[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 99 (Friday, May 22, 2015)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29592-29600]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-12350]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0040; FRL- 9928-05-Region-4]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Florida
Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Lead National Ambient Air
Quality Standards
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve portions of the October 14, 2011, State Implementation Plan
(SIP) submission, provided by the State of Florida, through the
Department of Environmental Protection (FL DEP) for inclusion into the
Florida SIP. This proposal pertains to the Clean Air Act (CAA or the
Act) infrastructure requirements for the 2008 Lead national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS). The CAA requires that each state adopt and
submit a SIP for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of
each NAAQS promulgated by EPA, which is commonly referred to as an
``infrastructure'' SIP. FL DEP certified that the Florida SIP contains
provisions that ensure the 2008 Lead NAAQS is implemented, enforced,
and maintained in Florida. With the exception of provisions pertaining
to prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) permitting, EPA is
proposing to approve Florida's infrastructure submission, provided to
EPA on October 14, 2011, as satisfying the required infrastructure
elements for the 2008 Lead NAAQS.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 22, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
[[Page 29593]]
OAR-2013-0040, by one of the following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. Email: [email protected].
3. Fax: (404) 562-9019.
4. Mail: ``EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0040,'' Air Regulatory Management
Section, (formerly the Regulatory Development Section), Air Planning
and Implementation Branch, (formerly the Air Planning Branch), Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Air
Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch,
Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional
Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2013-0040. 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 through www.regulations.gov or
email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email
comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your
email address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Zuri Farngalo, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. The telephone number is (404) 562-9152. Mr. Farngalo can be
reached via electronic mail at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. What elements are required under sections 110(a)(1) and (2)?
III. What is EPA's approach to the review of infrastructure SIP
submissions?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of how Florida addressed the elements of
sections 110(a)(1) and (2) ``infrastructure'' provisions?
V. Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
On October 5, 1978, EPA promulgated primary and secondary NAAQS for
Lead under section 109 of the Act. See 43 FR 46246. Both primary and
secondary standards were set at a level of 1.5 micrograms per cubic
meter ([micro]g/m \3\), measured as Lead in total suspended particulate
matter (Pb-TSP), not to be exceeded by the maximum arithmetic mean
concentration averaged over a calendar quarter. This standard was based
on the 1977 Air Quality Criteria for Lead (USEPA, August 7, 1977). On
November 12, 2008 (75 FR 81126), EPA issued a final rule to revise the
primary and secondary Lead NAAQS. The primary and secondary Lead NAAQS
were revised to 0.15 [micro]g/m \3\. By statute, SIPs meeting the
requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) are to be submitted by
states within three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS.
Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) require states to address basic SIP
requirements, including emissions inventories, monitoring, and modeling
to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. States were required
to submit such SIPs to EPA no later than October 15, 2011, for the 2008
Lead NAAQS.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In these infrastructure SIP submissions states generally
certify evidence of compliance with sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of
the CAA through a combination of state regulations and statutes,
some of which have been incorporated into the federally-approved
SIP. In addition, certain federally-approved, non-SIP regulations
may also be appropriate for demonstrating compliance with sections
110(a)(1) and (2). Throughout this rulemaking, unless otherwise
indicated, regulations referenced herein as the ``Florida
Administrative Code (F.A.C.)'' have been approved into Florida's
federally-approved SIP. Florida state statutes, referenced as
``Florida Statue (F.S.)'' herein are not a part of the SIP unless
otherwise indicated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Today's action is proposing to approve Florida's infrastructure SIP
submission for the applicable requirements of the 2008 Lead NAAQS, with
the exception of the preconstruction PSD permitting requirements for
major sources of sections 110(a)(2)(C), prong 3 of D(i), and (J). With
respect to Florida's infrastructure SIP submission related to the
provisions pertaining to the PSD permitting requirements for major
sources of section 110(a)(2)(C), prong 3 of D(i), and (J), EPA's
approval of these elements was published on March 18, 2015 (80 FR
14019). For the aspects of Florida's submittal proposed for approval
today, EPA notes that the Agency is not approving any specific rule,
but rather proposing that Florida's already approved SIP meets certain
CAA requirements.
II. What elements are required under sections 110(a)(1) and (2)?
Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit SIPs to provide
for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of a new or
revised NAAQS within three years following the promulgation of such
NAAQS, or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section
110(a) imposes the
[[Page 29594]]
obligation upon states to make a SIP submission to EPA for a new or
revised NAAQS, but the contents of that submission may vary depending
upon the facts and circumstances. In particular, the data and
analytical tools available at the time the state develops and submits
the SIP for a new or revised NAAQS affects the content of the
submission. The contents of such SIP submissions may also vary
depending upon what provisions the state's existing SIP already
contains. In the case of the 2008 Lead NAAQS, states typically have met
the basic program elements required in section 110(a)(2) through
earlier SIP submissions in connection with the 1978 Lead NAAQS.
Section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and timing requirements
for SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements that states must
meet for ``infrastructure'' SIP requirements related to a newly
established or revised NAAQS. As mentioned above, these requirements
include SIP infrastructure elements such as modeling, monitoring, and
emissions inventories that are designed to assure attainment and
maintenance of the NAAQS. The requirements that are the subject of this
proposed rulemaking are listed below \2\ and in EPA's October 14, 2011,
memorandum entitled ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation
Plan (SIP) Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for
the 2008 Lead (Pb) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)''
(2011 Lead Infrastructure SIP Guidance).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not
governed by the three year submission deadline of section 110(a)(1)
because SIPs incorporating necessary local nonattainment area
controls are not due within three years after promulgation of a new
or revised NAAQS, but rather due at the time the nonattainment area
plan requirements are due pursuant to section 172. These
requirements are: (1) Submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(C)
to the extent that subsection refers to a permit program as required
in part D Title I of the CAA, and (2) submissions required by
section 110(a)(2)(I) which pertain to the nonattainment planning
requirements of part D, Title I of the CAA. Today's proposed
rulemaking does not address infrastructure elements related to
section 110(a)(2)(I) or the nonattainment planning requirements of
110(a)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and other control measures.
