[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 168 (Tuesday, August 31, 2004)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 53007-53011]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-19818]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[WA-04-002; FRL-7807-1]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Washington

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: In this action EPA is approving numerous revisions to the 
State of Washington Implementation Plan. The Director of the Washington 
State Department of Ecology (Ecology) submitted two requests to EPA 
dated September 24, 2001 and February 9, 2004 to revise certain 
sections of the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency's (PS Clean Air) 
regulations. The revisions were submitted in accordance with the 
requirements of section 110 of the Clean Air Act (hereinafter, the 
Act). EPA is not approving in this rulemaking a number of submitted 
rule provisions which are inappropriate for EPA approval and is taking 
no action on a number of other provisions that are unrelated to the 
purposes of the State implementation plan (SIP).
    EPA is also approving certain source-specific SIP revisions 
relating to Saint Gobain Containers and LaFarge North America.

DATES: This final rule is effective on September 30, 2004.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID 
No. WA-04-002. Some information is not publicly available (i.e., CBI or 
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute). Publicly 
available docket materials are available in hard copy at the EPA Region 
10, Office of Air, Waste, and Toxics (AWT-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, 
Seattle, Washington 98101. This Docket facility is open from 8:30-4, 
Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The Docket telephone 
number is (206) 553-4273.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Roylene A. Cunningham, EPA Region 10, 
Office of Air, Waste and Toxics (AWT-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, 
Washington 98101, (206) 553-0513, or email address: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background
II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Geographic Scope of SIP Approval
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background

    On Friday April 2, 2004, EPA solicited public comment on a proposal 
to approve for inclusion in the Washington SIP numerous revisions to 
the PS Clean Air regulations. EPA also proposed not to approve into the 
SIP a number of PS Clean Air regulations which EPA believes are 
inappropriate for EPA approval and to take no action on a number of 
other provisions that are unrelated to the purposes of the SIP. EPA 
also proposed to approve certain source-specific SIP revisions relating 
to Saint Gobain Containers and LaFarge North America. A detailed 
description of our action was published in the Federal Register on 
April 2, 2004. The reader is referred to the proposed rulemaking (69 FR 
17368, April 2, 2004) for details.

II. Response to Comments

    EPA provided a 30-day review and comment period and solicited 
comments on our April 2, 2004 proposal. EPA received written comments 
from two commenters, which raised the same two issues. The following is 
a summary of the issues raised by the commenters, along with EPA's 
response to those comments. Copies of the written comments received by 
EPA are in the docket.
    Comment: EPA erred in three respects in denying PS Clean Air's 
request to remove PS Clean Air Reg. I, Section 9.11, from the SIP. 
First, in doing so, EPA relied on the fact that Section 9.11 is 
referred to by cross-reference in Regulation I, Subsection 6.03(a)(8) 
(adopted July 12, 2001). That version of Subsection 6.03(a)(8), 
however, is not currently contained in the SIP and is not the subject 
of this proposed rulemaking. The version of Section 6.03 that is 
currently contained in the SIP does not cross-reference Section 9.11 in 
any way. Thus, the perceived relationship between the 2001 version of 
Section 6.03 and the 1983 version of Section 9.11 is not relevant to 
this rulemaking. EPA should not base its current proposed denial of PS 
Clean Air's request to remove Section 9.11 from the SIP on an 
anticipated future action that is not the subject of this rulemaking. 
Only when EPA proposes to take action on a version of Section 6.03 that 
is related in some way to Section 9.11, will EPA's concern be relevant.
    Second, even if the SIP contained the 2001 version of Section 6.03, 
EPA's rationale would still be insufficient. There is no legal 
principle requiring that all laws in any way related to a SIP to be 
included in the SIP itself. For example, does a SIP that requires that 
permit applications be sealed by a licensed professional engineer and 
refers to the state's engineering licensure statute have to contain 
that statute? See, e.g., 30 TAC 116.110 (6/17/98) (approved as part of 
the Texas SIP 67 FR 58709 (September 18, 2002)). This rule requires 
certain permit applications to be submitted under the seal of a 
licensed professional engineer, and refers to the Texas Engineering 
Practice Act. As with the Texas SIP, the answer to both of these 
questions is no, because neither the Act nor EPA's regulations require 
such inclusion, and their inclusion is not otherwise necessary to 
implement the SIP.
    Finally, there is no practical problem that would arise from 
Section 9.11 existing outside of the SIP. Whether or not a source has 
been previously cited under Section 9.11 for causing air

