Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0151-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Permits: Federal Minor New Source Review Program in Indian Country
Posted Date: 2014-01-14T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 9 (Tuesday, January 14, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2545-2573]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-30345]

[[Page 2545]]

Vol. 79

Tuesday,

No. 9

January 14, 2014

Part II

Environmental Protection Agency

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

40 CFR Part 49

General Permits and Permits by Rule for the Federal Minor New Source 
Review Program in Indian Country; Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 79 , No. 9 / Tuesday, January 14, 2014 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 2546]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 49

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0151; FRL-9904-09-OAR]
RIN 2060-AQ95

General Permits and Permits by Rule for the Federal Minor New 
Source Review Program in Indian Country

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing general 
permits for use in Indian country pursuant to the Indian Country Minor 
New Source Review (NSR) rule for new or modified minor sources in the 
following five source categories: Hot mix asphalt (HMA) plants; stone 
quarrying, crushing, and screening (SQCS) facilities; auto body repair 
and miscellaneous surface coating operations; gasoline dispensing 
facilities (GDFs); and petroleum dry cleaning facilities. In the 
alternative, the EPA is also proposing permits by rule for use in 
Indian country for new or modified minor sources in three of the source 
categories: Auto body repair and miscellaneous surface coating 
operations; GDFs; and petroleum dry cleaning facilities. The EPA is 
also proposing certain changes to the Indian Country Minor NSR rule. 
The proposed changes include: Extending the deadline by when true minor 
sources in the oil and gas sector must receive minor source NSR 
permits; and allowing general permits and permits by rule for specific 
categories to create synthetic minor sources.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 17, 2014.
    Public Hearing. If anyone contacts us requesting to speak at a 
public hearing by February 4, 2014, we will hold a public hearing. 
Additional information about the hearing will be published in a 
subsequent Federal Register notice.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2011-0151, by one of the following methods:
     www.regulations.gov: Follow the online instructions for 
submitting comments.
     Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. Include Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OAR-2011-0151 in the subject line of the message.
     Fax: (202) 566-9744, attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2011-0151.
     Mail: Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0151, EPA, 
Mailcode: 6102T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460. 
Please include a total of two copies.
     Hand Delivery: The EPA Docket Center, Public Reading Room, 
EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460, 
Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0151. 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-HQ-OAR-
2011-0151. 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 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 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. For additional instructions on submitting comments, 
go to Section I.C of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this 
document.
    Docket: The EPA has established a docket for this rulemaking under 
Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0151. All documents in the docket are 
listed in the 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 either 
electronically in www.regulations.gov or under Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-
OAR-2011-0151, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave. NW., 
Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone 
number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone 
number for the Air Docket is (202) 564-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Christopher Stoneman, Outreach and 
Information Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, (C-
304-03), Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North 
Carolina, 27711, telephone number (919) 541-0823, facsimile number 
(919) 541-0072, email address: stoneman.chris@epa.gov.
    To request a public hearing or information pertaining to a public 
hearing on this document, contact Ms. Carolyn Childers, Outreach and 
Information Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards 
(C304-01), Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, 
North Carolina 27711; telephone number (919) 541-5604; fax number (919) 
541-0072; email address: childers.carolyn@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``reviewing 
authority,'' ``we,'' ``us'' and ``our'' refer to the EPA. The 
information in this preamble is organized as follows:

Table of Contents

I. General Information
    A. Does this action apply to me?
    B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments to the EPA?
    1. Submitting CBI
    2. Tips for Preparing Comments
    C. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related 
information?
    D. What acronyms, abbreviations and units are used in this 
preamble?
II. Purpose
    A. Proposed Action
    B. Areas Where the EPA Is Seeking Comment
III. Background
    A. Tribal Air Rule
    B. Indian Country Minor NSR Rule
    1. What is the Indian Country Minor NSR rule?
    2. What is a true minor source and how does it differ from a 
synthetic minor source?
    3. What are the minor NSR thresholds?
    4. What is a general permit?
    C. What is a permit by rule?
IV. Description of General Permit Program in Indian Country and the 
EPA's Use of This Package To Satisfy the General Permit Issuance 
Process

[[Page 2547]]

    A. General Permit Program
    B. How do sources apply for general permits?
    C. What are the required permitting elements?
V. Source Categories for Which Draft General Permits in Indian 
Country Are Available for Public Review
    A. Notice of Proposed General Permits
    B. Structure of General Permits
    C. The EPA's Control Technology Review
    D. Scope of Coverage Under Each General Permit
    E. Surrogate Annual Allowable Emission Limitations
    F. Requirements of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the 
National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)
VI. Summary of Specific Terms and Conditions of the General Permits 
and Request for Comment
    A. HMA Plants
    1. What is an HMA plant?
    2. What is in the proposed HMA general permit?
    3. What geographic restrictions are contained in the HMA general 
permit?
    B. SQCS Facilities
    1. What is a SQCS facility?
    2. What is in the proposed SQCS facility general permit?
    C. Request for Comment on the Proposed HMA Plant and SQCS 
Facility General Permits
    1. Throughput Production Limits as a Surrogate for Annual Ton 
Per Year Allowable Emission Limitations
    2. Setback Requirement
    3. Authorizing Multiple Locations
    4. Spark-ignition Engines
    D. Auto Body and Miscellaneous Surface Coating Operations
    1. What is an auto body repair and miscellaneous surface coating 
operation?
    2. What is in the proposed auto body repair and miscellaneous 
surface coating operations general permit?
    3. Request for Comment on the Proposed Auto Body Repair and 
Miscellaneous Surface Coating Operations General Permit
    a. Surrogate Annual Allowable Emission Limitations
    b. Covering Both Auto Body Repair and Miscellaneous Surface 
Coating Operations
    E. GDFs
    1. What is a GDF?
    2. What impact will the GDF National Emissions Standard for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants and onboard refueling vapor recovery 
control systems have on emissions from GDFs?
    3. Treatment of Diesel Fuel
    4. What are the requirements for the proposed general permit for 
GDFs in serious, severe, and extreme ozone nonattainment areas?
    5. What type of source may apply for coverage under the proposed 
GDF general permit?
    6. Request for Comment on the Proposed GDF General Permit
    a. Should the EPA establish an annual allowable emission 
limitation?
    b. Should proposed standing loss control requirements apply to 
GDFs in Indian country in potential future serious, severe, and 
extreme ozone nonattainment areas outside of California?
    F. Petroleum Dry Cleaning Facilities
    1. What is a petroleum dry cleaning facility?
    2. What is in the proposed petroleum dry cleaning facilities 
general permit?
    3. Request for Comment on the Proposed Petroleum Dry Cleaning 
Facilities General Permit
    a. Surrogate Annual Allowable Emission Limitations
    b. Should we establish additional requirements for serious, 
severe, and/or extreme ozone nonattainment areas?
VII. Description of the EPA's Proposed Permit by Rule Program in 
Indian Country
    A. What is a permit by rule?
    B. How would a permit by rule program operate in Indian country?
    C. Requirements of the ESA and NHPA
VIII. Proposed Permits by Rule
IX. Implementation Documents and Tools
X. Reconsideration of the Use of General Permits To Create Synthetic 
Minor Sources
XI. Additional Areas Where Comment Is Being Sought
    A. Should general permits and permits by rule be made available 
for sources in the same source category?
    B. Can sources have more than one general permit or permit by 
rule at a single location?
XII. Additional Source Categories for Which the EPA Is Planning To 
Propose General Permits and/or Permits by Rule
XIII. Rule Changes to the Indian Country Minor NSR Rule, Including 
Extension of Deadline for the Indian Country Minor NSR Rule
    A. Amending Sec.  49.151(c)(1)(iii)(B)
    B. Amending Sec.  49.156(e)
    C. Amending Sec.  49.160(c)(1)(ii) and (iii)
XIV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and 
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    Entities potentially affected by this proposed action include the 
EPA and tribal governments that are delegated administrative authority 
to assist the EPA with the implementation of the tribal minor source 
air permitting program and owners and operators of facilities located 
in Indian country as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151 and as provided in the 
NSR rule from the following source categories:

                       Table 1--Source Categories
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                      North
                                    American
       Industry category            industry      Examples of regulated
                                 classification          entities
                                     system
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HMA Facilities.................          324122  Asphalt Paving,
                                                  Roofing, and Saturated
                                                  Materials
                                                  Manufacturing.
                                         324121  Asphalt Paving Mixture
                                                  and Block
                                                  Manufacturing.
SQCS Facilities................          212311  Dimension Stone Mining
                                                  and Quarrying.
                                         212312  Crushed and Broken
                                                  Limestone Mining and
                                                  Quarrying.
                                         212313  Crushed and Broken
                                                  Granite Mining and
                                                  Quarrying.
                                         212319  Other Crushed and
                                                  Broken Stone Mining
                                                  and Quarrying.
                                         212321  Construction Sand and
                                                  Gravel Mining.
Auto Body Repair and                     811121  Automotive Body, Paint,
 Miscellaneous Surface Coating           332812   Interior, and Glass
 Operations.                                      Repair.
                                                 Metal Coating,
                                                  Engraving (Except
                                                  Jewelry and
                                                  Silverware), and
                                                  Allied Services to
                                                  Manufacturers.
GDFs...........................            4471  Gasoline stations.
                                          44711  Gasoline Stations with
                                                  Convenience Stores.

[[Page 2548]]

 
                                         447110  Gasoline Stations with
                                                  Convenience Stores.
                                          44719  Other Gasoline
                                                  Stations.
                                         447190  Other Gasoline
                                                  Stations.
Petroleum Dry Cleaning                   812320  Dry Cleaning and
 Facilities.                                      Laundry Services
                                                  (Except Coin-
                                                  Operated).
                                         812310  Coin-Operated Laundries
                                                  and Dry Cleaners.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This list is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather provides a 
guide for readers regarding entities likely to be potentially affected 
by this action. To determine whether your facility could be affected by 
this action, you should examine the applicability criteria in the final 
minor NSR program for Indian country, 40 CFR 49.153. If you have any 
questions regarding the applicability of this action to a particular 
entity, contact the person listed in the preceding section.

B. What should I consider as I prepare my comments to the EPA?

1. Submitting CBI
    Do not submit this information to the EPA through 
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.
    Send or deliver information identified as CBI only to the following 
address: Roberto Morales, OAQPS Document Control Officer (C404-02), 
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, EPA, Research Triangle 
Park, North Carolina 27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-
0151.
2. Tips for Preparing Comments
    When submitting comments, remember to:
     Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other 
identifying information (subject heading, Federal Register date and 
page number).
     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.
     Explain why you agree or disagree, suggest alternatives, 
and substitute language for your requested changes.
     Describe any assumptions and provide any technical 
information and/or data that you used.
     If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how 
you arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be 
reproduced.
     Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns and 
suggest alternatives.
     Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the 
use of profanity or personal threats.
     Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period 
deadline identified.

C. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related 
information?

    In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of 
this proposal will also be available on the World Wide Web. Following 
signature by the Acting EPA Assistant Administrator, a copy of this 
notice will be posted in the regulations and standards section of our 
NSR home page located at http://www.epa.gov/nsr and on the tribal NSR 
page at http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal/tribalnsr.html.

D. What acronyms, abbreviations and units are used in this preamble?

AST Aboveground storage tank.
CAA Clean Air Act.
CO Carbon monoxide.
EPA Environmental Protection Agency.
ESA Endangered Species Act.
FIP Federal Implementation Plan.
GDF Gasoline dispensing facility.
GPM Gallons per month.
GPY Gallons per year.
HAPs Hazardous Air Pollutants.
HMA Hot mix asphalt.
MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology.
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
NESHAP National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants.
NEI National Emissions Inventory.
NOX Nitrogen oxides.
NSR New Source Review.
NHPA National Historic Preservation Act.
NTTAA National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act.
OMB Office of Management and Budget.
ORVR Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery.
PM Particulate matter.
PSD Prevention of Significant Deterioration.
PTE Potential to Emit.
PSI Pounds per square inch.
RVP Reid Vapor Pressure.
SLC Standing loss control.
SIP State Implementation Plan.
SQCS Stone Quarrying, Crushing and Screening.
TIP Tribal Implementation Plan.
tpy Tons Per Year.
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
VOC Volatile organic compounds.

II. Purpose

A. Proposed Action

    In July 2011, the EPA issued the Indian Country Minor NSR rule that 
established, among other things, the requirements and process for the 
preconstruction permitting of minor sources in Indian country. Under 
the rule, on or after the effective date of the Indian Country NSR 
rule, that is September 2, 2014, an owner or operator must obtain a 
preconstruction permit from the reviewing authority \1\ if the source 
will construct a new true minor source,\2\ or will modify an existing 
true

[[Page 2549]]

minor source in Indian country. The rule also specified the process and 
requirements for using general permits as a streamlined permitting 
approach to authorize construction and modifications at true minor 
sources. General permits streamline the preconstruction permitting of 
new or modified true minor sources because they involve the issuance of 
one permit that can apply to multiple stationary sources that have 
similar emissions units.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In this document, reviewing authority refers to an EPA 
regional office. However, tribes can become reviewing authorities if 
they decide to assume responsibility for implementing the minor NSR 
program in their area.
    \2\ True minor source means a source that emits, or has the 
potential to emit, regulated NSR pollutants in amounts that are less 
than the major source thresholds under either the Prevention of 
Significant Deterioration program at 40 CFR 52.21, or the Major NSR 
program for Nonattainment Areas in Indian Country at 40 CFR 49.166 
through 49.173, but equal to or greater than the minor NSR 
thresholds in Sec.  49.153, without the need to take an enforceable 
restriction to reduce its PTE to such levels. The PTE includes 
fugitive emissions, to the extent that they are quantifiable, only 
if the source belongs to one of the 28 source categories listed in 
part 51, Appendix S, paragraph II.A.4(iii) or Sec.  52.21(b)(1)(iii) 
of 40 CFR, as applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In today's proposal, the EPA is proposing the use of two types of 
minor NSR preconstruction permits to help streamline the EPA's 
permitting of true minor sources that construct or modify in Indian 
country and belong to one of five different source categories. The 
first type of permit is a general permit. The second type is a permit 
by rule, which is another mechanism for streamlining the issuance of 
preconstruction permits. Permits by rule use a regulatory-type 
structure to permit sources by pre-authorizing construction and 
modification activities carried out in accordance with the permit's 
requirements. To become covered by a permit by rule, as we are 
proposing today, a source must notify the EPA that it meets the terms 
of coverage and is complying with the permit's conditions but does not 
need to await approval of a request for coverage.
    As our preferred approach, we are proposing general permits for HMA 
plants; SQCS facilities; GDFs; auto body repair and miscellaneous 
surface coating operations; and petroleum dry cleaning facilities. 
Specifically, we are proposing general permits for these source 
categories for permitting affected emissions units and emissions-
generating activities in these source categories. As an alternative, 
for GDFs, auto body repair and miscellaneous surface coating 
operations, and petroleum dry cleaning facilities, the EPA is also 
requesting comment on whether, in lieu of establishing general permits 
for each of these categories, we should instead adopt permits by rule 
for one or more of these three source categories. (In addition, as 
explained in Section XI, we are requesting comment on finalizing both 
permitting mechanisms for these three source categories by using 
permits by rule to provide authorization to construct or modify true 
minor sources and by providing general permits to establish enforceable 
limitations to create synthetic minor sources.)
    We are proposing the regulatory framework that the EPA will use to 
establish permits by rule, and we are making available various permit 
implementation documents and tools on which we request public comment. 
We are proposing to extend the date by when minor sources in the oil 
and gas sector must receive minor NSR permit (i.e., September 2, 2014). 
Finally, we are seeking comment on a requested change in policy 
provided in the Indian Country Minor NSR rule for which we have granted 
reconsideration.\3\ The current policy states that general permits 
cannot be used to create synthetic minor sources. We seek comment on 
changing that policy to allow general permits--and permits by rule--to 
create synthetic minor sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ ``Review of New Sources and Modifications in Indian Country: 
Notice of Action Partially Granting Petition for Reconsideration and 
Denying Request for Administrative Stay,'' U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, 78 FR 2210, January 10, 2013, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-01-10/html/2012-31742.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Areas Where the EPA Is Seeking Comment

    In this action, we are seeking comment on a number of issues, 
including, but not limited to:
    (1) All aspects of the permit documents and implementation tools 
for the following source categories (Sections VI and IX):
    a. HMA plants;
    b. SQCS facilities;
    c. Auto body repair and miscellaneous surface coating operations;
    d. GDFs; and
    e. Petroleum dry cleaning facilities;
    (2) The appropriateness of utilizing streamlined general permit 
applications for three source categories:
    a. Auto body repair and miscellaneous surface coating operations;
    b. GDFs; and
    c. Petroleum dry cleaning facilities;
    (3) Several administrative aspects of general permits, including 
(Section V):
    a. Whether the EPA's proposed approach of incorporating by 
reference each reviewing authority's approval of a request for coverage 
into the general permit is necessary and appropriate; and
    b. The appropriateness of proposed permit terms related to the 
reviewing authority's ability to reopen, revise, or terminate an 
individual approval of coverage under the general permit;
    (4) Different aspects of the EPA's conclusion on its control 
technology review that, because the control measures in this proposal 
are currently used by other similar sources in other areas of the 
country, the measures in the proposed permits are technically and 
economically feasible, and cost-effective (Section V);
    (5) Use of throughput limits as a surrogate for ton-per-year 
allowable emission limitations, or, alternatively, establishment of 
annual allowable emission limitations for each pollutant, and the use 
of throughput limits as surrogate monitoring measures to demonstrate 
compliance with ton-per-year annual allowable emission limitations 
(Section V);
    (6) The regulatory framework that the EPA is proposing as an 
alternative to use to establish permits by rule and the streamlined 
review and issuance process that the EPA is proposing whereby a source 
can become covered by a permit by rule by notifying the EPA that it 
qualifies for the permit, meets the terms of coverage and is complying 
with the permit's conditions (but not having to wait for the reviewing 
authority's approval) (Section VII);
    (7) Proposal to change the policy in the Indian Country Minor NSR 
rule to allow the use of both general permits and permits by rule to 
create synthetic minor sources (Section X);
    (8) Finalizing both permitting mechanisms for three source 
categories (i.e., auto body repair and miscellaneous surface coating 
operations; GDFs; and petroleum dry cleaning facilities) by providing 
authorization to construct or modify true minor sources via permits by 
rule and by providing enforceable limitations to create synthetic minor 
sources via general permits (Section XI);
    (9) Use of more than one general permit and/or permit by rule for a 
source at a location (Section XI);
    (10) Additional source categories for which the EPA is planning to 
propose general permits and/or permits by rule (Section XII); and
    (11) Proposed rule changes to the Indian Country Minor NSR rule in 
five areas in three provisions (Section XIII):
    a. Shortening the general permit application review process from 90 
to 45 days for certain source categories;
    b. Adjusting the deadline by which minor sources covered by a 
general permit need to obtain a preconstruction permit;
    c. Extending the permitting deadline for true minor sources within 
the oil and gas source category;
    d. Removing a provision to make clear that sources may seek 
coverage under a general permit as soon as it is effective

[[Page 2550]]

and need not wait an additional 4 months; and
    e. Adjusting the deadline for oil and gas sources for certain 
registration-related requirements to be consistent with the proposed 
permitting deadline extension.

