Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 210 / Monday, October 31, 2016 / Proposed Rules 75361 

purposes consistent with their 

certification without the permission of 

the controlling DoD office or when 

dissemination is: 

(1) To any foreign recipient for which 

the technical data and technology are 

approved, authorized, or licensed in 

accordance with 22 U.S.C. 2778 or 15 

CFR parts 730 through 774. 

(2) To another qualified U.S. 

contractor including existing or 

potential subcontractors, but only 

within the scope of the certified 

legitimate business purpose of the 

recipient. 

(3) To the Departments of State and 

Commerce to apply for approvals, 

authorizations, or licenses for export 

pursuant to 22 U.S.C. 2778 or 15 CFR 

parts 730 through 774. The application 

will include a statement that the 

technical data and technology for which 

the approval, authorization, or license is 

sought is controlled by the DoD in 

accordance with this part. 

(4) To the Congress or any Federal, 

State, or local governmental agency for 

regulatory purposes or otherwise as may 

be required by law or court order. Any 

such dissemination will include a 

statement that the technical data and 

technology are controlled by the DoD in 

accordance with this part. 

(j) A qualified contractor desiring to 

disseminate technical data and 

technology subject to this part in a 

manner not permitted expressly by the 

terms of this part must be granted 

authority to do so by the controlling 

DoD office, consistent with U.S. export 

control laws and regulations specified 

in 22 U.S.C. 2778, 50 U.S.C. chapter 35, 

22 CFR parts 120 through 130, and 15 

CFR parts 730 through 774 and DoD 

policies. 

(k) Any requester denied technical 

data and technology or any qualified 

U.S. contractor denied permission to 

disseminate such technical data and 

technology in accordance with this part 

will be promptly provided with a 

written statement of reasons for that 

action, and advised of the right to make 

a written appeal to a specifically 

identified appellate authority within the 

DoD Component. Other appeals will be 

processed as directed by the 

USD(AT&L). 

(l) Denials will cite 10 U.S.C. 130 and 

133 as implemented by this part. 

Implementing procedures will provide 

for resolution of any appeal within 20 

working days. 

§ 250.7 Directly arranged visits. 

(a) USG officials and certified U.S. 

contractors and Canadian government 

officials and certified Canadian 

contractors may use the certification 

process to facilitate directly arranged 

visits that involve access to unclassified 

technical data and technology. 

Activities under this process are limited 

to: 

(1) Procurement activities such as 

unclassified pre-solicitation 

conferences, discussions related to 

unclassified solicitations, and collection 

of procurement unclassified documents. 

(2) Performance of an unclassified 

contract. 

(3) Scientific research, in support of 

unclassified U.S. or Canadian national 

defense initiatives. 

(4) Attendance at restricted meetings, 

conferences, symposia, and program 

briefings where technical data and 

technology governed by this part or 

Canada Minister of Justice, Technical 

Data Control Regulations SOR/86–345, 

May 27, 2014 current edition will be 

presented, or the event is being held in 

an unclassified access controlled area. 

(b) A directly arranged visit does not 

apply to uncertified U.S. or Canadian 

contractors; classified visits, where 

confirmation of the visitors’ security 

clearances is required; or unsolicited 

marketing visits. 

(c) A directly arranged visit related to 

the release of information controlled in 

the United States by this part or in 

Canada by Canada Minister of Justice, 

Technical Data Control Regulations 

SOR/86–345, May 27, 2014 current 

edition, is permitted when two 

conditions are satisfied. 

(1) First condition: 

(i) There is a valid license covering 

the export of the technical data and 

technology; 

(ii) The export or release is permitted 

under the Canadian exemption on 22 

CFR 126.5; 

(iii) The export or release is covered 

by the general exemptions in 22 CFR 

125.4; or 

(iv) The export or release qualifies for 

a license exception under 15 CFR parts 

730 through 774. 

(2) Second condition: 

(i) The distribution statement applied 

to the technical data and technology 

pursuant to DoD Instruction 5230.24 

permits release; or 

(ii) The originator or government 

controlling office authorizes release. 

Dated: October 26, 2016. 