110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality monitoring/data system.
110(a)(2)(C): Program for enforcement, prevention of
significant deterioration (PSD) and new source review (NSR).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ This rulemaking only addresses requirements for this element
as they relate to attainment areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
110(a)(2)(D): Interstate and international transport
provisions.
110(a)(2)(E): Adequate personnel, funding, and authority.
110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source monitoring and reporting.
110(a)(2)(G): Emergency Powers.
110(a)(2)(H): Future SIP revisions.
110(a)(2)(I): Nonattainment area plan or plan revision
under part D.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ As mentioned above, this element is not relevant to today's
proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with government officials,
public notification, and PSD and visibility protection.
110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling/data.
110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees.
110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/participation by affected local
entities.
III. What is EPA's approach to the review of infrastructure SIP
submissions?
EPA is acting upon the SIP submission from Florida that addresses
the infrastructure requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)
for the 2008 Lead NAAQS. Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states must
make SIP submissions ``within 3 years (or such shorter period as the
Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a national
primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision thereof),'' and
these SIP submissions are to provide for the ``implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement'' of such NAAQS. The statute directly
imposes on states the duty to make these SIP submissions, and the
requirement to make the submissions is not conditioned upon EPA's
taking any action other than promulgating a new or revised NAAQS.
Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific elements that ``each such
plan'' submission must address.
EPA has historically referred to these SIP submissions made for the
purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2) as ``infrastructure SIP'' submissions. Although the term
``infrastructure SIP'' does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses the term to
distinguish this particular type of SIP submission from submissions
that are intended to satisfy other SIP requirements under the CAA, such
as ``nonattainment SIP'' or ``attainment plan SIP'' submissions to
address the nonattainment planning requirements of part D of title I of
the CAA, ``regional haze SIP'' submissions required by EPA rule to
address the visibility protection requirements of CAA section 169A, and
nonattainment new source review permit program submissions to address
the permit requirements of CAA, title I, part D.
Section 110(a)(1) addresses the timing and general requirements for
infrastructure SIP submissions, and section 110(a)(2) provides more
details concerning the required contents of these submissions. The list
of required elements provided in section 110(a)(2) contains a wide
variety of disparate provisions, some of which pertain to required
legal authority, some of which pertain to required substantive program
provisions, and some of which pertain to requirements for both
authority and substantive program provisions.\5\ EPA therefore believes
that while the timing requirement in section 110(a)(1) is unambiguous,
some of the other statutory provisions are ambiguous. In particular,
EPA believes that the list of required elements for infrastructure SIP
submissions provided in section 110(a)(2) contains ambiguities
concerning what is required for inclusion in an infrastructure SIP
submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ For example: Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) provides that states
must provide assurances that they have adequate legal authority
under state and local law to carry out the SIP; section 110(a)(2)(C)
provides that states must have a SIP-approved program to address
certain sources as required by part C of title I of the CAA; and
section 110(a)(2)(G) provides that states must have legal authority
to address emergencies as well as contingency plans that are
triggered in the event of such emergencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following examples of ambiguities illustrate the need for EPA
to interpret some section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2) requirements
with respect to infrastructure SIP submissions for a given new or
revised NAAQS. One example of ambiguity is that section 110(a)(2)
requires that ``each'' SIP submission must meet the list of
requirements therein, while EPA has long noted that this literal
reading of the statute is internally inconsistent and would create a
conflict with the nonattainment provisions in part D of title I of the
Act, which specifically address nonattainment SIP requirements.\6\
Section 110(a)(2)(I) pertains to nonattainment SIP requirements and
part D addresses when attainment plan SIP submissions to address
nonattainment area requirements are due. For example, section 172(b)
requires EPA to establish a schedule for submission of such plans for
certain pollutants when the Administrator promulgates the designation
of an area as nonattainment, and section 107(d)(1)(B) allows up to two
years, or in some cases three years, for such designations to be
[[Page 29595]]
promulgated.\7\ This ambiguity illustrates that rather than apply all
the stated requirements of section 110(a)(2) in a strict literal sense,
EPA must determine which provisions of section 110(a)(2) are applicable
for a particular infrastructure SIP submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See, e.g., ``Rule To Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine
Particulate Matter and Ozone (Clean Air Interstate Rule); Revisions
to Acid Rain Program; Revisions to the NOX SIP Call;
Final Rule,'' 70 FR 25162, at 25163-65 (May 12, 2005) (explaining
relationship between timing requirement of section 110(a)(2)(D)
versus section 110(a)(2)(I)).
\7\ EPA notes that this ambiguity within section 110(a)(2) is
heightened by the fact that various subparts of part D set specific
dates for submission of certain types of SIP submissions in
designated nonattainment areas for various pollutants. Note, e.g.,
that section 182(a)(1) provides specific dates for submission of
emissions inventories for the ozone NAAQS. Some of these specific
dates are necessarily later than three years after promulgation of
the new or revised NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another example of ambiguity within sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2) with respect to infrastructure SIPs pertains to whether
states must meet all of the infrastructure SIP requirements in a single
SIP submission, and whether EPA must act upon such SIP submission in a
single action. Although section 110(a)(1) directs states to submit ``a
plan'' to meet these requirements, EPA interprets the CAA to allow
states to make multiple SIP submissions separately addressing
infrastructure SIP elements for the same NAAQS. If states elect to make
such multiple SIP submissions to meet the infrastructure SIP
requirements, EPA can elect to act on such submissions either
individually or in a larger combined action.\8\ Similarly, EPA
interprets the CAA to allow it to take action on the individual parts
of one larger, comprehensive infrastructure SIP submission for a given
NAAQS without concurrent action on the entire submission. For example,
EPA has sometimes elected to act at different times on various elements
and sub-elements of the same infrastructure SIP submission.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See, e.g., ``Approval and Promulgation of Implementation
Plans; New Mexico; Revisions to the New Source Review (NSR) State
Implementation Plan (SIP); Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) Permitting,'' 78 FR
4339 (January 22, 2013) (EPA's final action approving the structural
PSD elements of the New Mexico SIP submitted by the State separately
to meet the requirements of EPA's 2008 PM2.5 NSR rule),
and ``Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
New Mexico; Infrastructure and Interstate Transport Requirements for
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,'' (78 FR 4337) (January 22, 2013)
(EPA's final action on the infrastructure SIP for the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS).