III. Background

A. Tribal Air Rule

    On February 12, 1998,\4\ the EPA used its authority under section 
301(d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) to find that we would not treat 
tribal governments the same as states with respect to specific plan 
submittal and implementation deadlines under the CAA for National 
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)-related requirements. This 
finding applied to many section 110 requirements, including 
requirements under section 110(a)(2)(c) to submit a program to regulate 
the modification and construction of any stationary source as necessary 
to assure that the NAAQS are achieved. Although we determined that 
Indian tribes were not obligated to implement a permitting program, the 
EPA also made clear that we continue to have a general obligation under 
the CAA to ensure the protection of air quality throughout Indian 
country. To that end, we also used our authority under sections 301(a) 
and 301(d)(4) to establish a requirement to promulgate such federal 
implementation plan (FIP) provisions as are necessary or appropriate to 
protect air quality in Indian country. See 40 CFR 49.11(a). For a 
number of years, the only federal CAA NSR permitting program that 
applied in Indian country was the major NSR program for areas meeting 
the NAAQS (``attainment'' areas) or areas for which there is 
insufficient information to determine whether they meet the NAAQS 
(``unclassifiable'' areas). We call this program the Prevention of 
Significant Deterioration (PSD) program. No federal NSR permitting 
program has covered minor sources or major sources in nonattainment 
areas. Nor was there a way for major sources to take enforceable limits 
and become synthetic minor sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``Indian Tribes: Air Quality Planning and Management,'' U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 63 FR 7254, February 12, 1998, 
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-1998-02-12/pdf/98-3451.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 21, 2006, the EPA proposed the regulation: ``Review of 
New Sources and Modifications in Indian Country'' (i.e., Indian Country 
NSR rule).\5\ Within this regulation, the EPA proposed to protect air 
quality in Indian country by establishing a FIP program to regulate the 
modification and construction of stationary sources consistent with the 
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(c) of the CAA. We call this part of 
the Indian Country NSR rule the Indian Country Minor NSR rule. Under 
the Indian Country Minor NSR rule, we proposed to fill a regulatory gap 
and provide a mechanism for issuing preconstruction permits for the 
construction of new minor sources and certain modifications of major 
and minor sources in Indian country. In developing the rule, the EPA 
conducted extensive outreach and consultation along with an extensive 
public comment period that ended on March 20, 2007. The comments 
provided detailed information specific to Indian country and the final 
Minor NSR rule incorporated many of the suggestions we received. We 
promulgated final rules on July 1, 2011,\6\ and the FIP became 
effective on August 30, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ ``Review of New Sources and Modifications in Indian 
Country,'' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 71 FR 48696, August 
21, 2006, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2006-08-21/html/06-6926.htm.
    \6\ ``Review of New Sources and Modifications in Indian 
Country,'' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 76 FR 38748, July 
1, 2011, https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2011/07/01/2011-14981/review-of-new-sources-and-modifications-in-indian-country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Indian Country Minor NSR Rule

1. What is the Indian Country Minor NSR rule?
    The Indian Country Minor NSR rule applies to new and modified minor 
stationary sources and to minor modifications at existing major 
stationary sources located in Indian country where there is no EPA-
approved program in place. The rule also includes a pre-construction 
permits program for major sources proposing to construct in areas of 
Indian country that have not attained one or more NAAQS, i.e., 
nonattainment areas. After September 2, 2014, any new stationary 
sources that will emit, or will have the potential to emit (PTE), a 
regulated NSR pollutant in amounts that will be: (1) Equal to or 
greater than the minor NSR thresholds, established in the Minor NSR 
rule; and (2) less than the amount that would qualify the source as a 
major source for purposes of the PSD or nonattainment major NSR 
programs, must apply for and obtain a minor NSR permit before 
commencing construction of the new source.\7\ Likewise, any existing 
stationary source (minor or major) must apply for and obtain a minor 
NSR permit before commencing construction of a physical or operational 
change that will increase the allowable emissions of the stationary 
source by more than the specified threshold amounts, if the change does 
not otherwise trigger the permitting requirements of the PSD or 
nonattainment major NSR program(s).\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Under the current Indian Country Minor NSR rule, certain 
sources may need to apply for a permit earlier than September 2014, 
if the EPA finalizes a general permit for that category before that 
date.
    \8\ A source may, however, be subject to certain monitoring, 
recordkeeping and reporting (MRR) requirements under the major NSR 
programs, if the change has a reasonable possibility of resulting in 
a major modification. A source may be subject to both the Indian 
Country Minor NSR program and the reasonable possibility MRR 
requirements of the major NSR program(s).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Among other things, the Indian Country Minor NSR rule created a 
framework for the EPA to streamline the issuance of preconstruction 
permits to true minor sources by using general permits. We explain this 
framework further in the sections below.
2. What is a true minor source and how does it differ from a synthetic 
minor source?
    ``True minor source'' means a source that emits, or has the 
potential to emit, regulated NSR pollutants in amounts that are less 
than the major source thresholds under either the PSD program at 40 CFR 
52.21, or the Major NSR program for Nonattainment Areas in Indian 
Country at 40 CFR 49.166 through 49.173, but equal to or greater than 
the minor NSR thresholds in Sec.  49.153, without the need to take an 
enforceable restriction to reduce its PTE to such levels. The PTE 
includes fugitive emissions, to the extent that they are quantifiable, 
only if the source belongs to one of the 28 source categories listed in 
part 51, Appendix S, paragraph II.A.4(iii) or Sec.  52.21(b)(1)(iii) of 
40 CFR, as applicable. For example, a hot mix facility, located in a 
sulfur dioxide (SO2) attainment area, that has a maximum 
potential to emit of 135 tons per year (tpy) of SO2, without 
the need to take an enforceable restriction to reduce its PTE to such 
levels, would qualify as a true minor source.
    By contrast, ``synthetic minor source'' means a source that 
otherwise has the potential to emit regulated NSR pollutants in amounts 
that are at or above those for major sources, but that has taken a 
restriction so that its PTE is less than such amounts. Such 
restrictions must be enforceable as a legal and practical matter. For 
example, a hot mix facility, located in an SO2 attainment 
area, that has an unrestricted potential to emit 270 tpy, but that is 
legally constrained to emit only 135 tpy of SO2 because the 
source has taken a throughput limit made enforceable

[[Page 2551]]

through a permit (i.e., a limit on how much hot mix product it can 
produce), would qualify as a synthetic minor source. In the preamble to 
both the proposed and final Indian Country Minor NSR rule, the EPA 
indicated that it would not use general permits to allow otherwise 
major sources to create synthetic minor sources.\9\ We discuss this 
issue more fully in Section X and request comment on our proposal to 
change this policy and also allowing permits by rule to create 
synthetic minor sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Note that the current regulatory language does not restrict 
the use of general permits in this manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. What are the minor NSR thresholds?
    The ``minor NSR thresholds'' establish cutoff levels for each 
regulated NSR pollutant. If a source naturally has a potential to emit 
in amounts lower than the thresholds, then it is exempt from the Indian 
Country Minor NSR rule (see Table 2 and 40 CFR 49.153) for that 
pollutant. New or modified sources which naturally have a potential to 
emit in amounts that are: (1) Equal to or greater than the minor NSR 
thresholds; and (2) less than the major NSR thresholds (generally 100 
to 250 tpy) are ``minor sources'' of emissions and subject to the 
Indian Country Minor NSR rule requirements at 40 CFR 49.151 through 
161.

    Table 2--Minor NSR Thresholds for Sources in Indian Country \10\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Minor NSR           Minor NSR
                                    thresholds for      thresholds for
     Regulated NSR pollutant         nonattainment     attainment  areas
                                      areas (tpy)            (tpy)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carbon monoxide (CO)............                   5                  10
Nitrogen oxides (NOX)...........              \11\ 5                  10
SO2.............................                   5                  10
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)               \4\ 2                   5
PM (particulate matter).........                   5                  10
PM10............................                   1                   5
PM2.5...........................                 0.6                   3
Lead............................                 0.1                 0.1
Fluorides.......................                  NA                   1
Sulfuric acid mist..............                  NA                   2
Hydrogen sulfide (H2S)..........                  NA                   2
Total reduced sulfur (including                   NA                   2
 H2S)...........................
Reduced sulfur compounds                          NA                   2
 (including H2S)................
Municipal waste combustor                         NA                   2
 emissions......................
Municipal solid waste landfill                    NA                  10
 emissions (measured as
 nonmethane organic compounds)..
------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. What is a general permit?
    The Indian Country Minor NSR rule specified the process and 
requirements for using general permits to authorize construction and 
modifications at true minor sources as a streamlined permitting 
approach. A general permit, for purposes of this action, is a permit 
document that contains standardized requirements that multiple 
stationary sources can use. The EPA may issue a general permit for 
categories of emissions units or stationary sources that are similar in 
nature, have substantially similar emissions, and would be subject to 
the same or substantially similar permit requirements.\12\ ``Similar in 
nature'' refers to size, processes, and operating conditions. The 
purpose of a general permit is to provide for protection of air quality 
while simplifying the permit process for similar minor sources. General 
permits offer a cost-effective means of issuing permits and provide a 
quicker and simpler mechanism for permitting minor sources than the 
site-specific permitting process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ If part of a tribe's area of Indian Country is designated 
as attainment and another part as nonattainment, the applicable 
threshold for a proposed source or modification is determined based 
on the designation where the source would be located. If the source 
straddles the two areas, the more stringent thresholds apply.
    \11\ In extreme ozone nonattainment areas, section 182(e)(2) of 
the CAA requires any change at a major source that results in any 
increase in emissions to be subject to major NSR permitting. In 
other words, any changes to existing major sources in extreme ozone 
nonattainment areas are subject to a ``0'' tpy threshold, but that 
threshold does not apply to minor sources.
    \12\ ``Review of New Sources and Modifications in Indian 
Country,'' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 76 FR 38770, July 
1, 2011, https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2011/07/01/2011-14981/review-of-new-sources-and-modifications-in-indian-country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While the final Indian Country Minor NSR rule contemplated issuance 
of general permits by the EPA regions, we have determined (for the 
permits on which we are taking comment here) that a nationwide action 
is appropriate. Through this action, we are proposing to issue general 
permits to serve as preconstruction permit authorizations that contains 
emission limitations and other restrictions to govern how a sources may 
construct, modify and operate. National general permits streamline the 
permit issuance process by establishing universal requirements through 
one notice for specific types of emissions activities at multiple 
sources across the country. The EPA believes that the general permit 
approach is appropriate for the source categories in today's proposal 
where the control equipment or techniques are generally similar from 
region to region.
    It also allows a reviewing authority to notify the public through 
one notice that it intends to apply these requirements to any eligible 
source that seeks coverage under the permit in the future. This 
minimizes the burden on reviewing authorities' resources by eliminating 
the need to issue separate permits for each individual minor source 
within the source type or category covered by the general permit. Use 
of a general permit also decreases the time required for an individual 
minor source to obtain a preconstruction permit because the application 
process is standardized.
    The Indian Country Minor NSR rule describes the process the EPA 
will use to issue general permits for the minor NSR program. A general 
permit must be issued in accordance with the requirements in Sec.  
49.156. Briefly, these requirements address public availability of 
information, public notification and participation, and public 
comments. In addition, as discussed in Section IX, we are providing 
implementation tools to

[[Page 2552]]

guide sources through a series of questions to determine whether they 
meet the criteria to be eligible for coverage under a general permit.

C. What is a permit by rule?

    Like a general permit, a permit by rule is a standard set of 
requirements that can apply to multiple stationary sources with similar 
emissions characteristics. For purposes of this action, a permit by 
rule would differ from a general permit in that the agency would codify 
a permit by rule directly into the Indian Country Minor NSR rule. The 
process for a source to apply for coverage under a permit by rule, and 
the process for the reviewing authority to grant coverage under a 
permit by rule, are more streamlined compared to a standard general 
permit, or a site-specific permit. Section VII provides a description 
of the source application for permits by rule.

IV. Description of General Permit Program in Indian Country and the 
EPA's Use of This Package To Satisfy the General Permit Issuance 
Process

A. General Permit Program

    The EPA codified the framework it would follow to issue general 
permits for minor sources in the Indian Country Minor NSR rule in 40 
CFR 49.156. While it was not necessary for the EPA to codify this 
framework to issue general permits, the EPA nonetheless created the 
regulatory framework to better inform the public of the process the EPA 
will use to issue general permits. Per the framework, to issue a 
general permit, the reviewing authority must follow the requirements 
for public participation contained in Sec.  49.157. These provisions 
require the reviewing authority then to provide a notice that a draft 
permit is available for comment. The regulations list a number of ways 
in which a reviewing authority can provide notice to the public, and 
also allow the reviewing authority to use other means of notification 
as appropriate. See 40 CFR 49.157(b)(1)(ii)(E). We have opted to 
provide notice to the public regarding the present proposal of general 
permits for five source categories through use of the Federal Register. 
We believe this means is appropriate in this case because we intend to 
apply these general permits in all areas of Indian country subject to 
the Indian Country Minor NSR program and the Federal Register provides 
a nationwide circulation of the notice. We will also mail a copy of 
each permit to the appropriate Indian governing bodies and the tribal, 
state and local air pollution agencies in adjacent air jurisdictions 
that may be impacted by the air pollution sources that use the general 
permit in accordance with 40 CFR 49.157(b)(1)(i).
    The existing regulations also identify the type of information that 
a reviewing authority must make available to the public, and list a 
number of elements to be included in the public notice. See 40 CFR 
49.157(a) and (b)(2). We are satisfying these requirements in this 
proposal in a wide-ranging manner by providing the public access to the 
application forms we will require an applicant to complete, and the 
other implementation tools for each general permit. (We discuss these 
tools in greater detail in Section IX of this preamble.) Many of these 
requirements relate to information that is best made available when an 
individual applicant applies for coverage under a specific general 
permit. We will make information specific to an individual source's 
request for coverage under a general permit available at the time we 
provide notice of the source's request for coverage.
    After providing adequate public notice of the availability of the 
draft permit, the reviewing authority must allow a period of at least 
30 days for the public to comment on the permit, and to request a 
public hearing. See 40 CFR 49.157. We are satisfying these requirements 
by using this package to propose and take comments on the general 
permits. Once we finalize a general permit, it will be used by the 
EPA's regional office reviewing authorities \13\ for sources requesting 
coverage under the permit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ The Administrator delegated the authority to each EPA 
Regional Administrator to carry out all aspects of the Indian 
Country minor NSR program, including issuing general permits and 
approving individual coverage under a general permit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The regulations set forth the provisions for a final permit to 
undergo administrative and judicial review in accordance with Sec.  
49.159. The procedures governing appeals of NSR permits to the 
Environmental Appeals Board will govern administrative review of these 
general permits. Issuance of a general permit is a final agency action 
with respect to all aspects of the general permit except its 
applicability to an individual source. The provisions of 40 CFR 49.159 
will continue to govern administrative and judicial review of the EPA's 
approval of an individual source's request for coverage. After the 
reviewing authority approves a request for coverage by an individual 
source, a party may appeal only the applicability of the general permit 
to that particular source.
    Although we are using a Federal Register notice to initially 
establish the general permits, we intend to use other methods also 
consistent with procedures in 40 CFR 49.159 to reopen or 
administratively amend the final permits if we determine it is 
necessary and appropriate. A reviewing authority may reopen and revise 
a final general permit for cause after providing the opportunity for 
notice and comment under Sec.  49.157. Revisions to a final general 
permit may be appropriate, for example, when the reviewing authority 
decides to issue a new general permit for the same category to account 
for advances in control technology or for other pertinent reasons. 
However, when a reviewing authority issues a new general permit, 
sources operating under the existing general permit will be able to 
continue to operate under the existing permit unless and until the 
source subsequently proposes to modify.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ If EPA revises an existing general permit, then the 
original permit can no longer be used for new and modified minor 
sources. The new general permit will be used for new and modified 
minor sources in the relevant source category. The existing general 
permit remains in place for existing facilities unless and until 
they choose to modify.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. How do sources apply for general permits?

    40 CFR 49.156(e) describes the procedure for sources to obtain 
coverage under a general permit. At the time a source submits a request 
for coverage under a general permit, it must submit a copy of such 
request to the appropriate Indian governing body for the area of Indian 
country where the source is locating. The reviewing authority must act 
on the source's request for coverage under the general permit as 
expeditiously as possible, but it must notify the source of the final 
decision within 90 days of its receipt of your coverage request. The 
source's reviewing authority must comply with a 45-day completeness 
review period to determine if the request for coverage under a general 
permit is complete. Therefore, within 30 days after the receipt of the 
source's coverage request, the reviewing authority must make an initial 
request for any additional information necessary to process your 
coverage request and the source must submit such information within 15 
days. If the source does not submit the requested information within 15 
days from the request for additional information and this results in a 
delay that is beyond the 45-day completeness review period, the 90-day 
permit issuance period for the general permit will be extended by the 
additional days the source takes to submit the requested information 
beyond the 45-day period. If the reviewing authority fails to notify

[[Page 2553]]

you within a 30-day period of any additional information necessary to 
process the source's coverage request, it will still have 15 days to 
submit such information and the reviewing authority must still grant or 
deny the request for coverage under a general permit within the 90-day 
general permit issuance period and without any time extension.
    If the reviewing authority determines that the source's request for 
coverage under a general permit has all the relevant information and is 
complete, it will notify the source in writing as soon as that 
determination is made. If the source does not receive from the 
reviewing authority a request for additional information or a notice 
that the request for coverage under a general permit is complete within 
the 45-day completeness review period, the request will be deemed 
complete.
    After permit coverage is granted, under 40 CFR 49.156 (e), coverage 
under a general permit becomes invalid if a source does not commence 
construction within 18 months after the effective date of coverage 
under a general permit, if the source discontinues construction for a 
period of 18 months or more, or if the source does not complete 
construction within a reasonable time. The reviewing authority may 
extend the 18-month period upon a satisfactory showing that an 
extension is justified, and the 18-month limit does not apply to the 
time period between construction of the approved phases of a phased 
construction project. In those cases, construction of each such phase 
must commence within 18 months of the projected and approved 
commencement date.
    In Section XIII, the EPA proposes to amend 40 CFR 49.156(e) to 
shorten the permit application procedure to 45 from 90 days.
    In Section IX, we describe the implementation documents and tools 
that we are making available for comment to assist sources with 
applying for general permits.

C. What are the required permitting elements?

    For general permits, these elements are discussed in the Indian 
Country Minor NSR rule and promulgated at 40 CFR 49.155(a) and include:
     The effective date of the permit and the date by which a 
source must commence construction in order for the permit's coverage to 
remain valid (i.e., 18 months after the permit effective date);
     The emissions units subject to the permit and their 
associated emission limitations (and other permit conditions);
     Monitoring, recordkeeping, reporting and testing 
requirements to assure compliance with the emission limitations; and
     A severability clause to ensure the continued validity of 
the other portions of the permit in the event of a challenge to a 
portion of the permit.

