Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 132 / Thursday, July 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 39351 

by the Captain of the Port Miami or a 

designated representative, all persons 

and vessels receiving such authorization 

must comply with the instructions of 

the Captain of the Port Miami or a 

designated representative. 

(3) The Coast Guard will provide 

notice of the regulated area by Local 

Notice to Mariners, Broadcast Notice to 

Mariners and on-scene designated 

representatives. 

(d) Enforcement. This rule will be 

enforced from 5 a.m. until 5 p.m. on 

September 13, 2014. 

Dated: June 25, 2014. 

A.J. Gould, 

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

Port Miami. 

[FR Doc. 2014–16066 Filed 7–9–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2014–0141: FRL–9913–47– 

Region–10] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Washington: 

General Regulations for Air Pollution 

Sources 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

revisions to the Washington State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by 

the Department of Ecology (Ecology) on 

January 27, 2014. These revisions were 

submitted in accordance with the 

requirements of section 110 of the Clean 

Air Act (hereinafter the Act or CAA), 

which requires states to develop a plan 

for the implementation, maintenance, 

and enforcement of the National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS). The revisions update the 

general air quality regulations that apply 

to sources within Ecology’s jurisdiction, 

including the minor new source review 

permitting program. Ecology’s submittal 

also includes regulations covering the 

major source Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) and the major 

Nonattainment New Source Review 

(NNSR) permitting program; however 

the EPA intends to address the major 

source permitting regulations in 

separate actions. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 11, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– 

OAR–2014–0141, by any of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Mail: Jeff Hunt, EPA Region 10, 

Office of Air, Waste and Toxics (AWT– 

107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, 

Seattle, WA 98101. 

C. Email: R10-Public_Comments@

epa.gov. 

D. Hand Delivery: EPA Region 10 

Mailroom, 9th Floor, 1200 Sixth 

Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, WA 98101. 

Attention: Jeff Hunt, Office of Air, Waste 

and Toxics, AWT–107. Such deliveries 

are only accepted during normal hours 

of operation, and special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R10–OAR–2014– 

0141. The EPA’s policy is that all 

comments received will be included in 

the public docket without change and 

may be made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

the disclosure of which is restricted by 

statute. Do not submit information that 

you consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means the EPA will not know 

your identity or contact information 

unless you provide it in the body of 

your comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to the EPA without 

going through www.regulations.gov your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, the EPA recommends that 

you include your name and other 

contact information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If the EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

the EPA may not be able to consider 

your comment. Electronic files should 

avoid the use of special characters, any 

form of encryption, and be free of any 

defects or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

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

information the disclosure of which is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy during normal business 

hours at the Office of Air, Waste and 

Toxics, EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth 

Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information on the New Source Review 

permitting program, please contact 

Donna Deneen at (206) 553–6706 or 

deneen.donna@epa.gov. For information 

on the Washington SIP in general, 

please contact Jeff Hunt at (206) 553– 

0256, hunt.jeff@epa.gov, or by using the 

above EPA, Region 10 address. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document wherever 

‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’ or ‘‘our’’ are used, it is 

intended to refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Purpose of Proposed Action 

II. Background for Proposed Action 

III. Washington SIP Revisions 

A. WAC 173–400–020, Applicability 

B. WAC 173–400–030, Definitions 

C. WAC 173–400–040, General Standards 

for Maximum Emissions 

D. WAC 173–400–050, Emission Standards 

for Combustion and Incineration Units 

E. WAC 173–400–060, Emission Standards 

for General Process Units 

F. WAC 173–400–070, Emission Standards 

for Certain Source Categories 

G. WAC 173–400–081, Startup and 

Shutdown and WAC 173–400–091, 

Voluntary Limits on Emissions 

H. WAC 173–400–100, Registration 

Program 

I. WAC 173–400–105, Records, Monitoring, 

and Reporting 

J. Minor New Source Review: WAC 173– 

400–110; WAC 173–400–111; WAC 173– 

400–112; WAC 173–400–113; WAC 173– 

400–036; and WAC 173–400–560 

K. WAC 173–400–116, Increment 

Protection 

L. WAC 173–400–117, Special Protection 

Requirements for Federal Class I Areas 

M. WAC 173–400–118, Designation of 

Class I, II, and III Areas 

N. WAC 173–400–131, Issuance of 

Emission Reduction Credits 

O. WAC 173–400–136, Use of Emission 

Reduction Credits (ERC) 

P. WAC 173–400–151, Retrofit 

Requirements for Visibility Protection 

Q. WAC 173–400–171, Public Notice 

R. WAC 173–400–175, Public Information 

S. WAC 173–400–200, Creditable Stack 

Height and Dispersion Techniques 

IV. The EPA’s Proposed Action 

A. Rules To Approve Into the SIP 

B. Rules To Remove From the SIP 

C. Rules on Which No Action Is Taken 

D. Scope of Proposed Action 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Purpose of Proposed Action 

The purpose of this action is to 

propose approval of revisions to 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
39352 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 132 / Thursday, July 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

1Although the Washington statutes and 

regulations use the term ‘‘local authority,’’ these 

entities are now more commonly referred to as 

‘‘local clean air agencies’’ or ‘‘local agencies’’ and 

that terminology will be used in this proposal. 

Washington’s SIP submitted to the EPA 

by Ecology on January 27, 2014. The SIP 

submittal revises and amends portions 

of Chapter 173–400 of the Washington 

Administrative Code (WAC) currently in 

the Federally-approved Washington SIP 

(40 CFR part 52, subpart WW). This 

action proposes to update the SIP to 

reflect many of the changes to Chapter 

173–400 WAC, last revised November 

28, 2012. Ecology did not submit to the 

EPA those sections of Chapter 173–400 

WAC that have not changed since the 

last SIP approval by the EPA. Ecology 

also did not submit certain provisions of 

Chapter 173–400 WAC because they are 

not related to the criteria pollutants 

regulated under title I of the CAA, not 

essential for meeting and maintaining 

the NAAQS, or not related to the 

requirements for SIPs under section 110 

of the CAA. The proposed SIP revisions 

covered by this action are explained in 

more detail below, along with an 

evaluation of how these rules comply 

with the CAA requirements for SIPs. 

Also included is a discussion of how the 

EPA intends to act on the remainder of 

Ecology’s submittal, covering the major 

source PSD and NNSR specific 

regulations in separate actions. 

II. Background for Proposed Action 

Title I of the CAA, as amended by 

Congress in 1990, specifies the general 

requirements for states to submit SIPs to 

attain or maintain the NAAQS and the 

EPA’s actions regarding approval of 

those SIPs. With this action we are 

proposing approval of many revisions to 

the SIP, including housekeeping 

changes such as updated references, 

renumbering, and clarifying wording, as 

well as more substantive changes. 

Further background on and analysis of 

the substantive changes is provided 

below. 

