Quiero saber acerca de...

32664

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 117 / Tuesday, June 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules
It is important in reaching this conclusion that we are able to understand the States process for determining whether an alternative AIMM is at least as effective as the two methods specified in the SIP. First, under the submitted rules at Section XII.L.8.a.iiC, an alternative AIMM
applicant must provide information on whether the proposed alternative is approved by other regulatory authorities, and for what application.
This information will allow the State to assess the reliability and viability of the alternative. In addition, under Section XII.L.8.a.iiD, the applicant must provide information, with supporting data, on the leak detection capabilities and limitations of the proposed alternative method. This data requirement is important to ensuring that the potential exercise of discretion in the alternative AIMM program is adequately bounded.
The State has further explained this process in a guidance document provided to the EPA.54 As explained in this document, in evaluating effectiveness, Colorado assumes that a certain level of emission reductions would be achieved using either infrared camera or Method 21 AIMM, on a periodic basis with increasing emission reductions under greater monitoring frequencies, and compares the anticipated results of the proposed alternative AIMM to those numbers.55
Testing and modeling of the alternative AIMM is required.56 Thus, the States program includes a quantitative evaluation according to specified criteria.
Additional safeguards and constraints in the alternative AIMM process include:
The Alternative AIMM approval has to be made based on a record.

The State must provide public notice of the proposed alternative.
Approved alternative AIMM is made available to the public on a state website: https cdphe.colorado.gov/
alternative-aimm-public-notices.
One final feature of the States alternative AIMM rule bears mentioning. It includes a requirement that the State agency submit the proposed alternative AIMM to the EPA
for review. The alternative AIMM must receive the EPAs approval, but this approval may occur by default if the EPA does not disapprove the rule within six months. While this six-month EPA review period gives an additional opportunity for regulatory scrutiny of alternative AIMM proposals before approval, it is not equivalent to the SIP
process, and is not the basis for our proposed approval of this action.
Rather, it is because the alternative AIMM rules provide substantive criteria that constrain the States exercise of discretion and allow the EPA to anticipate the impacts of the use of alternatives. For that reason, and as explained further above, we propose to approve the submitted new section XII.L.
A detailed evaluation of Section XII as a whole is in the TSD for this action. We propose to find that the submitted revisions to Section XII meet CAA and RACT requirements, and that they strengthen the SIP.
c. Section XVIII
Section XVIII regulates emissions from natural gas-actuated pneumatic controllers located at or upstream of natural gas processing plants, and establishes RACT requirements for oil and gas operations. Section XVIII.C.1.
requires that all pneumatic controllers installed on or before February 1, 2009
upstream of natural gas processing plants in the DMNFR Area must emit
natural gas emissions in an amount equal to or less than a low-bleed pneumatic controller, unless a highbleed pneumatic controller is required for safety or process purposes. Section XVIII.C.2. requires that all pneumatic controllers at natural gas processing plants have a bleed rate of zero unless a pneumatic controller with a bleed rate greater than zero is necessary due to safety and process. Monitoring and recordkeeping requirements are set forth in Sections XVIII.D. and XVIII.E. and include inspection, maintenance, and records demonstrating compliance with emission reduction requirements in Section XVIII.C. Section XVIII.D.2.
establishes additional monitoring and maintenance for pneumatic controllers with a natural gas bleed rate greater than zero.
A detailed evaluation of Section XVIII
is in the TSD for this action. We propose to find that the revisions to Section XVIII strengthen the SIP and meet CAA
and RACT requirements. We therefore propose to approve the changes in Section XVIII.
2. May 8, 2019 Submittal The States May 8, 2019 submittal contains typographical, grammatical, and formatting corrections to Reg. 7
Sections XII and XVIII that were not acted on in our February 24, 2021
action.57 The revisions do not change the substance of approved SIP
provisions. We therefore propose to approve the revisions in Sections XII
and XVIII.
3. May 13, 2020 SIP Submittal The States May 13, 2020 SIP
submittal contains amendments to Reg.
7, including a full reorganization of the regulation into Parts AE. Table 4 show the current Reg. 7 numbering as related to the proposed Reg. 7 renumbering.

TABLE 4CURRENT AND REORGANIZED REG. 7 SECTIONS
Current Reg. 7 sections
Reorganized Reg. 7 sections Part A

I. Applicability
II. General Provisions
Appendix A. Colorado Ozone Nonattainment or Attainment Maintenance Areas

Part A, Section I.
Part A, Section II.
Part A, Appendix A.

lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

Part B
III. General Requirements for Storage and Transfer of Volatile Organic Compounds
IV. Storage of Highly Volatile Organic Compounds
54 See Alternative AIMM Guidance & Procedures CDPHE, Oct. 31, 2019 EPAR08OAR2021
02620003.
55 See Alternative AIMM Guidance at 6.
56 In this respect the states guidance, provided to EPA to assist in explaining the functioning of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:16 Jun 21, 2021

Jkt 253001

state program, clarifies one arguable ambiguity in the submitted language. Specifically, the comma after data in XII.L.8.a.iiI leaves unclear whether the rule requires data or modeling, or data and modeling; the states guidance makes clear that and is intended when it says that modeling should not be relied on exclusively for this
PO 00000

Frm 00012

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

Part B, Section I.
Part B, Section II.
demonstration, but that there should be testing as well. See also Letter from Garry Kaufman, Director, Air Pollution Control Division March 24, 2021
providing clarifying information, available in the docket for this action.
57 86 FR 11125.

E:FRFM22JNP1.SGM

22JNP1