V. Source Categories for Which Draft General Permits in Indian Country 
Are Available for Public Review

A. Notice of Proposed General Permits

    In accordance with 40 CFR 49.171(b)(1)(1)(E), we are providing the 
public with a copy of five draft general permits covering (1) HMA 
plants; (2) SQCS facilities; (3) auto body repair and miscellaneous 
surface coating operations; (4) GDF facilities; and (5) petroleum dry 
cleaning facilities. Copies of each of these permits and the following 
four associated permitting documents are available in the docket for 
this notice (EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0151) and at http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal/tribalnsr.html:
    (1) Request for Coverage (Application);
    (2) Questionnaire;
    (3) Instructions; and
    (4) PTE calculator.
    The applications for three of the five source categories in today's 
proposal (i.e., auto body repair and miscellaneous surface coating 
operations; GDFs; and petroleum dry cleaning facilities) are 
streamlined and ask for contact and location information and general 
source-specific information (more detailed source-specific information 
would be required from sources seeking coverage under the HMA and SQCS 
general permits). This is discussed further in Section IX.
    The general permits will authorize construction of, or any change 
to, any of the affected emission units, or pollutant emitting 
activities named in the permit, at any proposed true minor source that 
meets the applicability and eligibility statements in the permit, and 
for which the reviewing authority approves coverage under the permit.
    We request comment on all aspects of the general permits and the 
associated forms and documentation provided to assist the stationary 
sources specified in the permits in complying with the Indian country 
minor NSR preconstruction permitting and post-construction operating 
requirements. In Section VIII, we propose, in the alternative, permits 
by rule for auto body repair and miscellaneous surface coating 
operations, GDFs and petroleum dry cleaning facilities. Should we 
decide to finalize a permit by rule for any of these categories, then 
we may not finalize the draft general permit for that category. 
Alternatively, we may opt to finalize both permitting mechanisms for 
the same source category, and may tailor one of the permitting 
mechanisms to provide authorization to construct or modify true minor 
sources (i.e., permits by rule) and another to provide enforceable 
limitations to create synthetic minor sources (i.e., general permits). 
(See Section X, for further discussion of the use of general permits 
and permits by rule to create synthetic minor sources.) We specifically 
request comment on this ``hybrid'' approach (see Section XI, for 
further discussion on the hybrid approach).
    For the five source categories in today's action, we are proposing 
general permits as our preferred approach. We have crafted our proposal 
to ensure air quality is protected and to provide a streamlined 
approach where appropriate. Specifically, for HMA plants and SQCS 
facilities, the EPA is proposing (1) that we retain the 90-day 
application review process provided in the Indian Country NSR Rule; and 
(2) that we provide lengthier, more detailed applications. Lengthier, 
more detailed applications are appropriate for source operations such 
as HMA and SQCS facilities that involve multiple pollutants where the 
reviewing authority needs to conduct a review to evaluate whether an 
individual source meets the requirements in the permit. However, we 
also recognize that a more streamlined approach may be appropriate for 
other source categories with few pollutants of concern and in which the 
operations are less complex. For those source categories (i.e., auto 
body repair and miscellaneous surface coating operations; GDFs; and 
petroleum dry cleaning facilities), the EPA is proposing to change the 
underlying rule to provide a shorter application review period (see 
Section XIII) and a shorter application (see Section IX). The permits 
by rule proposed as an alternative for these same three categories 
would take that streamlining a step further (see Section VII).
    The remainder of this section outlines the general structure of 
each of the draft general permits, and requests comment on issues that 
are common among the draft general permits. Specifically, we are 
requesting comment on:
    (1) Whether the EPA should allow the use of each general permit to 
create synthetic minor sources;
    (2) Whether the EPA's proposed approach of incorporating by 
reference each reviewing authority's approval of a request for coverage 
into the general

[[Page 2554]]

permit is necessary and appropriate; and
    (3) The appropriateness of proposed permit terms related to the 
reviewing authority's ability to reopen, revise, or terminate an 
individual approval of coverage under the general permit.

This section also describes the general process we undertook for each 
of the control technology reviews required to establish the terms and 
conditions of each draft general permit, and requests comment on our 
conclusions on several aspects of the control technology reviews.
    Additional information and supporting analyses on each of these 
draft permits are located in the background documents. These documents 
are available at Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0151 and online at 
http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal/tribalnsr.html.

B. Structure of General Permits

    Each draft general permit contains a similar overall structure. The 
cover page of each draft permit contains general information on the 
draft permit. First, it briefly describes the applicability of the 
permit to a particular source category or emissions activity the 
general permit regulates in accordance with 40 CFR 49.156(d)(1). This 
description varies for each of the draft permits, depending on the 
emissions activity covered by the draft permit.
    Second, the cover page limits eligibility for coverage under the 
permit to true minor sources. We included this limitation to allow 
permitting authorities the ability to process a permit application for 
inherently larger sources using the more extended time periods the 
Indian Country Minor NSR rule provides for case by case, site specific 
review. We also include this limitation in the draft permits to remain 
consistent with our current policy that we will not allow sources to 
use general permits to create synthetic minor sources.
    We recognize, however, that limiting eligibility of these draft 
permits to only true minor sources could limit the number and types of 
sources that could take advantage of the streamlined, general 
permitting process. We also recognize that there is similar emissions 
potential between true minor sources and properly regulated synthetic 
minor sources as we discuss in Section X. We request comment on whether 
there are reasons that the final general permits should retain the true 
minor limitation on eligibility for one or more of the permits, or 
whether we should expand the eligibility of these draft general permits 
to ``synthetic minor'' sources. After reviewing comments received, we 
may amend one or more of the final permits to allow any minor source to 
apply for coverage under that permit.
    Third, following the eligibility statement, the draft permit 
directs applicants to the specific information that an applicant must 
include in a request for coverage under the permit in accordance with 
40 CFR 49.156(d)(2)(ii) and (iii). The request for coverage serves as 
the permit application and the information in the application will 
differ for each draft permit. We discuss the application and 
implementation tools to assist true minor sources in determining 
whether a source is eligible for coverage under a general permit in 
Section IX.
    Fourth, the draft permit contains a statement that incorporates 
each reviewing authority's approval of a request for coverage into the 
general permit. Sections 1 through 6 of the general permit, and the 
most current approval of the request for coverage, must be posted 
prominently at the facility, and each affected emissions unit and any 
associated air pollution control technology must be labeled with the 
identification number listed in the Approval of the Request for 
Coverage for that permitted source. We request comment on the inclusion 
of this condition in the permits given that the Indian Country Minor 
NSR rule only requires posting of the approval of coverage.
    As we developed the draft permits, we envisioned situations in 
which the reviewing authority may need to revise information contained 
in the approval notice some time after issuance. For example, a source 
covered by a general permit may subsequently change ownership. A 
reviewing authority may delegate responsibilities for the general 
permit to a tribal air pollution control agency. A source may 
subsequently need to revise something in its request for coverage that 
would alter elements of the approval. For example, a source may 
misidentify an equipment identification number in its request for 
coverage, or decide to expand or limit the scope of the modification. A 
reviewing authority may need to alter its approval of the request for 
coverage for these situations. The general permit provisions at 40 CFR 
51.156(b)(2) broadly reference 40 CFR 49.159, which specifically 
addresses the reviewing authority's ability to reopen or 
administratively amend permits. The provisions, however, do not 
specifically delineate how they apply to an approval of a request for 
coverage under a general permit. By incorporating the approval into the 
general permit, we ensure that the revision procedures contained in 40 
CFR 49.159 apply to revisions a reviewing authority may make to the 
approval of the request for coverage. We request comment on this 
approach for incorporating the approval of the request for coverage 
into the general permit. Alternatively, we request comment on whether 
such incorporation is unnecessary and on whether to apply the 
procedures in 40 CFR 49.159 to the approval of the request for 
coverage, or whether the EPA should amend the existing regulations at 
Sec.  51.156 to address amendments to the request for coverage.
    Fifth, the draft permit contains information on the reviewing 
authority's right to terminate or revise the general permit. The 
general permit provisions in the Indian Country Minor NSR rule provide 
the reviewing authority the ability to revise, revoke and reissue, or 
terminate a general permit. In harmony with those provisions, the draft 
permits include authority for a reviewing authority to revise or 
terminate an approval of a request for coverage. We are adding these 
provisions to the general permit, under the authority of 40 CFR 
49.165(d), to clarify how the Indian Country Minor NSR rule intended 
these provisions to apply to an individual request for coverage. We 
request comment on inclusion of these provisions in the general permit, 
or, alternatively, whether the EPA should amend the Indian Country 
Minor NSR rule to expressly delineate the reviewing authority's right 
to revise or terminate an individual source's coverage under a general 
permit.
    Finally, the draft permit contains a statement indicating that the 
definitions contained in the Indian country rule govern use of those 
terms within the general permit. The statement also refers permittees 
to a section of the permit that contains definitions that may be 
specific to the source categories or emissions activities covered by 
the general permit; and indicates that when a term is not otherwise 
defined we will interpret that term consistent with normal business 
use. We, nonetheless, request comment on whether we should include any 
additional definitions to improve the clarity of the general permits.
    Following the general information section, each draft permit 
contains the enforceable terms and conditions of the general permit. 
Section 1 of the Terms and Conditions provisions contains general 
provisions that, with only a few exceptions, are similar for all the 
general permits. These provisions contain statements that the rules 
require in each permit pursuant to 40 CFR 49.155.

[[Page 2555]]

    In each permit, the general provisions are followed by emission 
limitations and other operational restrictions or specifications, and 
monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements that are unique 
to each of the permits. The notice and reporting requirements are 
followed by a section outlining the reviewing authority's ability to 
change the general permit, including the approval of the request for 
coverage, a section on requesting coverage under the permit, and 
attachments with abbreviations and acronyms, a list of definitions 
referenced on the cover page of the permit and a list of reviewing 
authorities and areas of coverage. Attachments to the HMA plant and 
rock crushing permits also contain requirements to minimize fugitive 
dust emissions. An attachment to the GDF permit contains requirements 
for vapor balance system design criteria, management practices, and 
performance testing. Attachments to the auto body repair and 
miscellaneous surface coating operations general permit provide 
standards for cold cleaner degreasers and training and certification 
requirements for spray-applied surface coating personnel. An attachment 
to the petroleum dry cleaning facilities permit contains requirements 
specific to serious, severe, or extreme ozone nonattainment areas.

C. The EPA's Control Technology Review

    With the exception of the GDF general permit, each permit 
establishes specific numerical limitations on the quantity, rate or 
concentration of emissions for each regulated NSR pollutant emitted by 
each affected emissions unit. (The GDF permit includes equipment 
requirements.) For each general permit, in a manner similar to what a 
permitting authority would be expected to do for an individual source, 
we established these control technology-based requirements by 
researching both state and local air quality programs to identify 
control technologies or other emissions reduction measures used by 
similar sources in surrounding areas, and by reviewing requirements 
contained in existing 40 CFR parts 60, 61 and 63 emissions standards 
that apply to these source categories. The draft permits build upon the 
requirements in the part 60, 61, and 63 emissions standards by 
including some control technology measures found in state and local 
agencies' general permits for these source categories.
    The background documents for each draft permit explain the state 
and local programs we reviewed to identify control technology options 
in each source category. We believe that, because these control 
measures are currently used by other similar sources in other areas of 
the country, that they are technically and economically feasible, and 
cost effective. We request comment on this conclusion, and invite 
commenters to submit specific information that would indicate that 
either: (1) The measures in the draft permits are not economically 
feasible and/or cost-effective; or (2) additional economically feasible 
and cost-effective measures are available and appropriate to include in 
the final general permits.
    In determining specific emission limitations and control measures 
for each permit, we considered the general, local air quality 
conditions in Indian country. Notably, Indian country contains both 
attainment and nonattainment areas for different regulated NSR 
pollutants.\15\ In some cases, for areas designated as nonattainment 
for a given pollutant, the draft permits contain more stringent 
emission limitations for that pollutant (or precursors of that 
pollutant). These control requirements will help mitigate any further 
degradation of air quality in those areas. In other cases, however, the 
draft permits do not include different emission limitations based on 
the attainment status of the area. In these situations, we determined 
that the emission limitations are sufficient to protect air quality in 
both attainment and nonattainment areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Maps for those NAAQS for which the EPA has designated 
nonattainment areas in Indian Country are available online at http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal/tribalnsr.html and Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2011-0151. NAAQS for which the EPA has designated nonattainment 
areas are: ozone (2008 NAAQS), PM10 (1987 NAAQS), 
PM2.5 24-Hour (2006 NAAQS), and PM2.5 Annual 
(1997 NAAQS). There are no tribal lands in nonattainment for 
SO2 (2010 NAAQS), NO2, lead (2008 NAAQS), and 
CO.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For HMA plants and SQCS facilities, we also added additional 
provisions related to the location of the emitting activities and the 
source property boundary. We call these provisions, which are designed 
to minimize the impacts of emissions, setback requirements. Under the 
setback requirement, sources may not locate within a specific distance 
from the property boundary and nearest residences. In reviewing state 
and local air agency general permits, we found that permitting 
authorities in Alaska and Washington include setback provisions to 
protect local ambient air quality from potential source impacts. We 
find that these provisions are both reasonable and prudent measures to 
protect local air quality, and are economically feasible and cost 
effective. We, therefore, included similar measures in the draft 
permits. We discuss the specific setback requirements for each category 
in Section VI.
    We welcome comments identifying other source categories for which a 
setback requirement should apply. We also welcome comments on the types 
of buildings from which we should establish setbacks (e.g., schools, 
nursing homes). We further request comment on whether the setback 
requirement conflicts with tribal authority over zoning-related 
matters, and, if so, on how we should resolve that conflict.
    To further protect against adverse local air quality impacts, the 
draft permits assure that no source will cause or contribute to NAAQS 
or PSD increment violations by prohibiting emissions that would result 
in such impacts. Thus, reviewing authorities will consider any air 
quality concerns unique to specific areas that arise after issuance of 
the general permits in this proposal when determining whether an 
individual permit applicant is eligible for coverage under the general 
permit. For example, if a source wants to locate in an area with air 
quality levels approaching or violating the NAAQS, the reviewing 
authority may need to request that a source apply for a site-specific 
permit so that the potential for greater control than that afforded by 
the general permit can be evaluated.
    In conducting the control technology review, we also considered the 
anticipated growth rate of the source categories. In general, we do not 
anticipate significant increases in the growth rates for these five 
source categories for the foreseeable future, as we identified no 
information indicating that that is the case.\16\ Thus, we do not 
believe that emissions increases from these categories will pose unique 
or unprecedented impacts on air quality in the near future that might 
warrant a more stringent approach to controlling emissions than 
contained in the draft permits. We request comment on our conclusion 
about anticipated economic growth in these source categories and 
regions, and the reasonableness of the emission limitations and control 
measures specified in the draft permits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See the following memo online at http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal/tribalnsr.html and in the docket (ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-
0151): ``Projected New Minor Sources in Indian Country,'' from 
Lillian Grace Bradley, Environmental Economist, EPA/OAQPS to Chris 
Stoneman, Policy Advisor, EPA/OAQPS, July 2, 2013.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 2556]]

D. Scope of Coverage Under Each General Permit

    In the Indian Country Minor NSR rule, the EPA stated that it may 
use the general permit mechanism to issue permits to ``similar'' types 
of emissions units or minor sources. This limitation on the ability to 
issue general permits is consistent with the EPA's longstanding 
interpretation of the CAA as it relates to the ability of a permitting 
agency and source to use standardized protocols to meet CAA permitting 
requirements. The general permits we are proposing meet the limitation 
that general permits apply only to similar sources, because each of the 
permits covers only affected emission units or emissions generating 
activities that are: (1) specifically identified by name in the permit; 
(2) generate the same regulated NSR pollutants in the same manner and 
magnitude; and (3) are associated only with operations within a defined 
source category.\17\ We discuss the specific scope of each draft 
general permit in more detail in Section VI below and in the background 
document for each draft general permit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ These criteria are not the sole manner for demonstrating 
that a general permit applies only to similar sources, but they 
serve as examples of the types of characteristics that may be 
relevant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

E. Surrogate Annual Allowable Emission Limitations

    The Indian Country Minor NSR rule requires the reviewing authority 
to establish annual allowable emission limitations for each affected 
emissions unit and for each NSR regulated pollutant emitted by the 
unit, if the unit is issued an enforceable limitation lower than the 
PTE of that unit. See 40 CFR 49.155(a)(2). For the five source 
categories in this proposal, some states (but not all) provide both 
annual ton per year allowable emission limitations and throughput 
limits in their general permits. Other state reviewing authorities 
provide only overall production limits that limit the amount of 
throughput a facility can process over a period of time. We believe 
that production limits serve as a reasonable surrogate for ton per year 
emission limitations, when there is a direct correlation between the 
amount of material processed and the amount of pollution emitted. We 
also believe that monitoring throughput rather than actual emissions 
may provide a more cost-effective method of demonstrating compliance. 
For example, HMA facilities regularly track a facility's throughput, 
but do not necessary analyze specific emissions discharges. Thus, 
reliance on throughput limits provides a more cost-effective approach 
to regulate emissions and we believe will enhance the potential for 
compliance with the draft permit for this and other categories. In 
Section VI, we request comment on our use of throughput limits as a 
surrogate for annual ton per year allowable emission limitations. 
Alternatively, we request comment on whether we should establish annual 
allowable emission limitations for each pollutant, and use throughput 
as a surrogate monitoring measure to demonstrate compliance with a ton 
per year annual allowable emission limitation.
    In a related matter, in Section X of this preamble, we indicate 
that we have granted reconsideration on the issue of allowing reviewing 
authorities to use general permits to create synthetic minor sources 
and propose to change the current policy. If the EPA allows otherwise 
major sources to qualify as synthetic minor sources through use of 
general permits, we request comment on specific changes that we would 
need to include in the production limits of each permit to properly 
regulate synthetic minor sources for these categories. For example, 
should the EPA establish higher annual tpy allowable emission 
limitations or surrogate production limits that are just below the 
major source thresholds for each regulated NSR pollutant, or should the 
EPA maintain the limitations in the current draft permits to maintain 
an adequate compliance margin?

F. Requirements of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the National 
Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) \18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ These requirements apply to both general permits and 
permits by rule. Only general permits are mentioned here but the 
requirements apply identically to both permit types. Section VII.C. 
is specific to permits by rule and notes that these requirements 
also apply to permits by rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The ESA requires federal agencies to ensure, in consultation with 
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and/or the National Marine Fisheries 
Service (the Services), that any action they authorize, fund, or carry 
out will not likely jeopardize the continued existence of any listed 
threatened or endangered species, or destroy or adversely modify the 
designated critical habitat of such species. Under relevant ESA 
implementing regulations, federal agencies consult with the Service(s) 
on actions that may affect listed species or designated critical 
habitat. The NHPA requires federal agencies to take into account the 
effects of their undertakings on historic properties--i.e., properties 
that are either listed on, or eligible for listing on, the National 
Register of Historic Places--and to provide the Advisory Council on 
Historic Preservation (the Council) a reasonable opportunity to comment 
on such undertakings. Under relevant NHPA implementing regulations, 
NHPA consultations are generally conducted with the appropriate Tribal 
and/or State Historic Preservation Officers in the first instance, with 
opportunities for direct Council involvement in appropriate 
circumstances, including, for example, consultations in connection with 
undertakings affecting multiple tribes or states. The Indian Country 
Minor NSR program has increased the number of activities for which the 
EPA is the permitting authority. To meet ESA and NHPA requirements, we 
have developed a process for compliance with these laws when issuing 
the general permits. The EPA intends to consult with the Services and 
the Council on our general permits and the proposed procedures to 
address potential effects on relevant protected resources.
    For purposes of general permits, the EPA intends to adopt a 
framework that provides appropriate protection for listed species and 
critical habitat and historic properties. The EPA believes, based on 
the evaluation of available information, that the sources that are the 
subject of this proposal are unlikely to present a significant risk to 
listed species and critical habitat and to historic properties because 
they are by their nature small, low emitting sources. However, to 
ensure listed species and critical habitats and historic properties are 
protected, the EPA has developed a framework in the general permits 
that requires the source to identify and assess effects before a 
request for coverage under the general permit is submitted to the EPA. 
Requiring this assessment should help identify any concerns related to 
potential impacts on listed species/critical habitat or historic 
properties early in the process when the greatest opportunities to 
mitigate or avoid any impacts--including changes to the facility's 
location or footprint--are available. This framework is similar to 
procedures established by the Office of Water for the National 
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Permit for Stormwater 
Discharges from Construction Activities.\19\ The EPA believes that 
requiring a similar process in both the general permits, and the 
general stormwater permits, will

[[Page 2557]]

streamline the process for all concerned: The applicants, the EPA, the 
tribes, and the Services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ ``Final National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 
(NPDES) General Permit for Stormwater Discharges from Construction 
Activities,'' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 FR 12286, 
February 29, 2012, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/granule/FR-2012-02-29/2012-4822/content-detail.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The screening processes developed in the permits for both the ESA 
and NHPA require the applicant to develop information about the 
possible effects of the proposed new or modified facility, which 
includes appropriate outreach to relevant expert resource agencies. 
Such information and a certification regarding the outcome of the 
applicant's screening procedures are submitted to the EPA as part of 
the request for coverage under the general permit. This information is 
included as an appendix to the applications for requests for coverage 
for each of the general permits. The EPA will review this information 
as part of determining whether a source is eligible for coverage under 
the general permit. Because we have limited the applicability of the 
general permits to categories of sources that have low emissions, we do 
not expect they are likely to adversely affect listed species/critical 
habitat, nor should they have potential effects on historic properties. 
However, if, through the procedures required in the permit, a source is 
determined to have an adverse effect on listed species/critical habitat 
or potential effects on a historic property, the EPA retains the 
authority to deny coverage under the general permit, or permit by rule, 
and to proceed with source-specific permitting and consultation with 
the appropriate resource agency(ies).