III. Washington SIP Revisions 

A. WAC 173–400–020, Applicability 

As described in the Ecology submittal, 

Chapter 70.94 Revised Code of 

Washington (RCW), Washington Clean 

Air Act directs Ecology to establish 

regulations to implement the state air 

quality programs and requirements. In 

the case of Chapter 173–400 WAC, the 

Ecology regulations apply statewide, 

except where a local clean air agency 

has implemented its own regulations.1

Chapter 70.94 RCW also specifies that 

the local agency and Ecology regulations 

do not apply to the energy facilities 

under the purview of the Energy 

Facilities Site Evaluation Council 

(EFSEC). EFSEC is given primary 

authority for the permitting of energy 

projects listed in Chapter 80.50 RCW, 

and the EPA-approved EFSEC 

regulations are also contained in the SIP 

under 40 CFR part 52, subpart WW. In 

the case of permitting stationary sources 

of air pollution, Ecology’s submittal 

states that the intent of the Washington 

Clean Air Act is that local clean air 

agencies, EFSEC, and Ecology have 

primary responsibility for implementing 

programs and regulations to control air 

pollution in their respective 

jurisdictions. The EPA also notes that 

under the SIP-approved provisions of 

WAC 173–405–012, WAC 173–410–012, 

and WAC 173–415–012, Ecology has 

statewide, direct jurisdiction for kraft 

pulp mills, sulfite pulping mills, and 

primary aluminum plants. The revised 

language of WAC 173–400–020 states: 

(1) The provisions of this chapter shall 

apply statewide, except for specific 

subsections where a local authority has 

adopted and implemented corresponding 

local rules that apply only to sources subject 

to local jurisdiction as provided under RCW 

70.94.141 and 70.94.331. 

Because under revised WAC 173– 

400–020(1), the applicability of Chapter 

173–400 WAC in a local clean air 

agency’s jurisdiction depends on 

whether the local agency has adopted 

and is implementing corresponding 

local rules that apply only to sources 

subject to local jurisdiction, the EPA’s 

proposed approval of the submitted 

Chapter 173–400 WAC provisions is 

limited to only those counties where 

there is no local clean air agency and 

Ecology has direct jurisdiction, 

excluding sources subject to EFSEC 

regulations. These counties are: Adams, 

Asotin, Chelan, Columbia, Douglas, 

Ferry, Franklin, Garfield, Grant, Kittitas, 

Klickitat, Lincoln, Okanogan, Pend 

Oreille, San Juan, Stevens, Walla Walla, 

and Whitman counties, as well as 

statewide jurisdiction for kraft pulp 

mills, sulfite pulping mills, and primary 

aluminum plants covered under the SIPapproved applicability provisions of 

WAC 173–405–012, WAC 173–410–012, 

and WAC 173–415–012. 

For the remaining counties and 

sources under the direct jurisdiction of 

local clean air agencies and sources 

under EFSEC jurisdiction, the statewide 

version of Chapter 173–400 WAC last 

approved by the EPA in 1995 will 

remain in the SIP. In addition, the 

corresponding local air agency 

regulations listed in 40 CFR part52, 

subpart WW, will also apply. This dual 

set of federally-approved regulations in 

the SIP will continue to apply until the 

EPA has an opportunity to work with 

the state and local authorities to clarify 

whether the local agencies wish to rely 

on the newly revised provisions of 

Chapter 173–400 WAC or use local 

agency corresponding provisions as 

replacements in the SIP. Due to the 

complexity of working with regulations 

from seven different local air agencies, 

the EPA intends to take a phased 

approach in reviewing and updating the 

Washington SIP. However, in the short 

term, the EPA sees considerable value in 

proposing approval of updated 

regulations covering the eighteen 

counties under Ecology’s direct 

jurisdiction, and the three source 

categories subject to Ecology’s direct 

jurisdiction. 

B. WAC 173–400–030, Definitions 

This section contains a list of terms 

and definitions used throughout 

Chapter 173–400 WAC. Many of the 

changes made since the EPA’s last 

approval are clarifying or housekeeping 

in nature. For example, many of the 

definitions related to visibility 

protection were moved to WAC 173– 

400–117, Special Protection 

Requirements for Federal Class I Areas. 

Similarly, many of the definitions 

specific to the major source PSD and 

NNSR programs were relocated to WAC 

173–400–720, Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration Program and WAC 173– 

400–810, Nonattainment Area New 

Source Review Program and will be 

acted on in separate actions. Ecology 

did not submit for approval the 

definition of ‘‘Toxic air pollutant 

(TAP)’’ or ‘‘toxic air contaminant’’ 

contained in a new subsection, WAC 

173–400–030(91), because these 

pollutants are not criteria pollutants or 

EPA-identified precursors under section 

110 of the CAA. 

An important revision to WAC 173– 

400–030 is the inclusion of fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5) definitions 

consistent with the EPA’s definitions. 

On March 4, 2014, the EPA approved 

Chapter 173–476 WAC, Ambient Air 

Quality Standards, which includes 

PM2.5 and all other criteria pollutants 

consistent with, or more stringent than, 

the Federal NAAQS (79 FR 12077). 

Inclusion of PM2.5 related definitions in 

WAC 173–400–030(70) and (71), along 

with the definition of criteria pollutants 

in WAC 173–400–030(21) and the 

NAAQS in WAC 173–400–030(49), 

supports this previous action and 

provides additional clarity in Chapter 

173–400 WAC. 

For a full description of the 

definitional changes, please see 

Ecology’s submittal in the docket for 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 132 / Thursday, July 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 39353 

this action. The EPA reviewed all of the 

changes and is proposing to determine 

that they are consistent with the 

definitions in 40 CFR 51.100 and meet 

the requirements for approval under 

section 110 of the CAA. 

C. WAC 173–400–040, General 

Standards for Maximum Emissions 

Aside from numerous nonsubstantive 

or editorial changes, the main change to 

this section is the addition of three 

narrow exemptions from the twenty 

percent opacity standard which, as 

explained below, the EPA proposes to 

approve as either de minimis activities 

and/or activities that are appropriately 

bounded to limit emissions to de 

minimis levels. 

The first exemption under WAC 173– 

400–040(2)(e)(i) relates to visible 

emissions reader certification testing. 

Ecology’s analysis for this exemption 

explains that this exemption is required 

in order to allow for certification of 

readers under 40 CFR Part 60 Appendix 

A, Method 9 because the reader 

certification testing protocol requires 

opacity values above the opacity 

standard in WAC 173–400–040(2) as 

part of the testing process. Given the 

limited circumstances under which this 

exemption will apply, the EPA believes 

this visible emissions reader 

certification testing exemption is 

sufficiently narrow so as not to interfere 

with attainment or maintenance of the 

NAAQS and is therefore proposing to 

determine that it meets the requirements 

for approval under section 110 of the 

CAA. 

The second exemption under WAC 

173–400–040(2)(e)(ii) relates to military 

training exercises. Ecology’s submittal 

explains that military training using 

obscurants is a necessary component of 

national defense and that the presence 

of obscurants emanating from a discrete 

source (such as a smoke pot) could be 

classified as a violation of the state 

opacity standard without an exemption. 