Aaron Siegel, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2016–26236 Filed 10–28–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2016–0620; FRL–9954–67– 

Region 8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; State of 

Utah; Revisions to Nonattainment 

Permitting Regulations 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to 

conditionally approve State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions 

submitted by the state of Utah on 

August 20, 2013, with supporting 

administrative documentation 

submitted on September 12, 2013. These 

submittals revise the Utah 

Administrative Code (UAC) that pertain 

to the issuance of Utah air quality 

permits for major sources in 

nonattainment areas. The EPA proposes 

a conditional approval because while 

the submitted revisions to Utah’s 

nonattainment permitting rules do not 

fully address the deficiencies in the 

state’s program, Utah has committed to 

address additional remaining 

deficiencies in the state’s nonattainment 

permitting program no later than a year 

from the EPA finalizing this conditional 

approval. If finalized, and upon the EPA 

finding a timely meeting of this 

commitment in full, the proposed 

conditional approval of the SIP 

revisions would convert to a final 

approval of Utah’s plan. This action is 

being taken under section 110 of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA) (Act). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before November 30, 

2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by EPA–R08–OAR–2016– 

0620 at http://www.regulations.gov. 

Follow the online instructions for 

submitting comments. Once submitted, 

comments cannot be edited or removed 

from regulations.gov. The EPA may 

publish any comment received to its 

public docket. Do not submit 

electronically any information you 

consider to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Multimedia submissions (audio, video, 

etc.) must be accompanied by a written 

comment. The written comment is 

considered the official comment and 

should include discussion of all points 

you wish to make. The EPA will 


Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
75362 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 210 / Monday, October 31, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

generally not consider comments or 

comment contents located outside of the 

primary submission (i.e., on the Web, 

cloud, or other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http://

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly-available docket 

materials are available at http://

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the EPA Region 8, Office of Partnerships 

and Regulatory Assistance, Air Program, 

1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129. The EPA requests that if at 

all possible, you contact the individual 

listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section to view the hard copy 

of the docket. You may view the hard 

copy of the docket Monday through 

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

federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kevin Leone, Air Program, EPA, Region 

8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop 

Street, Denver, Colorado 80202–1129, 

(303) 312–6227, leone.kevin@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

What should I consider as I prepare my 

comments for the EPA? 

a. Submitting CBI. Do not submit CBI 

to EPA through http://

www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly 

mark the part or all of the information 

that you claim to be CBI. For CBI 

information in a disk or CD ROM that 

you mail to the EPA, mark the outside 

of the disk or CD ROM as CBI and then 

identify electronically within the disk or 

CD ROM the specific information that is 

claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comment that 

includes information claimed as CBI, a 

copy of the comment that does not 

contain the information claimed as CBI 

must be submitted for inclusion in the 

public docket. Information so marked 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 CFR part 2. 

b. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

i. Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

ii. Follow directions—The agency 

may ask you to respond to specific 

questions or organize comments by 

referencing a Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) part or section 

number. 

iii. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

iv. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

v. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

vi. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

vii. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

viii. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

II. Background 

On May 10, 2001, the EPA sent Utah 

a letter outlining concerns that Utah’s 

nonattainment permitting rules, which 

are codified in UAC R307–403 (Permits: 

New and Modified Sources in 

Nonattainment Areas and Maintenance 

Areas), have not been consistent with 

federal requirements (see docket R08– 

OAR–2016–0620). On August 20, 2013, 

with supporting administrative 

documentation submitted on September 

12, 2013, Utah sent the EPA revisions to 

their nonattainment permitting 

regulations, specifically to address EPA 

identified deficiencies in their 

nonattainment permitting regulations 

that affected the EPA’s ability to 

approve Utah’s PM10 maintenance plan 

and that may affect the EPA’s ability to 

approve of Utah’s PM2.5 SIP. These 

revisions addressed R307–403–1 

(Purpose and Definitions), R307–403–2 

(Applicability), R307–403–11 (Actual 

Plant-wide Applicability Limits (PALs)), 

and R307–420 (Ozone Offset 

Requirements in Davis and Salt Lake 

Counties). In addition, Utah moved 

R307–401–19 (Analysis of Alternatives) 

to R307–403–10 and moved R307–401– 

20 (Relaxation of Limits) to R307–403– 

2. On June 2, 2016, the EPA entered into 

a consent decree with the Center for 

Biological Diversity, Center for 

Environmental Health, and Neighbors 

for Clean Air regarding a failure to act, 

pursuant to CAA sections 110(k)(2)–(4), 

on certain complete SIP submissions 

from states intended to address specific 

requirements related to the 2006 p.m.2.5

NAAQS for certain nonattainment areas, 

including the submittal from the 

Governor of Utah dated August 20, 

2013. 

