Deterioration and visibility protection.

The State's response: For CAA section 121: “O klahoma’s approved SIP includes established

consultation with various entities. Section 2- 5-105 of the OCAA specifically gives the DEQ authority to advise, consult, and cooperate with other agencies of the State, towns, cities and counties, industries, other states and the federa l government, and with affected groups in the prevention and control of new and existing ai r contamination sources within the State.” For CAA section 127: “Public notification proce dures to meet the requirements of 127 of

the CAA are established in Oklahoma’s SIP. DEQ provides notification of ambient air concentration levels for all NAAQS through its a nnual Air Data Reports, forecasting reports, and

health advisories.” For PSD and Visibility Protection (Part C) : “Oklahoma’s EPA-approved PSD permitting program, which addresses all regulated NSR air pollutants, operates under OAC 252:100-8, Part 7 – Prevention of Significant Deterioration ( PSD) Requirements for Attainment Areas; the existing PSD delegation agreement; and approved and pending portions of the SIP. Oklahoma’s Regional Haze Implementation Plan Revision (RH SIP) ... describes Oklahoma’s measures to protect visibility, including pr ovisions in OAC 252:100-8, Part 11. EPA approved core elements of the [RH] SIP on December 28, 2011 (76 FR 81728). EPA disapproved Oklahoma’s Best Available Retrofit Technology determinations for several emissions units and issued a Federal Implementation Plan covering those units.”

EPA analysis: Regarding consultation with governme nt officials and in addition to the authority provided to the DEQ under the OCAA at 27A O. S. 2-5-105(5), Chapter 10 of the original Oklahoma SIP approved on May 31, 1972 (37 FR 10887), provides for inter-governmental cooperation. Oklahoma’s Intergovernmental C onsultation Plan was revised and approved by EPA on May 14, 1982 (47 FR 20771). The revisi on consisted of the development and22

implementation of a State process for consultation and planning with relevant local governmental organizations having responsibility for any SIP development process. The 1990 Oklahoma Visibility Plan was approved by EPA into the SIP on November 8, 1999 (64 FR 60683), and requires the DEQ to notify the FLM of the receip t of any analysis of the anticipated impacts on visibility in any Federal Class I area, and to include a complete copy of the permit application of any proposed new major stationary source or major modification that may effect visibility in any Federal Class I area. The Oklahoma Visibility Plan also requires the DEQ to consider any timely analysis performed by the FLM and to coordinate with the FLM in conducting any monitoring of visibility in the mandatory Federal Class I area. The Attainment Demonstrations for each of the Central Oklahoma and Tulsa Early Action Comp act (EAC) Areas were approved by EPA on August 16, 2005 (70 FR 48078) and August 19, 2005 (70 FR 48645), respectively, and each incorporated a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA ) between the DEQ and the regional planning organization. Each MOA outlines the dutie s and responsibilities of each party for implementation of pollution control measures for the specific EAC area (see 70 FR 48078 and 70 FR 48645 for detail). Lastly, an element addressing “Coordination with States and Federal Land Managers” was approved under the Regional Ha ze SIP at 79 FR 12953 (March 7, 2014). The Oklahoma SIP meets this portion of th e section 110(a)(2)(J) requirements. Regarding public notification, section 110(a)(2)(J) further requires stat es to notify the public if NAAQS are exceeded in an area and to enhance public awareness of measures that can be taken to prevent exceedances. On A ugust 4, 1977 (42 FR 39389), the Oklahoma SIP was revised by amending Regulation 4.2, which provides for public disclosure of emission data. The revision to Regulation 4.2 pr ovided that emission data must be made available at all times to the public during normal working hours. On Ma y 14, 1982 (47 FR 20771), EPA approved into the Oklahoma SIP a Public Notification Workplan, whic h consists of a formal procedure for public notification, including notificati on of exceedances of any nationa l primary ambient air quality standard, the health hazards associated with such pollution, measures which can be taken to prevent such exceedances, and ways for particip ation in regulatory processes to improve air quality. Furthermore, Oklahoma ozone forecasts are made for each day of the ozone season for each forecast area, 23 and are available to the public th rough the ODEQ website. The public can also subscribe through the DEQ website to an “Air Quality Health Advisory,” which is a graphic

e-mail notification that tells the subscriber wh en current air pollution levels are unhealthy for sensitive groups or worse, allowing citizens to take steps to protect their h ealth and that of their family. 24 The Oklahoma SIP meets this portion of the section 110(a)(2)(J) requirements. Regarding PSD and visibility protection, se ction 110(a)(2)(J) requires States to meet applicable requirements of Part C related to prevention of signifi cant deterioration and visibility protection. As detailed in secti on C above, Oklahoma’s PSD program has been approved into the SIP. The EPA approved Oklahoma’s Visibility Pr otection Plan for the Federal Class I area on November 8, 1999 (64 FR 60683). 25 In that rulemaking, we determined that Oklahoma’s Visibility Protection Plan meets the visibili ty monitoring and NSR provisions under 40 CFR 51.305 and 51.307, respectively. We also determined th at Oklahoma’s Visibility Protection Plan meets the visibility implementation control st rategy and long-term strategy requirements under

23 There are three forecast areas in Oklahoma: Lawton, Okla homa City, and Tulsa. For more information, please see http://www.deq.state.ok.us/aqdnew/AQIndex/AQI.htm

. 24 Please see http://www.deq.state.ok.us/aqdnew/AdvisorySignUp.htm

. 25 Oklahoma has one mandatory Class I area - the Wichita Mountains National Wildlife Refuge in Comanche County near Fort Sill Military Reservation.23

40 CFR 51.302 and 51.306, respectively. Oklahoma’s Visibility Protection Plan includes visibility impact evaluation requirements and requ ires the ODEQ to coordinate with the FLM in conducting any monitoring of visibility in the ma ndatory Federal Class I area, to notify the FLM of the receipt of any analysis of the anticipated impacts of sour ces on visibility in any Federal Class I area, and to consider any timely analysis performed and submitted by the FLM. With regard to the applicable require ments for visibility protection, EPA recognizes that states are subject to visibility and regi onal haze program requirements under sections 169A and 169B of

the Act. In the event of the establishment of a new or revised NAAQS howe ver, these visibility and regional haze program requirements do not change. Thus, we find that there is no new visibility obligation trigge red under section 110(a)(2)(J) when a new or revised NAAQS

becomes effective.

The Oklahoma SIP meets this portion of the section 110(a) (2)(J) requirements for the 2008 Pb and ozone NAAQS and 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 NAAQS.

10. Air quality modeling and submission of data : Section 110(a)(2)(K) requires that SIPs provide for performing air quality modeling for predicting effect s on air quality of emissions from any NAAQS pollutant and submissi on of such data to EPA upon request.

The State’s response: “Oklahoma conducts air qual ity modeling to support its demonstrations of attainment, and reports results to EPA .... Source modeling requirements are also included in the PSD permitting program in OAC 252:100-8-35.”

EPA analysis: This requirement will be met if th e State submits its actual modeling in its SIP submittal, and EPA determines that the submitted SIP measures are approvable. 26 EPA currently does not have regulations concerning modeli ng for the SIP demonstration purposes, but has issued guidance. 27 Modeling was submitted with the Tulsa County Ozone Plan; 28 the Conoco

SO 2 Emissions Trade SIP revision; 29 and the Attainment Demonstr ation SIPs for each of the

Central Oklahoma and Tulsa EAC areas. 30
The Oklahoma SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(K) for the 2008 Pb and ozone NAAQS and 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 NAAQS.

11. Permitting fees : Section 110(a)(2)(L) requires SIPs to re quire each major stationary source to pay permitting fees to cover the cost of re viewing, approving, implementing and enforcing a permit.

The State's response: “27A O.S. §2-5-106 author izes the DEQ through the EQB to promulgate rules regarding permit fees and 27A O.S. §2-5-113 establishes that the owner or operator of any source required to have a permit must pay a perm it fee to cover the cost of implementing and enforcing Oklahoma’s Air Quality permit program. Oklahoma’s EP A-approved Title V Operating Program includes permit application fees and annual operating fees under OAC 252:100-8-1.7 and 252:100-5-2.2, respectively ( formerly Regulation 1.4.1(d) Permit fees).”

26 See the General Preamble to the Act’s 1990 Amendments (57 FR 13498, p. 13556).

27 See https://www3.epa.gov/scram001/aqmindex.htm

. 28 See 56 FR 03777, January 31, 1991.

29 See 57 FR 08077, March 6, 1992.

30 See 70 FR 48078 and 70 FR 48645, respectively.24

EPA analysis: The 1992 OCAA authorizes the DEQ, through the Board of Environmental Quality, to promulgate rules regarding permit fees. Such statute also establishes that the owner or operator of any source required to have a permit must pay a perm it fee to cover the cost of implementing and enforcing Oklahoma’s perm it program authorized by the OCAA and the

CAA. 31 Regulation 1.4.1(d) of the Oklahoma Air Pollution Control Regulations provides for permit fees, and was approved by EPA into the Oklahoma SIP on August 25, 1983 (48 FR 38635). The Oklahoma SIP also addresses annual operating fees at OAC 100-5 (see 75 FR 72695). The Oklahoma SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(L) for the 2008 Pb and ozone NAAQS and 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 NAAQS.

12. Consultation/participation by affected local entities : Section 110(a)(2)(M ) requires states to provide for consultation and participation in SIP development by local political subdivisions affected by the SIP.

The State’s response: [The] “approved SIP incl udes established opportunities for consultation and participation by local politi cal subdivisions affected by Ok lahoma’s SIP. DEQ’s powers and duties to implement air quality programs (including implementing Oklahoma’s SIP) described in 27A O.S. §2-5-105 authorizes the DEQ to advise, consult and cooperate w ith other agencies of the State, towns, cities and coun ties, industries, other states a nd the federal government, and with affected groups in the preven tion and control of new and exis ting air contamination sources within the State. The powers a nd duties of the Air Quality Adviso ry Council, as listed in 27A O.S. §2-5-107, include the “authority and discreti on to provide a public forum for the discussion

of issues it considers relevant to the air quality of th e state, and to ... hold public hearings to receive public comment in fulf illment of federal requirements regarding the [SIP] and make recommendation to the [DEQ] concerning the [SIP ]. Any substantive changes to Oklahoma’s SIP ... are initiated through the rulemaking process, which includes public notice and hearing procedures.”

EPA analysis: In addition to the documenta tion provided by the DEQ above, OAC 252:4, which stipulates rules of practice a nd procedures, addresses rulemaki ng, hearings and public comment periods, is in the approved SI P (see 73 FR 79400 and 75 FR 72695). Per 40 CFR 51.240, each SIP must identify organi zations, by official title, which will participate in developing, implementing and enforc ing the plan and the responsibilities of such organizations. The plan shall include any rela ted agreements or memoranda of understanding among the organizations. As noted in elemen t J above, Oklahoma’s Intergovernmental Consultation plan is in the a pproved SIP (47 FR 20771) and consists of a process for consultation and planning with relevant local governmental organizations having responsibility for any SIP revision process. As part of th e plan, the State entered into formal agreements with designated metropolitan planning organizations for air quality pl anning in their respective areas of the State. Also noted in element J above, such agreements are in the form of MOAs with the ACOG and INCOG in the Oklahoma City and Tulsa EACs , respectively, and a pproved into the SIP. 32

31 As indicated earlier in this TSD, such revisions have no t been submitted for approval into the SIP, but the current version of the Oklahoma Statutes retains the enforcement authority approved into the Oklahoma SIP in 1994.

32 See 70 FR 48078 and 70 FR 48645, respectively.25

The Oklahoma SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(M) for the 2008 Pb and ozone NAAQS and 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 NAAQS.

III. EPA’s Recommendation Oklahoma provided four submittals that address th e requirements of section 110 (a)(2) of the Act for each of the 2008 ozone and lead NAAQS and the 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 NAAQS. The Oklahoma submittals did not certify that the Oklahoma SIP meets the requirements of sections 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i )(II) for the 2008 ozone and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS.

Therefore, and as outlined in this TSD, we recommend approval of the following elements for the 2008 ozone and Pb NAAQS and the 2010 NO 2 and SO 2 NAAQS:

Enforceable emission limits and other control measures: Section 110(a)(2)(A) Ambient air quality monitoring/d ata system: Section 110(a)(2)(B) Program for enforcement of contro l measures: Section 110(a)(2)(C) Interstate and international polluti on abatement: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) Adequate personnel, funding and authority: Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i)

Conflict of interest for state boards: Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) Stationary source monitoring system: Section 110(a)(2)(F) Emergency power: Section 110(a)(2)(G) Future SIP revisions: Section 110(a)(2)(H) Consultation with government of ficials: Section 110(a)(2)(J)

Public notification: Section 110(a)(2)(J) Prevention of significant deterior ation (PSD) and visibility pr otection: Section 110(a)(2)(J) Air quality modeling/submission of such data: Section 110(a)(2)(K) Permitting fees: Section 110(a)(2)(L) Consultation/participation by affected local entities: Section 110(a)(2)(M)

We are not taking action on the foll owing elements for the following NAAQS:

2008 ozone and 2010 SO 2 NAAQS: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), prongs 1 and 2

2010 SO 2 NAAQS: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), prong 426

Appendix A: EPA’s Approach to the Revi ew of Infrastructure SIP Submissions

EPA is acting upon this SIP submission that a ddress the infrastructure requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for NAAQS

. The requirement for states to make a SIP submissions of these types arises out of CAA s ection 110(a)(1). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states must make SIP submissions “within 3 year s (or such shorter period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a nationa l primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision thereof),” and these SIP submissions are to provide for the “implementation, maintenance, and enforcement” of such NAAQS. The statute directly im poses on states the duty to make these SIP submissions, and the requireme nt to make the submissions is not conditioned upon EPA’s taking any action othe r than promulgating a new or revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) includes a lis t of specific elements that “[e]ach such plan” submission must address. EPA has historically referred to these SIP s ubmissions made for the purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA secti ons 110(a)(1) and 110(a )(2) as “infrastructure SIP” submissions. Although the term “infrastructure SIP” does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses the term to distinguish this particular type of SIP submission from submissions that are intended to satisfy other SIP requirements under the CAA, such as “ nonattainment SIP” or “attainment plan SIP” submissions to address the nonattainment planning requirements of part D of title I of the CAA, “regional haze SIP” submissions required by EPA rule to address the visibility protection requirements of CAA section 169A, and nonattai nment new source review permit program submissions to address the permit requirements of CAA, title I, part D. Section 110(a)(1) addresses the timing and general requirements for infrastructure SIP submissions, and section 110(a)(2) provides more details concerning the required contents of these submissions. The list of required elements provided in section 110 (a)(2) contains a wide variety of disparate provisions, some of which pe rtain to required legal authority, some of which pertain to required substantive program provisions, and some of which pertain to requirements for both authority and substantive program provisions. 33 EPA therefore believes that while the timing requirement in section 110(a)(1) is unam biguous, some of the other statutory provisions are ambiguous. In particular, EPA believes that the list of required elements for infrastructure SIP submissions provided in sec tion 110(a)(2) contains ambiguities concerning what is required

for inclusion in an infrastructure SIP submission. The following examples of ambiguities illustra te the need for EPA to interpret some section 110(a)(1) and section 110 (a)(2) requirements with re spect to infrastructure SIP submissions for a given new or revised NAAQS. One example of ambiguity is that section 110(a)(2) requires that “each” SIP submission must meet the list of requirements therein, while EPA has long noted that this literal reading of th e statute is internally inconsistent and would

create a conflict with the nonatta inment provisions in part D of title I of the Act, which specifically address nonatta inment SIP requirements. 34 Section 110(a)(2)(I) pertains to nonattainment SIP requirements and part D addresse s when attainment plan SIP submissions to

33 For example: Section 110(a)(2 )(E)(i) provides that states must provide assurances that they have adequate legal authority under state and local law to carry out the SIP; section 110(a)(2)(C) provides that states must have a SIPapproved program to address certain sources as required by part C of title I of the CAA; and section 110(a)(2)(G) provides that states must have legal authority to address emergencies as well as contingency plans that are triggered in the event of such emergencies.

34 See, e.g., “Rule To Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter an d Ozone (Clean Air Interstate Rule); Revisions to Acid Rain Program; Revisions to the NOx SIP Call; Final Rule,” 70 FR 25162, at 25163 – 65 (May 12, 2005) (explaining relationship between timing requirement of section 110(a)(2)(D) versus section 110(a)(2)(I)).27

address nonattainment area requirements are due. Fo r example, section 172(b) requires EPA to establish a schedule for submission of such plan s for certain pollutants when the Administrator promulgates the designation of an area as nonatt ainment, and section 107 (d)(1)(B) allows up to two years, or in some cases three years, for such designations to be promulgated. 35 This ambiguity illustrates that rather than apply all the stated requirements of section 110(a)(2) in a strict literal sense, EPA must determine which provisions of section 110(a )(2) are applicable for a particular infrastructure SIP submission. Another example of ambiguity within secti ons 110(a)(1) and 110(a )(2) with respect to infrastructure SIPs pertains to whether states must meet all of the infrastructure SIP requirements in a single SIP submission, and whether EPA must act upon such SIP submission in a single action. Although section 110(a)(1) dir ects states to submit “a plan” to meet these requirements, EPA interprets the CAA to allow states to make multiple SIP submissions separately addressing infrastructure SIP elements for the same NAAQS. If states elect to make such multiple SIP

submissions to meet the infrastructure SIP requirements, EPA can elect to act on such submissions either individually or in a larger combined action. Similarly, EPA interprets the

CAA to allow it to take action on the individual parts of one larger , comprehensive infrastructure SIP submission for a given NAAQ S without concurrent action on the entire submission. For example, EPA has sometimes elected to act at different times on various elements and subelements of the same infrastructure SIP submission. 36 Ambiguities within sections 110(a)(1) and 110( a)(2) may also arise with respect to infrastructure SIP submission requirements for different NAAQS. Thus, EPA notes that not every element of section 110(a)(2) would be relevant, or as relevant, or rele vant in the same way, for each new or revised NAAQS. The states’ atte ndant infrastructure SIP submissions for each NAAQS therefore could be differe nt. For example, the monitoring requirements that a state might need to meet in its infrastructure SIP submission for purposes of section 110(a)(2)(B) could be very different for diffe rent pollutants, for example becau se the content and scope of a

state’s infrastructure SIP submission to meet this element might be very different for an entirely new NAAQS than for a minor revision to an existing NAAQS. 37
EPA notes that interpretation of section 110( a)(2) is also necessary when EPA reviews other types of SIP submissions required under the CAA. Therefore, as with infrastructure SIP submissions, EPA also has to identify and interpre t the relevant elements of section 110(a)(2) that logically apply to these other types of SIP submissions. For example, section 172(c)(7) requires that attainment plan SIP submissions re quired by part D have to meet the “applicable requirements” of section 110(a)(2). Thus, for ex ample, attainment plan SIP submissions must meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) re garding enforceable emission limits and control

35 EPA notes that this ambiguity within section 110(a)(2) is he ightened by the fact that various subparts of part D set specific dates for submission of certain types of SIP submissions in designated nonattainment areas for various pollutants. Note, e.g., that section 182(a)(1) provides specific dates for submission of emissions inventories for the ozone NAAQS. Some of these specific da tes are necessarily later than three y ears after promulgation of the new or revised NAAQS.

36 On December 14, 2007, the State of Tennessee, thr ough the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, made a SIP revision to EPA demonstrating that the State meets the requirem ents of sections 110(a)(1) and (2). EPA proposed action for infrastructure SIP elements (C) and (J) on January 23, 2012 (77 FR 3213) and took final action on March 14, 2012 (77 FR 14976). On April 16, 2012 (77 FR 22533) and July 23, 2012 (77 FR 42997), EPA took separate proposed and final actions on all other section 110(a)(2) infrastructure SIP elements of Tennessee’s December 14, 2007 submittal.

37 For example, implemen tation of the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS required the deployment of a system of new monitors to

measure ambient levels of that new indicator species for the new NAAQS.28

measures and section 110(a)(2)(E)( i) regarding air agency resources and authority. By contrast, it is clear that attainment plan SIP submissions required by part D would not need to meet the portion of section 110(a)(2)(C) that pertains to the PSD program required in part C of title I of the CAA, because PSD does not apply to a pollutant for which an area is designated nonattainment and thus subject to part D planning requirements. As this example illustrates, each type of SIP submission may implicate some el ements of section 110(a)(2) but not others. Given the potential for ambiguity in some of the statutory language of section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2), EPA believes that it is ap propriate to interpret the ambiguous portions of section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)( 2) in the context of acting on a particular SIP submission. In other words, EPA assumes that Congress could not have intended that each and every SIP submission, regardless of the NA AQS in question or the history of SIP development for the relevant pollutant, would meet each of the requireme nts, or meet each of them in the same way. Therefore, EPA has adopted an approach under wh ich it reviews infrastructure SIP submissions against the list of elements in section 110(a)(2), but only to th e extent each element applies for that particular NAAQS. Historically, EPA has elected to use guidance documents to make recommendations to states for infrastructure SIPs, in some cases conveying needed interpre tations on newly arising issues and in some cases conveying interpretations that have already been developed and applied to individual SIP submissions for particular elements. 38 EPA most recently issued guidance for infrastructure SIPs on September 13, 2013 (2013 Guidance). 39 EPA developed this document to provide states with up-to-date guidance for infr astructure SIPs for any new or revised NAAQS. Within this guidance, EPA describes the duty of st ates to make infrastructure SIP submissions to meet basic structural SIP requirements within th ree years of promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. EPA also made recommen dations about many specific subs ections of section 110(a)(2)

that are relevant in the context of infrastructure SIP submissions. 40 The guidance also discusses the substantively important issues that are german e to certain subsections of section 110(a)(2). Significantly, EPA interprets sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) such that infrastructure SIP

submissions need to address certain issues and need not address others. Accordingly, EPA

reviews each infrastructure SIP submission fo r compliance with the applicable statutory provisions of section 110( a)(2), as appropriate. As an example, section 110(a )(2)(E)(ii) is a required elem ent of section 110(a)(2) for

infrastructure SIP submissions. Under this el ement, a state must meet the substantive requirements of section 128, which pertain to stat e boards that approve permits or enforcement orders and heads of executive agencies with si milar powers. Thus, EPA reviews infrastructure SIP submissions to ensure that the state’s SIP ap propriately addresses the requirements of section

38 EPA notes, however, that nothing in the CAA requires EPA to provide guidance or to promulgate regulations for infrastructure SIP submissions. The CAA directly applies to states and requires the subm ission of infrastructure SIP submissions, regardless of whether or not EPA provides guidance or regulations pertaining to such submissions. EPA elects to issue such guidance in orde r to assist states, as appropriate.

39 “Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2),” Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, September 13, 2013.

40 EPA’s September 13, 2013, guidance did not make recommendations with respect to infrastructure SIP submissions to address section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). EPA issued the guidance shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review the D.C. Circuit decision in EME Homer City , 696 F.3d7 (D.C. Cir. 2012) which had interpreted the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)( i)(I). In light of the uncertainty cr eated by ongoing litigation, EPA elected not to provide additional guidance on the requirements of se ction 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) at that time. As the guidance is neither binding nor required by statute, whether EPA elects to provide guidance on a particular section has no impact on a state’s CAA obligations.29

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) and section 128. The 2013 Guidance explains EPA’s interpretation that there may be a variety of ways by which states can ap propriately address thes e substantive statutory requirements, depending on the structure of an individual state’s perm itting or enforcement program ( e.g., whether permits and enforcement orders are approved by a multi-member board or by a head of an executive agency). However they are addressed by the state, the substantive requirements of section 128 are ne cessarily included in EPA’s ev aluation of infrastructure SIP submissions because section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) ex plicitly requires that the state satisfy the provisions of section 128. As another example, EPA’s review of infrastr ucture SIP submissions with respect to the PSD program requirements in sections 110(a) (2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) focuses upon the structural PSD program requireme nts contained in part C and EP A’s PSD regulations. Structural PSD program requirements include provisions ne cessary for the PSD program to address all regulated sources and NSR pollutants, includi ng GHGs. By contrast, st ructural PSD program requirements do not include provisi ons that are not required unde r EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR 51.166 but are merely available as an option for the state, such as the option to provide grandfathering of complete permit app lications with respect to the 2012 PM 2.5 NAAQS. Accordingly, the latter optional provisions are ty pes of provisions EPA c onsiders irrelevant in

the context of an infrastructure SIP action. For other section 110(a)(2) elements, however, EPA’s review of a state’s infrastructure SIP submission focuses on assuring that the state’ s SIP meets basic structural requirements. For example, section 110(a)(2)(C) includes, inter alia, the requirement that states have a program to regulate minor new sources. Thus, EPA evaluates whether the state has an EPA-approved minor new source review program and whether the progra m addresses the pollutants relevant to that NAAQS. In the context of acting on an infras tructure SIP submission, however, EPA does not think it is necessary to conduct a review of each and every provision of a state’s existing minor source program ( i.e., already in the existing SIP) for co mpliance with the requirements of the CAA and EPA’s regulations that pertain to such programs. With respect to certain other issues, EPA doe s not believe that an action on a state’s infrastructure SIP submission is necessarily the appropriate type of actio n in which to address possible deficiencies in a state’s existing SIP. These issues include : (i) existing provisions related to excess emissions from sources during periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction that may be contrary to the CAA and EPA’s policies addressing such excess emissions (“SSM”); (ii) existing provisions related to “dir ector’s variance” or “director’s di scretion” that may be contrary to the CAA because they purport to allow revi sions to SIP-approved emissions limits while limiting public process or not requiring further a pproval by EPA; and (iii) existing provisions for PSD programs that may be inconsistent with current requirements of EPA’s “Final NSR Improvement Rule,” 67 FR 80186 (December 3 1, 2002), as amended by 72 FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (“NSR Reform”). Thus, EPA believes it ma y approve an infrastructure SIP submission without scrutinizing the to tality of the existing SIP for such potentially deficient provisions and may approve the submission even if it is aware of such existing provisions. 41 It is important to note that EPA’s approval of a st ate’s infrastructure SIP submi ssion should not be construed as

41 By contrast, EPA notes that if a state were to include a new provision in an infrastructure SIP submission that contained a legal deficiency, such as a new exemption for excess emissions during SSM events, then EPA would need to evaluate that provision for compliance against the rubric of applicable CAA requirements in the context of

the action on the infrastructure SIP.30

explicit or implicit re-approval of a ny existing potentially deficient provisions that relate to the three specific issues just described. EPA’s approach to review of infrastructure SIP submissions is to identify the CAA requirements that are logically a pplicable to that submission. EPA believes that this approach to the review of a particular infrastructure SIP s ubmission is appropriate, b ecause it would not be reasonable to read the general requirements of section 110(a)(1) and the list of elements in 110(a)(2) as requiring review of each and every provision of a state’s existing SIP against all requirements in the CAA and EPA regulations mere ly for purposes of assu ring that the state in question has the basic structural elements fo r a functioning SIP for a new or revised NAAQS. Because SIPs have grown by accretion over the d ecades as statutory and regulatory requirements under the CAA have evolved, they may include some outmoded provisions and historical artifacts. These provisions, while not fully up to date, nevertheless may not pose a significant problem for the purposes of “implementation, ma intenance, and enforcement” of a new or revised NAAQS when EPA evaluates adequacy of the infrastructure SIP submission. EPA believes that a better approach is for states and EPA to focus attention on those elements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA most likely to warrant a sp ecific SIP revision due to the promulgation of a new or revi sed NAAQS or other factors. For example, EPA’s 2013 Guidance gives simp ler recommendations with respect to carbon monoxide than other NAAQS pollutants to m eet the visibility requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), be cause carbon monoxide does not affect visibility. As a result, an infrastructure SIP submission for any future new or revised NAAQS fo r carbon monoxide need only state this fact in order to address the visibility prong of secti on 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Finally, EPA believes that its approach with re spect to infrastructure SIP requirements is based on a reasonable reading of sections 110( a)(1) and 110(a)(2) because the CAA provides other avenues and mechanisms to address specif ic substantive deficien cies in existing SIPs. These other statutory tools allo w EPA to take appropriately tailored action, depending upon the nature and severity of the alle ged SIP deficiency. Section 110(k )(5) authorizes EPA to issue a “SIP call” whenever the Agency de termines that a state’s SIP is substantially inadequate to attain or maintain the NAAQS, to mitigate interstate tr ansport, or to otherwis e comply with the CAA. 42
Section 110(k)(6) authorizes EPA to correct errors in past actions, such as past approvals of SIP

submissions. 43 Significantly, EPA’s determination that an action on a state’s infrastructure SIP submission is not the appropriate time and place to address all poten tial existing SIP deficiencies does not preclude EPA’s subseque nt reliance on provisions in sect ion 110(a)(2) as part of the

basis for action to correct those deficiencies at a later time. Fo r example, although it may not be appropriate to require a state to eliminate a ll existing inappropriate director’s discretion provisions in the course of acti ng on an infrastructure SIP subm ission, EPA believes that section

42 For example, EPA issued a SIP call to Utah to address spec ific existing SIP deficiencies related to the treatment of excess emissions during SSM events. See “Finding of Substantial Inadequacy of Implementation Plan; Call for Utah State Implementation Plan Revisions,” 74 FR 21639 (April 18, 2011).

43 EPA has used this authority to correct errors in past actions on SIP submissions related to PSD programs. See “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). EPA has previously used its authority under CAA section 110(k)(6) to remove numerous other SIP provisions that the Agency determined it had approved in error. See, e.g., 61 FR 38664 (July 25, 1996) and 62 FR 34641 (June 27, 1997) (corrections to American Samoa, Arizona, California, Hawaii, and Nevada SIPs); 69 FR 67062 (November 16, 2004) (corrections to CA SIP); and 74 FR 57051 (November 3, 2009) (corrections to AZ and NV SIPs).31

110(a)(2)(A) may be among the statutory bases that EPA relies upon in the course of addressing such deficiency in a subsequent action. 44

Appendix B: EPA’s Evaluation of the June 23, 2014 United States Supreme Court Decision

on Green House Gas emissions on infrastructure SIP reviews

With respect to the infrastructure elements contained in section 110(a)(2)(C) and (J), EPA interprets the CAA to require each state to make an infrastructure SIP submission for a new or revised NAAQS that demonstrat es that the air agency has a complete PSD permitting program meeting the current requirements for all regulat ed NSR pollutants. One requirement of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) may also be sa tisfied by demonstra ting the air agency has a complete PSD permitting program correctly addressing all regulated NSR pollutants. Oklahoma has shown that it currently has a PSD program in place that co vers all regulated NSR pollutants, including greenhouse gases (GHGs), meeting one por tion of section 1 10(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). On June 23, 2014, the United States Supreme Court issued a decision addressing the application of PSD permitting re quirements to GHG emissions. (see Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection Agency, 134 S. Ct. 2427) The Supreme Court said that the EPA may not treat GHGs as an air pollutant for purposes of determining whether a source is a major source required to obtain a PSD permit. The Court also said that the EPA could continue to require that PSD pe rmits, otherwise required based on em issions of pollutants other than GHGs, contain limitations on GHG em issions based on the applicati on of Best Available Control Technology (BACT). In order to act consistently with its unders tanding of the Court’s decision pending further judicial action to effectuate the decision, the EPA is not continuing to apply EPA regulations that would require that SIPs incl ude permitting requirements that the Supreme Court found impermissible. Specifically, EPA is not applying the requirement that a state’s SIPapproved PSD program require that sources obtain PSD permits when GHGs are the only pollutant (i) that the source emits or has the po tential to emit above the major source thresholds, or (ii) for which there is a significant emissions increase and a significant net emissions increase from a modification (e.g. 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v)). EPA anticipates a need to revise federal PSD rules in light of the Supreme Court opinion. In addition, EPA anticipat es that many states will revise their existing SIP-approved PSD pr ograms in light of the Supreme Court’s decision. The timing and content of subsequent EPA actions with respect to the EPA regulations and state PSD program approvals are expected to be in formed by additional legal process before the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. At this juncture, EPA is not expecting states to have re vised their PSD programs for pur poses of infrastructure SIP submissions and is only evaluating such submissions to assure that the state’s program correctly

addresses GHGs consistent with the Supreme Court’s decision. EPA has previously approved Oklahoma SIP re visions submitted to align the State’s PSD program rules for GHGs with federal requireme nts. At present, EPA has determined the Oklahoma SIP is sufficient to satisfy the infrastruc ture elements of Sectio ns 110(a)(2)(C), part of (D)(i)(II), and (J) with respect to GHGs because the PSD permitting program previously

44 See, e.g., EPA’s disapproval of a SIP submission from Colorado on the grounds that it would have included a director’s discretion provision inconsiste nt with CAA requirements, including s ection 110(a)(2)(A). See, e.g., 75 FR 42342 at 42344 (July 21, 2010) (proposed disapproval of director’s discretion provisions); 76 FR 4540 (Jan. 26, 2011) (final disapproval of such provisions).32

approved by EPA into the SIP con tinues to require that PSD perm its (otherwise required based on emissions of pollutants other than GHGs) c ontain limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of BACT. Although the approved Ok lahoma PSD permitting program may currently contain provisions that are no longer necessary in light of the Supreme Court decision, this does not render the infrastructure SIP submission inadequa te to satisfy the infrastructure elements of Sections 110(a)(2)(C), a portion of (D)(i)(II), and (J). The SI P contains the necessary PSD requirements at this time, and the applicati on of those requirements is not impeded by the presence of other previously-approved provisions regarding the permitting of sources of GHGs that EPA does not consider necessary at this time in light of the Supreme Court decision. Accordingly, the Supreme Court decision doe s not affect EPA’s proposed approval of Oklahoma’s infrastructure SIP as to the requirement s of the infrastructure elements of sections 110(a)(2)(C) and (J) or the portion of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II).