Ecology’s submittal describes 

environmental assessments (EAs) 

performed by the Army that indicate 

that no offsite exceedance of a NAAQS 

would occur with adherence to the 

location usage criteria within the EAs. 

The submittal also explains that Ecology 

has included as limitations on the 

exemption specific requirements to 

control/reduce the offsite impacts from 

obscurant training based on the results 

of the EAs, such as the tracking of 

weather conditions so that a training is 

canceled if winds patterns change such 

that the obscurant could travel beyond 

the boundaries of the military site/

reservation. Based on this analysis and 

the fact that the EPA has approved a 

similar exemption in another state (77 

FR 2488, January 18, 2012), the EPA is 

proposing to determine that this 

military training exemption will not 

interfere with attainment or 

maintenance of the NAAQS and meets 

the requirements for approval under 

section 110 of the CAA. 

The final new exemption under WAC 

173–400–040(2)(e)(iii) relates to 

firefighter training. Ecology’s submittal 

and analysis explains that the 

exemption implements a statutory 

provision allowing instructional fires for 

firefighter training, and that there are 

limitations and requirements in place 

that minimize this activity and the 

associated air impacts. Based on 

Ecology’s submittal and the expected 

limited occurrence of the exempted 

activity, the EPA is proposing to 

determine that the exemption for 

firefighter training will not interfere 

with attainment and maintenance of the 

NAAQS and meets the requirements for 

approval under section 110 of the CAA. 

In summary, the EPA has reviewed 

the revisions to the portions of WAC 

173–400–040 submitted by Ecology and 

proposes to determine that they meet 

the requirements for approval under 

section 110 of the CAA. In so doing, the 

EPA notes that Ecology did not submit 

for EPA approval WAC 173–400– 

040(2)(c) and (d); WAC 173–400–040(3); 

WAC 173–400–040(5); and WAC 173– 

400–040(7), second paragraph. These 

sections are not currently part of the SIP 

because they are unbounded director’s 

discretion provisions, not related to 

criteria pollutants regulated under title 

I of the CAA, not essential for meeting 

and maintaining the NAAQS, or not 

related to the requirements for SIPs 

under section 110 of the CAA. For more 

information on these provisions that 

Ecology did not include in its SIP 

submission, please see the EPA’s 

proposed action on the Washington SIP 

(60 FR 9802, Feb. 22, 1995) and the final 

action (60 FR 28726, June 2, 1995). 

D. WAC 173–400–050, Emission 

Standards for Combustion and 

Incineration Units 

The EPA approved WAC 173–400– 

050(1) through (3) into the SIP in 1993. 

The EPA’s subsequent approval of 

Chapter 173–400 WAC in 1995 made no 

changes to these provisions. In this 

action, Ecology requested that the EPA 

approve minor wording changes and 

updates to WAC 173–400–050(1). 

Ecology also modified WAC 173–400– 

050(3), which had been previously 

disapproved by the EPA as an 

impermissible director’s discretion 

provision (60 FR 28726, June 2, 1995), 

and has requested approval. As revised, 

WAC 173–400–050(3) contains criteria 

for modifying the default oxygen 

correction factor when appropriate, 

such as where the source is also subject 

to a New Source Performance Standard 

(NSPS) and that standard has a different 

oxygen correction factor. Ecology’s 

revisions to subsection (3) provide 

adequately bounded requirements for 

the use of an alternative oxygen 

correction factor and satisfy previous 

concerns. The EPA is therefore 

proposing to determine that the changes 

to WAC 173–400–050(1) and (3) meet 

the requirements for approval under 

section 110 of the CAA. 

Ecology also requested that the EPA 

remove the previously approved WAC 

173–400–050(2) from the SIP because it 

does not regulate criteria pollutants 

covered under title I of the CAA, is not 

essential for meeting and maintaining 

the NAAQS, and is not a requirement 

for SIPs under section 110 of the CAA. 

Ecology’s submission explains that this 

subsection regulates emissions from 

incinerators that are not subject to 

regulation under the state solid waste 

incinerator rule or under Federal NSPS 

rules that have been adopted by the 

state, such as small incinerators at 

grocery stores and apartment buildings 

that are no longer common. Ecology also 

explains that total carbonyls are not a 

criteria air pollutant or an EPAdesignated precursor to criteria 

pollutants and, consistent with previous 

EPA decisions, are therefore not 

appropriate for inclusion in a SIP. 

Ecology also states that, to the extent 

any of these sources remain and that the 

carbonyls subject to this limitation are 

volatile organic compounds (VOCs) or 

particulate matter (which are criteria 

pollutants or EPA-designated 

precursors), such emissions will be 

regulated as VOCs or particulate matter 

emissions from the source under other 

requirements of the SIP. For these 

reasons, the EPA agrees with Ecology 

that removal of this specific provision 

from the SIP will not affect attainment 

or maintenance of the NAAQS and is 

not otherwise needed to meet the 

requirements for SIPs under section 110 

of the CAA and we therefore propose to 

approve the removal of WAC 173–400– 

050(2) from the SIP. 

E. WAC 173–400–060, Emission 

Standards for General Process Units 

Ecology’s changes to this section 

include an updated reference to EPA 

test methods and a minor word change. 

The EPA reviewed these changes and is 

proposing to determine that WAC 173– 

400–060 meets the requirements for 

approval under section 110 of the CAA. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
39354 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 132 / Thursday, July 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

2Ecology’s NSR rules refer to the approval 

document as an ‘‘order’’ or ‘‘order of approval’’ 

rather than a permit and an application as a ‘‘notice 

of construction application’’ rather than a permit 

application. 

F. WAC 173–400–070, Emission 

Standards for Certain Source Categories 

Ecology requested that the EPA 

replace WAC 173–400–070(1) through 

(6) currently in the SIP with updated 

versions, adopted as of November 28, 

2012. The changes add silo burners as 

sources covered by the emission 

standards of this subsection, expand the 

areas for which additional requirements 

may be established (by removing the 

reference to sensitive areas in WAC 

173–400–040(1)(d)), and include minor 

language clarifications and updated 

references. The EPA reviewed these 

changes and is proposing to determine 

that they meet the requirements for 

approval under section 110 of the CAA. 

G. WAC 173–400–081, Startup and 

Shutdown and WAC 173–400–091, 

Voluntary Limits on Emissions 

Ecology’s update to both of these 

sections consists of very minor wording 

changes from the versions last approved 

by the EPA. One change merits further 

discussion. WAC 173–400–091 

authorizes Ecology to issue regulatory 

orders setting voluntary limits on the 

potential to emit of a source, which 

limits could be used to allow a source 

to avoid applicability of certain CAA 

‘‘major’’ source programs. In 1995, the 

EPA approved this regulation as 

meeting the requirements for Federallyenforceable state operating permit 

programs set forth in 54 FR 27274 (June 

28, 1989), with respect to criteria 

pollutants and pollutants regulated 

under the PSD program under section 

110 of the CAA (as part of the SIP) and 

with respect to hazardous air pollutants 

under section 112(l) of the CAA (as part 

of Ecology’s CAA section 112 program 

and not as part of the SIP). See 60 FR 

9805 (proposed action); 60 FR 28726 

(final action). Ecology has revised WAC 

173–400–091 to delete the language 

stating that such orders ‘‘shall be 

federally enforceable upon approval of 

this section as an element of the 

Washington state implementation plan.’’ 