\9\ On December 14, 2007, the State of Tennessee, through the
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, made a SIP
revision to EPA demonstrating that the State meets the requirements
of sections 110(a)(1) and (2). EPA proposed action for
infrastructure SIP elements (C) and (J) on January 23, 2012 (77 FR
3213) and took final action on March 14, 2012 (77 FR 14976). On
April 16, 2012 (77 FR 22533) and July 23, 2012 (77 FR 42997), EPA
took separate proposed and final actions on all other section
110(a)(2) infrastructure SIP elements of Tennessee's December 14,
2007 submittal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ambiguities within sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) may also arise
with respect to infrastructure SIP submission requirements for
different NAAQS. Thus, EPA notes that not every element of section
110(a)(2) would be relevant, or as relevant, or relevant in the same
way, for each new or revised NAAQS. The states' attendant
infrastructure SIP submissions for each NAAQS therefore could be
different. For example, the monitoring requirements that a state might
need to meet in its infrastructure SIP submission for purposes of
section 110(a)(2)(B) could be very different for different pollutants
because the content and scope of a state's infrastructure SIP
submission to meet this element might be very different for an entirely
new NAAQS than for a minor revision to an existing NAAQS.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ For example, implementation of the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS required the deployment of a system of new monitors to measure
ambient levels of that new indicator species for the new NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA notes that interpretation of section 110(a)(2) is also
necessary when EPA reviews other types of SIP submissions required
under the CAA. Therefore, as with infrastructure SIP submissions, EPA
also has to identify and interpret the relevant elements of section
110(a)(2) that logically apply to these other types of SIP submissions.
For example, section 172(c)(7) requires that attainment plan SIP
submissions required by part D have to meet the ``applicable
requirements'' of section 110(a)(2). Thus, for example, attainment plan
SIP submissions must meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A)
regarding enforceable emission limits and control measures and section
110(a)(2)(E)(i) regarding air agency resources and authority. By
contrast, it is clear that attainment plan SIP submissions required by
part D would not need to meet the portion of section 110(a)(2)(C) that
pertains to the PSD program required in part C of title I of the CAA,
because PSD does not apply to a pollutant for which an area is
designated nonattainment and thus subject to part D planning
requirements. As this example illustrates, each type of SIP submission
may implicate some elements of section 110(a)(2) but not others.
Given the potential for ambiguity in some of the statutory language
of section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2), EPA believes that it is
appropriate to interpret the ambiguous portions of section 110(a)(1)
and section 110(a)(2) in the context of acting on a particular SIP
submission. In other words, EPA assumes that Congress could not have
intended that each and every SIP submission, regardless of the NAAQS in
question or the history of SIP development for the relevant pollutant,
would meet each of the requirements, or meet each of them in the same
way. Therefore, EPA has adopted an approach under which it reviews
infrastructure SIP submissions against the list of elements in section
110(a)(2), but only to the extent each element applies for that
particular NAAQS.
Historically, EPA has elected to use guidance documents to make
recommendations to states for infrastructure SIPs, in some cases
conveying needed interpretations on newly arising issues and in some
cases conveying interpretations that have already been developed and
applied to individual SIP submissions for particular elements.\11\ EPA
issued the 2011 Lead Infrastructure SIP Guidance \12\ to provide states
with up-to-date guidance for Lead infrastructure SIPs. Within this
guidance, EPA describes the duty of states to make infrastructure SIP
submissions to meet basic structural SIP requirements within three
years of promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. EPA also made
recommendations about many specific subsections of section 110(a)(2)
that are relevant in the context of infrastructure SIP submissions. The
guidance also discusses the substantively important issues that are
germane to certain subsections of section 110(a)(2). Significantly, EPA
interprets sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) such that infrastructure
SIP submissions need to address certain issues and need not address
others. Accordingly, EPA reviews each infrastructure SIP submission for
compliance with the applicable statutory provisions of section
110(a)(2), as appropriate.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ EPA notes, however, that nothing in the CAA requires EPA to
provide guidance or to promulgate regulations for infrastructure SIP
submissions. The CAA directly applies to states and requires the
submission of infrastructure SIP submissions, regardless of whether
or not EPA provides guidance or regulations pertaining to such
submissions. EPA elects to issue such guidance in order to assist
states, as appropriate.
\12\ ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan
(SIP) Elements Required under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and
110(a)(2) for the 2008 Lead (Pb) National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS),'' Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, October 14,
2011.
\13\ Although not intended to provide guidance for purposes of
infrastructure SIP submissions for the 2008 Lead NAAQS, EPA notes,
that following the 2011 Lead Infrastructure SIP Guidance, EPA issued
the ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2).''
Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, September 13, 2013. This 2013
guidance provides recommendations for air agencies' development and
the EPA's review of infrastructure SIPs for the 2008 ozone primary
and secondary NAAQS, the 2010 primary nitrogen dioxide
(NO2) NAAQS, the 2010 primary sulfur dioxide
(SO2) NAAQS, and the 2012 primary fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) NAAQS, as well as infrastructure SIPs for new or
revised NAAQS promulgated in the future.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 29596]]
EPA's approach to review of infrastructure SIP submissions is to
identify the CAA requirements that are logically applicable to that
submission. EPA believes that this approach to the review of a
particular infrastructure SIP submission is appropriate, because it
would not be reasonable to read the general requirements of section
110(a)(1) and the list of elements in 110(a)(2) as requiring review of
each and every provision of a state's existing SIP against all
requirements in the CAA and EPA regulations merely for purposes of
assuring that the state in question has the basic structural elements
for a functioning SIP for a new or revised NAAQS. Because SIPs have
grown by accretion over the decades as statutory and regulatory
requirements under the CAA have evolved, they may include some outmoded
provisions and historical artifacts. These provisions, while not fully
up to date, nevertheless may not pose a significant problem for the
purposes of ``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement'' of a new
or revised NAAQS when EPA evaluates adequacy of the infrastructure SIP
submission. EPA believes that a better approach is for states and EPA
to focus attention on those elements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA
most likely to warrant a specific SIP revision due to the promulgation
of a new or revised NAAQS or other factors.
Finally, EPA believes that its approach with respect to
infrastructure SIP requirements is based on a reasonable reading of
sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) because the CAA provides other avenues
and mechanisms to address specific substantive deficiencies in existing
SIPs. These other statutory tools allow EPA to take appropriately
tailored action, depending upon the nature and severity of the alleged
SIP deficiency. Section 110(k)(5) authorizes EPA to issue a ``SIP
call'' whenever the Agency determines that a state's SIP is
substantially inadequate to attain or maintain the NAAQS, to mitigate
interstate transport, or to otherwise comply with the CAA.\14\ Section
110(k)(6) authorizes EPA to correct errors in past actions, such as
past approvals of SIP submissions.\15\ Significantly, EPA's
determination that an action on a state's infrastructure SIP submission
is not the appropriate time and place to address all potential existing
SIP deficiencies does not preclude EPA's subsequent reliance on
provisions in section 110(a)(2) as part of the basis for action to
correct those deficiencies at a later time. For example, although it
may not be appropriate to require a state to eliminate all existing
inappropriate director's discretion provisions in the course of acting
on an infrastructure SIP submission, EPA believes that section
110(a)(2)(A) may be among the statutory bases that EPA relies upon in
the course of addressing such deficiency in a subsequent action.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ For example, EPA issued a SIP call to Utah to address
specific existing SIP deficiencies related to the treatment of
excess emissions during SSM events. See ``Finding of Substantial
Inadequacy of Implementation Plan; Call for Utah State
Implementation Plan Revisions,'' 74 FR 21639 (April 18, 2011).
\15\ EPA has used this authority to correct errors in past
actions on SIP submissions related to PSD programs. See ``Limitation
of Approval of Prevention of Significant Deterioration Provisions
Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in State Implementation
Plans; Final Rule,'' 75 FR 82536 (December 30, 2010). EPA has
previously used its authority under CAA section 110(k)(6) to remove
numerous other SIP provisions that the Agency determined it had
approved in error. See, e.g., 61 FR 38664 (July 25, 1996) and 62 FR
34641 (June 27, 1997) (corrections to American Samoa, Arizona,
California, Hawaii, and Nevada SIPs); 69 FR 67062 (November 16,
2004) (corrections to California SIP); and 74 FR 57051 (November 3,
2009) (corrections to Arizona and Nevada SIPs).
\16\ See, e.g., EPA's disapproval of a SIP submission from
Colorado on the grounds that it would have included a director's
discretion provision inconsistent with CAA requirements, including
section 110(a)(2)(A). See, e.g., 75 FR 42342 at 42344 (July 21,
2010) (proposed disapproval of director's discretion provisions); 76
FR 4540 (Jan. 26, 2011) (final disapproval of such provisions).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. What is EPA's analysis of how Florida addressed the elements of
sections 110(a)(1) and (2) ``infrastructure'' provisions?
The Florida infrastructure submission addresses the provisions of
sections 110(a)(1) and (2) as described below.
1. 110(a)(2)(A)--Emission limits and other control measures:
Florida's infrastructure submission cites provisions of the Florida
Administrative Code (F.A.C.) that provide FL DEP with the necessary
authority to adopt and enforce air quality controls, which include
enforceable emission limitations and other control measures. Chapters
62-204, F.A.C., Air Pollution Control Provisions; 62-210, F.A.C.,
Stationary Sources--General Requirements; 62-212,F.A.C. Stationary
Source-Preconstruction Review; 62-296, F.A.C., Stationary Sources--
Emissions Standards; and 62-297, F.A.C., Stationary Sources--Emissions
Monitoring, establish emission limits for Lead and address the required
control measures, means and techniques for compliance with the 2008
Lead NAAQS respectively. EPA has made the preliminary determination
that the above provisions and Florida's practices are adequate to
protect the 2008 Lead NAAQS in the State. Accordingly, EPA is proposing
to approve Florida's infrastructure SIP submission with respect to
section 110(a)(2)(A).
In this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove any
existing State provisions with regard to excess emissions during
startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) of operations at a facility.
EPA believes that a number of states have SSM provisions which are
contrary to the CAA and existing EPA guidance, ``State Implementation
Plans: Policy Regarding Excess Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup,
and Shutdown'' (September 20, 1999), and the Agency plans to address
such state regulations in the future.\17\ In the meantime, EPA
encourages any state having a deficient SSM provision to take steps to
correct it as soon as possible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ On February 22, 2013, EPA published a proposed action in
the Federal Register entitled, ``State Implementation Plans:
Response to Petition for Rulemaking; Findings of Substantial
Inadequacy; and SIP Calls to Amend Provisions Applying to Excess
Emissions During Periods of Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction;
Proposed Rule.'' 78 FR 12459.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, in this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or
disapprove any existing State rules with regard to director's
discretion or variance provisions. In the meantime, EPA encourages any
state having a director's discretion or variance provision which is
contrary to the CAA and EPA guidance to take steps to correct the
deficiency as soon as possible.
