Air Plan Approval; Georgia; Regional Haze Plan and Prong 4 (Visibility) for the 2012 PM2.5, 19637-19641 [2018-09412]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
*
*
*
*
*
5. Section 52.144 is amended by
adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:
■
§ 52.144
quality.
Significant deterioration of air
*
*
*
*
*
(c) The requirements of sections 160
through 165 of the Clean Air Act are met
as they apply to stationary sources
under the jurisdiction of the Arizona
Department of Environmental Quality
(ADEQ), except with respect to
emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs)
(as defined in § 52.21(b)(49)(i)).
Therefore, the provisions of § 52.21,
except paragraph (a)(1) of this section,
for GHGs are hereby made a part of the
plan for stationary sources under the
jurisdiction of ADEQ as it applies to the
stationary sources described in
§ 52.21(b)(49)(iv).
[FR Doc. 2018–09205 Filed 5–3–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2016–0315; FRL–9977–49–
Region 4]
Air Plan Approval; Georgia; Regional
Haze Plan and Prong 4 (Visibility) for
the 2012 PM2.5, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2,
and 2008 Ozone NAAQS
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving the portion
of Georgia’s July 26, 2017, State
Implementation Plan (SIP) submittal
changing reliance from the Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR) to the Cross-State
Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) for certain
regional haze requirements. EPA is also
converting the previous limited
approval/limited disapproval of
Georgia’s regional haze plan to a full
approval and is removing the Federal
Implementation Plan (FIP) for Georgia
which replaced reliance on CAIR with
reliance on CSAPR. Finally, EPA is
converting the conditional approvals to
full approvals for the visibility prong of
Georgia’s infrastructure SIP submittals
for the 2012 Fine Particulate Matter
(PM2.5), 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2),
2010 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2), and 2008 8hour Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS).
DATES: This rule will be effective June
4, 2018.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:15 May 03, 2018
Jkt 244001
Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR–
2016–0315. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov
website. Although listed in the index,
some information may not be publicly
available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Regulatory Management Section,
Air Planning and Implementation
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michele Notarianni, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides
and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta,
Georgia 30303–8960. Ms. Notarianni can
be reached by telephone at (404) 562–
9031 or via electronic mail at
notarianni.michele@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
A. Regional Haze Plans and Their
Relationship With CAIR and CSAPR
Section 169A(b)(2)(A) of the Clean Air
Act (CAA or Act) requires states to
submit regional haze plans that contain
such measures as may be necessary to
make reasonable progress towards the
natural visibility goal, including a
requirement that certain categories of
existing major stationary sources built
between 1962 and 1977 procure, install,
and operate Best Available Retrofit
Technology (BART) as determined by
the state. Under the Regional Haze Rule
(RHR), states are directed to conduct
BART determinations for such ‘‘BARTeligible’’ sources that may be
anticipated to cause or contribute to any
visibility impairment in a Class I area.
Rather than requiring source-specific
BART controls, states also have the
flexibility to adopt an emissions trading
program or other alternative program as
long as the alternative provides greater
reasonable progress towards improving
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
19637
visibility than BART. See 40 CFR
51.308(e)(2). EPA provided states with
this flexibility in the RHR, adopted in
1999, and further refined the criteria for
assessing whether an alternative
program provides for greater reasonable
progress in two subsequent
rulemakings. See 64 FR 35714 (July 1,
1999); 70 FR 39104 (July 6, 2005); 71 FR
60612 (October 13, 2006).
EPA demonstrated that CAIR would
achieve greater reasonable progress than
BART in revisions to the regional haze
program made in 2005.1 See 70 FR 39104
(July 6, 2005). In those revisions, EPA
amended its regulations to provide that
states participating in the CAIR cap-andtrade programs pursuant to an EPAapproved CAIR SIP or states that remain
subject to a CAIR FIP need not require
affected BART-eligible electric
generating units (EGUs) to install,
operate, and maintain BART for
emissions of SO2 and nitrogen oxides
(NOX). As a result of EPA’s
determination that CAIR was ‘‘betterthan-BART,’’ a number of states in the
CAIR region, including Georgia, relied
on the CAIR cap-and-trade programs as
an alternative to BART for EGU
emissions of SO2 and NOX in designing
their regional haze plans. These states
also relied on CAIR as an element of a
long-term strategy (LTS) for achieving
their reasonable progress goals (RPGs)
for their regional haze programs.
However, in 2008, the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit)
remanded CAIR to EPA without vacatur
to preserve the environmental benefits
provided by CAIR. North Carolina v.
EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir.
2008). On August 8, 2011 (76 FR 48208),
acting on the D.C. Circuit’s remand, EPA
promulgated CSAPR to replace CAIR
and issued FIPs to implement the rule
in CSAPR-subject states.2
Implementation of CSAPR was
scheduled to begin on January 1, 2012,
1 CAIR created regional cap-and-trade programs to
reduce SO2 and NOX emissions in 27 eastern states
(and the District of Columbia), including Georgia,
that contributed to downwind nonattainment or
interfered with maintenance of the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS or the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.
2 CSAPR requires 28 eastern states to limit their
statewide emissions of SO2 and/or NOX in order to
mitigate transported air pollution unlawfully
impacting other states’ ability to attain or maintain
four NAAQS: the 1997 ozone NAAQS, the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS, and the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The
CSAPR emissions limitations are defined in terms
of maximum statewide ‘‘budgets’’ for emissions of
annual SO2, annual NOX, and/or ozone-season NOX
by each covered state’s large EGUs. The CSAPR
state budgets are implemented in two phases of
generally increasing stringency, with the Phase 1
budgets applying to emissions in 2015 and 2016
and the Phase 2 budgets applying to emissions in
2017 and later years.
E:\FR\FM\04MYR1.SGM
04MYR1
19638
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
when CSAPR would have superseded
the CAIR program.
Due to the D.C. Circuit’s 2008 ruling
that CAIR was ‘‘fatally flawed’’ and its
resulting status as a temporary measure
following that ruling, EPA could not
fully approve regional haze plans to the
extent that they relied on CAIR to satisfy
the BART requirement and the
requirement for a LTS sufficient to
achieve the state-adopted RPGs. On
these grounds, EPA finalized a limited
disapproval of Georgia’s regional haze
plan on June 7, 2012 (77 FR 33642), and
in the same action, promulgated a FIP
to replace reliance on CAIR with
reliance on CSAPR to address the
deficiencies in Georgia’s regional haze
plan. EPA finalized a limited approval
of Georgia’s regional haze plan on June
28, 2012 (77 FR 38501), as meeting the
remaining applicable regional haze
requirements set forth in the CAA and
the RHR.
In the June 7, 2012, limited
disapproval action, EPA also amended
the RHR to provide that participation by
a state’s EGUs in a CSAPR trading
program for a given pollutant—either a
CSAPR federal trading program
implemented through a CSAPR FIP or
an integrated CSAPR state trading
program implemented through an
approved CSAPR SIP revision—
qualifies as a BART alternative for those
EGUs for that pollutant. See 40 CFR
51.308(e)(4). Since EPA promulgated
this amendment, numerous states
covered by CSAPR have come to rely on
the provision through either SIPs or
FIPs.3
Numerous parties filed petitions for
review of CSAPR in the D.C. Circuit,
and on August 21, 2012, the court
issued its ruling, vacating and
remanding CSAPR to EPA and ordering
continued implementation of CAIR.
EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v.
EPA, 696 F.3d 7, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2012). The
D.C. Circuit’s vacatur of CSAPR was
reversed by the United States Supreme
Court on April 29, 2014, and the case
was remanded to the D.C. Circuit to
resolve remaining issues in accordance
with the high court’s ruling. EPA v. EME
Homer City Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct.
1584 (2014). On remand, the D.C.