This is consistent with a Federal court 

decision vacating the requirement that 

limits be Federally-enforceable to be 

effective as a means of limiting a 

source’s ‘‘potential to emit’’ for 

purposes of avoiding being considered a 

major source under the PSD or major 

NNSR program. Because Ecology has 

requested EPA approval of this revised 

provision in the Washington SIP, 

however, limits on potential to emit 

such pollutants created under WAC 

173–400–091 will continue to be 

Federally-enforceable, notwithstanding 

the revised language in Ecology’s rule. 

See Release of Interim Policy on Federal 

Enforceability of Limitations on 

Potential to Emit, by John S. Seitz, 

Director, Office of Air Quality Planning 

and Standards, Office of Air and 

Radiation and Robert I. Van Heuvelen, 

Director, Office of Regulatory 

Enforcement, Office of Enforcement and 

Compliance Assurance, dated January 

22, 1996. As with our previous 

approval, we are approving the revised 

version for purposes of the Washington 

SIP only with respect to criteria 

pollutants and pollutants regulated 

under the PSD program. In sum, the 

EPA reviewed the changes to these 

regulations and we are proposing to 

determine that they meet the 

requirements for approval under section 

110 of the CAA. 

H. WAC 173–400–100, Registration 

Program 

The registration program was 

approved into the SIP in 1993 under 

WAC 173–400–100. Ecology has since 

significantly revised this section and the 

registration program, which is now 

contained in WAC 173–400–099 

through –104. Ecology has not 

submitted these sections for approval 

and has requested that the version of 

WAC 173–400–100 currently in the SIP 

be removed. Ecology’s submittal 

explains that, unlike the version of 

WAC 173–400–100 currently in the 

Federally-approved SIP, Washington’s 

current registration regulations (WAC 

173–400–099 through –104) no longer 

are a means of determining the 

applicability of Washington’s new 

source review permitting requirements. 

Moreover, the registration provisions do 

not impose air pollution control 

requirements on sources or implement 

or enforce Federal standards. Based on 

the EPA’s review of the section and 

Ecology’s explanation for its request, we 

are proposing to remove WAC 173–400– 

100 from the SIP. 

I. WAC 173–400–105, Records, 

Monitoring, and Reporting 

WAC 173–400–105 contains 

provisions implementing the air 

emissions reporting requirements and 

source surveillance requirements in 40 

CFR part 51, subparts A and K. 

Revisions to this section update 

references to pollutants (requiring the 

inclusion of PM2.5, oxides of nitrogen, 

and ammonia in emission inventories), 

test methods, and continuous emissions 

monitoring requirements. Revisions also 

clarify the existing exemption for 

monitoring required of sources subject 

to Federal standards, such as the NSPS 

or National Emissions Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS). A 

key change is the addition of detailed 

requirements for continuous emission 

monitoring systems (CEMs) that are not 

required by NSPS, NESHAPS or other 

identified Federal standards. The EPA 

reviewed the changes to WAC 173–400– 

105 and we are proposing to determine 

that the changes meet the requirements 

for approval under section 110 of the 

CAA and 40 CFR part 51, subparts A 

and K. 

J. Minor New Source Review: WAC 173– 

400–110; WAC 173–400–111; WAC 173– 

400–112; WAC 173–400–113; WAC 173– 

400–036; and WAC 173–400–560 

Ecology’s minor NSR program 2 was 

last approved into the SIP in 1995. 

Since then, Ecology has revised the 

applicability provisions, restructured 

the regulations, made many clarifying 

revisions, and made some substantive 

revisions. Together, WAC 173–400–110 

through –113 are the starting point for 

any source seeking to construct a new 

source or modify an existing source. 

Specific provisions in these sections 

direct sources constructing a ‘‘major’’ 

source or making a ‘‘major 

modification’’ to a ‘‘major’’ source in an 

attainment or unclassifiable area to also 

comply with the requirements of WAC 

173–400–700 through –750 (PSD) and in 

a nonattainment area to also comply 

with the requirements of WAC 173– 

400–800 through –860 (major NNSR). 

See, for example, WAC 173–400– 

110(1)(d). As discussed above, although 

Ecology’s submittal also includes 

regulations covering the PSD and the 

major NNSR permitting programs, the 

EPA intends to address these major 

source NSR program regulations in 

separate actions. Accordingly, the EPA’s 

review of and proposed approval of the 

revised WAC 173–400–110 through 

–113, 173–400–036, and 173–400–560 

in this action is not a determination that 

these revised regulations meet 

requirements for approval of a SIPapproved PSD permitting program (40 

CFR 51.166) or a SIP-approved major 

NNSR permitting program (40 CFR 

51.165). 

1. Applicability 

As discussed in Ecology’s SIP 

submittal, the minor NSR rules 

approved by the EPA in 1995 required 

(1) all new sources listed as being 

required to register with the state or the 

local clean air agency and (2) existing 

sources being modified and having 

emission increases to undergo NSR and 

receive an order of approval prior to 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 132 / Thursday, July 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 39355 

3The Tacoma-Pierce County fine particulate 

matter (PM2.5) nonattainment area (Tacoma-Pierce 

County) was designated for violating the 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS established in 2006 (71 FR 61144, 

October 17, 2006). For this area, elevated 24-hour 

PM2.5 levels were driven by residential wood smoke 

emissions (74%) rather than industrial emissions 

(2%). In part due to community outreach, more 

stringent controls on residential wood smoke, and 

fleet turnover with cleaner cars, Tacoma-Pierce 

County met the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS based on 

2009–2011 data (77 FR 53772, September 4, 2012), 

as well as more recent 2010–2012 data (78 FR 

57503, September 19, 2013). 

construction. State law was amended in 

1996 to require Ecology to develop a 

listing of de minimis emission sources 

which would not require preconstruction review and approval. 

Specifically, RCW 70.94 .152(11) states, 

‘‘[n]o person is required to submit a 

notice of construction or receive 

approval for a new source that is 

deemed by the department of ecology or 

board to have de minimis impact on air 

quality. The department of ecology shall 

adopt and periodically update rules 

identifying categories of de minimis 

new sources. The department of ecology 

may identify de minimis new sources by 

category, size, or emission thresholds.’’ 

RCW 70.94 .152(12) adds, ‘‘[f]or 

purposes of this section, ‘de minimis 

new sources’ means new sources with 

trivial levels of emissions that do not 

pose a threat to human health or the 

environment.’’ 

In response to that statutory directive, 

Ecology revised WAC 173–400–110 to 

exempt from review de minimis 

emission sources in two different ways: 

(1) Through a list of emission units and 

activities determined to have de 

minimis emissions, and (2) through 

annual emissions threshold levels 

determined to be de minimis for nonlisted emission units and activities. 