2. 110(a)(2)(B)--Ambient air quality monitoring/data system: SIPs
are required to provide for the establishment and operation of ambient
air quality monitors; the compilation and analysis of ambient air
quality data; and the submission of these data to EPA upon request.
Chapters 62-204, F.A.C., Air Pollution Control Provisions, 62-210,
F.A.C., Stationary Sources--General Requirements, and 62-212, F.A.C.,
Stationary Sources--Preconstruction Review of the Florida SIP, along
with the Florida Network Description and Ambient Air Monitoring Network
Plan, provide for an ambient air quality monitoring system in the
State. Annually, States develop and submit to EPA for approval
statewide ambient monitoring network plans consistent with the
requirements of 40 CFR parts 50, 53, and 58. The annual network plan
involves an evaluation of any proposed changes to the monitoring
network, and includes
[[Page 29597]]
the annual ambient monitoring network design plan and a certified
evaluation of the agency's ambient monitors and auxiliary support
equipment.\18\ The latest monitoring network plan for Florida was
submitted to EPA in May 2014 and on November 7, 2014, EPA approved this
plan. Florida's approved monitoring network plan can be accessed at
www.regulations.gov using Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2013-0040. EPA has
made the preliminary determination that Florida's SIP and practices are
adequate for the ambient air quality monitoring and data system
requirements related to the 2008 Lead NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ On occasion, proposed changes to the monitoring network are
evaluated outside of the network plan approval process in accordance
with 40 CFR part 58.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. 110(a)(2)(C)--Program for enforcement, Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) and new source review (NSR): This element consists
of three sub-elements; enforcement, state-wide regulation of new and
modified minor sources and minor modifications of major sources; and
preconstruction permitting of major sources and major modifications in
areas designated attainment or unclassifiable for the subject NAAQS as
required by CAA title I part C (i.e., the major source PSD program). In
this action EPA is proposing to approve Florida's infrastructure SIP
submission for the 2008 Lead NAAQS with respect to the general
requirement of 110(a)(2)(C) to include a program in the SIP that
provides for enforcement of emission limits and control measures and
regulation of minor sources and minor modifications as well as the
enforcement of lead emission limits to assist in the protection of air
quality in nonattainment, attainment or unclassifiable areas. This is
established in Chapters 62-210, F.A.C., Stationary Sources--General
Requirements, Section 200--Definitions; and 62-212, F.A.C., Stationary
Sources--Preconstruction Review, Section 400--Prevention of Significant
Deterioration..
Enforcement: FL DEP's SIP approved regulations provide for
enforcement of lead emission limits and control measures and
construction permitting for new or modified stationary lead sources.
Preconstruction PSD Permitting for Major Sources: With respect to
Florida's infrastructure SIP submission related to the preconstruction
PSD permitting requirements for major sources of section 110(a)(2)(C),
EPA approved this element at 80 FR 14019, published on March 18, 2015,
and thus is not proposing any action today regarding these
requirements.
Regulation of minor sources and modifications: Section 110(a)(2)(C)
also requires the regulation of new and modified minor sources and
minor modifications. FL DEP's SIP-approved rule chapters 62-204, 62-
210, and 62-212, F.A.C., collectively establish a preconstruction, new
source permitting program that meets the NNSR requirements under parts
C and D of the CAA for pollutant-emitting activities that contribute to
lead concentrations in the ambient air and also provide for the
enforcement of lead emission limits and control measures. FL DEP's SIP-
approved preconstruction review program applies to minor sources and
modifications as well as major stationary sources and modifications (as
discussed above).
EPA has made the preliminary determination that Florida's SIP and
practices are adequate for enforcement of control measures and
regulation of minor sources and modifications related to the 2008 Lead
NAAQS.
4. 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II), and 110(a)(2)(D)(ii)--Interstate
and International transport provisions: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) has two
components; 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Each of these
components have two subparts resulting in four distinct components,
commonly referred to as ``prongs,'' that must be addressed in
infrastructure SIP submissions. The first two prongs, which are
codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), are provisions that prohibit
any source or other type of emissions activity in one state from
contributing significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS in another
state (``prong 1''), and interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS in
another state (``prong 2''). The third and fourth prongs, which are
codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are provisions that prohibit
emissions activity in one state from interfering with measures required
to prevent significant deterioration of air quality in another state
(``prong 3''), or to protect visibility in another state (``prong 4'').
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) Intestate and International transport
provisions requires SIPs to include provisions insuring compliance with
sections 115 and 126 of the Act, relating to interstate and
international pollution abatement.
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)--prongs 1 and 2: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)
requires infrastructure SIP submissions to include provisions
prohibiting any source or other type of emissions activity in one state
from contributing significantly to nonattainment, or interfering with
maintenance, of the NAAQS in another state.
The physical properties of lead prevent lead emissions from
experiencing that same travel or formation phenomena as
PM2.5 and ozone for interstate transport as outlined in
prongs 1 and 2. More specifically, there is a sharp decrease in the
lead concentrations, at least in the coarse fraction, as the distance
from a lead source increases. EPA believes that the requirements of
prongs 1 and 2 can be satisfied through a state's assessment as to
whether a lead source located within its State in close proximity to a
state border has emissions that contribute significantly to the
nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in the
neighboring state. For example, EPA's experience with the initial lead
designations suggests that sources that emit less than 0.5 tpy
generally appear unlikely to contribute significantly to the
nonattainment in another state. EPA's experience also suggest that
sources located more than two miles from the state border generally
appear unlikely to contribute significantly to the nonattainment in
another state. Florida has two lead sources that have emissions of lead
over 0.5 tons per year (tpy) but these sources are located well beyond
two miles from the State border.\19\ Thus, EPA believes there are no
sources in Florida that are likely to contribute significantly to the
nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in another
state. Therefore, EPA has made the preliminary determination that
Florida's SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ There are two facilities in Florida that have Lead
emissions greater than 0.5 tpy. The facilities are EnviroFocus
Technologies and GulfPower Company Crist power plant. EnviroFocus
Technologies is located at 1901 N 66th St, Tampa, FL 33619, which
about 150 miles from the border of Georgia. GulfPower Company Crist
power plant is located in Escambia County 11999 Pate Street,
Pensacola, FL, approximately 10 miles from Alabama.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--prong 3: With respect to Florida's
infrastructure SIP submission related to the interstate transport
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3), EPA approved
this element at 80 FR 14019, published on March 18, 2015, and thus is
not proposing any action today regarding these requirements.