VI. Summary of Specific Terms and Conditions of the General Permits and 
Request for Comment

    In the following sections, we provide a brief summary of the source 
category regulated by each general permit and areas of each draft 
general permit on which we specifically seek public comment. Because 
the areas upon which we specifically seek comment in the HMA plant and 
SQCS facility general permits are common among the two permits, we have 
combined the request for comment section on these permits into one 
subsection. In this preamble, we are not delineating every aspect of 
the requirements of the general permits. Instead, we refer readers to 
the draft permits and associated background information to review all 
the detailed requirements we include in each general permit. Although 
we are soliciting comments on specific aspects of the draft permits, 
we, nonetheless, invite the public to comment on all relevant aspects 
of the draft permits.

A. HMA Plants

1. What is an HMA plant?
    An HMA plant manufactures hot mix asphalt by heating and drying 
aggregate material and then mixing it with asphalt cements. An HMA 
plant consists of an assembly of mechanical and electronic equipment 
used to prepare hot aggregate and mineral filler for mixing to make hot 
mix asphalt. The facility includes any combination of the following 
activities/equipment: Dryers, liquid asphalt storage tanks, fuel oil 
storage tanks, auxiliary heaters (including hot oil heaters), material 
storage handling and transfer systems, generators, storage bins/silos, 
storage piles, and haul roads. An HMA plant can be constructed as a 
permanent plant, a skid-mounted (easily relocated) plant, or a portable 
plant.
    HMA paving materials are a mixture of size-graded, high quality 
aggregate, which can include reclaimed asphalt pavement (RAP), and 
liquid asphalt cement. The production process involves sorting and 
drying the aggregate, heating the asphalt binder, and heating and 
applying the mixture. Aggregate material can be produced from numerous 
sources, including natural rock, RAP, reclaimed concrete pavement 
(RCP), glass, fly ash, bottom ash, steel slag, recycled asphalt 
shingles, and crumb rubber. Aggregate and RAP (if used) constitute over 
92 percent by weight of the total mixture. Aside from the amount and 
grade of asphalt cement used, mix characteristics are determined by the 
relative amounts and types of aggregate and RAP used. A certain 
percentage of fine aggregate (less than 74 micrometers in physical 
diameter) is required for the production of good quality HMA.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ AP 42, Fifth Edition, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission 
Factors, Volume 1: Stationary Point and Area Sources; Chapter 11.1--
Hot Mix Asphalt Plants; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/index.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are four types of HMA plants based on the type of 
manufacturing process used: (1) Batch mix plants; (2) continuous mix 
(mix outside dryer drum) plants; (3) parallel flow drum mix plants; and 
(4) counterflow drum mix plants. Historically, about 85 percent of 
manufacturing plants have been of the counterflow drum mix design, 
while batch plants and parallel flow drum mix plants account for 10 
percent and 5 percent, respectively.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The emissions associated with HMA plants are generated by: (1) Raw 
materials acquisition and manufacturing processes; and (2) 
transportation of raw materials during manufacture and transportation 
to the roadway construction site. The emissions from HMA plants consist 
of: (1) Combustion emissions from mixer/dryers, auxiliary heaters, and 
generators; (2) PM emissions from the mixing/drying process and the 
material handling process; and (3) fugitive PM emissions from haul 
roads. The CO emissions from the batch mix plants are significantly 
higher than the CO emissions from drum mix plants due to the incomplete 
combustion process occurring in the batch mixer/dryers.
2. What is in the proposed HMA general permit?
    This proposed general permit would apply to the construction of new 
true minor source HMA plants or the modification of existing true minor 
HMA plants, located in Indian country. This general permit does not 
apply to HMA plants that perform contaminated soil remediation, and 
does not apply to cold mix asphalt production facilities. The draft 
permit contains emission limitations requirements for the following 
affected emission units:
     Dryers;
     Systems for screening, handling, storing, and weighing hot 
aggregate;
     Systems for mixing hot mix asphalt;
     Loading transfer, and storage systems associated with 
emission control equipment;
     Fuel storage tanks; and
     Stationary engines.
    The permit requires dryers/mixers to be controlled by a baghouse, 
fugitive emissions controlled by a fugitive dust control plan, and 
engines to be controlled to appropriate standards. Fuel used in the 
dryer/mixer and auxiliary heaters must be limited to natural gas, 
distillate fuel, and biodiesel. The stationary engines are limited to 
using diesel and biodiesel as fuels. All liquid fuels are limited to no 
more than 0.0015 percent sulfur by weight.
    The proposed general permit includes monitoring that is sufficient 
to assure compliance with the emission limitations that apply to the 
source, including ensuring the baghouse is operating properly, taking 
weekly opacity observations and fugitive emissions surveys and meeting 
certain other requirements. The proposed general permit includes 
recordkeeping and reporting sufficient to assure compliance with the 
emission limitations and monitoring requirements.
3. What geographic restrictions are contained in the HMA general 
permit?
    The general provisions of the HMA plant draft permit restrict 
sources from

[[Page 2558]]

locating in severe and extreme ozone nonattainment areas or serious CO 
nonattainment areas.\22\ Because the major stationary source thresholds 
are very low in these types of areas, we do not envision that any minor 
source HMA plants or SQCS facilities will locate in these areas. Thus, 
we did not to address this situation in these general permits. We 
request comment on whether the EPA should limit the geographic scope of 
eligibility of the general permits in this manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ Sources can still locate in these areas but would need to 
obtain a site-specific NSR permit and may face more stringent 
control requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. SQCS Facilities

1. What is a SQCS facility?
    A SQCS facility is any non-metallic mineral processing facility 
which uses rock crushers, grinding mills, screening operations, bucket 
elevators, belt conveyors, bagging operations, storage bins, storage 
piles, truck loading stations, or railcar loading stations to process 
sand, gravel, or mineral aggregate.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ The operations and equipment at a typical SQCS facility are 
described in: AP 42, Fifth Edition, Volume I, Chapter 11: Mineral 
Products Industry, Chapters 11.19.1, Sand and Gravel Processing, and 
11.19.2, Crushed Stone Processing and Pulverized Mineral Processing; 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch11/index.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The SQCS facilities are part of a larger industrial process where 
sand, gravel, rock, and minerals are removed from the earth and 
prepared for industrial, commercial and residential use. In sand and 
gravel processing, deposits of sand and gravel are mined and processed 
with screens, washing, and clarifiers to segregate the material into 
different particle sizes. Sometimes facilities use crushing equipment 
to reduce particle sizes. In rock crushing operations, drilling and 
blasting operations loosen rock, and then a front-end loader or power 
shovel loads the rock into large haul trucks that transport the 
material to the processing operations. Processing operations may 
include: Crushing, screening, size classification, material handling 
and storage operations. Rock is loaded into bins and sent through 
screens, sorted for size, and conveyed to one or more rock crushers 
until all of the raw material is reduced to the desired size. Each 
crusher machine has associated screening and conveying equipment. After 
crushing, the rock is sorted according to size in screeners and 
conveyers that move the rock to storage piles. Front end loaders and 
trucks move finished materials offsite. Rock types processed by the 
crushed stone industry include: Limestone, granite, dolomite, traprock, 
sandstone, quartz, quartzite, and lesser amounts of calcareous marl, 
marble, shell, and slate. Electricity for the motors running the 
crushers, screens, and conveyors is provided either by grid electric 
power or by diesel generators.
    Criteria pollutant emissions of concern are primarily PM from 
crushing and screening, and PM and NOX from diesel 
generators. For sources with available water, water sprays may be used 
to control PM emissions. In sand processing, water is typically used in 
clarifiers to sort the sand by size, and the sand is processed wet. Dry 
PM control methods (baghouses) may also be used to control PM 
emissions.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. What is in the proposed SQCS facility general permit?
    This proposed general permit would apply to the construction of new 
true minor source SQCS facilities or the modification of existing true 
minor SQCS facilities, located in Indian country. The proposed general 
permit is for a facility that processes non-metallic materials only 
(i.e., sand, rock or stone). A source that processes any of the 
following is not eligible for coverage under this proposed permit: 
Metallic materials; radioactive materials; materials that contain 
asbestos; materials intended to be used as fuel; and minerals for 
structural clay, clay ceramics, brick, lime manufacturing, phosphate 
products, Portland cement, or refractory products.
    The draft permit covers emissions from the following equipment at 
HMA facilities:
     Engines;
     Material handling equipment; and
     Fuel storage tanks.

The draft permit requires emissions from all crushers, screens, drop 
points, and other possible release points to be controlled by wet 
suppression, requires fugitive emissions to be controlled by a fugitive 
dust control plan, and engines to be controlled to appropriate 
standards. Stationary engines are limited to using diesel and biodiesel 
as fuels. All liquid fuels are limited to no more than 0.0015 percent 
sulfur by weight.
    The proposed general permit includes monitoring that is sufficient 
to assure compliance with the emission limitations that apply to the 
source, including ensuring the wet suppression system is operating 
properly, taking weekly opacity observations and fugitive emissions 
surveys and meeting certain other requirements. The proposed general 
permit includes recordkeeping and reporting requirements sufficient to 
assure compliance with the emission limitations and monitoring 
requirements.

C. Request for Comment on the Proposed HMA Plant and SQCS Facility 
General Permits

    We request comment on all aspects of the general permits for HMA 
plants and SQCS facilities. We specifically request comment in the 
following four areas:
1. Throughput Production Limits as a Surrogate for Annual Ton Per Year 
Allowable Emission Limitations
    The proposed HMA plant and SQCS facility general permits contain 
throughput-based production limits that serve as surrogates for annual 
ton per year allowable emission limitations. We discuss the use of 
surrogate limits in Section V.E. above. For HMA plants, for production 
of hot mix asphalt the draft permit contains separate production 
limits:
     100,000 tons-per-month based on a 12-month rolling average 
from a drum mix asphalt plant; or
     33,000 tons-per-month based on a 12-month rolling average 
from a batch mix asphalt plant.

For SQCS facilities, the draft permit restricts raw material annual 
throughput to 10,500,000 tons based on any continuous rolling 12-month 
period. The background information documents for the draft permits 
contain the approximate ton per year emission thresholds for which the 
throughput limits act as surrogates. The draft permit does not 
establish different throughput limits based on the attainment status of 
the area. We request comment on our use of throughput limits as a 
surrogate for tpy emission limitations for this source category, and on 
whether there should be different production throughput limits in 
attainment and nonattainment areas.
    In establishing specific limits for HMA plants and SQCS facilities, 
we considered whether we should compute the production throughput 
limits on a ton per year basis, or over a shorter period of time to 
assure continuous compliance. For HMA plants, where NOX is 
the limiting pollutant, we elected monthly average production limits to 
ensure continuous compliance for portable plants that may relocate to 
ozone nonattainment areas within the same year. For SQCS facilities, 
where PM is the limiting pollutant, we elected to include an annual 
limit based on a 12-month rolling total. Nonetheless, we request 
comment on whether we should instead establish a monthly total

[[Page 2559]]

emission limitation based on a 30-day rolling total or any other 
appropriate averaging period.
    In addition to the production throughput limits, each of the draft 
permits contains restrictions on the amount of fuel used. For HMA 
plants, the combined fuel consumption in all engines and generators, 
excluding nonroad mobile engines, may not exceed 12,500 gallons-per-
calendar month if the source is located in an attainment area for 
ozone; or 2,500 gallons-per-calendar month if the source is located in 
an ozone nonattainment area. (In the HMA permit, fuel combustion is 
limited to natural gas, propane, distillate fuel, and biodiesel in the 
dryer/mixer and auxiliary heaters and diesel and biodiesel in the 
stationary engines and generators.) We are proposing monthly limits on 
production and fuel use at HMA plants because NOX emissions 
from the dryer and engines are the limiting factor in determining 
whether a source qualifies for a general permit. The monthly limits 
allow a source to relocate to an area with a different attainment 
status and still ensure they are operating as a minor source consistent 
with their application. We determined that it would be unnecessarily 
complicated for sources to show compliance with two different annual 
fuel limits within the same 12-month period (assuming the HMA plant is 
co-located with a SQCS facility), since during the previous 11 months 
they could have been at different locations. (Below, we discuss how 
multiple locations can be handled for the SQCS general permit.) The 
monthly limit on fuel use makes demonstrating compliance 
straightforward and maintains operational flexibility (since the same 
annual production limit applies to attainment and nonattainment areas).
    For SQCS facilities, the combined fuel consumption of all engines 
and generators, excluding nonroad mobile engines, may not exceed a 
range of between 33,000 gallons and 162,000 gallons annually based on a 
12-month rolling total for each month, depending on the ozone 
attainment status of the area. (In the SQCS permit, fuel combustion in 
stationary internal combustion engines is limited to diesel and 
biodiesel.) In the case of SQCS facilities, PM emissions from engines 
are not a limiting factor in determining whether a facility qualifies 
for a general permit so we did not find monthly limits necessary. We 
request comment on whether to distinguish the amount of fuel use based 
on ozone attainment status, or whether we should set one usage limit 
within the stated range for both attainment and nonattainment areas. 
The simplicity of a single usage limit may outweigh the benefits of the 
flexibility of offering varying limits.
2. Setback Requirement
    The draft general permits require HMA and SQCS facilities to locate 
at least 150 feet from the nearest property boundary and 1,000 feet 
from the nearest residence. These requirements are beyond the 
requirements in the EPA's 40 CFR parts 60, 61, and 63 regulations 
affecting these source categories. Nonetheless, the states of 
Washington \25\ and Alaska \26\ include setback provisions in their 
general permits for this source category. We believe that these 
requirements will minimize the impact of emissions from these sources 
on localized air quality. We request comment on whether we should 
include these setback requirements in the final permits to provide 
additional protection against adverse impacts to local air quality. In 
addition, we request comment on whether there are other neighboring 
types of buildings from which the setback should apply (e.g., schools, 
nursing homes) and whether to require these facilities to use physical 
markers on their property to show compliance with the setback 
requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ The setback requirement in the Washington's general permit 
is based on dispersion modeling for rock crushing facilities with a 
high rock throughput rate. For more information, go to: https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/summarypages/ecy070237.html.
    \26\ For information on Alaska's setback requirements, go to: 
http://dec.alaska.gov/air/ap/docs/General%20Permit%20Application%20for%20Asphalt%20Plants%2004-12-12.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Authorizing Multiple Locations
    HMA facilities and SQCS facilities often operate as portable 
stationary sources. A facility will locate in a single area for a 
specified period of time and then disassemble and relocate to another 
area. We structured both draft general permits to accommodate 
relocation of a facility. A source may identify multiple sites of 
operation in its request for coverage. The reviewing authority will 
consider the request for each location, and will specify approval of 
one or more of these locations in the approval of the request for 
coverage. If the reviewing authority does not approve a specific 
location, then the source will need to reapply for coverage under the 
general permit or for a site specific permit before relocating to this 
site. The general permits also require a source to submit a 
notification to the reviewing authority each time it relocates to a 
pre-approved site. We request comment on the use of these general 
permits to authorize relocation of a facility to pre-approved site 
locations. In addition, because these two types of facilities can co-
locate at the same site, we seek comment on whether we should issue 
general permits that cover both source categories within one permit, in 
lieu of two separate permits, or in addition to two separate permits. 
If we finalize such an approach, we propose to include all the 
requirements proposed for the separate permits in a single permit, but 
we seek comment on whether the combined permit should include any 
additional or different requirements.
4. Spark-Ignition Engines
    The draft general permits for both HMA and SQCS facilities include 
control measures for a number of different engine types. We did not 
include spark-ignition engine control measures in either general 
permit, because we do not believe that HMA or SQCS facilities commonly 
use these types of engines, and, as we discuss above, we precluded use 
of any fuel other than diesel or biodiesel in stationary internal 
combustion engines. We request comment on this conclusion. If 
commenters indicate that spark ignition engines should be regulated 
under the general permits, then we may include emission limitations 
comparable to the levels established for other type of engines in the 
final general permits.

D. Auto Body Repair and Miscellaneous Surface Coating Operations

1. What is an auto body repair and miscellaneous surface coating 
operation?
    An auto body shop repairs, repaints, and/or customizes passenger 
cars, trucks, vans, motorcycles, and other mobile equipment capable of 
being driven or drawn on the highway. Auto body refinishing shops 
involve cleaning the auto body surface to ensure proper adhesion of the 
coating, priming and sealing the surface, applying a topcoat, and 
cleaning of the spray equipment. Coating application equipment includes 
preparation stations, spray booths, spray guns, and spray gun cleaning 
equipment. Some facilities are equipped with heating units to heat the 
air in the drying booth or to maintain a constant shop temperature 
during cold months. The majority of these operations occur at small 
body shops that repair and refinish automobiles. The activities include 
sanding, cleaning, spray-applying coating, and cleaning spray 
equipment, all of which may release pollutants into the air.

