+(,121/,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 will be posted at

the entrance gate.

(d) Slana Developed Area (SDA). For

purposes of this section, the Slana

Developed Area consists of all park

areas within a 1/4 mile radius of the

Slana Ranger Station.

(e) KNHL and developed area closures

and restrictions. 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 of this

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,

Deputy Assistant Secretaryfor Fish and

Wildlife and Parks.

[FR Doc. 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

on its proposal to approve numerous

revisions to the State of Washington

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 to revise

certain sections of the Puget Sound

Clean Air Agency's (PS Clean Air)

regulation. The revisions were

submitted in accordance with the

requirements of section 110 of the Clean

Air Act (hereinafter the Act). EPA is not

approving in this rulemaking a number

of submitted rule provisions which are

inappropriate for EPA approval and is

taking no action on a number of other

provisions that are unrelated to the

purposes of the implementation plan.

EPA also invites public comment on

its proposal to approve certain sourcespecific State implementation plan (SIP)

revisions relating to Saint Gobain

Containers and LaFarge North America.

DATES: Written comments must be

received on or before May 3, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be sent

either by mail or electronically. Written

comments should be 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 to EPA. To send

comments, please follow the detailed

instructions described in the

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section,

Part VIII, General Information.

Copies of the State's request and other

information supporting this proposed

action are available for inspection

during normal business hours at the

following locations: EPA, Office of Air

Quality (OAQ-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue,

Seattle, Washington 98101, and State of

Washington, Department of Ecology,

P.O. Box 47600, Olympia, Washington

98504-7600. Interested persons wanting

to examine these documents should

make an appointment with the

appropriate office at least 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 of Contents

I. Background of Submittal

II. Requested Sections to be Approved into

the SIP, but not IBR'd

A. Key Changes to PS Clean Air's SIP

B. Summary of Action

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 to be IBR'd into the

SIP

A. Key Changes to PS Clean Air's SIP

B. Summary of Action

1. Provisions Approved by EPA and IBR'd

2. Provisions not Approved by EPA

3. Provisions on Which EPA is Taking No

Action at this Time

IV. Requested Sections to be Removed from

the SIP

A. Summary of Action

1. Regulation I

2. Regulation II

3. Regulation III

V. Saint Gobain Containers, NOC Order of

Approval #8244

A. Background

B. Summary of Action

VI. LaFarge North America, NOC Order of

Approval #5183

A. Background

B. Summary of Action

VII. Geographic Scope of SIP Approval

VIII. General Information

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background of Submittal

On February 9, 2004, the Director of

Ecology submitted a request to EPA to

revise certain sections of PS Clean Air's

regulation, which has been referred to as

the PS Clean Air Cleanup or Resolution

#1004. PS Clean Air adopted Resolution

#1004 in order to facilitate the State

Implementation Plan Process

Improvement Project (SIP PIP), which

was initiated by EPA Region 10 to

simplify preparing and adopting SIP

revisions. An important element of this

process is to not include in the SIP

portions of those regulations that are not

related to attainment or maintenance of

the NAAQS or to the requirements for

SIPs under the Act. Another important

element of this process is to include in

the SIP, but not to submit for

incorporation by reference into Federal

law, portions of regulations that provide

legal authority necessary to meet the

requirements of title I of the Act, but do

not directly regulate air emissions,

because incorporating such general

authority provisions by reference into

Federal law is unnecessary and could

potentially conflict with EPA's

independent authorities. PS Clean Air

also had as a goal to eliminate, where

possible, duplicate regulations found in

Ecology regulations and EPA

regulations.

PS Clean Air is therefore requesting

that all sections of their currently SIP

approved regulations that are not related

to criteria pollutants or to the

requirements for SIPs under title I of the

Act be removed from the SIP and has

submitted a current version of their

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 of the

SIP but that should not be incorporated

by reference into Federal law.

II. Requested Sections to be Approved

Into the SIP, but not IBR'd

A. Key Changes to PS Clean Air's SIP

Only three out of the 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 of the Control Officer; 3.11, Civil

Penalties; and 3.17, Appeal of Orders.

The revisions to these three sections are

17368

HeinOnline -- 69 Fed. Reg. 17368 2004
Federal 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 to the authority of

the Board in addition to the Control

Officer.