Ecology’s annual emission exemption 

thresholds are equal to five percent of 

the PSD significance levels defined in 

40 CFR 52.21(b)(23), as they existed in 

1997. In its submittal, Ecology explains 

that its annual emissions exemption 

thresholds are lower than the levels in 

the SIPs of 12 other states it reviewed 

in developing its thresholds, and also 

lower than the annual emissions 

exemption thresholds in the EPA’s rule 

for New Sources and Modifications in 

Indian Country (Tribal NSR rule) at 40 

CFR 49.153(b)(3), Table 1. Ecology also 

compared its list of exempted emission 

units and activities with those of 12 

other states and the EPA’s Tribal NSR 

rule and found that its list of exempt 

units and activities is similar to the lists 

of other states and in the Tribal NSR 

rule, although each state’s list reflects 

differences in the mix of sources and 

priorities of the state. Ecology noted that 

where a particular exempt unit or 

activity had a size cutoff to be 

considered de minimis, Ecology’s 

cutoffs were often lower than for 

comparable emission units and activity 

exemptions in the SIPs of other states. 

In addition to comparing its 

exemption list and thresholds to those 

of other states with SIP-approved minor 

NSR programs and with the Tribal NSR 

rule, Ecology also conducted modeling 

to demonstrate that its list of exempt 

emission units and activities, and its 

exemption thresholds would not cause 

or contribute to an exceedance of the 

NAAQS. Ecology’s justification and 

modeling is also supported by the EPA’s 

ambient air quality monitoring data for 

the State of Washington. This 

information shows that, despite 

increasingly more stringent NAAQS 

over the years, Washington has 

remained in attainment for all criteria 

pollutants with the exception of one 

area designated as nonattainment for 

PM2.5 in 2009 that has since met the 

standard.3

2. Permit Processing and Issuance 

Ecology has consolidated in WAC 

173–400–111 many of the permit 

processing and issuance criteria the EPA 

previously approved into the SIP and 

that were previously contained in WAC 

173–400–110, WAC 173–400–112, and 

WAC 173–400–113. This section now 

contains provisions for determining the 

completeness of applications, criteria 

for approval of notice of construction 

approvals, timeframes for issuing 

approvals, appeals, and revisions. The 

EPA views this consolidation of the 

permit issuance and processing 

procedures as administrative, clarifying, 

and non-substantive. 

3. Minor NSR in Nonattainment Areas 

The EPA last approved this section on 

June 2, 1995 (60 FR 28726). The current 

version of WAC 173–400–112, adopted 

in 2012, remains substantively the same 

for minor sources in nonattainment 

areas. The most significant change is 

that Ecology moved the major NNSR 

requirements to WAC 173–400–800 

through –850 in order to provide clarity 

and to more easily incorporate changes 

to the EPA program, including 

implementation of the 2002 NSR Reform 

requirements (67 FR 80186, December 

31, 2002). As discussed above, the EPA 

intends to evaluate WAC 173–400–800 

through –850 in a separate proposed 

action in the near future. However, in 

the interim, we believe there is 

significant value in proposing approval 

of the revised WAC 173–400–112 so that 

the federally enforceable SIP will 

contain the most up to date 

requirements for minor sources in 

nonattainment areas. 

4. Minor NSR in Attainment and 

Unclassifiable Areas 

Most of the revisions submitted for 

approval in WAC 173–400–113 are 

clarifying in nature, but do not 

substantively alter the underlying 

provisions previously approved by the 

EPA. For example, Ecology’s rules still 

require that a new source or 

modification will employ ‘‘best 

available control technology’’ for all 

pollutants not previously emitted or 

whose emissions would increase as a 

result of the new source or modification, 

which goes beyond the minimum 

requirements for a minor NSR program 

in 40 CFR 51.160. 

We note that Ecology did not submit 

as part of its SIP revision the second 

sentence in subsection (3), which relies 

on impact levels in Table 4 of this 

regulation as a basis for concluding that 

a proposed new source or modification 

does not cause or contribute to a 

violation of the NAAQS. The language 

in this sentence is similar to language 

that was recently vacated by a court and 

repealed by the EPA in the EPA’s PSD 

regulations with respect to PM2.5. See 

Sierra Club v. EPA, 703 F.3d 458 (D.C. 

Cir. 2013); 78 FR 73698 (December 9, 

2013). Ecology explained that its 

decision not to submit this sentence in 

subsection (3) is to ensure that its SIP 

is consistent with the court decision. 

In subsection (4), Ecology has 

included PM2.5 significance levels for 

determining if impacts from a new 

major source or major modification to a 

major source in an attainment or 

unclassifiable area will cause or 

contribute to a violation of an ambient 

air quality standard in a nearby 

nonattainment area. Ecology’s 

significance levels contained in WAC 

173–400–113(4)(a) are the same as the 

EPA’s significance levels contained in 

40 CFR 51.165(b)(2). Ecology also added 

WAC 173–400–113(4)(b) to implement 

the emission reduction offset provisions 

contained in 40 CFR 51.165(b)(3). 

5. Relocation of Portable Sources 

The state regulations regarding 

portable sources were originally part of 

the SIP-approved regulations under 

WAC 173–400–110(5). Ecology moved 

these provisions to a stand-alone 

section, WAC 173–400–036. Portable 

sources that meet the requirements of 

this section may, without obtaining a 

site-specific or permitting authorityspecific order of approval, relocate and 

operate in any jurisdiction in which the 

permitting authority has adopted this 

section by reference. Permitting 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
39356 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 132 / Thursday, July 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

authority participation in the interjurisdictional provisions of this section 

is optional. Before a source can move, 

it must: Already have an approved 

notice of construction order identifying 

the emission units as a portable source; 

submit a relocation notice and a copy of 

the applicable portable source order of 

approval to the permitting authority 

with jurisdiction over the intended 

operation location a minimum of fifteen 

calendar days before the portable source 

begins operation at the new location; 

submit the emission inventory required 

under WAC 173–400–105 to each 

permitting authority in whose 

jurisdiction the portable source operated 

during the preceding year; and limit 

operations to one year or less. 

Importantly, a source moving into 

nonattainment area that emits a 

pollutant or precursor for which the 

area is classified as nonattainment must 

obtain a site-specific order of approval 

and may not rely on this provision. In 

addition, major stationary sources must 

comply with all otherwise applicable 

PSD requirements. 

6. General Orders of Approval 

WAC 173–400–560 provides an 

alternative path to meeting minor NSR 

permit obligations for certain new 

sources, fulfilling the requirements 

contained in WAC 173–400–110, 173– 

400–111, 173–400–112, or 173–400– 

113. Under this provision, Ecology is 

authorized to issue a general order of 

approval that would authorize 

construction or modification of a 

specific type of emission unit or source, 

subject to specified terms and 

conditions. The general order of 

approval must identify criteria by which 

an emission unit or source may qualify 

for coverage under the associated 

general order of approval and include 

terms and conditions under which the 

owner or operator agrees to install and/ 

or operate the covered emission unit or 

source. 