The SIP revisions submitted by the 

Utah Department of Air Quality (UDAQ) 

on August 20, 2013, establish specific 

nonattainment new source review 

permitting requirements. In this 

revision, the UDAQ has incorporated 

federal regulatory language— 

establishing permitting requirements for 

new and modified major stationary 

sources in a nonattainment area—from 

portions of 40 CFR 51.165 and 

reformatted it into state-specific 

requirements for sources in Utah under 

R307–403–1 (Purpose and Definitions) 

and R307–403–2 (Applicability), 

including provisions relevant to 

nonattainment NSR programs for PM2.5

nonattainment areas. Additionally, 

UDAQ incorporated by reference the 

provisions of 40 CFR 51.165(f)(1)–(f)(14) 

into 307–403–11 (Actual PALs), and 

revised R307–420 to state that the 

definitions and applicability provisions 

in R307–403–1 apply to this section. 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(C) requires 

each state plan to include ‘‘a program to 

provide for . . . regulation of the 

modification and construction of any 

stationary source within the areas 

covered by the plan as necessary to 

assure that [NAAQS] are achieved, 

including a permit program as required 

in parts C and D of this subchapter,’’ 

and CAA section 172(c)(5) provides that 

the plan ‘‘shall require permits for the 

construction and operation of new or 

modified major stationary sources 

anywhere in the nonattainment area, in 

accordance with section [173].’’ CAA 

section 173 lays out the requirements 

for obtaining a permit that must be 

included in a state’s SIP-approved 

permit program. CAA section 

110(a)(2)(A) requires that SIPs contain 

enforceable emissions limitations and 

other control measures. Under section 

CAA section 110(a)(2), the 

enforceability requirement in section 

110(a)(2)(A) applies to all plans 

submitted by a state. CAA section 110(i) 

(with certain limited exceptions) 

prohibits states from modifying SIP 

requirements for stationary sources 

except through the SIP revision process. 

CAA section 172(c)(7) requires that 

nonattainment plans, including 

nonattainment New Source Review 

(NSR) programs required by section 

172(c)(5), meet the applicable 

provisions of section 110(a)(2), 

including the requirement in section 

110(a)(2)(A) for enforceable emission 

limitations and other control measures. 

CAA section 110(l) provides that the 


Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 210 / Monday, October 31, 2016 / Proposed Rules 75363 

EPA cannot approve a SIP revision that 

interferes with any applicable 

requirement of the Act. 

Section 51.165 in title 40 of the CFR 

(Permit Requirements) sets out the 

minimum plan requirements states are 

to meet within each SIP nonattainment 

NSR permitting program. Generally, 40 

CFR 51.165 consists of a set of 

definitions, minimum plan 

requirements regarding procedures for 

determining applicability of 

nonattainment NSR and use of offsets, 

and minimum plan requirements 

regarding other source obligations, such 

as recordkeeping. 

Specifically, subparagraphs 

51.165(a)(1)(i) through (xlvi) enumerate 

a set of definitions which states must 

either use or replace with definitions 

that a state demonstrates are more 

stringent or at least as stringent in all 

respects. Subparagraph 51.165(a)(2) sets 

minimum plan requirements for 

procedures to determine the 

applicability of the nonattainment NSR 

program to new and modified sources. 

Subparagraph 51.165(a)(3), (a)(9) and 

(a)(11) set minimum plan requirements 

for the use of offsets by sources subject 

to nonattainment NSR requirements. 

Subparagraphs (a)(8) and (a)(10) regard 

precursors, and subparagraphs (a)(6) 

and (a)(7) regard recordkeeping 

obligations. Subparagraph 51.165(a)(4) 

allows nonattainment NSR programs to 

treat fugitive emissions in certain ways. 

Subparagraph 51.165(a)(5) regards 

enforceable procedures for after 

approval to construct has been granted. 