B. Summary of 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 of the SIP:

Sections 3.01, Duties and Powers of the

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 of Orders, 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 of these

regulations from PS Clean Air's

incorporation by reference section of the

Washington State SIP, as follows:

Sections 3.01, Duties and Powers of the

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 of Orders, 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

of PS Clean Air's regulation if the owner

or operator demonstrates that the

alternative methods are at least as

effective as the required method and if

the alternative method is included in a

permit or regulatory order. Section 3.23

essentially authorizes PS Clean Air to

issue variances from regulatory

requirements. EPA approved this

provision into the SIP on August 6, 1997

(62 FR 42216). Although PS Clean Air

has requested that this provision not be

incorporated by reference, the agency

did submit it as part of its SIP submittal.

EPA believes that it erred when it

approved this section as part of the SIP.

Section 110(i) of the Act specifically

precludes States from changing the

requirements of the SIP except through

SIP revisions approved by EPA. SIP

revisions will be approved by EPA only

if they meet all requirements of section

110 of the Act and the implementing

regulations at 40 CFR Part 51. See CAA

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 submit it in accordance with the

requirements of 40 CFR 51.104, which

includes the public notice, comment

and hearing provisions of 40 CFR

51.102. Section 3.23 does not meet all

of the requirements of section 110 of the

Act, such as ensuring attainment and

maintenance of the NAAQS. Section

3.23 allows the Control Office to

approve "alternative methods" for

achieving compliance if the Control

Officer finds that the alternative

methods are "at least as effective" as the

required methods. This provision,

however, does not contain specific,

objective, and replicable criteria for

determining if such "alternative

methods" are in fact at least as effective

as the required methods in terms of

emission rates and ambient impacts. In

addition, Section 3.23 states that such

alternative means of compliance 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 of the Washington 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 is no

requirement that all permits issued

under Article 6 establishing such

alternative means of compliance be

subject to public review. Public and

EPA review of revisions to the SIP are

important elements of the SIP revision

process.

Moreover, EPA's approval of the

Washington SIP specifically states that

any variance, exception, exemption,

alternative emission limit, bubble,

alternative sampling or testing method,

compliance schedule revision,

alternative compliance schedule or any

other substantial change to a provision

of the SIP must be submitted by the

State for approval in accordance with 40

CFR 51.104 and that any such change

does not modify the requirements of the

Federally-promulgated SIP until it has

been approved by EPA as an

amendment to the SIP in accordance

with section 110 of the 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) of the Act authorizes

EPA, upon a determination that EPA's

action approving, disapproving or

promulgating any SIP or plan revision

(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.

EPA is by this proposal notifying the PS

Clean Air, Ecology and the public that

EPA is removing Section 3.23 from the

SIP and from incorporation by reference

into Federal law.

It is important to emphasize that if PS

Clean Air issues an order or permit in

reliance on Section 3.23 that approves

an alternative to a PS Clean Air

regulation that has been approved as

part of the SIP, EPA is not precluded

from enforcing the Federally-approved

SIP limit against the source. The

granting of an alternative method of

compliance by PS Clean Air to a SIP

requirement does not change the

Federally-enforceable SIP requirement

for that source unless and until the

alternative has been approved by EPA as

a source-specific SIP revision.

III. Requested Sections To Be IBR'd

Into the SIP

A. Key Changes to PS Clean Air's SIP

The docket includes a technical

support document which describes in

detail the substantive changes to the PS

Clean Air rules that have been

submitted by Ecology as revisions to the

SIP, EPA's evaluation of the 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 of PS Clean Air's

regulation.

B. Summary of Action

1. Provisions Approved by EPA and

IBR'd

EPA has determined that the

following sections are consistent with

the requirements of title I of the Act and

is proposing to approve them as part of

17369

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

the SIP and incorporate them by

reference into Federal law:

Regulation L Sections 1.01, Policy;

1.03, Name of Agency; 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 of King County NoBurn Area; 8.10, Description of Pierce

County No-Burn Area; and 8.11,

Description of Snohomish County NoBurn Area, adopted November 9, 2000;

and 8.12, Description of Kitsap County

No-Burn Area, adopted October 24,

2002; 9.03, Emission of Air

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, adopted March 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.