Ecology’s SIP revision submittal 

explains that it intends to use this 

authority for source categories where it 

has had considerable experience in 

issuing approvals, where ‘‘best available 

control technology’’ (BACT) emission 

controls have not been changing or 

anticipated to change in the near future, 

and the use of BACT emission controls 

will protect the NAAQS. To date, 

Ecology has issued general orders of 

approval for dairy anaerobic digesters, 

concrete batch plants, gas-powered 

emergency electric generators, rock 

crushers, small water heaters and steam 

generating boilers, auto body shops, and 

asphalt plants. Importantly, applying for 

a general order of approval is not an 

option if the emission unit or source is 

part of a major stationary source or 

major modification subject to the 

requirements of WAC 173–400–700 

through –750 or WAC 173–400–800 

through –860, if the emission unit or 

source triggers applicability of the 

operating permit program under Chapter 

173–401 WAC, or if the new source or 

modification would require 

modification of an existing operating 

permit. These limitations are designed 

to ensure that the applicant does not 

divide a project into smaller projects to 

avoid major NSR permitting, or does not 

avoid additional requirements found in 

WAC 173–401, Air Operating Permits. 

7. Summary 

The EPA has reviewed the revisions 

to WAC 173–400–110 to 113, –036, and 

560 as well as the information 

submitted by Ecology in its submittal. 

Based on our review, we are proposing 

to determine that these provisions, 

together with the public notice 

requirements in WAC 173–400–171 

discussed below, meet the requirements 

for an approvable minor NSR program 

under 110 of the CAA and 40 CFR 

51.160, 51.161, and 51.163. The EPA 

also notes that Ecology is not submitting 

for approval into the SIP several 

provisions in WAC 173–400–110 

through 113, –036, and –560, primarily 

related to toxic air pollutants, because 

these sections are not related to 

regulation of criteria pollutants, are not 

essential for meeting and maintaining 

the NAAQS, or are not otherwise 

required under section 110 of the CAA. 

A full list of the sections not submitted 

for approval into the SIP is included in 

the docket for this action. 

K. WAC 173–400–116, Increment 

Protection 

As previously discussed, the EPA 

intends to evaluate and propose a 

determination on the major source 

permitting programs, PSD and major 

NNSR, in separate actions. Because 

WAC 173–400–116 implements the PSD 

increment protection requirements, the 

EPA will address this section in a 

separate action as part of our evaluation 

of Ecology’s PSD program contained in 

WAC 173–400–700 through –750. 

L. WAC 173–400–117, Special 

Protection Requirements for Federal 

Class I Areas 

WAC 173–400–117 applies only to 

major sources. The EPA intends to 

address this section in a separate action 

as part of our evaluation of Ecology’s 

PSD program contained in WAC 173– 

400–700 through –750. 

M. WAC 173–400–118, Designation of 

Class I, II, and III Areas 

This new section codifies the 

designation of Class I areas previously 

approved into the Washington SIP in 

WAC 173–400–030, Definitions. These 

areas are the Alpine Lakes Wilderness, 

Glacier Peak Wilderness, Goat Rocks 

Wilderness, Adams Wilderness; Mount 

Rainier National Park, North Cascades 

National Park, Olympic National Park, 

Pasayten Wilderness, and Spokane 

Indian Reservation. WAC 173–400–118 

also lays out procedures for 

redesignation of Class I, II, and III areas 

consistent with the EPA requirements 

contained in 40 CFR 51.166(g). The EPA 

reviewed this new section and we are 

proposing to determine that it meets the 

requirements for approval under section 

110 of the CAA and 40 CFR 51.166(g). 

N. WAC 173–400–131, Issuance of 

Emission Reduction Credits 

This new section implements a 

program to issue emission reduction 

credits useable for offsets required by 

the NNSR permitting program. The EPA 

will address this section in a separate 

action as part of our evaluation of 

Ecology’s NNSR program contained in 

WAC 173–400–800 through –860. 

O. WAC 173–400–136, Use of Emission 

Reduction Credits (ERC) 

This new section implements the 

requirements for the use of emission 

reduction credits, including their use as 

offsets required by the NNSR permitting 

program and other uses allowed in 

Chapter 173–400 WAC. The EPA will 

address this section in a separate action 

as part of our evaluation of Ecology’s 

NNSR program contained in WAC 173– 

400–800 through –860. 

P. WAC 173–400–151, Retrofit 

Requirements for Visibility Protection 

This section implementing the Best 

Available Retrofit Technology (BART) 

program for existing stationary sources 

was last approved by the EPA in 1995. 

Ecology has revised the rule to address 

a number of inconsistencies with the 

requirements of 40 CFR part 51, sections 

51.301–306, in particular, to align the 

definition of ‘‘existing stationary 

facility’’ (previously in WAC 173–400– 

030(26) and now in WAC 173–400–151) 

with the Federal definition in 40 CFR 

51.301 by limiting BART applicability 

to the 26 listed source types and 

categories, and to those facilities that 

came into existence between 1962 and 

1977. Because the version of the rule 

currently in the SIP had not previously 

been applied to any source, revising it 

to be consistent with the Federal 

definition had no substantive effect on 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 132 / Thursday, July 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 39357 

the actual implementation of the BART 

process or defining which sources could 

be potentially subject to BART in 

Washington. This revision was used to 

develop the 2010 Regional Haze State 

Implementation Plan for Washington. 

The EPA reviewed these changes to the 

BART program and we are proposing to 

determine that they meet the 

requirements for approval under section 

110 of the CAA and 40 CFR part 51, 

subpart P, Protection of Visibility. 

Q. WAC 173–400–171, Public Notice 

The section establishes procedures for 

informing the public of the receipt of 

Notice of Construction applications and 

on the criteria that would result in a 

public notice and public comment 

period on the permitting agency’s 

proposed action. The version of this 

regulation currently approved in the SIP 

limits the types of Notice of 

Construction applications that are 

subject to public notice and comment to 

those that would authorize emissions 

above certain thresholds. Since then, 

Ecology has broadened its public notice 

and comment requirements so that 

notice of receipt of each Notice of 

Construction application is posted on 

the permitting authority’s Web site. In 

addition, to requiring notice and a 30- 

day public comment period on Notice of 

Construction applications that would 

authorize emissions above certain 

thresholds, this provision now also 

requires notice and a 30-day public 

comment period on any application for 

which a written request for public 

notice and comment was received as a 

result of the internet posting. In 

addition, this section requires notice 

and public comment for certain actions, 

such as use of a modified or substituted 

air quality model, other than a guideline 

model in 40 CFR part 51, appendix W; 

orders issued under WAC 173–400–091 

that establish limitations on a source’s 

potential to emit; and any application or 

other action for which the permitting 

authority determines that there is 

significant public interest. The EPA 

reviewed these changes to the public 

participation procedures and we are 

proposing to determine that they meet 

the requirements for approval under 

section 110 of the CAA, including for 

minor NSR (see 40 CFR 51.161), 

Federally-enforceable state operating 

permit programs (54 FR 27274, June 28, 

1989), and stack height procedures (40 

CFR 51.164). As with the EPA’s review 

and proposed action on WAC 173–400– 

110 through –113, our review and 

proposed action on WAC 173–400–171 

in this notice is not a determination that 

this revised regulations meet 

requirements for approval under the 

EPA’s regulations for SIP-approved PSD 

permitting programs (40 CFR 51.166) or 

SIP-approved major NNSR permitting 

programs (40 CFR 51.165). 