[[Page 2560]]

    Miscellaneous surface coating operations are those that involve the 
spray application of coatings to miscellaneous parts and/or products 
made of metal or plastic, or combinations of metal and plastic. These 
activities include:
     Paint stripping for the removal of dried paint (including, 
but not limited to, paint, enamel, varnish, shellac, and lacquer) from 
wood, metal, plastic, and other substrates;
     Spray application of coatings to motor vehicles and mobile 
equipment including operations that are located in stationary 
structures at fixed locations, and mobile repair and refinishing 
operations that travel to the customer's location; and
     Spray application of coatings to a plastic and/or metal 
substrate on a part or product, except spray coating applications that 
meet the definition of facility maintenance or space vehicle.
    The coating application operations include washes, primers, primer 
surfacers, primer sealers, and topcoats. Coatings are applied using a 
hand-held device that creates an atomized mist of coating and deposits 
the coating on assembled motor vehicles and mobile equipment.
    The pollutants of concern for auto body repair and surface coating 
operations are VOCs and hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from the use of 
solvents and coatings. Particulate matter emissions are also emitted 
from spray coating operations. Paints, coatings, and the solvents used 
for paint gun clean-up are the main sources of VOCs in auto body shops. 
Emissions are typically controlled through use of lower-VOC coatings, 
increased transfer efficiency of spray guns, minimizing solvent 
evaporation during clean-up and other best practices, such as closing 
all containers of painting materials immediately after use. Particulate 
matter emissions are also emitted from spray coating operations. 
Because spray coating operations are normally performed in enclosed 
spray booths and controlled by dry filters or other equivalent control 
devices, PM emissions from spray coating operations are not significant 
if the spray booths and the associated control devices are operated 
properly. If a facility contains fuel combustion heating units, there 
are associated combustion emissions from those units.
    Coatings processes also include degreasing. Solvent degreasing (or 
solvent cleaning) is the physical process of using organic solvents to 
remove grease, fats, oils, wax or soil from various metal, glass, or 
plastic items. The types of equipment used in this method are 
categorized as cold cleaners, open top vapor degreasers, or 
conveyorized degreasers. The general permit only allows for the use of 
cold cleaners that are batch loaded and non-boiling solvent degreasers. 
These processes usually provide the simplest and least expensive method 
of metal cleaning. Maintenance cold cleaners are smaller, more 
numerous, and generally use petroleum solvents such as mineral spirits 
(petroleum distillates and Stoddard solvents). Manufacturing cold 
cleaners use a wide variety of solvents, which perform more specialized 
and higher quality cleaning with about twice the average emission rate 
of maintenance cold cleaners. Some cold cleaners can serve both 
purposes.
    Cold cleaner operations include spraying, brushing, flushing, and 
immersion. In a typical maintenance cleaner, dirty parts are cleaned 
manually by spraying and then soaking in the tank. After cleaning, the 
parts are either suspended over the tank to drain or are placed on an 
external rack that routes the drained solvent back into the cleaner. 
The cover is intended to be closed whenever parts are not being 
processed in the cleaner. Typical manufacturing cold cleaner operations 
vary widely in design, but there are two basic tank designs: the simple 
spray sink and the dip tank. Of these, the dip tank provides more 
thorough cleaning through immersion, and often is made to improve 
cleaning efficiency by agitation. Small cold cleaning operations may be 
numerous in urban areas.
2. What is in the proposed auto body repair and miscellaneous surface 
coating operations general permit?
    This proposed general permit would apply to the construction of 
new, true minor source auto body repair and miscellaneous surface 
coating facilities or the modification of existing, true minor source 
facilities, located in Indian country. Surface coating facilities that 
are major sources under 40 CFR part 63, and are subject to the 
requirements of certain National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants (NESHAP),\27\ are not eligible for coverage under this 
general permit.\28\ The Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) 
standards in these regulations cover a wide array of surface coating 
operations, each with a different set of emission standards for the 
various coatings typically used by the particular source category, some 
of which may require add-on controls. Creating a general permit that 
covers all of these surface coating operations--as required by 40 CFR 
49.154(c)(4)--would be cumbersome and likely create a general permit 
that would be confusing to the permittee. We believe auto body repair 
and miscellaneous surface coating operations are a typical type of true 
minor surface coating operation such that it is a good candidate for a 
general permit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ The relevant NESHAPs are: Subpart II--National Emission 
Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Shipbuilding and Ship 
Repair; Subpart IIII--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants: Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks; 
Subpart KKKK--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants: Surface Coating of Metal Cans; Subpart MMMM--National 
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Surface Coating 
of Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products; Subpart NNNN--National 
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Surface Coating of 
Large Appliances; Subpart OOOO--National Emission Standards for 
Hazardous Air Pollutants: Printing, Coating, and Dyeing of Fabrics 
and Other Textiles
    Subpart PPPP--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants for Surface Coating of Plastic Parts and Products; 
Subpart QQQQ--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants: Surface Coating of Wood Building Products; Subpart 
RRRR--National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: 
Surface Coating of Metal Furniture; and Subpart SSSS--National 
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Surface Coating of 
Metal Coil.
    \28\ Due to the surface coating-related requirements in a 
NESHAP, it is possible that a source could be a major source for 
HAPs but a minor source for regulated NSR pollutants. However, for 
simplicity, we are proposing to exclude major HAP sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We request comment on limiting eligibility of the general permit to 
true minor sources that are not major sources of HAP, or whether there 
are any terms or conditions we could add to the final permit that would 
ensure both compliance with the general permit and with the MACT 
standards.
    The draft permit requires that all spray applications of coatings 
must be performed using high efficiency spray guns in a spray booth 
controlled by exhaust filters. We assumed that only batch-loaded cold 
cleaning degreasers were used at these types of facilities. The 
requirements for cold solvent degreasing include several work practice 
standards to ensure VOC emissions are minimized, including: keeping the 
degreaser cover closed at all times, except during parts entry and 
removal; the degreaser should be free of cracks, holes and other 
defects; all waste solvents must be properly stored and identified in 
sealed containers; and solvent flow must be directed downward.
    The proposed permit includes monitoring that is sufficient to 
assure compliance with the emission limitations that apply to the 
source, including requiring monitoring for overspray, assuring that 
pressure drop

[[Page 2561]]

across the exhaust filters does not exceed manufacturers' 
recommendations and inspecting solvent degreasers for leaks and cracks 
prior to use. The proposed permit includes recordkeeping and reporting 
sufficient to assure compliance with the emission limitations and 
monitoring requirements.
3. Request for Comment on the Proposed Auto Body Repair and 
Miscellaneous Surface Coating Operations General Permit
    We request comment on all aspects of the general permit for auto 
body repair and miscellaneous surface coating operations. We 
specifically request comment in the following two areas:
(a) Surrogate Annual Allowable Emission Limitations
    The EPA is also proposing to include an annual allowable emission 
limitation for auto body repair and miscellaneous surface coating 
operations source category. This general permit would apply to the 
construction of new facilities proposing to locate in Indian country or 
the modification of existing auto body repair and miscellaneous surface 
coating operations located in Indian country. In attainment areas of 
Indian country, the draft general permit includes an upper throughput 
limit for VOC containing materials (e.g., coatings, thinners, and 
clean-up solvents) not to exceed 5,000 gallons per year (gpy) based on 
a 12-month rolling total. This surrogate emission limitation equates to 
approximately 25 tpy or less of VOCs.\29\ In ozone nonattainment areas 
of Indian country, the draft general permit includes an upper 
throughput limit for VOC containing materials (e.g., coatings, 
thinners, and clean-up solvents) not to exceed 900 gpy based on a 12-
month rolling total. This surrogate emission limitation equates to 7 
tpy or less of VOCs.\30\ Finally, we request comment on the 
appropriateness of establishing different limitations based on the 
attainment status of the area and whether the specified limitations 
should be slightly higher or slightly lower.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ Information on the source of these thresholds is available 
at: Background Document, Minor Source Auto Body Repair and 
Refinishing Shops General Permit and Permit by Rule, Docket ID No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0151, http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal/tribalnsr.html.
    \30\ Information on the source of these thresholds is available 
at: Background Document, Minor Source Auto Body Repair and 
Refinishing Shops General Permit and Permit by Rule, Docket ID No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0151, http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal/tribalnsr.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

(b) Covering Both Auto Body Repair and Miscellaneous Surface Coating 
Operations
    As currently structured, both auto body repair shops and 
miscellaneous surface coating operations are eligible to apply for 
coverage under the general permit. We think these types of emissions 
activities qualify as similar sources because (1) they both use the 
same type of equipment (such as spray guns) and materials (such as 
paint) that have similar forms of emissions with a similar overall 
emissions potential and (2) they use similar approaches to minimizing 
emissions. We request comment on treating these emissions activities as 
similar sources and on regulating both activities within the same 
general permit.

E. GDFs

1. What is a GDF?
    A GDF is any stationary facility that dispenses gasoline into the 
fuel tank of a motor vehicle, nonroad vehicle or equipment, including a 
nonroad vehicle or nonroad engine used solely for competition.\31\ It 
should also be noted that a GDF could also include equipment that 
dispenses diesel fuel (diesel is discussed further below). Furthermore, 
a GDF could be an operation supporting other activities at a facility 
that otherwise requires a permit.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ A more formal regulatory definition of GDF can be found at 
40 CFR 63.11132.
    \32\ Under the general permit and permit by rule programs, such 
a source would be considered a minor source and potentially eligible 
for the permit provided the PTE of all existing, new and modified 
emission units at the stationary source were below the major source 
thresholds for all regulated NSR pollutants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Gasoline is delivered by tank trucks to GDFs and then transferred 
to highway motor vehicles and nonroad equipment and engines. GDFs 
include all retail outlets such as traditional gasoline service 
stations, convenience stores, truck stops, and hypermarkets (e.g., 
warehouse clubs and big box stores), marinas, as well as private and 
commercial outlets, such as centrally-fueled fleets, government 
operations, and private businesses such as farms and landscaping 
operations. This does not include airports offering aviation gasoline 
or mobile fueling capabilities.
    Gasoline vapors are released during the transfer of gasoline from 
tank trucks to stationary gasoline storage tanks and during the 
refueling of vehicles and equipment.\33\ Gasoline vapors are the major 
air pollution concern associated with gasoline dispensing and handling 
facilities because they contain VOCs and HAPs such as aromatic 
compounds and isooctane.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ Some vapors can also be released due to spillage by vehicle 
operators as vehicles are fueled.
    \34\ For more information, go to: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiip/techreport/volume03/iii11_apr2001.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA's emissions factor document, AP-42, has traditionally 
divided VOC emissions from GDFs into two basic segments of operation: 
Stage I and Stage II.\35\ Stage I generally refers to the transfer of 
gasoline from the delivery truck to the aboveground storage tank (AST) 
or underground storage tank (UST). Fuel storage tanks are generally, 
but not always, cylindrical in shape, and vary in volume from 250 
gallons (approximately 1,000 liters) to 30,000 gallons. Volumes of 250 
to 1,000 gallons are most common for ASTs and 6,000 to 12,000 gallons 
are most common USTs. Stage II refers to gasoline in storage in these 
tanks and/or its transfer to a vehicle or equipment fuel tank through a 
pump and dispenser.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ For more information, go to: AP 42, Fifth Edition, Volume 
I, Chapter 5: Petroleum Industry; U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency; http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch05/index.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    VOC emissions control technology exists and is required for Stage I 
and Stage II operations. Stage I vapor recovery is a control method to 
capture gasoline vapors that are released when gasoline is delivered by 
a tank truck to a storage tank located at a GDF. Instead of being 
released to the air, the gasoline vapors from filling the tank are 
captured and returned to the tank truck as the storage tank is being 
filled with fuel. From there, the vapors are transported back to the 
gasoline terminal vapor processor for recovery or destruction. Because 
of the GDF NESHAP requirements (found at 40 CFR part 63, Subpart 
CCCCCC), all GDFs dispensing more than 1,200,000 gpy were required to 
have Stage I controls in place in January 2011, with lesser 
requirements in the same timeframe for GDFs with gasoline throughputs 
between 120,000 gpy and 1,200,000 gpy.\36\ Stage I controls were 
commonly in place at many larger throughput GDFs prior to 2000. There 
are no such requirements for diesel fuel.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ Certified vapor recovery systems include hoses, nozzles, 
processors, and other equipment that create a closed system which 
returns gasoline vapor back to the underground storage tank and then 
back to the truck that delivers the gasoline to your station. The 
system and equipment are designed to capture vapor before it is 
released to the air.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Stage II vapor recovery captures gasoline vapor that would 
otherwise escape into the air when motorists refuel their vehicles. 
Section 182(b)(3) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7511a(b)(3), required pump-
based Stage II vapor recovery for some GDFs located in

[[Page 2562]]

``moderate'' or above ozone nonattainment areas. Section 202(a)(6) of 
the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7521(a)(6), required the EPA to develop standards 
for vehicle-based onboard vapor recovery (ORVR) controls on light-duty 
vehicles to capture these emissions. Section 202(a)(6) of the CAA also 
states that the section 182(b)(3) pump-based Stage II requirement shall 
not apply in moderate nonattainment areas after ORVR standards are 
promulgated, but would be required for serious, severe, or extreme 
ozone nonattainment areas.\37\ On April 16, 1994, the EPA published 
regulations requiring the phase-in of ORVR controls on new passenger 
cars and light trucks.\38\ These controls were required on all new 
gasoline-powered motor vehicles, not just those in ozone nonattainment 
areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \37\ For more information, see: ``Widespread Use for Onboard 
Refueling Vapor Recovery and Stage II Waiver,'' U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, 77 FR 28772, May 16, 2012, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-07-15/html/2011-17888.htm. The rulemaking 
documents and supporting analyses are available at EPA public docket 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-1076.
    \38\ These requirements were ultimately extended to all complete 
heavy-duty gasoline-powered vehicles (HDGVs) with a gross vehicle 
weight rating (GVWR) less than 10,000 pounds and have recently been 
proposed to extend to all complete HDGVs with a GVWR up to 14,000 
pounds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the CAA provides that the EPA may revise or waive the 
pump-based Stage II control requirements of section 182(b)(3) for 
serious or above ozone nonattainment areas after the EPA determines 
that ORVR control systems are in ``widespread use'' throughout the 
motor vehicle fleet. The EPA has determined that vehicle-based ORVR 
refueling emission control systems were in widespread use in the motor 
vehicle fleet as of May 9, 2012.\39\ This determination triggered the 
provision of section 202(a)(6) of the CAA, which waives the section 
182(b)(3) Stage II requirement for serious or above ozone nonattainment 
areas. Under this waiver, states are no longer required to have pump-
based Stage II vapor recovery systems for control of vehicle refueling 
emissions under section 182 (b)(3).\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \39\ ``Widespread Use for Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery and 
Stage II Waiver,'' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 FR 
28772, May 16, 2012, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-05-16/html/2012-11846.htm.
    \40\ If a state submits a State Implementation Plan (SIP) 
revision to remove Stage II requirements from a previously approved 
SIP, it would need to demonstrate that the revision meets the 
requirements of sections 110(l) of the CAA as well as sections 193 
and 184(b)(2), if applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. What impact will the GDF National Emissions Standard for Hazardous 
Air Pollutants and onboard refueling vapor recovery control systems 
have on emissions from GDFs?
    The GDF NESHAP and ORVR controls have a significant impact on 
lowering the VOC emissions levels from GDFs. GDF NESHAP requirements 
address Stage I emissions for all but the lowest throughput GDFs. ORVR 
controls and the gasoline dispensing rate limits which the EPA put in 
place in 1996 have significantly reduced the VOC emission rates. When 
fully phased-in, ORVR will reduce Stage II vapor displacement emissions 
by about 98 percent and fuel spillage by 50 percent.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \41\ These values are discussed more fully in EPA memoranda, 
``Updated Data for ORVR Widespread Use Assessment,'' February 29, 
2012 and ``Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery Widespread Use 
Assessment,'' June 9, 2011. Both are available in: Docket EPA-HQ-
OAR-2010-1076.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Using this information, Table 3 illustrates how the minor source 
NSR VOC emission permitting thresholds of 2 and 5 tpy translates into 
the equivalent volumes of gasoline dispensed by a GDF on both a monthly 
and yearly basis based on the control efficiencies for the GDF NESHAP 
and ORVR regulations. The 2 tpy value applies to any area classified as 
ozone nonattainment (marginal, moderate, serious, severe, or extreme) 
at the time the permit is being submitted and the 5 tpy applies to 
areas meeting the ozone NAAQS at that time. It includes the basic Stage 
I and Stage II emission sources plus the impacts that the GDF NESHAP 
and the increasing percentage of vehicles with ORVR controls will have 
on refueling emissions from GDFs (assuming pump-based Stage II vapor 
recovery is not in place). In this table, the displacement VOC emission 
rate in pounds/1,000 gallons depends on the gasoline Reid Vapor 
Pressure (RVP), the dispensed fuel temperature, and the difference 
between the temperature of the fuel in the tank and the dispensed fuel. 
For these purposes, the EPA has used 7 pounds per square inch (psi) RVP 
and temperatures representative of the summertime western U.S. for 
ozone non-attainment areas and 10 psi RVP and national average 
summertime temperatures for all other areas in calculating the 
uncontrolled displacement VOC emission rate in pounds/1,000 gallons. 
This yields values of about 7.5 and 10.8 pounds/1,000 gallons, 
respectively.\42\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \42\ For information on how these values were determined, see 
``Calculation of Emissions from GDFs,'' Memorandum from Glenn W. 
Passavant to Public Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0151, September 24, 2012, 
http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal/tribalnsr.html.

                                                                      Table 3--Emissions From GDFs With ORVR Consideration
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NSR CATEGORY                                                                             End of       % ORVR      Disp.      Breathing      Stage I     Total                Gpy     Gallons per
                                                                                       calendar                3 lb/10          losses      3 lb/10   3 lb/10         equivalent     month (gpm)
                                                                                           year                gallons         3 lb/10      gallons   gallons                         equivalent
                                                                                                                               gallons
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1a........................  2 tpy....................  Ozone NA...................         2011           72         2.1          0.25          0.3         2.65       1,509,434         125,786
1b........................  2 tpy....................  Ozone NA...................         2014           82         1.35         0.25          0.3         1.9        2,105,263         175,439
1c........................  2 tpy....................  Ozone NA...................         2020           92         0.6          0.25          0.3         1.15       3,478,261         289,855
1d........................  2 tpy....................  Ozone NA...................         2025           96         0.3          0.25          0.3         0.85       4,705,882         392,157
2a........................  5 tpy....................  Ozone attain...............         2011           72         3.02         0.25          0.3         3.57       2,801,112         233,427
2b........................  5 tpy....................  Ozone attain...............         2014           82         1.94         0.25          0.3         2.49       4,016,064         334,673
2c........................  5 tpy....................  Ozone attain...............         2020           92         0.86         0.25          0.3         1.41       7,142,857         595,238
2d........................  5 tpy....................  Ozone attain...............         2025           96         0.43         0.25          0.3         0.98      10,204,082         850,340
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As shown in row 1b, the EPA estimates that ORVR will control 82 
percent of motor vehicle gasoline refueling emissions in 2014. A GDF in 
an ozone nonattainment area could dispense approximately 2.1 million 
gpy before reaching the 2 tpy emissions threshold. As seen in row 1c, 
however, that same GDF could dispense approximately 3.5 million gpy in 
2020 because 92 percent of refueling

