k ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ROCKY MOUNTAIN-PRAIRIE REGION
REGION VIII
| ENFORCEMENT OF STATE
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN COMPLIANCE
SCHEDULES
JUNE 5, 1972

-------
^ 3!f3
ies
oil?
ACC0WUSHffiN1 BLAS
REGION VIII 			
U.S EPA Region 8 Library
80C-L
999 181 h St , Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2466
ENFORCEMENT OF STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES
JUNE 5, 1972
J DONALD P. DUBOIS
DEPUTY REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR
DAVID D. EMERY
ASSISTANT FOR PLANNING
AND EVALUATION

-------
COLORADO COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES
I.	Priority Areas Covered:
A.	Priority I
1.	Pawnee - Particulates
2.	Denver - Particulates, CO, HC and S0X
3.	San Isabel - Particulates
B.	Priority IA
1. Four Corners - Particulates, S0X and N0X
II.	Problem Assessment:
A. State Statutory Law and Regulations
Regulations have been adopted for the national air pollutants, and they
are presently effective. Therefore, compliance schedules are necessary
for those stationary sources which cannot meet the specific regulation
requirements. Statutory authority exists for establishing compliance
schedules in Colorado for the attainment of the standards for national air
pollutants. Such compliance schedules are developed through the variance
procedure. Under Colorado law failure to meet any condition of a compliance
schedule voids the same and subjects the source to immediate enforcement
penalties.
Although no problems are anticipated as to those sources which are not
yet under compliance schedules, we will monitor closely the schedules which
the State develops to determine whether they are legally and technically
sufficient.
Generally, the "Federal-State relationship is excellent and an effective
joint effort to achieve national standards is likely.

-------
Page 2 - Colorado Compliance Schedules
B. State Air Quality Region
1.	Pawnee: Particulates caused by sugar beet processing and
alfalfa dehydration plants are the major problem in this AQCR and var-
iances or compliance schedules and the content will have to be studied.
2.	Denver: Particulates, CO, HC and 0X ambient level problems
are caused for the most part by mobile sources, with power plants con-
tributing. At present, power plants are under a compliance schedule.
3.	San Isabel: Excessive particulate level is caused in part
by CF&I Cement Plant near Florence, Colorado, and Rock Wool Company in
Pueblo. Sources are under compliance schedule.
4.	Four Corners: Particulates, S0X and N0X levels result from
power plant operations in adjoining states.
III. Agency Objectives
A.	Ensure attainment and maintenance of national primary ambient
air quality standards for particulates, S0X and NOx by July 31, 1975,
and for CO and hydrocarbons and oxidants by 1977 (two year extension
granted), by overseeing the proper administration and enforcement by the
State of regulations and variances (compliance schedules) pertaining
thereto. Objective applies to whole State.
B.	Assist in the development of legally and technically adequate
compliance schedules not yet established for all sources producing ex-
cessive emissions by February 15, 1973, and enforce the same.

-------
Page 3 - Colorado Compliance Schedules
IV. Approach:
Since it is felt that the Colorado Air Pollution Control Commission
has adequately addressed itself to bringing sources into compliance by
1975, our approach will be to monitor compliance schedules closely to see
that effective progress toward the attainment of national ambient air
quality standards is made. Any violations of Section 113 of the Clean
Air Act will be vigorously pursued.

-------
~ PE OF PLAN
, SUB-EL EM EN T
. P ART SU B-EL EM EN T
. GEOGRAPHICAL AREA
2. PROGRAM SUB-ELEMENT TITLE
Stationary Source Enforcement - Comcliance Schedules
3. SUB-ELEMENT NO.
3A1121
4. SH EE T NO.
lof 1
S. GEOGRAPHICAL AREA TITLE
Colorado: Pawnee. Denver. San Isabel. & Four Corners A0CR
6. GEOGRAPHICAL AREA COOE
08
7. PRIORITY
I & IA
DE
9-
NO.
10. SCHEDULE
DATE O F
COMPL ETION
11.
PLANNED ACCOMPLISHMENTS

1
2-15-73
Ensure that remaining compliance schedules developed by State are legally and technically



enforceable and are submitted by 2-15-73.