Subparagraph 51.165(b) sets minimum 

plan requirements for new major 

stationary sources and major 

modifications in attainment and 

unclassifiable areas that would cause or 

contribute to violations of the national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS.) 

Finally, subparagraph 51.165(f) sets 

minimum plan requirements for the use 

of PALs. Please refer to docket EPA– 

R08–OAR–2016–0620 to view a crosswalk table which outlines how Utah’s 

nonattainment permitting rules correlate 

with the requirements of 40 CFR 51.165. 

Clean Air Act section 189(e) requires 

that state SIPs apply the same control 

requirements that apply to major 

stationary sources of PM10 to major 

stationary sources of PM10 precursors, 

‘‘except where the Administrator 

determines that such sources do not 

contribute significantly to PM10 levels 

which exceed the standard in the area.’’ 

On January 4, 2013, the U.S. Court of 

Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit, in Natural Resources Defense 

Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 

2013), issued a decision that remanded 

the EPA’s 2008 PM2.5 NSR 

Implementation Rule (73 FR 28321). 

The court found that the EPA erred in 

implementing the PM2.5 NAAQS in 

these rules solely pursuant to the 

general implementation provisions of 

subpart 1 of part D of title I of the CAA, 

rather than pursuant to the additional 

implementation provisions specific to 

particulate matter nonattainment areas 

in subpart 4. In particular, subpart 4 

includes section 189(e) of the CAA, 

which requires the control of major 

stationary sources of PM10 precursors 

(and hence under the court decision, 

PM2.5 precursors) ‘‘except where the 

Administrator determines that such 

sources do not contribute significantly 

to PM10 levels which exceed the 

standard in the area.’’ Accordingly, 

nonattainment NSR programs that are 

submitted for PM2.5 nonattainment areas 

must regulate all PM2.5 precursors, i.e., 

SO2, NOX, VOC, and ammonia, unless 

the Administrator determines that such 

sources of a particular precursor do not 

contribute significantly to 

nonattainment in the nonattainment 

area. The EPA recently finalized a new 

provision at 40 CFR 51.165(a)(13) that 

codifies this requirement, as it applies 

to PM2.5, in the federal regulations. 

As a result, it became clear that Utah 

needed to submit further revisions to 

address remaining deficiencies in the 

nonattainment permitting program for 

the EPA to approve the August 20, 2013, 

submittal. Included as part of those 

deficiencies was that Utah has not 

submitted an analysis demonstrating 

that sources of ammonia, as a PM2.5

precursor, do not contribute 

significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed 

the NAAQS in nonattainment areas in 

the State. On September 30, 2016, Utah 

submitted to EPA a commitment letter 

in which Utah commits to address 

additional remaining deficiencies in the 

State’s nonattainment permitting 

program in R307–403 by December 8, 

2017, that were not addressed in the 

August 20, 2013, submittal, including 

revisions to R307–403–2, R307–403–3, 

and R307–403–4. In Utah’s commitment 

letter, Utah specifies that: 

1. UDAQ commits to submit a SIP 

revision that either regulates major 

stationary sources of the pursuant to 

Utah’s nonattainment new source 

review (NNSR) permitting program, 

consistent with all applicable federal 

regulatory requirements or demonstrates 

that sources of ammonia, as a PM2.5

precursor, do not contribute 

significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed 

the NAAQS in nonattainment areas in 

the state, consistent with new 

provisions at 40 CFR 51.1006(a)(3); 

2. UDAQ commits to revise R307– 

403–2 consistent with the new 

definitions in 40 CFR 51.165 that EPA 

recently finalized in the PM2.5 SIP 

Requirements Rules; 

3. UDAQ commits to revise R307– 

403–3, including R307–403–3(3), to 

remove the reference to NNSR 

determinations being made ‘‘at the time 

of the source’s proposed start-up date’’; 

4. UDAQ commits to revise R307– 

403–3, including R307–403–3(2) and 

R307–403–3(3), to specify that NNSR 

permit requirements are applicable to 

all new major stationary sources or 

major modifications located in a 

nonattainment area that are major for 

the pollutant for which the area is 

designated nonattainment; 

5. UDAQ commits to revise R307– 

403–3, in addition to the previously 

adopted definition of lowest achievable 

emission rate (LAER) in R307–403–1, to 

explicitly state that LAER applies to all 

major new sources and major 

modifications for the relevant pollutants 

in nonattainment areas; 