[[Page 2563]]

emissions will be controlled by vehicles equipped with ORVR.
    In row 2b, the EPA estimates that a GDF in an ozone attainment area 
could dispense approximately 4 million gpy in 2014 before reaching the 
5 tpy emissions threshold for ozone in a PSD area. As seen in row 2c, 
however, a GDF in an attainment area could dispense about 7.1 million 
gpy in 2020 because 92 percent of gasoline refueling emissions are 
expected to be controlled by ORVR. The calculations in Table 3 are 
snapshots for the various calendar years. Based on the PTE calculator, 
the gpy or gpm values for any given permit depend on the geographic 
location (attainment or non-attainment area) and the year in which 
coverage under the permit is requested.
    The average GDF has a throughput of 1.5 million gpy; thus, many 
GDFs have throughputs below the 2014 gpy values listed in Table 3. If a 
GDF has projected emissions below the 2 tpy and 5 tpy minor NSR 
emissions thresholds for ozone nonattainment and attainment areas 
specified in the Indian Country Minor NSR rule, it does not need to 
obtain a pre-construction permit but may still be required to meet the 
GDF NESHAP requirements of 40 CFR part 63, Subpart CCCCCC and those 
proposed below for ASTs. While it is possible that a large and very 
active GDF could exceed the minor NSR emissions thresholds for ozone 
nonattainment and attainment areas (2 and 5 tpy, respectively) and, 
thus, be subject to the Minor NSR rule permit requirements, it is very 
unlikely that a single GDF could dispense enough fuel to exceed a 10 
tpy level, which is the strictest VOC emissions threshold for a major 
source in a nonattainment area. The average refueling event is 10 to 11 
gallons. If, for example, one simply multiplies the gpy entries in the 
Table 3 rows (1b) by a value of 5 tpy and divides by 11 gallons per 
minute, the result is over approximately 950,000 refueling events per 
year at one GDF. There are practical limitations on GDF acreage, as 
well as vehicle transit and tanker truck deliveries, which serve as a 
practical cap on the number of refueling events per year. Exceeding the 
10 tpy limit in ozone nonattainment areas in 2014 would require over 
2,600 gasoline refueling events per day, which is practically unlikely 
at even the largest and busiest GDFs.
    Thus, considering the physical limitations on GDFs and the 
emissions impact of ORVR, we propose that for most areas there is no 
need for numerical limits on the quantity (throughput) or rate (tpy) of 
emissions for GDFs as it is practically not possible to become a major 
source. However, to provide extra air quality protection, we are 
proposing to have a surrogate emission limitation for serious, severe 
or extreme ozone nonattainment areas. For these areas, the draft permit 
requires the source to limit annual gasoline surrogate throughput to 10 
million gallons or less based on a 12-month rolling total for each 
month. This surrogate throughput limit is set at a level intended to 
ensure that GDFs under this general permit and permit by rule remain 
minor sources and below the lowest major source threshold for extreme 
ozone nonattainment areas of 10 tpy.
3. Treatment of Diesel Fuel
    It is common for facilities with gasoline dispensing operations to 
also dispense diesel fuel to autos, light trucks, heavy-trucks, and 
nonroad equipment. However, the true vapor pressure of diesel fuel is 
only about 0.2 percent of the 7 psi RVP gasoline at 70[emsp14][deg]F. 
Thus, while Stage I and Stage II type emissions occur with diesel fuel 
dispensing operations, they are very low in comparison and no Stage I 
or Stage II controls are required. For completeness, the PTE calculator 
provided as part of this NPRM includes diesel emissions but these in 
total would be very small in comparison to gasoline vapor emissions. 
This PTE could also help to inform calculations of total VOC emissions 
from a facility where a GDF is only part of the overall VOC emissions 
from the source used in assessing the permit application.
4. What are the requirements for the proposed general permit for GDFs 
in serious, severe, and extreme ozone nonattainment areas?
    We are proposing the following additional requirements, as 
discussed below, for GDFs in Indian country that are located in 
serious, severe, and extreme ozone nonattainment areas. Currently, all 
of the areas of Indian country located in serious, severe, and extreme 
ozone nonattainment areas are located in California, but that situation 
could change in the future.\43\ We examined the GDF requirements of the 
California Air Resources Board (ARB) and the six California air quality 
management and air pollution control districts (collectively AQMDs) 
that are designated serious, severe, or extreme for ozone nonattainment 
and have areas of Indian country within their boundaries.\44\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \43\ For more information, see: ``Air Quality Designations for 
the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards,'' 77 FR 
30088, May 21, 2012, http://www.epa.gov/airquality/ozonepollution/designations/2008standards/final/tribalf.htm.
    \44\ These include El Dorado County AQMD, San Joaquin Valley 
Unified APCD, Placer County APCD, South Coast AQMD, Mojave Desert 
AQMD, and Yolo-Solano AQMD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    California ARB adopted regulations for control of standing loss 
control (SLC) VOC emissions from ASTs.\45\ Emissions of this type are 
not included in the GDF NESHAP requirements. The test procedures and 
SLC emission standard (0.57 lbs/1,000 gallons ullage/day) for these 
requirements potentially cover all ASTs regardless of volume.\46\ 
Systems can be certified to the SLC emission standards either by design 
or performance as discussed in ARB CP-206.\47\ Responding to these 
requirements generally involves the use of one of several techniques to 
treat the tank in such a way as to reduce the diurnal temperature 
changes in the fuel in the AST and to add a pressure vacuum (p/v) valve 
to address AST venting. These requirements became applicable to 
existing ASTs in California in April 2009, and to new ASTs (including 
major modifications) in April 2013. They apply to ASTs in the 
individual air districts in California if the ARB rule is adopted by 
that air district.\48\ All of the AQMDs in serious, severe, and extreme 
ozone nonattainment areas in California have adopted the SLC 
requirements, but have granted exemptions for tanks of 250 gallons 
capacity or less. Thus, to address ozone air quality and as a matter of 
equity, the EPA is requesting comment on whether the final permits 
should include these SLC requirements. If we include these 
requirements, then

[[Page 2564]]

we would delay the effective date of compliance until January 1, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \45\ Standing losses are gasoline vapor emissions that occur 
whenever the gasoline evaporates during periods of no gasoline 
transfer. These evaporative emissions escape through open vent pipes 
and leaks in the AST. They occur when internal tank pressure 
increases as a result of diurnal temperature changes. Standing 
losses from ASTs vary based on the different tank configurations, 
fill levels, and volumes.
    \46\ For more information on test procedures and standards, see: 
http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2007/ast07/ast07.htm. Most notably, 
refer to the ISOR and TP-206.1, TP-206.2, and CP-206.
    \47\ See http://www.arb.ca.gov/testmeth/vol2/cp-206.pdf, 
Certification Procedure for Vapor Recovery Systems at Gasoline 
Dispensing Facilities Using Aboveground Storage Tanks, CP--206, 
California Air Resources Board, Adopted: May 2, 2008.
    \48\ The EPA has approved requirements for aboveground storage 
tanks with capacity greater than 250 gallons for Sacramento 
Metropolitan AQMD (Revisions to the California State Implementation 
Plan, San Diego APCD,
    Northern Sierra AQMD, and Sacramento Metropolitan AQMD; January 
7, 2013; 78 FR 897) and San Joaquin Valley Unified APCD (Revisions 
to the California State Implementation Plan, Northern Sierra Air 
Quality Management District and San Joaquin Valley Unified Air 
Pollution Control District; October 30, 2009; 74 FR 56120).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We would, though, propose to exempt any AST with a volume equal to 
or less than 250 gallons. This is consistent with the current NESHAP 
and California air district rules. Tanks not qualifying for this 
exemption would need to meet the proposed applicable NESHAP 
requirements, as well as the SLC requirements as discussed above, 
including the reporting requirements.
    Since these ASTs are all expected to be in California, we seek 
comment as to whether the EPA should simply adopt the SLC and ARB Phase 
I requirements for ASTs for new or reconstructed ASTs with a volume 
greater than 250 gallons \49\ in lieu of SLC and the EPA Stage I 
requirements as prescribed in 40 CFR part 63, subpart CCCCCC. This 
approach could be more efficient and offer wider availability of ASTs 
that meet California emissions requirements. Furthermore, the EPA is 
asking for comment on whether the exemption threshold should be set at 
250 gallons or less or at 1,000 liters or less. An AST with 1,000 liter 
volume is the equivalent of about 265 gallons. An uncontrolled 250 
gallon AST which is splash refilled monthly would emit about 62 pounds 
per year. A 265 gallon AST would emit 6 percent more.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ See California ARB certification requirement (CP-206) and 
test procedures (TP-206.1. TP-206.2. and TP-206.3) for more detail 
on these requirements. These are available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/vapor/vapor.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, we note that many of the California Air Districts allow 
exemptions for ASTs when 50 percent or more of the throughput is 
involved in supporting husbandry activities (e.g., ranching and 
farming). Since we are not proposing such a provision, this creates a 
question as to whether new SLC controlled tanks would be available in 
some tank sizes such as 250 gallons and what would be the control costs 
if they are required only in areas of Indian country. We request 
comment on these two points.
5. What type of source may apply for coverage under the proposed GDF 
general permit?
    This proposed general permit covers construction of new true minor 
source GDFs to be located in Indian country, or the modification of 
existing true minor source GDFs in Indian country. The general permit 
is available to any facility that qualifies as a GDF. There are no 
limitations on the eligibility of GDFs to apply for this general 
permit. The permit contains requirements for proper design, 
construction, installation and operation of vapor balance systems for 
the loading of gasoline into storage tanks and daily storage therein. 
It applies to GDFs with USTs and/or ASTs. It potentially includes 
facilities dispensing gasoline, gasoline and diesel fuel, or diesel 
fuel only.
6. Request for Comment on the Proposed GDF General Permit
    We request comment on all aspects of the general permit for GDFs. 
We specifically request comment in the following two areas:
a. Should the EPA establish an annual allowable emission limitation?
    The draft permit does not contain an annual ton per year allowable 
emission limitation or a surrogate emission limitation, unless a source 
locates in a serious, severe or extreme ozone nonattainment area. 
Because of the effectiveness of ORVR and other practical constraints on 
emissions from GDF operations, for most areas we do not believe that it 
is necessary to establish an annual allowable emission limitation to 
properly regulate the construction or modification and then operation 
of true minor GDF sources. We request comment on this conclusion. If 
the EPA were to include a throughput emission limitation, we would 
establish this limit just below the major source threshold for VOC. The 
throughput emission limitation would be calculated as the product of 
emissions factors and the volume of annual gasoline throughput that 
corresponds to the ton per year of the major source threshold. As the 
implementation of ORVR continues, in the future there would be little 
need to adjust throughput emission limitation because of the practical 
limitations on how much gasoline a GDF can process.
    However, if a source locates in an extreme ozone nonattainment 
area, then the draft permit requires the source to limit annual 
gasoline throughput to 8 million gallons or less based on a 12-month 
rolling total for each month. This throughput limit is set at a level 
intended to ensure that GDFs under this general permit or permit by 
rule remain minor sources and below the major source threshold for 
extreme ozone nonattainment areas of 10 tpy. We request comment on the 
need for this additional requirement in serious and above ozone 
nonattainment areas.
b. Should proposed standing loss control requirements apply to GDFs in 
Indian country in potential future serious, severe, and extreme ozone 
nonattainment areas outside of California?
    The EPA is proposing that new and modified ASTs greater than 250 
gallons to be located in Indian country in California meet proposed SLC 
emission control requirements. This is consistent with air quality 
needs and is the same as required for ASTs outside of Indian country in 
California. As discussed above, compliant ASTs are expected to be 
readily available in California. This may not necessarily be the case 
outside of California, however, as no other state has adopted SLC 
requirements. Given this potential disparity in technology 
availability, the EPA asks for comment on applying SLC requirements in 
areas outside of California. The EPA also asks if this requirement 
should be linked to whether the GDF would exceed the minor NSR 
thresholds (2 and 5 tpy) for ozone attainment and nonattainment areas, 
respectively, if SLC emissions were not included.\50\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ Uncontrolled SLC emissions = 5.7 pounds/1,000 gallons of 
ullage per day. Normally, an AST would have ullage of 45 percent of 
capacity on average, assuming it is filled to capacity each time it 
drops to 10 percent of capacity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

F. Petroleum Dry Cleaning Facilities

1. What is a petroleum dry cleaning facility?
    A petroleum dry cleaning facility can consist of dry cleaning 
dryers, washers, filters, stills, settling tanks, and boilers. The dry 
cleaning industry is a service industry involved in the cleaning of 
articles ranging from personal clothing to mops and mats. Dry cleaning 
involves the cleaning of fabrics with nonaqueous organic solvents. The 
dry cleaning process includes three steps: (1) Washing the fabric in 
solvent; (2) spinning to extract excess solvent; and (3) drying by 
tumbling in a hot air stream. There are two general types of cleaning 
fluids used in the industry: petroleum solvents and synthetic solvents. 
Petroleum solvents, such as Stoddard or 140-F, are combustible 
hydrocarbon mixtures similar to kerosene. Synthetic solvents or 
halogenated hydrocarbons, such as perchloroethylene (``perc'' or PCE), 
are nonflammable.
    Petroleum dry cleaning operations are similar to detergent and 
water wash operations. There are two basic types of dry cleaning 
machines, transfer and dry-to-dry machines. Transfer machines 
accomplish washing and drying in separate machines. Dry cleaning as a

[[Page 2565]]

batch process in transfer machines can result in a large amount of VOC 
or HAP emissions due to vaporization of solvent during the transfer 
process. Dry-to-dry machines are single units that perform all of the 
washing, extraction, and drying operations. Since cleaning and drying 
take place in the same compartment of dry-to-dry machines, significant 
amounts of VOC and HAP emissions are eliminated from dry-to-dry 
machines.\51\ Most petroleum dry cleaning machines in operation today 
are dry-to-dry machines.\52\ Dryers, solvent filtration and 
distillation systems, and miscellaneous (fugitive) sources are the 
major contributors of VOC emissions in a dry cleaning plant. Most 
petroleum dry cleaning facilities have one or two small natural gas 
fired steam boilers. VOC emissions from combustion are typically not a 
significant concern at petroleum dry cleaning facilities. The EPA has 
issued a New Source Performance Standard (NSPS) for petroleum dry 
cleaning facilities \53\ and a NESHAP for perc.54 55
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \51\ AP 42, Fifth Edition, Volume I, Chapter 4.1: Dry Cleaning; 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch04/index.html.
    \52\ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, DRAFT, ``Petroleum 
Solvent Dry Cleaning Industry Profile,'' Graham Gibson and Colin 
Hayes, ERG; August 4, 2010.
    \53\ 40 CFR part 60, subpart JJJ--Standards of Performance for 
Petroleum Dry Cleaners, http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=a4ffb0a8d823382f497b95a61ef26817&rgn=div6&view=text&node=40:6.0.1.1.1.75&idno=40.
    \54\ 40 CFR part 63, subpart M--National Emission Standards for 
Perchloroethylene Dry Cleaning Facilities, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/dryperc/dryclpg.html.
    \55\ The petroleum dry cleaner NSPS requires each solvent dry 
cleaning dryer to be a solvent recovery dryer, petroleum solvent 
filters to be drained for 8 hours prior to removal, and the 
manufacturer to put a specific label on dryers requiring leak 
inspections and repairs. The general permit includes the requirement 
to use a solvent recovery dry. The general permit does not include 
the work practice standard for petroleum solvent filters as it is 
EPA's more recent experience that solvent filters are an antiquated 
practice and no longer is use. The general permit also does not 
include the labeling requirement for manufacturers, but does include 
the same monitoring requirements that must be included on the label.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. What is in the proposed petroleum dry cleaning facilities general 
permit?
    This proposed general permit would apply to the construction of new 
(or modification of existing) true minor source petroleum dry cleaning 
facilities located in Indian country. The sources in question only use 
petroleum solvent in dry cleaning dryers, washers, filters, stills and 
settling tanks. The draft permit requires that all petroleum dry 
cleaning dryers must be solvent recovery dryers and that care must be 
taken to ensure equipment is operated properly and solvents are 
properly stored. Facilities that use synthetic solvents are not 
eligible for coverage under this general permit. The permit contains 
requirements for:
     Material use;
     Dryers;
     Solvent storage;
     Solvent recovery;
     Button, washer and line traps;
     Access doors and other equipment; and
     Used material storage.
    The proposed permit includes monitoring that is sufficient to 
assure compliance with the emission limitations that apply to the 
source, including requiring each petroleum solvent dry cleaning dryer 
to be inspected every 15 calendar days for evidence of leaks and all 
vapor or liquid leaks to be repaired within the subsequent 15 calendar 
day period. The proposed permit includes recordkeeping and reporting 
sufficient to assure compliance with the emission limitations and 
monitoring requirements.
    For sources located in severe or extreme ozone nonattainment areas, 
the permit also requires that, no less frequently than monthly, the 
owner or operator shall inspect the dry cleaning system for liquid and 
vapor leaks, including, but not limited to, the following:
     Hose connections, unions, couplings, valves, and flanges;
     Machine door gasket and seating of the machine cylinder;
     Filter head gasket and seating;
     Pumps;
     Base tanks and storage containers;
     Water separators;
     Filter sludge recovery;
     Seals and gaskets of distillation unit(s);
     Diverter valves;
     Saturated lint from lint trap basket;
     Button trap lid;
     Seals, gaskets and the diverter valve of the refrigerated 
condenser;
     Exhaust stream ducts;
     Lint trap ducts; and
     Gaskets and ducts of the carbon adsorber.
3. Request for Comment on the Proposed Petroleum Dry Cleaning 
Facilities General Permit
    We request comment on all aspects of the general permit for 
petroleum dry cleaning facilities. We specifically request comment in 
the following two areas:
a. Surrogate Annual Allowable Emission Limitations
    The petroleum dry cleaning general permit contains material use 
limits that serve as surrogate annual ton per year allowable emission 
limitations. We discuss the use of surrogate limits in Section V.E. 
above. If a source locates in an ozone attainment or unclassifiable 
area of Indian country, the draft permit requires the source to limit 
material use to 5,600 gallons or less of cleaning solvent per year. 
This is roughly equivalent to 25 tpy of VOCs. If a source locates in an 
ozone nonattainment area, the draft permit requires the source to limit 
material use to 1,300 gallons or less of cleaning solvent per year. 
This is roughly equivalent to 7 tpy of VOC. Both annual material use 
limits are based on a 12-month rolling total calculated each month. We 
request comment on the use of these surrogate limits. In lieu of 
establishing surrogate limits, we request comment on whether the final 
permits should contain ton per year emission limitations and the use of 
monitoring of material use as a compliance method. Finally, we request 
comment on the appropriateness of establishing different limitations 
based on the attainment status of the area and whether the specified 
limitations should be slightly higher or slightly lower.
b. Should we establish additional requirements for serious, severe, 
and/or extreme ozone nonattainment areas?
    The draft permits contain additional requirements for sources that 
locate in serious, severe, and extreme ozone nonattainment areas. These 
requirements include requirements for changing paper or carbon 
cartridge filters; wastewater evaporators; additional specifications 
for closed-loop machines (e.g., proper exhausting and locking); leak 
check and repair requirements; and enhanced recordkeeping and reporting 
requirements. We adopted these practices from the South Coast Air 
Quality Management District's rule for Dry Cleaners Using Solvent Other 
Than Perchloroethylene \56\ for facilities located in ozone 
nonattainment areas. We request comment on the need for these enhanced 
requirements in serious, severe and/or extreme nonattainment areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ South Coast Air Quality Rule 1102--Dry Cleaners Using 
Solvent Other Than Perchloroethylene; http://www.aqmd.gov/rules/reg/reg11/r1102.pdf.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 2566]]

VII. Description of the EPA's Proposed Permit by Rule Program in Indian 
Country

A. What is a permit by rule?

    For purposes of this proposal, a permit by rule is a standard set 
of requirements that can apply to multiple sources with similar 
emissions and other characteristics. This is similar to a general 
permit. Unlike a general permit, however, we codify the permit by rule 
requirements into regulation using a rulemaking process, rather than 
establish the requirements through a general permit document that 
undergoes notice and comment.
    For purposes of this proposal, the permit by rule mechanism is a 
permit streamlining approach that reduces the time permitting 
authorities must devote to reviewing permit applications and issuing 
permits for source categories or emissions generating activities that 
pose a lower environmental concern. We believe that permits by rule 
offer another cost-effective means of issuing permits, and provide a 
quicker and simpler alternative mechanism for permitting true minor 
sources than the site-specific permit or standard general permit 
process.
    State and local reviewing authorities use the permit by rule 
mechanism to authorize construction of less complex sources, and 
sources that emit at specified levels below the major stationary source 
thresholds. The EPA has approved several state or local permits by rule 
programs into SIPs.\57\ By this proposal, we would provide similar 
opportunities for permitting efficiency in Indian country, while also 
providing a comparable level of protection of air quality.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ The EPA has approved the following permits by rule: (1) 
Connecticut for automotive refinishing (``Approval and Promulgation 
of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Connecticut; VOC Regulations 
and One-Hour Ozone Attainment Demonstration Shortfall;'' U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency; 71 FR 51761; August 31, 2006; 
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/granule/FR-2006-08-31/06-7314/content-detail.html); (2) Iowa for spray booths (``Approval and Promulgation 
of Implementation Plans; State of Iowa;'' U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency; 75 FR 10182; March 5, 2010; https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/08/27/2013-20750/approval-and-promulgation-of-implementation-plans-state-of-iowa); (3) Operating 
PBR for small sources (``Approval and Promulgation of State 
Implementation Plans and Operating Permits Program; State of Iowa;'' 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 72 Federal Register 58535; 
March 5, 2010); (4) Kansas Class II operating permits for 
reciprocating engines, evaporative sources, and hot mix asphalt 
facilities (``Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and 
Section 112(l) Program for the Issuance of Federally Enforceable 
State Operating Permits; State of Kansas;'' U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency; 60 FR 36361; July 17, 1995; http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-1995-07-17/html/95-17214.htm); (5) Massachusetts for 
paint spray booths (``Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality 
Implementation Plans; Massachusetts; Volatile Organic Compound 
Regulations;'' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 64 FR 48297; 
September 3, 1999); (6) Missouri for construction (``Approval and 
Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Operating Permits Program; 
State of Missouri;'' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 71 FR 
38997; July 11, 2006; http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2006-07-11/html/06-6092.htm); (7) Nebraska for HMA facilities and small animal 
incinerators (``Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans 
and Operating Permits Program; State of Nebraska;'' U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency; 71 FR 38776; July 10, 2006; http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/granule/FR-2006-07-10/E6-10730/content-detail.html); (8) Auto body refinishing facilities; gasoline 
dispensing facilities; boilers and heaters; small printing 
facilities; and mid-size printing facilities (``Approval and 
Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio; PBR and 
PTIO;'' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 78 FR 11748; February 
20, 2013; http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-02-20/html/2013-03761.htm); and (9) multiple source categories, such as: batch 
mixers; comfort heating; rock crushers; saw mills; vacuum cleaning 
systems (47 FR 35194; August 13, 1982) and (``Approval and 
Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Texas; Revisions to 
Regulations for Permits by Rule, Control of Air Pollution by Permits 
for New Construction or Modification, and Federal Operating 
Permits;'' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; 68 FR 64543; 
November 14, 2003; http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2003-11-14/pdf/03-28416.pdf).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. How would a permit by rule program operate in Indian Country?

