Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Permitting for Greenhouse Gases: Removal of Certain Vacated Elements, 50199-50203 [2015-20501]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 160 / Wednesday, August 19, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
III. Final Action
IV. Implementation
V. Environmental Justice Considerations
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
VII. Judicial Review
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 51, 52, 70, and 71
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2015–0414; FRL–9932–11–
OAR]
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
and Title V Permitting for Greenhouse
Gases: Removal of Certain Vacated
Elements
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is amending its
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD) and title V regulations to remove
from the Code of Federal Regulations
portions of those regulations that were
initially promulgated in 2010 and that
the Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit)
specifically identified as vacated in the
April 10, 2015, amended judgment,
Coalition for Responsible Regulation v.
EPA. This action is exempt from noticeand-comment rulemaking because it is
ministerial in nature.
DATES: This rule is effective on August
19, 2015.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2015–0414. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the EPA Docket Center, Room 3334,
EPA William Jefferson Clinton West
Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004.
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 Office of
Air and Radiation Docket is (202) 566–
1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Questions concerning this final rule
should be addressed to Mrs. Jessica
˜
Montanez, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Air Quality
Planning Division, (C504–03), Research
Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone
number (919) 541–3407, email at
montanez.jessica@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
information in this section of the
preamble is organized as follows:
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
I. Does this action apply to me?
II. Background and Rationale for This Action
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:08 Aug 18, 2015
Jkt 235001
I. Does this action apply to me?
Entities potentially affected by this
final action include new and modified
stationary sources in all industry
groups. To determine whether your
facility would be affected by this action,
you should carefully examine the
applicability criteria in §§ 51.166 and
52.21 of title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR). Entities potentially
affected by this final action also include
state, local and tribal governments that
are authorized to implement the PSD
program through an EPA-approved State
Implementation Plan (SIP) or Tribal
Implementation Plan (TIP) or that have
been authorized to implement the PSD
program through a delegation of the
federal PSD regulations.
II. Background and Rationale for This
Action
Part C of title I of the Clean Air Act
(CAA or the Act) contains the
requirements for a component of the
major New Source Review (NSR)
program known as the PSD program.
This program sets forth procedures for
the preconstruction review and
permitting of new and modified
stationary sources of air pollution
locating in areas meeting the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) (‘‘attainment’’ areas) and areas
for which there is insufficient
information to classify an area as either
attainment or nonattainment
(‘‘unclassifiable’’ areas). The
applicability of PSD to a particular
source must be determined in advance
of construction of a new source or major
modification of an existing source and
is pollutant-specific. Once a source is
determined to be subject to PSD, among
other requirements, the source must
demonstrate that it will not cause or
contribute to a violation of any NAAQS
or PSD increment,1 and that it will use
the Best Available Control Technology
(BACT).2 The EPA regulations for the
PSD program are contained in 40 CFR
51.166 (applicable to air agencies that
issue permits under EPA-approved SIPs)
and 40 CFR 52.21 (the federal PSD
program applicable to permits issued by
the EPA or air agencies that have
received delegation to implement the
federal PSD program).
Title V of the CAA, on the other hand,
requires all major stationary sources of
air pollution and certain other sources
1 CAA
2 CAA
PO 00000
section 165(a)(3).
section 165(a)(4).
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
to apply for a title V operating permit
that includes emission limitations and
other conditions as necessary to assure
compliance with applicable
requirements of the CAA.3 The title V
operating permit program is a vehicle
for ensuring that air quality control
requirements are appropriately applied
to facility emission units and for
assuring compliance with such
requirements. The title V program does
not generally impose new substantive
air quality control requirements, but
does require permits to contain
adequate monitoring, recordkeeping,
reporting and other requirements to
assure sources’ compliance. The title V
program is implemented through
regulations contained in 40 CFR part 70
(for programs implemented by state or
local agencies and tribes) and 40 CFR
part 71 (for programs generally
implemented by the EPA).
On June 3, 2010, the EPA published
a final rule, known as the Tailoring
Rule, which phased in permitting
requirements for greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions from stationary sources under
the CAA PSD and title V permitting
programs (75 FR 31514). Under its
interpretation of the CAA at the time,
the EPA believed the Tailoring Rule was
necessary to avoid a sudden and
unmanageable increase in the number of
sources that would be required to obtain
PSD and title V permits under the CAA
because the sources emitted or had the
potential to emit GHGs above the
applicable major source and major
modification thresholds. In Step 1 of the
Tailoring Rule, which began on January
2, 2011, the EPA limited application of
PSD and title V requirements to sources
only if they were subject to PSD or title
V ‘‘anyway’’ due to their emissions of
non-GHG pollutants. These sources are
referred to as ‘‘anyway sources.’’ In Step
2 of the Tailoring Rule, which began on
July 1, 2011, the EPA applied the PSD
and title V permitting requirements
under the CAA to sources that were
classified as major, and, thus, required
to obtain a permit, based solely on their
GHG emissions or potential to emit
GHGs, and to modifications of otherwise
major sources that required a PSD
permit because they increased only
GHG emissions above the level in the
EPA regulations.
On June 23, 2014, the U.S. Supreme
Court issued a decision in Utility Air
Regulatory Group (UARG) v. EPA, 134
S. Ct. 2427, addressing the application
of stationary source permitting
requirements to GHGs. The U.S.
Supreme Court held that the EPA may
not treat GHGs as an air pollutant for the
3 CAA
Sfmt 4700
50199
E:\FR\FM\19AUR1.SGM
sections 502(a) and 504(a).
19AUR1
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
50200
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 160 / Wednesday, August 19, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
specific purpose of determining whether
a source is a major source (or a
modification thereof) and thus required
to obtain a PSD or title V permit.
However, the U.S. Supreme Court also
said that the EPA could continue to
require that PSD permits, otherwise
required based on emissions of
pollutants other than GHGs pollutants,
contain limitations on GHG emissions
based on the application of GHG BACT.
That is, with respect to PSD, the ruling
effectively upheld PSD permitting
requirements for GHG emissions under
Step 1 of the Tailoring Rule for ‘‘anyway
sources,’’ and invalidated PSD
permitting requirements for Step 2
sources.
Because the Supreme Court decision
affirmed in part and reversed in part an
earlier decision of the D.C. Circuit in
Coalition for Responsible Regulation v.
EPA, 684 F.3d 102 (D.C. Cir. 2012), on
April 10, 2015, the D.C. Circuit issued
an Amended Judgment (Nos. 09–1322,
10–073, 10–1092 and 10–1167), which
reflects the UARG v. EPA Supreme
Court decision. The D.C. Circuit
simultaneously issued its mandate,
which means that the Coalition
Amended Judgment became final and
effective upon issuance.
In the Coalition Amended Judgment,
the D.C. Circuit ordered that the EPA
regulations under review (including 40
CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v) and 40 CFR
52.21(b)(49)(v)) be vacated to the extent
they require a stationary source to
obtain a PSD permit if GHGs are the
only pollutant (i) that the source emits
or has the potential to emit above the
applicable major source thresholds, or
(ii) for which there is a significant
emissions increase from a modification.
The D.C. Circuit also ordered that the
regulations under review be vacated to
the extent they require (i) a stationary
source to obtain a title V permit solely
because the source emits or has the
potential to emit GHGs above the
applicable major source thresholds and
(ii) the EPA to consider further phasingin the GHG permitting requirements at
lower GHG emission thresholds (in
particular 40 CFR 52.22 and 40 CFR
70.12, 71.13).
Consistent with the Coalition
Amended Judgment, this action removes
from the PSD regulations certain
regulatory provisions that require a
stationary source to obtain a PSD permit
solely on the basis of the source’s GHG
emissions and the regulations that
require the EPA to consider further
phasing-in GHG permitting
requirements into the PSD and title V
permitting programs at lower GHG
emissions thresholds. The EPA intends
to further revise the PSD and title V
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:08 Aug 18, 2015
Jkt 235001
regulations to fully implement the
Coalition Amended Judgment in a
separate rulemaking. This future
rulemaking will include revisions to
additional definitions in the PSD
regulations. It will also include further
revising the title V regulations to
remove portions of the title V
regulations that were vacated in the
Coalition Amended Judgment case—
those that require a stationary source to
obtain a title V permit solely because
the source emits or has the potential to
emit GHGs above the applicable major
source thresholds. Those additional
revisions to the PSD and title V
regulations, although necessary to
implement the Coalition Amended
Judgment, are not purely ministerial in
nature and will be addressed in this
separate notice-and-comment
rulemaking, which would give the
public an opportunity to comment on
how the EPA proposes to address those
portions of the Coalition Amended
Judgment.
III. Final Action
This final action removes from the
CFR several provisions of the PSD and
title V permitting regulations that were
originally promulgated as part of the
Tailoring Rule and that the D.C. Circuit
specifically identified as vacated in the
Coalition Amended Judgment. Because
the D.C. Circuit specifically identified
the Tailoring Rule Step 2 PSD
permitting requirements in 40 CFR
51.166(b)(48)(v) and 40 CFR
52.21(b)(49)(v) and the regulations that
require the EPA to consider further
phasing-in the GHG permitting
requirements at lower GHG emission
thresholds in 40 CFR 52.22, 70.12, and
71.13 as vacated, the EPA is taking the
ministerial action of removing these
provisions from the CFR.
Furthermore, and since the D.C.
Circuit’s Coalition Amended Judgment
further ordered ‘‘the EPA to take steps
to rescind and/or revise the applicable
provisions of the CFR as expeditiously
as practicable’’ to reflect its vacatur of
certain provisions from the Tailoring
Rule, this rulemaking addresses only
those provisions specifically identified
in the Coalition Amended Judgment that
can be removed from the CFR without
the need for any further changes. In a
subsequent notice-and-comment
rulemaking, the EPA will need to make
additional changes to its PSD and title
V permitting regulations in order to
fully implement the Coalition Amended
Judgment.
The EPA is taking this action as a
final rule without providing an
opportunity for public comment or a
public hearing because the EPA finds
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
that the Administrative Procedure Act
(APA) good cause exemption applies
here. In general, the APA requires that
general notice of proposed rulemaking
shall be published in the Federal
Register. Such notice must provide an
opportunity for public participation in
the rulemaking process. However, the
APA also provides a way for an agency
to directly issue a final rulemaking in
certain specific instances. This may
occur, in particular, when an agency for
good cause finds (and incorporates the
finding and a brief statement of reasons
in the rule issued) that notice and
public procedure thereon are
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary
to the public interest. See 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B). The EPA has determined
that it is not necessary to provide a
public hearing or an opportunity for
public comment on this action because
the removal of the affected PSD and title
V Tailoring Rule provisions from the
CFR is a necessary ministerial act. The
D.C. Circuit specifically identified as
vacated the PSD and title V regulations
this rule removes, and ordered that the
EPA take steps to rescind and/or revise
the applicable provisions of the CFR as
expeditiously as practicable. The EPA
no longer has the authority to require
any source to obtain a PSD or title V
permit based solely on the source
having GHG emissions above applicable
thresholds. Thus, EPA may not
implement the vacated provisions at 40
CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v) and 52.21(b)(49)(v)
that applied PSD to this population of
sources. Further, the EPA is no longer
required to take the actions specified in
the vacated regulations at 40 CFR 52.22,
70.12, and 71.13 to consider further
phasing in GHG PSD and title V
permitting requirements at lower GHG
emissions thresholds. Therefore,
removing the affected regulatory text
simply implements the decision of the
Supreme Court and D.C. Circuit and it
would serve no useful purpose to
provide an opportunity for public
comment or a public hearing on this
issue.
In addition, notice-and-comment
would be contrary to the public interest
because it would unnecessarily delay
the removal from the CFR of the
Tailoring Rule Step 2 PSD permitting
provisions that the Supreme Court held
were invalid and the regulations that
require the EPA to consider further
phasing-in the GHG permitting
requirements for lower GHG emissions
thresholds in 40 CFR 52.22, 70.12, and
71.13 that the D.C. Circuit’s Coalition
Amended Judgment specifically
identified as vacated. Such delay could
result in confusion on the part of the
E:\FR\FM\19AUR1.SGM
19AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 160 / Wednesday, August 19, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
regulated industry and state, local and
tribal air agencies about how the D.C.
Circuit’s decision affects the PSD and
title V regulations as well as PSD
permitting. Promulgation of this rule
soon after the D.C. Circuit decision
serves to clarify that sources are no
longer required to obtain PSD permits
under the preconstruction permitting
regulations associated with Step 2 of the
Tailoring Rule and that the EPA will not
be required under 40 CFR 52.22, 70.12,
and 71.13 to take further steps to
consider further phasing in PSD and
title V permitting requirements at lower
GHG emissions thresholds. Given the
substantial costs to the owner/operator
of projects associated with delays and
uncertainty, it is in the public interest
for the EPA to amend the CFR without
delay. Furthermore, and as stated
previously, the D.C. Circuit’s Coalition
Amended Judgment ordered the EPA to
take steps to undertake these revisions
as expeditiously as practicable.
For these reasons, the EPA finds good
cause to issue a final rulemaking
pursuant to section 553 of the APA, 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B). The requirements of
CAA section 307(d), including the
requirement for public comment and
hearing on proposed rulemakings, do
not apply to this action because 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B) applies. In addition, this
rule relieves a restriction on
construction of some stationary sources
and therefore is not subject to the
requirement for a 30-day delay in
effective date. 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1).
Moreover, the agency finds that the
problems outlined above regarding the
effects of delaying issuance of the rule
also provide good cause for not delaying
its effective date. 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3).
Accordingly, the requirement for a delay
in effective date does not apply and the
rule will take effect upon publication in
the Federal Register. 5 U.S.C. 553(d).
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
IV. Implementation
The D.C. Circuit’s vacatur of the
Tailoring Rule Step 2 PSD permitting
requirements in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v)
and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(49)(v) and the
provisions that required further action
to consider phasing-in GHG permitting
requirements into the PSD and title V
programs at lower GHG emission
thresholds at 40 CFR 52.22, 70.12, and
71.13 means that these provisions can
no longer be relied upon by the EPA,
permit applicants or permitting
authorities as a basis for issuing PSD
permits. Further, this means that the
EPA will not be required to take the
actions specified in the regulations at 40
CFR 52.22, 70.12, and 71.13 to consider
further phasing in GHG PSD and title V
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:08 Aug 18, 2015
Jkt 235001
permitting requirements at lower GHG
emissions thresholds.
Permit reviewing authorities with
EPA-approved SIPs containing any or
all of the affected provisions previously
allowed by 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v) may
request to remove their corresponding
Tailoring Rule Step 2 provisions as soon
as feasible, which may be in
conjunction with the next otherwise
planned SIP revision. Permit reviewing
authorities also have the option to retain
the Tailoring Rule Step 2 permitting
requirements solely as a requirement of
state law, but these requirements will
not be approved as part of their
federally-enforceable SIP. As we
explained in a memorandum issued by
the agency on July 24, 2014, titled,
‘‘Next Steps and Preliminary Views on
the Application of Clean Air Act
Permitting Programs to Greenhouse
Gases Following the Supreme Court’s
Decision in UARG v. EPA’’ (Preliminary
Views Memo),4 we again note that the
‘‘[EPA does] not read the [U.S.] Supreme
Court decision to preclude states from
retaining permitting requirements for
sources of GHG emissions that apply
independently under state law even
where those requirements are no longer
required under federal law.’’
With regard to PSD Step 2 permits
already issued, the Preliminary Views
Memo explained that the EPA ‘‘will no
longer require PSD . . . permits for Step
2 sources’’ (Preliminary Views Memo at
2) and that the EPA expected ‘‘to
provide additional views in the future
with respect to Step 2 sources that had
already obtained a PSD permit . . .’’
(Preliminary Views Memo at 4). The
EPA provided additional views
regarding EPA-issued Step 2 PSD
permits 5 when it issued two
memoranda on December 19, 2014. In
the first memorandum issued by the
Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) and
titled, ‘‘Next Steps for Addressing EPAIssued Step 2 Prevention of Significant
Deterioration Greenhouse Gas Permits
and Associated Requirements’’ (OAR
Next Steps Memo),6 the EPA explained
that it intended to complete a
rulemaking ‘‘authorizing the rescission
of Step 2 PSD permits.’’ In the second
4 https://epa.gov/nsr/documents/
20140724memo.pdf.
5 For purposes of this rule, the phrases ‘‘EPAissued PSD permits that were issued under Step 2
of the Tailoring Rule’’ and ‘‘EPA-issued Step 2 PSD
permits’’ are intended to have the same meaning.
The use of the term ‘‘EPA-issued’’ in both phrases
includes PSD permits issued by the EPA as well as
permits issued by state or local reviewing
authorities exercising federal law authority
delegated by an EPA Regional Office under 40 CFR
52.21(u).
6 https://www.epa.gov/nsr/ghgdocs/
Step2PermitRescissionMemoFinal_12-19-14.pdf.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
50201
memorandum, which was issued by the
Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance (OECA) and titled, ‘‘No
Action Assurance Regarding EPA-Issued
Step 2 Prevention of Significant
Deterioration Permits and Related Title
V Requirements Following Utility Air
Regulatory Group v. Environmental
Protection Agency’’ (OECA No Action
Assurance Memo),7 OECA issued a
narrowly tailored No Action Assurance
for sources with EPA-issued Step 2 PSD
permits. The OECA No Action
Assurance Memo establishes that the
EPA will exercise its enforcement
discretion not to pursue enforcement of
the terms and conditions relating to
GHGs in a source’s EPA-issued Step 2
PSD permit, and for related GHG terms
and conditions that are contained in the
source’s title V permit, if any, until
11:59 p.m. EDT, September 30, 2016.
The No Action Assurance ceases to
apply to a source once its EPA-issued
Step 2 PSD permit is rescinded, and, if
applicable, its title V permit is
accordingly revised, whichever is later.
Consistent with the plan described in
the OAR Next Steps Memo, the EPA
completed the rulemaking that allows
for rescission of Step 2 permits.
‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration
Permitting for Greenhouse Gases:
Providing Option for Rescission of EPAIssued Tailoring Rule Step 2 Prevention
of Significant Deterioration Permits’’ (80
FR 26183; May 7, 2015). This rule
provides a mechanism for the EPA and
delegated reviewing authorities to
rescind EPA-issued Step 2 PSD permits
in response to requests from applicants
who can demonstrate that they are
eligible for permit rescission and as
further discussed in that rule. EPA
received no comments on this rule, and
it is now in effect. Sources with
questions on PSD permitting obligations
arising from Step 2 PSD permits issued
by state, local or tribal permitting
authorities under permitting programs
approved into the state or tribal
implementation plans should review the
governing statutory provisions and the
provisions in the applicable state or
tribal implementation plans to
determine how to address these Step 2
permits and consult with the EPA, states
and tribes, as necessary.
In the case of sources that trigger PSD
based on emissions of pollutants other
than GHG (‘‘anyway sources’’), the PSD
BACT requirement continues to apply to
GHG emissions from such sources. This
rulemaking does not change
§§ 51.166(j), 51.166(b)(48)(iv), 52.21(j),
7 https://epa.gov/nsr/ghgdocs/
OECANoActionAssuranceMemo_
December192014.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\19AUR1.SGM
19AUR1
50202
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 160 / Wednesday, August 19, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
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 and was therefore not
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review.
This action does not contain any
unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does
not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The action imposes no
enforceable duty on any state, local or
tribal governments or the private sector.
This 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.
V. Environmental Justice
Considerations
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose any new
information collection burden under the
PRA. OMB has previously approved the
information collection activities
contained in the existing regulations
and has assigned OMB control number
2060–0003. To the extent this rule has
any substantive effect, it relieves
regulatory burdens by removing
regulations that purport to require
permit applicants to request PSD
permits if GHGs are the only pollutant
emitted by the new source or
modification to an existing source above
the applicable major source thresholds
and regulations that required the EPA to
consider further phasing-in the GHG
permitting requirements at lower GHG
emission thresholds. This action is
taken in light of the D.C. Circuit’s
Coalition Amended Judgment that
vacated those regulations.
This action removes sections and
paragraphs of the PSD and title V GHG
Tailoring Rule regulations that the D.C.
Circuit specifically identified as vacated
in the Coalition Amended Judgment. In
accordance with the changes made by
this action, permit applicants are no
longer required to request PSD permits
if GHGs are the only pollutant (i) that
the source emits or has the potential to
emit above the major source thresholds,
or (ii) for which there is a significant
emissions increase and a significant net
emissions increase from a modification.
In addition, the EPA will not be
required to take the actions specified in
the regulations at 40 CFR 52.22, 70.12,
and 71.13 to consider further phasing in
GHG PSD and title V permitting
requirements at lower GHG emissions
thresholds. Therefore, this action itself
does not compel any specific permit
action that will affect the fair treatment
and meaningful involvement of all
people. Rather, it makes clear that a
portion of the Coalition Amended
Judgment is efficiently implemented
and permit applicants are no longer
required to submit PSD permit
applications if GHGs are the only
pollutant that the sources emits above
the applicable major source thresholds.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the RFA. In making this
determination, the impact of concern is
any significant adverse economic
impact on small entities. An agency may
certify that a rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities if
the rule relieves regulatory burden, has
no net burden or otherwise has a
positive economic effect on the small
entities subject to the rule. To the extent
this rule has any substantive effect, it
relieves regulatory burdens by removing
regulations that purport to require
permit applicants to request PSD
permits if GHGs are the only pollutant
emitted by the new source or
modification to an existing source above
the applicable major source thresholds
and regulations that required the EPA to
consider further phasing-in the GHG
permitting requirements at lower GHG
emission thresholds. This action is
taken in light of the D.C. Circuit’s
Coalition Amended Judgment that
vacated those regulations. We have
therefore concluded that this action will
relieve regulatory burden for all directly
regulated small entities.
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
or 52.21(b)(48)(iv) of EPA’s regulations,
which remain in effect. Under these
provisions, the BACT requirement
applies to GHG emissions from ‘‘anyway
sources’’ when a new source emits or
has the potential to emit 75,000 tons per
year (tpy) or more of GHG on a carbon
dioxide equivalent (‘‘CO2e’’) basis.
When an anyway source is modified,
under these provisions, the BACT
requirement applies to GHGs if (1) the
modification is otherwise subject to PSD
for a pollutant other than GHG; and (2)
the modification results in a GHG
emissions increase and a net GHG
emission increase equal to or greater
than 75,000 tpy or more on a CO2e basis
and greater than zero on a mass basis.
With respect to title V, the D.C.
Circuit’s Amended Judgment in
Coalition means that the provisions at
40 CFR 70.12 and 71.13 addressing
further consideration of phasing-in of
title V permitting program requirements
at lower GHG emission thresholds are
no longer in effect. The obligations that
they contain for the EPA to further
study and take further action to consider
regulating GHGs at lower GHG
emissions thresholds under the title V
program no longer exist.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:08 Aug 18, 2015
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications, as specified in Executive
Order 13175. Although the Tribal Air
Rule (76 FR 38748, July 1, 2011) under
the CAA gives tribes the opportunity to
request and be granted delegation of the
federal PSD program found at 40 CFR
52.21 to issue PSD permits, there are no
tribal agencies currently implementing
the federal PSD permitting program. As
a result, the removal of the PSD
provisions that the D.C. Circuit vacated
will not affect any tribal reviewing
authorities and any tribally-owned
sources with EPA-issued Step 2 PSD
permits have the discretion to request
the EPA to rescind their permit. In
addition, the D.C. Circuit vacatur of the
requirements for the EPA to consider
further phasing in GHG permitting
requirements into the PSD and title V
programs at lower GHG emission
thresholds provides relief to triballyowned sources that could have been
subject to GHG permitting regulations at
lower GHG emission thresholds if the
EPA would have taken steps to apply
GHG permitting requirements to such
sources at such thresholds. Thus,
Executive Order 13175 does not apply
to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order
13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern
environmental health or safety risks that
the EPA has reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per
the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory
action’’ in section 2–202 of the
Executive Order. This action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045
E:\FR\FM\19AUR1.SGM
19AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 160 / Wednesday, August 19, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
because it does not concern an
environmental health risk or safety risk.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution or Use
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, because it is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes the human health or
environmental risk addressed by this
action will not have potential
disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects
on minority, low-income or indigenous
populations. The results of this
evaluation are contained in the section
V titled, ‘‘Environmental Justice
Considerations’’ for this action.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, and
the EPA will submit a rule report to
each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United
States. The CRA allows the issuing
agency to make a rule effective sooner
than otherwise provided by the CRA if
the agency makes a good cause finding
that notice-and-comment rulemaking
procedures are impracticable,
unnecessary or contrary to the public
interest (5 U.S.C. 808(2)). The EPA has
made a good cause finding for this rule
as discussed in the Final Action section
of this rulemaking, including the basis
for that finding.
L. Determination Under Section 307(d)
rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Pursuant to CAA section 307(d)(1)(V),
the Administrator determines that this
action is subject to provisions of section
307(d). Section 307(d) establishes
procedural requirements specific to
rulemaking under the CAA. Section
307(d)(1)(V) provides that the
provisions of section 307(d) apply to
‘‘such other actions as the Administrator
may determine.’’
VII. Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the D.C. Circuit within 60
days from August 19, 2015. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
15:08 Aug 18, 2015
Jkt 235001
List of Subjects
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Greenhouse gases, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead, National ambient air quality
standards, New source review, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Preconstruction permitting, Prevention
of significant deterioration, Reviewing
authorities, Sulfur oxides, Tailoring
rule, Volatile organic compounds.
40 CFR Parts 70 and 71
Dated: August 12, 2015.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
PART 51—REQUIREMENTS FOR
PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND
SUBMITTAL OF IMPLEMENTATION
PLANS
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—Review of New Sources and
Modifications
[Amended]
2. Section 51.166 is amended by
removing paragraph (b)(48)(v).
■
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
3. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et. seq.
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
[Amended]
4. Section 52.21 is amended by
removing paragraph (b)(49)(v).
■
§ 52.22
■
[Removed]
5. Section 52.22 is removed.
PART 70—STATE OPERATING PERMIT
PROGRAMS
6. The authority citation for part 70
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et. seq.
§ 70.12
■
[Removed]
7. Section 70.12 is removed.
PART 71—FEDERAL OPERATING
PERMIT PROGRAMS
8. The authority citation for part 71
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et. seq.
[Removed]
■ 9. Section 71.13 is removed.
[FR Doc. 2015–20501 Filed 8–18–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R01–OAR–2009–0541; A–1–FRL–
9932–46–Region 1]
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, title 40, Chapter I of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PO 00000
§ 52.21
§ 71.13
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Greenhouse gases, Intergovernmental
relations, Lead, National ambient air
quality standards, Nitrogen dioxide,
Operating permits, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Permitting authorities, Sulfur
oxides, Tailoring rule, Title V, Volatile
organic compounds.
§ 51.166
Subpart A—General Provisions
■
40 CFR Parts 51 and 52
This rulemaking does not involve
technical standards.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review, nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements (see section
307(b)(2) of the CAA).
50203
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Rhode
Island; Rhode Island Low Emission
Vehicle Program
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the State of Rhode Island
Department of Environmental
Management. The regulations adopted
by Rhode Island include the California
Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) II lightduty motor vehicle emission standards
effective in model year 2008, the
California LEV II medium-duty vehicle
standards effective in model year 2009,
and greenhouse gas emission standards
for light-duty motor vehicles and
medium-duty vehicles effective with
model year 2009. The Rhode Island LEV
regulation submitted also includes a
zero emission vehicle (ZEV) provision.
Rhode Island has adopted these
revisions to reduce emissions of volatile
organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\19AUR1.SGM
19AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 160 (Wednesday, August 19, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50199-50203]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-20501]
[[Page 50199]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 51, 52, 70, and 71
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0414; FRL-9932-11-OAR]
Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Permitting
for Greenhouse Gases: Removal of Certain Vacated Elements
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is amending its
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and title V regulations
to remove from the Code of Federal Regulations portions of those
regulations that were initially promulgated in 2010 and that the Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit)
specifically identified as vacated in the April 10, 2015, amended
judgment, Coalition for Responsible Regulation v. EPA. This action is
exempt from notice-and-comment rulemaking because it is ministerial in
nature.
DATES: This rule is effective on August 19, 2015.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2015-0414. All documents in the docket are
listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Docket Center, Room
3334, EPA William Jefferson Clinton West Building, Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004. 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 Office of Air and
Radiation Docket is (202) 566-1742.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions concerning this final rule
should be addressed to Mrs. Jessica Monta[ntilde]ez, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air
Quality Planning Division, (C504-03), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711,
telephone number (919) 541-3407, email at montanez.jessica@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The information in this section of the
preamble is organized as follows:
I. Does this action apply to me?
II. Background and Rationale for This Action
III. Final Action
IV. Implementation
V. Environmental Justice Considerations
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
VII. Judicial Review
I. Does this action apply to me?
Entities potentially affected by this final action include new and
modified stationary sources in all industry groups. To determine
whether your facility would be affected by this action, you should
carefully examine the applicability criteria in Sec. Sec. 51.166 and
52.21 of title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Entities
potentially affected by this final action also include state, local and
tribal governments that are authorized to implement the PSD program
through an EPA-approved State Implementation Plan (SIP) or Tribal
Implementation Plan (TIP) or that have been authorized to implement the
PSD program through a delegation of the federal PSD regulations.
II. Background and Rationale for This Action
Part C of title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) contains
the requirements for a component of the major New Source Review (NSR)
program known as the PSD program. This program sets forth procedures
for the preconstruction review and permitting of new and modified
stationary sources of air pollution locating in areas meeting the
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) (``attainment'' areas)
and areas for which there is insufficient information to classify an
area as either attainment or nonattainment (``unclassifiable'' areas).
The applicability of PSD to a particular source must be determined in
advance of construction of a new source or major modification of an
existing source and is pollutant-specific. Once a source is determined
to be subject to PSD, among other requirements, the source must
demonstrate that it will not cause or contribute to a violation of any
NAAQS or PSD increment,\1\ and that it will use the Best Available
Control Technology (BACT).\2\ The EPA regulations for the PSD program
are contained in 40 CFR 51.166 (applicable to air agencies that issue
permits under EPA-approved SIPs) and 40 CFR 52.21 (the federal PSD
program applicable to permits issued by the EPA or air agencies that
have received delegation to implement the federal PSD program).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ CAA section 165(a)(3).
\2\ CAA section 165(a)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title V of the CAA, on the other hand, requires all major
stationary sources of air pollution and certain other sources to apply
for a title V operating permit that includes emission limitations and
other conditions as necessary to assure compliance with applicable
requirements of the CAA.\3\ The title V operating permit program is a
vehicle for ensuring that air quality control requirements are
appropriately applied to facility emission units and for assuring
compliance with such requirements. The title V program does not
generally impose new substantive air quality control requirements, but
does require permits to contain adequate monitoring, recordkeeping,
reporting and other requirements to assure sources' compliance. The
title V program is implemented through regulations contained in 40 CFR
part 70 (for programs implemented by state or local agencies and
tribes) and 40 CFR part 71 (for programs generally implemented by the
EPA).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ CAA sections 502(a) and 504(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 3, 2010, the EPA published a final rule, known as the
Tailoring Rule, which phased in permitting requirements for greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions from stationary sources under the CAA PSD and title
V permitting programs (75 FR 31514). Under its interpretation of the
CAA at the time, the EPA believed the Tailoring Rule was necessary to
avoid a sudden and unmanageable increase in the number of sources that
would be required to obtain PSD and title V permits under the CAA
because the sources emitted or had the potential to emit GHGs above the
applicable major source and major modification thresholds. In Step 1 of
the Tailoring Rule, which began on January 2, 2011, the EPA limited
application of PSD and title V requirements to sources only if they
were subject to PSD or title V ``anyway'' due to their emissions of
non-GHG pollutants. These sources are referred to as ``anyway
sources.'' In Step 2 of the Tailoring Rule, which began on July 1,
2011, the EPA applied the PSD and title V permitting requirements under
the CAA to sources that were classified as major, and, thus, required
to obtain a permit, based solely on their GHG emissions or potential to
emit GHGs, and to modifications of otherwise major sources that
required a PSD permit because they increased only GHG emissions above
the level in the EPA regulations.
On June 23, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in
Utility Air Regulatory Group (UARG) v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 2427, addressing
the application of stationary source permitting requirements to GHGs.
The U.S. Supreme Court held that the EPA may not treat GHGs as an air
pollutant for the
[[Page 50200]]
specific purpose of determining whether a source is a major source (or
a modification thereof) and thus required to obtain a PSD or title V
permit. However, the U.S. Supreme Court also said that the EPA could
continue to require that PSD permits, otherwise required based on
emissions of pollutants other than GHGs pollutants, contain limitations
on GHG emissions based on the application of GHG BACT. That is, with
respect to PSD, the ruling effectively upheld PSD permitting
requirements for GHG emissions under Step 1 of the Tailoring Rule for
``anyway sources,'' and invalidated PSD permitting requirements for
Step 2 sources.
Because the Supreme Court decision affirmed in part and reversed in
part an earlier decision of the D.C. Circuit in Coalition for
Responsible Regulation v. EPA, 684 F.3d 102 (D.C. Cir. 2012), on April
10, 2015, the D.C. Circuit issued an Amended Judgment (Nos. 09-1322,
10-073, 10-1092 and 10-1167), which reflects the UARG v. EPA Supreme
Court decision. The D.C. Circuit simultaneously issued its mandate,
which means that the Coalition Amended Judgment became final and
effective upon issuance.
In the Coalition Amended Judgment, the D.C. Circuit ordered that
the EPA regulations under review (including 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v) and
40 CFR 52.21(b)(49)(v)) be vacated to the extent they require a
stationary source to obtain a PSD permit if GHGs are the only pollutant
(i) that the source emits or has the potential to emit above the
applicable major source thresholds, or (ii) for which there is a
significant emissions increase from a modification. The D.C. Circuit
also ordered that the regulations under review be vacated to the extent
they require (i) a stationary source to obtain a title V permit solely
because the source emits or has the potential to emit GHGs above the
applicable major source thresholds and (ii) the EPA to consider further
phasing-in the GHG permitting requirements at lower GHG emission
thresholds (in particular 40 CFR 52.22 and 40 CFR 70.12, 71.13).
Consistent with the Coalition Amended Judgment, this action removes
from the PSD regulations certain regulatory provisions that require a
stationary source to obtain a PSD permit solely on the basis of the
source's GHG emissions and the regulations that require the EPA to
consider further phasing-in GHG permitting requirements into the PSD
and title V permitting programs at lower GHG emissions thresholds. The
EPA intends to further revise the PSD and title V regulations to fully
implement the Coalition Amended Judgment in a separate rulemaking. This
future rulemaking will include revisions to additional definitions in
the PSD regulations. It will also include further revising the title V
regulations to remove portions of the title V regulations that were
vacated in the Coalition Amended Judgment case--those that require a
stationary source to obtain a title V permit solely because the source
emits or has the potential to emit GHGs above the applicable major
source thresholds. Those additional revisions to the PSD and title V
regulations, although necessary to implement the Coalition Amended
Judgment, are not purely ministerial in nature and will be addressed in
this separate notice-and-comment rulemaking, which would give the
public an opportunity to comment on how the EPA proposes to address
those portions of the Coalition Amended Judgment.
III. Final Action
This final action removes from the CFR several provisions of the
PSD and title V permitting regulations that were originally promulgated
as part of the Tailoring Rule and that the D.C. Circuit specifically
identified as vacated in the Coalition Amended Judgment. Because the
D.C. Circuit specifically identified the Tailoring Rule Step 2 PSD
permitting requirements in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v) and 40 CFR
52.21(b)(49)(v) and the regulations that require the EPA to consider
further phasing-in the GHG permitting requirements at lower GHG
emission thresholds in 40 CFR 52.22, 70.12, and 71.13 as vacated, the
EPA is taking the ministerial action of removing these provisions from
the CFR.
Furthermore, and since the D.C. Circuit's Coalition Amended
Judgment further ordered ``the EPA to take steps to rescind and/or
revise the applicable provisions of the CFR as expeditiously as
practicable'' to reflect its vacatur of certain provisions from the
Tailoring Rule, this rulemaking addresses only those provisions
specifically identified in the Coalition Amended Judgment that can be
removed from the CFR without the need for any further changes. In a
subsequent notice-and-comment rulemaking, the EPA will need to make
additional changes to its PSD and title V permitting regulations in
order to fully implement the Coalition Amended Judgment.
The EPA is taking this action as a final rule without providing an
opportunity for public comment or a public hearing because the EPA
finds that the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) good cause exemption
applies here. In general, the APA requires that general notice of
proposed rulemaking shall be published in the Federal Register. Such
notice must provide an opportunity for public participation in the
rulemaking process. However, the APA also provides a way for an agency
to directly issue a final rulemaking in certain specific instances.
This may occur, in particular, when an agency for good cause finds (and
incorporates the finding and a brief statement of reasons in the rule
issued) that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest. See 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B). The EPA has determined that it is not necessary to
provide a public hearing or an opportunity for public comment on this
action because the removal of the affected PSD and title V Tailoring
Rule provisions from the CFR is a necessary ministerial act. The D.C.
Circuit specifically identified as vacated the PSD and title V
regulations this rule removes, and ordered that the EPA take steps to
rescind and/or revise the applicable provisions of the CFR as
expeditiously as practicable. The EPA no longer has the authority to
require any source to obtain a PSD or title V permit based solely on
the source having GHG emissions above applicable thresholds. Thus, EPA
may not implement the vacated provisions at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v) and
52.21(b)(49)(v) that applied PSD to this population of sources.
Further, the EPA is no longer required to take the actions specified in
the vacated regulations at 40 CFR 52.22, 70.12, and 71.13 to consider
further phasing in GHG PSD and title V permitting requirements at lower
GHG emissions thresholds. Therefore, removing the affected regulatory
text simply implements the decision of the Supreme Court and D.C.
Circuit and it would serve no useful purpose to provide an opportunity
for public comment or a public hearing on this issue.
In addition, notice-and-comment would be contrary to the public
interest because it would unnecessarily delay the removal from the CFR
of the Tailoring Rule Step 2 PSD permitting provisions that the Supreme
Court held were invalid and the regulations that require the EPA to
consider further phasing-in the GHG permitting requirements for lower
GHG emissions thresholds in 40 CFR 52.22, 70.12, and 71.13 that the
D.C. Circuit's Coalition Amended Judgment specifically identified as
vacated. Such delay could result in confusion on the part of the
[[Page 50201]]
regulated industry and state, local and tribal air agencies about how
the D.C. Circuit's decision affects the PSD and title V regulations as
well as PSD permitting. Promulgation of this rule soon after the D.C.
Circuit decision serves to clarify that sources are no longer required
to obtain PSD permits under the preconstruction permitting regulations
associated with Step 2 of the Tailoring Rule and that the EPA will not
be required under 40 CFR 52.22, 70.12, and 71.13 to take further steps
to consider further phasing in PSD and title V permitting requirements
at lower GHG emissions thresholds. Given the substantial costs to the
owner/operator of projects associated with delays and uncertainty, it
is in the public interest for the EPA to amend the CFR without delay.
Furthermore, and as stated previously, the D.C. Circuit's Coalition
Amended Judgment ordered the EPA to take steps to undertake these
revisions as expeditiously as practicable.
For these reasons, the EPA finds good cause to issue a final
rulemaking pursuant to section 553 of the APA, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).
The requirements of CAA section 307(d), including the requirement for
public comment and hearing on proposed rulemakings, do not apply to
this action because 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) applies. In addition, this
rule relieves a restriction on construction of some stationary sources
and therefore is not subject to the requirement for a 30-day delay in
effective date. 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1). Moreover, the agency finds that the
problems outlined above regarding the effects of delaying issuance of
the rule also provide good cause for not delaying its effective date. 5
U.S.C. 553(d)(3). Accordingly, the requirement for a delay in effective
date does not apply and the rule will take effect upon publication in
the Federal Register. 5 U.S.C. 553(d).
IV. Implementation
The D.C. Circuit's vacatur of the Tailoring Rule Step 2 PSD
permitting requirements in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v) and 40 CFR
52.21(b)(49)(v) and the provisions that required further action to
consider phasing-in GHG permitting requirements into the PSD and title
V programs at lower GHG emission thresholds at 40 CFR 52.22, 70.12, and
71.13 means that these provisions can no longer be relied upon by the
EPA, permit applicants or permitting authorities as a basis for issuing
PSD permits. Further, this means that the EPA will not be required to
take the actions specified in the regulations at 40 CFR 52.22, 70.12,
and 71.13 to consider further phasing in GHG PSD and title V permitting
requirements at lower GHG emissions thresholds.
Permit reviewing authorities with EPA-approved SIPs containing any
or all of the affected provisions previously allowed by 40 CFR
51.166(b)(48)(v) may request to remove their corresponding Tailoring
Rule Step 2 provisions as soon as feasible, which may be in conjunction
with the next otherwise planned SIP revision. Permit reviewing
authorities also have the option to retain the Tailoring Rule Step 2
permitting requirements solely as a requirement of state law, but these
requirements will not be approved as part of their federally-
enforceable SIP. As we explained in a memorandum issued by the agency
on July 24, 2014, titled, ``Next Steps and Preliminary Views on the
Application of Clean Air Act Permitting Programs to Greenhouse Gases
Following the Supreme Court's Decision in UARG v. EPA'' (Preliminary
Views Memo),\4\ we again note that the ``[EPA does] not read the [U.S.]
Supreme Court decision to preclude states from retaining permitting
requirements for sources of GHG emissions that apply independently
under state law even where those requirements are no longer required
under federal law.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ https://epa.gov/nsr/documents/20140724memo.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With regard to PSD Step 2 permits already issued, the Preliminary
Views Memo explained that the EPA ``will no longer require PSD . . .
permits for Step 2 sources'' (Preliminary Views Memo at 2) and that the
EPA expected ``to provide additional views in the future with respect
to Step 2 sources that had already obtained a PSD permit . . .''
(Preliminary Views Memo at 4). The EPA provided additional views
regarding EPA-issued Step 2 PSD permits \5\ when it issued two
memoranda on December 19, 2014. In the first memorandum issued by the
Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) and titled, ``Next Steps for
Addressing EPA-Issued Step 2 Prevention of Significant Deterioration
Greenhouse Gas Permits and Associated Requirements'' (OAR Next Steps
Memo),\6\ the EPA explained that it intended to complete a rulemaking
``authorizing the rescission of Step 2 PSD permits.'' In the second
memorandum, which was issued by the Office of Enforcement and
Compliance Assurance (OECA) and titled, ``No Action Assurance Regarding
EPA-Issued Step 2 Prevention of Significant Deterioration Permits and
Related Title V Requirements Following Utility Air Regulatory Group v.
Environmental Protection Agency'' (OECA No Action Assurance Memo),\7\
OECA issued a narrowly tailored No Action Assurance for sources with
EPA-issued Step 2 PSD permits. The OECA No Action Assurance Memo
establishes that the EPA will exercise its enforcement discretion not
to pursue enforcement of the terms and conditions relating to GHGs in a
source's EPA-issued Step 2 PSD permit, and for related GHG terms and
conditions that are contained in the source's title V permit, if any,
until 11:59 p.m. EDT, September 30, 2016. The No Action Assurance
ceases to apply to a source once its EPA-issued Step 2 PSD permit is
rescinded, and, if applicable, its title V permit is accordingly
revised, whichever is later.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ For purposes of this rule, the phrases ``EPA-issued PSD
permits that were issued under Step 2 of the Tailoring Rule'' and
``EPA-issued Step 2 PSD permits'' are intended to have the same
meaning. The use of the term ``EPA-issued'' in both phrases includes
PSD permits issued by the EPA as well as permits issued by state or
local reviewing authorities exercising federal law authority
delegated by an EPA Regional Office under 40 CFR 52.21(u).
\6\ https://www.epa.gov/nsr/ghgdocs/Step2PermitRescissionMemoFinal_12-19-14.pdf.
\7\ https://epa.gov/nsr/ghgdocs/OECANoActionAssuranceMemo_December192014.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistent with the plan described in the OAR Next Steps Memo, the
EPA completed the rulemaking that allows for rescission of Step 2
permits. ``Prevention of Significant Deterioration Permitting for
Greenhouse Gases: Providing Option for Rescission of EPA-Issued
Tailoring Rule Step 2 Prevention of Significant Deterioration Permits''
(80 FR 26183; May 7, 2015). This rule provides a mechanism for the EPA
and delegated reviewing authorities to rescind EPA-issued Step 2 PSD
permits in response to requests from applicants who can demonstrate
that they are eligible for permit rescission and as further discussed
in that rule. EPA received no comments on this rule, and it is now in
effect. Sources with questions on PSD permitting obligations arising
from Step 2 PSD permits issued by state, local or tribal permitting
authorities under permitting programs approved into the state or tribal
implementation plans should review the governing statutory provisions
and the provisions in the applicable state or tribal implementation
plans to determine how to address these Step 2 permits and consult with
the EPA, states and tribes, as necessary.
In the case of sources that trigger PSD based on emissions of
pollutants other than GHG (``anyway sources''), the PSD BACT
requirement continues to apply to GHG emissions from such sources. This
rulemaking does not change Sec. Sec. 51.166(j), 51.166(b)(48)(iv),
52.21(j),
[[Page 50202]]
or 52.21(b)(48)(iv) of EPA's regulations, which remain in effect. Under
these provisions, the BACT requirement applies to GHG emissions from
``anyway sources'' when a new source emits or has the potential to emit
75,000 tons per year (tpy) or more of GHG on a carbon dioxide
equivalent (``CO2e'') basis. When an anyway source is
modified, under these provisions, the BACT requirement applies to GHGs
if (1) the modification is otherwise subject to PSD for a pollutant
other than GHG; and (2) the modification results in a GHG emissions
increase and a net GHG emission increase equal to or greater than
75,000 tpy or more on a CO2e basis and greater than zero on
a mass basis.
With respect to title V, the D.C. Circuit's Amended Judgment in
Coalition means that the provisions at 40 CFR 70.12 and 71.13
addressing further consideration of phasing-in of title V permitting
program requirements at lower GHG emission thresholds are no longer in
effect. The obligations that they contain for the EPA to further study
and take further action to consider regulating GHGs at lower GHG
emissions thresholds under the title V program no longer exist.
V. Environmental Justice Considerations
This action removes sections and paragraphs of the PSD and title V
GHG Tailoring Rule regulations that the D.C. Circuit specifically
identified as vacated in the Coalition Amended Judgment. In accordance
with the changes made by this action, permit applicants are no longer
required to request PSD permits if GHGs are the only pollutant (i) that
the source emits or has the potential to emit above the major source
thresholds, or (ii) for which there is a significant emissions increase
and a significant net emissions increase from a modification. In
addition, the EPA will not be required to take the actions specified in
the regulations at 40 CFR 52.22, 70.12, and 71.13 to consider further
phasing in GHG PSD and title V permitting requirements at lower GHG
emissions thresholds. Therefore, this action itself does not compel any
specific permit action that will affect the fair treatment and
meaningful involvement of all people. Rather, it makes clear that a
portion of the Coalition Amended Judgment is efficiently implemented
and permit applicants are no longer required to submit PSD permit
applications if GHGs are the only pollutant that the sources emits
above the applicable major source thresholds.
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 and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.
B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose any new information collection burden
under the PRA. OMB has previously approved the information collection
activities contained in the existing regulations and has assigned OMB
control number 2060-0003. To the extent this rule has any substantive
effect, it relieves regulatory burdens by removing regulations that
purport to require permit applicants to request PSD permits if GHGs are
the only pollutant emitted by the new source or modification to an
existing source above the applicable major source thresholds and
regulations that required the EPA to consider further phasing-in the
GHG permitting requirements at lower GHG emission thresholds. This
action is taken in light of the D.C. Circuit's Coalition Amended
Judgment that vacated those regulations.
C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. In
making this determination, the impact of concern is any significant
adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency may certify that a
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory burden, has no
net burden or otherwise has a positive economic effect on the small
entities subject to the rule. To the extent this rule has any
substantive effect, it relieves regulatory burdens by removing
regulations that purport to require permit applicants to request PSD
permits if GHGs are the only pollutant emitted by the new source or
modification to an existing source above the applicable major source
thresholds and regulations that required the EPA to consider further
phasing-in the GHG permitting requirements at lower GHG emission
thresholds. This action is taken in light of the D.C. Circuit's
Coalition Amended Judgment that vacated those regulations. We have
therefore concluded that this action will relieve regulatory burden for
all directly regulated small entities.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state,
local or tribal governments or the private sector.
E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This 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.
F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in
Executive Order 13175. Although the Tribal Air Rule (76 FR 38748, July
1, 2011) under the CAA gives tribes the opportunity to request and be
granted delegation of the federal PSD program found at 40 CFR 52.21 to
issue PSD permits, there are no tribal agencies currently implementing
the federal PSD permitting program. As a result, the removal of the PSD
provisions that the D.C. Circuit vacated will not affect any tribal
reviewing authorities and any tribally-owned sources with EPA-issued
Step 2 PSD permits have the discretion to request the EPA to rescind
their permit. In addition, the D.C. Circuit vacatur of the requirements
for the EPA to consider further phasing in GHG permitting requirements
into the PSD and title V programs at lower GHG emission thresholds
provides relief to tribally-owned sources that could have been subject
to GHG permitting regulations at lower GHG emission thresholds if the
EPA would have taken steps to apply GHG permitting requirements to such
sources at such thresholds. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply
to this action.
G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045
[[Page 50203]]
because it does not concern an environmental health risk or safety
risk.
H. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed
by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income
or indigenous populations. The results of this evaluation are contained
in the section V titled, ``Environmental Justice Considerations'' for
this action.
K. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. The CRA allows the issuing agency to make a rule
effective sooner than otherwise provided by the CRA if the agency makes
a good cause finding that notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures are
impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest (5 U.S.C.
808(2)). The EPA has made a good cause finding for this rule as
discussed in the Final Action section of this rulemaking, including the
basis for that finding.
L. Determination Under Section 307(d)
Pursuant to CAA section 307(d)(1)(V), the Administrator determines
that this action is subject to provisions of section 307(d). Section
307(d) establishes procedural requirements specific to rulemaking under
the CAA. Section 307(d)(1)(V) provides that the provisions of section
307(d) apply to ``such other actions as the Administrator may
determine.''
VII. Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C.
Circuit within 60 days from August 19, 2015. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review, nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2) of the CAA).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Parts 51 and 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Greenhouse gases, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental
relations, Lead, National ambient air quality standards, New source
review, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Preconstruction
permitting, Prevention of significant deterioration, Reviewing
authorities, Sulfur oxides, Tailoring rule, Volatile organic compounds.
40 CFR Parts 70 and 71
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Greenhouse gases, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, National ambient
air quality standards, Nitrogen dioxide, Operating permits, Ozone,
Particulate matter, Permitting authorities, Sulfur oxides, Tailoring
rule, Title V, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: August 12, 2015.
Gina McCarthy,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, title 40, Chapter I of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 51--REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND SUBMITTAL OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
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--Review of New Sources and Modifications
Sec. 51.166 [Amended]
0
2. Section 51.166 is amended by removing paragraph (b)(48)(v).
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
3. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et. seq.
Subpart A--General Provisions
Sec. 52.21 [Amended]
0
4. Section 52.21 is amended by removing paragraph (b)(49)(v).
Sec. 52.22 [Removed]
0
5. Section 52.22 is removed.
PART 70--STATE OPERATING PERMIT PROGRAMS
0
6. The authority citation for part 70 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et. seq.
Sec. 70.12 [Removed]
0
7. Section 70.12 is removed.
PART 71--FEDERAL OPERATING PERMIT PROGRAMS
0
8. The authority citation for part 71 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et. seq.
Sec. 71.13 [Removed]
0
9. Section 71.13 is removed.
[FR Doc. 2015-20501 Filed 8-18-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P