6. UDAQ commits to revise R307– 

403–4 to incorporate the requirements 

from 40 CFR 51.165 to establish that all 

general offset permitting requirements 

apply for all offsets regardless of the 

pollutant at issue, and to revise the 

provision to impose immediate and 

direct general offset permitting 

requirements on all new major 

stationary sources or major 

modifications located in a 

nonattainment area that are major for 

the pollutant for which the area is 

designated nonattainment; 

7. UDAQ commits to work with the 

Utah Air Quality Board to revise R307– 

403–4 to reference the criteria discussed 

in section IV.D. of 40 CFR 51, Appendix 

S; and 

8. UDAQ will update R307–403 to 

include a new section that imposes 

requirements that address emission 

offsets for PM2.5 nonattainment areas (as 

required in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(11)) on 

NNSR sources in Utah. UDAQ will 

revise R307–403–3, including R307– 

403–3(3)(c), to cross reference this new 

section, as well as the requirements in 

R307–403–4, R307–403–5, and R307– 

403–6; and UDAQ commits to work 

with the Utah Air Quality Board to 

revise this section to include the 

requirements of CAA Section 173(c)(1) 

and 40 CFR 51.165 (specifically 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(3)) concerning the 

requirement that creditable reductions 

be calculated based on actual emissions 

for offset purposes. 

Under section 110(k)(4) of the Act, the 

EPA may approve a SIP revision based 

on a commitment by the state to adopt 

specific enforceable measures by a date 

certain, but not later than one year after 

the date of approval of the plan revision. 


Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
75364 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 210 / Monday, October 31, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

Under a conditional approval, the state 

must adopt and submit the specific 

revisions it has committed to within one 

year of the EPA’s finalization. If the EPA 

fully approves the submittal of the 

revisions specified in the commitment 

letter, the conditional nature of the 

approval would be removed and the 

submittal would become fully approved. 

If the state does not submit these 

revisions within one year, or if the EPA 

finds the state’s revisions to be 

incomplete, or EPA disapproves the 

state’s revisions, a conditional approval 

will convert to a disapproval. If any of 

these occur and the EPA’s conditional 

approval converts to a disapproval, that 

will constitute a disapproval of a 

required plan element under part D of 

title I of the Act, which starts an 18- 

month clock for sanctions, see section 

179(a)(2), and the two-year clock for a 

federal implementation plan (FIP), see 

section 110(c)(1)(B). 

III. Proposed Action 

The EPA is proposing to conditionally 

approve Utah’s revisions submitted on 

August 20, 2013, which have not been 

withdrawn by Utah. These revisions 

addressed R307–403–1 (Purpose and 

Definitions), R307–403–2 

(Applicability), R307–403–11 (Actual 

PALs), and R307–420 (Ozone Offset 

Requirements in Davis and Salt Lake 

Counties). In addition, Utah moved 

R307–401–19 (Analysis of Alternatives) 

to R307–403–10 and moved R307–401– 

20 (Relaxation of Limits) to R307–403– 

2. The EPA proposes that these changes, 

when combined with the changes Utah 

has committed to submitting to the EPA 

by December 8, 2017, in Utah’s 

September 30, 2016 commitment letter, 

create enforceable obligations for 

sources and are consistent with the CAA 

and EPA regulations, including the 

requirements of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(A), 110(a)(2)(C), 110(i), 110(l), 

172(c)(5), 172(c)(7), 173. 

The crosswalk table in the docket 

details how the submittal corresponds 

to specific requirements in 40 CFR 

51.165; however, as stated earlier, we 

are not proposing to determine that 

Utah’s PM2.5 nonattainment permitting 

rules meet all requirements of 40 CFR 

51.165 at this time, but rather are 

conditionally approving these revisions 

based on Utah’s September 30, 2016 

commitment letter. If we finalize our 

proposed conditional approval, Utah 

must adopt and submit to the EPA the 

specific revisions it has committed to by 

December 8, 2017. If the EPA fully 

approves the submittal of the revisions 

specified in the commitment letter, the 

conditional nature of this proposed 

approval would be removed and the 

August 20, 2013 submittal would, at 

that time, become fully approved. If 

Utah does not submit these revisions by 

December 8, 2017, or if we find Utah’s 

revisions to be incomplete, or we 

disapprove Utah’s revisions, the final 

conditional approval will convert to a 

disapproval. If any of these occur and 

our final conditional approval converts 

to a disapproval, that will constitute a 

disapproval of a required plan element 

under part D of title I of the Act, which 

starts an 18-month clock for sanctions, 

see CAA section 179(a)(2), and the twoyear clock for a FIP, see CAA section 

110(c)(1)(B). 