2
Ongoing
Monitor compliance schedules to ensure that sources are complying with conditions and interim



dates; bring Federal enforcement action when violations of Section 113 occur and State



enforcement action is deemed inadequate.

3
7-31-75/77
Achieve attainment of national primary ambient air quality standards for particulates, S0X and



N0X by July 31, 1975, and for CO and hydrocarbons - oxidants by July 31, 1977 (2 year extension



granted).




























FY 1973
13. FY 1974
14. PREPARED BY AND DATE
Tom Rogers June 6, 1972
IS. REVIEW BY ANO DATE
a. $1000
b. MAN-YEARS
O. s 1000
b. M AN- Y EARS




16. APPROVED.FOR RPIO
, Form3500-4 (R*v. 4-72)	PLANNED ACCOMPLISHMENTS SCHEDULE

-------
MONTANA COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES
I.	Priority Areas Covered
A.	Priority I - Missoula - Particulates
B.	Priority IA - Great Falls - S0X *
- Helena - Particulates and S0X
*NOTE: That the plan submitted has inadequate S0X emission standards;
however, standards will be promulgated, and implemented and enforced,
if State does not submit by deadline date or if the State does not
enforce its own more stringent standards.
II.	Problem Assessment
A. State Statute and Regulations
Emission control regulations for all national air pollutants, with the
exception of S0X requirements for smelters, have been adopted by the State,
and approved by EPA. These regulations all contain a final effective date
for compliance with national standards. Some regulations provide for
interim progress dates, which vary with each pollutant depending upon the
difficulty of meeting the established standard. In addition, where a
source cannot meet the requirement of a regulation, a variance establishing
a different compliance schedule may be obtained. The statutory authority
to enforce violations of compliance schedules, whether established through
regulations or variances, appears to be adequate.
With respect to a regulation for S0X emissions from smelters, it is
not expected that the State will submit such a regulation before July 31,
1972. Consequently, an enforceable regulation will have to be Federally
promulgated.

-------
Page 2 - Montana Compliance Schedules
Local agencies in Cascade, Missoula, and Yellowstone Counties have
been granted authority, pursuant to statute, to enforce air pollution con-
trol plans for these areas. Information to date indicates that enforcement
will proceed adequately under local efforts. (These local agencies have
adopted, in toto, the State statutes and regulations.) The local agency
burden is lessened by the fact that jurisdiction over major sources of air
pollution has been retained by the State agency.
Notwithstanding the fact that we have approved the regulations
mentioned above, there are several potential problems. State statutory
authority for enforcement, although adequate to allow enforcement action,
does not provide for mandatory enforcement of a violation of the regulations.
Similarly, when enforcement action is taken, there is neither an obligation
to require corrective action nor is there a specified time within which
such correction, if any, must be taken. Consequently, the possibility
exists for either weak or open-ended State enforcement of its regulations.
At this point it is impossible to determine whether or not the State
will use its enforcement authority aggressively to attain national standards.
We will work closely with the State to seek legislative correction of these
apparent weaknesses in the enforcement provisions.
B. State Air Quality Regions
1. Missoula: Ambient air quality for particulates exceeds the
National primary ambient air quality standards. A combination of sources:
Hoerner Waldorf Corporation (Kraft pulp mill); Dupius Brothers Lumber
Company (plywood plant-wood burners, etc.); Van Evans Company (teepee

