[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 207 (Thursday, October 25, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 65107-65119]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-25978]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 51 and 52

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0062; FRL-9742-8]
RIN 2060-AR30


Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program for 
Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5): 
Amendment to the Definition of ``Regulated NSR Pollutant'' Concerning 
Condensable Particulate Matter

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA is issuing a final rule that revises the definition of 
``regulated NSR pollutant'' contained in two sets of Prevention of 
Significant Deterioration (PSD) regulations and in the EPA's Emission 
Offset Interpretative Ruling. The revision corrects an inadvertent 
error made in 2008 when the EPA issued its rule to implement the New 
Source Review (NSR) program for fine particles with an aerodynamic 
diameter of less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5). 
This revision removes a general requirement in the definition of 
``regulated NSR pollutant'' to include condensable PM when measuring 
one of the emissions-related indicators for particulate matter (PM) 
known as ``particulate matter emissions'' in the context of the PSD and 
NSR regulations. However, the rule preserves the requirement in some 
particular cases to include condensable PM in measurements of 
``particulate matter emissions'' as required by other regulations. In 
addition, measurement of condensable PM continues to be required in all 
cases for two other emissions-related indicators for emissions of PM--
emissions of particles with an aerodynamic diameter of less than or 
equal to 10 micrometers (PM10 emissions) and 
PM2.5 emissions.

DATES: The amendments to 40 CFR parts 51 and 52 are effective December 
24, 2012.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under 
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0062. All documents in the docket are 
listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, 
some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business 
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted 
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is 
not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard 
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either 
electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA 
Docket Center, Public Reading Room, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 
Constitution Avenue, Northwest, Washington, DC 20460. The Public 
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public 
Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air 
Docket is (202) 566-1742.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Dan deRoeck, Air Quality Policy 
Division (C504-03), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research 
Triangle Park, NC, 27711; telephone number (919) 541-5593; fax number 
(919) 541-5509; or email address: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information in this Supplementary 
Information section of this preamble is organized as follows:

I. General Information
    A. Does this action apply to me?
    B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related 
information?
II. Purpose
III. Background
    A. National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for PM
    B. Measuring and Reporting Emissions of PM
    C. NSR Program for PM
IV. What is the final action that the EPA is taking on the 
definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant'' and how does it affect the 
way ``particulate matter emissions'' are measured?
V. What comments did we receive on the proposed amendments to the 
definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant''?
    A. Regulated Indicators of PM
    B. Defining PM Consistent With an Applicable New Source 
Performance Standard (NSPS)
    C. Defining PM To Include Condensable PM in the State 
Implementation Plan (SIP)
    D. Comments Related to Special EPA Policies for Implementing PM 
Requirements Under the NSR Program
    E. Other Comments Unrelated to the Final Rule
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866--Regulatory Planning and Review and 
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132--Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175--Consultation and Coordination With 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045--Protection of Children From 
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211--Actions That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
    J. Executive Order 12898--Federal Actions To Address 
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income 
Populations
    K. Congressional Review Act
    L. Judicial Review
VII. Statutory Authority

I. General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    Entities affected by this rule include sources in all industry 
groups. The majority of sources potentially affected are expected to be 
in the following groups that emit PM:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Industry group                          NAICS \a\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Electric services.................................  221111, 221112,
                                                     221113, 221119,
                                                     221121, 221122.
Petroleum refining................................  32411.
Industrial inorganic chemicals....................  325181, 32512,
                                                     325131, 325182,
                                                     211112, 325998,
                                                     331311, 325188.
Industrial organic chemicals......................  32511, 325132,
                                                     325192, 325188,
                                                     325193, 32512,
                                                     325199.
Miscellaneous chemical products...................  32552, 32592, 32591,
                                                     325182, 32551.

[[Page 65108]]

 
Natural gas liquids...............................  211112.
Natural gas transport.............................  48621, 22121.
Pulp and paper mills..............................  32211, 322121,
                                                     322122, 32213.
Paper mills.......................................  322121, 322122.
Automobile manufacturing..........................  336111, 336112,
                                                     336712, 336211,
                                                     336992, 336322,
                                                     336312, 33633,
                                                     33634, 33635,
                                                     336399, 336212,
                                                     336213.
Pharmaceuticals...................................  325411, 325412,
                                                     325413, 325414.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ North American Industry Classification System.

    Entities affected by this rule also include state, local and tribal 
reviewing authorities responsible for implementing Clean Air Act (CAA 
or Act) stationary source permitting programs.

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

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

II. Purpose

    The purpose of this rulemaking is to revise the definition of 
``regulated NSR pollutant'' to correct an inadvertent error contained 
in the regulations for PSD at 40 CFR 51.166 and 52.21, and in the EPA's 
Emission Offset Interpretative Ruling at 40 CFR part 51 Appendix S. 
This error was introduced in the revised definition of ``regulated NSR 
pollutant'' in the 2008 rule titled, ``Implementation of the New Source 
Review (NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers 
(PM2.5).'' See 73 FR 28321 (May 16, 2008). The revised 
definition required that particulate matter emissions, PM10 
emissions and PM2.5 emissions--representing three separate 
size ranges or indicators of particles--must include ``gaseous 
emissions from a source or activity which condense to form particulate 
matter at ambient temperatures,'' i.e., condensable particulate matter 
(condensable PM). See existing 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(vi), part 51 
Appendix S, and 52.21(b)(50)(vi). This final action removes an 
unintended new requirement on state and local agencies and the 
regulated community that ``particulate matter emissions'' must include 
the condensable PM fraction in all cases. As described in more detail 
in section IV of this preamble, in the 2008 rule we did not intend that 
the term ``particulate matter emissions'' be listed with 
``PM2.5 emissions'' and ``PM10 emissions'' to 
include the condensable PM fraction of primary PM. Historically, for 
``particulate matter emissions'' often only the filterable fraction had 
been considered for NSR purposes, consistent with the applicable New 
Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for PM and the corresponding 
compliance test method.
    This final action ensures that our originally-intended approach for 
regulating the three indicators for emissions of particulate matter 
under the PSD program is codified. Thus, ``PM10 emissions'' 
and ``PM2.5 emissions'' are regulated as criteria pollutants 
(that is, under the portion of the definition of ``regulated NSR 
pollutant'' that refers to ``[a]ny pollutant for which a national 
ambient air quality standard has been promulgated * * *''), and are 
required to include the condensable PM fraction emitted by a source. 
See 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i) and 52.21(b)(50)(i). By contrast, 
``particulate matter emissions'' is regulated as a non-criteria 
pollutant under the portion of the definition that refers to ``[a]ny 
pollutant that is subject to any standard promulgated under section 111 
of the Act,'' where the condensable PM fraction generally is not 
required to be included in measurements to determine compliance with 
standards of performance for PM. See 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(ii) and 
52.21(b)(50)(ii).

III. Background

A. National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for PM

    Sections 108 and 109 of the CAA govern the establishment and 
revision of the NAAQS. Section 108 directs the Administrator to 
identify and list each air pollutant that ``in his judgment, cause[s] 
or contribute[s] to air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated 
to endanger public health and welfare'' and ``the presence of which in 
the ambient air results from numerous or diverse mobile or stationary 
sources'' and to issue air quality criteria for those pollutants that 
are listed. CAA section 108(a)(1)(A), (B). Section 109 directs the 
Administrator to propose and promulgate primary and secondary NAAQS for 
pollutants listed under section 108 to protect public health and 
welfare, respectively. Section 109 also requires review of the NAAQS at 
5-year intervals.
    ``Particulate matter'' is a term used to define an air pollutant 
that consists of a mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets found 
in the ambient air. Particulate matter occurs in many sizes and shapes 
and can be made up of hundreds of different chemicals. As explained 
further in the discussion that follows, the EPA has regulated several 
size ranges of particles under the CAA, referred to as indicators of 
particles, which has required that test methods be developed to measure 
the appropriate size particles that occur in the ambient air or that 
are being emitted directly from a source. In some cases, the EPA 
regulates certain species of particles as separate ``air pollutants.'' 
For example, lead, beryllium, fluorides and sulfuric acid mist are 
constituents of particulate matter that are also regulated separately 
under New Source Performance Standards (40 CFR part 60) and/or National 
Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (40 CFR parts 61, 63 
or 65).
    Particles as measured in the ambient air consist of both primary 
and secondary particles. Primary particles are emitted directly from 
sources, and may include gaseous emissions, which, when emitted from 
the stack of a source, condense under ambient conditions to form 
particles. Primary particles directly emitted by a source as a solid or 
liquid at the stack and captured on the filter of a test train are 
referred to as the ``filterable'' PM fraction. The gaseous emissions 
that form particles upon condensing under ambient conditions soon after 
release from the stack are referred to as ``condensable PM.'' Other 
types of particles, known as secondary particles, are formed from 
precursors, such as SO2 and NOX, at a distance 
from their point of release as a result of complex reactions in the 
atmosphere.
    Initially, the EPA established NAAQS for PM on April 30, 1971, 
under sections 108 and 109 of the Act. See 36 FR 8186. Compliance with 
the original PM NAAQS was based on the measurement of particles in the 
ambient

[[Page 65109]]

air using an indicator of particles measuring up to a nominal size of 
25 to 45 micrometers ([micro]m). The EPA used the indicator name 
``total suspended particulate'' or ``TSP'' to define the particle size 
range that was being measured. Total suspended particulate remained the 
indicator for the PM NAAQS until 1987 when the EPA revised the NAAQS in 
part by replacing the TSP indicator for both the primary and secondary 
standards with a new indicator that includes only those particles with 
an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 [micro]m 
(PM10).
    On July 18, 1997, the EPA made significant revisions to the PM 
NAAQS in several respects. While the EPA determined that the PM NAAQS 
should continue to focus on particles less than or equal to 10 [micro]m 
in diameter, the EPA also determined that the fine and coarse fractions 
of PM10 should be considered separately. Accordingly, on 
July 18, 1997, the EPA added a new indicator for fine particles with a 
nominal mean aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 2.5 [micro]m 
(PM2.5), and continued to use PM10 as the 
indicator for purposes of regulating the coarse fraction of 
PM10. See 62 FR 38652.
    In the next periodic review, the EPA concluded, on October 17, 
2006, that it was necessary to revise the primary and secondary NAAQS 
for PM to provide increased protection of public health and welfare. 
See 71 FR 61144. The EPA retained the two separate indicators--
PM10 and PM2.5--for determining compliance with 
the revised NAAQS for PM, so both continue to be regarded as pollutants 
for which a NAAQS has been promulgated.

B. Measuring and Reporting Emissions of PM

    Section 110 of the Act requires that state and local air pollution 
control agencies develop and submit plans, known as state 
implementation plans or SIPs (that provide for the attainment, 
maintenance and enforcement of the NAAQS), for approval by the EPA. An 
essential component of each SIP is the emissions reduction strategy, 
including emissions limitations and other control measures (as set 
forth in SIPs and in individual source permits) designed to control the 
emissions of pollutants that contribute to the air quality against 
which the NAAQS are measured. For many years, most control measures for 
PM were generally focused on primary PM--specifically, the filterable 
PM fraction. Accordingly, the early EPA test methods for quantifying 
amounts of PM emitted by sources generally were based on the collection 
of the filterable PM fraction.
    In support of state obligations to develop emissions reduction 
strategies, section 111 of the Act requires the EPA to adopt standards 
of performance that focus on sources that cause or contribute 
significantly to ``air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to 
endanger public health and welfare.'' Such standards, referred to as 
NSPS, are emissions standards that are intended to reflect the degree 
of air pollution emission limitation attainable through the application 
of the best system of emission reduction (taking into account the cost 
of achieving such reduction and any non-air quality health and energy 
requirements) that the Administrator determines has been adequately 
demonstrated. Accordingly, the EPA historically has developed NSPS (and 
corresponding compliance test methods) under 40 CFR part 60 to provide 
standards of performance that address, among other pollutants, the 
control of PM.
    When the EPA promulgated the first set of NSPS for PM in 1971, only 
the filterable PM fraction was regulated. The EPA simultaneously 
promulgated a test method, known as Method 5, as the NSPS compliance 
test method to measure the filterable fraction of PM. Once available, 
Method 5 was often also used for permitting purposes to quantify the 
in-stack emissions of PM that represented the particles in the 
atmosphere expressed in terms of the ambient indicator, TSP--the 
original indicator for the PM NAAQS. Thus, the filterable PM collected 
by Method 5 or other similar source test methods was sometimes referred 
to as ``TSP emissions,'' even though it was recognized that Method 5 
actually collected particles that exceeded the TSP size range (25-45 
[micro]m), and did not include the condensable PM fraction. Today, 
Method 5 continues to serve as the performance testing procedure for 
most NSPS for PM.
    As a result of the promulgation of the PM10 NAAQS in 
1987, the annual source emissions reporting of ``particulate matter 
emissions'' (required under 40 CFR 51.322 and 51.323) ended with the 
state reporting of calendar year 1987 emissions, and the required 
reporting of PM10 emissions began with state reporting of 
calendar year 1988 emissions. In the absence of a standard reference 
test method for measuring PM10 emissions, states were 
instructed to choose an appropriate method of determining 
PM10 emissions for each source. On April 17, 1990, the EPA 
promulgated Method 201A to provide the states with a standard means of 
measuring filterable PM10 emissions contained in the stack. 
In the preamble of the promulgated Method 201A, the EPA noted that 
condensable PM forms very fine particles in the PM10 size 
range and is considered a portion of total PM10 emissions. 
The EPA announced its intent to propose Method 202 as a test method to 
measure the condensable portion. On October 12, 1990, the EPA proposed 
Method 202 to provide states with a means of measuring condensable PM 
from stationary sources. See 55 FR 41546. The test method for 
condensable PM, known as Method 202, was promulgated on December 17, 
1991, in Appendix M of 40 CFR part 51. With the new focus on the 
PM10 indicator the EPA also began to emphasize the relevance 
of condensable PM,\1\ and encouraged states to consider the condensable 
PM fraction as part of PM10 emissions where it was 
considered to be a significant contributor to an area's PM10 
nonattainment status. However, there were only a few nonattainment 
areas where control of the condensable PM portion was actually required 
in order to achieve attainment of the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ ``Condensable PM is of potential importance because it 
usually is quite fine and thus falls primarily within the 
PM10 fraction.'' See ``PM-10 SIP Development Guideline,'' 
EPA-450/2-86-001 (June 1987) at p. 5-32.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Even before the EPA introduced the PM2.5 indicator for 
the PM NAAQS in 1997, the agency published information on 
PM2.5 emissions in its National Emission Inventory Database 
(NEI).\2\ With the assistance of information gained through speciation 
analyses of PM2.5, the EPA recognized that condensable PM 
could be a substantial portion of the total PM2.5 emitted by 
certain source categories. Beginning with the 1999 NEI, the EPA began 
including the condensable PM fraction of the total PM2.5 
emitted by certain source categories, and encouraged states to consider 
the condensable PM fraction for the development of emissions 
inventories for PM2.5 SIPs.\3\ The EPA also provided 
condensable PM emission factors for various source categories in AP-42 
so that those state and local air control agencies having the 
responsibility to report emission inventories would have the tools 
needed

[[Page 65110]]

to estimate and report those emissions to the EPA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The EPA's NEI contains information about sources that emit 
criteria pollutants and their precursors, and hazardous pollutants. 
The database includes estimates of annual air pollutant emissions 
from point, nonpoint and mobile sources. The NEI currently contains 
information on PM with regard to the criteria indicators 
PM10 and PM2.5.
    \3\ ``Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone 
and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards 
(NAAQS) and Regional Haze,'' EPA-454/R-99-006 (April 1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 2002, the EPA issued a rule known as the Consolidated Emissions 
Reporting Rule (CERR), which, among other things, established 
requirements for the reporting to the EPA of PM2.5 
emissions. In conjunction with the new reporting requirements, the EPA 
added definitions of ``primary PM,'' ``primary PM10,'' and 
``primary PM2.5,'' all of which included both the filterable 
and condensable PM fraction. See 67 FR 39602 (June 10, 2002). The CERR 
required states to report emissions of primary PM10 and 
primary PM2.5, and listed as optional the reporting of 
emissions of primary PM. However, when the EPA amended those rules in 
2008, it dropped the definition of ``primary PM'' and the listing of 
``primary PM'' as an optional pollutant, eliminating the requirement 
for reporting ``PM'' (as opposed to PM10 and 
PM2.5). See 73 FR 76539 (December 17, 2008).
    In November 2005, the EPA proposed requirements that states must 
fulfill in developing their implementation plans for the attainment of 
PM2.5 NAAQS. See 70 FR 65984 (November 1, 2005). With the 
historical emphasis on controlling the filterable PM fraction, it 
became apparent that in many cases it would be necessary to take a 
closer look at the control of the condensable PM fraction in order to 
attain the PM2.5 NAAQS in some areas.\4\ The preamble to the 
2005 proposed rule highlighted the importance in certain cases of 
controlling the condensable PM fraction to help ensure the attainment 
of the new NAAQS. It was acknowledged at that time that most stationary 
source test methods specified in state rules did not provide for the 
measurement of condensable PM. As such, it was found that most source 
test methods referenced in SIPs provided a measurement of only the 
filterable fraction of PM. The EPA further noted that ``these 
filterable particulate matter test methods are either identical or very 
similar to one of the ten federal test methods published in Appendix A 
of 40 CFR Part 60 and used to determine compliance with New Source 
Performance Standards (NSPS).'' Id. at 66049. The EPA indicated that 
states needing to adopt local control measures for primary 
PM2.5 in nonattainment areas would need to revise their 
stationary source test methods to focus on the PM2.5 
indicator, including the condensable PM fraction.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ ``The inclusion of condensable emissions in a source's 
PM2.5 emissions is of increasing importance with the 
change in the indicator for particulate matter to PM2.5. 
Condensible emissions are essentially fine particles, and thus are a 
larger fraction of PM2.5 than of TSP or 
PM10.'' 70 FR 65984 (November 1, 2005) at p. 66039.
    \5\ The EPA did indicate that ``test methodologies that measure 
only filterable particulate matter would be acceptable in areas 
where no additional reductions of primary PM2.5 and 
particulate precursor emissions are required to project attainment 
of the PM2.5 NAAQS.'' Id. at 66049.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On March 25, 2009, the EPA proposed to modify existing Method 201A 
to allow for measurement of filterable PM2.5. In fact, the 
proposed modification offered the ability to measure filterable 
PM10, filterable PM2.5, or both filterable 
PM10 and filterable PM2.5 from stationary 
sources. At the same time, the EPA proposed amendments to Method 202 to 
improve the precision of the method for measuring condensable PM and to 
provide for more accurate overall quantification of primary emissions 
of PM10 and PM2.5 to the ambient air. Method 202 
contained several optional procedures that were intended to accommodate 
the various test methods used by state and local regulatory entities at 
the time Method 202 was being developed. The inclusion of the optional 
procedures ultimately proved problematic in that each of them resulted 
in a different emissions value. To address this issue, the EPA explored 
the influence of the optional procedures to identify the ones that 
would result in biased or imprecise measurements. In December 2010, the 
EPA promulgated an improved Method 202 with limited options that would 
produce more consistent measures of emissions.

C. NSR Program for PM

    The NSR program is a statutorily-based preconstruction permitting 
program that applies when a stationary source of air pollution proposes 
to construct or undergo modification. The NSR program consists of three 
different preconstruction permit programs: PSD, nonattainment NSR and 
minor NSR. We often refer to the PSD and nonattainment NSR programs 
together as the major NSR program because those permit programs 
regulate the construction of new major stationary sources and major 
modifications to existing major stationary sources.
    The nonattainment NSR program applies in advance of construction to 
new major stationary sources and major modifications of sources of a 
pollutant that locate in an area that is designated ``nonattainment'' 
for that pollutant. As such, the nonattainment NSR program applies only 
with respect to pollutants for which the EPA has promulgated NAAQS 
(commonly described as ``criteria pollutants''). On the other hand, the 
PSD program is a statutorily-based preconstruction review and 
permitting program that applies to new or modified major stationary 
sources proposing to locate in an area meeting any NAAQS 
(``attainment'' areas) and areas for which there is insufficient 
information to classify them as either attainment or nonattainment 
(``unclassifiable'' areas) for at least one pollutant. Like the 
nonattainment NSR program, the applicability of the PSD program to a 
major stationary source or major modification must be determined in 
advance of construction and is on a pollutant-specific basis. However, 
unlike the nonattainment NSR program, the PSD requirements may apply to 
any ``air pollutant'' that is ``subject to regulation'' under the 
Act.\6\ Thus, the PSD program is not restricted to criteria 
pollutants.\7\ Once a major source is determined to be subject to the 
PSD program (PSD source) for a particular air pollutant, among other 
requirements, it must undertake a series of analyses to demonstrate 
that it will use the best available control technology (BACT) to 
minimize the emissions of each regulated pollutant and that the 
emissions of the source will not cause or contribute to a violation of 
any applicable NAAQS or any applicable maximum allowable increase in a 
pollutant concentration (PSD increment).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ Although the language in the PSD requirements in the CAA 
states that those requirements apply to any pollutant subject to 
regulation under the Act, section 112(b)(6) of the CAA specifically 
excludes hazardous pollutants regulated under that section of the 
CAA from the PSD provisions. Accordingly, hazardous pollutants 
listed in section 112 of the CAA are not regulated under the EPA's 
PSD regulations. See, e.g., 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)(v).
    \7\ The EPA uses the term ``particulate matter emissions'' to 
define a pollutant regulated under the PSD program, but not under 
the nonattainment NSR program because nonattainment designations 
apply only with regard to criteria pollutants (pollutants for which 
NAAQS exist, e.g., PM10 and PM2.5). 
``Particulate matter emissions'' are not considered a criteria 
pollutant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with the original NAAQS and PSD increments for PM, the 
PSD program established pollutant applicability requirements for PM on 
the basis of the TSP indicator. Accordingly, the PSD regulations 
defined a ``significant'' increase in emissions of PM as 25 tons per 
year (tpy). When the EPA revised the PM NAAQS in 1987, establishing a 
new PM10 indicator, two indicators for particles were 
recognized as being regulated under the Act because the statutory PSD 
increments for PM were still expressed in terms of TSP. The addition of 
the new PM10 indicator also necessitated a distinction 
between those emissions of PM that should be used to determine a 
source's compliance with

[[Page 65111]]

the new PM10 NAAQS and those emissions of PM that should be 
used to determine a source's compliance with the existing TSP-based 
increments. Hence, in 1987, the EPA adopted the term ``particulate 
matter emissions'' to represent the indicator of emissions of PM that 
roughly corresponds to the ambient indicator, TSP, and adopted the term 
``PM10 emissions'' to represent the indicator of emissions 
of PM that corresponds to the ambient indicator, PM10. See 
52 FR 24672 (July 1, 1987). Accordingly, the original significant 
emissions rate of 25 tpy was retained and applied to the newly-defined 
term ``particulate matter emissions'' (associated with the ambient TSP 
indicator), and simultaneously a significant emissions rate of 15 tpy 
was defined with regard to ``PM10 emissions.'' See 40 CFR 
51.166(b)(23)(i) and 52.21(b)(23)(i).
    In 1993, as authorized by the CAA Amendments of 1990, the EPA 
adopted increments for PM that were expressed in terms of ambient 
concentrations of PM10, and substituted those increments for 
the original statutory increments for PM based on the TSP indicator. 
See 58 FR 31622 (June 3, 1993). As a result, both the NAAQS for PM and 
the PSD increments for PM were henceforth measured by the 
PM10 indicator and, once states revised their SIPs to 
incorporate the new PM10 NAAQS and PM10 
increments, the TSP (ambient) indicator was no longer considered a 
regulated indicator of particles. However, because the NSPS for PM 
commonly measured performance standard compliance based on emissions of 
PM in a manner that was roughly associated with the original ambient 
TSP indicator, the EPA stated in the preamble to the 1993 final rule 
promulgating new PSD increments based on PM10 that the 
agency would continue to regulate ``particulate matter emissions'' (25 
tpy significant emissions rate) separately from ``PM10 
emissions'' (15 tpy significant emissions rate) for purposes of PSD 
applicability determinations. Id. at 31629.
    In October 1997, following the promulgation of revised NAAQS for 
PM, which included the addition of NAAQS defined by the 
PM2.5 indicator, the EPA issued a guidance memorandum titled 
``Interim Implementation for the New Source Review Requirements for 
PM2.5'' (John Seitz, EPA, October 27, 1997).\8\ In this 
guidance, the EPA set forth what is referred to as the 1997 
PM10 Surrogate Policy, in which it was explained that 
sources could continue to use implementation of a PM10 
program as a surrogate for meeting the PM2.5 NSR 
requirements until certain technical difficulties were resolved. Those 
technical difficulties included the lack of necessary tools to 
calculate PM2.5 emissions and related precursors from 
individual stationary sources, the lack of adequate modeling techniques 
to project ambient PM2.5 impacts, and the lack of 
PM2.5 ambient monitoring sites. Accordingly, sources 
applying for PSD permits could rely on a demonstration of compliance 
with regard to the PM10 requirements as an interim measure 
to satisfy the CAA requirements for meeting BACT and ambient air 
quality standards for the new PM2.5 indicator. In 2005, 
following the promulgation of nonattainment area designations for 
PM2.5, the EPA issued guidance extending the 1997 
PM10 Surrogate Policy to the issuance of major source 
permits in PM2.5 nonattainment areas. (``Implementation of 
New Source Review Requirements in PM2.5 Nonattainment 
Areas,'' April 5, 2005.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Available in the docket, ID. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0063, and 
at http://www.epa.gov.nsr/documents/nsrmemo.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 2008, the EPA issued a final rule setting forth certain new 
requirements for PM2.5 in its NSR and PSD regulations. See 
``Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate 
Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5),'' 73 FR 28321 (May 
16, 2008). Specifically, the EPA identified the major source threshold 
and significant emissions rate for PM2.5 to reflect the 
indicator for the PM NAAQS promulgated in 1997. See 40 CFR 
51.166(b)(23)(i) and 52.21(b)(23)(i). The 2008 rule also announced the 
end of the use of the EPA's 1997 PM10 Surrogate Policy under 
the federal PSD program at 40 CFR 52.21 and the nonattainment NSR 
program (including the Emission Offset Rule at 40 CFR part 51 Appendix 
S) upon the effective date of the final rule (July 15, 2008). See 73 FR 
at 28340-28343. However, the rule provided a grandfathering provision, 
under the federal PSD program, for PSD permit applications that were 
determined to be complete before July 15, 2008, but had not yet 
received a PSD permit by that date, enabling those applications to 
continue to be reviewed under the 1997 PM10 Surrogate Policy 
in lieu of the new PM2.5 requirements. Later, in a final 
rule issued on May 18, 2011, which became effective on July 18, 2011, 
the EPA announced the repeal of that PSD grandfather provision. See 76 
FR 28646. The EPA continued to allow the use of the surrogate policy 
\9\ for PSD permits issued under SIP-approved PSD programs until May 
16, 2011--the due date for revising SIPs to incorporate the new 
PM2.5 PSD requirements promulgated in the 2008 rule. See 76 
FR at 28659 (declining to adopt a proposal to end the policy earlier).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ During this period, EPA communicated that the policy should 
be applied consistent with applicable case law on use of surrogates. 
See 75 FR at 6831.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Hence, PM is currently being regulated under the PSD program as 
three separate regulated pollutants. Those include PM10 and 
PM2.5--both of which are indicators reflecting the way the 
NAAQS for PM are currently measured--and ``particulate matter 
emissions,'' which is a term used in the PSD regulations to signify the 
indicator of PM that is measured and regulated under various NSPS for 
PM (40 CFR part 60).\10\ All three of the indicators for PM are 
considered separately as regulated NSR pollutants subject to review 
under the PSD program, which means that proposed new and modified 
sources must treat each indicator of PM as a separate regulated 
pollutant for applicability determinations, and must then apply the PSD 
requirements, as appropriate, independently for each indicator of PM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ In addition to the NSPS for PM, it is noted that states 
regulated ``particulate matter emissions'' for many years in their 
SIPs for PM, and the same indicator has been used as a surrogate for 
determining compliance with certain standards contained in 40 CFR 
part 63, regarding National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 2008 rule also added a provision to the definition of 
``regulated NSR pollutant'' in the PSD regulations and the Emission 
Offset Interpretative Ruling that required the inclusion of the 
condensable PM fraction for all three emissions-based indicators of PM. 
Accordingly, the determination of the potential emissions (for permit 
applicability determinations), and the setting of emissions limitations 
and in-stack pollutant measurements (for source compliance purposes) 
would involve the inclusion of the condensable fraction of PM for each 
of the three PM indicators. However, the EPA also announced in the 2008 
rule that it would not require states to implement the requirement to 
account for condensable PM in establishing enforceable emissions limits 
for either PM10 or PM2.5 in permits until the 
completion of a transition period that would end on January 1, 2011. 
See 73 FR at 28335. The EPA explained that the transition period would 
allow the agency time to assess concerns raised about uncertainties 
associated with the measurement of direct PM2.5, including 
condensable PM, and to conduct a notice and comment rulemaking to 
codify new or revised test methods.

[[Page 65112]]

Thus, while the definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant'' required the 
inclusion of condensable PM in all three indicators for emissions of 
PM, the transition policy effectively delayed its implementation until 
January 1, 2011, unless an existing permit condition or SIP expressly 
required that the condensable PM fraction be included in the 
measurement of PM10 emissions or PM2.5 emissions. 
Also, states were required to submit to the EPA by May 16, 2011, SIP 
revisions addressing the new, revised definition of ``regulated NSR 
pollutant'' and other new PM2.5 NSR requirements promulgated 
in the 2008 rule.

IV. What is the final action that the EPA is taking on the definition 
of ``regulated NSR pollutant'' and how does it affect the way 
``particulate matter emissions'' are measured?

    This final rule corrects an inadvertent error that established a 
general requirement under the definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant'' 
to account for the condensable PM fraction in applicability 
determinations and in establishing emissions limitations with regard to 
``particulate matter emissions.'' The change that has been made affects 
three sets of NSR regulations, including the PSD regulations at 40 CFR 
51.166 and 52.21, and the Emission Offset Interpretative Ruling at 40 
CFR part 51 Appendix S.
    It is important to note that the change being finalized under this 
action does not mean that we are totally exempting the inclusion of the 
condensable PM fraction as part of ``particulate matter emissions.'' As 
we described in the proposal, it may be necessary for PSD sources to 
count the condensable PM fraction with regard to ``particulate matter 
emissions'' in certain cases. The first case is for a source that is 
subject to an NSPS for which the condensable PM fraction must be 
included in the determination of compliance with the standard of 
performance for PM.\11\ The second case is where the applicable SIP 
already requires that the condensable PM fraction be included in the 
measurement of ``particulate matter emissions.'' Finally, the third 
case is where a source that emits ``particulate matter emissions'' is 
not subject to an NSPS, but is required by the reviewing authority to 
include the condensable PM fraction. See 77 FR 15661. Accordingly, the 
EPA proposed to add new regulatory language at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(ii) 
and 52.21(b)(50)(ii) to address these particular situations. (However, 
as pointed out by a commenter, we omitted language referencing an 
approved SIP (case 2) in the proposed regulatory language.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ In developing the NSPS for Wool Fiberglass Insulation 
Manufacturing facilities (Subpart PPP), the EPA determined that the 
control device could effectively reduce both the solid particles and 
the condensable PM, and promulgated the PM standard based on the 
measurement of both filterable solid particles and condensable PM. 
In addition, the agency established a variant of Method 5, referred 
to as Method 5e, to measure the filterable PM and the total organic 
carbon portion of the impinger catch. See 50 FR 7694 (February 25, 
1985).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In this final rule, based on public comments and additional 
considerations we have since identified, we are not adopting the 
proposed clarifying text in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(ii) and 
52.21(b)(50)(ii). In the proposal, the EPA explained that the revisions 
to these subsections were intended to assure that the condensable PM 
fraction of ``particulate matter emissions'' was counted in those cases 
where either the applicable NSPS requires that the condensable PM 
fraction be included in the determination of compliance with the 
standard of performance for PM or the applicable SIP already requires 
the inclusion of the condensable PM fraction. The EPA does not believe 
that the proposed revisions to subparagraph (ii) are necessary to 
include the condensable fraction of ``particulate matter emissions'' 
where it would be consistent with the applicable NSPS. Federal 
regulations at 40 CFR 51.100(pp) already define ``particulate matter 
emissions'' to be measured according to ``the applicable reference 
methods, or an equivalent or alternative method, specified in this 
chapter, or by a test method specified in an approved State 
implementation plan.'' We believe that definition is appropriately 
applied under both part 51 and part 52 of our regulations, even though 
part 52 does not presently contain such any definition of the term 
``particulate matter emissions,'' and thus is not directly applicable. 
Thus, the condensable fraction of particulate matter emissions should 
be counted where appropriate, consistent with the part 51 definition.
    In addition, public comments discussed later in this preamble 
raised questions about the proposed regulatory language that provided 
the option, when an NSPS was not applicable to a source, for a 
reviewing authority to determine on a case-by-case basis whether to 
include condensables in ``particular matter emissions.'' Comments have 
persuaded the EPA that this case-by-case approach is not needed and 
that if a source is not covered by an NSPS, the condensable PM fraction 
need not be included in ``particulate matter emission'' unless the 
state elects to implement such a requirement through its SIP.
    Furthermore, we have recognized that the regulatory text that we 
proposed (which is not specific to ``particulate matter emissions'') 
may have a broader effect on the definition and measurement of other 
regulated NSR pollutants that extends beyond the intentions outlined in 
the proposal. Accordingly, in order to allow for further evaluation of 
the possible implications of the proposed regulatory text, the EPA is 
not finalizing the proposed revisions to subparagraph (ii) at this 
point.
    For these reasons, we are retaining the existing regulatory 
language in these subparts of the PSD regulations without change. 
However, we will continue to evaluate the need for the proposed changes 
to 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(ii) and 52.21(b)(50)(ii).
    The proposed revisions to these paragraphs of the regulations were 
a secondary component of the proposed rule. The primary objective of 
our decision to revise the definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant'' is 
to correct an inadvertent error, and thus ensuring that we do not 
impose a new requirement on state/local agencies and the regulated 
community that has little if any effect on preventing significant air 
quality deterioration or on efforts to attain the primary and secondary 
PM NAAQS. That is, the PSD regulations will not require the inclusion 
of condensable PM in measurements of ``particulate matter emissions,'' 
except where either the applicable NSPS compliance test includes the 
condensable PM fraction or the applicable implementation plan requires 
the condensable PM fraction to be counted. Proposed new or modified 
stationary sources of PM typically will be subjected to the PSD 
requirements on the basis of their potential to emit significant 
amounts of PM10 or PM2.5 and will be required to 
install controls for their emissions of PM10 and/or 
PM2.5, both of which must consider the condensable PM 
fraction.

V. What comments did we receive on the proposed amendments to the 
definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant''?

    The EPA provided a 60-day review and comment period on this 
rulemaking, which closed on May 15, 2012. A total of seven comment 
letters (six industry comment letters and one state agency comment 
letter) were received on the proposed amendment to correct the 
definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant'' by removing the unilateral 
requirement that condensable PM be

[[Page 65113]]

included in measurements of ``particulate matter emissions.'' All of 
the commenters supported the EPA's proposed correction. Although the 
commenters supported the EPA's proposal with regard to the way that 
``particulate matter emissions'' should be measured, some commenters 
also requested that the EPA make additional revisions or clarify 
certain aspects of the proposal in the final rule preamble and 
regulation language. The following subsections provide a summary of 
those requests.

A. Regulated Indicators of PM

    Comment: A state agency commenter claims that the EPA's discussion 
of PM and the various indicators of PM is confusing in several ways. 
First, the state agency commenter notes that the EPA uses the general 
term ``particulate matter'' in the Integrated Science Assessment or ISA 
(previously called the Air Quality Criteria Document) to describe the 
criteria pollutant, while also using various indicators--TSP, 
PM10 and PM2.5--based on particle size to 
establish NAAQS. The state then explained that ``[w]e have always 
understood that each of the indicators used for PM included all 
applicable size distributions. Therefore, PMTSP includes 
PM10 and PM2.5 and PM10 includes 
PM2.5. Therefore, we found the preamble justification 
confusing when EPA refers to PM without reference to particle size.''
    Response: Any reference to ``PM'' alone was intended to generally 
describe the generic pollutant without regard to the specific indicator 
being regulated by either the NAAQS or an emissions test method. The 
term ``particulate matter'' or ``PM'' is used generically to describe a 
broad range of particles. PM is a pollutant that is defined more 
specifically for regulatory purposes by the method in which it is 
collected, either under in-stack or ambient conditions. As explained 
earlier in this preamble, for NSR purposes, the EPA regulates three 
indicators of emissions of PM--``particulate matter emissions,'' 
``PM10 emissions'' and ``PM2.5 emissions,'' and 
two indicators of ambient PM--PM10 and PM2.5. The 
term ``total suspended particulate'' or ``TSP'' was originally used by 
the EPA as an indicator of ambient concentrations of PM by which 
compliance with the original NAAQS for PM was measured. The term 
``particulate matter emissions'' represents the indicator of emissions 
of PM that roughly corresponds with the ambient indicator ``TSP.'' 
Since the EPA revoked the TSP-based NAAQS, but continues to regulate 
``particulate matter emissions'' as an emissions indicator associated 
with various NSPS for PM, ``particulate matter emissions'' is referred 
to as a non-criteria emissions indicator of PM. Accordingly, when we 
intend to refer to a specific regulated form of PM, the preamble uses 
the appropriate term--``particulate matter emissions,'' 
``PM10 emissions,'' or ``PM2.5 emissions''--to 
establish the form of PM to be regulated for NSR applicability 
determinations and emissions setting purposes.
    Comment: The same state agency commenter claims that ``EPA proposes 
to regulate only the filterable portion of PM under Method 5 and retain 
PM10 and PM2.5 as indicators for the PM criteria 
pollutant.'' The state then indicated that ``[t]he definition of direct 
emissions for PM10 and PM2.5 includes both 
filterable and condensable PM emissions.'' Thus, the state agency 
commenter claims that it was unclear how the EPA's final rule would 
affect permit applicability determinations, ``since the state 
implementation plan (SIP) includes condensable emissions for total 
PM.'' In conjunction with this uncertainty, the state commenter asks 
whether it is the EPA's intent ``to limit the emissions for PM to only 
the fraction larger than PM10 or PM2.5? Or, is 
EPA's intent to limit the emissions for PM to only the filterable 
fraction larger than PM10 or PM2.5, but include 
the filterable and condensable emissions for PM10 and 
PM2.5?'' The state agency commenter requests that the EPA 
confirm its understanding that ``no source impact analysis under PSD is 
required for PM because EPA considers PM--as PMTSP--to be a 
non-criteria pollutant indicator similar to sulfuric acid mist.'' Thus, 
the state agency commenter understood that it would evaluate impacts 
under the state's minor NSR program, and only require a control 
technology review under PSD for the filterable fraction of particulate 
matter emissions.
    Response: The final rule sets forth minimum PSD program 
requirements at 40 CFR 51.166 for an approvable SIP. Under those 
requirements, the measurement of ``particulate matter emissions'' 
generally includes only the filterable portion, unless the applicable 
NSPS or SIP requires that the condensable PM fraction be counted as 
well. Hence, as in the case of the state commenter, where a SIP 
requires the inclusion of condensable PM emissions in the measurement 
of ``total PM'' (the term that the state commenter appears to use in 
lieu of the EPA's term ``particulate matter emissions''), the final 
rule does not preclude the state from requiring a source to determine 
its applicability, and enforceable emissions limits, for ``particulate 
matter emissions'' based on both the filterable and the condensable PM 
fractions. In any case, it was not the EPA's intent to limit the 
measurement of ``particulate matter emissions'' to the fraction (or 
filterable fraction) larger than PM10 and PM2.5. 
Clearly, Method 5 measures particles that include the filterable 
PM10 and PM2.5, but includes larger particles as 
well.
    To address ``particulate matter emissions,'' we generally agree 
with the commenter's understanding that one of the primary concerns 
under the PSD program is to ensure that a new major stationary source 
that emits significant amounts of ``particulate matter emissions'' or a 
major modification that results in a significant net emissions increase 
of ``particulate matter emissions'' must undergo a control technology 
review for that emissions indicator of PM. However, there is a source 
impact assessment component in the PSD requirements that cannot simply 
be relegated to a minor NSR review requirement with regard to 
``particulate matter emissions.'' While there are no air quality 
standards (NAAQS or increments) associated with ``particulate matter 
emissions,'' section 165(e)(3)(B) of the CAA requires an analysis of 
the ambient air quality, climate, meteorology, terrain, soils and 
vegetation, and visibility ``for each pollutant regulated under this 
Act'' that will be emitted by the proposed PSD project. This 
requirement, referred to as the ``Additional Impact Analysis'' at 40 
CFR 51.166(o) and 40 CFR 52.21(o), could potentially require certain 
analyses with regard to ``particulate matter emissions'' as part of the 
PSD preconstruction review process.
    Comment: The state agency commenter and an industry commenter both 
had recommendations for excluding ``particulate matter emissions'' from 
the major source applicability requirements. The state agency 
commenter's recommendation addresses major modifications, while the 
industry commenter recommends an exclusion from major source 
applicability altogether. The state agency commenter recommends that, 
because the concern with ``particulate matter emissions'' rests with 
NSPS applicability and control technology review, the EPA should 
``remove the major modification significant emission rate (25 tpy) for 
PM from the PSD major modification portion of the PSD rules, and rely 
on the state's minor NSR program to conduct the technology review under 
the NSPS program. * * *'' The industry commenter

[[Page 65114]]

believes that there is no reason to include ``particulate matter 
emissions'' in any major NSR applicability determinations, regardless 
of whether the term includes condensable PM or not, because (1) 
particles larger than 10 [mu]m are not a significant driver of health 
effects; and (2) applicability thresholds for PM10 and 
PM2.5 are already in place and are generally more protective 
standards than the ``particulate matter emissions'' standards. Thus, 
the industry commenter recommends that the definition of ``regulated 
NSR pollutant'' be further modified to eliminate ``particulate matter 
emissions'' as a third indicator of PM for NSR purposes.
    Response: With regard to the comments that ``particulate matter 
emissions'' should be excluded from major source applicability 
determinations, we note that the statutory PSD requirements mandate 
preconstruction review for each pollutant regulated under the CAA. For 
example, section 165(a)(4) requires best available control technology 
for ``each pollutant subject to regulation under this Act. * * * '' 
Thus, the EPA's PSD regulations require that both criteria and non-
criteria pollutants undergo PSD review under the applicable provisions. 
The term ``particulate matter emissions'' represents an indicator of 
emissions of PM, different from the current indicators of PM that 
define the PM NAAQS, that is regulated under various NSPS to determine 
compliance with regard to PM based on Test Method 5. For this reason, 
the EPA believes that it is necessary to consider ``particulate matter 
emissions'' to be a separate pollutant subject to regulation under the 
CAA and, thus, subject to PSD. See, e.g., 58 FR 31622 at 31629 (June 3, 
1993).
    Comment: Two industry commenters request that the EPA clarify that, 
consistent with prior rulemaking, it intends to limit the 
interpretation of existing limits--and associated compliance 
demonstration requirements--to filterable PM. The commenters point to 
several instances when the EPA stated the importance of implementing 
any new or revised emissions limits and test methods that account for 
condensable emissions in a prospective manner and clearly 
differentiated from existing NSR permit requirements in order to avoid 
confusion over a source's compliance status relative to existing PM 
emissions limits that did not include the condensable portion. 
(Commenters cited similar EPA statements made in two separate Federal 
Register notices, i.e., 72 FR 20586 (April 25, 2007) at 20654 and 73 FR 
28321 (May 16, 2008) at 28335.)
    Response: The EPA's position with regard to the enforcement of 
permits, as explained in the preamble to the 2008 rule, was and 
continues to be that the provisions requiring the inclusion of the 
condensable PM fraction should be implemented prospectively and not 
retroactively after the January 1, 2011, default end date for the 
condensable PM transition period. In the preamble to the 2008 rule, we 
indicated with regard to the potential for retroactive enforcement that 
the EPA ``will not revisit applicability determinations made in good 
faith prior to the end of the transition period, insofar as the 
quantity of condensable PM emissions are concerned, unless the 
applicable implementation plan clearly required consideration of 
condensable PM.'' See 73 FR at 28335. We also stated that ``EPA will 
interpret PM emissions limitations in existing permits or permits 
issued during the transition period as not requiring quantification of 
condensable PM2.5 for compliance purposes unless such a 
requirement was clearly specified in the permit conditions or the 
applicable implementation plan.'' Id. 28335. Thus, we believe our 
position is clear that it is not our intention to apply the requirement 
to include the condensable PM fraction to applicability determinations 
and emissions limitations in permits that occurred prior to the January 
1, 2011, end of the condensable PM transition period, unless such 
determinations and emissions limitations already address the 
condensable PM fraction. We do, however, intend to apply the 
requirement prospectively, such that when existing sources undergo 
modifications involving increases in PM10 emissions and 
PM2.5 emissions, the source will be required to consider the 
condensable fraction of PM10 and PM2.5 emissions 
in determining the applicability of PSD to the proposed project, and 
establishing enforceable emissions limits and compliance tests.

B. Defining PM Consistent With an Applicable New Source Performance 
Standard (NSPS)

    Comment: Several industry commenters support the EPA's proposal to 
define PM consistent with an applicable NSPS. One of the commenters 
recommends that the final regulation be amended to clarify that the 
definition and measurement of PM10 and PM2.5, 
when used in the context of NSR and PSD reviews and analyses, also be 
tied to the underlying and governing NSPS requirements of the source 
being considered. Specifically, the commenter states that the final 
regulation should be amended to state that PM2.5 and 
PM10 should not include the condensable fraction of PM for 
any source where the applicable NSPS does not include the condensable 
fraction of PM in the definition or measurement of the PM standard.
    Response: The main purpose of this rule is to remove the general 
requirement that ``particulate matter emissions'' include the 
condensable PM fraction and to make the measurement of ``particulate 
matter emissions'' generally consistent with the method prescribed by 
the applicable NSPS (except where a SIP would be more stringent). We do 
not agree with the recommendation by the commenters that the final PSD 
regulations should not require ``PM2.5 emissions'' and 
``PM10 emissions'' to include the condensable PM fraction 
when the applicable NSPS does not include the condensable fraction. 
There may be more than one basis upon which a pollutant is regulated 
under the Clean Air Act, and hence defined as a regulated NSR 
pollutant. Both PM2.5 and PM10 are indicators of 
PM for which the EPA has promulgated health- and welfare-based NAAQS 
and thus each is a regulated NSR pollutant independent of the scope of 
any applicable NSPS for a source. Furthermore, it is important that a 
source seeking a PSD permit demonstrate that its proposed emissions 
increases will not cause or contribute to a violation of any NAAQS or 
increment, as is clearly required by the CAA and PSD regulations. As 
such, it is important to consider the condensable PM fraction in each 
case when setting enforceable emissions limits and compliance tests for 
PSD sources. The fact that a particular NSPS may not include the 
condensable fraction to determine compliance with a particular 
performance-based standard does not alter that fact. The standards of 
performance for new sources established under section 111 of the CAA 
reflect emission limits achievable at the time of promulgation with the 
best adequately demonstrated technological system of continuous 
emission reduction considering the cost of achieving such emission 
reductions and any non-air quality health, environmental and energy 
impacts. Thus, if the consideration of the condensable fraction of 
PM10 and PM2.5 emissions would not be indicative 
of the efficiency of a control device used by the industry at the time 
of promulgation, then it would not be necessary or appropriate to 
include

[[Page 65115]]

measurement of the condensable PM fraction as part of the NSPS.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Several preambles for NSPS have recognized that the 
measurement methods for the standards highlight the basis for the 
test methods selected and that the selected test methods will not 
necessarily measure emissions as they would exist upon release to 
the atmosphere. See, e.g., 40 FR 46250 (Oct. 6, 1975); 43 FR 7568 
(Feb. 23, 1978); 44 FR 34840 (June 15, 1979); 45 FR 66742 (Oct. 7, 
1980).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On the other hand, SIPs, including the NSR permitting requirements, 
approved under section 110 of the Act, must provide for the attainment 
and maintenance of NAAQS designed to protect public health and welfare. 
If the enforceable limits in a PSD permit for PM10 and 
PM2.5 do not include the condensable PM fraction, simply 
because the applicable NSPS does not include it, the source's 
demonstration of compliance with the NAAQS and increments for 
PM10 and PM2.5 would be incomplete and subject to 
challenge. Similarly, for nonattainment NSR, it is important to 
consider the condensable PM fraction so that all PM10 and 
PM2.5 emissions increases can be considered for 
applicability determinations and for determining required offsets.
    Thus, the final rule retains the general requirement to include the 
condensable fraction of PM10 and PM2.5 emissions 
in each case for purposes of NSR permitting under the EPA's regulations 
at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i), 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)(i), 40 CFR 
51.165(a)(1)(xxxvii), and 40 CFR part 51 Appendix S. Because of these 
provisions, the definition of ``PM10 emissions'' in section 
51.100(rr) of the EPA's regulations should not be construed to limit 
PM10 emissions to only the fraction covered by an applicable 
test method in an NSPS or SIP. Section 51.100(rr) defines 
``PM10 emissions'' as measured under the chapter of the Code 
of Federal Regulations where this provision is located or an approved 
SIP. The more specific definitions of the term ``regulated NSR 
pollutant'' referenced above are part of the same chapter and thus 
applicable under the general definition of ``PM10 
emissions'' in section 51.100(rr). Therefore, the specific definitions 
in the NSR regulations control in this instance to require inclusion of 
the condensable fraction of PM10 emissions in all cases 
under the NSR program.

C. Defining PM To Include Condensable PM in the State Implementation 
Plan (SIP)

    In the preamble to the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), we 
indicated that when a proposed source or modification emits a pollutant 
that is regulated under section 111 of the CAA, but the source itself 
is not subject to an NSPS for that pollutant, the reviewing authority 
will determine the applicable test method to be used to determine the 
source's compliance, e.g., with regard to the possible inclusion of 
condensable PM in the measurement of ``particulate matter emissions.'' 
See 77 FR at 15661 and 15663 (proposed regulatory text at 40 CFR 
51.166(b)(49)(ii) providing that ``[f]or sources not currently 
regulated by an applicable NSPS, measurement of such pollutant shall be 
determined by the reviewing authority'').
    Comment: Two industry commenters opine that reviewing authorities 
should not be allowed to define PM as requiring consideration of 
condensable PM where the SIP does not already require it of a 
particular source category. One of the industry commenters suggest that 
the EPA replace the reference to the ``reviewing authority'' in 
proposed 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(ii) and 52.21(b)(50)(ii) with a reference 
to the ``applicable state implementation plan.'' The commenter states 
that the proposed language suggests that, for a non-NSPS source, a 
permitting authority could specify a measurement method that is 
inconsistent with the SIP.
    Response: The EPA believes that states should follow the 
requirements set forth in their EPA-approved SIP and that it would be 
inappropriate to make decisions on individual permits that are 
inconsistent with the applicable SIP provisions. Thus, where a SIP 
provides that only the filterable fraction of ``particulate matter 
emissions'' be counted, individual sources should not be selectively 
required to count the condensable PM fraction as well. We do not 
believe, however, that explicit language needs to be included in the 
regulatory text as recommended by the commenters. As explained earlier 
in this preamble, we have decided to take no final action at this time 
with regard to revising subparagraph (ii) of the definition ``regulated 
NSR pollutant.'' Accordingly, this final action does not revise the PSD 
regulations to include the proposed language or any clarification of 
it. As explained earlier, the definition of ``particulate matter 
emissions'' at 40 CFR 51.100(pp) provides that states can rely on a 
test method contained in ``an approved State implementation plan'' to 
determine the measurement of that pollutant. In the absence of specific 
language in the definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant,'' this 
definition provides sufficient criteria for the reviewing authority to 
determine the applicable method under federal law for measuring 
``particulate matter emissions,'' and should address the commenters' 
concerns about the reviewing authority using a method inconsistent with 
the SIP in circumstances where the reviewing authority is implementing 
the approved SIP.
    Comment: One state agency commenter provides that the actual 
proposed rule language (40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(ii) and 52.21(b)(50)(ii)) 
only accounts for two of three stated cases cited by the EPA where 
condensable PM could be included in the measurement of ``particulate 
matter emissions,'' and omits the EPA-cited case where the applicable 
SIP already requires that the condensable PM fraction be included in 
the measurement of ``particulate matter emissions.'' The commenter 
suggests that the EPA reconsider and specifically list the SIP 
requirement case (where condensable PM should still be counted) in the 
final rule language to avoid confusion in regulatory intent.
    Response: The commenter is correct in identifying the omission of 
the cited regulatory language in the proposal. For reasons discussed 
above, we are not adopting the proposed revisions to sections 
51.166(b)(49)(ii) and 52.21(b)(50)(ii) at this time. In light of the 
definition of ``particulate matter emission'' in section 51.100(pp), we 
do not believe that a direct reference to the SIP needs to be included 
in sections 51.166(b)(49)(ii) and 52.21(b)(50)(ii). Accordingly, it 
should be clear that a state may choose to adopt a requirement for a 
test method that includes the condensable PM fraction as part of 
``particulate matter emissions,'' for PSD applicability and permit 
enforcement purposes. It should also be noted that such requirement in 
a state's SIP will not similarly affect PSD sources in other states or 
SIP jurisdictions.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ See Memo from Stephen L. Johnson, Administrator, to 
Regional Administrators re: EPA's Interpretation of Regulations that 
Determine Pollutants Covered by Federal Prevention of Significant 
Deterioration (PSD) Permit Program, at 15 (Dec. 18, 2008) (outlining 
interpretation of CAA section 116); 74 FR 51535, 51542-43 (Oct. 7, 
2009) (proposing to retain Johnson Memo interpretation on 
reconsideration); 75 FR 17004, 17011-12 (April 2, 2010) (final 
action on reconsideration of interpretation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Comments Related to Special EPA Policies for Implementing PM 
Requirements Under the NSR Program

    Comment: Two industry commenters express concerns that the 
discussion in the March 16, 2012, proposal preamble regarding the 
history of the EPA's regulation of PM under the NSR program, failed to 
include a description of several key policy decisions, including the 
1997 PM10 Surrogate

[[Page 65116]]

Policy, the Grandfather Policy for PM2.5 (for pending 
permits under the federal PSD program) and the condensable PM 
Transition Policy. These commenters indicate that there are continued 
concerns regarding the EPA's PM regulations that have created 
uncertainty and hardship for the regulated community, and specifically 
requests that the EPA include a discussion of these policies in the 
final rule preamble for accuracy purposes.
    Response: This preamble includes a limited discussion about each of 
these special policies for implementing the PM program in section III.C 
of this preamble (New Source Review Program for PM). In addition, we 
have included references to earlier actions that provide greater 
details of the respective policies. Thus, we do not believe that it is 
necessary to provide more lengthy descriptions of the individual 
policies herein.

E. Other Comments Unrelated to the Final Rule

    Several commenters raise concerns of either a policy or technical 
nature unrelated to the actions associated with this final rule. For 
example, two industry commenters state that EPA Method 201A cannot be 
used to accurately measure filterable PM10 and 
PM2.5 from emissions units that use wet controls. Another 
commenter recommends that the EPA continue work toward development of a 
methodology known as the air dilution test methodology. A commenter 
recommends that the EPA accelerate its progress toward promulgating 
complete and appropriate modeling and monitoring methods necessary to 
provide the required technical support for effective and equitable 
implementation of PM2.5 major NSR permitting. Finally, one 
commenter requests that the EPA review guidance documents to the states 
to assure that the EPA is giving them correct and clear direction 
regarding the need to test certified stationary engines. The details of 
these comments can be reviewed in the docket where all of the 
individual sets of comments received for this rulemaking have been 
posted. The EPA believes that these comments generally pertain to 
broader PM2.5 issues but are not relevant to this limited 
action to revise the definition of ``regulated NSR pollutant'' as it 
applies to condensable PM emissions. As such, the issues described 
above are more appropriately addressed in forums other than this final 
rule.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

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

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

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. 
Burden is defined at 5 CFR 1320.3(b). This final action removes an 
unintended requirement to include condensable PM when quantifying 
``particulate matter emissions'' from proposed new major stationary 
sources and major modifications subject to the PSD program. The change 
will eliminate an unintended burden.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative 
Procedure Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that the 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, 
small organizations and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For purposes of assessing the impacts of this rule on small 
entities, ``small entity'' is defined as: (1) A small business as 
defined by the Small Business Administration's regulations at 13 CFR 
121.201; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of 
a city, county, town, school district or special district with a 
population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is 
any not-for-profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated 
and is not dominant in its field.
    After considering the economic impacts of this final rule on small 
entities, which removes an unintended requirement to include 
condensable PM when quantifying ``particulate matter emissions'' from 
proposed new major stationary sources and major modifications, I 
certify that this action will not have a significant economic impact on 
a substantial number of small entities. This final rule will not impose 
any requirements on small entities because small entities are not 
subject to the requirements of this rule.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This final action contains no federal mandates under the provisions 
of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), 2 
U.S.C. 1531-1538 for state, local or tribal governments or the private 
sector. The action does not impose any enforceable duty on any state, 
local or tribal governments or the private sector. This action removes 
an unintended requirement to include condensable PM when quantifying 
``particulate matter emissions'' from proposed new major stationary 
sources and major modifications. Thus, this action is not subject to 
the requirements of sections 202 or 205 of UMRA.
    This final action is also not subject to the requirements of 
section 203 of UMRA because it contains no regulatory requirements that 
might significantly or uniquely affect small governments. As noted 
above, this final action removes an unintended requirement to include 
condensable PM when quantifying ``particulate matter emissions'' from 
proposed new major stationary sources and major modifications.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This final action does not have federalism implications. It will 
not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship 
between the national government and the states, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, 
as specified in Executive Order 13132. This final action removes the 
unintended requirement to include condensable PM when quantifying 
``particulate matter emissions'' from proposed new major stationary 
sources and major modifications. The requirement being removed was 
inadvertently included in the 2008 rule for implementation of the 
PM2.5 NSR program. Thus, Executive Order 13132 does not 
apply to this rule. Nevertheless, in the spirit of Executive Order 
13132, and consistent with EPA policy to promote communications between 
EPA and state and local governments, EPA specifically solicited comment 
on the proposed action from state and local officials.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in 
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This final 
action removes the

[[Page 65117]]

unintended requirement to include condensable PM when quantifying 
``particulate matter emissions'' from proposed new major stationary 
sources and major modification. The removed requirement was 
inadvertently included in the 2008 rule for implementation of the 
PM2.5 NSR program.
    The Act provides for states to develop plans to regulate emissions 
of air pollutants within their jurisdictions. The Tribal Air Rule (TAR) 
under the Act gives tribes the opportunity to develop and implement Act 
programs to attain and maintain the PM2.5 NAAQS, but leaves 
to the discretion of the tribes the decision of whether to develop 
these programs and which programs, or appropriate elements of a 
program, they will adopt. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to 
this action.

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

    This final action is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997) because it is not economically significant as 
defined in Executive Order 12866, and because the agency does not 
believe the environmental health or safety risks addressed by this 
action to eliminate an unintended requirement present a 
disproportionate risk to children. The removal of this requirement will 
not affect one of the basic requirements of the PSD program; that new 
and modified major sources must demonstrate that any new emissions do 
not cause or contribute to air quality in violation of the NAAQS.

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

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

I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

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

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

    Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, Feb. 16, 1994) establishes 
federal executive policy on environmental justice. Its main provision 
directs federal agencies, to the greatest extent practicable and 
permitted by law, to make environmental justice part of their mission 
by identifying and addressing, as appropriate, disproportionately high 
and adverse human health or environmental effects of their programs, 
policies and activities on minority populations and low-income 
populations in the United States.
    The EPA has determined that this final rule action to remove an 
inadvertent error that was introduced in a 2008 rulemaking will not 
have adverse human health or environmental effects on minority or low-
income populations because it does not appreciably affect the level of 
protection provided to human health or the environment.

K. Congressional Review Act

    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. The 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). This rule will be effective on December 24, 2012.

L. Judicial Review

    Under CAA section 307(b)(1), judicial review of this final rule is 
available only by filing a petition for review in the United States 
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit by December 24, 
2012. Under CAA section 307(d)(7)(B), only an objection to this final 
rule that was raised with reasonable specificity during the period for 
public comment (including any public hearing) can be raised during 
judicial review. This section also provides a mechanism for the EPA to 
convene a proceeding for reconsideration ``[i]f the person raising an 
objection can demonstrate to the Administrator that it was 
impracticable to raise such objection within [the period for public 
comment] or if the grounds for such objection arose after the period 
for public comment (but within the time specified for judicial review) 
and if such objection is of central relevance to the outcome of the 
rule[.]'' Any person seeking to make such a demonstration to us should 
submit a Petition for Reconsideration to the Office of the 
Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, Room 3000, Ariel Rios 
Building, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20004, with a copy 
to the person listed in the preceding FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section, and the Associate General Counsel for the Air and Radiation 
Law Office, Office of General Counsel (Mail Code 2344A), Environmental 
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20004. 
Note, under CAA section 307(b)(2), the requirements established by this 
final rule may not be challenged separately in any civil or criminal 
proceedings brought by the EPA to enforce these requirements.

VII. Statutory Authority

    The statutory authority for this final action is provided by 
sections 101, 160, 163, 165, 166, 301 and 307(d) of the Act as amended 
(42 U.S.C. 7401, 7470, 7473, 7475, 7476, 7601 and 7607(d)).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 51

    Environmental protection, Administrative practices and procedures, 
Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations.

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Administrative practices and procedures, 
Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental 
relations.

    Dated: October 12, 2012.
Lisa P. Jackson,
Administrator.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the 
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

[[Page 65118]]

PART 51--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 51 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  23 U.S.C. 101; 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.

Subpart I--[Amended]

0
2. Section 51.166 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(49)(i) and by 
removing paragraph (b)(49)(vi). The revised text reads as follows:


Sec.  51.166  Prevention of significant deterioration of air quality.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (49) * * *
    (i) Any pollutant for which a national ambient air quality standard 
has been promulgated. This includes, but is not limited to, the 
following:
    (a) PM2.5 emissions and PM10 emissions shall 
include gaseous emissions from a source or activity which condense to 
form particulate matter at ambient temperatures. On or after January 1, 
2011, such condensable particulate matter shall be accounted for in 
applicability determinations and in establishing emissions limitations 
for PM2.5 and PM10 in PSD permits. Compliance 
with emissions limitations for PM2.5 and PM10 
issued prior to this date shall not be based on condensable particulate 
matter unless required by the terms and conditions of the permit or the 
applicable implementation plan. Applicability determinations made prior 
to this date without accounting for condensable particulate matter 
shall not be considered in violation of this section unless the 
applicable implementation plan required condensable particulate matter 
to be included;
    (b) Any pollutant identified under this paragraph (b)(49)(i)(b) as 
a constituent or precursor to a pollutant for which a national ambient 
air quality standard has been promulgated. Precursors identified by the 
Administrator for purposes of NSR are the following:
    (1) Volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides are precursors 
to ozone in all attainment and unclassifiable areas.
    (2) Sulfur dioxide is a precursor to PM2.5 in all 
attainment and unclassifiable areas.
    (3) Nitrogen oxides are presumed to be precursors to 
PM2.5 in all attainment and unclassifiable areas, unless the 
State demonstrates to the Administrator's satisfaction or EPA 
demonstrates that emissions of nitrogen oxides from sources in a 
specific area are not a significant contributor to that area's ambient 
PM2.5 concentrations.
    (4) Volatile organic compounds are presumed not to be precursors to 
PM2.5 in any attainment or unclassifiable area, unless the 
State demonstrates to the Administrator's satisfaction or EPA 
demonstrates that emissions of volatile organic compounds from sources 
in a specific area are a significant contributor to that area's ambient 
PM2.5 concentrations.
* * * * *

0
3. Appendix S to Part 51 is amended by revising paragraph II.A.31(ii) 
and by removing paragraphs II.A.31(iii) and (iv). The revised text 
reads as follows:

Appendix S to Part 51--Emission Offset Interpretative Ruling

* * * * *
    II. * * *
    A. * * *
    31. * * *
    (ii) Any pollutant for which a national ambient air quality 
standard has been promulgated. This includes, but is not limited to, 
the following:
    (a) PM2.5 emissions and PM10 emissions 
shall include gaseous emissions from a source or activity, which 
condense to form particulate matter at ambient temperatures. On or 
after January 1, 2011, such condensable particulate matter shall be 
accounted for in applicability determinations and in establishing 
emissions limitations for PM2.5 and PM10 in 
permits issued under this ruling. Compliance with emissions 
limitations for PM2.5 and PM10 issued prior to 
this date shall not be based on condensable particulate matter 
unless required by the terms and conditions of the permit or the 
applicable implementation plan. Applicability determinations made 
prior to this date without accounting for condensable particulate 
matter shall not be considered in violation of this section unless 
the applicable implementation plan required condensable particulate 
matter to be included.
    (b) Any pollutant that is identified under this paragraph 
II.A.31(ii)(2) as a constituent or precursor of a general pollutant 
listed under paragraph II.A.31(i) or (ii) of this Ruling, provided 
that such constituent or precursor pollutant may only be regulated 
under NSR as part of regulation of the general pollutant. Precursors 
identified by the Administrator for purposes of NSR are the 
following:
    (1) Volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides are 
precursors to ozone in all ozone nonattainment areas.
    (2) Sulfur dioxide is a precursor to PM2.5 in all 
PM2.5 nonattainment areas.
* * * * *

PART 52--[Amended]

0
4. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart A--[Amended]

0
5. Section 52.21 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(50)(i) and by 
removing paragraph (b)(50)(vi). The revised text reads as follows:


Sec.  52.21  Prevention of significant deterioration of air quality.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (50) * * *
    (i) Any pollutant for which a national ambient air quality standard 
has been promulgated. This includes, but is not limited to, the 
following:
    (a) PM2.5 emissions and PM10 emissions shall 
include gaseous emissions from a source or activity, which condense to 
form particulate matter at ambient temperatures. On or after January 1, 
2011, such condensable particulate matter shall be accounted for in 
applicability determinations and in establishing emissions limitations 
for PM2.5 and PM10 in PSD permits. Compliance 
with emissions limitations for PM2.5 and PM10 
issued prior to this date shall not be based on condensable particulate 
matter unless required by the terms and conditions of the permit or the 
applicable implementation plan. Applicability determinations made prior 
to this date without accounting for condensable particulate matter 
shall not be considered in violation of this section unless the 
applicable implementation plan required condensable particulate matter 
to be included.
    (b) Any pollutant identified under this paragraph (b)(50)(i)(b) as 
a constituent or precursor for a pollutant for which a national ambient 
air quality standard has been promulgated. Precursors identified by the 
Administrator for purposes of NSR are the following:
    (1) Volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides are precursors 
to ozone in all attainment and unclassifiable areas.
    (2) Sulfur dioxide is a precursor to PM2.5 in all 
attainment and unclassifiable areas.
    (3) Nitrogen oxides are presumed to be precursors to 
PM2.5 in all attainment and unclassifiable areas, unless the 
State demonstrates to the Administrator's satisfaction or EPA 
demonstrates that emissions of nitrogen oxides from sources in a 
specific area are not a significant contributor to that area's ambient 
PM2.5 concentrations.
    (4) Volatile organic compounds are presumed not to be precursors to 
PM2.5 in any attainment or unclassifiable area, unless the 
State demonstrates to the Administrator's satisfaction or EPA

[[Page 65119]]

demonstrates that emissions of volatile organic compounds from sources 
in a specific area are a significant contributor to that area's ambient 
PM2.5 concentrations.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2012-25978 Filed 10-24-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P