R. WAC 173–400–175, Public 

Information 

This new section provides that, 

subject to certain exceptions, all 

information, including copies of notice 

of construction applications, orders, and 

applications to modify orders are 

available for public inspection. As 

provided in RCW 70.94.205 information 

that relates ‘‘to processes or production 

unique to the owner or operator, or is 

likely to affect adversely the competitive 

position of such owner or operator if 

released to the public or to a 

competitor’’ can be claimed as exempt 

from disclosure except to the extent 

such information is ambient air quality 

data or emission data. The EPA 

reviewed this new section and is 

proposing to determine that it meets the 

requirements for approval under section 

110 of the CAA and 40 CFR 51.116(c) 

and 51.230(f). 

S. WAC 173–400–200, Creditable Stack 

Height and Dispersion Techniques 

This section last modified effective 

February 10, 2005, makes only minor 

wording clarifications from the version 

previously approved into the SIP. The 

EPA reviewed these minor changes and 

is proposing to determine that they meet 

the requirements for approval under 

section 110 of the CAA, including the 

stack height provisions in 40 CFR 

51.118 and the stack height procedures 

in 40 CFR 51.164. 

IV. The EPA’s Proposed Action 

Consistent with the discussion above, 

the EPA proposes to approve many of 

the submitted SIP provisions and to take 

action on the remaining provisions 

separately, as discussed below. This 

action, if finalized, will result in 

changes to the Washington SIP in 40 

CFR part 52, subpart WW. 

A. Rules To Approve Into the SIP 

The EPA proposes to approve into the 

SIP at 40 CFR part 52, subpart WW, the 

Ecology regulations listed in Table 1. It 

is important to note that Ecology did not 

submit for approval into the SIP certain 

provisions of Chapter 173–400 WAC, 

generally because they are not related to 

the criteria pollutants regulated under 

title I of the CAA, are not essential for 

meeting and maintaining the NAAQS, 

or are not related to the requirements for 

SIPs under section 110 of the CAA. 

These exceptions are noted in the 

‘‘Explanation’’ column of the table. The 

EPA’s review of and proposed approval 

of the revised WAC 173–400–110 

through –113, 173–400–036, 173–400– 

171, and 173–400–560 in this action is 

not a determination that these revised 

regulations meet requirements for major 

sources such as a SIP-approved PSD 

permitting program (40 CFR 51.166), a 

SIP-approved major NNSR permitting 

program (40 CFR 51.165), or a SIPapproved visibility program (40 CFR 

51.307). These regulations are marked 

with asterisks in Table 1. The EPA will 

evaluate these regulations for 

consistency with the requirements for 

major NSR permitting programs and 

visibility in a separate action. 

TABLE 1—WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY REGULATIONS FOR PROPOSED APPROVAL

State citation Title/subject State 

effective date Explanation 

Chapter 173–400 WAC, General Regulations for Air Pollution Sources 

173–400–020 ........................ Applicability ....................................................... 12/29/12. 

173–400–030 ........................ Definitions ......................................................... 12/29/12 Except: 

173–400–030(91). 

173–400–036 * ...................... Relocation of Portable Sources ........................ 12/29/12. 

173–400–040 ........................ General Standards for Maximum Emissions .... 4/1/11 Except: 

173–400–040(2)(c); 

173–400–040(2)(d); 

173–400–040(3); 

173–400–040(5); 

173–400–040(7), second paragraph. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
39358 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 132 / Thursday, July 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1—WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY REGULATIONS FOR PROPOSED APPROVAL—Continued 

State citation Title/subject State 

effective date Explanation 

173–400–050 ........................ Emission Standards for Combustion and Incineration Units.12/29/12 Except: 

173–400–050(4); 

173–400–050(5). 

173–400–060 ........................ Emission Standards for General Process Units 2/10/05. 

173–400–070 ........................ Emission Standards for Certain Source Categories.12/29/12 Except: 

173–400–070(7); 

173–400–070(8). 

173–400–081 ........................ Startup and Shutdown ...................................... 4/1/11. 

173–400–091 ........................ Voluntary Limits on Emissions ......................... 4/1/11. 

173–400–105 ........................ Records, Monitoring, and Reporting ................. 12/29/12. 

173–400–110 * ...................... New Source Review (NSR) for Sources and 

Portable Sources.

12/29/12 Except: 

173–400–110(1)(c)(ii)(C); 

173–400–110(1)(e); 

173–400–110(2)(d); 

The part of WAC 173–400–110(4)(b)(vi) that 

says, 

• ‘‘not for use with materials containing toxic 

air pollutants, as listed in chapter 173–460 

WAC,’’; 

The part of 400–110(4)(e)(iii) that says, 

• ‘‘where toxic air pollutants as defined in 

chapter 173–460 WAC are not emitted’’; 

The part of 400–110(4)(e)(f)(i) that says, 

• ‘‘that are not toxic air pollutants listed in 

chapter 173–460 WAC’’; 

The part of 400–110(4)(h)(xviii) that says, 

• ‘‘, to the extent that toxic air pollutant gases 

as defined in chapter 173–460 WAC are not 

emitted’’; 

The part of 400–110 (4)(h)(xxxiii) that says, 

• ‘‘where no toxic air pollutants as listed under 

chapter 173–460 WAC are emitted’’; 

The part of 400–110(4)(h)(xxxiv) that says, 

• ‘‘, or ≤1% (by weight) toxic air pollutants as 

listed in chapter 173–460 WAC’’; 

The part of 400–110(4)(h)(xxxv) that says, 

• ‘‘or ≤1% (by weight) toxic air pollutants’’; 

The part of 400–110(4)(h)(xxxvi) that says, 

• ‘‘or ≤1% (by weight) toxic air pollutants as 

listed in chapter 173–460 WAC’’; 

400–110(4)(h)(xl), second sentence; The last 

row of the table in 173–400–110(5)(b) regarding exemption levels for Toxic Air Pollutants. 

173–400–111 * ...................... Processing Notice of Construction Applications 

for Sources, Stationary Sources and Portable Sources.

12/29/12 Except: 

173–400–111(3)(h); 

173–400–111(3)(i); 

The part of 173–400–111(8)(a)(v) that says, 

• ‘‘and 173–460–040,’’; 

173–400–111(9). 

173–400–112 * ...................... Requirements for New Sources in Nonattainment Areas—Review for Compliance with 

Regulations.

12/29/12 Except: 

173–400–112(8). 

173–400–113 * ...................... New Sources in Attainment or Unclassifiable 

Areas—Review for Compliance with Regulations.

12/29/12 Except: 

173–400–113(3), second sentence. 