Circuit affirmed CSAPR in most
respects, but invalidated without
3 EPA has promulgated FIPs relying on CSAPR
participation for BART purposes for Georgia,
Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia,
and West Virginia, 77 FR at 33654, and Nebraska,
77 FR 40150, 40151 (July 6, 2012). EPA has
approved SIPs from several states relying on CSAPR
participation for BART purposes. See, e.g., 82 FR
47393 (October 12, 2017) for Alabama; 77 FR 34801
(June 12, 2012) for Minnesota; and 77 FR 46952
(August 7, 2012) for Wisconsin.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:15 May 03, 2018
Jkt 244001
vacating some of the CSAPR budgets as
to a number of states. EME Homer City
Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 795 F.3d 118
(D.C. Cir. 2015). The remanded budgets
include the Phase 2 SO2 emissions
budgets for Alabama, Georgia, South
Carolina, and Texas and the Phase 2
ozone-season NOX budgets for 11 states.
This litigation ultimately delayed
implementation of CSAPR for three
years, from January 1, 2012, when
CSAPR’s cap-and-trade programs were
originally scheduled to replace the CAIR
cap-and-trade programs, to January 1,
2015. Thus, the rule’s Phase 2 budgets
that were originally promulgated to
begin on January 1, 2014, began on
January 1, 2017.
On September 29, 2017 (82 FR 45481),
EPA issued a final rule affirming the
continued validity of the Agency’s 2012
determination that participation in
CSAPR meets the RHR’s criteria for an
alternative to the application of sourcespecific BART.4 EPA has determined
that changes to CSAPR’s geographic
scope resulting from the actions EPA
has taken or expects to take in response
to the D.C. Circuit’s budget remand do
not affect the continued validity of
participation in CSAPR as a BART
alternative, because the changes in
geographic scope would not have
adversely affected the results of the air
quality modeling analysis upon which
the EPA based the 2012 determination.
EPA’s September 29, 2017,
determination was based, in part, on
EPA’s final action approving a SIP
revision from Alabama (81 FR 59869
(August 31, 2016)) adopting Phase 2
annual NOX and SO2 budgets equivalent
to the federally-developed budgets and
on SIP revisions submitted by Georgia
and South Carolina to also adopt Phase
2 annual NOX and SO2 budgets
equivalent to the federally-developed
budgets.5 Since that time, EPA has
approved the SIP revisions from Georgia
and South Carolina. See 82 FR 47930
(October 13, 2017) and 82 FR 47936
(October 13, 2017), respectively.
A portion of Georgia’s July 26, 2017,
SIP submittal seeks to correct the
deficiencies identified in the June 7,
2012, limited disapproval of its regional
haze plan submitted on February 11,
2010, and supplemented on November
19, 2010, by replacing reliance on CAIR
with reliance on CSAPR.6 Specifically,
4 Legal challenges to this rule are pending. Nat’l
Parks Conservation Ass’n v. EPA, No. 17–1253 (D.C.
Cir. filed November 28, 2017).
5 EPA proposed to approve the Georgia and South
Carolina SIP revisions adopting CSAPR budgets on
August 16, 2017 (82 FR 38866), and August 10,
2017 (82 FR 37389), respectively.
6 On October 13, 2017, (82 FR 47930), EPA
approved the portions of the July 26, 2017, SIP
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Georgia requests that EPA amend the
State’s regional haze plan by replacing
its reliance on CAIR with CSAPR to
satisfy SO2 and NOX BART
requirements and first implementation
period SO2 reasonable progress
requirements for EGUs formerly subject
to CAIR,7 and to support the RPGs for
the Class I areas in Georgia for the first
implementation period. EPA is
approving the regional haze plan
portion of the SIP submittal and
amending the SIP accordingly.
B. Infrastructure SIPs
By statute, plans meeting the
requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and
(2) of the CAA are to be submitted by
states within three years (or less, if the
Administrator so prescribes) after
promulgation of a new or revised
NAAQS to provide for the
implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement of the new or revised
NAAQS. EPA has historically referred to
these SIP submissions made for the
purpose of satisfying the requirements
of sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) as
‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ submissions.
Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) require states
to address basic SIP elements such as
for monitoring, basic program
requirements, and legal authority that
are designed to assure attainment and
maintenance of the newly established or
revised NAAQS. More specifically,
section 110(a)(1) provides the
procedural and timing requirements for
infrastructure SIPs. Section 110(a)(2)
lists specific elements that states must
meet for the infrastructure SIP
requirements related to a newly
established or revised NAAQS. The
contents of an infrastructure SIP
submission may vary depending upon
the data and analytical tools available to
the state, as well as the provisions
already contained in the state’s
implementation plan at the time in
which the state develops and submits
submission incorporating into Georgia’s SIP the
State’s regulations requiring Georgia EGUs to
participate in CSAPR state trading programs for
annual NOX and SO2 emissions integrated with the
CSAPR federal trading programs and thus replacing
the corresponding FIP requirements. In the October
13, 2017, action, EPA did not take any action
regarding Georgia’s request in this July 26, 2017,
SIP submission to revise the State’s regional haze
plan nor regarding the prong 4 element of the 2008
8-hour ozone, 2010 1-hour NO2, 2010 1-hour SO2,
and 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
7 In its regional haze plan, Georgia concluded and
EPA found acceptable the State’s determination that
no additional controls beyond CAIR are reasonable
for SO2 for affected Georgia EGUs for the first
implementation period, with the exception of five
EGUs at three facilities owned by Georgia Power.
See 77 FR 11464 (February 27, 2012).
E:\FR\FM\04MYR1.SGM
04MYR1
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
the submission for a new or revised
NAAQS.8
Section 110(a)(2)(D) has two
components: 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and
110(a)(2)(D)(ii). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)
includes four distinct components,
commonly referred to as ‘‘prongs,’’ that
must be addressed in infrastructure SIP
submissions. The first two prongs,
which are codified in section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), are provisions that
prohibit any source or other type of
emissions activity in one state from
contributing significantly to
nonattainment of the NAAQS in another
state (prong 1) and from interfering with
maintenance of the NAAQS in another
state (prong 2). The third and fourth
prongs, which are codified in section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are provisions that
prohibit emissions activity in one state
from interfering with measures required
to prevent significant deterioration of air
quality in another state (prong 3) or
from interfering with measures to
protect visibility in another state (prong
4). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires SIPs
to include provisions ensuring
compliance with sections 115 and 126
of the Act, relating to interstate and
international pollution abatement.
A state can meet prong 4 requirements
via confirmation in its infrastructure SIP
submission that the state has an
approved regional haze plan that fully
meets the requirements of 40 CFR
51.308 or 51.309. 40 CFR 51.308 and
51.309 specifically require that a state
participating in a regional planning
process include all measures needed to
achieve its apportionment of emission
reduction obligations agreed upon
through that process. A fully approved
regional haze plan will ensure that
emissions from sources under an air
agency’s jurisdiction are not interfering
with measures required to be included
in other air agencies’ plans to protect
visibility.
Georgia’s May 14, 2012, 2008 8-hour
Ozone submission; March 25, 2013,
2010 1-hour NO2 submission; October
22, 2013, 2010 1-hour SO2 submission
as supplemented on July 25, 2014; and
December 14, 2015, 2012 annual PM2.5
submission rely on the State having a
fully approved regional haze plan to
satisfy its prong 4 requirements. EPA is
approving the regional haze plan
portion of the State’s July 26, 2017, SIP
revision and converting EPA’s previous
action on Georgia’s regional haze plan
from a limited approval/limited
disapproval to a full approval because
8 For additional information regarding EPA’s
approach to the review of infrastructure SIP
submissions, see, e.g., 81 FR 57544 (August 23,
2016) (proposal to approve portions of Georgia’s
infrastructure SIP for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:15 May 03, 2018
Jkt 244001
final approval of this portion of the SIP
revision would correct the deficiencies
that led to EPA’s limited approval/
limited disapproval of the State’s
regional haze plan. Specifically, EPA’s
approval of this portion of Georgia’s July
26, 2017, SIP revision would satisfy the
SO2 and NOX BART requirements and
SO2 reasonable progress requirements
for EGUs formerly subject to CAIR and
the requirement that a LTS include
measures as necessary to achieve the
State-adopted RPGs. Because a state
may satisfy prong 4 requirements
through a fully approved regional haze
plan, EPA is also converting the
Agency’s September 26, 2016,
conditional approvals to full approvals
of the prong 4 portion of Georgia’s May
14, 2012, 2008 8-hour Ozone
submission; March 25, 2013, 2010 1hour NO2 submission; October 22, 2013,
2010 1-hour SO2 submission as
supplemented on July 25, 2014; and
December 14, 2015, 2012 annual PM2.5
submission.
In a notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) published on February 2, 2018
(83 FR 4886), EPA proposed to take the
following actions: (1) Approve the
regional haze plan portion of Georgia’s
July 26, 2017, SIP submission to change
reliance from CAIR to CSAPR; (2)
convert EPA’s limited approval/limited
disapproval of Georgia’s February 11,
2010, regional haze plan as
supplemented on November 19, 2010, to
a full approval; (3) remove EPA’s FIP for
Georgia which replaced reliance on
CAIR with reliance on CSAPR to
address the deficiencies identified in
the limited disapproval of Georgia’s
regional haze plan; and (4) convert
EPA’s September 26, 2016, conditional
approvals to full approvals of the prong
4 portion of Georgia’s May 14, 2012,
2008 8-hour Ozone submission; March
25, 2013, 2010 1-hour NO2 submission;
the State’s October 22, 2013, 2010 1hour SO2 submission as supplemented
on July 25, 2014; and the State’s
December 14, 2015, 2012 annual PM2.5
submission. The details of Georgia’s
submission and the rationale for EPA’s
actions are explained in the NPRM.
Comments on the proposed rulemaking
were due on or before March 5, 2018.
EPA received no adverse comments on
the proposed action.
II. Final Actions
As described above, EPA is taking the
following actions: (1) Approving the
regional haze plan portion of Georgia’s
July 26, 2017, SIP submission to change
reliance from CAIR to CSAPR; (2)
converting EPA’s limited approval/
limited disapproval of Georgia’s
February 11, 2010, regional haze plan as
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
19639
supplemented on November 19, 2010, to
a full approval; (3) removing EPA’s FIP
for Georgia which replaced reliance on
CAIR with reliance on CSAPR to
address the deficiencies identified in
the limited disapproval of Georgia’s
regional haze plan; and (4) converting
EPA’s September 26, 2016, conditional
approvals to full approvals of the prong
4 portion of Georgia’s May 14, 2012,
2008 8-hour Ozone submission; March
25, 2013, 2010 1-hour NO2 submission;
the State’s October 22, 2013, 2010 1hour SO2 submission as supplemented
on July 25, 2014; and the State’s
December 14, 2015, 2012 annual PM2.5
submission. All other applicable
infrastructure requirements for the
infrastructure SIP submissions have
been or will be addressed in separate
rulemakings.
III. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable Federal regulations.
See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. These actions merely approve
state law as meeting Federal
requirements and do not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
these actions:
• Are not significant regulatory
actions subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Are not Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
actions because SIP approvals are
exempted under Executive Order 12866;
• Do not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Are certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Do not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Do not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Are not economically significant
regulatory actions based on health or
E:\FR\FM\04MYR1.SGM
04MYR1
19640
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Are not significant regulatory
actions subject to Executive Order
13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• Are not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Do not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The SIP is not approved to apply on
any Indian reservation land or in any
other area where EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal
implications as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), nor will it impose substantial
direct costs on tribal governments or
preempt tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing these actions and
other required information to the U.S.
Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller
General of the United States prior to
publication of the rule in the Federal
Register. A major rule cannot take effect
until 60 days after it is published in the
Federal Register.These actions are not a
‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of these
actions must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by July 3, 2018.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
the Administrator of this final rule does
not affect the finality of these actions 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. These actions
may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements.