    As proposed in this notice, once the EPA identifies a source 
category or emissions generating activity for which the permit by rule 
mechanism would offer permit streamlining benefits, while at the same 
time protecting air quality, the EPA will codify a nationally 
applicable permit by rule for those similar sources into a new section 
of the Indian Country Minor NSR FIP. If the permit by rule will apply 
only at a regional level, then the EPA regional reviewing authority 
will conduct the rulemaking process, and appropriately limit the 
applicability of the permit by rule to a specified geographic area.
    As proposed, permits by rule would be used to address source 
categories of true minor sources, where the reviewing authority does 
not need to conduct an in-depth review to evaluate whether an 
individual source meets requirements in the permit. A source category 
would be covered by a permit by rule if the reviewing authority needs 
to take no further action other than receiving confirmation from an 
individual source that it meets all appropriate criteria to be eligible 
for coverage under the permit by rule. Under a permit by rule, an 
individual source would be subject to the operational, monitoring and 
recordkeeping requirements specified in this rule.
    In this action, we propose to amend the Indian Country Minor NSR 
rule general permit provisions at 40 CFR 49.156 to set forth the unique 
elements of the permits by rule process discussed below. We also 
propose permits by rule for several specific source categories. The 
proposed permits by rule program would follow a more streamlined 
application process that would allow an individual applicant to notify 
the reviewing authority that it meets the eligibility criteria for the 
permit and the permit conditions. The applicant would need to complete 
an application, but would keep it on file to be available upon request. 
The source would simply need to send a notification letter signed by an 
authorized official representing the source who certifies that the 
source is eligible for the permit and is complying or will comply with 
all of the permit's conditions. This streamlined application process 
would serve as a ``notification'' and would streamline permitting for 
eligible sources, and make it easier for the reviewing authority to 
implement the permit by rule program compared to traditional site-
specific permits and standard general permits.
    We request comment on this streamlined permit by rule approach. 
Specifically, while it would streamline the permitting process for the 
applicant, it would not allow the public the opportunity (as that 
available under the general permit program) to object, except by 
judicial challenge, to a particular source receiving coverage under a 
specific permit by rule. We specifically request comment on whether 
this tradeoff of allowing more streamlining while reducing the public's 
ability to object to the granting of permit coverage in specific 
instances represents sound policy and is appropriately protective of 
air quality.
    Like general permits, the EPA is proposing that true minor sources 
may use the permit by rule mechanism to gain authorization to construct 
or modify, and then operate a source. We are also proposing to allow 
the use of the permits by rule mechanism to create synthetic minor 
sources. We are proposing this approach to remain consistent with our 
current policies on the use of general permits in Indian country. As 
discussed in Section X, we propose to change this policy (and request 
comment) to allow general permits to create synthetic minor sources 
both to regulate construction, modification and then operation, and to 
obtain minor source status. Similarly, we propose to allow reviewing 
authorities to use the permit by rule mechanism for these same purposes 
and

[[Page 2567]]

request comment on the proposed change.
    Like general permits, a reviewing authority's receipt of a source 
notification requesting coverage under a permit by rule qualifies as a 
final action for purposes of judicial review (see 40 CFR 49.159). Any 
such review is limited to the issue of whether a source meets the 
eligibility requirements for coverage under the permit by rule. If a 
reviewing authority accepts a source's notification of coverage under a 
permit by rule, the source must post, prominently, a copy of the 
written confirmation granting such request at the location of the 
source. Also, like general permits, any source subject to a permit by 
rule is subject to enforcement action for failure to obtain a permit to 
construct and then operate if the source constructs the affected 
emissions unit(s) under coverage of a permit by rule, and we later 
determine that the source was not eligible for coverage under the 
permit by rule.

C. Requirements of the ESA and NHPA

    Similar to general permits, prior to seeking coverage under a 
permit by rule, a source must satisfactorily address the permit 
requirements related to the ESA and the NHPA. Attached to the 
notification the source sends to the reviewing authority, the EPA 
provides guidance to assist sources in complying with these 
requirements. Section V.F. above describes the process for complying 
with a permit by rule in more detail.

VIII. Proposed Permits by Rule

    As an alternative to general permits, we are proposing to establish 
permits by rule, for three source categories: GDFs, auto body repair 
and miscellaneous surface coating operations, and petroleum dry 
cleaning facilities. We are proposing these source categories for 
permits by rule because they are the most straightforward, have the 
least variation in pieces of equipment and the simplest compliance 
requirements.
    We are not providing specific regulatory language for any of the 
proposed permits by rule but rather are proposing to codify the 
requirements of the proposal general permits of the specified source 
category. If we decide to finalize a permit by rule for any of the 
three source categories, then we will codify the requirements as 
contained in the proposed draft general permit for that source 
category, with consideration of any changes that may be appropriate 
after we review public comments on the general permits. In other words, 
whether we use the permits by rule or the standard general permit 
mechanism, we propose to apply identical requirements to regulate 
construction and modification activities of affected emission units in 
the specified source category. We believe that the proposed general 
permits provide the public with a sufficient understanding of the 
contents of any final rule, and, therefore, satisfy our obligations 
under section 301(a) of the CAA.
    The EPA welcomes comments on all aspects of the proposed general 
permits and permits by rule approaches, mechanisms, and categories 
covered by this proposed notice. In particular, we request that 
commenters focus on the differences between notification procedures for 
general permits and permits by rule. Commenters should inform the EPA 
if the process laid out for permits by rule is appropriate. We request 
comments on whether the permit by rule terms and conditions should be 
identical to the general permits terms and conditions, or whether they 
should differ.

IX. Implementation Documents and Tools

    We are providing several tools and documents to assist sources with 
obtaining coverage under the general permits and permits by rule for 
the five source categories that are the subject of today's proposal. 
The tools are drafted based on our preferred approach of general 
permits. If we decide to issue permits by rule for one or more of the 
three categories we are proposing in the alternative today, then we 
will need to adjust the wording in the documents to reflect that tool 
being made available for a permit by rule and not a general permit. The 
background documents support both our general permit proposal (and 
permit by rule proposal, in the alternative); therefore, those 
documents cite both general permits and permits by rule as the permit 
types they support.
    The tools consist of the following six types of documents:
    Request for Coverage: This form is for sources seeking to use 
general permits and is essentially an application to request coverage 
under a general permit. The application asks for contact and location 
information, as well as more in-depth operational and source-specific 
information. The application will also guide sources through processes 
to comply with permit requirements related to the ESA and the NHPA.
    The general permit applications for certain source categories in 
today's proposal (i.e., auto body repair and miscellaneous surface 
coating operations; GDFs; and petroleum dry cleaning facilities) are 
more streamlined because sources in those categories represent more 
straightforward operations, largely involve one air pollutant (i.e., 
VOCs) and, therefore, necessitate less intensive review for approval. 
The general permit application forms for the three categories primarily 
ask whether you have or will comply with relevant requirements. For 
example, for the auto body repair and miscellaneous surface coating 
operations permits, the general permit application asks questions 
concerning whether you have or comply with certain requirements such as 
throughput limits, but does not require details on affected units. By 
contrast, the general permit applications for HMA and SQCS facilities 
request more detailed technical information about the proposed facility 
in question because these facilities are more complex and involve 
multiple operations and pollutants.
    For auto body repair and miscellaneous surface coating operations; 
GDFs; and petroleum dry cleaning facilities, this form also serves as 
an application for sources seeking coverage under a permit by rule 
should the EPA decide to issue one or more for these categories. The 
source would need to complete the shortened applications and keep a 
record on file. Successfully completing the application will enable the 
source to determine if it can certify to the reviewing that it meets 
the permit's eligibility terms and conditions, which the source would 
need to do via a letter in order to begin its construction or 
modification.
    Questionnaire: This tool is tailored to each source category and 
guides sources through a series of questions to determine whether or 
not it is eligible for coverage under a general permit. It is not 
required to be completed or submitted. First, the source needs to 
determine whether it is a true minor source and, therefore, subject to 
the requirements of the minor NSR rule for Indian country. To do this, 
a source needs to perform a PTE analysis (see PTE calculator below). If 
the source determines that it is a true minor, the questionnaire asks 
the source to consider a series of questions to determine if it 
qualifies for the general permit or permit by rule. If the source does 
not qualify for coverage, then it must seek a site-specific permit 
under the minor source program (or a major source permit, if 
appropriate).
    Instructions: The document assists sources with information that 
may be useful in completing the request for coverage application.
    Permit Terms and Conditions: The permit is a specific document for 
each

[[Page 2568]]

source category that lays out the general and specific terms and 
conditions of the permit, including the specific emission limitations 
and standards and monitoring, recordkeeping, reporting and notification 
requirements.
    PTE Calculator: This spreadsheet-based tool helps sources in 
specific source categories calculate the PTE of its affected emissions 
units, using data the source is expected to have on hand, such as 
equipment specifications.
    Background Document: These documents are provided as a reference 
and contain important information:
     Source category definition and characterization;
     State minor source permit programs for that category used 
for comparison;
     Requirements for general permits and permits by rule for 
that category; and
     Threshold (emission limitations) development and rationale 
for that category.
    All of these documents are available online at http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal/tribalnsr.html and Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0151.

X. Reconsideration of the Use of General Permits To Create Synthetic 
Minor Sources

    On August 30, 2011, and November 4, 2011, the American Petroleum 
Institute, the American Natural Gas Alliance and the Independent 
Petroleum Association of America submitted a petition (and supplemental 
petition) for reconsideration on the Indian Country Minor NSR rule to 
the Administrator, under section 307(d)(7) of the CAA. Among other 
issues, the petition asks the Administrator to reconsider our position 
of not allowing reviewing authorities to issue general permits to 
create synthetic minor sources.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ ``Request for Reconsideration of Effective Date of Tribal 
New Source Review Rule as it Relates to Synthetic Minor Sources and 
Request for Administrative Stay of Effective Date of the Rule as it 
Relates to Synthetic Minor Sources,'' Letter from Matt Todd, Senior 
Policy Advisor, American Petroleum Institute et al to Lisa Jackson, 
EPA Administrator, August 30, 2011 and ``Supplemental Request for 
Reconsideration of the Tribal NSR Rule,'' Letter from Matt Todd, 
Senior Policy Advisor, American Petroleum Institute et al to Lisa 
Jackson, EPA Administrator, November 4, 2011. Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2003-0076.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 49.158 of the Indian Country Minor NSR rule provides a 
reviewing agency with the authority to issue synthetic minor permits. 
Under the Indian Country Minor NSR rule, a synthetic minor permit 
creates federally enforceable emission limitations that restrict a 
source's ability to emit regulated NSR pollutants in an amount that 
exceeds major source threshold(s). The Indian Country minor NSR 
regulatory provisions, however, do not expressly address whether a 
reviewing authority could use the general permit issuance process in 40 
CFR 49.156 to satisfy the requirements for issuing synthetic minor 
permits allowed by 40 CFR 49.158. Nonetheless, we received a comment on 
the proposed rule requesting that we clarify that a reviewing authority 
could issue general permits to create synthetic minor permits.
    In response to this comment, we indicated that the final rule would 
not allow a reviewing authority to use a general permit to create a 
synthetic minor source, because we believed that the size and amount of 
emissions from these sources warranted a case-by-case review of the 
source and its proposed emission limitations.\59\ We did not, however, 
add specific regulatory language to the final rule to restrict the use 
of general permits in this manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \59\ ``Review of New Sources and Modifications in Indian 
Country,'' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 76 FR 38770, July 
1, 2011, https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2011/07/01/2011-14981/review-of-new-sources-and-modifications-in-indian-country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The petitioners believe that a reviewing authority can establish 
effective limits on PTE through general permits, and that there is no 
need for case-by-case determinations for source types where equipment 
and operations do not significantly vary from source to source (e.g., 
oil and gas facilities). The petitioners request that reviewing 
authorities not preclude sources from obtaining synthetic minor 
limitations through use of a general permit. In a letter to the 
petitioners, dated December 19, 2012, the Administrator expressed her 
intent to grant reconsideration of several aspects of the Indian 
Country Minor NSR rule, including the use of general permits to create 
synthetic minor sources.\60\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \60\ ``Review of New Sources and Modifications in Indian 
Country: Notice of Action Partially Granting Petition for 
Reconsideration and Denying Request for Administrative Stay,'' U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, 78 FR 2210, January 10, 2013, 
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-01-10/html/2012-31742.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this proposal, in response to the Administrator's decision to 
grant reconsideration on this issue, we propose to allow a reviewing 
authority to use general permits, including the permits by rule 
mechanism, to create federally enforceable emission limitations that 
can restrict operations of an otherwise major source, such that the 
source qualifies as a synthetic minor source. The fact that a source's 
PTE is above the major source threshold does not mean that standardized 
permit conditions are necessarily inappropriate. Nor does it 
necessarily mean that compliance determinations are more complex than 
can be handled through a general permit. State and local permitting 
agencies often successfully use these mechanisms to reduce permit 
workload and to provide sources with regulatory certainty, and, a 
number of streamlining and environmental benefits can result for 
reviewing authorities, sources and the environment if we allow these 
mechanisms. Accordingly, we believe we should reconsider our position 
in light of the benefits of these approaches. While we continue to have 
some concerns about the potential emissions impacts from sources that 
otherwise would qualify as major sources, we believe that we can 
address these concerns in the process of developing the synthetic minor 
general permit or permit by rule for a given category.
    While sources that would qualify as synthetic minor sources would 
have the potential to emit pollutants above the major source thresholds 
in the absence of enforceable restrictions, in many cases, the sources' 
actual emissions remain well below these thresholds even without the 
restrictions. This may arise, for example, when the source only 
operates a limited number of shifts in a day, when the source operates 
seasonally, or when the source sporadically uses a raw material with 
higher emissions potential. Thus, these sources do not have, in actual 
operation, the same potential for environmental impacts as facilities 
operating at consistently higher emissions levels.
    For example, we analyzed actual emissions from the 2008 National 
Emissions Inventory (NEI) \61\ for HMA plants and SQCS facilities. In 
that database, average emissions for several regulated NSR pollutants 
for HMA plants are well below major source levels.\62\ This is 
consistent with our understanding of how such facilities operate. 
Typically, they operate seasonally and not each day of the year. The 
average actual emissions for several regulated NSR pollutants for SQCS 
facilities also were well below major source levels.\63\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \61\ The results of the NEI analysis are available to consult at 
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0151 and online at http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal/tribalnsr.html.
    \62\ The EPA analyzed emissions for multiple pollutants emitted 
from point sources. The pollutants are: PM10, 
PM2.5, NOX, SO2, CO and VOC. See 
Background Document, Minor Source Hot Mix Asphalt Plants General 
Permit, Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0151, http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal/tribalnsr.html.
    \63\ See Background Document, Minor Source Stone Quarrying, 
Crushing and Screening General Permit and Permit by Rule, available 
online at http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal/tribalnsr.html and in the 
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0151, http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal/tribalnsr.html.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 2569]]

    For sources that currently emit above major source threshold(s), 
the availability of a pre-defined synthetic minor permit may provide 
such facilities with a degree of regulatory certainty and create an 
incentive to voluntarily reduce emissions to qualify for minor source 
status. Such reductions in emissions benefit the environment and 
provide another reason for us to reconsider our previous position on 
this matter.
    Moreover, irrespective of a source's emissions before qualifying 
for a synthetic minor permit, that source must operate at levels below 
the major source thresholds after qualifying for the permit, which is 
also the case for true minor sources. If the synthetic minor permit 
contains sufficient monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting provisions 
to assure continuous compliance, then there may be little reason to 
distinguish these sources for purposes of further regulation, because 
their emissions potential is now essentially equivalent to that of a 
true minor source. We request comment on this conclusion.
    Finally, a synthetic minor permit being sought by a facility that 
is also undergoing a modification that triggers NSR may provide the 
public with more information and greater certainty as to the emissions 
potential of the source. Absent the permit, for the part of the source 
not being permitted as part of the modification, the source would be 
under no obligation to report emissions on a continuous basis, and the 
source could also, without a modification, increase emissions. A 
synthetic minor permit would provide a limit on the total emissions the 
facility would generate, and provide advance notice to the public of 
the expected level of emissions from the facility. Synthetic minor 
permitting also saves reviewing authority resources by potentially: (1) 
Reducing the number of sources that need to obtain permits under the 
title V and PSD/nonattainment NSR permitting programs; and (2) avoiding 
a repetitive administrative process for each source that seeks a 
synthetic minor permit with the same terms and conditions.
    We request comment on all aspects of using general permits and 
permits by rule to create synthetic minor sources generally and with 
respect to the five source categories in this proposal. We request 
specific comment on whether any regulatory changes in the permits being 
proposed are necessary to implement this change in policy, given that 
the current regulations do not expressly preclude the EPA from issuing 
general permits to create synthetic minor sources. We also request 
comment on whether, as a policy matter, the EPA should use general 
permits and permits by rule to separate construction and modification 
requirements from requirements for qualifying as a synthetic minor 
source, even if the general permits/permits by rule would regulate the 
same source category; or, whether the EPA can effectively achieve both 
regulatory purposes in a single general permit/permit by rule. In 
addition, we request comment on whether permits by rule as proposed in 
this action are an appropriate type of permit for creating synthetic 
minor sources, given that the permit notification does not provide an 
opportunity for public input on the coverage of a particular source by 
a permit by rule.
    If the EPA allows otherwise major sources to qualify as synthetic 
minor sources through use of general permits (or permits by rule), we 
request comment on any specific changes we should make to the general 
permits to include provisions for creating synthetic minor permits for 
these source categories. For example, would the EPA need to require 
more stringent monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting for synthetic 
minor sources than currently contained in the draft general permits for 
true minor sources? Should the EPA scale up the surrogate annual 
allowable emission limitations to reflect a value closer to the major 
source threshold, or should the EPA only issue synthetic minor permits 
to sources with actual emissions at some margin below the major source 
thresholds (e.g., 25-50 percent below the major source threshold)? If 
the EPA includes synthetic minor limits in the final general permits, 
these limits would be proportional to the limits currently contained in 
the draft permit, as revised to reflect public comments.
    We also request comment on whether, irrespective of our proposed 
policy of not allowing a facility to qualify for more than one general 
permit, which is discussed later in this document, we should, 
nonetheless, allow a source to qualify to use a general permit or 
permit by rule to become a synthetic minor source, and then 
subsequently use a general permit or permit by rule to authorize 
construction or modification activities. As stated in Section XI.B., we 
are concerned that allowing a source to qualify for more than one 
general permit or permit by rule may allow incremental increases in 
emissions that could adversely impact air quality, or allow a source to 
evade major source requirements. The use of multiple general permit 
mechanisms for the purposes described here might not lead to 
incremental emissions increases. Accordingly, we request comment on 
allowing multiple general permits for these distinct purposes.