Regulation I, Sections 1.01, Purpose;

1.02, Policy; 1.03, Short Title; and 1.05,

Special Definitions, adopted September

9, 1999; 2.01, Definitions, adopted July

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 the requirements

of the Act. To the extent such provisions

are currently incorporated by reference

into the SIP, EPA is 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 and maintain the NAAQS by

granting an exemption or alternative to

such requirements without going

through a SIP revision and, as such, are

not approvable. As discussed above,

section 110(i) of the Act specifically

precludes States from changing the

requirements of the SIP except through

SIP revisions approved by EPA. SIP

revisions will be approved by EPA only

if they meet all requirements of section

110 of the Act and the implementing

regulations at 40 CFR part 51. See CAA

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 submit it in accordance with the

requirements of 40 CFR 51.104, which

includes the public notice, comment

and hearing provisions of 40 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 of the requirements of section

110 of the Act, such as ensuring

attainment and maintenance of the

NAAQS. None of these provisions

contain sufficiently specific, objective,

and replicable 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 of emission rates

and ambient impacts. Moreover, none of

the provisions ensure that the approval

of such 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 of the granting of the exemption.

In the case of Subsections 9.03(e),

9.04(d)(2), 9.04(f), and 12.03(b)(2), the

approval of the 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

of the Washington 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 is no requirement that

all permits issued under Article 6

establishing such alternative methods or

requirements be subject to public

review. Public and EPA review of

revisions to the SIP are important

elements of the SIP revision process.

Moreover, EPA's approval of the

Washington SIP specifically states that

any variance, exception, exemption,

alternative emission limit, bubble,

alternative sampling or testing method,

compliance schedule revision,

alternative compliance schedule or any

other substantial change to a provision

of the SIP must be submitted by the

State for approval in accordance with 40

CFR 51.104 and that any such change

does not modify the requirements of the

Federally-promulgated SIP until it has

been approved by EPA as an

amendment to the SIP in accordance

with section 110 of the 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) of the Act authorizes

EPA, upon a determination that EPA's

action approving, disapproving or

promulgating any SIP or plan revision

(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.

EPA is by this proposal notifying the PS

Clean Air, Ecology and the public that

EPA is 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

if PS Clean Air grants an exemption to

registration, an alternate opacity

standard, or an exemption from a data

recovery requirement, which exemption

or alternative has not been approved as

part of the Washington SIP, EPA is not

precluded from enforcing the Federallyapproved SIP registration requirement,

opacity limit, or monitoring requirement

against the source. As provided in 40

CFR 52.2476, the granting of such an

exemption or alternate opacity standard

by PS Clean Air to a SIP requirement

does not change the Federallyenforceable SIP requirement for that

source unless and until the exemption

or alternate has been approved by EPA

as a source-specific SIP revision. 2

Subsection 12.03(b)(1) is different in

effect from the other provisions that

EPA is not approving in this action.

This provision authorizes the Control

Officer to excuse or exempt an owner or

operator from periods of monitoring

downtime if the 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 of Section

9.09(c) and Section 9.09(c), which was previously

approved as part of the SIP, was deleted.

2 Note that PS Clean Air has also not submitted

as part of this 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

under title I of the Act for the reasons stated above

and EPA is in no way approving such provisions.

17370

HeinOnline -- 69 Fed. Reg. 17370 2004
Federal 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 of the event. As such,

Subsection 12.03(b)(1) is in essence an

enforcement discretion provision.

Although this provision does have

objective criteria relating to the exercise

of this discretion, the provision does not

clarify that the Control Officers's

determination that compliance with the

data recovery requirements should be

excused is not binding on EPA or

citizens. As such, it is not appropriate

for EPA to approve such a provision.

See Memorandum 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

Implementation Plans: Policy Regarding

Excess Emissions During Malfunctions,

Startup, and Shutdown, p. 3 (September

20, 1999).

3. Provisions on Which EPA is Taking

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 EPA in a

separate action. EPA will therefore be

taking action on this section in a

separate rulemaking.

IV. Requested Sections To Be Removed

from the SIP

PS Clean Air has requested that EPA

remove certain provisions from the SIP

because they are not required elements

of a SIP under title I of the Act or

because they have been previously

repealed by the Agency.

A. Summary of 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

Section 5.07, Registration Fees

Section 5.07, Registration Fees

(adopted September 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 it is appropriate for local agencies

to implement fee provisions, for

example, to recover costs for issuing

permits, it is generally not appropriate

to make local fee collection Federally

enforceable. Therefore, EPA is

proposing to remove Section 5.07,

Registration Fees, from the SIP.

