Finding of Failure To Submit a Section 110 State Implementation Plan for Interstate Transport for the 2012 Annual National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Fine Particles, 58745-58747 [2017-26894]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 239 / Thursday, December 14, 2017 / Rules and Regulations zone except vessels that are engaged in the following operations: enforcement of laws, service of aids to navigation, and emergency response. (d) Enforcement periods. This section will be enforced from December 8, 2017, through February 28, 2018. Enforcement will generally be between the hours of 5 a.m. and 7 p.m., Monday through Sunday, while the zone is in effect. Dated: December 8, 2017. Scott E. Anderson, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Delaware Bay. [FR Doc. 2017–26935 Filed 12–13–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R10–OAR–2017–0677; FRL–9971–88– Region 10] Finding of Failure To Submit a Section 110 State Implementation Plan for Interstate Transport for the 2012 Annual National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Fine Particles Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:57 Dec 13, 2017 Jkt 244001 Table of Contents I. General Information II. Background and Overview III. Finding of Failure To Submit for Washington State IV. Environmental Justice Considerations V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. General Information The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final action finding that Washington State failed to submit an infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) to satisfy certain interstate transport requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) with respect to the 2012 annual fine particles (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). Specifically, these requirements pertain to significant contribution to nonattainment, or interference with maintenance, of the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in other states. This finding of failure to submit establishes a 2-year deadline for the EPA to promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to address the interstate transport SIP requirements pertaining to significant contribution to nonattainment and interference with maintenance unless, prior to the EPA promulgating a FIP, the state submits, and the EPA approves, a SIP that meets these requirements. DATES: This final rule is effective on January 16, 2018. ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. EPA–R10–OAR–2017–0677. All documents in the dockets are listed on https://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, some information is SUMMARY: not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly-available docket materials are available at https:// www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the EPA Region 10, Office of Air and Waste, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, Washington, 98101. The EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to view the hard copy of the docket. You may view the hard copy of the docket Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Hunt, Air Planning Unit, Office of Air and Waste (OAW–150), EPA, Region 10, 1200 Sixth Ave., Suite 900, Seattle, Washington 98101; (206) 553–0256; hunt.jeff@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A. Notice and Comment Under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) Section 553 of the APA, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), provides that, when an agency for good cause finds that notice and public procedure are impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest, the agency may issue a rule without providing notice and an opportunity for public comment. The EPA has determined that there is good cause for making this rule final without prior proposal and opportunity for comment because no significant EPA judgment is involved in making a finding of failure to submit SIPs, or elements of SIPs, required by the CAA, where states have made no submissions or incomplete submissions, to meet the requirement. Thus, notice and public procedure are unnecessary. The EPA finds that this constitutes good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B). B. How is the Preamble organized? II. Background and Overview A. Interstate Transport SIPs CAA section 110(a) imposes an obligation upon states to submit SIPs that provide for the implementation, maintenance and enforcement of a new or revised NAAQS within 3 years PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 58745 following the promulgation of that NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific requirements that states must meet in these SIP submissions, as applicable. The EPA refers to this type of SIP submission as the ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP because it ensures that states can implement, maintain and enforce the air standards. Within these requirements, section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) contains requirements to address interstate transport of NAAQS pollutants. A SIP revision submitted for this sub-section is referred to as an ‘‘interstate transport SIP.’’ In turn, section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires that such a plan contain adequate provisions to prohibit emissions from the state that will contribute significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS in any other state (‘‘prong 1’’) or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in any other state (‘‘prong 2’’). Interstate transport prongs 1 and 2, also called the ‘‘good neighbor’’ provisions, are the requirements relevant to this finding. Pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(1)(B), the EPA must determine no later than 6 months after the date by which a state is required to submit a SIP whether a state has made a submission that meets the minimum completeness criteria established per section 110(k)(1)(A). The EPA refers to the determination that a state has not submitted a SIP submission that meets the minimum completeness criteria as a ‘‘finding of failure to submit.’’ If the EPA finds a state has failed to submit a SIP to meet its statutory obligation to address section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), pursuant to section 110(c)(1) the EPA has not only the authority, but the obligation, to promulgate a FIP within 2 years to address the CAA requirement. This finding therefore starts a 2-year clock for promulgation by the EPA of a FIP, in accordance with section 110(c)(1), unless prior to such promulgation the state submits, and the EPA approves, a submittal from the state to meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The EPA will work with the state subject to this finding of failure to submit and provide assistance as necessary to help the state develop an approvable submittal in a timely manner. The EPA notes this action does not start a mandatory sanctions clock pursuant to CAA section 179 because this finding of failure to submit does not pertain to a part D plan for nonattainment areas required under section 110(a)(2)(I) or a SIP call pursuant section 110(k)(5). E:\FR\FM\14DER1.SGM 14DER1 58746 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 239 / Thursday, December 14, 2017 / Rules and Regulations B. Background on the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS On December 14, 2012, the EPA promulgated a revised primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS to provide increased protection of public health and welfare from fine particle pollution.1 In that action, the EPA revised the primary annual PM2.5 standard, strengthening it from 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3) to 12.0 mg/m3, which is attained when the 3-year average of the annual arithmetic means does not exceed 12.0 mg/m3. Infrastructure SIPs addressing the revised standard were due on December 14, 2015. To date, Washington State has not submitted a good neighbor SIP for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Accordingly, the EPA is issuing a finding that Washington State has failed to submit a SIP addressing the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) (prongs 1–2), for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. IV. Environmental Justice Considerations This notice is making a procedural finding that Washington State has failed to submit a SIP to address CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The EPA did not conduct an environmental analysis for this rule because this rule would not directly affect the air emissions from particular sources. Because this rule will not directly affect the air emissions from particular sources, it does not affect the level of protection provided to human health or the environment. Therefore, this action will not have potential disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income or indigenous populations. V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES 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. FR 3086; January 15, 2013. VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:57 Dec 13, 2017 Jkt 244001 This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866. C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) This action does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. This final rule does not establish any new information collection requirement apart from what is already required by law. D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) III. Finding of Failure To Submit for Washington State 1 78 B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling Regulatory Costs This action is not subject to the RFA. The RFA applies only to rules subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the APA, 5 U.S.C. 553, or any other statute. This rule is not subject to notice and comment requirements because the agency has invoked the APA ‘‘good cause’’ exemption under 5 U.S.C. 553(b). E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (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 implements mandates specifically and explicitly set forth in the CAA under section 110(a) without the exercise of any policy discretion by the EPA. F. 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. G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments This action does not have tribal implications as specified in Executive Order 13175. This rule responds to the requirement in the CAA for states to submit SIPs under section 110(a) to address CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. No tribe is subject to the requirement to submit an implementation plan under section 110(a) within 3 years of promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action. PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health 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 because it does not concern an environmental health risk or safety risk. I. Executive Order 13211: Actions 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. J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act This rulemaking does not involve technical standards. K. 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 because it does not affect the level of protection provided to human health or the environment. The EPA’s evaluation of environmental justice considerations is contained in section IV of this document. L. 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. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). M. Petitions for Judicial Review Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 12, 2018. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to E:\FR\FM\14DER1.SGM 14DER1 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 239 / Thursday, December 14, 2017 / Rules and Regulations enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)). List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Interstate transport, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. [FR Doc. 2017–26894 Filed 12–13–17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0580; FRL–9972–02– Region 9] Contingency Measures for the 1997 PM2.5 Standards; California; San Joaquin Valley; Correction of Deficiency Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or ‘‘Agency’’) is taking final action to determine that the deficiency that formed the basis for a disapproval of the contingency measures submitted for the San Joaquin Valley nonattainment area for the 1997 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) has been corrected. The effect of this action is to permanently stop the sanctions clocks triggered by the disapproval. SUMMARY: This final rule is effective December 14, 2017. ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket No. EPA–R09–OAR–2017–0580. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed on the website, some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through https:// www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with RULES VerDate Sep<11>2014 15:57 Dec 13, 2017 Jkt 244001 Table of Contents I. Proposed Action II. Public Comments and EPA Responses III. Final Action IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Dated: November 30, 2017. Michelle L. Pirzadeh, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10. DATES: section for additional availability information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rory Mays, EPA Region IX, (415) 972–3227, mays.rory@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, whenever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean the EPA. INFORMATION CONTACT I. Proposed Action On October 23, 2017 (82 FR 48944) (herein ‘‘proposed rule’’), we proposed to determine that the deficiency that formed the basis for a disapproval of the contingency measures submitted for the San Joaquin Valley 1 nonattainment area for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS (‘‘1997 PM2.5 standards’’) 2 has been corrected. We did so based on the Agency’s approval of California regulations establishing standards and other requirements relating to the control of emissions from new on-road and new and in-use offroad vehicles and engines (herein, ‘‘waiver measures’’) into the California State Implementation Plan (SIP), and a finding that the purposes of the contingency measure requirement, as applicable to the San Joaquin Valley based on its initial designation as a nonattainment area for the 1997 PM2.5 standards, have been fulfilled. Our proposed rule provides a detailed background section that describes the relevant NAAQS, area designations, the relevant SIP submittal requirements, and the relevant SIP revisions submitted and either approved or disapproved by the EPA under Clean Air Act (CAA or ‘‘Act’’) section 110. In short, under CAA section 172(c)(9), SIPs for areas designated as nonattainment for a NAAQS must be revised to provide for the implementation of specific measures (‘‘contingency measures’’) to take effect if the area fails to make reasonable further progress (RFP) or fails to attain by the applicable attainment date. The EPA disapproved the contingency measure element of a set of SIP revisions collectively referred to as the ‘‘2008 PM2.5 Plan,’’ which was developed and submitted by California 1 The San Joaquin Valley PM 2.5 nonattainment area is located in the southern half of California’s central valley and includes all of San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Tulare, and Kings counties, and the valley portion of Kern County. See 40 CFR 81.305. 2 The EPA promulgated the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS at 62 FR 38652 (July 18, 1997). PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 58747 to address SIP requirements triggered by the designation of the San Joaquin Valley as a nonattainment area for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.3 In response to the EPA’s disapproval of the contingency measure element of the 2008 PM2.5 Plan, California submitted a SIP revision referred to as the ‘‘2013 Contingency Measure SIP.’’ The 2013 Contingency Measure SIP primarily relied upon California’s waiver measures, i.e., California mobile source regulations that had been waived or authorized by the EPA under CAA section 209, to provide post-attainment year emissions reductions equivalent to one year’s worth of RFP.4 The EPA approved,5 but later disapproved,6 the 2013 Contingency Measure SIP in the wake of a court decision 7 that undermined the basis for the EPA’s approval. The court decision at issue held that waiver measures must be approved into the SIP if California relies upon them to meet CAA SIP requirements, thereby rejecting the EPA’s longstanding practice allowing California SIP credit for waiver measures notwithstanding their absence from the SIP. Our disapproval of the 2013 Contingency Measure SIP became effective on June 13, 2016, and started a sanctions clock for imposition of offset sanctions 18 months after June 13, 2016, and highway sanctions 6 months later, pursuant to CAA section 179 and our regulations at 40 CFR 52.31, unless the State submits and the EPA approves, prior to the implementation of the sanctions, a SIP submission that corrects the deficiencies identified in the disapproval action.8 Since the disapproval of the 2013 Contingency Measure SIP, we have approved the waiver measures as 3 76 FR 69896 (November 9, 2011) (final action on the 2008 PM2.5 Plan). 4 One year’s worth of RFP is the yardstick the EPA has cited historically as the approximate quantity of emissions reductions that contingency measures should provide to satisfy CAA section 172(c)(9). See, e.g., 81 FR 58010, at 58066 (August 24, 2016) (final rule implementing the PM2.5 NAAQS). 5 79 FR 29327 (May 22, 2014) (final action approving the 2013 Contingency Measure SIP). 6 81 FR 29498 (May 12, 2016) (final action disapproving the 2013 Contingency Measure SIP). 7 Committee for a Better Arvin v. EPA, 786 F.3d 1169 (9th Cir. 2015) (‘‘Committee for a Better Arvin’’) (partially granting and partially denying petition for review). 8 The offset sanction applies to New Source Review (NSR) permits for new major stationary sources or major modifications proposed in a nonattainment area, and it increases the ratio of emissions reductions (i.e., offsets) to increased emissions from the new or modified source, which must be obtained to receive an NSR permit, to 2 to 1. The highway sanction prohibits, with certain exceptions, the U.S. Department of Transportation from approving or funding transportation projects in a nonattainment area. E:\FR\FM\14DER1.SGM 14DER1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 239 (Thursday, December 14, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 58745-58747]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-26894]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R10-OAR-2017-0677; FRL-9971-88-Region 10]


Finding of Failure To Submit a Section 110 State Implementation 
Plan for Interstate Transport for the 2012 Annual National Ambient Air 
Quality Standards for Fine Particles

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final 
action finding that Washington State failed to submit an infrastructure 
State Implementation Plan (SIP) to satisfy certain interstate transport 
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) with respect to the 2012 annual 
fine particles (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standard 
(NAAQS). Specifically, these requirements pertain to significant 
contribution to nonattainment, or interference with maintenance, of the 
2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in other states. This finding of 
failure to submit establishes a 2-year deadline for the EPA to 
promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) to address the 
interstate transport SIP requirements pertaining to significant 
contribution to nonattainment and interference with maintenance unless, 
prior to the EPA promulgating a FIP, the state submits, and the EPA 
approves, a SIP that meets these requirements.

DATES: This final rule is effective on January 16, 2018.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under 
Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-2017-0677. All documents in the dockets are 
listed on https://www.regulations.gov. Although listed in the index, 
some information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business 
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted 
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will 
be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly-available docket 
materials are available at https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy 
at the EPA Region 10, Office of Air and Waste, 1200 Sixth Avenue, 
Seattle, Washington, 98101. The EPA requests that if at all possible, 
you contact the individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section to view the hard copy of the docket. You may view the 
hard copy of the docket Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., 
excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Hunt, Air Planning Unit, Office 
of Air and Waste (OAW-150), EPA, Region 10, 1200 Sixth Ave., Suite 900, 
Seattle, Washington 98101; (206) 553-0256; [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents

I. General Information
II. Background and Overview
III. Finding of Failure To Submit for Washington State
IV. Environmental Justice Considerations
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. General Information

A. Notice and Comment Under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA)

    Section 553 of the APA, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), provides that, when 
an agency for good cause finds that notice and public procedure are 
impracticable, unnecessary or contrary to the public interest, the 
agency may issue a rule without providing notice and an opportunity for 
public comment. The EPA has determined that there is good cause for 
making this rule final without prior proposal and opportunity for 
comment because no significant EPA judgment is involved in making a 
finding of failure to submit SIPs, or elements of SIPs, required by the 
CAA, where states have made no submissions or incomplete submissions, 
to meet the requirement. Thus, notice and public procedure are 
unnecessary. The EPA finds that this constitutes good cause under 5 
U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).

B. How is the Preamble organized?

II. Background and Overview

A. Interstate Transport SIPs

    CAA section 110(a) imposes an obligation upon states to submit SIPs 
that provide for the implementation, maintenance and enforcement of a 
new or revised NAAQS within 3 years following the promulgation of that 
NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific requirements that states must 
meet in these SIP submissions, as applicable. The EPA refers to this 
type of SIP submission as the ``infrastructure'' SIP because it ensures 
that states can implement, maintain and enforce the air standards. 
Within these requirements, section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) contains 
requirements to address interstate transport of NAAQS pollutants. A SIP 
revision submitted for this sub-section is referred to as an 
``interstate transport SIP.'' In turn, section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 
requires that such a plan contain adequate provisions to prohibit 
emissions from the state that will contribute significantly to 
nonattainment of the NAAQS in any other state (``prong 1'') or 
interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in any other state (``prong 
2''). Interstate transport prongs 1 and 2, also called the ``good 
neighbor'' provisions, are the requirements relevant to this finding.
    Pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(1)(B), the EPA must determine no 
later than 6 months after the date by which a state is required to 
submit a SIP whether a state has made a submission that meets the 
minimum completeness criteria established per section 110(k)(1)(A). The 
EPA refers to the determination that a state has not submitted a SIP 
submission that meets the minimum completeness criteria as a ``finding 
of failure to submit.'' If the EPA finds a state has failed to submit a 
SIP to meet its statutory obligation to address section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), pursuant to section 110(c)(1) the EPA has not only 
the authority, but the obligation, to promulgate a FIP within 2 years 
to address the CAA requirement. This finding therefore starts a 2-year 
clock for promulgation by the EPA of a FIP, in accordance with section 
110(c)(1), unless prior to such promulgation the state submits, and the 
EPA approves, a submittal from the state to meet the requirements of 
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 
The EPA will work with the state subject to this finding of failure to 
submit and provide assistance as necessary to help the state develop an 
approvable submittal in a timely manner. The EPA notes this action does 
not start a mandatory sanctions clock pursuant to CAA section 179 
because this finding of failure to submit does not pertain to a part D 
plan for nonattainment areas required under section 110(a)(2)(I) or a 
SIP call pursuant section 110(k)(5).

[[Page 58746]]

B. Background on the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS

    On December 14, 2012, the EPA promulgated a revised primary annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS to provide increased protection of public health 
and welfare from fine particle pollution.\1\ In that action, the EPA 
revised the primary annual PM2.5 standard, strengthening it 
from 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\) to 12.0 [mu]g/m\3\, 
which is attained when the 3-year average of the annual arithmetic 
means does not exceed 12.0 [mu]g/m\3\. Infrastructure SIPs addressing 
the revised standard were due on December 14, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 78 FR 3086; January 15, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Finding of Failure To Submit for Washington State

    To date, Washington State has not submitted a good neighbor SIP for 
the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Accordingly, the EPA is issuing 
a finding that Washington State has failed to submit a SIP addressing 
the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. 
7410(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) (prongs 1-2), for the 2012 annual PM2.5 
NAAQS.

IV. Environmental Justice Considerations

    This notice is making a procedural finding that Washington State 
has failed to submit a SIP to address CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 
for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The EPA did not conduct an 
environmental analysis for this rule because this rule would not 
directly affect the air emissions from particular sources. Because this 
rule will not directly affect the air emissions from particular 
sources, it does not affect the level of protection provided to human 
health or the environment. Therefore, this action will not have 
potential disproportionately high and adverse human health or 
environmental effects on minority, low-income or indigenous 
populations.

V. 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. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling 
Regulatory Costs

    This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action 
because it is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 
12866.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the PRA, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. This final rule does 
not establish any new information collection requirement apart from 
what is already required by law.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

    This action is not subject to the RFA. The RFA applies only to 
rules subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the 
APA, 5 U.S.C. 553, or any other statute. This rule is not subject to 
notice and comment requirements because the agency has invoked the APA 
``good cause'' exemption under 5 U.S.C. 553(b).

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (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 implements mandates specifically and 
explicitly set forth in the CAA under section 110(a) without the 
exercise of any policy discretion by the EPA.

F. 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.

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

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13175. This rule responds to the requirement in the CAA 
for states to submit SIPs under section 110(a) to address CAA section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. No tribe 
is subject to the requirement to submit an implementation plan under 
section 110(a) within 3 years of promulgation of a new or revised 
NAAQS. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this action.

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health 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 because it does not concern an environmental 
health risk or safety risk.

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions 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.

J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

K. 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 because it does not affect the level of 
protection provided to human health or the environment. The EPA's 
evaluation of environmental justice considerations is contained in 
section IV of this document.

L. 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. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 
U.S.C. 804(2).

M. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by February 12, 2018. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does 
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be 
filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. 
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to

[[Page 58747]]

enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Interstate transport, 
Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: November 30, 2017.
Michelle L. Pirzadeh,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 10.
[FR Doc. 2017-26894 Filed 12-13-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.