-------
Page 3 - Montana Compliance Schedules
burners and sawmill) and slash burning (seasonal) account for most of the
excessive level. Some sources of excessive emissions are under variance,
while others are not, see page 23-24 of Montana IP. Obviously, a great
deal of attention will have to be paid to this situation and notices of
violations issued as soon as the IP has become effective, if variances are
not developed in the interim.
2.	Great Falls - S0X: Anaconda Zinc Smelter, plus the Phillips
Petroleum refinery, is the reason that the S0X primary ambient air quality
standard is being exceeded. Information at this date indicates that the
smelter has begun to cease operations; thereby eliminating it from
the problem area. The refinery is presently on a variance from present
regulations. Compliance with the regulation would achieve the air quality
standards.
3.	Helena - Particulates and S0X American Smelting and Refinery
Company (ASARCO), a lead and zinc smelter, is the source of particulates
and S0X emission which currently cause the primary national standards to
be exceeded. Emissions from the Anaconda Copper Smelter at Anaconda are
also causing the S0X air quality standard to be exceeded. These sources
are under State compliance schedules calling for compliance with a State
emission' regulation effective June 30, 1973. However, these SOx compliance
schedules were not submitted as part of the Montana IP and it is likely that
EPA will have to develop regulations and compliance schedules. These
regulations would call for interim progress dates to insure compliance with
the regulation by July 31, 1975. It is possible, however, that the State
agency will enforce the more stringent compliance schedules for S0X making
it unnecessary for EPA to do so.

-------
Page 4 - Montana Compliance Schedules
III.	Agency Objectives
A.	Ensure attainment and maintenance of national primary ambient air
quality standards by July 31, 1975, through proper monitoring of regulations
and compliance schedules designed to ensure attainment of the standards.
(See: IV Approach)
B.	Assist the State in the development by February 15, 1973, of
legally and technically adequate compliance schedules for all sources
producing excessive emissions, and take Federal enforcement action with
regard to the same if adequate action is not taken by the State within 30
days of any Notice of Violation issued by EPA, as required by Section 113
of the Clean Air Act.
C.	Observe and analyze the success of the State and local enforcement
effort to determine if the statutory provisions relating to enforcement
and penalties are adequate. Assist the State in developing statutory
language to improve any determined inadequacy, at such time as is appropriate.
IV.	Approach
Efforts to reach primary national ambient air quality standards in
Montana, both on the State and local level, appear to be adequate in many
respects at this time. However, special attention will have to be given
to the development by February 15, 1973, of adequate compliance schedules
for all sources violating present regulations. Once adequate compliance
schedules are established, either through the State variance procedure or
the Federal enforcement procedure, enforcement efforts by Region VIII will
turn to monitoring. The monitoring procedure will be as follows: when a

-------
Page 5 - Montana Compliance Schedules
emission violation is alleged, we will check to ensure that the emission
from the source is within the parameters allowed by State regulation as
of the day of violation, and if not, we will see if a variance has been
granted and the emission meets the variance conditions as of the date
involved. If not, notice will be given and Federal enforcement action
will be initiated when State action is deemed inadequate. In addition,
failure to submit on time reports or plans required by a compliance
schedule or regulation will result in a notice of violation. We will
require correction within 30 days. Federal enforcement action will be
taken if adequate correction is not made within the time allowed.
State enforcement effectiveness will be followed closely to determine
if any improvement in the existing statutcpry requirements, or lack of
requirements, is necessary. If the State does not strengthen the provisions
in its enforcement statute, a period of Federally assumed enforcement will
ensue.

-------
1. TYPE or PLAN
j Q. SUB-ELEMENT
' b. PART SUB-ELEMENT
C. GEOGRAPHICAL AREA
12. PROGRAM SUB-ELEMENT TITLE
Stationary Source Enforcement - Compliance Schedules
3. SUB-ELEMENT NO.
3A112.1
4. SHEET NO. !
1 nf 1
5. GEOGRAPHICAL AREA TITLE
Montana: Missoula, Great Falls, & Helena AOCP
6. GEOGRAPHICAL AREA CODE'
OR
7. PRIORITY ;
T ATA
8.
CODE
9.
NO.
10. SCHEDULE
DATE OF
COMPLETION
i 1.
PLANNED ACCOMPLISHMENTS
I

1
8-31-72
Promulgate enforcement regulations for S0X standards for smelter sources.