Specifically, we are proposing to 

conditionally approve: 

R307–401–19 (Analysis of Alternatives) 

Section R307–401–19 being moved 

removed from R307–401–19 and being 

added to R307–403–10. Because this 

section applies only to major sources or 

major modifications that are located in 

a nonattainment area or impact a 

nonattainment area, this section is more 

appropriately located in R307–403. 

R307–401–20 (Relaxation of Limits) 

Section R307–401–20 being moved 

removed from R307–401–19 and being 

added to R307–403–2. Because this 

section applies only to major sources or 

major modifications that are located in 

a nonattainment area or impact a 

nonattainment area, this section is more 

appropriately located in R307–403. 

R307–403–1 (Purpose and Definitions) 

Language being added in R307–403– 

1(1)–(4) to parallel federal 

nonattainment permitting regulations in 

40 CFR 51.165; however, Utah 

committed to addressing further 

deficiencies regarding ammonia as a 

precursor to PM2.5 in this section, as 

specified in Utah’s September 30, 2016 

commitment letter. 

In particular, R307–403–1(4)(b) states 

that ‘‘ammonia is not a precursor to 

PM2.5 in the Logan, Salt Lake City, and 

Provo PM2.5 nonattainment areas as 

defined in the July 1, 2010 version of 40 

CFR 81.345,’’ however, UDAQ has not 

submitted an analysis demonstrating 

that sources of ammonia, as a PM2.5

precursor, do not contribute 

significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed 

the NAAQS in nonattainment areas in 

the State. UDAQ committed to submit a 

SIP revision that either regulates major 

stationary sources of ammonia pursuant 

to Utah’s NNSR permitting program, 

consistent with all applicable federal 

regulatory requirements or demonstrates 

that sources of ammonia, as a PM2.5

precursor, do not contribute 

significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed 

the NAAQS in nonattainment areas in 

the State, consistent with new 

provisions at 40 CFR 51.1006(a)(3). 

R307–403–2 (Applicability) 

The title of this section being changed 

from ‘‘Emission Limitations’’ to 

‘‘applicability’’ and language being 

added to R307–403–2(1)–(12) to parallel 

federal nonattainment permitting 

regulations in 40 CFR 51.165; however, 

Utah committed to addressing further 

deficiencies in this section in its 

September 30, 2016 commitment letter. 

Utah committed to revise R307–403–2 

consistent with the new definitions in 

40 CFR 51.165 that the EPA recently 

finalized in the PM2.5 SIP Requirements 

Rules. 

On September 23, 2016, Utah 

submitted a letter to the EPA requesting 

to withdraw R307–403–2(12) (see 

docket EPA–R08–OAR–2016–0620.) As 

a result, we will not be acting on that 

subparagraph. 

R307–403–11 (Actuals PALs) 

R307–403–11 being added to 

implement a portion of the EPA’s NSR 

Reform provisions that were adopted in 

the federal regulations in 2002 and have 

not yet been incorporated into the Utah 

Air Quality Rules. R307–403–11 

incorporates by reference the provisions 

of 40 CFR 51.165(f)(1) through (14). 

R307–403–20 (Permits: Ozone Offset 

Requirements in Davis and Salt Lake 

Counties) 

This rule being revised to include the 

definitions and applicability provisions 

of R307–403–1. This rule change will 

ensure that the definitions and 

applicability provisions in R307–420 are 

consistent with related permitting rules 

in R307–403. 