[[Page 53008]]

pollution is a mere question of fact to be determined at the time a 
project potentially subject to the Notice of Construction program under 
Section 6.03 (2001) is proposed. If the source has been cited, it 
cannot take advantage of the exemptions in Subsections 6.03(b) and (c) 
(2001) from the Notice of Construction requirement. If it has not been 
cited, then Subsection 6.03(a)(8) (2001) does not bar use of the 
exemptions. Thus, it simply makes no difference as a practical matter 
whether or not Section 9.11 itself is in the SIP itself or instead 
exists in law external to the SIP.
    Response: Because Subsection 6.03(a)(8) (adopted July 12, 2001), 
which cross-references Section 9.11, is not currently approved as part 
of the SIP, EPA is granting PS Clean Air's request to remove Section 
9.11 from the SIP. As discussed in the proposal, WAC 173-400-040(5), 
(Emissions detrimental to persons or property), is very similar to the 
provisions of PS Clean Air Regulation I, Section 9.11, and is currently 
part of the Washington SIP. Because WAC 173-400-040(5) applies 
statewide, removing Section 9.11 from the SIP will not decrease the 
stringency of the Washington SIP. See 69 FR at 17371.
    Comment: PS Clean Air's Regulation I, Subsection 12.03(b) (adopted 
April 9, 1998) requires that a source that is required to have a 
continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS) must recover valid hourly 
monitoring data for at least 95% of the hours that the equipment 
(required to be monitored) is operated during each month. EPA proposed 
not to approve as part of the SIP Subsection 12.03(b)(1), which states 
that this requirement does not include:
    Periods of monitoring system downtime, provided that the owner or 
operator demonstrates to the Control Officer that the downtime was not 
a result of inadequate design, operation, or maintenance, or any other 
reasonably preventable condition, and any necessary repairs to the 
monitoring system are conducted in a timely manner.
    EPA erred in concluding that EPA cannot approve Subsection 
12.03(b)(1) into the SIP. EPA reasoned that Subsection 12.03(b)(1) is 
in essence an enforcement discretion provision and does not make clear 
that the Control Officer's determination that compliance with the data 
recovery requirements should be excused is not binding on EPA or 
citizens. EPA's reliance on EPA's guidance document regarding State 
excess emission provisions \1\ is not appropriate because Subsection 
12.03(b)(1) is not an ``enforcement discretion'' provision and does not 
``excuse'' an ``excess emission.'' Instead, Subsection 12.03(b)(1) 
defines a source's substantive legal obligation to recover such data 
from a required CEMS--providing an affirmative defense, under specified 
circumstances, to the failure to recover CEMS data as otherwise 
required under Subsection 12.03(b). Where a source is able to make the 
required demonstration, the Control Officer has no discretion to 
consider the down time to be a violation of the data recovery 
requirements of Subsection 12.03(b). It is simply not a violation. 
Hence, the provision fits squarely within the permissible ``affirmative 
defense'' category (rather than the ``enforcement discretion'' 
category) of the guidance relied on by EPA in proposing to not approve 
this provision for inclusion in the SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Memorandum from Steven A. Herman, Assistant Administrator 
for Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring, and Robert Perciasepe, 
Assistant Administrator for Air AND Radiation, to the Regional 
Administrators, entitled ``State Implementation Plans: Policy 
Regarding Excess Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup, and 
Shutdown,'' p. 3 (September 20, 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Subsection 12.03(b)(1) applies only to CEMS required by PS Clean 
Air regulations, orders and permits, and does not relieve anyone of the 
responsibility of complying with monitoring requirements under 40 CFR 
part 60, 61, or 63. See PS Clean Air, Regulation I, Section 12.01. In 
addition, as EPA notes, the criteria in Subsection 12.03(b)(1) for 
determining whether less than 95% data recovery is permissible are 
objective. 69 FR at 17370. CEMS, no matter how diligently maintained, 
sustain malfunction and calibration problems. Section 12.03 is more 
stringent than many analogous data recovery rules in 40 CFR parts 60 
and 63. Finally, Subsection 12.03(b)(1) is more stringent than 
Washington's SIP-approved data recovery rule, WAC 173-400-105(h).
    Response: Since publication of the proposal, PS Clean Air has 
submitted a letter to EPA stating that the intent of the language 
``demonstrates to the Control Officer'' in Subsection 12.03(b)(1) was 
to make clear that the decision regarding whether a facility meets the 
requirements for the exception to monitoring is not a unilateral 
decision on the part of the facility. PS Clean Air further stated that 
it never intended that PS Clean Air's decision regarding whether a 
facility meets the requirements for the exception to monitoring would 
be conclusive or binding on EPA or on a federal court in a citizen suit 
enforcement action. Based on PS Clean Air's explanation regarding the 
intent of the ``to the Control Officer'' language, EPA is approving 
Subsection 12.03(b)(1) into the SIP with the understanding that the 
Control Officer's determination is not binding on EPA or citizens in an 
enforcement action.\2\ In short, EPA is approving as part of the SIP 
all of Section 12.03, Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems, adopted 
April 9, 1998, except for Subsection 12.03(b)(2). As discussed in the 
proposal, EPA believes that Subsection 12.03(b)(2), if approved into 
the SIP, would authorize PS Clean Air to modify standards or 
requirements relied on to attain and maintain the NAAQS by granting an 
exemption or alternative to such requirements without going through a 
SIP revision and, as such, is not approvable. See 69 FR at 17370.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ To avoid any ambiguity regarding the issue in the future, PS 
Clean Air has advised EPA that it will make clarifying changes to 
Subsection 12.03(b)(1) within the next six months to remove the 
language ``to the Control Officer.'' EPA supports this clarifying 
change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Final Action

    EPA is taking final action to approve as part of the Washington SIP 
the following new and revised sections of the PS Clean Air regulations 
submitted by Ecology on September 24, 2001 and February 9, 2004:
    Regulation I, Sections 1.01, Policy; 1.03, Name of Agency; 1.05, 
Short Title, adopted September 9, 1999; 3.04, Reasonably Available 
Control Technology [except (e)], adopted March 11, 1999; 3.06 Credible 
Evidence, adopted October 8, 1998; 5.03, Registration Required [except 
(a)(5)], adopted July 8, 1999; 5.05 General Reporting Requirements for 
Registration, adopted September 10, 1998; 7.09, General Reporting 
Requirements for Operating Permits, adopted September 10, 1998; 8.04, 
General Conditions for Outdoor Burning; 8.05, Agricultural Burning; 
8.09, Description of King County No-Burn Area; 8.10, Description of 
Pierce County No-Burn Area; and 8.11, Description of Snohomish County 
No-Burn Area, adopted November 9, 2000; and 8.12, Description of Kitsap 
County No-Burn Area, adopted October 24, 2002; 9.03, Emission of Air 
Contaminant: Visual Standard [except (e)], adopted March 11, 1999; 
9.04, Opacity Standards for Equipment with Continuous Opacity 
Monitoring Systems [except (d)(2) and (f)], adopted April 9, 1998; 
9.09, Particulate Matter Emission Standards, adopted April 9,

[[Page 53009]]

1998; 9.15, Fugitive Dust Control Measures, adopted March 11, 1999; 
9.16, Spray-Coating Operations, adopted July 12, 2001; 12.01, 
Applicability and 12.03, Continuous Emission Monitoring Systems [except 
(b)(2)], adopted April 9, 1998; 13.01, Policy and Purpose, adopted 
September 9, 1999; and 13.02, Definitions, adopted October 8, 1998.
    Regulation II, Sections 1.01, Purpose; 1.02, Policy; 1.03, Short 
Title; and 1.05, Special Definitions, adopted September 9, 1999; 2.01, 
Definitions, adopted July 8, 1999; 2.07, Gasoline Stations, adopted 
December 9, 1999; 2.08, Gasoline Transport Tanks, adopted July 8, 1999; 
and 3.02, Volatile Organic Compound Storage Tanks, July 8, 1999.
    EPA is also approving the following new and revised PS Clean Air 
regulations, but is not incorporating them by reference because they 
relate to PS Clean Air's enforcement authority or administrative 
procedures:
    Regulation I, Sections 3.01, Duties and Powers of the Control 
Officer, adopted September 9, 1999; 3.05, Investigations by the Control 
Officer, adopted February 10, 1994; 3.07, Compliance Tests, adopted 
February 9, 1995; 3.09, Violations--Notice, adopted August 8, 1991; 
3.11, Civil Penalties, adopted September 26, 2002; 3.13, Criminal 
Penalties, adopted August 8, 1991; 3.15, Additional Enforcement, 
adopted August 8, 1991; 3.17, Appeal of Orders, adopted October 8, 
1998; 3.19, Confidential Information, adopted August 8, 1991; and 3.21, 
Separability, adopted August 8, 1991. EPA is not incorporating these 
regulations by reference as part of the Washington SIP to avoid 
potential conflict with EPA's independent authorities.
    EPA is not approving in this rulemaking a number of submitted rule 
provisions which are inappropriate for EPA approval and is taking no 
action on a number of other provisions that are unrelated to the 
purposes of the implementation plan. This includes removing such 
provisions from the current incorporation by reference where they have 
been previously incorporated:
    Regulation I, Sections 3.01, Duties and Powers of the Control 
Officer; 3.05, Investigations by the Control Officer; 3.07, Compliance 
Tests; 3.09, Violations--Notice; 3.11, Civil Penalties; 3.13, Criminal 
Penalties; 3.15, Additional Enforcement; 3.17, Appeal of Orders; 3.19, 
Confidential Information; and 3.21, Separability; 3.23, Alternate Means 
of Compliance; 5.07, Registration Fees; 8.02, Outdoor Fires--Prohibited 
Types; 8.03, Outdoor Fires--Prohibited Areas; 9.03(e), Emission of Air 
Contaminant: Visual Standard; 9.09(c), Particulate Matter Emission 
Standards; 9.11, Emission of Air Contaminant: Detriment to Person or 
Property; 9.13, Emission of Air Contaminant: Concealment and Masking 
Restricted; 11.01, Ambient Air Quality Standards; 11.02, Ambient Air 
Monitoring; 12.02, Continuous Emission Monitoring Requirements; and 
12.04, Recordkeeping and Report Requirements; Regulation II, Sections 
2.04, Volatile Organic Compound Storage Tanks; and 3.07, Petroleum 
Solvent Dry Cleaning Systems; and Regulation III.
    EPA is taking no action on Article 1, Section 1.07, Definitions, as 
this section has been revised since this SIP submission was submitted 
to EPA. PS Clean Air will be submitting the revisions to Section 1.07 
to EPA in a separate action. EPA will therefore be taking action on 
Section 1.07 in a separate rulemaking.
    Finally, EPA is approving the following Notice of Construction 
(NOC) Order of Approvals as source-specific SIP revisions: Holnam, 
Inc., Ideal Division (now known as LaFarge North America, Inc.) NOC 
Order of Approval No. 5183, effective date February 9, 1994; and Saint-
Gobain Containers LLC, NOC Order of Approval No. 8244, effective date 
September 30, 2004.

IV. Geographic Scope of SIP Approval

    This SIP approval does not extend to sources or activities located 
in Indian Country, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151. Consistent with 
previous Federal program approvals or delegations, EPA will continue to 
implement the Act in Indian Country in Washington because PS Clean Air 
did not adequately demonstrate authority over sources and activities 
located within the exterior boundaries of Indian reservations and other 
areas of Indian Country. The one exception is within the exterior 
boundaries of the Puyallup Indian Reservation, also known as the 1873 
Survey Area. Under the Puyallup Tribe of Indians Settlement Act of 
1989, 25 U.S.C. 1773, Congress explicitly provided State and local 
agencies in Washington authority over activities on non-trust lands 
within the 1873 Survey Area. Therefore, EPA's SIP approval applies to 
sources and activities on non-trust lands within the 1873 Survey Area.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action 
merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under State law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
State law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism 
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the 
States, on the relationship between the national government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a State rule 
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or 
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean 
Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically 
significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements 
of section 12(d) of the

[[Page 53010]]

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an information collection 
burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 1, 2004. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial 
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial 
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such 
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings 
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 
Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, 
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: August 19, 2004.
Julie Hagensen,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.

0
Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is 
amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart WW--Washington

0
2. Section 52.2470 is amended by adding paragraph (c)(84) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.2470  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *
    (84) On September 24, 2001 and February 9, 2004, the Washington 
State Department of Ecology submitted amendments to Puget Sound Clean 
Air Agency's regulations (Regulation I, II, and III) as revisions to 
the Washington State implementation plan.
    (i) Incorporation by reference.
    (A) The following new and revised sections of Puget Sound Clean Air 
Agency's Regulations: Regulation I, Sections 1.01, Policy; 1.03, Name 
of Agency; and 1.05, Short Title, adopted September 9, 1999; 3.04, 
Reasonably Available Control Technology [except (e)], adopted March 11, 
1999; 3.06 Credible Evidence, adopted October 8, 1998; 5.03, 
Registration Required [except (a)(5)], adopted July 8, 1999; 5.05 
General Reporting Requirements for Registration, adopted September 10, 
1998; 7.09, General Reporting Requirements for Operating Permits, 
adopted September 10, 1998; 8.04, General Conditions for Outdoor 
Burning; 8.05, Agricultural Burning; 8.09, Description of King County 
No-Burn Area; 8.10, Description of Pierce County No-Burn Area; and 
8.11, Description of Snohomish County No-Burn Area, adopted November 9, 
2000; and 8.12, Description of Kitsap County No-Burn Area, adopted 
October 24, 2002; 9.03, Emission of Air Contaminant: Visual Standard 
[except (e)], adopted March 11, 1999; 9.04, Opacity Standards for 
Equipment with Continuous Opacity Monitoring Systems [except (d)(2) and 
(f)], adopted April 9, 1998; 9.09, Particulate Matter Emission 
Standards, adopted April 9, 1998; 9.15, Fugitive Dust Control Measures, 
adopted March 11, 1999; 9.16, Spray-Coating Operations, adopted July 
12, 2001; 12.01, Applicability and 12.03, Continuous Emission 
Monitoring Systems [except (b)(2)], adopted April 9, 1998; 13.01, 
Policy and Purpose, adopted September 9, 1999; and 13.02, Definitions, 
adopted October 8, 1998; Regulation II, Sections 1.01, Purpose; 1.02, 
Policy; 1.03, Short Title; and 1.05, Special Definitions, adopted 
September 9, 1999; 2.01, Definitions, adopted July 8, 1999; 2.07, 
Gasoline Stations, adopted December 9, 1999; 2.08, Gasoline Transport 
Tanks, adopted July 8, 1999; and 3.02, Volatile Organic Compound 
Storage Tanks, adopted July 8, 1999.
    (B) The following Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Notice of 
Construction (NOC) Order of Approvals: Holnam, Inc., Ideal Division 
(now known as LaFarge North America, Inc.) NOC Order of Approval No. 
5183, effective date February 9, 1994; and Saint-Gobain Containers LLC, 
NOC Order of Approval No. 8244, effective date September 30, 2004.
    (C) Remove the following provisions from the current incorporation 
by reference: Regulation I, Sections 3.01, Duties and Powers of the 
Control Officer; 3.05, Investigations by the Control Officer; 3.07, 
Compliance Tests; 3.09, Violations--Notice; 3.11, Civil Penalties; 
3.13, Criminal Penalties; 3.15, Additional Enforcement; 3.17, Appeal of 
Orders; 3.19, Confidential Information; 3.21, Separability; 3.23, 
Alternate Means of Compliance; 5.07, Registration Fees; 8.02, Outdoor 
Fires-Prohibited Types; 8.03, Outdoor Fires-Prohibited Areas; 9.03(e), 
Emission of Air Contaminant: Visual Standard; 9.09(c), Particulate 
Matter Emission Standards; 9.11, Emission of Air Contaminant: Detriment 
to Person or Property; 9.13, Emission of Air Contaminant: Concealment 
and Masking Restricted; 11.01, Ambient Air Quality Standards; 11.02, 
Ambient Air Monitoring; 12.02, Continuous Emission Monitoring 
Requirements; and 12.04, Recordkeeping and Report Requirements; 
Regulation II, Sections 2.04, Volatile Organic Compound Storage Tanks; 
and 3.07, Petroleum Solvent Dry Cleaning Systems; and Regulation III.
    (ii) Additional Material.
    (A) The following sections of Puget Sound Clean Air Agency 
Regulation I: Sections 3.01, Duties and Powers of the Control Officer, 
adopted September 9, 1999; 3.05, Investigations by the Control Officer, 
adopted February 10, 1994; 3.07, Compliance Tests, adopted February 9, 
1995; 3.09, Violations--Notice, adopted August 8, 1991; 3.11, Civil 
Penalties, adopted September 26, 2002; 3.13, Criminal Penalties, 
adopted August 8, 1991; 3.15, Additional Enforcement, adopted August 8, 
1991; 3.17, Appeal of Orders, adopted October 8, 1998; 3.19, 
Confidential Information, adopted August 8, 1991; and 3.21, 
Separability, adopted August 8, 1991.

0
3. Section 3.PS of Sec.  52.2479 is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  52.2479  Contents of the federally approved, State submitted 
implementation plan.

* * * * *

[[Page 53011]]

Washington State Implementation Plan for Air Quality; State and Local 
Requirements

Table of Contents

* * * * *
3.PS--Puget Sound Clean Air Agency
3.PS.1--Regulation I

Article 1: Policy, Short Title, and Definitions

Section 1.01 Policy [9/9/99]
Section 1.03 Name of Agency [9/9/99]
Section 1.05 Short Title [9/9/99]
Section 1.07 Definitions [4/14/94]

Article 3: General Provisions

Section 3.04 Reasonably Available Control Technology, except (e) [3/
11/99]
Section 3.06 Credible Evidence [10/8/98]

Article 5: Registration

Section 5.02 Applicability and Purpose of the Registration Program 
[9/12/96]
Section 5.03 Registration Required, except (a)(5) [7/8/99]
Section 5.05 General Reporting Requirements for Registration [9/10/
98]

Article 6: New Source Review

Section 6.03 Notice of Construction [9/12/96]
Section 6.04 Notice of Construction Review Fees [9/11/97]
Section 6.06 Public Notice [4/14/94]
Section 6.07 Order of Approval--Order to Prevent Construction [4/14/
94]
Section 6.08 Emission Reduction Credit Banking [11/19/92]
Section 6.09 Notice of Completion [4/14/94]
Section 6.10 Work Done without an Approval [9/11/97]

Article 7: Operating Permits

Section 7.09 General Reporting Requirements for Operating Permits 
[9/10/98]

Article 8: Outdoor Fires

Section 8.04 General Conditions for Outdoor Burning [11/9/00]
Section 8.05 Agricultural Burning [11/9/00]
Section 8.06 Outdoor Burning Ozone Contingency Measure [12/19/02]
Section 8.09 Description of King County No-Burn Area [11/9/00]
Section 8.10 Description of Pierce County No-Burn Area [11/9/00]
Section 8.11 Description of Snohomish County No-Burn Area [11/9/00]
Section 8.12 Description of Kitsap County No-Burn Area [10/24/02]

Article 9: Emission Standards

Section 9.03 Emission of Air Contaminant: Visual Standard, except 
(e) [3/11/99]
Section 9.04 Opacity Standards for Equipment With Continuous Opacity 
Monitoring Systems, except (d)(2) and (f) [4/9/98]
Section 9.05 Refuse Burning [12/9/93]
Section 9.07 Sulfur Dioxide Emission Standard [4/14/94]
Section 9.08 Fuel Oil Standards [4/14/94]
Section 9.09 Particulate Matter Emission Standards [4/9/98]
Section 9.15 Fugitive Dust Control Measures [3/11/99]
Section 9.16 Spray-Coating Operations [7/12/01]
Section 9.20 Maintenance of Equipment [6/9/88]

Article 12: Standards of Performance for Continuous Emission Monitoring 
Systems

Section 12.01 Applicability [4/9/98]
Section 12.03 Continuous Emission Monitoring System, except (b)(2) 
[4/9/98]

Article 13: Solid Fuel Burning Device Standards

Section 13.01 Policy and Purpose [9/9/99]
Section 13.02 Definitions [10/8/98]
Section 13.03 Opacity Standards [10/11/90]
Section 13.04 Prohibited Fuel Types [9/26/91]
Section 13.05 Curtailment [9/26/91]
Section 13.07 Contingency [12/8/94]
3.PS.2--Regulation II

Article 1: Purpose, Policy, Short Title, and Definitions

Section 1.01 Purpose [9/9/99]
Section 1.02 Policy [9/9/99]
Section 1.03 Short Title [9/9/99]
Section 1.04 General Definitions [12/11/80]
Section 1.05 Special Definitions [9/9/99]

Article 2: Gasoline Marketing Emission Standards

Section 2.01 Definitions [7/8/99]
Section 2.03 Petroleum Refineries [6/13/91]
Section 2.05 Gasoline Loading Terminals [12/9/93]
Section 2.06 Bulk Gasoline Plants [6/13/91]
Section 2.07 Gasoline Stations [12/9/99]
Section 2.08 Gasoline Transport Tanks [7/8/99]
Section 2.09 Oxygenated Gasoline Carbon Monoxide Contingency Measure 
and Fee Schedule [12/19/02]
Section 2.10 Gasoline Station Ozone Contingency Measure [12/19/02]

Article 3: Miscellaneous Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards

Section 3.01 Cutback Asphalt Paving [6/13/91]
Section 3.02 Volatile Organic Compound Storage Tanks [7/8/99]
Section 3.03 Can and Paper Coating Operations [2/10/94]
Section 3.04 Motor Vehicle and Mobile Equipment Coating Operations 
[12/9/93]
Section 3.05 Graphic Arts Systems [12/9/93]
Section 3.08 Polyester, Vinylester, Gelcoat, and Resin Operations 
[12/9/93]
Section 3.09 Aerospace Component Coating Operations [12/9/93]
Section 3.11 Coatings and Ink Manufacturing [4/11/96]
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 04-19818 Filed 8-30-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P