2
2-15-73
Place all sources in violation of State regulations for national air pollutants under



compliance schedules and ensure, through cooperation with the State, that thp rnntpnt nf



the compliance schedules is legally and technically adequate.

3
3ngoing
Monitor State administration and enforcement of compliance schedules: take action under



Section 113 whenever violations occur.

4
Ongoing
1
Observe effects of lack of requirement for corrective action and timetable for taking action



in State enforcement authority; seek legislative improvement and/or assume period of Federal



i
enforcement, if necessary.

5
7-31-75
Achieve national primary ambient standards throughout State.




















12. FY 1973
13. FY 1974
14. PREPARED BY AND DATE
Tom Rogers 6/5/72
15. REVIEW BY AND DATE
I. Dickstein 6/5/72
a. 5 1000
b. MAN-V EARS
O. $ 1000
b. M AN- YEARS




16. APPROVED FOR RPIO
EPA Form 3500-4 (Rev. 4-72)	PLANNED ACCOMPLISHMENTS SCHEDULE

-------
UTAH COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES
I.	Priority Areas Covered
A.	Priority I - Wasatch Front Range - All Pollutants
B.	Priority IA - Four Corners Area - Particulate, S0X and N0X
II.	Problem Assessment
A. State Statute and Regulations
Utah regulations for the attainment of national primary air standards
have been disapproved. Acceptable and enforceable revised regulations must
be submitted by July 31, 1972, or Federally promulgated regulations will
result. If the State does submit revised regulations, it is expected that
they will take the form of emission limitations for all sources which will
be immediately effective. If immediate compliance resulted, theoretically
the national primary air standards would be achieved.
However, from a practical standpoint, many sources will not be able
to comply immediately and will have to be placed on a compliance schedule.
Under Utah law, such compliance schedules for emissions in violation of
air standards can only be established through a variance procedure. These
variances, by law, may not be issued to sources which pose a threat to
human health. Therefore, a major problem is the legal enforceability of
variances incorporating compliance schedules which would be issued to sources
presently violating national primary standards established to protect the
public health.
Consequently, an immediate task is to determine no later than June 30,
1972, whether or not the revised regulations, in their anticipated form,
will be rendered unenforceable by the requirement that any variance issued
must not endanger the public health. If a determination is made that the
regulations will be unenforceable, we must work with the State to develop

-------
Page 2 - Utah Compliance Schedules
enforceable regulations by July 31, 1972, which will not incorporate the
variance procedure. New legislation modifying the variance law before
July 31, 1972, is out of the question.
If the State does not submit an acceptable and enforceable set of
revised regulations, we will have to promulgate such regulations for Utah.
These regulations will contain interim achievement dates for attaining
compliance with national primary standards. As such, these compliance
schedules will not be dependent upon any State variance procedure. Indeed,
the applicable Federal regulations do not provide for variances to
Federally adopted compliance schedules.
Another problem concerns the fact that, under the Utah Implementation
Plan, local air pollution control agencies have been delegated much
responsibility by the Utah Air Pollution Control Agency. However, there
is a great deal of vagueness as to how State and local enforcement activity
will be coordinated. This could result in a dissipated enforcement program.
Clarification will be sought.
A significant planning effort to focus on improving the Federal/State
relationship and determine how to get the State to strengthen its compliance
schedules under the present variance procedure will be necessary.
B. State Air Quality Areas
L. Wasatch Front: This AQCR includes Salt Lake City, the second
largest metro area in Region VIII. The present air quality violates
national ambient standards for all national pollutants. Kennecott Copper
is the largest single stationary source contributor, with several oil
refineries and severe mobile source pollution compounding the problem.

-------
Page 3 - Utah Compliance Schedules
The problem, therefore, involves several areas and will require close
attention to State enforcement of State or Federally established compliance
schedules.
2. Four Corners: The Southwest Energy Study has predicted that
ambient air quality standards for sulfur oxides will be exceeded
as a result of a single source of pollution, a fossil fuel steam generating
plant to be located near Price, Utah. The Utah IP at this time does not
contain a regulation addressing itself to S0X air quality. An enforceable
regulation to achieve national standards must be submitted by the State by
July 31, 1972, or a Federal regulation will be promulgated.
III. Agency Objectives
A.	Ensure attainment and maintenance of national primary ambient air
standards for S0X, particulate, HC, N0X and photochemical oxidants in
the State of Utah by July 31, 1975. Standards for CO in the Wasatch
intrastate AQCR must be achieved by July 31, 1977. Standards should be
achieved through proper State administration of individual or source
category compliance schedules, or through Federally assumed enforcement
activity, if necessary. This objective applies to both the Wasatch Front
and the Four Corners AQC Regions.
B.	Strengthen compliance schedule programs through improvement of
content and enforceability, and by development of all necessary regulations
pertaining thereto. Federal action may be required if State progress is
inadequate by July 31, 1972.

-------
Page 4 - Utah Compliance Schedules
C. Work toward interim short-term achievement, in both emission
reduction and visibility improvement, by improving Federal/State relation-
ship and by stressing the importance of attaining compliance schedule
interim dates.
IV. Approach
Assuming that revised regulations are submitted in their anticipated
form, determination of the legality of granting variances under Utah law
will have to be made immediately. If the variance procedure will render
the revised regulations unenforceable, we must work closely with the State
to develop regulations by July 31, 1972, which are enforceable and do not
rely on a variance procedure. If such enforceable regulations are not
submitted by July 31, 1972, Federal promulgation will ensue.
Following the establishment of enforceable regulations for developing
effective compliance schedules, Federal enforcement activity will consist
of observing closely State enforcement of such compliance schedules. Any
violations of Section 113 of the Clean Air Act will be vigorously pursued.

-------
1. TYPE OF PLAN
i ' Q. SUB-ELEMENT
' ' b. PA^T S'J B-EL EM EN"**
' ' C. GEOGRAPHICAL AREA
2. PROGRAM SUB-ELEMENT TITLE
Stationary Source Enforcement - Compliance Schedules
3. SUB-ELEMENT NO.
3A1121
4. SH EET NO.
1 of 1
-5. geographical-area title
Utah: Wasatch Front Range & Four Corners Area AOCR
61 'GEOGRAPHIC AL AREA CODE"
08
-7/PRIORITY*-
I & IA
s
CODE
5.
NO.
¦¦0. SCHEDULE
DATE OF
COMPLETION
11.
F .ANN ED ACCOMPLISHMENTS

1 l
6-30-72
Determine legal enforceability of anticipated revised regulations hased nn prpspnt-
:
i

Utah variance procedure.
I
i
I 2-
•7-31-7-2
Work with State to^develop'enforceable revised - regulations if present variance prnrpHnrp
j

invalid. !
I
I
i 3
8-31-72
Promulgate effective Federal regulations for attaining national air standards if State
1
. I

does not submit enforceable revised regulations.
t
I
; 4
9-30-72
Determine how State and local agencies will handle respective enforcement authorities.
! 5
2-15-73
i
Ensure that all compliance schedules developed through effective regulations are technically 1
i
1

and legally enforceable and are submitted on time.

6
Ongoing
Monitor State and local administration of State Implementation Plan to ensure effective



enforcement of regulations; take Federal enforcement action whenever necessary under Section 11:

7
7-31-75/77
Achieve and maintain national ambient primary air quality standards for particulates, S0x and



hydrocarbon-oxidants throughout the State of Utah by July 31, 1975, and standards for CO and



N0X by July 31, 1977, on account of 2-year extension.




12. FY 1973
13. FY 1974
14. PREPARED HY AND DATE
Irwin L. Dickstein, June 6, 1972
15. REVIEW BY AND DATE
a. $1000
b. WAN-Y EARS
O. S 1 000
b. MAN-YEARS




16. APPROVED f'OR RPIO
S
EPA Form 3500-4 (R„v. 4.72)	PLANNED ACCOMPLISHMENTS SCHEDULE

-------