XI. Additional Areas Where Comment Is Being Sought

A. Should general permits and permits by rule be made available for 
sources in the same source category?

    The EPA requests comments on whether, for certain source 
categories, the EPA should structure the permits so that eligible true 
minor sources can receive coverage under permits by rule and synthetic 
minor sources receive coverage under general permits. In addition, just 
as we are proposing that general permits are more appropriate for more 
complex source categories, we request comments on whether general 
permits (and not permits by rule) are more appropriate for major 
sources that seek to become ``synthetic'' minor sources. And, as we are 
proposing that permits by rule are more appropriate for less complex 
source categories, we request comments on whether permits by rule (and 
not general permits) are more appropriate for true minor sources. We 
request comment on whether this concept should be applied differently 
or the same for different source categories.
    For example, in some cases actual emissions for HMA plants and for 
SQCS facilities for some regulated NSR pollutants may be above major 
source levels. Perhaps these sources could be candidates for coverage 
under synthetic minor general permits, while the smaller, true minor 
sources could be candidates for coverage under permits by rule. We 
request comments on this issue. In the docket, a background document is 
provided for each of the categories in this proposal, which includes a 
summary of NEI data for that category.

B. Can sources have more than one general permit or permit by rule at a 
single location?

    We request comment on whether we should allow a single stationary 
source to gain coverage under more than one general permit and/or 
permit by rule. In the questionnaires provided to assist applicants 
with completing the applications and notifications of coverage, the EPA 
asks applicants to provide PTE emissions for existing, new and modified 
emission units to determine whether or not it qualifies for a true 
minor source permit. The intent

[[Page 2570]]

is to ensure that a single stationary source does not gain coverage 
under a general permit or permit by rule if its PTE emissions are above 
major source levels. If multiple general permits or permits by rule are 
an effective and efficient approach, what provisions are needed to 
ensure sources do not become major and to ensure that the public has 
adequate information about the source?
    The need for multiple preconstruction permits could arise if the 
stationary source proposes to modify equipment that could be regulated 
by more than one general permit. For example, this could occur if a new 
SQCS facility co-locates with a new HMA plant. This could also occur if 
a source has some equipment covered by an existing general permit, and 
then proposes to modify different equipment at a later date after we 
have updated the general permit with new requirements. The source would 
need to apply for coverage under and meet the requirements of the 
updated permit for the proposed modification but would remain regulated 
by the old general permit for the previous modifications. We are 
concerned that if a single stationary source may construct or modify 
through the use of multiple general permits, then that source may 
inadvertently circumvent the major source NSR construction requirements 
by failing to properly compute or track the stationary-source-wide PTE. 
The EPA seeks comment on whether there are special recordkeeping 
conditions that could be added to the general permits and/or permits by 
rule to address this concern.
    On the other hand, we also recognize that unless there are unique 
air quality concerns, the site-specific permit terms and conditions for 
each emission generating activity may not vary from those already in 
the relevant general permits. As such, there may be little benefit from 
engaging in a site-specific permitting action, other than to verify the 
continued minor source eligibility of the stationary source. We request 
comment on whether we should decline to issue more than one general 
permit or permit by rule for stationary sources, or whether the 
application/notification materials offer the EPA an adequate 
opportunity to verify that source-wide PTE for a stationary source is 
below major source levels.

XII. Additional Source Categories for Which the EPA Is Planning To 
Propose General Permits and/or Permits by Rule

    The EPA solicited input from tribal governments and the EPA 
Regional Offices on which source categories should be covered by 
streamlined permitting in Indian country. The tribes and the EPA 
Regional Offices identified the source categories covered in this 
proposal because they are thought to be common in Indian country and 
good potential candidates for streamlined permitting. The input 
included the following source categories that are also under 
consideration for future action:
     Printing operations (including solvent cleaning/
degreasing);
     Engines (spark and compression ignition);
     Concrete batch plants;
     Saw mills;
     Landfill operations;
     Boilers; and
     Oil and gas production and operations.
    As a first step, we are requesting comment on whether these source 
categories should receive coverage by general permits or permits by 
rule, including comments as to what categories are appropriate for each 
type of rule. We are not, however, proposing general permits or permits 
by rule for these categories at this time. Rather, some or all of these 
categories will be addressed in a subsequent action.
    We have also consulted the best available (but incomplete) data we 
have available to confirm the presence of these source categories in 
Indian country. The number of sources in Indian country was determined 
as part of the process to assess if general permits and/or permits by 
rule are warranted for each sector. The NEI is the EPA's default 
database on the location and type of emission sources in the U.S. The 
NEI, however, is not complete with regards to sources in Indian 
country. The EPA Regions 5 and 10 have also compiled lists of existing 
sources in Indian country. We have culled the lists for Regions 5 and 
10 and the NEI for the other eight regions (Regions 1 to 4 and 6 to 9) 
to compile a source count by source type for sources located in Indian 
country that fall into the categories listed above.\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \64\ The lists are available to consult at Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2011-0151 and online at http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal/tribalnsr.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to landfill operations, the EPA specifically requests 
comment on whether enough landfill activity is occurring in Indian 
country to warrant the development of a general permit or permit by 
rule. In connection with the EPA's Municipal Solid Waste Landfills New 
Source Performance Standard (40 CFR 60.750, Subpart WWW), the EPA 
created a database of active landfills across the U.S. from EPA's 
Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program, Landfill Methane Outreach Program, 
and Information Collection Request Center. The database indicates a 
very small number of landfills in Indian country. These results were 
compared to the source culling that we did with the NEI and the lists 
of sources from Regions 5 and 10, which also showed few landfills in 
Indian country. Based on this information, we are not convinced that 
the resources necessary to develop a general permit and/or permit by 
rule would be justified and welcome comment on the issue.\65\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \65\ The results of this analysis can be found in Docket ID No. 
EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0151 and online at http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal/tribalnsr.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For the remaining sectors under consideration for the use of a 
general permit and/or permit by rule, we evaluated the number of 
facilities by sector using the culled source lists. For all but two of 
these other sectors, the results of our analysis found sufficient 
facilities in each sector listed above to warrant the development of 
general permits and/or permits by rule for these categories.\66\ Two 
source categories--engines and oil and gas sources--did not appear in 
significant numbers in the NEI because, as mentioned, it is an 
incomplete data source in Indian country. However, discussions with 
tribes have confirmed that both of these source types are prevalent 
enough in Indian country to more than justify the resources necessary 
to develop general permits. In addition, registrations of oil and gas 
sources to the EPA's registration data base (required pursuant to the 
Indian Country NSR rule) have been significant, further confirming the 
presence of this source category in Indian country.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \66\ The lists can be found in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-
0151 and online at http://www.epa.gov/air/tribal/tribalnsr.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

XIII. Rule Changes to the Indian Country Minor NSR Rule, Including 
Extension of Deadline for the Indian Country Minor NSR Rule

    We are proposing five changes to three separate provisions in the 
existing Indian country minor NSR rule to ensure the smooth functioning 
of the general permit program.

A. Amending Sec.  49.151(c)(1)(iii)(B)

    The first provision we propose to amend is Sec.  
49.151(c)(1)(iii)(B) addressing the timing for when a true minor source 
must obtain a preconstruction permit. The provision currently requires 
the owner/operator of a new true minor source, or an existing true 
minor source undertaking a minor modification, to obtain a permit prior 
to commencing construction by the earlier

[[Page 2571]]

of 6 months after the general permit for a source category is published 
in the Federal Register or September 2, 2014.
    We are proposing to amend this provision in two ways. First, we 
propose to eliminate the requirement to obtain a permit beginning 6 
months after the general permit for a source category is published in 
the Federal Register if that date is before September 2, 2014. The 
original intent of this provision was to ensure that sources in a 
particular source category obtain preconstruction permits as soon as 
practicable after we issue a general permit, rather than wait until 
September 2, 2014. Because we currently do not anticipate that we will 
complete the rulemakings to establish general permits to carry out the 
minor NSR program in Indian country any earlier than 6 months prior to 
September 2, 2014, we do not believe the clause is necessary. Moreover, 
we received informal feedback that this clause is confusing. Therefore, 
we propose to remove the clause to provide a clear date by which true 
minor sources must obtain preconstruction permits. Except as explained 
below, all true minor sources must obtain a preconstruction permit, 
using the general permit mechanism or an alternative mechanism, before 
constructing or modifying a true minor source on or after September 2, 
2014.
    Second, we propose to extend the permitting deadline for true minor 
sources within the oil and gas source category by adding language to 
provide an exception for true minor sources included in certain NAICS 
codes related to the oil and gas operations and production source 
category.\67\ For true minor sources within these NAICS codes, we 
propose that sources must obtain a permit pursuant to Sec. Sec.  49.154 
and 49.155 prior to commencing construction beginning on a fixed date 
after September 2, 2014. We have begun work on a general permit for 
true minor sources in the oil and gas production industry, which we 
intend to discuss in a separate rulemaking action. We believe that an 
extension of the permitting deadline for this industry is necessary 
because of the additional time required to appropriately address issues 
associated with this sector. We are requesting comment on extending the 
September 2, 2014 deadline to a date within a range between September 
2, 2015 to March 2, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \67\ 21111 oil and gas production/operations; 211111 Crude 
petroleum and natural gas extraction; 211112 natural gas liquid 
extraction; and 221210 Natural gas distribution.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Amending Sec.  49.156(e)

    We propose to amend Sec.  49.156(e)(1) addressing the timing for 
when a source that qualifies for a general permit may request coverage 
under that permit. The provision currently specifies that a source 
qualifying for a particular general permit may request coverage under 
that general permit beginning 4 months after the effective date of the 
general permit. We propose to remove this provision to make clear that 
sources may seek coverage under a general permit as soon as it is 
effective and need not wait an additional 4 months.
    In addition, we propose to amend Sec.  49.156(e)(4) to shorten the 
application review process for general permits from 90 to 45 days for 
three source categories in today's proposal:
     Auto body repair and miscellaneous surface coating 
operations;
     GDFs; and
     Petroleum dry cleaning facilities.
    Allowing this streamlining (combined with shorter applications for 
these same three categories) will allow for reduced processing time for 
general permits coverage requests for these categories and a reduction 
in information required to be included in requests for coverage. 
Specifically, a reviewing authority must either determine whether a 
request for coverage is complete within 15-days from receiving a 
source's request for coverage under the permit by rule or request any 
additional information necessary to process the request. If a reviewing 
authority requests additional information, an applicant must submit the 
requested information within 15 days from the date of the reviewing 
authority's request, or the reviewing authority may automatically deny 
a source's request for coverage under the permit by rule. If the 
reviewing authority receives all the requested information, then the 
reviewing authority will grant or deny coverage under a permit by rule 
no later than 45 days after the date the reviewing authority received 
the request. We propose the shortened timeframe for a reviewing 
authority's completeness review of a permit by rule, compared to 
general permits, because the abbreviated and standardized request for 
coverage \68\ process should allow the reviewing authority to readily 
determine whether the source submitted all of the necessary 
information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \68\ 40 CFR 49.156 of the Indian Country NSR rule sets forth the 
requirements for general permits, suggesting that the EPA may 
develop standard application forms for general permits. In this 
proposal, we have developed applications for general permits. We 
have also developed the ``notification'' forms for permits by rule, 
which satisfy all of the requirements applicants need to address but 
do so in a more streamlined manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We propose to provide the reviewing authority the option of 
automatically denying a source's request for coverage if the source 
fails to submit any additional requested information within 15 days to 
remain consistent with our intent to provide a streamlined notification 
and review process. The streamlined nature of the general permits for 
these three source categories is inconsistent with lengthy and 
potentially open-ended ongoing exchanges with applicants to obtain 
necessary information and not the best use of limited resources. If a 
reviewing authority denies a request for coverage because a source 
fails to submit requested information by the deadline, then the source 
may re-apply at a later date to re-initiate the request for coverage.

C. Amending Sec.  49.160(c)(1)(ii) and (iii)

    We propose to amend Sec.  49.160(c)(1)(ii) and (iii) that addresses 
the timeframes for when true minor sources must register. The 
provisions indicate that, if a true minor source commences construction 
in the time period between the effective date of the rule and September 
2, 2014, then the source must register with its reviewing authority 
within 90 days after the source begins operation. If construction or 
modification of a source commenced any time on or after September 2, 
2014 and the source is subject to this rule, the source must report its 
actual emissions (if available) as part of its permit application and 
its permit application information will be used to fulfill the 
registration requirements.
    The EPA is proposing to amend these two provisions to reflect the 
proposed extension for oil and gas sources discussed above in this 
section. We are requesting comment on changing the September 2, 2014 
deadline in these two paragraphs to a date within a range between 
September 2, 2015 to March 2, 2016. For Sec.  49.160(c)(1)(ii), this 
proposed change is necessary to ensure that oil and gas sources 
continue to register past the September 2, 2014 date. For Sec.  
49.160(c)(1)(iii), this proposed change is necessary to reflect that 
the EPA is proposing to move the minor source permitting deadline for 
oil and gas sources. If the EPA does take final action to do so, then 
minor oil and gas sources will not be in a position to report their 
actual emissions as part of a permit application and permit application 
information because it will not be required at that point to obtain a 
minor source permit. Hence, the need to propose to change the September 
2,

[[Page 2572]]

2014 date to reflect the oil and gas minor source permitting deadline 
extension.

XIV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive 
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the 
terms of EO 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and is, therefore, not 
subject to review under EOs 12866 and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 
2011).

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. 
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). This action merely proposes to 
establish general permits and/or permits by rule to satisfy the 
requirements of the Minor NSR rule. Such permits are already available 
in many states. It does not impose any new obligations or enforceable 
duties on any state, local or tribal government or the private sector. 
Therefore, this action does not impose an information collection 
burden.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative 
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, 
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of today's rule on small 
entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business as defined 
by the Small Business Administration's (SBA) regulations at 13 CFR 
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of 
a city, county, town, school district or special district with a 
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is 
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated 
and is not dominant in its field.
    The EPA analyzed the impact of streamlined permitting on small 
entities in the Review of New Sources and Modifications in Indian 
Country (76 FR 38748, July 1, 2011). The EPA determined that that 
action would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Today's action merely implements a particular 
aspect of the Review of New Sources and Modifications in Indian 
country. As such, this proposed action will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action contains no federal mandates under the provisions of 
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 U.S.C. 
1531- 1538 for state, local, or tribal governments or the private 
sector. This action imposes no enforceable duty on any state, local or 
tribal government or the private sector. Therefore, this action is not 
subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA. This 
action is also not subject to the requirements of section 203 of UMRA 
because it contains no regulatory requirements that might significantly 
or uniquely affect small governments. This rule has no requirements 
applicable to small governments and, as such, does not impose 
obligations upon them.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have 
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between 
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power 
and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as 
specified in EO 13132. This action merely proposes to provide sources 
in Indian country with streamlined permitting opportunities that are 
generally available in states outside of Indian country. It does not 
impose any new obligations or enforceable duties on any state, local or 
tribal government or the private sector. Thus, EO 13132 does not apply 
to this rule.
    In the spirit of EO 13132, and consistent with the EPA policy to 
promote communications between the EPA and state and local governments, 
the EPA specifically solicits comment on this proposed action from 
state and local officials.

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian 
Tribal Governments

    Pursuant to the EO 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), the EPA 
may not issue a regulation that has tribal implications, that imposes 
substantial direct compliance costs, and that is not required by 
statute, unless the federal government provides the funds necessary to 
pay the direct compliance costs incurred by tribal governments, or the 
EPA consults with tribal officials early in the process of developing 
the proposed regulation and develops a tribal summary impact statement.
    The EPA has concluded that this action will not impose duties or 
responsibilities on tribes, although it will have tribal implications. 
The EPA has conducted outreach via on-going monthly meetings with 
tribal environmental professionals in the development of this proposed 
action. This proposal reflects priorities for developing permits, 
comments on the general permits and suggestions for developing permits 
by rules developed as a result of that outreach. The EPA will offer 
consultation to elected tribal officials immediately after proposal to 
provide an opportunity for meaningful and timely input into the 
development of this regulation.
    The EPA specifically solicits additional comment on this proposed 
action from tribal officials.

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health Risks and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets EO 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) as 
applying only to those regulatory actions that concern health or safety 
risks, such that the analysis required under section 5-501 of the EO 
has the potential to influence the regulation. This action is not 
subject to EO 13045 because it does not establish an environmental 
standard intended to mitigate health or safety risks.

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not subject to EO 13211 (66 FR 28355 (May 22, 
2001)), because it is not a significant regulatory action under EO 
12866.

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement 
Act of 1995 (``NTTAA''), Public Law 104-113, 12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) 
directs the EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in its regulatory 
activities unless to do so would be inconsistent with applicable law or 
otherwise impractical. Voluntary consensus standards are technical 
standards (e.g., materials specifications, test methods, sampling 
procedures, and business practices) that are developed or adopted by 
voluntary consensus standards bodies. The NTTAA directs the EPA to 
provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the agency decides not 
to use available and

[[Page 2573]]

applicable voluntary consensus standards.
    The proposed rulemaking involves technical standards. The EPA 
proposes to use EPA Methods 5, 7E and 10. While the Agency identified 
13 voluntary consensus standards (ASME B133.9-1994 (2001), ISO 
9096:1992 (2003), ANSI/ASME PTC-38-1980 (1985), ASTM D3685/D3685M-98 
(2005), CAN/CSA Z223.1-M1977, ANSI/ASME PTC 19-10-1981--Part 10, ISO 
10396:1993 (2007), ISO 12039:2001, ASTM D5835-95 (2007), ASTM D6522-00 
(2005), CAN/CSA Z223.2-M86 (1999), CAN/CSA Z223.21-M1978, ASTM D3162-94 
(2005)) as being potentially applicable, we do not propose to use these 
in this rulemaking. The use of these voluntary consensus standards 
would not be practical with applicable law due to a lack of 
equivalency, documentation, validation data and other important 
technical and policy considerations.
    The EPA welcomes comments on this aspect of the proposed rulemaking 
and, specifically, invites the public to identify potentially-
applicable voluntary consensus standards and to explain why such 
standards should be used in this regulation.

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental 
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    EO 12898 (59 FR 7629 (Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes federal executive 
policy on environmental justice. Its main provision directs federal 
agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law, to 
make environmental justice part of their mission by identifying and 
addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human 
health or environmental effects of its programs, policies, and 
activities on minorities and low-income populations in the United 
States.
    The EPA has determined that this proposed rule will not have 
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects on minority or low-income populations because it does not 
affect the level of protection provided to human health or the 
environment. This proposed rule merely implements certain aspects of 
the Review of New Sources and Modifications in Indian Country. As such, 
this proposed action will not have a disproportionately high and 
adverse human health or environmental effects on minorities and low-
income populations in the United States.
    Our primary goal in developing this program is to ensure that air 
resources in Indian country will be protected in the manner intended by 
the CAA. As such, this rule will reduce adverse impacts by improving 
air quality in Indian country. In addition, we seek to establish a 
flexible preconstruction permitting program for minor sources in Indian 
country that is comparable to similar programs in neighboring states in 
order to create a more level regulatory playing field for owners and 
operators within and outside of Indian country. This rule will reduce 
an existing disparity by filling the regulatory gap.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 49

    Environmental protection, Administrative practices and procedures, 
Air pollution control, Indians, Indians--law, Indians--tribal 
government, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

    Dated: December 12, 2013.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2013-30345 Filed 1-13-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P