UDAQ additionally committed to 

submit a revised SIP by December 8, 

2017 to: (1) Revise R307–403–3, 

including R307–403–3(3), to remove the 

reference to NNSR determinations being 

made ‘‘at the time of the source’s 

proposed start-up date; (2) revise R307– 

403–3, including R307–403–3(2) and 

R307–403–3(3), to specify that NNSR 

permit requirements are applicable to 

all new major stationary sources or 

major modifications located in a 

nonattainment area that are major for 

the pollutant for which the area is 

designated nonattainment; (3) revise 

R307–403–3, in addition to the 

previously adopted definition of LAER 

in R307–403–1, to explicitly state that 

LAER applies to all major new sources 

and major modifications for the relevant 

pollutants in nonattainment areas; (4) 

revise R307–403–4 to incorporate the 

requirements from 40 CFR 51.165 to 


Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 210 / Monday, October 31, 2016 / Proposed Rules 75365 

establish that all general offset 

permitting requirements apply for all 

offsets regardless of the pollutant at 

issue, and to revise the provision to 

impose immediate and direct general 

offset permitting requirements on all 

new major stationary sources or major 

modifications located in a 

nonattainment area that are major for 

the pollutant for which the area is 

designated nonattainment; (5) revise 

R307–403–4 to reference the criteria 

discussed in section IV.D. of 40 CFR 51, 

Appendix S; (6) update R307–403, to 

include a new section that imposes 

requirements that address emission 

offsets for PM2.5 nonattainment areas (as 

required in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(11)) on 

NNSR sources, and revise R307–403–3, 

including R307–403–3(3)(c), to cross 

reference this new section, as well as 

the requirements in R307–403–4, R307– 

403–5, and R307–403–6, and revise this 

section to include the requirements of 

CAA Section 173(c)(1) and 40 CFR 

51.165 (specifically 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)) 

concerning the requirement that 

creditable reductions be calculated 

based on actual emissions for offset 

purposes; and (7) address further 

deficiencies regarding ammonia as a 

precursor to PM2.5.

IV. Consideration of Section 110(l) of 

the CAA 

Under section 110(l) of the CAA, the 

EPA cannot approve a SIP revision if the 

revision would interfere with any 

applicable requirements concerning 

attainment and reasonable futher 

progress (RFP) toward attainment of the 

NAAQS, or any other applicable 

requirement of the Act. In addition, 

section 110(l) requires that each revision 

to an implementation plan submitted by 

a state shall be adopted by the state after 

reasonable notice and public hearing. 

The Utah SIP revisions that the EPA 

is proposing to approve do not interfere 

with any applicable requirements of the 

Act. The revisions to R307–401 and 

R307–403 submitted by the Utah on 

August 20, 2013, are intended to 

strengthen the SIP. Therefore, CAA 

section 110(l) requirements are satisfied. 

V. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, the EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

the UDAQ rules promulgated in the 

DAR, R307–400 Series as discussed in 

section III of this preamble. The EPA 

has made, and will continue to make, 

these materials generally available 

through www.regulations.gov and/or at 

the EPA Region 8 Office (please contact 

the person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

preamble for more information). 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, the EPA’s role is to 

approve state choices, provided that 

they meet the criteria of the Clean Air 

Act. Accordingly, this action merely 

proposes to approve state law as 

meeting federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• does not provide the EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where the EPA or 

an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the proposed rule does 

not have tribal implications and will not 

impose substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Intergovernmental relations, 

Incorporation by reference, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organization compounds. 

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

Dated: October 20, 2016. 

Shaun L. McGrath, 

Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2016–26233 Filed 10–28–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 63 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0234; FRL–9954–62– 

OAR] 

RIN 2060–AS75 

Mercury and Air Toxics Standards 

(MATS) Completion of Electronic 

Reporting Requirements 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: On September 29, 2016, the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

proposed a rule titled, ‘‘Mercury and Air 

Toxics Standards (MATS) Completion 

of Electronic Reporting Requirements.’’ 

The EPA is extending the comment 

period on the proposed rule that was 

scheduled to close on October 31, 2016, 

by 15 days until November 15, 2016. 

The EPA is making this change based on 

three requests for additional time to 

prepare comments on this proposed 

rule. 

DATES: The public comment period for 

the proposed rule published in the 

Federal Register on September 29, 2016 

(81 FR 67062), is being extended. 

Written comments must be received on 

or before November 15, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for the proposed rulemaking 

(available at http://

www.regulations.gov). The Docket ID 

No. is EPA–HQ–OAR–2009–0234. 

Submit your comments, identified by 


Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS