# + 2

(,1 1/,1(

Citation: 69 Fed. Reg. 17368 2004

Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline (http://heinonline.org) Tue Apr 9 15:05:28 2013

-- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License

-- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text.Federal Register/Vol. 69, No. 64/Friday, April 2, 2004/Proposed Rules

(1)Lighting or maintaining a fire. (2)Camping. (3)Entering the area after visiting hours. Visiting hours willbe posted at the entrance gate. (d) SlanaDeveloped Area (SDA). For
purposes ofthis section, the Slana Developed Area consists ofall park

areas within a 1/4mile radius ofthe Slana Ranger Station.

(e) KNHL anddevelopedareaclosures andrestrictions. The Superintendent may prohibit or otherwise restrict activities in the KNHL, Headquarter/ Visitor Center Developed Area, and Slana Developed Area to protect public health and safety or park resources. Information on closures and restrictions will be available at the park visitor
center. Violating such closures or restrictions is prohibited. Notwithstanding the provisions ofthis section, the Superintendent may issue a Special Use Permit to authorize uses in the KNHL and either developed area.

Dated: March 17, 2004. Paul Hoffman, DeputyAssistantSecretaryfor Fishand Wildlifeand Parks. [FRDoc. 04-7131 Filed 4-1-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-PW-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52 [WA-04-002; FRL-7642-6]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Washington

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA invites public comment

onits proposal to approve numerous revisions to the State ofWashington Implementation Plan. The Director of the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology)submitted two requests to EPA dated September 24, 2001 and February 9, 2004 torevise certain sections ofthe Puget Sound Clean Air Agency's (PS Clean Air) regulation. The revisions were submitted in accordance with the requirements of section 110 ofthe Clean Air Act (hereinafter the Act). EPAis not approving in this rulemaking a number ofsubmitted rule provisions which are inappropriate for EPA approval and is taking no action on a number ofother provisions that are unrelated to the
purposes ofthe implementation plan.

EPA also invites public comment on its proposal to approve certain sourcespecific State implementation plan (SIP) revisions relating to Saint Gobain Containers andLaFarge North America. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before May 3, 2004. ADDRESSES: Comments may be sent either bymail or electronically. Written
comments shouldbe addressed to Roylene A. Cunningham, EPA, Office of Air Quality (OAQ-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. Electronic comments should be sent either to rlO.aircom@epa.gov or to http: //www.regulations.gov,which is an alternative method for sending electronic comments toEPA. To send comments, please follow the detailed instructions described in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section, Part VIII, General Information.

Copies ofthe State's request and other information supporting this proposed action are available for inspection duringnormal business hours at the following locations: EPA, Office ofAir Quality (OAQ-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101, and State of Washington, Department ofEcology, P.O. Box 47600, Olympia, Washington 98504-7600. Interested persons wanting
to examine these documents should make an appointment with the appropriate office atleast 24 hours before the visiting day.A reasonable fee may be charged for copies.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roylene A. Cunningham, EPA, Office of Air Quality (OAQ-107), Seattle, Washington 98101, (206) 553-0513, or e-mail address: cunningham.roylene@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table ofContents I.Background ofSubmittal II.Requested Sections tobeApproved into the SIP, butnotIBR'd A. Key Changesto PS Clean Air's SIP B.Summary ofAction 1. Sections 3.01 through 3.21 in Regulation

I, Article 3: General Provisions 2. Section 3.23 Alternate Means of

Compliance II. Requested Sections tobe IBR'd into the SIP A. Key Changesto PS Clean Air's SIP B.Summary ofAction 1.Provisions Approved byEPA and IBR'd 2.Provisions notApproved byEPA 3.Provisions on WhichEPA isTakingNo

Action at this Time IV. Requested Sections tobe Removedfrom the SIP A. Summary ofAction 1.Regulation I 2.Regulation II 3.Regulation III V. Saint Gobain Containers, NOC Order of Approval #8244 A. Background B.Summary ofAction VI.LaFarge NorthAmerica, NOC Order of Approval #5183 A.Background B.Summary ofAction VII. Geographic Scope ofSIP Approval VIII. General Information IX. Statutory andExecutive Order Reviews

I. Background ofSubmittal

On February 9, 2004, the Director of Ecology submitted a request toEPA to revise certain sections ofPS Clean Air's regulation, which hasbeen referred to as the PS Clean AirCleanup orResolution #1004. PS Clean Air adopted Resolution #1004 in order to facilitate the State Implementation Plan Process Improvement Project (SIP PIP), which

was initiated by EPARegion 10 to simplify preparing and adopting SIP revisions. An important element ofthis
process is to not include in the SIP portions ofthose regulations that are not related to attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS or to the requirements for SIPs under the Act. Another important element ofthis process is to include in the SIP, but not to submitfor incorporation by reference into Federal law, portions ofregulations thatprovide legal authority necessary to meet the requirements oftitle I ofthe Act, but do
not directly regulate air emissions, because incorporating such general authority provisions byreference into Federal lawis unnecessary and could potentially conflict with EPA's independent authorities. PS Clean Air also had as agoal to eliminate, where possible, duplicate regulations found in Ecology regulations and EPA regulations.

PS Clean Air is therefore requesting that all sections oftheir currently SIP approved regulations that are not related
to criteria pollutants or to the requirements for SIPs under title I ofthe Actbe removed from the SIP and has submitted a current version oftheir regulations to EPA as a SIP revision. The current submittal includes only those sections or regulations relating to criteria pollutants or to the requirements for SIPs and designates those provisions that are being submitted as part ofthe SIP but that shouldnot be incorporated by reference into Federal law.
II. Requested Sections to be Approved
Intothe SIP, butnot IBR'd

A. Key ChangestoPS CleanAir'sSIP Only three out ofthe eleven sections in Regulation I, Article 3: General Provisions have been revised since they

were last approved into the SIP. These include Sections 3.01, Duties and Powers ofthe Control Officer; 3.11, Civil Penalties; and 3.17, Appeal of Orders. The revisions tothese three sections are 

### 17368

HeinOnline -- 69 Fed. Reg. 17368 2004Federal Register/Vol. 69, No. 64/Friday, April 2, 2004/Proposed Rules

limited to editorial changes such as, Agency name changes; updated penalty fees; and references tothe authority of the Board in addition to the Control Officer.

B. Summaryof Action

1.Sections 3.01 through 3.21 in Regulation I, Article 3: General Provisions

EPA is proposing to approve the following sections as part ofthe SIP: Sections 3.01, Duties and Powers ofthe Control Officer, adopted September 9, 1999; 3.05, Investigations by the Control Officer, adopted February 10, 1994; 3.07, Compliance Tests, adopted February 9, 1995; 3.09, ViolationsNotice, adopted August 8, 1991; 3.11, Civil Penalties, adopted September 26, 2002; 3.13, Criminal Penalties, adopted August 8, 1991; 3.15, Additional Enforcement, adopted August 8, 1991; 3.17, Appeal ofOrders, adopted October 8, 1998; 3.19, Confidential Information, adopted August 8, 1991; and 3.21, Separability, adopted August 8, 1991.

These provisions do not regulate air emissions, but rather, describe general authorities such as investigative and enforcement authorities. Incorporation by reference of such provisions into Federal law is unnecessary and could potentially conflict with EPA's independent authorities. Therefore, EPA is proposing to not incorporate by reference these sections into the SIP and
to remove the previous versions ofthese regulations from PS Clean Air's incorporation by reference section ofthe Washington State SIP, as follows: Sections 3.01, Duties and Powers ofthe Control Officer, adopted February 10, 1994; 3.05, Investigations by the Control Officer, adopted February 10, 1994; 3.07, Compliance Tests, adopted February 9, 1995; 3.09, ViolationsNotice, adopted August 8, 1991; 3.11, Civil Penalties, adopted September 12, 1996; 3.13, Criminal Penalties, adopted August 8, 1991; 3.15, Additional Enforcement, adopted August 8, 1991; 3.17, Appeal ofOrders, adopted August 8, 1991; 3.19, Confidential Information, adopted August 8, 1991; and 3.21, Separability, adopted August 8, 1991.

2.Section 3.23 Alternate Means of Compliance

This section grants PS Clean Air authority to allow other emission methods to be used to achieve compliance with the emission standards ofPS Clean Air's regulation ifthe owner

oroperator demonstrates thatthe alternative methods are at least as effective as therequired method and if the alternative method is included in a permit orregulatory order. Section 3.23 essentially authorizes PS Clean Air to issue variances from regulatory requirements. EPA approved this provision into the SIP onAugust 6, 1997 (62 FR 42216). Although PS Clean Air has requested that this provision not be incorporated byreference, the agency did submit it aspart ofits SIP submittal.

EPA believes that it erred when it approved this section as part ofthe SIP. Section 110(i) ofthe Act specifically precludes States from changing the requirements ofthe SIP except through SIP revisions approved by EPA. SIP revisions will be approved byEPA only ifthey meet all requirements ofsection 110 ofthe Act and the implementing regulations at 40 CFR Part 51. SeeCAA section 110(1); 40 CFR 51.104. Section 51.104(d) specifically states that in order for a variance to be considered for approval as a SIP revision, the State
must submitit in accordance with the requirements of40 CFR 51.104, which includes the public notice, comment andhearing provisions of40 CFR 51.102. Section 3.23 does not meet all oftherequirements ofsection 110 ofthe Act, such as ensuring attainment and maintenance ofthe NAAQS. Section 3.23 allows the Control Office to approve "alternative methods" for achieving compliance ifthe Control Officer finds thatthe alternative methods are "at least as effective" asthe required methods. This provision, however, does not contain specific, objective, andreplicable criteria for determining ifsuch "alternative methods" are in fact at least as effective

asthe required methods in terms of emission rates and ambient impacts. In addition, Section 3.23 states that such alternative means ofcompliance are to be established in regulatory orders issued under Section 3.03 or permits issued under Article 6 or 7. Section 3.03 is not part ofthe Washington SIP and orders issued under thatprovision are not Federally enforceable. In addition, regulatory orders issued under Section 3.03 are not sent toEPA for review prior
to issuance. With respect to permits issued under Article 6, there isno requirement that all permits issued under Article 6 establishing such alternative means ofcompliance be subject to public review. Public and EPA review ofrevisions tothe SIP are important elements ofthe SIP revision
process.

Moreover, EPA's approval ofthe Washington SIP specifically states that any variance, exception, exemption, alternative emission limit, bubble, alternative sampling ortesting method, compliance schedule revision, alternative compliance schedule or any other substantial change to a provision ofthe SIP must be submitted bythe State for approval in accordance with 40 CFR 51.104 and that any such change does not modify the requirements ofthe Federally-promulgated SIP until it has been approved byEPA as an amendment to the SIP in accordance with section 110 ofthe Act. See 40 CFR 52.2476(b) and (c). Therefore, it is not appropriate for EPA to approve this provision into the SIP.

Section 110(k)(6) ofthe Act authorizes EPA, upon a determination thatEPA's action approving, disapproving or promulgating any SIP or planrevision (or any part thereof) was in error, to revise such action as appropriate in the

same manner as the approval, disapproval or promulgation. In making such a correction, EPA must provide such determination and the basis therefore to the State and the public. EPAisby this proposal notifying the PS Clean Air,Ecology and the public that EPAis removing Section 3.23 from the SIP and from incorporation by reference into Federal law.

It is important to emphasize that ifPS Clean Air issues an order or permit in reliance on Section 3.23 that approves

an alternative to a PS Clean Air regulation thathas been approved as part ofthe SIP, EPA isnot precluded from enforcing the Federally-approved SIP limit against the source. The granting of an alternative method of compliance byPS Clean Air to a SIP requirement does not change the Federally-enforceable SIP requirement for that source unless anduntil the alternative has been approved by EPA as

a source-specific SIP revision.
III.Requested Sections To Be IBR'd
Intothe SIP

A. Key ChangestoPS CleanAir'sSIP

The docket includes a technical support document which describes in detail the substantive changes to the PS Clean Air rules that have been submittedby Ecology as revisions tothe SIP, EPA's evaluation ofthe changes, and the basis for EPA's proposed action. In general the revisions were minor in
nature and were made to improve the overall clarity, effectiveness, and enforceability ofPS Clean Air's regulation.

B. Summary of Action

1.Provisions Approved by EPA and IBR'd

EPA has determined thatthe following sections are consistent with the requirements oftitle I ofthe Act and is proposing to approve them as part of 

### 17369

HeinOnline -- 69 Fed. Reg. 17369 2004Federal Register/Vol. 69, No. 64/Friday, April 2, 2004/Proposed Rules

the SIP and incorporate them by reference into Federal law:

RegulationL Sections 1.01, Policy; 1.03, Name ofAgency; and 1.05, Short Title, adopted September 9, 1999; 3.04, Reasonably Available Control Technology [except (e)], adopted March 11, 1999; 3.06 Credible Evidence, adopted October 8, 1998; 5.03, Registration Required [except (a)(5)], adopted July 8, 1999; 5.05 General Reporting Requirements for Registration, adopted September 10, 1998; 7.09, General Reporting Requirements for Operating Permits, adopted September 10, 1998; 8.04, General Conditions for Outdoor Burning; 8.05, Agricultural Burning; 8.09, Description ofKing County NoBurn Area; 8.10, Description ofPierce County No-Burn Area; and 8.11, Description of Snohomish County NoBurn Area, adopted November 9, 2000; and 8.12, Description ofKitsap County No-Burn Area, adopted October 24, 2002; 9.03, Emission ofAir Contaminant: Visual Standard [except (e)], adopted March 11, 1999; 9.04, Opacity Standards for Equipment with Continuous Opacity Monitoring Systems [except (d)(2) and (f)], adopted April 9, 1998; 9.09, Particulate Matter Emission Standards, adopted April 9, 1998; 9.15, Fugitive Dust Control Measures, adoptedMarch 11, 1999; 9.16, Spray-Coating Operations, adopted July 12, 2001; 12.01, Applicability and 12.03, Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems [except (b)(1) and (b)(2)], adopted April 9, 1998; 13.01, Policy and Purpose, adopted September 9, 1999; and 13.02, Definitions, adopted October 8, 1998.

RegulationI, Sections 1.01, Purpose; 1.02, Policy; 1.03, Short Title; and 1.05, Special Definitions, adopted September 9, 1999; 2.01, Definitions, adoptedJuly 8, 1999; 2.07, Gasoline Stations, adopted December 9, 1999; 2.08, Gasoline Transport Tanks, adopted July 8, 1999; and 3.02, Volatile Organic Compound Storage Tanks, July 8, 1999.

2.Provisions Not Approved by EPA

EPA is proposing not to approve certain provisions, which EPA believes

are inconsistent with therequirements ofthe Act. To the extent such provisions

are currently incorporated by reference into the SIP, EPAis proposing to

remove them from the SIP.

Subsections 5.03(a)(5), 9.03(e), 9.04(d)(2), 9.04(f), and 12.03(b)(2) each authorize PS Clean Air to modify standards or requirements relied on to attain andmaintain the NAAQS by granting an exemption or alternative to suchrequirements without going through a SIP revision and, as such, are not approvable. As discussed above, section 110(i) ofthe Act specifically precludes States from changing the requirements ofthe SIP except through SIP revisions approved by EPA. SIP revisions will be approved byEPA only ifthey meet all requirements ofsection 110 ofthe Act and the implementing regulations at 40 CFR part 51. SeeCAA section 110(1); 40 CFR 51.104. Section 51.104(d) specifically states that in order for a variance to be considered for approval as a SIP revision, the State
must submitit in accordance with the requirements of40 CFR 51.104, which includes the public notice, comment andhearing provisions of40 CFR 51.102.

Subsections 5.03(a)(5), 9.03(e), 9.04(d)(2), 9.04(f), and 12.03(b)(2) do not meet all ofthe requirements of section 110 ofthe Act, such as ensuring attainment and maintenance ofthe NAAQS. None ofthese provisions contain sufficiently specific, objective, andreplicable criteria for determining if the exemption or alternative methods or requirements will, in fact, be at least as effective as the required methods or requirements in terms ofemission rates and ambient impacts. Moreover, none of the provisions ensure thatthe approval ofsuch exemptions or alternatives will be subject to EPA and public review. In the case of an exemption granted under Subsection 5.03(a)(5), there is no review
at all ofthe granting ofthe exemption. In the case of Subsections 9.03(e), 9.04(d)(2), 9.04(f), and 12.03(b)(2), the approval ofthe alternative or exemption will be contained in an order or permit issued under Section 3.03 or Article 6. As stated above, Section 3.03 is not part oftheWashington SIP and orders issued under that provision are not Federally enforceable. In addition, regulatory orders issued under Section 3.03 are not sent to EPA for review prior to issuance. With respect to permits issued under Article 6, there isno requirement that allpermits issued under Article 6 establishing such alternative methods or requirements be subject topublic review. Public andEPA review of revisions to the SIP are important elements ofthe SIP revision process.

Moreover, EPA's approval ofthe Washington SIP specifically states that any variance, exception, exemption, alternative emission limit, bubble, alternative sampling ortesting method, compliance schedule revision, alternative compliance schedule or any other substantial change to a provision ofthe SIP must be submittedby the State for approval in accordance with 40 CFR 51.104 andthat any such change does not modify the requirements ofthe Federally-promulgated SIP until it has been approved byEPA as an amendment to the SIP in accordance with section 110 ofthe Act. See 40 CFR 52.2476(b) and (c). Therefore, it is not appropriate for EPA to approve these provisions into the SIP.

Section 110(k)(6) ofthe Act authorizes EPA, upon a determination thatEPA's action approving, disapproving or promulgating any SIP or planrevision (or any part thereof) was in error, to revise such action as appropriate in the

same manner as the approval, disapproval or promulgation. In making such a correction, EPA must provide such determination and the basis therefore to the State and the public. EPAisby this proposal notifying the PS Clean Air,Ecology and the public that EPAis removing from the SIP and from incorporation by reference into Federal law Subsection 9.03(e) (State adoption date September 8, 1994; EPA effective date June 29, 1995) and Section 9.09(c) 1 (State adoption date February 10, 1994; EPA effective date June 29, 1995).

It is important to emphasize that, even ifPS Clean Air grants an exemption to registration, an alternate opacity standard, or an exemption from a data recovery requirement, which exemption

or alternative has notbeen approved as part ofthe Washington SIP, EPA is not precluded from enforcing the Federallyapproved SIP registration requirement, opacity limit, ormonitoring requirement against the source. As provided in 40 CFR 52.2476, the granting of such an exemption or alternate opacity standard by PS CleanAir to a SIP requirement does not change the Federallyenforceable SIP requirement for that

source unless and until the exemption

or alternate hasbeen approved byEPA

as a source-specific SIP revision. 2

Subsection 12.03(b)(1) is different in effect fromthe other provisions that EPAis not approving in this action. Thisprovision authorizes the Control Officer to excuse or exempt an owner or operator from periods ofmonitoring downtime ifthe owner or operator demonstrates to the Control Officer that the downtime was not the result of inadequate design, operation, or maintenance, or any other reasonably preventable condition and any necessary repairs to the monitoring

'Note Subsection 9.04(d)(2) was revised to incorporate the substantive provisions ofSection 9.09(c) and Section 9.09(c), which was previously approved as part ofthe SIP, was deleted.

2Note that PS Clean Airhas also not submitted

as part ofthis SIP submittal Sections 3.03, General Regulatory Orders, and Article IV, Variances. These provisions also could be used to change requirements approved as part of the SIP without

a SIP revision. As such, they are not approvable undertitle I ofthe Act for the reasons stated above andEPA is inno way approving such provisions. 

### 17370

HeinOnline -- 69 Fed. Reg. 17370 2004Federal Register/Vol. 69, No. 64/Friday, April 2, 2004/Proposed Rules

system are conducted in a timely

manner. In contrast to the other provisions discussed in this section, Subsection 12.03(b)(1) authorizes the Control Officer to excuse an event after the occurrence ofthe event. As such, Subsection 12.03(b)(1) is in essence an enforcement discretion provision. Although this provision does have objective criteria relating tothe exercise ofthis discretion, the provision does not clarify that the Control Officers's determination that compliance with the datarecovery requirements shouldbe excused is not binding on EPA or citizens. As such, it isnot appropriate for EPA to approve such a provision. SeeMemorandum from Steven A. Herman, Assistant Administrator for Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring, and Robert Perciasepe, Assistant Administrator for Air And Radiation, to the Regional Administrators, entitled State ImplementationPlans:PolicyRegarding ExcessEmissionsDuring Malfunctions, Startup,andShutdown, p. 3 (September 20, 1999).

3.Provisions onWhich EPA isTaking No Action at this Time

Article 1, Section 1.07, Definitions, has been revised since this SIP submission was submitted to EPA. PS Clean Air will be submitting the revisions to Section 1.07 to EPAin a separate action. EPA will therefore be taking action onthis section in a separate rulemaking.

IV. Requested Sections To Be Removed from the SIP

PS Clean Air has requested thatEPA

remove certain provisions from the SIP because they are not required elements ofa SIP under title I ofthe Act or because they havebeen previously repealed by the Agency.

A. Summaryof Action
EPA proposes to take the following action on the provisions which PS Clean Air has requested be removed from the SIP.

1.Regulation I

Section5.07,RegistrationFees

Section 5.07, Registration Fees (adoptedSeptember 11, 1997) was inappropriately approved into the SIP. Local fee provisions that are not economic incentive programs and are not designed to replace or relax a SIP emission limit are generally not appropriate for inclusion into the SIP. While itis appropriate for local agencies
to implement fee provisions, for example, to recover costs for issuing permits, itis generally not appropriate to make local fee collection Federally enforceable. Therefore, EPAis proposing to remove Section 5.07, Registration Fees, from the SIP.

Sections8.02, OutdoorFiresProhibitedTypes, and8.03, Outdoor Fires-Prohibited Areas
Sections 8.02, Outdoor FiresProhibited Types (adopted February 8, 1996), and 8.03, Outdoor FiresProhibited Areas (adoptedFebruary 9, 1995), were repealed byPS Clean Air's Board by Resolution No. 933 on November 9, 2000. The requirements of these provisions areincluded in the

new Section 8.04, General Conditions for Outdoor Burning (adopted November 9, 2000), through incorporation by reference ofthe provisions ofWAC 173-425. Removing these provisions from the SIP does not change the stringency ofthe SIP because Section 8.04 isbeing submitted for inclusion into the SIP. Therefore, EPA is proposing to remove Sections 8.02, Outdoor Fires-Prohibited Types and 8.03, Outdoor Fires-Prohibited Areas from the SIP.

Sections9.11, Emissionof Air Contaminant: DetrimenttoPersonor Propertyand9.13,Emissionof Air Contaminant:Concealmentand MaskingRequirement

PS Clean Air isrequesting thatthese sections be removed from the SIP. As justification for the request, the Agency
states that Sections 9.11 (adopted June 9, 1983) and 9.13 (adopted June 9, 1988)

are onlyused astools to deal with nuisance, primarily odors. PS Clean Air further states that, because the similar provisions ofWAC 173-400-040(5) and (7) are already part ofthe SIP, itis unnecessary to include Sections 9.11 or 9.13 in the SIP.

With reservations, EPA is granting PS Clean Air's request to remove Section 9.13 from the SIP, but is denying the request toremove Section 9.11. As an initial matter, EPA does not agree that Sections 9.11 and 9.13 apply only or primarily to nuisance and odors. There is nothing in the text ofthe regulations
to suggest that they are so limited, and EPA believes the regulations apply equally to NAAQS pollutants, such as particulate. As part ofthe SIP, EPA would not attemptto enforce the provisions ofSections 9.11 and 9.13 as they apply to odors and nuisance. If,in fact, PS Clean Air intends that these sections apply onlyto nuisance and odors, PS Clean Air could create separate "odors" or "nuisance" provisions much like WAC 173-400- 040(4), Odors, which isnot included in the SIP. It is true that WAC 173-400-040(5), Emissions detrimental to persons or property, and WAC 173-400-040(7), Concealment and masking, are very similar to the provisions ofPS Clean Air Regulation I, Section 9.11 and 9.13, respectively. These WAC provisions apply Statewide and have been part of the Washington SIP for many years. To avoid confusion, we believe that PS Clean Air Sections 9.11 and 9.13 should alsobe included as part ofthe SIP because they do not, ontheir face, exclude NAAQS pollutants, and because they are in effect in PS Clean Air'sjurisdiction. Because WAC 173- 400-040(5) and WAC 173-400-040(7) will continue to apply Statewide, even ifthe PS Clean Air provisions are removed from the SIP, however, removing these provisions from the SIP will not decrease the stringency ofthe Washington SIP. For this reason, EPA, with great reluctance, is proposing to grant PSCAA's request to remove Section 9.13 from the SIP.

EPA is proposing to deny PS Clean Air's request, however, to remove Section 9.11 from the SIP. Section 6.03, Notice ofConstruction, which PS Clean Airis submitting as a SIP revision, refers to andrelies on Section 9.11 for applicability. Section 6.03(a)(8) (adoptedJuly 12, 2001) 3,states that a minor new source review permit is required for "any stationary source previously exempted from review that is citedby the Agency for causing air pollution under Section 9.11 ofthis regulation." Thus, sources that are cited forviolation of Section 9.11 are subject
to PS Clean Air's minornew source review program, which must be submitted and approved as part ofthe SIP. Until Section 9.11 is no longer tied
to applicability ofPS Clean Air's new

source review program, EPA does not believe thatthis provision can be removed from the SIP.

In granting PS Clean Air's request to

remove Section 9.13 from the SIP, EPA emphasizes the importance ofthe fact thatthe Federally-enforceable requirements ofthe Washington SIP have not, in fact, been substantively changed by the removal because WAC 173-400-040(7) continues to apply to

sources within PS Clean Air's jurisdiction. If,for example, Washington

was seeking to remove WAC 173-400- 040(5) and (7), EPA would require a showing that, consistent with CAA section 110(1), removal ofthese provisions did not interfere with any

3PSClean Air has proposedtorenumber this subsection to Section 6.03(a)(5) and plans on submitting the revised Section 6.03 as part ofthe SIP. 

### 17371

HeinOnline -- 69 Fed. Reg. 17371 2004Federal Register/Vol. 69, No. 64/Friday, April 2, 2004/Proposed Rules

applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further
progress orany other applicable requirement ofthe Act and that, if applicable, the revision meets the requirements ofCAA section 193.

Sections 11.01, AmbientAirQuality Standards,and11.02,AmbientAir Monitoring

PS Clean Air isrequesting that Sections 11.01 and 11.02 (adopted April 14, 1994)be removed from the SIP because they are informational only and
not regulatory. Sections 11.01 and 11.02

are not referenced in any other provisions that are part ofthe PS Clean Air's regulations that are approved into the SIP. Therefore, EPAis proposing to grant PS Clean Air's request to remove Sections 11.01 and 11.02 from the SIP.

Sections12.02, Continuous Emission MonitoringRequirements,and12.04, RecordkeepingandReporting Requirements

Sections 12.02, Continuous Emission Monitoring Requirements, and 12.04, Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements (adopted August 10, 1989) were repealed by PS Clean Air's Board through Resolution No. 865 on April 9, 1998. The requirements ofthese provisions are included in new and revised Sections 12.01, Applicability, and Section 12.03, Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems (adopted April 9, 1998), through incorporation by reference of40 CFR Part 60, 61, and 63. Removal ofthese provisions from the SIP does not make the SIP less stringent because Sections 12.01 and 12.03 are being submitted for inclusion into the SIP. Therefore, EPA is proposing to grant PS Clean Air's request to remove Sections 12.02, Continuous Emission Monitoring Requirements, and 12.04, Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements from the SIP.

2.Regulation II

Section2.04, Volatile Organic CompoundStorage Tanks

Section 2.04, Volatile Organic Compound Storage Tanks (adoptedJune 13, 1991) was revised and renumbered
to Regulation II, Section 3.02 Volatile Organic Compound Storage Tanks. The
purpose oftherevisions to this section

was to reflect thatthe requirements for large volatile organic compound storage tanks are sometimes used for products otherthan petroleum (whichmakes this sectionmore appropriately located in Article 3: Miscellaneous Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards). Removing Section 2.04 from the SIP does not change the stringency ofthe SIPbecause Section 3.02 isbeing submitted for inclusion into the SIP. Therefore, EPA is proposing to grant PS Clean Air's request to remove Section 2.04, Volatile Organic Compound Storage Tanks from the SIP.

Section3.07,PetroleumSolventDry CleaningSystems

Section 3.07, Petroleum SolventDry Cleaning Systems (adopted February 11, 1982) was repealed by PS Clean Air's Board through Resolution No. 914 on March 9, 2000. PS Clean Air's Board took this action because it determined that Section 3.07 was not necessary because there were no longer any

sources subject to this section in their jurisdiction. There is no relaxation of the SIP because ifa new facility sought operation within PS Clean Air's jurisdiction; Regulation I, Article 6, Notice ofConstruction would apply and insure local, State, andFederal emission requirements were met. Therefore, EPA is proposing toremove Section 3.07, Petroleum SolventDry Cleaning Systems from the SIP.

3.Regulation III

PS Clean Air isrequesting removal of Regulation III, their airtoxics regulations, from the SIP. The provisions ofRegulation III are not related to criteria pollutants regulated under title I ofthe Act or tothe requirements for SIPs under title I ofthe Act andtherefore, were inappropriately approved into the SIP. Thus, EPA is proposing to grant PS Clean Air's request toremove Regulation III from the SIP.

V. Saint Gobain Containers, NOC Order ofApproval #8244

This Order was issued to SaintGobain Containers andwill become effective on the effective date ofEPA's SIP approval. The Order establishes PM10 emission limits for Glass Furnaces Nos. 2, 3,4, and 5combined; PM10 emissions limits from any baghouse exhaust; and details of compliance response.
A. Background

In October 1992, EPA noted thatthe Puget Sound Region PM10 SIP was deficient because the plan did not contain enforceable facility-wide particulate emission limits for the industrial sources in the SeattleDuwamish area. EPA conditionally approved the Puget Sound Region PM10 SIP on June 23, 1994 (59 FR 32370), subject to the condition that the State submitlimits for these sources on a set schedule. In December 1994, the Board of Directors ofthe Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency (nowknown

as Puget Sound Clean AirAgency) issued regulatory orders with emission limits for major industrial sources in the Duwamish area and EPA approved these regulatory orders as part ofthe SIP on October 26, 1995 (60FR 54812). Saint Gobain was one ofthese sources. Subsequently, Saint Gobainrequested a minor revision to its facility emission limit. The requested change relates to the form ofthe standard andthe compliance test procedure, but not the overall emission limit. PS CleanAir
proposes to approve this change and has forwarded the proposal to Ecology with

a request thatEcology submitthe change as a revision to the SIP.

B. Summary of Action
PS Clean Air is proposing aminor revision to Saint-Gobain's PM10 emission limits (i.e.,Glass Furnaces Nos. 2, 3,4, and 5)within the facility and the test procedure for determining compliance. The revision affects the form ofthe standard and the compliance
test procedure, but notthe overall emission limit, which was established
to protect the ambient PM10 standard. Emissions allowed underthe order are expected to remain unchanged. Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve Saint Gobain Containers, NOC Order of Approval #8244 into the SIP.
VI.LaFarge North America, NOC Order
ofApproval #5183

A. Background

PS Clean Air issued an order to Holnam, Inc., Ideal Division, now known as LaFarge North America, Inc.,

on February 9, 1994, under the authority ofRegulation I, Section 9.09(c) [State adopted, February 10, 1994], which has since been renumbered to Regulation I, Section 9.04(d)(2). The rule language reads as follows: "The provisions of Section 9.09(b)(2) shall not apply to any

source that has obtained an Order of Approval for a Notice ofConstruction that correlates the particulate matter concentration with opacity suchthat
any violation ofthe alternate opacity standard accurately indicates a violation ofthe applicable emission standard of the Section 9.09(a)." [State adopted, February 10, 1994]

LaFarge submitted to PS Clean Air an analysis showing that, at 0.05 gr/dscf, its predicted opacity was 15.02%. LaFarge's submittal also demonstrated thatthe change in the in stack opacity levels was not expected tohave an impact on total annual or short term particulate matter emissions. Therefore, 

### 17372

HeinOnline -- 69 Fed. Reg. 17372 2004Federal Register/Vol. 69, No. 64/Friday, April 2, 2004/Proposed Rules

PS Clean Air granted LaFarge an alternate opacity limitof 12% (lhr average) in NOC Order ofApproval #5183, dated February 9, 1994. The Order also requires LaFarge to source test annually to verify that the 12% (lhr average) opacity standard demonstrates continuous compliance with the 0.05 gr/ dscfmass emission limit ofSection 9.09(a) ofRegulation I [State adopted, February 10, 1994], which has since been renumbered to Regulation I, Section 9.09.

PS Clean Air is submitting NOC Order ofApproval #5183, dated February 9, 1994 for inclusion into the SIP at this time.

B. Summaryof Action
Based onLaFarge's submittal which demonstrated that the change in the in stack opacity levels was not expected to have an impact on total annual or short
term particulate matter emissions, EPA is proposing to approve the LaFarge order as a source-specific SIP revision.

VII. Geographic Scope ofSIP Approval

This SIP approval does not extend to

sources or activities located in Indian Country, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151. Consistent with previous Federal program approvals or delegations, EPA will continue to implement the Act in Indian Country in Washington because PS Clean Air did not adequately demonstrate authority over sources and activities located within the exterior boundaries ofIndian reservations and other areas ofIndian Country. The one exception is within the exterior boundaries ofthe Puyallup Indian Reservation, also known as the 1873 Survey Area. Under the Puyallup Tribe ofIndians Settlement Act of 1989, 25 U.S.C. 1773, Congress explicitly provided State and local agencies in Washington authority over activities on non-trust lands within the 1873 Survey Area. Therefore, EPA's SIP approval applies to sources and activities on nontrust lands within the 1873 Survey Area.

VIII. General Information

A. How CanI Get CopiesofThis Document and OtherRelated Information?
1.The Regional Office has established

an official public rulemaking file available for inspection at the Regional Office, under Docket number WA-04- 002. The official public file consists of the documents specifically referenced in this action, and other information related to this action. The official public rulemaking file is available for public viewing at EPA, Office ofAir Quality (OAQ-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. EPA requests that, if possible, you contact theperson listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. EPA's official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal Holidays. 2.Copies ofthe State submission and EPA's technical support document are also available for public inspection duringnormal business hours, by appointment at the State ofWashington, Department ofEcology, P.O. Box 47600, Olympia, Washington 98504-7600.

3.Electronic Access. You may access this Federal Register document electronically throughthe Regulations.gov Web site located at http://www.regulations.gov where you

can find, review, and submit comments

onFederal rules thathave been published in the Federal Register, the Government's legal newspaper, and are open for comment.

For public commenters, it is important to note thatEPA's policy is that public comments, whether submitted electronically or onpaper, will be made available for public viewing at the EPA Regional Office, as EPA receives them and without change, unless the comment contains copyrighted material, CBI, or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. When EPA identifies a comment containing copyrighted material, EPA will provide

areference tothat material in the version ofthe comment that isplaced in the official public rulemaking file. The entire printed comment, including the copyrighted material, will be available
atthe Regional Office for public inspection.

B. How andTo Whom DoISubmit Comments?

You may submit comments electronically, bymail, or through hand delivery/courier. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate rulemaking identification number by including the text "Public comment on proposed rulemaking WA-04-002" in the subject line on the first page ofyour comment. Please ensure thatyour comments are submitted within the specified commentperiod. Comments received after the close ofthe comment period will be marked "late." EPA isnot required to consider these late
comments.