Sections 8.02, Outdoor FiresProhibited Types, and 8.03, Outdoor

Fires-Prohibited Areas

Sections 8.02, Outdoor FiresProhibited Types (adopted February 8,

1996), and 8.03, Outdoor FiresProhibited Areas (adopted February 9,

1995), were repealed by PS Clean Air's

Board by Resolution No. 933 on

November 9, 2000. The requirements of

these provisions are included in the

new Section 8.04, General Conditions

for Outdoor Burning (adopted

November 9, 2000), through

incorporation by reference of the

provisions of WAC 173-425. Removing

these provisions from the SIP does not

change the stringency of the SIP because

Section 8.04 is being 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.

Sections 9.11, Emission of Air

Contaminant: Detriment to Person or

Property and 9.13, Emission of Air

Contaminant: Concealment and

Masking Requirement

PS Clean Air is requesting that these

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 only used as tools to deal with

nuisance, primarily odors. PS Clean Air

further states that, because the similar

provisions of WAC 173-400-040(5) and

(7) are already part of the SIP, it is

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 to remove 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 of the regulations

to suggest that they are so limited, and

EPA believes the regulations apply

equally to NAAQS pollutants, such as

particulate. As part of the SIP, EPA

would not attempt to enforce the

provisions of Sections 9.11 and 9.13 as

they apply to odors and nuisance. If, in

fact, PS Clean Air intends that these

sections apply only to nuisance and

odors, PS Clean Air could create

separate "odors" or "nuisance"

provisions much like WAC 173-400-

040(4), Odors, which is not 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 of PS 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

also be included as part of the SIP

because they do not, on their face,

exclude NAAQS pollutants, and

because they are in effect in PS Clean

Air's jurisdiction. Because WAC 173-

400-040(5) and WAC 173-400-040(7)

will continue to apply Statewide, even

if the PS Clean Air provisions are

removed from the SIP, however,

removing these provisions from the SIP

will not decrease the stringency of the

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 of Construction, which PS Clean

Air is submitting as a SIP revision,

refers to and relies on Section 9.11 for

applicability. Section 6.03(a)(8)

(adopted July 12, 2001) 3, states that a

minor new source review permit is

required for "any stationary source

previously exempted from review that is

cited by the Agency for causing air

pollution under Section 9.11 of this

regulation." Thus, sources that are cited

for violation of Section 9.11 are subject

to PS Clean Air's minor new source

review program, which must be

submitted and approved as part of the

SIP. Until Section 9.11 is no longer tied

to applicability of PS Clean Air's new

source review program, EPA does not

believe that this 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 of the fact

that the Federally-enforceable

requirements of the 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 of these

provisions did not interfere with any

3

PS Clean Air has proposed to renumber this

subsection to Section 6.03(a)(5) and plans on

submitting the revised Section 6.03 as part of the

SIP.

17371

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

applicable requirement concerning

attainment and reasonable further

progress or any other applicable

requirement of the Act and that, if

applicable, the revision meets the

requirements of CAA section 193.

Sections 11.01, Ambient Air Quality

Standards, and 11.02, Ambient Air

Monitoring

PS Clean Air is requesting 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 of the PS Clean

Air's regulations that are approved into

the SIP. Therefore, EPA is proposing to

grant PS Clean Air's request to remove

Sections 11.01 and 11.02 from the SIP.

Sections 12.02, Continuous Emission

Monitoring Requirements, and 12.04,

Recordkeeping and Reporting

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 of these

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 of 40 CFR Part 60, 61, and 63.

Removal of these 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

Section 2.04, Volatile Organic

Compound Storage Tanks

Section 2.04, Volatile Organic

Compound Storage Tanks (adopted June

13, 1991) was revised and renumbered

to Regulation II, Section 3.02 Volatile

Organic Compound Storage Tanks. The

purpose of the revisions to this section

was to reflect that the requirements for

large volatile organic compound storage

tanks are sometimes used for products

other than petroleum (which makes this

section more appropriately located in

Article 3: Miscellaneous Volatile

Organic Compound Emission

Standards). Removing Section 2.04 from

the SIP does not change the stringency

of the SIP because Section 3.02 is being

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.