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--prong 4: With regard to section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), the visibility sub-element, referred to as prong
4, significant impacts from lead emissions from stationary sources are
expected to be limited to short distances from the source. The 2011
Lead Infrastructure SIP Guidance notes that
[[Page 29598]]
the lead constituent of PM would likely not travel far enough to affect
Class I areas and that the visibility provisions of the CAA do not
directly regulate lead. Lead stationary sources in Florida are located
distances from Class I areas such that visibility impacts are
negligible. In addition, Florida's Regional Haze SIP, which addresses
visibility protection, was approved on August 29, 2013 (78 FR 53250).
Accordingly, EPA has preliminarily determined that the Florida SIP
meets the relevant visibility requirements.
110(a)(2)(D)(ii)--Interstate and International transport
provisions: Chapters 62-204, 62-210, and 62-212, F.A.C. require that
any new major source or major modification undergo PSD or NNSR
permitting and thereby provide notification to other potentially
affected federal, state, and local government agencies. EPA is unaware
of any pending obligations for the State of Florida pursuant to
sections 115 and 126. EPA has made the preliminary determination that
Florida's SIP and practices are adequate for insuring compliance with
the applicable requirements relating to interstate and international
pollution abatement for the 2008 Lead NAAQS.
5. 110(a)(2)(E)--Adequate personnel, funding, and authority.
Section 110(a)(2)(E) requires that each implementation plan provide (i)
necessary assurances that the State will have adequate personnel,
funding, and authority under state law to carry out its implementation
plan, (ii) that the State comply with the requirements respecting State
Boards pursuant to section 128 of the Act, and (iii) necessary
assurances that, where the State has relied on a local or regional
government, agency, or instrumentality for the implementation of any
plan provision, the State has responsibility for ensuring adequate
implementation of such plan provisions. EPA is proposing to approve
Florida's SIP as meeting the requirements of sub-elements
110(a)(2)(E)(i) through (iii). EPA's rationale for today's proposal
respecting sub-element (i) through (iii) is described in turn below.
To satisfy the requirements of sections 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii),
Florida's infrastructure SIP submission describes that rules regarding
emissions standards general policies, a system of permits, and fee
schedules for the review of plans, and other planning needs. 403.601
(2),F.S., 403.601(4), F.S., section 403 .182, F.S., are the statutes
that Florida relies on to meet this element. As evidence of the
adequacy of FL DEP's resources, EPA submitted a letter to Florida on
March 6, 2015, outlining 105 grant commitments and the current status
of these commitments for fiscal year 2014. The letter EPA submitted to
Florida can be accessed at www.regulations.gov using Docket ID No. EPA-
R04-OAR-2013-0040. Annually, states update these grant commitments
based on current SIP requirements, air quality planning, and applicable
requirements related to the NAAQS. Florida satisfactorily met all
commitments agreed to in the Air Planning Agreement for fiscal year
2014, therefore Florida's grants were finalized and closed out. EPA has
made the preliminary determination that Florida has adequate resources
for implementation of the 2008 Lead NAAQS.
The section 128(a)(1) State Board requirements--as applicable to
the infrastructure SIP pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii)--provide
that each SIP shall require that any board or body which approves
permits or enforcement orders shall be subject to the described public
interest and income restrictions therein. Subsection 128(a)(2), also
pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii), requires that any board or body,
or the head of an executive agency with similar power to approve
permits or enforcement orders under the CAA, shall also be subject to
conflict of interest disclosure requirements.
For purposes of section 128(a)(1), Florida has no boards or bodies
with authority over air pollution permits or enforcement actions. Such
matters are instead handled by an appointed Secretary. Appeals of final
administrative orders and permits are available only through the
judicial appellate process described at Florida Statute 120.68. As
such, a ``board or body'' is not responsible for approving permits or
enforcement orders in Florida, and the requirements of section
128(a)(1) are not applicable.
With respect to section 128(a)(2), FL DEP previously submitted the
relevant provisions of Florida Statutes, specifically subsections
112.3143(4) and 112.3144, F.S., for incorporation into the Florida SIP
in its infrastructure submittal for the 1997 ozone NAAQS. EPA approved
these conflict of interest provisions for inclusion in the Florida SIP
on July 30, 2012. See 77 FR 44485. These provisions of the Florida SIP
are sufficient to satisfy the conflict of interest provisions
applicable to the head of FL DEP and all public officers within the
Department. Thus, EPA has made the preliminary determination that
Florida's SIP and practices are adequate for insuring compliance with
the applicable requirements relating to state boards for the 2008 Lead
NAAQS.
6. 110(a)(2)(F)--Stationary source monitoring system: Florida's
infrastructure SIP submission describes how the State establishes
requirements for emissions compliance testing and utilizes emissions
sampling and analysis. It further describes how the State ensures the
quality of its data through observing emissions and monitoring
operations. FL DEP uses these data to track progress towards
maintaining the NAAQS, develop control and maintenance strategies,
identify sources and general emission levels, and determine compliance
with emission regulations and additional EPA requirements. These
requirements are provided in Chapters 62-204, Air Pollution Control
Provisions; 62-210, F.A.C., Stationary Sources--General Requirements;
62-212, F.A.C., Stationary Sources--Preconstruction Review; 62-296,
F.A.C., Stationary Sources--Emissions Standards: and 62-297, F.A.C.,
Stationary Sources--Emissions Monitoring.
Additionally, Florida is required to submit emissions data to EPA
for purposes of the National Emissions Inventory (NEI). The NEI is
EPA's central repository for air emissions data. EPA published the Air
Emissions Reporting Rule (AERR) on December 5, 2008, which modified the
requirements for collecting and reporting air emissions data (73 FR
76539). The AERR shortened the time states had to report emissions data
from 17 to 12 months, giving states one calendar year to submit
emissions data. All states are required to submit a comprehensive
emissions inventory every three years and report emissions for certain
larger sources annually through EPA's online Emissions Inventory
System. States report emissions data for the six criteria pollutants
and the precursors that form them--NOX, sulfur dioxide,
ammonia, Lead, carbon monoxide, particulate matter, and volatile
organic compounds. Many states also voluntarily report emissions of
hazardous air pollutants. Florida made its latest update to the 2013
NEI on December 24, 2014. EPA compiles the emissions data,
supplementing it where necessary, and releases it to the general public
through the Web site http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiinformation.html.
EPA has made the preliminary determination that Florida's SIP and
practices are adequate for the stationary source monitoring systems
related to the 2008 Lead NAAQS.
7. 110(a)(2)(G)--Emergency Powers: This section of the CAA requires
that states demonstrate authority comparable with section 303 of the
CAA and adequate contingency plans to
[[Page 29599]]
implement such authority. This section of Florida's infrastructure SIP
submission identifies Florida Statutes subsections 403.131 and
120.569(2)(n), F.S which authorize DEP to ``[s]eek injunctive relief to
prevent irreparable injury to the air, waters, and property, including
animal, plant, and aquatic life, of the state and to protect human
health, safety, and welfare caused or threatened by any violation'';
and to issue emergency orders to address immediate dangers to the
public health, safety, or welfare. These statutes were incorporated
into the SIP to address the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(G) of the
CAA in an EPA action approving certain portions of Florida's
infrastructure SIP for the 1997 ozone NAAQS on July 30, 2012. See 77 FR
44485. EPA has made the preliminary determination that Florida's SIP
and practices are adequate for emergency powers related to the 2008
Lead NAAQS.
8. 110(a)(2)(H)--Future SIP revisions: FL DEP is responsible for
adopting air quality rules and revising SIPs as needed to attain or
maintain the NAAQS in Florida. Florida Statutes Subsection 403.061(35)
grants FL DEP the broad authority to implement the CAA; also,
subsection 403.061(9), F.S., which authorizes FL DEP to adopt a
comprehensive program for the prevention, control, and abatement of
pollution of the air of the state, and from time to time review and
modify such programs as necessary. FL DEP has the ability and authority
to respond to calls for SIP revisions, and has provided a number of SIP
revisions over the years for implementation of the NAAQS. Florida has
one nonattainment area for the 2008 Lead NAAQS in Hillsborough County
related to the EnviroFocus Technologies, LLC facility. On June 29,
2012, FL DEP submitted the required attainment demonstration for this
Area. EPA approved this SIP revision on April 16, 2015. See 80 FR 6485.
EPA has made the preliminary determination that Florida's SIP and
practices adequately demonstrate a commitment to provide future SIP
revisions related to the 2008 Lead NAAQS, when necessary.
9. 110(a)(2)(J): EPA is proposing to approve Florida's
infrastructure SIP for the 2008 Lead NAAQS with respect to the general
requirement in section 110(a)(2)(J) to include a program in the SIP
that provides for meeting the applicable consultation requirements of
section 121, the public notification requirements of section 127; and
visibility protection requirements of part C of the Act. With respect
to Florida's infrastructure SIP submission related to the
preconstruction PSD permitting, EPA approved this sub-element of
110(a)(2)(J) on March 18, 2015, and thus is not proposing any action
today regarding these requirements. See 80 FR 14019. EPA's rationale
for its proposed action regarding applicable consultation requirements
of section 121, the public notification requirements of section 127,
and visibility protection requirements is described below.
110(a)(2)(J) (121 consultation) Consultation with government
officials: Section 110(a)(2)(J) of the CAA requires states to provide a
process for consultation with local governments, designated
organizations and federal land managers (FLMs) carrying out NAAQS
implementation requirements pursuant to section 121 relative to
consultation. Chapters 62-204, F.A.C., Air Pollution Control
Provisions; 62-210, F.A.C., Stationary Sources--General Requirements,
and 62-212, F.A.C., Stationary Sources--Preconstruction Review, as well
as Florida's Regional Haze Implementation Plan (which allows for
consultation between appropriate state, local, and tribal air pollution
control agencies as well as the corresponding Federal Land Managers),
provide for consultation with government officials whose jurisdictions
might be affected by SIP development activities. Florida adopted state-
wide consultation procedures for the implementation of transportation
conformity. These consultation procedures include considerations
associated with the development of mobile inventories for SIPs.
Implementation of transportation conformity as outlined in the
consultation procedures requires FL DEP to consult with federal, state
and local transportation and air quality agency officials on the
development of motor vehicle emissions budgets. EPA approved Florida's
consultation procedures on August 11, 2003. See 68 FR 47468. EPA has
made the preliminary determination that Florida's SIP and practices
adequately demonstrate that the State meets applicable requirements
related to consultation with government officials related to the 2008
Lead NAAQS, when necessary.