1.Electronically. Ifyou submit an electronic comment as prescribed below, EPA recommends that you include your name, mailing address, and an e-mail address or other contact information in the body ofyour comment. Also include this contact information on the outside ofany disk

or CD ROMyou submit, and in any

cover letter accompanying the disk or CDROM. This ensures thatyou canbe identified as the submitter ofthe
comment and allows EPA to contact you in case EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties or needs further information on the substance of your comment. EPA's policy is that EPA will not edityour comment, and any identifying or contact information provided in the body of a comment will be included as part ofthe comment that is placed in the official public docket. IfEPA cannot read your comment due
to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may notbe able to consider your comment.

a.E-mail.You may send comments by electronic mail (e-mail) to riO.aircom@epa.gov, please including the text "Public comment on proposed rulemaking WA-04-002" in the subject line.EPA's e-mail system isnot an "anonymous access" system. Ifyou send an e-mail comment directly without going throughRegulations.gov, EPA's e-mail system automatically captures your e-mail address. E-mail addresses that are automatically captured by EPA's e-mail system are included as part ofthe comment thatis placed inthe official public docket.

b. Regulations.gov.You may use Regulations.gov as an alternative methodto submit electronic comments to EPA. Go directly to Regulations.gov at http://www.regulations.gov, then select Environmental Protection Agency at the top ofthe page and use the "go" button. The list ofcurrent EPA actions available for comment willbe listed.Please follow the online instructions for submitting comments. The system is an "anonymous access" system, which

means EPA will not know your identity, e-mail address, or other contact information unless you provide itin the body ofyour comment.

c. DiskorCDROM.You may submit
comments on a disk orCD ROM that
you mailto the mailing address identified in section 2, directly below. These electronic submissions will be accepted in WordPerfect, Word orASCII fileformat. Avoidthe use ofspecial characters and any form ofencryption.

2. ByMail. Sendyour comments to: Roylene A. Cunningham, EPA, Office of Air Quality, (OAQ-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. Please include the text "Public
comment on proposed rulemaking WA04-002" in the subject line onthe first page ofyour comment.

3. ByHandDeliveryorCourier. Deliver your comments to: Roylene A. 

### 17373

HeinOnline -- 69 Fed. Reg. 17373 2004Federal Register/Vol. 69, No. 64/Friday, April 2, 2004/Proposed Rules

Cunningham, EPA, Office ofAir Quality, (OAQ-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. Such deliveries are only accepted duringthe Regional Office's normal hours ofoperation. The Regional Office's official hours ofbusiness are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal holidays.

C.How ShouldISubmit CBITo the EPA?

Do not submit information thatyou consider to be CBI electronically to EPA. You may claim information thatyou submitto EPAto be CBIby marking any part orall ofthat information as CBI (if you submitCBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside ofthe disk or CD ROM

as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific information that is CBI). EPAwill not disclose information so marked except in accordance with procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.

In addition to one complete version of the comment that includes any information claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information claimed as CBI mustbe submitted for inclusion in the official public regional rulemaking file. Ifyou submitthe copy that does not contain CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the outside ofthe disk or CD ROM clearly that itdoes not contain CBI. Information
not marked as CBI will be included in the public file and available for public inspection without prior notice. Ifyou have any questions about CBI or the procedures for claiming CBI, please consult the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed action is not a "significant regulatory action" and therefore is not subject to review bythe Office ofManagement and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject toExecutive Order 13211, "Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, orUse" (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This proposed action merely proposes to approve State law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposedby State law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).Because this rule proposes to approve pre-existing requirements under State law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond thatrequired by State law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly oruniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of1995 (Pub.L. 104-4).

This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or

more Indian tribes, onthe relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the Federal Government andIndian tribes,

as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects onthe States,

onthe relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution ofpower and responsibilities amongthe various levels ofgovernment, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely
proposes to approve a State rule implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter therelationship or the distribution ofpower and responsibilities established in the Act. This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 "Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks" (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because itis not economically significant.

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State choices, provided that theymeet the criteria of the Act. In this context, in the absence ofa prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPAhas no authority
to disapprove aSIP submission for failure to use VCS. Itwould thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when itreviews a SIP submission,
to use VCS in place ofa SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Act. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) ofthe National Technology Transfer andAdvancement Act of1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) donot apply. This proposed rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions ofthe Paperwork Reduction Act of1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 etseq.).

Authority:U.S.C. 7401 etseq.
List ofSubjects in 40 CFRPart52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

Dated:March 24, 2004. L.Johnlani, Regional Administrator,Region 10. [FR Doc. 04-7470 Filed4-1-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 [PA209-4301; FRL-7642-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Pennsylvania; Redesignation ofthe Hazelwood SO 2 Nonattainment and the Monongahela RiverValley Unclassifiable Areas to Attainment and Approval ofthe Maintenance Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA isproposing to approve State Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submittedby the Commonwealth ofPennsylvania. These SIP revisions include a regulation change to the allowable sulfur oxide emission limits for fuel burning equipment and a modeled demonstration of attainment ofthe national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for sulfur dioxide (SO 2)in the Hazelwood nonattainment area and the Monongahela River Valley unclassifiable area located in the Allegheny Air Basin in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. In addition, EPA is proposing to redesignate these areas to attainment ofthe NAAQS for SO 2 and
to approve a combined maintenance planfor both areas as a SIP revision. These SIP revisions were submittedby the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) on behalf ofthe Allegheny County Health Department (ACHD). This action is being taken in accordance with the Clean Air Act (CAA). DATES: Comments must be received on

orbefore May 3, 2004.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted either bymail or electronically. Written comments shouldbe mailed to Makeba Morris, Chief,Air Quality Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Electronic comments should be
sent either to morris.makeba@epa.gov or to http://www.regulations.gov, which is

an alternative method for submitting 

### 17374

HeinOnline -- 69 Fed. Reg. 17374 2004