Section 3.07, Petroleum Solvent Dry

Cleaning Systems

Section 3.07, Petroleum Solvent Dry

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 if a new facility sought

operation within PS Clean Air's

jurisdiction; Regulation I, Article 6,

Notice of Construction would apply and

insure local, State, and Federal emission

requirements were met. Therefore, EPA

is proposing to remove Section 3.07,

Petroleum Solvent Dry Cleaning

Systems from the SIP.

3. Regulation III

PS Clean Air is requesting removal of

Regulation III, their air toxics

regulations, from the SIP. The

provisions of Regulation III are not

related to criteria pollutants regulated

under title I of the Act or to the

requirements for SIPs under title I of the

Act and therefore, were inappropriately

approved into the SIP. Thus, EPA is

proposing to grant PS Clean Air's

request to remove Regulation III from

the SIP.

V. Saint Gobain Containers, NOC Order

of Approval #8244

This Order was issued to SaintGobain Containers and will become

effective on the effective date of EPA's

SIP approval. The Order establishes

PM10 emission limits for Glass

Furnaces Nos. 2, 3, 4, and 5 combined;

PM10 emissions limits from any

baghouse exhaust; and details of

compliance response.

A. Background

In October 1992, EPA noted that the

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

submit limits for these sources on a set

schedule.

In December 1994, the Board of

Directors of the Puget Sound Air

Pollution Control Agency (now known

as Puget Sound Clean Air Agency)

issued regulatory orders with emission

limits for major industrial sources in the

Duwamish area and EPA approved these

regulatory orders as part of the SIP on

October 26, 1995 (60 FR 54812). Saint

Gobain was one of these sources.

Subsequently, Saint Gobain requested a

minor revision to its facility emission

limit. The requested change relates to

the form of the standard and the

compliance test procedure, but not the

overall emission limit. PS Clean Air

proposes to approve this change and has

forwarded the proposal to Ecology with

a request that Ecology submit the

change as a revision to the SIP.

B. Summary of Action

PS Clean Air is proposing a minor

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 of the standard and the compliance

test procedure, but not the overall

emission limit, which was established

to protect the ambient PM10 standard.

Emissions allowed under the 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

of Approval #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

of Regulation 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 of Construction

that correlates the particulate matter

concentration with opacity such that

any violation of the alternate opacity

standard accurately indicates a violation

of the 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

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. Therefore,

17372

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

PS Clean Air granted LaFarge an

alternate opacity limit of 12% (lhr

average) in NOC Order of Approval

#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/

dscf mass emission limit of Section

9.09(a) of Regulation I [State adopted,

February 10, 1994], which has since

been renumbered to Regulation I,

Section 9.09.

PS Clean Air is submitting NOC Order

of Approval #5183, dated February 9,

1994 for inclusion into the SIP at this

time.

B. Summary of Action

Based on LaFarge'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 of SIP 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 of Indian reservations and

other areas of Indian Country. The one

exception is within the exterior

boundaries of the Puyallup Indian

Reservation, also known as the 1873

Survey Area. Under the Puyallup Tribe

of Indians 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 Can I Get Copies of This

Document and Other Related

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 of Air Quality

(OAQ-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle,

Washington 98101. EPA requests that, if

possible, you contact the person 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 of the State submission and

EPA's technical support document are

also available for public inspection

during normal business hours, by

appointment at the State of Washington,

Department of Ecology, P.O. Box 47600,

Olympia, Washington 98504-7600.

3. Electronic Access. You may access

this Federal Register document

electronically through the

Regulations.gov Web site located at

http://www.regulations.gov where you

can find, review, and submit comments

on Federal rules that have been

published in the Federal Register, the

Government's legal newspaper, and are

open for comment.

For public commenters, it is

important to note that EPA's policy is

that public comments, whether

submitted electronically or on paper,

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

a reference to that material in the

version of the comment that is placed in

the official public rulemaking file. The

entire printed comment, including the

copyrighted material, will be available

at the Regional Office for public

inspection.

B. How and To Whom Do I Submit

Comments?

You may submit comments

electronically, by mail, 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 of your

comment. Please ensure that your

comments are submitted within the

specified comment period. Comments

received after the close of the comment

period will be marked "late." EPA is not

required to consider these late

comments.

1. Electronically. If you 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 of your

comment. Also include this contact

information on the outside of any disk

or CD ROM you submit, and in any

cover letter accompanying the disk or

CD ROM. This ensures that you can be

identified as the submitter of the

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 edit your comment, and any

identifying or contact information

provided in the body of a comment will

be included as part of the comment that

is placed in the official public docket.

If EPA cannot read your comment due

to technical difficulties and cannot

contact you for clarification, EPA may

not be able to consider your comment.

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 is not an "anonymous access" system. If you

send an e-mail comment directly

without going through Regulations.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 of the comment that is

placed in the official public docket.

b. Regulations.gov. You may use

Regulations.gov as an alternative

method to submit electronic comments

to EPA. Go directly to Regulations.gov at

http://www.regulations.gov, then select

Environmental Protection Agency at the

top of the page and use the "go" button.

The list of current EPA actions available

for comment will be 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 it in the

body of your comment.

c. Disk or CD ROM. You may submit

comments on a disk or CD ROM that

you mail to the mailing address

identified in section 2, directly below.

These electronic submissions will be

accepted in WordPerfect, Word or ASCII

file format. Avoid the use of special

characters and any form of encryption.

2. By Mail. Send your 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 on the first

page of your comment.

3. By Hand Delivery or Courier.

Deliver your comments to: Roylene A.

17373

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

Cunningham, EPA, Office of Air

Quality, (OAQ-107), 1200 Sixth

Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101.

Such deliveries are only accepted

during the Regional Office's normal

hours of operation. The Regional

Office's official hours of business are

Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to

4:30 p.m. excluding Federal holidays.

C. How Should I Submit CBI To the

EPA?

Do not submit information that you

consider to be CBI electronically to EPA.

You may claim information that you

submit to EPA to be CBI by marking any

part or all of that information as CBI (if

you submit CBI on disk or CD ROM,

mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM

as CBI and then identify electronically

within the disk or CD ROM the specific

information that is CBI). EPA will 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 must be

submitted for inclusion in the official

public regional rulemaking file. If you

submit the copy that does not contain

CBI on disk or CD ROM, mark the

outside of the disk or CD ROM clearly

that it does not contain CBI. Information

not marked as CBI will be included in

the public file and available for public

inspection without prior notice. If you

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 by the Office of Management and

Budget. For this reason, this action is

also not subject to Executive Order

13211, "Actions Concerning Regulations

That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,

Distribution, or Use" (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 imposed by 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 that required by State law,

it does not contain any unfunded

mandate or significantly or uniquely

affect small governments, as described

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).

This proposed rule also does not have

tribal implications because it will not

have a substantial direct effect on one or

more Indian tribes, on the relationship

between the Federal Government and

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities between the

Federal Government and Indian 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 on the States,

on the relationship between the national

government and the States, or on the

distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various

levels of government, 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 the relationship or the

distribution of power 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 it is not

economically significant.

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's

role is to approve State choices,

provided that they meet the criteria of

the Act. In this context, in the absence

of a prior existing requirement for the

State to use voluntary consensus

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority

to disapprove a SIP submission for

failure to use VCS. It would thus be

inconsistent with applicable law for

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of

the Act. Thus, the requirements of

section 12(d) of the National

Technology Transfer and Advancement

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not

apply. This proposed rule does not

impose an information collection

burden under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

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

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

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Carbon monoxide,

Intergovernmental relations, Lead,

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile

organic compounds.

Dated: March 24, 2004.

L. John lani,

Regional Administrator, Region 10.

[FR Doc. 04-7470 Filed 4-1-04; 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 of the

Hazelwood SO 2 Nonattainment and the

Monongahela River Valley

Unclassifiable Areas to Attainment and

Approval of the Maintenance Plan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve

State Implementation Plan (SIP)

revisions submitted by the

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. These

SIP revisions include a regulation

change to the allowable sulfur oxide

emission limits for fuel burning

equipment and a modeled

demonstration of attainment of the

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 of the NAAQS for SO 2 and

to approve a combined maintenance

plan for both areas as a SIP revision.

These SIP revisions were submitted by

the Pennsylvania Department of

Environmental Protection (PADEP) on

behalf of the Allegheny County Health

Department (ACHD). This action is

being taken in accordance with the

Clean Air Act (CAA).

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before May 3, 2004.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be

submitted either by mail or

electronically. Written comments

should be 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