173–400–118 ........................ Designation of Class I, II, and III Areas ........... 12/29/12. 

173–400–151 ........................ Retrofit Requirements for Visibility Protection .. 2/10/05. 

173–400–171 * ...................... Public Notice and Opportunity for Public Comment.12/29/12 Except: 

The part of 173–400–171(3)(b) that says, 

• ‘‘or any increase in emissions of a toxic air 

pollutant above the acceptable source impact level for that toxic air pollutant as regulated under chapter 173–460 WAC’’; 

173–400–171(12). 

173–400–175 ........................ Public Information ............................................. 2/10/05. 

173–400–200 ........................ Creditable Stack Height and Dispersion Techniques.2/10/05. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 132 / Thursday, July 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 39359 

TABLE 1—WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY REGULATIONS FOR PROPOSED APPROVAL—Continued 

State citation Title/subject State 

effective date Explanation 

173–400–560 * ...................... General Order of Approval ............................... 12/29/12 Except: 

The part of 173–400–560(1)(f) that says, 

• ‘‘173–460 WAC’’. 

B. Rules To Remove From the SIP 

For the reasons discussed in section H 

above, the EPA is proposing to remove 

from the SIP 173–400–100 WAC, 

originally adopted September 20, 1993, 

and which has since been revised. 

C. Rules on Which No Action Is Taken 

As previously discussed, the EPA 

intends to evaluate and propose a 

determination on the major source 

permitting programs, major NNSR and 

PSD, in separate actions. Table 2 lists 

the rules upon which the EPA is taking 

no action at this time. 

TABLE 2—WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY REGULATIONS UPON WHICH THE EPA IS TAKING NO ACTION

AT THIS TIME

State citation Title/subject 

173–400–116 ............................................................................................... Increment Protection.

173–400–117 ............................................................................................... Special Protection Requirements for Federal Class I Areas. 

173–400–131 ............................................................................................... Issuance of Emission Reduction Credits. 

173–400–136 ............................................................................................... Use of Emission Reduction Credits (ERC). 

173–400–700 ............................................................................................... Review of Major Stationary Sources of Air Pollution. 

173–400–710 ............................................................................................... Definitions. 

173–400–720 ............................................................................................... Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD). 

173–400–730 ............................................................................................... Prevention of Significant Deterioration Application Processing Procedures. 

173–400–740 ............................................................................................... PSD Permitting Public Involvement Requirements. 

173–400–750 ............................................................................................... Revisions to PSD Permits. 

173–400–800 ............................................................................................... Major Stationary Source and Major Modification in a Nonattainment 

Area. 

173–400–810 ............................................................................................... Major Stationary Source and Major Modification Definitions 

173–400–820 ............................................................................................... Determining if a New Stationary Source or Modification to a Stationary Source is Subject to these Requirements. 

173–400–830 ............................................................................................... Permitting Requirements. 

173–400–840 ............................................................................................... Emission Offset Requirements. 

173–400–850 ............................................................................................... Actual Emissions Plantwide Applicability Limitation (PAL). 

173–400–860 ............................................................................................... Public Involvement Procedures. 

In addition, as discussed above, the 

EPA’s proposed approval of WAC 173– 

400–110 through 113, –036, –560, and 

–171 in this Federal Register 

publication is not a determination that 

these revised regulations meet 

requirements for approval under the 

EPA’s regulations for SIP-approved PSD 

permitting programs (40 CFR 51.166) or 

SIP- approved major NNSR permitting 

programs (40 CFR 51.165). The EPA will 

evaluate WAC 173–400–110 through 

113, –036, –560, and –171 for 

consistency with the requirements for 

major NSR permitting programs and 

visibility in a separate action. 

D. Scope of Proposed Action 

As previously discussed with respect 

to WAC 173–400–020, Applicability, the 

EPA’s proposed approval for this action 

is limited to only those counties or 

sources where the Department of 

Ecology has direct jurisdiction. This 

proposed action excludes sources 

subject to EFSEC or local clean air 

agency jurisdiction. The counties where 

Ecology has direct jurisdiction are: 

Adams, Asotin, Chelan, Columbia, 

Douglas, Ferry, Franklin, Garfield, 

Grant, Kittitas, Klickitat, Lincoln, 

Okanogan, Pend Oreille, San Juan, 

Stevens, Walla Walla, and Whitman 

counties. The EPA also notes that under 

the SIP approved provisions of WAC 

173–405–012, WAC 173–410–012, and 

WAC 173–415–012, Ecology has 

statewide, direct jurisdiction for kraft 

pulp mills, sulfite pulping mills, and 

primary aluminum plants. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, the 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed 

action merely approves the state’s law 

as meeting Federal requirements and 

does not impose additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

the state’s 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); 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
39360 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 132 / Thursday, July 10, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

• 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 the requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

this action does not involve technical 

standards; 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, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because it will not 

impose substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. The 

SIP is not approved to apply in Indian 

country located in the state, except for 

non-trust land 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 and the EPA is therefore approving 

this SIP on such lands. Consistent with 

EPA policy, the EPA nonetheless 

provided a consultation opportunity to 

the Puyallup Tribe in a letter dated 

February 25, 2014. The EPA did not 

receive a request for consultation. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: June 26, 2014. 

Dennis J. McLerran, 

Regional Administrator, Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2014–16141 Filed 7–9–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 62 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0475; FRL–9913–31- 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of State 

Air Quality Plans for Designated 

Facilities and Pollutants; Delaware, 

District of Columbia, and West 

Virginia; Control of Emissions From 

Existing Sewage Sludge Incinerator 

Units 

AGENCY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

Clean Air Act (CAA) negative 

declarations for the State of Delaware, 

the District of Columbia, and the State 

of West Virginia for existing sewage 

sludge incinerator (SSI) units. These 

negative declarations certify that SSI 

units subject to the requirements of 

sections 111(d) and 129 of the CAA do 

not exist within the jurisdictional 

boundaries of the Delaware Department 

of Natural Resources and Environmental 

Control (DNREC), the District 

Department of the Environment (DDOE), 

and the West Virginia Department of 

Environmental Protection (WVDEP). 

DATES: Comments must be received in 

writing by August 11, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2013–0475 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Email: rehn.brian@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0475, 

Brian Rehn, Acting Associate Director, 

Office of Permits and Air Toxics, 

Mailcode 3AP10, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2013– 

0475. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change, and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

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

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy during normal business 

hours at the Air Protection Division, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the submittals are available at 

the Delaware Department of Natural 

Resources and Environmental Control, 

89 Kings Highway, P.O. Box 1401, 

Dover, Delaware 19903, the District of 

Columbia Department of the 

Environment, Air Quality Division, 

1200 1st Street NE., Fifth Floor, 

Washington, DC 20002, and the West 

Virginia Department of Environmental 

Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 

57th Street SE., Charleston, West 

Virginia 25304. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Mike Gordon, (215) 814–2039, or by 

email at gordon.mike@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of this 

Federal Register, the EPA is approving 

these negative declarations in a direct 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS