[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 54 (Wednesday, March 22, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14654-14670]
[FR Doc No: 2017-05463]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R10-OAR-2015-0333; FRL-9959-06-Region 10]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Oregon:
Permitting and General Rule Revisions

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to approve,
and incorporate by reference, specific changes to Oregon's State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted on April 22, 2015. The changes
relate to the criteria pollutants for which the EPA has established
national ambient air quality standards--carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen
dioxide, ozone, particulate matter, and sulfur dioxide. Specifically,
the changes account for new federal requirements for fine particulate
matter, update the major and minor source pre-construction permitting
programs, and add state-level air quality designations. The changes
also address public notice procedures for informational meetings, and
tighten emission standards for dust and smoke. In addition, Oregon
reorganized rules in the SIP by consolidating definitions, removing
duplicate provisions, correcting errors, and removing outdated
provisions. We note that certain rule changes are not appropriate for
SIP approval, or are inconsistent with Clean Air Act requirements. In
those cases, we are not approving the revisions.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 21, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2015-0333, at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kristin Hall, Air Planning Unit,
Office of Air and Waste (OAW-150), Environmental Protection Agency--
Region 10, 1200 Sixth Ave., Seattle, WA 98101; telephone number: (206)
553-6357; email address<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, wherever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Evaluation of Revisions
    A. Division 200: General Air Pollution Procedures and
Definitions
    B. Division 202: Ambient Air Quality Standards and PSD
Increments
    C. Division 204: Designation of Air Quality Areas
    D. Division 206: Air Pollution Emergencies
    E. Division 208: Visible Emissions and Nuisance Requirements
    F. Division 209: Public Participation
    G. Division 210: Stationary Source Notification Requirements
    H. Division 212: Stationary Source Testing and Monitoring
    I. Division 214: Stationary Source Reporting Requirements
    J. Division 216: Air Contaminant Discharge Permits
    K. Division 222: Stationary Source Plant Site Emission Limits
    L. Division 224: New Source Review
    M. Division 225: Air Quality Analysis Requirements
    N. Division 226: General Emission Standards
    O. Division 228: Requirements for Fuel Burning Equipment and
Fuel Sulfur Content
    P. Division 232: Emission Standards for VOC Point Sources
    Q. Division 234: Emissions Standards for Wood Products
Industries
    R. Division 236: Emissions Standards for Specific Industries
    S. Division 240: Rules for Areas With Unique Air Quality Needs
    T. Division 242: Rules Applicable to the Portland Area

    U. Division 262: Heat Smart Program for Residential Woodstoves
and Other Solid Fuel Heating Devices
    V. Division 264: Rules for Open Burning
    W. Division 268: Emission Reduction Credits
    X. Source Sampling Manual and Continuous Monitoring Manual
IV. Proposed Action
    A. Rules Approved and Incorporated by Reference
    B. Rules Approved but Not Incorporated by Reference
    C. Rules Removed
    D. Rules Not Approved
V. Incorporation by Reference
VI. Oregon Notice Provision
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    Each state has a SIP containing the control measures and strategies
used to attain and maintain the national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) established by the EPA for the criteria pollutants (carbon
monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, particulate matter, sulfur
dioxide). The SIP is extensive, containing such elements as air
pollution control regulations, emission inventories, monitoring
network, attainment demonstrations, and enforcement mechanisms. The SIP
is a living compilation of these elements and is revised and updated by
the state over time--to keep pace with federal requirements and to
address changing air quality issues in the state.
    On April 22, 2015, the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
(ODEQ) submitted significant revisions to the Oregon SIP. Oregon made
changes to 26 Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) divisions within Chapter
340, and two source sampling and monitoring manuals related to the
rules. These changes, effective April 16, 2015, are part of Oregon's
ongoing efforts to update state air quality rules and the SIP.
    Oregon's April 22, 2015 submission documents the public notice and
hearing process undertaken by the state, including the state's response
to comments received. The submission requests EPA approval of the
following changes to air quality rules in Oregon's federally-approved
State Implementation Plan (SIP):
     Updates particulate matter emission standards;
     revises permitting requirements for emergency generators
and small natural gas or oil-fired equipment;
     establishes two new state air quality area designations--
sustainment and reattainment;
     revises the major and minor source pre-construction
permitting programs;
     changes public processes for informational meetings;
     revises the state's woodstove replacement program for
small commercial solid fuel boilers regulated under the permitting
program;
     updates the Oregon Source Sampling Manual, Volumes I and
II, and the Oregon Continuous Monitoring Manual; and
     removes annual reporting requirements for small gasoline
dispensing facilities.
    As part of the submission, Oregon included a staff report outlining
the changes to the state air quality rules and how the revised rules
have been designed to protect air quality standards. Oregon also
developed a ``crosswalk'' document--a comprehensive list of the rule
changes and why they were proposed. The submission, including the staff
report, crosswalk document, public comments and responses, is located
in the docket for this action.
    We note that on November 14, 2016, Oregon submitted a letter to
correct administrative errors in the original April 20, 2015, cover
letter and attachment. In the letter of correction, Oregon identified
several rules that were submitted to the EPA in error. These rules were
not adopted by the Oregon Environmental Quality Commission (EQC) as
part of the Oregon SIP, and should not have been submitted for SIP
approval. Oregon also noted one provision that was adopted by the EQC
and should have been submitted. Please see the November 14, 2016 letter
of correction in the docket for this action.
    Below, we discuss our review of the submitted changes to the Oregon
SIP, and our proposed action. We have focused on the substantive rule
revisions. We did not describe the many typographical corrections,
minor edits, and renumbering changes. We also note this action does not
address submitted revisions for small gasoline dispensing facilities
because we approved the revisions on October 27, 2015 (80 FR 65655).

II. Evaluation of Revisions

A. Division 200: General Air Pollution Procedures and Definitions

Definitions
    Division 200 contains definitions used throughout the air quality
divisions of Chapter 340 of the OAR, as well as other generally-
applicable rules. However, over time, terms and definitions have also
been established throughout other divisions. In the submitted changes,
Oregon re-organized and streamlined rules to move most air quality
terms and definitions into Division 200. Oregon also moved procedural
elements out of the definitions in Division 200, and into the specific
divisions to which they apply. Duplicate and obsolete terms were
removed. In this section of our evaluation, we discuss key changes to
existing definitions and new terms used in multiple divisions.
Substantive new terms, or revisions to definitions that are mostly used
in a single division, are evaluated in Sections B through X below (in
the discussion of the changes to the specific division).
    To improve clarity, the state revised key definitions to
consistently use certain terms--such as ``regulated pollutant,''
``control device,'' ``major modification,'' ``major source,'' and
``unclassified,''--and removed variations on these terms that may have
created confusion. Oregon also added new definitions to Division 200.
``Capture efficiency,'' ``control efficiency,'' ``destruction
efficiency,'' and ``removal efficiency'' were added to differentiate
amongst similar terms. The state defined the term ``internal combustion
sources'' to clarify the universe of regulated fuel burning equipment
under Oregon's rules.
    Oregon also defined the term ``portable,'' as ``designed and
capable of being carried or moved from one location to another.'' At
the same time, the state revised the definition of ``stationary
source'' to include portable sources required to have permits under
Oregon's air contaminant discharge permitting (ACDP) program at
Division 216. ``Wood fuel-fired device'' was used in multiple Oregon
rules, but was never formally defined. The state added the term,
defined as ``a device or appliance designed for wood fuel combustion,
including cordwood stoves, woodstoves, and fireplace stove inserts,
fireplaces, wood fuel-fired cook stoves, pellet stoves and combination
fuel furnaces and boilers that burn wood fuels.'' The remainder of the
new definitions established are common dictionary terms.
    Oregon also made substantive changes to several definitions. The
definition of ``adjacent'' at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(4) was narrowed by
limiting the use of this defined term (``interdependent facilities that
are nearby to each other'') to its use in the ``major source''
definition at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(91), and in the air contaminant
discharge permit program (ACDP) at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>. In other places
where the term ``adjacent'' is used, the ODEQ's response to comments
document in the submission indicates that the ODEQ intends to use the
dictionary definition.

    Oregon revised the term ``categorically insignificant activities''
at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(23) in several respects. In general, the revisions
narrow when emissions may be excluded from consideration--in some
aspects of Oregon's permitting program--as ``insignificant.'' For
example, Oregon put a cap on the aggregate emissions from fuel burning
equipment that may be considered categorically insignificant, and also
restricted when emergency generators may be considered categorically
insignificant (limiting the exemption to no more than 3,000 horsepower,
in the aggregate). Oregon also narrowed when emissions from oil/water
separators in effluent treatment systems may be considered
categorically insignificant. We note that Oregon did create a new
category of insignificant emissions--fuel burning equipment brought on
site for six months or less for construction, maintenance, or similar
purposes, provided the equipment performs the same function as the
permanent equipment, and is operated within the source's existing plant
site emission limit. Importantly, however, insignificant activity
emissions must be included in determining whether a source is a
``federal major source'' (OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(66)) or a ``major
modification'' (OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(2)(a)(B)) subject to federal major new
source review (federal major NSR).\1\ In addition, as specified in OAR
340-200-0020(23), categorically insignificant activities must still
comply with all applicable requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ This includes both the prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) new source review permitting program that
applies in attainment and unclassifiable areas (40 CFR 51.166) and
the nonattainment major source new source review permitting program
that applies in nonattainment areas (40 CFR 51.165).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Oregon revised the definition of ``modification,'' at OAR 340-200-
0020(93), to differentiate it from the terms ``major modification,''
``permit modification,'' and ``title I modification,'' and to make
clear that it applies to a change in a portion of a source, as well as
a source in its entirety. The state also simplified the definition of
``ozone precursor'' at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(107) to remove redundant
language pointing to the reference method for measuring volatile
organic compounds (VOCs). Oregon made the same type of change to the
definition of ``particulate matter'' at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(110). For
consistency, at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(119) and (120), the short-hand terms
for coarse and fine particulate matter, ``PM10'' and
``PM2.5,'' were updated to reference the test method for
measuring each pollutant. The definition of ``volatile organic
compounds'' or ``VOC,'' at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(190), was updated to take
into account changes to the EPA's definition of VOC in the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) at 40 CFR 51.100(s).
    We have evaluated these changes, and the additional changes to
definitions discussed in Sections B through X below, and propose to
find that they are consistent with Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements and
the EPA's implementing regulations. We therefore propose to approve the
revised and added definitions into the Oregon SIP.
LRAPA Jurisdiction
    A key aspect of the submitted revisions relates to jurisdiction.
Oregon added new applicability language to Division 200, and throughout
the air quality rules, to address the applicability of state rules in
Lane County, the authority of the Lane Regional Air Protection Agency
(LRAPA) to implement and enforce state rules in the county, and the
authority of LRAPA to adopt local rules. The changes clarify that the
ODEQ administers its rules in all areas, except where the Oregon
Environmental Quality Commission (EQC) has designated the LRAPA to have
primary jurisdiction in Lane County. The revisions also make clear that
the LRAPA is authorized to implement state rules within Lane County,
and may promulgate a local rule in lieu of a state rule provided: (1)
It is as stringent as the state rule; and (2) it has been submitted to
and approved by the EQC. We propose to approve the delegation of
authority language in Division 200, and in all other divisions, because
it is consistent with CAA section 110(a)(2)(E) requirements for state
and local air agencies.
    We note that the state also submitted the ODEQ-LRAPA Stringency
Analysis and Directive, comparing the Oregon state rule revisions to
the corollary rules generally applicable in Lane County. The analysis
identifies which of the revised state rules are more stringent, and
directs the LRAPA to implement them, until such time as the LRAPA
revises its own rules to be at least as strict. Please see Section IV
below for a listing of the submitted rule revisions that we propose to
approve as also applying in Lane County. The ODEQ-LRAPA Stringency
Analysis and Directive is in Attachment B of the submission, and may be
found in the docket for this action.
Other Provisions
    The submission also includes changes to the generally applicable
sections in Division 200. Oregon submitted changes to OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>
to clarify that woodstove emissions are regulated, and may also be used
to create emissions reduction credits. In addition, Oregon added a
general rule section at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, listing updated versions of
key reference materials for air quality requirements. We propose to
approve and incorporate by reference these changes.
    We note that this division contains rules on conflicts of interests
at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, 0110, and 0120. These rules were not substantively
changed in the submittal and remain consistent with the CAA
requirements for such rules at CAA sections 110(a)(2)(E) and 128. We
propose to approve, but not incorporate by reference, OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>,
0110, and 0120, to avoid the potential for confusion or potential
conflict with the EPA's independent authorities. We note that,
consistent with our 2003 action, we are not approving OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>
because any compliance schedule established by Oregon under this
provision must be submitted to, and approved by EPA, before it will be
federally-enforceable or change the requirements of the EPA-approved
SIP. 40 CFR 51.102(a)(2) and (c) and 260; 68 FR 2891, 2894 (Jan. 22,
2003).

B. Division 202: Ambient Air Quality Standards and PSD Increments

    Division 202 contains Oregon's ambient air quality standards and
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) increments. Oregon
revised Division 202 by removing obsolete definitions and moving
definitions used in more than one division to the general definitions
in Division 200. At OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, Oregon added language expressly
stating that no source may cause or contribute to a new violation of an
ambient air quality standard or a PSD increment, even if the single
source impact is less than the significant impact level. Oregon made
this change to address a court decision vacating and remanding
regulatory text for the PM2.5 significant impact level.
Please see Section L below for a more detailed discussion of the basis
for our determination that this change, along with other related
changes, adequately addresses the court decision.
    At OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, the specific PSD increments were moved from a
table to the text of the rule for readability. Oregon also clarified
that PSD increments are compared to

aggregate increases in pollution concentrations from the new or
modified source, over the baseline concentration. The state moved
ambient air quality thresholds for pollutants from Division 224 to this
division, to centralize ambient standards and thresholds. Finally,
Oregon consolidated requirements for areas subject to an approved
maintenance plan, moving ambient standards and thresholds from Division
224 into a new section, at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>. We propose to approve the
submitted revisions to Division 202 as being consistent with CAA
requirements.

C. Division 204: Designation of Air Quality Areas

    This division contains provisions for the designation of air
quality areas in Oregon. In the submission, the state removed a
reference to ``Indian Governing Bodies'' at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> because
the ODEQ does not have authority or jurisdiction to regulate them.
Oregon also replaced an expired oxygenated gasoline requirement at OAR
340-204-0090 with an updated reference to the applicable maintenance
plan and its associated provisions.
    A significant change in this division is the introduction of three
new concepts: ``sustainment areas,'' ``reattainment areas,'' and
``priority'' sources. See OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> through 0320. Both
sustainment and reattainment areas are new, state-level designations
designed to add to federal requirements. Oregon has implemented a
state-level designation in the past--specifically, the maintenance area
designation. Now, Oregon has developed two new designations intended to
help areas address air quality problems by further regulating emission
increases from major and minor sources.
    To designate an area as sustainment or reattainment, the ODEQ will
undertake the same process as used in the past to designate a state
maintenance area. The process includes public notice, a rule change,
and approval by the EQC. Oregon asserts that the new designations and
associated requirements are intended to help solve air quality issues,
and do not change attainment planning requirements or federal
requirements for major stationary sources.
    The sustainment area designation at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> is designed to
apply to an area where monitored values exceed, or have the potential
to exceed, ambient air quality standards, but has not been formally
designated nonattainment by the EPA.\2\ To construct or modify a major
or minor source in a sustainment area, the owner or operator may need
to offset new emissions with reductions from other sources, including
the option of targeting ``priority'' sources, in that area. Priority
sources are defined as sources causing or contributing to elevated
emissions levels in the area. This is determined using local airshed
information, such as emissions inventories and modeling results. A new
major or minor stationary source seeking to construct in a sustainment
area may obtain more favorable offsets from priority sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ As codified at 40 CFR part 81.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The reattainment area designation is designed to apply to an area
that is formally designated nonattainment by the EPA, has an EPA-
approved attainment plan, and also has three years of quality-assured/
quality-controlled monitoring data showing the area is attaining the
relevant standard. See OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>. When an area has met
attainment planning requirements and has attained the standard, the CAA
requires that a state submit, and the EPA approve, a maintenance plan
for the next ten years. The state may then request that the EPA
redesignate the area to attainment. In the interim, Oregon may
designate the area a reattainment area. The Oregon rules requires that
all elements of the area's attainment plan continue to apply with a
reattainment designation. However, minor sources will be subject to
less stringent state new source review permitting requirements--unless
the ODEQ has specifically identified a source as a significant
contributor to air quality problems in the area, or has controlled the
source and relied on the controls as part of the attainment plan. The
federal requirements for redesignation remain in place and are
unchanged.
    We propose to approve the revisions to Division 204 because the
added rules for state-level designations are consistent with CAA
requirements and the EPA's implementing regulations for attainment
planning and major source pre-construction permitting. The changes to
Oregon's major and minor source permitting program--and our evaluation
of those changes--are discussed in detail in Section L below.

D. Division 206: Air Pollution Emergencies

    This division establishes criteria for identifying and declaring
air pollution episodes at levels below the levels of significant harm.
Oregon submitted minor changes to this division, such as updating
references to the outdated total suspended particulate matter standard,
and moving information from four tables into regulatory text. We
propose to approve these revisions.

E. Division 208: Visible Emissions and Nuisance Requirements

    Division 208 contains provisions regulating visible emissions,
odor, nuisance, and fugitive emissions from sources. Oregon made
substantive changes to the visible emission standards at OAR 340-208-
0100 through 0110, supported by a demonstration of why the state
believes the changes continue to protect air quality. For all point
sources, the state changed visible emission standards from an aggregate
exception of three minutes in a 60-minute period to a six-minute block
average, aligning the form of and test method for Oregon's visible
emission standards with federal New Source Performance Standards
(NSPS). At the same time, Oregon made visible emission standards
applicable to each individual stack or emission point, to preclude
averaging across the source.
    Oregon also made changes to phase out less stringent visible
emission limits granted to certain older facilities in operation before
1970. These sources were required to meet a 40% visible emission limit.
However, starting in 2020, these sources will be required to meet the
state's standard 20% visible emissions limit. Wood-fired boilers
constructed or installed before 1970, and not since modified, also will
be held to the tighter 20% visible emissions limit starting in 2020,
except for certain, limited situations.
    Oregon asserted in its SIP submittal that a visible emissions
standard based on a six-minute average is no more or less stringent
than a standard based on an aggregate exception of three minutes in any
hour. Oregon argued that, theoretically, either basis could be more
stringent than the other, but practically, sources do not typically
have intermittent puffs of smoke. Oregon also claimed that changing to
a six-minute average is appropriate because a reference compliance
method has not been developed for the three-minute standard; EPA Method
9 results are also reported as six-minute averages; and using a three-
minute standard results in additional costs for sources that also
monitor visible emissions with continuous opacity monitoring systems
(COMS).
    Many COMS are designed for six-minute averages, and must be
modified to record and report data for a three-minute standard. Oregon
stated in the

submittal that compliance with a six-minute average can be determined
with 24 readings (six-minute observation period), while, compliance
with a three-minute standard may require as many as 240 readings (60-
minute observation period).
    We have evaluated the visible emissions rule changes and Oregon's
justification for the changes. We propose to approve the revised
version of OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> and the removal of OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> because
we agree that the changes will streamline visible emissions and related
testing and monitoring requirements for sources, impose more stringent
requirements on certain older sources, and are, overall, at least as
protective of the ambient air quality standards as the existing SIP
requirements.
    The final changes made to this division revise fugitive emission
requirements at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> through 0210. The revised rules
require sources to take reasonable precautions to prevent fugitive
emissions, and may require a fugitive emissions control plan to prevent
visible emissions from leaving a facility property for more than 18
seconds in a six-minute period. Compliance is based on EPA Method 22,
Visual Determination of Fugitive Emissions from Material Sources and
Smoke Emissions from Flares. Oregon also replaced the specific
references to ``asphalt'' and ``oil'' in the lists of dust suppressants
and control measures with the term ``other suitable chemicals,'' to
discourage the use of oil and asphalt as dust suppressants.
    We propose to approve the revised version of OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> and
the repeal of OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> because we have determined that the
fugitive emissions rule changes are consistent with CAA requirements
and are expected to improve the effectiveness of controls and
compliance with emission limits.

F. Division 209: Public Participation

    Division 209 governs public participation in the review of proposed
permit actions. Oregon revised this division to modernize and clarify
public notice requirements. The Oregon SIP provides four different
levels of public process, depending on the type of permitting action,
with Category I having the least amount of public notice and
opportunities for public participation and Category IV having the most.
Most new source review permitting actions are subject to category III,
for which the ODEQ provides public notice and an opportunity for a
hearing at a reasonable time and place if requested, or if the ODEQ
otherwise determines a public hearing is necessary. For the state's
category IV public process, which applies to Major NSR permitting
actions, the ODEQ provides an informational meeting that occurs before
issuing a draft permit for public review and comment. The ODEQ has
revised the requirements for informational meetings to provide at least
a 14-day public notice, prior to the scheduled informational meeting.
The revisions also make clear that although the ODEQ accepts, and will
consider, comments from the public during the informational meeting,
the ODEQ does not maintain an official record of the informational
meeting, or respond in writing to comments provided at the
informational meeting.
    Oregon also revised this division to address permitting in new
state-designated sustainment and reattainment areas, added email
notification as an option, and specified where the public comment
records would be made available. We note that revisions to the hearing
procedures in OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> were reorganized, moving the notice and
comment requirements for informational meetings to OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    We have concluded that the submitted revisions to Oregon's public
participation rules remain consistent with the CAA and federal
requirements for public notice of new source review actions in 40 CFR
51.161 Public availability of information, 40 CFR 51.165 Permit
requirements, and 40 CFR 51.166 Prevention of significant deterioration
of air quality, and we propose to approve them. We also propose to
approve the hearing procedures, but not incorporate them by reference,
to avoid confusion or potential conflict with the EPA's independent
authorities.

G. Division 210: Stationary Source Notification Requirements

    Division 210 contains a registration program for sources not
subject to one of Oregon's operating permit programs, as well as some
of the requirements for the construction and modification of sources.
In OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, Oregon broadened the applicability of this
division so that it applies to ``air contaminant sources'' and to
``modifications of existing portable sources that are required to have
permits under OAR 340 division 216''--in addition to stationary
sources. Oregon also revised source registration requirements at OAR
340-210-0100 to specify in more detail the information an owner or
operator must submit to register and re-register. In addition, at OAR
340-210-0205, Oregon made changes to clarify when a Notice of
Construction application is required--with certain exceptions the state
has specifically listed.
    Oregon revised construction approval and approval to operate
provisions at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> and 0250 to spell out when sources may
proceed with construction or modification, and that construction
approval does not mean approval to operate the source, unless the
source is not required to obtain an ACDP under Division 216.
    We are proposing to approve the revisions to Division 210 because
we have determined they are consistent with CAA requirements, and
correct or clarify existing source notification requirements, to help
ensure that changes to sources go through the appropriate approval
process.

H. Division 212: Stationary Source Testing and Monitoring

    This division contains general requirements for source testing and
monitoring. Most of the revisions to this division were clarifications
or updates. For example, Oregon revised Division 212 to clarify that
the term ``stationary source'' in this division includes portable
sources that require permits under Division 216. This change is
consistent with the term as used in other divisions. Oregon also made
clear that, with respect to stack height and dispersion technique
requirements, the procedures referenced in 40 CFR 51.164 are the major
and minor NSR review procedures used in Oregon, as applicable.
    OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> of this division sets forth test methods, and
requires that sampling, testing, or measurements performed pursuant to
Division 212 conform to the methods in Oregon's Source Sampling Manual,
Volumes I and II, and Oregon's Continuous Monitoring Manual. The
manuals, revised as of 2015, have been submitted for approval. As
discussed below in Section X, we have concluded that the revised
manuals are consistent with the EPA's monitoring requirements for
criteria pollutants and we propose to approve them for the purpose of
the limits approved into the SIP.
    A final change to this division is Oregon's request to remove rules
that were approved into the Oregon SIP on January 22, 2003 (68 FR
2891). The specified rules, under the compliance assurance monitoring
section, apply to title V sources only and implement the requirements
of 40 CFR parts 64 and 70. We agree with Oregon that these rules are
not necessary for SIP approval under section 110 of title I of the CAA,
because

the rules implement provisions of title V. Therefore, we propose to
approve Oregon's request to remove OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> through 0280 from
the federally-approved Oregon SIP.

I. Division 214: Stationary Source Reporting Requirements

    This division contains Oregon's provisions for reporting and
recordkeeping, information requests (CAA section 114 authority),
credible evidence, business confidentiality, emissions statements, and
excess emissions. Oregon made substantive changes to several sections
of this division. First, at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, Oregon changed the
definition of ``large source'' to align with a recent court decision on
the regulation of GHG emissions from new and modified major stationary
sources in attainment and unclassifiable areas, in addition to title V
sources. Please see our discussion at Section L, below. Oregon also
removed from the definition of ``large source,'' those sources subject
to a National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP).
NESHAP reporting requirements are separate and independent of the SIP
and CAA section 110 criteria pollutant requirements, and we propose to
approve the revision.
    Oregon revised OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> of this division to clarify that
stationary sources include portable sources required to have ACDPs
under Division 216. In addition, at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(5), starting on
July 1, 2015, owners and operators of specific sources must retain
records of all required monitoring data and supporting information for
five years. Oregon also revised the section on disclosure of
information at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, to spell out that emissions data
cannot be exempted from disclosure as a trade secret. Under OAR 340-
214-0200, with respect to emission statements for VOC and
NOX sources, Oregon clarified that ``actual emissions
include, but are not limited, to routine process emissions, fugitive
emissions, and excess emissions from maintenance, startups and
shutdowns, equipment malfunction, and other activities.'' We propose to
approve these revisions because they are consistent with CAA
requirements.
    Oregon made several revisions to the excess emissions and emergency
provision requirements in Division 214, at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> through
0360, that are currently in the SIP, and these revisions are included
in the submittal that is the subject of this proposed action. First, in
OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, the state clarified that ``emissions in excess of
applicable standards are not excess emissions if the standard is in an
NSPS or NESHAP and the NSPS or NESHAP exempts startups, shutdowns and
malfunctions as defined in the applicable NSPS or NESHAP.'' By its
terms, this provision only applies to standards in NSPS or NESHAPs, and
Oregon's incorporation by reference of the federal NSPS and NESHAP
standards are not included in the SIP. Because this addition relates
solely to standards that are not in the SIP, the EPA is not approving
this provision. The state also expanded the prohibition on planned
startups, shutdowns, and scheduled maintenance--that may result in
excess emissions during declared air quality alerts, warning or
emergencies, or during times when residential wood burning is curtailed
in PM10 nonattainment areas--to include sources in
PM2.5 nonattainment areas.
    In addition, Oregon made changes to a provision in its SIP that
contains criteria for determining whether Oregon will take an
enforcement action for excess emissions (OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>). In the
context of the EPA's recent ``SSM SIP Action of 2015,'' the EPA
evaluated the enforcement discretion provision of OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> (re-
codified from OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>) and found it to be consistent with CAA
requirements and with the EPA's SSM policy as it applies to SIPs.\3\
The EPA's SSM SIP Action of 2015 responded to a petition from the
Sierra Club requesting that the EPA address concerns about specific
provisions approved into 39 state SIPs. Sierra Club's petition alleged
that specific provisions in these states' SIPs were inconsistent with
the CAA. With respect to Oregon's SIP, the petitioner objected to OAR
340-028-1450 (recodified as OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>) which specifies criteria
to be considered by Oregon in determining whether to pursue enforcement
action for excess emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ State Implementation Plans: Response to Petition for
Rulemaking; Restatement and Update of EPA's [Startup, Shutdown and
Malfunction] SSM Policy Applicable to SIPs; Findings of Substantial
Inadequacy; and SIP Calls to Amend Provisions Applying to Excess
Emissions During Periods of Startup, Shutdown and Malfunction: Final
Rule.'' (June 12, 2015, 80 FR 33839).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the SSM SIP Action of 2015, we noted that Oregon's provision
provides that ``[i]n determining whether to take enforcement action for
excess emissions, DEQ considers, based upon information submitted by
the owner or operator,'' a list of factors. As discussed in the SSM SIP
Action of 2015, the EPA has interpreted the CAA to allow states to
elect to have SIP provisions that pertain to the exercise of
enforcement discretion by state personnel. See 80 FR 33839, 33980. We
explained that the provision cited by the petitioners--OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>
(recodified as OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>)--is plainly a statement of enforcement
discretion, delineating factors to be considered by the ODEQ in
determining whether to pursue state enforcement for violations of the
applicable SIP emission limits due to excess emissions. The EPA further
concluded that there was no language in this Oregon regulation
suggesting that Oregon's determination to forgo enforcement by the
state against a source would in any way prevent the EPA or the public
from demonstrating that violations occurred and taking enforcement
action. The EPA therefore concluded that Oregon's regulation was
consistent with the requirements of the CAA and denied the petitioner's
request to require Oregon to revise its SIP provision. See 80 FR 33839,
33973 (final action); 78 FR 12459, 12537 (February 22, 2013) (proposed
action).
    In the submittal that is the subject of this proposed action,
Oregon has added to OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> two criteria that the ODEQ
considers in determining whether to take enforcement action: (1)
Whether any federal NSPS or NESHAP apply to the source in question and
whether the excess emission event caused a violation of the federal
standard,\4\ and (2) whether the excess emission event was due to an
``emergency.'' \5\ Because OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> is a true enforcement
discretion provision, rather than an affirmative defense, the addition
of these criteria does not change the EPA's recent conclusion that this
provision is approvable, consistent with EPA guidance in the SSM SIP
Action of 2015 and CAA requirements for SIP provisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Unlike the provision addressing NSPS and NESHAP added to OAR
340-214-0300 above, which by its terms applies only to NSPS and
NESHAP, which are not part of the SIP, the provision here is not
limited to NSPS and NESHAP standards. For example, a SIP provision
and an NSPS could each have an opacity limit of 20% that applies to
the same emission unit at a facility. The fact that the NSPS limit
does not apply during startup of the emission unit could be a
relevant factor for Oregon to consider in determining whether to
take an enforcement action for emissions in excess of the SIP
opacity limit during startup.
    \5\ ``Emergency'' is defined as any situation arising from
sudden and reasonably unforeseen events beyond the control of the
owner or operator, including acts of God, which situation requires
immediate corrective action to restore normal operation, and that
causes the source to exceed a technology-based emission limit under
the permit, due to unavoidable increases in emissions attributable
to the emergency. An emergency does not include noncompliance to the
extent caused by improperly designed equipment, lack of preventative
maintenance, careless or improper operation, or operator error. See
OAR 340-200-020(50).

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

    Further, Oregon changed an affirmative defense provision for excess
emissions (OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>) that is in the current SIP. OAR 340-214-
0360 provides, by its title and language, an affirmative defense to
excess emissions due to an ``emergency.'' The language in this
provision closely follows language in regulations that govern title V
operating permit programs, and states are currently authorized under
the 40 CFR part 70 regulations to include this provision in title V
permits. See 40 CFR 70.6(g).\6\ The EPA most recently approved this
provision into the Oregon SIP on December 27, 2011 (76 FR 80747).
Although this provision was not a subject of the SIP call, the SSM SIP
Action of 2015 expressly concluded that affirmative defense provisions
are inconsistent with CAA requirements for SIPs and cannot be approved.
See 80 FR at 33852.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The EPA proposed changes to federal title V regulations on
June 14, 2016 (81 FR 38645). The proposed changes would remove this
affirmative defense from the title V rules. If finalized, states
would be required to make changes to their title V programs, where
applicable, to conform to the revised federal title V regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Oregon revised OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> so that it provides an affirmative
defense available only in penalty actions due to noncompliance with
technology-based emission limits in title V operating permits; as
revised, the affirmative defense would no longer be available for
violations of SIP requirements. Oregon's revision makes OAR 340-214-
0360 consistent with current requirements for title V operating permit
programs. Oregon has not submitted the revised version of section 0360
for approval into the SIP and instead, as part of the current
submittal, has requested that the EPA remove the old version of OAR
340-214-0360 from the SIP. The removal of this affirmative defense
provision from the SIP is consistent with EPA guidance in the SSM SIP
Call and CAA requirements for SIP provisions. We are therefore
proposing to approve the removal of this title V affirmative defense
provision from the Oregon SIP.
    We note that Oregon also repealed the sulfur dioxide emission
inventory requirements at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> through 0430. These
provisions are not part of the federally-approved Oregon SIP. These
provisions were repealed as a matter of state law because they were
replaced with more stringent sulfur dioxide limits established as a
part of the state's regional haze plan (July 5, 2011; 76 FR 38997).

J. Division 216: Air Contaminant Discharge Permits

    Oregon's Air Contaminant Discharge Permit (ACDP) program is both
Oregon's federally-enforceable non-title V state operating permit
program, and also the administrative mechanism used to implement the
notice of construction and new source review programs. There are six
types of ACDPs under Oregon's rules: Construction, General, Short Term
Activity, Basic, Simple, and Standard. The types of ACDPs have not
changed, but the ODEQ has made some changes and clarifications to the
criteria and requirements for the various ACDPs. Oregon also revised
application requirements to set application renewal deadlines, and to
clarify the required contents of applications.
    The applicability section at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> references the table
of applicability criteria for the various types of permits in OAR 340-
216-8010. The associated fees are listed at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>. Oregon
made clarifying changes throughout the table in OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, and
made some revisions to the type of ACDP (Basic, General, Simple, or
Standard) each source category is required to obtain prior to
construction and operation. Overall, Oregon slightly expanded the list
of sources required to obtain Basic, General, Simple, or Standard
ACDPs, with one exception. Oregon removed the requirement that GHG-only
sources obtain a Standard ACDP, and pay the associated permitting fees,
consistent with the federal court decision described below in Section
L.
    Oregon also made revisions, mostly clarifying, to the requirements
for applying for and issuing certain types of permits, as well as the
contents of the various permits. For Construction ACDPs at OAR 340-216-
0052, Oregon added a qualifier to the rule that construction commence
within 18 months after the permit is issued. This deadline now applies
only if a source is subject to federal major NSR and certain state
major NSR permitting (discussed in more detail below). Oregon also
added language to the public notice requirements for a modified
Construction ACDP, making clear when public notice as a Category I
permit action is appropriate, as opposed to a Category II permit action
under OAR 340 Division 209. Oregon spelled out that, although the
construction permit itself expires, the requirements remain in effect
and must be added to the subsequent operating permit (ACDP or Title V
operating permit). See OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    General ACDP requirements at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> were updated to refer
to the appropriate public notice procedures, reference the fee class
for specific source categories, and confirm the procedures the ODEQ
will use to rescind a source's General ACDP if the source no longer
qualifies and must obtain a Simple or Standard ACDP instead. Oregon
also changed the rule to make clear that the ODEQ may rescind an
individual source's assignment to a General Permit. When the ODEQ
notifies the source that the department intends to rescind the permit,
the source has 60 days to submit an application for a Simple or
Standard ACDP. Oregon also revised General ACDP Attachments to clarify
public notice requirements and fees.
    For Simple ACDPs at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, it is now clear that the ODEQ
may determine a source ineligible for a Simple ACDP with generic
emission limits, and instead, require the source obtain a Standard ACDP
with source-specific emission limits, as necessary. Oregon has also
clarified the public notice requirements and fees for Simple ACDPs and
removed redundant requirements from the Simple ACDP section that are
also in the applicability and jurisdiction section.
    The Standard ACDP requirements at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> were updated to
lay out the different application requirements for sources seeking this
type of permit when they are subject to federal major versus minor NSR.
Oregon also changed this section to allow sources with multiple
activities or processes at a single site, covered by more than one
General ACDP or that has multiple processes, to obtain a Standard ACDP.
    With respect to processing permits, Oregon's provision at OAR 340-
216-0082 now expressly provide that sources with expired ACDP permits
may continue operating under the expired permit if they have submitted
a timely and complete renewal application. Sources may also request a
contested case hearing, if the ODEQ revokes a permit or denies a permit
renewal. The ODEQ has clarified in a written supplement that
department-initiated modifications at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> follow the
public notice procedures for the relevant ACDP permit type spelled out
in Division 209. Based on the evaluation above and this clarification
from the ODEQ, we propose to approve the revisions to Division 216.

K. Division 222: Stationary Source Plant Site Emission Limits

    This division contains the Oregon program for managing airshed
capacity

through a Plant Site Emission Limit (PSEL). PSELs are used to protect
ambient air quality standards, prevent significant deterioration of air
quality, and to ensure protection of visibility. Establishing such a
limit is a mandatory step in the Oregon permitting process. A PSEL is
designed to be set at the actual baseline emissions from a source plus
approved emissions increases and minus required emissions reductions.
This design is intended to maintain a more realistic emissions
inventory. Oregon uses a fixed baseline year of 1977 or 1978 (or a
prior year if more representative of normal operation) and factors in
all approved emissions increases and required emissions decreases since
baseline, to set the allowable emissions in the PSEL. Increases and
decreases since the baseline year do not affect the baseline, but are
included in the difference between baseline and allowable emissions.
    ``Netting basis'' is a concept in Oregon's program that defines
both the baseline emissions from which increases are measured--to
determine if changes are subject to review--as well as the process for
re-establishing the baseline, after changes have been through the new
source review permitting process.
    As noted above, Oregon's PSEL program is used, in part, to
implement NSR permitting. For major NSR, if a PSEL is calculated at a
level greater than an established significant emission rate (SER) over
the baseline actual emission rate, an evaluation of the air quality
impact and major NSR permitting are required. If not, the PSEL is set
without further review (a construction permit may also be required).
For minor NSR (State NSR), a similar calculation is conducted. If the
difference is greater than the SER, an air quality analysis is required
to evaluate whether ambient air quality standards and increments are
protected. The air quality analysis results may require the source to
reduce the airshed impact and/or comply with a tighter emission limit.
    Oregon submitted a number of changes to the PSEL requirements in
this division. Many of the changes are organizational, centralizing
requirements related to PSELs in Division 222. We propose to approve
the organizational changes. Other submitted changes are substantive.
Oregon revised the criteria for establishing PSELs at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>
through 0090 by consolidating requirements from other sections into
these provisions, and revising them to take into account the
differentiated major and State NSR requirements. Oregon also updated
the source-specific annual PSEL provision, at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, to
account for PM2.5 and major and State NSR requirements. We
note that the current SIP-approved rule includes provisions at OAR 340-
222-0041(3)(b) for PSEL increases that were not subject to New Source
Review. The revised rule revokes those provisions and instead makes
these PSEL increases subject to the new State New Source Review
requirements in Division 224 (see new applicability provision in OAR
340-224-0010(2)(b)(B)). The comprehensive requirements for approval of
such PSEL increases in sustainment, nonattainment, reattainment,
maintenance, and attainment/unclassifiable areas are as stringent as
the current requirements in OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(b)(A) through (D).
    Oregon also revised the short-term PSEL requirements at OAR 340-
222-0042 to spell out the process a source must follow to request an
increase in a short-term PSEL--and when that source must obtain
offsets, or an allocation, from an available growth allowance in the
area.
    At OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, Oregon clarified the process for setting the
initial netting basis for PM2.5 and how potential increases
are limited. The state also made changes to spell out how a source's
netting basis may be reduced--when a rule, order or permit condition
requires the reductions--and how unassigned emissions and emissions
reduction credits are to be addressed. In addition, Oregon clarified
that a source may retain a netting basis if that source relocates to a
different site, as opposed to an adjacent site. However, it is only
allowed if the ODEQ determines the different site is within or affects
the same airshed, and that the time span between operation at the old
site and new sites is less than six months.
    At OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, Oregon consolidated baseline period and
baseline emission rate provisions, and indicated when a baseline
emission rate may be recalculated--limited to circumstances when more
accurate or reliable emission factor information becomes available or
when regulatory changes require that additional emissions units be
addressed. Changes were also made to OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, which addresses
actual emissions, and how to appropriately calculate the mass emissions
of a pollutant from an emissions source during a specified time period.
The state revised this provision to account for the changes in the
program that differentiate major NSR from State NSR.
    We note that Oregon also clarified OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, which
establishes how unassigned emissions are to be treated. The rule was
revised to state that a source may not use emissions that are removed
from the netting basis--including emission reductions required by rule,
order or permit condition--for netting any future permit actions.
    Oregon also revised OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, applicable to sources of
hazardous air pollutants, and submitted it for approval. However, the
provision is not appropriate for SIP approval because it is related to
CAA section 112 and hazardous air pollutants, not CAA section 110 and
the criteria pollutants. Oregon also updated OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, which
addresses the impact on PSEL calculations and permitting requirements
when sources combine, split, and change primary Standard Industrial
Code. The changes make clear that sources must qualify to combine, and
that it will impact the netting basis and SER, and trigger new source
review and recordkeeping requirements, if applicable.
    With the exception noted below, we are proposing to approve the
submitted changes to Division 222 because we believe the revisions to
the PSEL provisions are intended to clarify and strengthen the rules.
We are not approving OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> because it is related to CAA
section 112 and hazardous air pollutants, not CAA section 110 and the
criteria pollutants.

L. Division 224: New Source Review

    Parts C and D of title I of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7470-7515, set forth
preconstruction review and permitting program requirements that apply
to new and modified major stationary sources of air pollutants, known
as major New Source Review (major NSR). The CAA major NSR programs
include a combination of air quality planning and air pollution control
technology program requirements. States adopt major NSR programs as
part of their SIP. Part C is the Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) program, which applies in areas that meet the NAAQS
(attainment areas), as well as in areas for which there is insufficient
information to determine whether the area meets the NAAQS
(unclassifiable areas). Part D is the Nonattainment New Source Review
(major nonattainment NSR) program, which applies in areas that are not
in attainment of the NAAQS (nonattainment areas). The EPA regulations
for SIPs implementing these programs are contained in 40 CFR 51.165 and
51.166, and appendix S to part 51. As discussed above, regulations
addressing the EPA's minor new source review (NSR) requirements are set
forth at 40 CFR 51.160 through 164. States

generally have more flexibility in designing minor NSR programs. Minor
NSR programs, however, must still ensure that emissions from the
construction or modification of a facility, building, structure, or
installation (or any combination thereof) will not interfere with
attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS, or violate an applicable
portion of a control strategy approved into the SIP.
    Oregon's major NSR program has long differed from the federal major
NSR programs in several respects. Oregon's program does not subject the
same sources and modifications to major NSR as would the EPA's rules.
Oregon's program has had lower major source thresholds for sources in
nonattainment and maintenance areas. The program also requires fugitive
emissions to be included in applicability determinations for all new
major sources and modifications to existing major sources. However,
Oregon also utilizes a PSEL approach to defining ``major''
modifications, rather than the contemporaneous net emissions increase
approach used in the EPA's main, non-PAL major NSR program. The EPA has
previously determined that, over all, Oregon's major NSR program is at
least as stringent as the EPA's major NSR program and meets the
requirements of 40 CFR 51.165 and 51.166. See 76 FR 80747, 80748
(December 27, 2011) (final action); 76 FR 59090, 59094 (Sept. 23, 2011)
(proposed action).
    Under Oregon's SIP-approved program, to which the state has made
changes, both federal major sources and large minor sources have been
covered by this Division. The submitted changes to Division 224 revise
this approach and establish distinct components within Division 224,
referred to as Major New Source Review (Oregon Major NSR--sections 0045
through 0100) and State New Source Review (State NSR--sections 0245
through 0270) to help clarify the requirements that apply to federal
major sources and larger minor sources. Pre-construction review and
permitting of other minor sources continue to be covered in Division
210 Stationary Source Notification Requirements, Division 216 Air
Contaminant Discharge Permits, and Division 222 Plant Site Emission
Limits.
    As discussed above, Oregon has also created two new state
designations. Sustainment areas are state-designated areas that are
violating or close to violating the NAAQS but which are not formally
designated nonattainment by the EPA. Reattainment areas are state-
designated areas that have been designated nonattainment by the EPA but
that now have air quality data showing the area is attaining the NAAQS.
Key changes to the Oregon Major NSR and State NSR programs are
discussed below.
OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> Applicability, General Prohibitions, General
Requirements, and Jurisdiction
    Oregon has narrowed the scope of sources that are subject to Oregon
Major NSR in nonattainment and maintenance areas by increasing the
thresholds, from the significant emission rate (SER) to the major
source thresholds in the CAA specified for the current nonattainment
areas in Oregon. See OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(66)(d) and OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(b).
At the same time, Oregon's State NSR requirements under Division 224
apply to the construction of new sources with emissions of a regulated
air pollutant at or above the SER, as well as increases in emissions of
a regulated pollutant from existing sources that equal or exceed the
SER over the netting basis.
    Oregon has divided its State NSR program into two parts: Type A,
which generally applies in nonattainment, reattainment, and maintenance
areas, and Type B, for attainment, unclassifiable, and sustainment
areas. Sources subject to Type A State NSR remain subject to many of
the same requirements that apply to such sources under Oregon's current
SIP-approved program in nonattainment \7\ and maintenance areas,
whereas sources subject to Type B State NSR are subject to requirements
equivalent to the minor NSR requirements under Oregon's PSEL rule at
OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> in its current SIP.\8\ Because Oregon's changes to the
definition of ``federal major source'' in nonattainment areas are
consistent with the federal definition of ``major stationary source''
at 40 CFR 51.165 for the designated areas in Oregon, and because Oregon
has retained most of the characteristics of the Oregon's SIP-approved
Major NSR permitting program for Type A State NSR, the EPA is proposing
to approve these revisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Key changes are discussed below in the discussion of State
NSR.
    \8\ Sources in sustainment areas subject to OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(2)
are also subject to Type A NSR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The state also made revisions here, and in several other places in
its rules, to be consistent with revisions to the federal PSD rules
made in response to a Supreme Court decision \9\ regarding the
regulation of GHGs (May 7, 2015, 80 FR 26183). Specifically, Oregon
revised definitions and procedures in Divisions 200, 214, 216, 222 and
224 to remove GHG-only sources from PSD applicability. Therefore, as
required by the federal PSD program, a source is now subject to the
Oregon Major NSR requirements for GHGs in attainment and unclassifiable
areas only when the source is subject to Oregon Major NSR requirements
anyway for one or more criteria pollutants. As specified in the federal
PSD regulations, Oregon's rules continue to require that sources of
GHGs subject to Oregon Major NSR in attainment and unclassifiable areas
for a criteria pollutant, are also subject to Oregon Major NSR for
GHGs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Environmental Protection
Agency, 134 S.Ct. 2427 (2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Oregon also made clear in this section that a source is subject to
Division 224 requirements for the designated area in which the source
is located--for each regulated pollutant, including precursors.
Finally, Oregon spelled out that sources subject to Division 224 must
not begin actual construction, continue construction, or operate
without complying with the requirements of Division 224 and obtaining
an ACDP permit authorizing construction or operation.
OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> Major Modification
    Importantly, Oregon moved the definition of ``major modification''
from Division 200 to Division 224, to reflect that the former
definition was really a procedure for determining whether a major
modification has or will occur, rather than a true definition. The
revised definition and procedure are intended to better explain how
emissions increases and decreases are tracked to determine whether a
major modification has, or will, occur.
    Oregon also specified that emissions from categorically
insignificant activities, aggregate insignificant emissions, and
fugitive emissions must be included in determining whether a major
modification has occurred. In addition, the state clarified that major
modifications for ozone precursors, or PM2.5 precursors,
also constitute major modifications for ozone and PM2.5,
respectively. Finally, Oregon added language stating that the PSEL,
netting basis, and emissions changes must be recalculated when more
accurate or reliable emissions information becomes available to
determine whether a major modification has occurred.
OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> New Source Review Procedural Requirements
    Oregon revised this section to account for differing Oregon Major
NSR and State NSR procedures. These revisions include when the ODEQ
will determine whether an application is complete, when a final
determination will be made, when construction is permitted,

how to revise a permit and extend it, and when and how the ODEQ will
terminate an NSR permit. With respect to the provision in the federal
PSD regulations authorizing extensions to the 18-month construction
time limitation in 40 CFR 52.21(r)(2) ``upon a satisfactory showing
that an extension is justified,'' Oregon revised its extension
provisions to be consistent with recent EPA guidance. This guidance set
out the EPA's views on what constitutes an adequate justification for
an extension of the 18-month timeframe under 40 CFR 52.21(r)(2) for
commencing construction of a source that has been issued a PSD permit.
See Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Director of EPA's Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, to Regional Air Division Directors,
Region 1-10, entitled Guidance on Extension of Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) Permits under 40 CFR 52.21(r)(2), dated
January 31, 2014 (Extension Guidance). In addition, Oregon extended the
time period for making a final determination on an Oregon Major NSR or
Type A State NSR permit from six months to one year, to reflect the
more complex nature of such permitting actions. The one-year time-frame
for permit issuance is consistent with the EPA's requirements for major
NSR permitting. See 40 CFR 52.21(q)(2).
OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> Fugitive and Secondary Emissions
    This section was moved and amended to account for State NSR
requirements. For sources subject to Oregon Major NSR and Type A State
NSR, fugitive emissions are included in the calculation of emission
rates and subject to the same control requirements and analyses
required for emissions from identifiable stacks or vents. Secondary
emissions are not included in potential to emit calculations for Oregon
Major NSR or Type A State NSR, but once a source is subject to Oregon
Major NSR or Type A State NSR, secondary emissions must be considered
in the required air quality impact analysis under Divisions 224 and
225.
340-224-0045 to<PHONE_NUMBER> Major NSR
    Oregon has specified Oregon Major NSR requirements for each of the
following designations: Sustainment, nonattainment, reattainment,
maintenance, and attainment/unclassifiable.
Major NSR in Sustainment Areas
    New sources and modifications subject to Oregon Major NSR in
sustainment areas (areas that are classified as attainment/
unclassifiable by the EPA but have air quality either violating the
NAAQS or just below the NAAQS) must meet PSD requirements for each
sustainment pollutant, but must also satisfy additional requirements
for obtaining offsets and demonstrating a net air quality benefit to
address the air quality problems in the area, as discussed in more
detail below. Because such areas are designated as attainment/
unclassifiable by the EPA, requiring compliance with Oregon's PSD
requirements meets federal requirements. The additional requirements
for obtaining offsets and demonstrating a net air quality benefit go
beyond CAA requirements for attainment/classifiable areas and are thus
approvable.
Major NSR in Nonattainment Areas
    For new sources and modifications subject to Oregon Major NSR in
nonattainment areas, Oregon reorganized and clarified the requirements,
including that they apply for each pollutant for which the area is
designated nonattainment. Lowest Achievable Emission Rate (LAER) and
offsets continue to be required for such sources and modifications.
Oregon's submitted revisions tighten offsets required in nonattainment
areas (except with respect to ozone). Oregon's rules now initially
require 1.2:1 offsets to emissions in non-ozone areas. If offsets are
obtained from priority sources in the area, the ratio may be reduced to
1:1, equivalent to the federal requirement in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(9)(i).
Oregon's revisions also tighten requirements for sources seeking
construction permit extensions, and limits extension requests to two
18-month periods, with certain additional review and re-evaluation
steps. We note that beyond the federal rules, Oregon's rules extend
BACT and offset requirements to new and modified minor sources in
nonattainment areas.
    The EPA is proposing limited, rather than full, approval of the
Oregon Major NSR program for nonattainment areas because, although the
submitted revisions strengthen the existing SIP-approved program, we
cannot fully evaluate the program for the following reasons. On January
4, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, in
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) v. EPA,\10\ issued a decision
that remanded the EPA's 2007 and 2008 rules implementing the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS. Relevant here, the EPA's 2008 implementation
rule addressed by the court decision, ``Implementation of NSR Program
for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)''
(the 2008 NSR PM2.5 Rule),\11\ promulgated NSR requirements
in both nonattainment areas (nonattainment NSR) and attainment/
unclassifiable areas (PSD). The court concluded that the EPA had
improperly based the implementation rule solely upon the requirements
of part D, subpart I, of the CAA, and had failed to address the
requirements of part D, subpart 4, which establishes additional
provisions for particulate matter nonattainment areas. The court
ordered the EPA to ``repromulgate these rules pursuant to subpart 4
consistent with this opinion.'' Id. at 437.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir.).
    \11\ 73 FR 28321 (May 16, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result of the court's decision, the EPA withdrew its guidance
for implementing the 2006 PM2.5 standard \12\ because the
guidance was based largely on the remanded rule promulgated to
implement the 1997 PM2.5 standard.\13\ On June 2, 2014, the
EPA promulgated the Identification of Nonattainment Classification and
Deadlines for Submission of State Implementation Plan (SIP) Provisions
for the 1997 Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (79 FR
31566). This rule promulgated classifications and deadlines under
subpart 4, part D, title I of the CAA for 2006 PM2.5
nonattainment areas, including two areas in Oregon, specifically the
Klamath Falls and Oakridge PM2.5 nonattainment areas. On
August 24, 2016, the EPA finalized the Fine Particulate Matter National
Ambient Air Quality Standards: State Implementation Plan Requirements
(81 FR 58010). The EPA has now set revised requirements for
PM2.5 nonattainment areas, including new rules for major new
and modified sources. The EPA also stated its intent to provide states
with guidance regarding precursor demonstrations to supplement the new
rules. Because these changes only recently became effective on October
24, 2016, and the EPA's guidance is still forthcoming, we intend to
work with Oregon to address the requirements of subpart 4 for
PM2.5 in a separate, future action. In this action, as
stated above, we propose a limited approval of the revisions to the
Oregon Major NSR program in nonattainment areas as

strengthening the current federally-approved program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Implementation Guidance
for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate (PM2.5) National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (Mar. 2, 2012).
    \13\ Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Withdrawal of
Implementation Guidance for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (Jun. 6,
2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Major NSR in Reattainment Areas
    In reattainment areas (areas meeting the NAAQS but not yet
redesignated to attainment), new sources and modifications subject to
Oregon Major NSR must continue to meet all nonattainment Oregon Major
NSR requirements for the reattainment pollutant. In addition, to ensure
air quality does not again deteriorate, Oregon now requires that
sources subject to Oregon Major NSR also meet other requirements for
each reattainment pollutant. Specifically, the owner or operator of the
source must demonstrate the source will not cause or contribute to a
new violation of the ambient air quality standard or PSD increment by
conducting an air quality analysis as outlined in Division 225.
Major NSR in Maintenance Areas
    In maintenance areas, as under Oregon's current federally-approved
SIP, new sources and modifications subject to Oregon Major NSR must
continue to comply with Oregon Major NSR requirements for attainment/
unclassifiable areas (i.e., PSD) and also conduct a demonstration or
obtain allowances to ensure a net air quality benefit in the area.
Rather than setting out the specific PSD requirements in this section,
however, this section now simply references the PSD requirements at OAR
340-224-0070.
Major NSR in Attainment/Unclassifiable Areas (PSD)
    For the construction of new sources and modifications subject to
Oregon Major NSR in attainment or unclassifiable areas, Oregon revised
its rules to address several court decisions impacting federal PSD
rules. First, as discussed above, Oregon revised definitions and
procedures in Divisions 200, 214, 216, 222 and 224 to remove GHG-only
sources from PSD applicability. Therefore, as required under the EPA's
federal PSD program, a source is now subject to the Oregon Major NSR
requirements for GHGs only when the source also is subject to Oregon
PSD requirements for one or more criteria pollutants. As required,
Oregon's rules continue to require that sources of GHGs subject to
Oregon's PSD rules for a criteria pollutant are also subject to PSD for
GHGs.
    Second, Oregon revised its requirements for preconstruction
monitoring to address another court decision and resulting revisions to
the EPA's PSD rules. On October 20, 2010, the EPA promulgated the 2010
PSD PM2.5 Implementation Rule revising the federal
significant monitoring concentration (SMC) and SILs for
PM2.5 (75 FR 64864). On January 22, 2013, the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia, in Sierra Club v. EPA,\14\ issued
a judgment that, among other things, vacated the provisions adding the
PM2.5 SMC to the federal regulations at 40 CFR
51.166(i)(5)(i)(c) and 52.21(i)(5)(i)(c). In its decision, the court
held that the EPA did not have the authority to use SMCs to exempt
permit applicants from the statutory requirement in CAA section
165(e)(2) that ambient monitoring data for PM2.5 be included
in all PSD permit applications. Although the PM2.5 SMC was
not a required element, where a state program contained an SMC and
applied it to allow new permits without requiring ambient
PM2.5 monitoring data, the provision would be inconsistent
with the court's opinion and CAA section 165(e)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 703 F.3d 458 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    At the EPA's request, the decision also vacated and remanded the
portions of the 2010 PSD PM2.5 Implementation Rule that
revised 40 CFR 51.166 and 40 CFR 52.21 related to SILs for
PM2.5. The EPA requested this vacatur and remand of two of
the three provisions in the EPA regulations that contain SILs for
PM2.5 because the wording of these two SIL provisions (40
CFR 51.166(k)(2) and 40 CFR 52.21(k)(2)) was inconsistent with the
explanation of when and how SILs should be used by permitting
authorities that we provided in the preamble to the Federal Register
publication when we promulgated these provisions. Specifically, the EPA
erred because the language promulgated in 2010 does not provide
permitting authorities the discretion to require a cumulative impact
analysis notwithstanding that the source's impact is below the SIL,
where there is information that shows the proposed source would lead to
a violation of the NAAQS or increments. The third SIL provision (40 CFR
51.165(b)(2)) was not vacated and remains in effect. On December 9,
2013, the EPA removed the vacated PM2.5 SILs and SMC
provisions from federal PSD regulations (78 FR 73698). The EPA is
starting a rulemaking on the PM2.5 SILs to address the
court's remand. In the meantime, we advised states to remove the
vacated provisions from state PSD regulations.
    In response to the vacatur and remand, Oregon submitted revisions
to several divisions, including Divisions 200, 202, 224 and 225. Oregon
revised the PM2.5 SMC to zero, as the EPA did, to address
this issue in the federal PSD regulations. Oregon also revised the
definition of ``significant impact levels'' or ``SIL'' in state rules,
removed the vacated language and added text to make clear that ``no
source may cause or contribute to a new violation of an ambient air
quality standard or PSD increment even if the single source impact is
less than the significant impact level.'' We are proposing to approve
Oregon's revisions as consistent with the court decision.
    Oregon also revised its PSD rules to address a court decision
vacating provisions of EPA's 2011 biogenic deferral. In 2011, the EPA
revised the definition of ``subject to regulation'' at 40 CFR
52.21(b)(49)(ii)(a) to defer PSD permitting requirements for carbon
dioxide (CO2) emissions from bioenergy and other biogenic
sources for three years. See Deferral for CO2 Emissions from
Bioenergy and Other Biogenic Sources under the Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Title V Programs; Final Rule (July
20, 2011, 76 FR 43490) (Biogenic CO2 Deferral Rule)). On
July 12, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia,
in Center for Biological Diversity v. EPA,\15\ vacated the provisions
of the Biogenic CO2 Deferral Rule. The deferral expired on
July 21, 2014, and by its terms is no longer in effect. The current
definition of ``greenhouse gases or GHGs'' in Division 200 states that
CO2 emissions from the combustion or decomposition of
biomass is not included in the definition, except to the extent
required by federal law. We are proposing to approve Oregon's rules as
consistent with current federal law, under which CO2
emissions from biogenic sources are regulated under Oregon's PSD
program to the same extent as CO2 emissions from any other
source.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 722 F.3d 401 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition to revisions addressing these three court decisions,
Oregon also eliminated language that allowed the substitution of post-
construction monitoring for preconstruction monitoring. Oregon added an
exemption from the preconstruction ambient air monitoring requirement,
with the ODEQ's approval, if representative or conservative background
concentration data is available, and the source demonstrates that such
data is adequate to determine that the source would not cause or
contribute to a violation of an ambient air quality standard or any
applicable PSD increment. These revisions, along with the other
existing provisions regarding preconstruction monitoring in Oregon's
PSD regulations,

are consistent with 40 CFR 51.166(m)(iii) and therefore approvable.
    Finally, Oregon added the requirement to demonstrate a net air
quality benefit for subject sources that will have a significant impact
on air quality in a designated area other than the area in which the
source is located. This demonstration of net air quality benefit is
beyond federal PSD requirements, and will be discussed in more detail
below.
OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> to<PHONE_NUMBER>, State NSR
    Division 224 now also specifies State NSR requirements for
sustainment, nonattainment, reattainment, maintenance, and attainment/
unclassifiable areas. For sources that emit between the SER and 100
tons per year in nonattainment and maintenance areas (Type A State NSR
sources), Oregon has relaxed some of the requirements, as compared to
its current SIP, that historically went beyond federal requirements. In
nonattainment areas, if the increase in emissions from the source is
the result of a major modification,\16\ BACT rather than LAER is now
required. In maintenance areas, Type A State NSR sources are no longer
required to conduct preconstruction monitoring to support the ambient
air impact analysis for the source. In addition, in both nonattainment
and maintenance areas, Oregon's new State NSR rules allow a reduction
of the offset ratio if some of the offsets come from sources that are
contributing to air quality problems in the area (which historically
have been woodstoves). In sustainment and reattainment areas, Oregon's
new State NSR requirements go beyond CAA requirements for minor NSR
programs by requiring a demonstration of a net air quality benefit
(discussed below).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Oregon uses the term ``major modification'' for physical
and operational changes that result in significant increases to both
existing major and existing minor sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because BACT, LAER, pre-construction monitoring, and offsets are
not required components of a State's SIP-approved minor NSR program,
and because the offset requirements now provide sources with incentives
to obtain offsets from sources found to be specifically contributing to
air quality problems in the area, the EPA proposes to find that
Oregon's minor NSR program continues to meet CAA requirements for
approval.
OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> to<PHONE_NUMBER>, Net Air Quality Benefit Emission
Offsets
    Oregon moved the net air quality benefit emission offset rules from
Division 225 to Division 224 to better consolidate new source review
requirements. The CAA requires that, for major nonattainment NSR, the
proposed major source or major modifications must obtain emissions
reductions of the affected nonattainment pollutant from the same source
or other sources in the area to offset the proposed emissions increase.
See CAA section 173(c). Consistent with that requirement, the EPA's
major nonattainment NSR regulations require that major sources and
major modifications in nonattainment areas obtain emissions offsets at
a ratio of at least 1 to 1 (1:1) from existing sources in the area to
offset emissions from the new or modified source. 40 CFR
51.165(a)(9)(i).
    Oregon revised the state's criteria for demonstrating a net air
quality benefit. In addition to the incentives provided to sources
subject to Type A State NSR in sustainment and reattainment areas to
obtain offsets from priority sources discussed above, Oregon made an
additional change. The state revised its rules to provide incentives
for major sources to use priority source offsets for Oregon Major NSR
sources in nonattainment and reattainment areas by increasing the
required offset ratio for major sources to 1.2:1 from the current 1:1.
If a source subject to Oregon Major NSR obtains offsets of some
emissions increases from priority sources, the ratio may be reduced to
no less than 1:1, the minimum offset level under the federal major
nonattainment NSR program.
    We most recently reviewed and took action on submitted changes to
Division 225 on December 27, 2011 (76 FR 80747). Although Oregon
adopted the EPA's recommended inter-pollutant offset ratios for
PM2.5 and submitted them to the EPA, we were unable to
approve them in our 2011 action because, between the time that Oregon
adopted the ratios and our 2011 action, the EPA granted a petition to
reconsider the ratios and changed its policy. As a result, in 2011 we
deferred action to give Oregon time to demonstrate that the ratios
protected ambient air quality standards in Oregon, or otherwise revise
the ratios--in line with the EPA's July 21, 2011, memorandum updating
the inter-pollutant offset policy.\17\ Oregon did revise its rules,
moved these provisions to Division 224, at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, and
submitted the changes in the April 2015 submission evaluated in this
action. Specifically, Oregon removed the state-wide PM2.5
inter-pollutant offset ratios, and instead, added rule language to
require that they be calculated on a case-by-case basis. However, the
EPA's revised inter-pollutant offset policy states that a state should
make a specific demonstration for set ratios in a SIP submittal.\18\
Oregon's submittal does not include a demonstration for set ratios in
specific areas. With the exception of OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(3), we are
proposing to approve the revisions to Oregon's net air quality benefit
emissions rules (OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> through 0540).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ Gina McCarthy, EPA Administrator. ``Revised Policy to
Address Reconsideration of Inter-pollutant Trading Provisions for
Fine Particles (PM2.5),'' Memorandum to Regional
Administrators, July 21, 2011.
    \18\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary
    We are proposing to approve the revisions to Division 224, with the
exceptions and limitations noted above, because we have determined
that, in conjunction with other provisions in Divisions 200, 222, and
225, the revisions are consistent with the requirements of the EPA's
PSD, major nonattainment NSR, and minor NSR permitting programs. See 40
CFR 51.160 through 161, 51.165, and 51.166.

M. Division 225: Air Quality Analysis Requirements

    This division contains the air quality analysis requirements, which
are primarily used in Oregon's NSR program. By its terms, it does not
apply unless a rule in another division, primarily Division 224, refers
to Division 225 or a rule in Division 225.
    Substantive changes include revising the definition of ``allowable
emissions'' at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(1) to add ``40 CFR part 62'' to the
list of referenced standards and clarifying the definition of
``baseline concentration year'' at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(3) that varies
depending on the pollutant for a particular designated area. Oregon
revised the definitions of ``competing PSD increment consuming source
impacts'' and ``competing NAAQS [national ambient air quality
standards] source impacts,'' at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(4) and (5)
respectively, to broaden the reference to include all of Oregon's
ambient air quality standards at Division 202 (which include the
NAAQS)\19\ and to specify that in calculating these concentrations,
sources may factor in the distance from the new or modified source to
other emission sources (range of influence or ROI), spatial
distribution of existing emission sources, topography, and

meteorology. Oregon also clarified and reorganized the defined ROI
formula at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(10). The ROI is the distance from the new
or modified source or source impact area to other emission sources that
could impact that area. The ROI and source impact area are used to
predict the air quality impacts of a new or modified source. Oregon
continues to limit the maximum ROI to 50 kilometers and has moved the
constant values in the ROI formula from the table at the end of the
division into the text of the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ Our approval of OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(4) and (5) would not
extend to those ambient standards in Division 202 that we have
excluded from our approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Oregon revised the PSD requirements to align with the court
decision vacating and remanding the PM2.5 SIL. Please see
Section L above for a discussion of the court decision. Division 225
now includes language stating that application of a SIL as a screening
tool does not preclude the ODEQ from requiring additional analysis to
evaluate whether a proposed source or modification will cause or
contribute to a violation of an air quality standard or PSD increment.
    The state also updated the PSD requirements for demonstrating
compliance with air quality related values. Oregon made clear that, if
applicable, the analysis applies to each emission unit that increases
the actual emissions of a regulated pollutant above the portion of the
netting basis attributable to that emission unit. The state also
spelled out that the term ``air quality related values'' includes
visibility, deposition, and ozone impacts. In addition, the state
mandated a visibility analysis for sources impacting the Columbia River
Gorge National Scenic Area (Gorge), instead of recommending sources
also evaluate potential impacts on the Gorge. We propose to approve the
revisions to Division 225 as meeting CAA requirements, including the
EPA's major NSR permitting regulations at 40 CFR 51.165 and 51.166, and
the regional haze requirements at 40 CFR part 51, subpart P.
    As discussed above, Oregon repealed the Requirements for
Demonstrating a Net Air Quality Benefit section at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>,
after moving the requirements into the Net Air Quality Benefit Emission
Offsets section in Division 224, which we described above. We propose
to approve the repeal of OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>.

N. Division 226: General Emission Standards

    This division contains emission standards and requirements of
general applicability, including requirements for highest and best
practicable treatment and control, operating and maintenance, typically
achievable control technology, additional requirements imposed on a
permit by permit basis, alternative emission limits (bubbles), and
particulate emission limits for process equipment and other sources
(other than fuel or refuse burning equipment or fugitive emissions). In
OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, Oregon clarified that pressure drop and ammonia slip
are operational, maintenance and work practice requirements that the
ODEQ may establish in a permit condition or notice of construction
approval. Oregon also revised OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> Typically Achievable
Control Technology by moving procedural requirements from the
definitions at Division 200 to this division, and revising them to
account for Oregon's changes to NSR, Major NSR and Type A State NSR.
    Notably, the state made substantive revisions to the particulate
emission limits under the Grain Loading Standards section starting at
OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>. Oregon's stated goal was to reduce emissions from
certain sources built before June 1970. The rules phase in tighter
standards for these older sources, based on typically available control
technology, such as multiclones. The revisions generally tighten grain
loading standards for existing sources from 0.2 grains per dry standard
cubic foot (gr/dscf) to between 0.10 and 0.15 gr/dscf depending on
whether there is existing source test data for the source and what that
data shows. Oregon set timelines to achieve these rates depending on
whether sources were built before or after June 1, 1970. Existing
sources that operate equipment less frequently (less than 867 hours a
year) must meet less stringent standards. For new sources, the ODEQ has
increases the stringency of the grain loading standard by adding a
significant digit, revising the standard from 0.1 gr/dscf to 0.10 gr/
dscf. We propose to approve the revisions to Division 226 because they
tighten particulate emission standards and strengthen the SIP.

O. Division 228: Requirements for Fuel Burning Equipment and Fuel
Sulfur Content

    These rules establish generally applicable requirements for fuel
burning equipment, including limits on sulfur content and particulate
matter. Oregon removed a coal space-heating exemption that expired in
1983 and clarified that sulfur dioxide emissions from recovery furnaces
are not subject to this division but are instead regulated under the
SO2 emissions limits for wood products industries in
Division 234.
    Oregon revised Division 228 to tighten grain loading standards for
fuel burning equipment in the same manner as in Division 226, discussed
above. We propose to approve the revisions because they tighten
particulate emission standards for fuel burning equipment and
strengthen the SIP. We note that revisions to this division related to
the federal Acid Rain Program (OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, and -0400 through -
0530) were not submitted, but were included to show a complete record
of the revisions. These rules are not a part of Oregon's federally-
approved SIP.

P. Division 232: Emission Standards for VOC Point Sources

    This division restricts emissions of VOC from new and existing
listed source categories in the Portland and Medford Air Quality
Maintenance Areas and in Salem-Keizer in the Salem-Keizer Area
Transportation Study Area as well as any source in these areas with the
potential to emit over 100 tons of VOC per year. Consistent with CAA
requirements, Oregon has clarified that the determination of whether a
source has a potential to emit over 100 tons of VOC per year is made
before consideration of add-on controls.
    Oregon expanded the section on marine tank vessels so that the
marine vapor control requirements now apply to marine tank vessel
loading of other volatile organic liquids in addition to gasoline,
effective July 1, 2018. The loading of organic liquids stored in
pressurized tanks, such as liquefied natural gas and propane, are not
included in this expansion. Consistent with the change discussed above,
the state also made clear that, in determining whether a course is
subject to the rules on surface coating in manufacturing, determination
of the source's potential to emit is made before consideration of add-
on controls. Oregon also requires records under the surface coating in
manufacturing rule to be retained for five years rather than two,
consistent with title V. Finally, Oregon also clarified that
determining potential to emit for rotogravure and flexographic printing
sources subject to VOC requirements is made before consideration of
add-on controls. We propose to approve the changes described above
because they strengthen the SIP and are consistent with the CAA.

Q. Division 234: Emissions Standards for Wood Products Industries

    Oregon repealed two sections of this division--the neutral sulfite
semi-chemical section (OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>

through 0360) and the sulfite pulp mill section (OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>
through 0430)--because sources of this type no longer exist in the
state. Any new sources constructed would be subject to new source
review, as well as applicable NSPS and NESHAP requirements. As a
result, Oregon removed terms no longer used in this division, including
acid absorption tower, acid plant, average daily production, blow
system, continual monitoring, continuous-flow conveying system,
modified wigwam waste burner, neutral sulfite semi-chemical (NSSC) pulp
mill, production, spent liquor incinerator, sulfite mill, and sulfur
oxides.
    In the Kraft Pulp Mills section at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> through 0270,
the state revised what was formerly referred to as ``significant
upgrading'' of equipment for purposes of determining whether more
restrictive standards apply. This change was intended to enhance the
enforceability of the requirement to meet more restrictive emission
standards based on changes to the source. This section was also revised
to update the non-recovery furnace opacity limit averaging times to six
minutes in lieu of the previous three-minute exception. In making this
change, Oregon relied on the same rationale discussed in Section E.
above.
    Oregon also added source test methods for particulate matter and
required demonstrations of oxygen concentrations in recovery furnace
and lime kiln gases. Under the Reporting section at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>,
the state removed the alternative sampling option where
transmissometers are not feasible because all pulp mills in Oregon now
have transmissometers.
    Oregon made minor changes to OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, a provision
authorizing the ODEQ to determine that upset conditions at a subject
source are chronic and correctable by the installation of new or
modified process or control equipment and requiring a program and
schedule to effectively eliminate the deficiencies causing the upset
conditions. This provision makes clear that such upsets causing
emissions in excess of applicable limits may be subject to a civil
penalty or other appropriate action. The EPA is proposing to reapprove
this provision with these changes based on the understanding that it
does not excuse excess emissions from enforcement action seeking
penalties or injunctive relief.
    Oregon moved the test method for the opacity limit for veneer and
plywood manufacturing operations from the definitions into the
requirement itself (OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(1)(b)(A)). The state also added
test methods for moisture content to the emission standards for veneer
and plywood manufacturing requirements. For hardboard tempering ovens,
Oregon revised the emission requirements to require that alternative
temperatures be approved using the procedures in the federal NESHAP for
Plywood and Composite Wood Products, 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDD.
Because these rules did not include testing and monitoring
requirements, Oregon added a new section, OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> Testing and
Monitoring.
    We propose to approve the changes to Division 234, except with
respect to requirements regulating total reduced sulfur and odor,
because they strengthen the SIP and are consistent with CAA
requirements. Total reduced sulfur and odor requirements are not
appropriate for SIP approval because they are not criteria pollutants
under title I of the CAA. We therefore are excluding from approval into
the Oregon SIP the references to total reduced sulfur and odor in
definitions at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(8) and (10), and in Kraft Pulp Mill
rules at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(1), OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(2), OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(1),
and OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(1) and (2).

R. Division 236: Emissions Standards for Specific Industries

    Under Division 236, Oregon repealed rules designed to regulate
aluminum (OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> through 0150) and laterite ore production of
ferronickel (OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> through 0230) because sources of this
type no longer exist in the state. Any new facilities would be subject
to new source review as well as applicable NSPS and NESHAP
requirements. Oregon also made clear the appropriate test method to
determine compliance with the hot mix asphalt plant rules at OAR 340-
236-0410(1). In addition, the state added a requirement that hot mix
asphalt plants must develop a fugitive emissions control plan if
requested by the ODEQ. See OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>(4).
    We note that Oregon repealed OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> specific to portable
hot mix asphalt plants, which addressed only permit requirements for
such plants, because these plants are now regulated under general
permits in Division 216. With the exception of the provisions
regulating animal matter and municipal solid waste landfills, we
propose to approve the revisions and repeals because they are
consistent with CAA requirements. The provisions regulating animal
matter and municipal solid waste landfills are not related to the
criteria pollutants regulated under title I of the CAA, not essential
for meeting and maintaining the NAAQS, nor related to the requirements
for SIPs under section 110 of the CAA.

S. Division 240: Rules for Areas With Unique Air Quality Needs

    In the submission, Oregon revised air quality control requirements
for certain areas--these are generally areas that are, or have been,
designated nonattainment by the EPA. At OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, the state
clarified the appropriate test methods for determining compliance with
emission standards in this division, improving the enforceability of
the standards. In addition, visible emissions requirements, at OAR 340-
240-0110, 0140, 0330, 0350, and 0510, were revised to update opacity
testing averaging times from an aggregate three-minute exception in any
one hour to a six-minute average. The state explained the basis for
this change in its submission, and we describe, in Section E above, why
we propose to approve this change.
    Oregon also revised particulate control requirements for air
conveying systems, at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, setting removal efficiency
standards designed to ensure that the pollution collected from a source
is not ultimately discharged into the atmosphere. In making this
change, the state regulated design removal efficiency rather than
actual removal efficiency because of the challenges of testing for
removal efficiency, which requires measuring emissions at the inlet and
the outlet. Oregon updated the grain loading standard for air conveying
systems in the La Grande Urban Growth Area emitting ten tons or less a
year (from 0.1 to 0.10 grains per standard cubic foot) but allowed
extensions of up to one year, if necessary to install controls to meet
the revised standard. Oregon made the changes intending to better align
the rules with federally-approved standards and testing methods.
    Also in this division, Oregon repealed the charcoal producing plant
rules at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> because there are no longer any existing
sources of this type in Oregon outside of Lane County (which is subject
to rules in addition to, or in lieu of, these rules), and any new
charcoal producing plants would be subject to new source review and any
applicable NSPS and NESHAP requirements. In accord with changes to
other divisions discussed above, the state removed the sanctioned use
of asphalt and oil as dust suppressants. Oregon also repealed old,
expired provisions in this division.
    We note that Oregon's federally-approved SIP currently controls
sources

in the Klamath Falls nonattainment area, and incentivizes sources in
Klamath Falls to offset particulate emissions by decommissioning
fireplaces, installing fireplace inserts, replacing old stoves with
certified stoves, and replacing wood-fired heaters with alternatives
like natural gas and electric baseboards. In this submission, Oregon
updated requirements in Klamath Falls by removing an exception from the
20% opacity standard, and by uniformly applying the 6-minute averaging
time to measure opacity, as described above in Section E.
    Oregon also revised this section to expand offsets to the Lakeview
sustainment area as well as other eligible areas. See OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>.
We propose to approve the revisions because they are consistent with
the CAA and strengthen the SIP.

T. Division 242: Rules Applicable to the Portland Area

    This division contains additional requirements that apply in the
Portland area. The industrial emissions management program was updated
to account for the changes to Oregon's Major NSR and State NSR
programs. Oregon also moved the net air quality benefit provisions to
Division 224 to consolidate NSR requirements. We note that we already
approved the changes to the Gasoline Vapors from Gasoline Transfer and
Dispensing Operations section at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>, 0510, and 0520 on
October 27, 2015 (80 FR 65655), and are therefore not addressing them
in this action.
    Oregon repealed the Spray Paint rule sections at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>
through 0790 because the EPA has set national rules designed to be more
stringent. The Oregon spray paint rules were originally a mass-based
standard adopted in 1995 and projected to have a 15 percent reduction
in VOCs in the 1996 Portland Ozone Maintenance Plan. On March 24, 2008,
the EPA finalized national VOC rules (73 FR 15604). As described in the
proposal for the EPA's rule, the EPA's reactivity-based standard would
provide a 19 percent reduction in VOCs (July 16, 2007, 72 FR 38952).
The EPA also cited the rule's projected 19 percent reduction of VOC in
an EPA memo providing guidelines on emissions reduction credit.\20\ In
addition, California Air Resource Board developed a reactivity-based
standard, approved by the EPA in September 2005 (70 FR 53930). We find
the repeal to be approvable and propose to approve the submitted
changes to Division 242 as consistent with CAA requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ Stephen Page, ``Emission Reduction Credit for Three Federal
Rules for Categories of Consumer and Commercial Products,'' Memo to
Regional Administrators, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

U. Division 262: Heat Smart Program for Residential Woodstoves and
Other Solid Fuel Heating Devices

    Oregon submitted a change to the definitions section of this
division, at OAR<PHONE_NUMBER>. Oregon's rules now expressly exclude
boilers providing process heat to a commercial, industrial, or
institutional establishment (that obtain a construction approval from
the ODEQ) from the definition of ``solid fuel burning device''
regulated under the Heat Smart Program. These units are currently
exempt from the Heat Smart Program under Oregon's SIP and the revision
to Oregon's rules continues that exemption. We propose to approve the
change because as a matter of federal law, this revision results in no
change to the Oregon SIP.

V. Division 264: Rules for Open Burning

    The only substantive change to this division is the repeal of the
forced air pit incinerators rule and associated references at OAR 340-
264-0190. Forced air pit and air curtain incinerators are regulated
under the EPA's rules for Commercial/Industrial Solid Waste
Incinerators and are required to have title V operating permits. The
ODEQ has therefore determined that such units should no longer be
regulated under Oregon's rules for open burning. We propose to approve
the repeal as consistent with the CAA.

W. Division 268: Emission Reduction Credits

    In Division 268, Oregon submitted revisions to OAR<PHONE_NUMBER> to
clarify when reductions in criteria pollutant emissions that are also
hazardous air pollutant emissions are creditable. Emissions reductions
required to meet federal NESHAP standards in 40 CFR part 61 or 63 are
not creditable as emission reduction credits for purposes of Major NSR
in nonattainment or reattainment areas in Oregon. However, criteria
pollutant reductions that are in excess of, or incidental to, the
required hazardous air pollutant reductions can potentially earn
credits--as long as all conditions are met. Oregon also lowered the
threshold for banking credits in the Klamath Falls and Lakeview areas
from ten tons to one ton--to encourage trading activity. Finally,
Oregon specified when such credits are considered used up, and when
they expire. The revisions are consistent with the CAA and the EPA's
implementing regulations and we propose to approve them.

X. Source Sampling Manual and Continuous Monitoring Manual

    Oregon submitted the ODEQ Source Sampling Manual, Volumes I and II,
and the ODEQ Continuous Monitoring Manual, revised as of April 2015.
These manuals are key reference materials used in OAR Divisions 200
through 268. As noted above, Oregon added references to the April 2015
edition of both manuals in Division 200. Oregon incorporates changes to
testing and monitoring requirements--spelled out in these manuals--into
the permits of source owners and operators, as necessary.
    The Source Sampling Manual addresses air emissions source sampling
practices and procedures for projects in Oregon. Volume I of this
manual was updated to account for changes to the EPA methods for
measuring fine particulate matter, and other new and modernized
methods. Volume II of this manual was revised to remove the annual
reporting requirements for small gasoline dispensing facilities
(throughput of less than 10,000 gallons of gasoline per month). The
state determined that the annual reporting requirement was not needed
to measure compliance because the ODEQ collected one-time throughput
data from these facilities and is authorized to request additional
information if needed.
    Oregon extensively revised the Continuous Monitoring Manual,
originally published in 1992. The manual includes federal monitoring
requirements for the NSPS, NESHAP, and Acid Rain programs and was
updated primarily to address continuous monitoring systems of all
types. The changes affect commercial operations that are required to
install and operate continuous monitoring systems, contractors that
audit or certify the systems, and vendors that sell or design the
systems. We reviewed the revised manuals, and we propose to approve the
changes as consistent with 40 CFR part 51, subpart M, and part 60,
subparts A and B, for purposes of the emission limits and requirements
approved into the SIP.

IV. Proposed Action

    We propose to approve, and incorporate by reference, specific rule
revisions submitted by Oregon on May 21, 2015. As documented in the
submission, we propose to approve certain of the state rule revisions
to also apply in Lane County, because the Oregon EQC has determined
those rule to be more stringent that the

corresponding local rules. We also propose to approve, but not
incorporate by reference, specific provisions that provide the ODEQ
with authority needed for SIP approval.
    In addition, we propose to remove repealed rules from Oregon's
federally-approved SIP, as requested by the state, because they are
obsolete or redundant. Finally, we are not approving certain rules that
are inconsistent with CAA requirements, or that are inappropriate for
SIP approval, because they are not related to the criteria pollutants
regulated under title I of the CAA, not essential for meeting and
maintaining the NAAQS, or not related to the requirements for SIPs
under section 110 of the CAA.

A. Rules Approved and Incorporated by Reference

    We propose to approve into the Oregon SIP, and incorporate by
reference at 40 CFR part 52, subpart MM, the submitted revisions to
Chapter 340 of the OAR listed below, state effective April 16, 2015:
     Division 200--General Air Pollution Procedures and
Definitions (0010, 0020, 0025, 0030, 0035);
     Division 202--Ambient Air Quality Standards and PSD
Increments (0010, 0020, 0050, 0070, 0100, 0130, 0200, 0210, 0220,
0225);
     Division 204--Designation of Air Quality Areas (0010,
0020, 0030, 0040, 0050, 0060, 0070, 0080, 0090, 0300, 0310, 0320);
     Division 206--Air Pollution Emergencies (0010, 0020, 0030,
0040, 0050, 0060, 0070, 8010, 8020, 8030, 8040);
     Division 208--Visible Emissions and Nuisance Requirements
(0005, 0010, 0110, 0210);
     Division 209--Public Participation (0010, 0020, 0030,
0040, 0050, 0060, 0070, 0080);
     Division 210--Stationary Source Notification Requirements
(0010, 0020, 0100, 0110, 0120, 0205, 0215, 0225, 0230, 0240, 0250);
     Division 212--Stationary Source Testing and Monitoring
(0005, 0010, 0110, 0120, 0130, 0140, 0150);
     Division 214--Stationary Source Reporting Requirements
(0005, 0010, 0100, 0110, 0114, 0130, 0200, 0210, 0220, 0300--except
introductory sentence related to NSPS and NESHAPs, 0310, 0320, 0330,
0340, 0350);
     Division 216--Air Contaminant Discharge Permits (0010,
0020, 0025, 0030, 0040, 0052, 0054, 0060, 0062, 0064, 0066, 0068, 0070,
0082, 0084, 0090, 0094, 8010, 8020);
     Division 222--Stationary Source Plant Site Emission Limits
(0010, 0020, 0030, 0035, 0040, 0041, 0042, 0046, 0048, 0051, 0055,
0080, 0090);
     Division 224--New Source Review (0010, 0020, 0025, 0030,
0034, 0038, 0040, 0045, 0050, 0055, 0060, 0070, 0245, 0250, 0255, 0260,
0270, 0500, 0510--except paragraph (3), 0520, 0530, 0540);
     Division 225--Air Quality Analysis Requirements (0010,
0020, 0030, 0040, 0045, 0050, 0060, 0070);
     Division 226--General Emissions Standards (0005, 0010,
0100, 0110, 0120, 0130, 0140, 0210, 0310, 0320, 0400, 8010);
     Division 228--Requirements for Fuel Burning Equipment and
Fuel Sulfur Content (0010, 0020, 0100, 0110, 0120, 0130, 0200, 0210);
     Division 232--Emission Standards for VOC Point Sources
(0010, 0020, 0030, 0040, 0050, 0060, 0080, 0085, 0090, 0100, 0110,
0120, 0130, 0140, 0150, 0160, 0170, 0180, 0190, 0200, 0210, 0220,
0230);
     Division 234--Emission Standards for Wood Products
Industries (0005, 0010--except (8) and (10), 0100, 0140, 0200, 0210--
except (1), 0220--except (2), 0240--except (1), 0250--except (1) and
(2), 0270, 0500, 0510, 0520, 0530, 0540);
     Division 236--Emission Standards for Specific Industries
(0005, 0010, 0400, 0410, 0420, 0440, 8010);
     Division 240--Rules for Areas with Unique Air Quality
Needs (0010, 0020, 0030, 0050, 0100, 0110, 0120, 0130, 0140, 0150,
0160, 0180, 0190, 0210, 0220, 0250, 0300, 0320, 0330, 0340, 0350, 0360,
0400, 0410, 0420, 0430, 0440, 0510, 0550, 0560, 0610);
     Division 242--Rules Applicable to the Portland Area (0400,
0410, 0420, 0430, 0440, 0600, 0610, 0620, 0630);
     Division 262--Heat Smart Program for Residential
Woodstoves and Other Solid Fuel Heating Devices (0450);
     Division 264--Rules for Open Burning (0010, 0020, 0030,
0040, 0050, 0060, 0070, 0075, 0078, 0080, 0100, 0110, 0120, 0130, 0140,
0150, 0160, 0170, 0175, 0180); and
     Division 268--Emission Reduction Credits (0010, 0020,
0030).
Rules Also Approved for Lane County
     Division 200--General Air Pollution Procedures and
Definitions (0020);
     Division 202--Ambient Air Quality Standards and PSD
Increments (0050);
     Division 204--Designation of Air Quality Areas (0300,
0310, 0320);
     Division 208--Visible Emissions and Nuisance Requirements
(0110, 0210);
     Division 214--Stationary Source Reporting Requirements
(0114) (5);
     Division 216--Air Contaminant Discharge Permits (0040,
8010);
     Division 222--Stationary Source Plant Site Emission Limits
(0090);
     Division 224 -New Source Review (0030, 0530);
     Division 225--Air Quality Analysis Requirements (0010,
0020, 0030, 0040, 0045, 0050, 0060, 0070);
     Division 226--General Emissions Standards (0210); and
     Division 228--Requirements for Fuel Burning Equipment and
Fuel Sulfur Content (0210).

B. Rules Approved but Not Incorporated by Reference

    We propose to approve, but not incorporate by reference, the
following provisions:
     ODEQ Source Sampling Manual, Volumes I and II, April 2015
(for purposes of the limits approved into the SIP);
     ODEQ Continuous Emissions Monitoring Manual, April 2015
(for purposes of the limits approved into the SIP);
     ODEQ-LRAPA Stringency Analysis and Directive, Attachment
B; and
     Division 200--General Air Pollution Procedures and
Definitions (0100, 0110, 0120).

C. Rules Removed

    We propose to remove the following sections from the Oregon SIP
because they have been repealed, replaced by rules noted in paragraph A
above, or the state has asked that they be removed:
     Division 208--Visible Emissions and Fugitive Emissions
Requirements (0100, 0200);
     Division 212--Compliance Assurance Monitoring (0200, 0210,
0220, 0230, 0240, 0250, 0260, 0270, 0280);
     Division 214--Stationary Source Reporting Requirements
(0360);
     Division 222--Stationary Source Plant Site Emissions
Limits (0043, 0045, 0070);
     Division 224--New Source Review (0080, 0100);
     Division 225--Air Quality Analysis Requirements (0090);
     Division 226--General Emission Standards (0200);
     Division 228--Requirements for Fuel Burning Equipment and
Fuel Sulfur Content (0400, 0410, 0420, 0430, 0440, 0450, 0460, 0470,
0480, 0490, 0500, 0510, 0520, 0530);
     Division 234--Emission Standards for Wood Products
Industries (0300, 0310, 0320, 0330, 0340, 0350, 0360, 0400, 0410, 0420,
0430);
     Division 236--Emission Standards for Specific Industries
(0100, 0110,

0120, 0130, 0140, 0150, 0200, 0210, 0220, 0230, 0430);
     Division 240--Rules for Areas with Unique Air Quality
Needs (0170, 0230, 0310);
     Division 242--Rules Applicable to the Portland Areas
(0700, 0710, 0720, 0730, 0740, 0750, 0760, 0770, 0780, 0790); and
     Division 264--Rules for Open Burning (0190).

D. Rules Not Approved

    For the reasons stated above, we are not approving the following
revised provisions submitted by Oregon because they are inconsistent
with CAA requirements, or because they are inappropriate for SIP
approval under section 110, title I of the CAA:
     Division 200--General Air Pollution Procedures and
Definitions (0050) (compliance schedules);
     Division 214--Stationary Source Reporting Requirements
(0300 introductory sentence related to NSPS and NESHAPs);
     Division 222--Stationary Source Plant Site Emission Limits
(0060) (hazardous air pollutants);
     Division 224--New Source Review (0510(3))
(PM2.5 inter-pollutant offset ratios); and
     Division 234--Emission Standards for Wood Products
Industries (0010(8) and (10), 0210(1), 0220(2), 0240(1), 0250 (1) and
(2)) (total reduced sulfur and odor).

V. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, we are proposing to include in a final rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, we are proposing to incorporate by
reference the provisions described above in Section IV. Proposed
Action. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these documents
generally available electronically through http://www.regulations.gov
and/or in hard copy at the appropriate EPA office (see the ADDRESSES
section of this preamble for more information).

VI. Oregon Notice Provision

    Oregon Revised Statute 468.126 prohibits the ODEQ from imposing a
penalty for violation of an air, water or solid waste permit unless the
source has been provided five days' advanced written notice of the
violation and has not come into compliance or submitted a compliance
schedule within that five-day period. By its terms, the statute does
not apply to Oregon's title V program or to any program if application
of the notice provision would disqualify the program from federal
delegation. Oregon has previously confirmed that, because application
of the notice provision would preclude EPA approval of the Oregon SIP,
no advance notice is required for violation of SIP requirements.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely approves 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 this action does not involve technical standards; and
     does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated
that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the
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, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: March 9, 2017.
Michelle L. Pirzadeh,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2017-05463 Filed 3-21-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P