110(a)(2)(J) (127 public notification) Public notification: To meet
the public notification requirements of section 110(a)(2)(J), Florida
has state statutes, subsections 403.061(20) Department; powers and
duties which provides FL DEP with the authority ``to control and
prohibit pollution of air and water in accordance with the law and
rules adopted and promulgated by it and, for this purpose, to: collect
and disseminate information and conduct educational and training
programs relating to pollution.'' Along with 403.061 (21), F.S. which
states that the FL DEP also can advise, consult, cooperate, and enter
into agreements with other agencies of the state, the Federal
Government, other states, interstate agencies, groups, political
subdivisions, and industries affected by the provisions of this act,
rules, or policies of the department. Chapters 62-204, F.A.C., Air
Pollution Control Provisions; 62-210, F.A.C., Stationary Sources--
General Requirements, and 62-212, F.A.C., Stationary Sources--
Preconstruction Review also include public notice requirements for the
State's permitting program. Additionally, Notification to the public of
instances or areas exceeding the NAAQS and associated health effects is
provided through implementation of the Air Quality Index reporting
system in all required areas. EPA has made the preliminary
determination that Florida's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate
the State's ability to provide public notification related to the 2008
Lead NAAQS when necessary. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve
Florida's infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section
110(a)(2)(J) public notification.
110(a)(2)(J) Visibility Protection: The 2011 Lead Infrastructure
SIP Guidance notes that EPA does not generally treat the visibility
protection aspects of section 110(a)(2)(J) as applicable for purposes
of the infrastructure SIP approval process. EPA recognizes that states
are subject to visibility protection and regional haze program
requirements under Part C of the Act (which includes sections 169A and
169B). However, in the event of the establishment of a new primary
NAAQS, the visibility protection and regional haze program requirements
under part C do not change. Thus, EPA concludes there are no new
applicable visibility protection obligations under section 110(a)(2)(J)
as a result of the 2008 Lead NAAQS, and as such, EPA is proposing to
approve section 110(a)(2)(J) of FL DEP's infrastructure SIP submission
as it relates to visibility protection.
10. 110(a)(2)(K)--Air quality and modeling/data: Section
110(a)(2)(K) of the CAA requires that SIPs provide for performing air
quality modeling so that effects on air quality of emissions from NAAQS
pollutants can be predicted and submission of such data to the USEPA
can be made. Chapter 62-204.800, F.A.C., Air Pollution Control
Provisions; 62-210, F.A.C., Stationary Sources--General Requirements,
and 62-212, F.A.C., Stationary Sources--
[[Page 29600]]
Preconstruction Review, incorporates by reference 40 CFR 52.21(l),
which specifies that air modeling be conducted in accordance with 40
CFR part 51, Appendix W ``Guideline on Air Quality Models.'' These
regulations demonstrate that Florida has the authority to provide
relevant data for the purpose of predicting the effect on ambient air
quality of the 2008 Lead NAAQS. Additionally, Florida supports a
regional effort to coordinate the development of emissions inventories
and conduct regional modeling for several NAAQS, including the 2008
Lead NAAQS, for the Southeastern states. Taken as a whole, Florida's
air quality regulations demonstrate that FL DEP has the authority to
provide relevant data for the purpose of predicting the effect on
ambient air quality of the 2008 Lead NAAQS. EPA has made the
preliminary determination that Florida's SIP and practices adequately
demonstrate the State's ability to provide for air quality and
modeling, along with analysis of the associated data, related to the
2008 Lead NAAQS when necessary.
11. 110(a)(2)(L)--Permitting fees: This element necessitates that
the SIP require the owner or operator of each major stationary source
to pay to the permitting authority, as a condition of any permit
required under the CAA, a fee sufficient to cover (i) the reasonable
costs of reviewing and acting upon any application for such a permit,
and (ii) if the owner or operator receives a permit for such source,
the reasonable costs of implementing and enforcing the terms and
conditions of any such permit (not including any court costs or other
costs associated with any enforcement action), until such fee
requirement is superseded with respect to such sources by the
Administrator's approval of a fee program under title V. Florida
statute subsection 403.087(6)(a), F.S., Permit Fees directs FL DEP to
require a processing fee in an amount sufficient for the reasonable
cost of reviewing and acting upon PSD and NNSR permits. The local air
program costs are covered by the Air Pollution Control Trust Fund which
is comprised of various funding sources. Additionally, Florida has a
fully approved title V operating permit program at subsection 403.0872,
F.S., Annual Emissions Fee. and Chapter 62.213, F.A.C. Operation
Permits For Major Sources of Air Pollution that covers the cost of
implementation and enforcement of PSD and NNSR permits after they have
been issued. EPA has made the preliminary determination that Florida's
statues and practices adequately provide for permitting fees related to
the 2008 Lead NAAQS, when necessary.
12. 110(a)(2)(M)--Consultation/participation by affected local
entities: This element requires states to provide for consultation and
participation in SIP development by local political subdivisions
affected by the SIP. Chapter 62-204, Air Pollution Control Provisions,
requires that SIPs be submitted in accordance with 40 CFR part 51,
subpart F. Florida statute subsection 403.061(21), F.S. authorizes FDEP
to ``advise, consult, cooperate and enter into agreements with other
agencies of the state, the Federal Government, other states, interstate
agencies, groups, political subdivisions, and industries affected by
the provisions of this act, rules, or policies of the department.'' EPA
has made the preliminary determination that Florida's SIP and practices
adequately demonstrate consultation with affected local entities
related to the 2008 Lead NAAQS, when necessary.
V. Proposed Action
With the exception of the PSD permitting requirements for major
sources contained in sections 110(a)(2)(C), prong 3 of D(i) and (J),
EPA is proposing to approve Florida's October 14, 2011, SIP submission
to incorporate provisions into the Florida SIP to address
infrastructure requirements for the 2008 Lead NAAQS. EPA is proposing
to approve these portions of Florida's infrastructure submission for
the 2008 Lead NAAQS because this submission is consistent with section
110 of the CAA.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The Florida SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation
land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated
that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the
rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order
13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial
direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, and recordkeeping
requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 12, 2015.
Heather McTeer Toney,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2015-12350 Filed 5-21-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P