See section 307(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection,
Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
Matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: April 20, 2018.
Onis ‘‘Trey’’ Glenn, III,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart L—Georgia
§ 52.569
[Removed and Reserved]
2. Section 52.569 is removed and
reserved.
■ 3. Section 52.570(e) is amended by
adding entries for ‘‘110(a)(1) and (2)
Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010
1-hour NO2 NAAQS’’, ‘‘110(a)(1) and (2)
Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010
1-hour SO2 NAAQS’’, ‘‘110(a)(1) and (2)
Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS’’, ‘‘110(a)(1) and
(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the
2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS’’, and
‘‘Regional Haze Plan Revision’’ at the
end of the table to read as follows:
■
§ 52.570
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED GEORGIA NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS
Name of nonregulatory SIP provision
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
*
*
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 1-hour
NO2 NAAQS.
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS.
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2012 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS.
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 8-hour
Ozone NAAQS.
Regional Haze Plan Revision .........
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:15 May 03, 2018
State
submittal
date/
effective
date
Applicable
geographic or
nonattainment
area
*
Georgia .............
3/25/2013
Georgia .............
EPA approval date
Explanation
*
*
5/4/2018, ........................................
[Insert Federal Register citation] ..
*
*
Addressing Prong 4 only.
7/25/2014
5/4/2018, ........................................
[Insert Federal Register citation] ..
Addressing Prong 4 only.
Georgia .............
12/14/2015
5/4/2018, ........................................
[Insert Federal Register citation] ..
Addressing Prong 4 only.
Georgia .............
5/14/2012
5/4/2018, ........................................
[Insert Federal Register citation] ..
Addressing Prong 4 only.
Georgia .............
7/26/2017
5/4/2018, ........................................
[Insert Federal Register citation] ..
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\04MYR1.SGM
04MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 87 / Friday, May 4, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
§ 52.580
[Removed and Reserved]
4. Section 52.580 is removed and
reserved.
■
[FR Doc. 2018–09412 Filed 5–3–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations
System
48 CFR Part 201
[Docket DARS–2018–0017]
RIN 0750–AJ69
Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement: Statement of
Purpose for Department of Defense
Acquisition (DFARS Case 2018–D005)
Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Department of
Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
DoD is issuing a final rule
amending the Defense Federal
Acquisition Regulation Supplement
(DFARS) to implement a section of the
National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2018 to revise the DFARS to
include a statement of purpose.
DATES: Effective May 4, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Kelly Hughes, telephone 571–372–6090.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
I. Background
DoD is amending the DFARS to
implement section 801 of the National
Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for
Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 (Pub. L. 115–404).
Section 801 directs the insertion of a
statement of purpose for Department of
Defense acquisition in the DFARS. This
rule adds the statement of purpose to
DFARS 201.101.
II. Applicability to Contracts at or
Below the Simplified Acquisition
Threshold and for Commercial Items,
Including Commercially Available Offthe-Shelf Items
amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with RULES
This rule does not add any new
provisions or clauses or impact existing
provisions or clauses. The rule merely
adds a purpose statement to the
regulations.
III. Publication of This Final Rule for
Public Comment Is Not Required by
Statute
The statute that applies to the
publication of the Federal Acquisition
Regulation (FAR) is the Office of Federal
Procurement Policy statute (codified at
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:15 May 03, 2018
Jkt 244001
title 41 of the United States Code).
Specifically, 41 U.S.C. 1707(a)(1)
requires that a procurement policy,
regulation, procedure or form (including
an amendment or modification thereof)
must be published for public comment
if it relates to the expenditure of
appropriated funds, and has either a
significant effect beyond the internal
operating procedures of the agency
issuing the policy, regulation, procedure
or form, or has a significant cost or
administrative impact on contractors or
offerors. This final rule is not required
to be published for public comment,
because it clarifies the purpose of the
defense system as required by the
NDAA for FY 2018. There is no cost or
administrative impact on contractors or
offerors. These requirements affect only
the internal operating guidance of the
Government.
IV. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders (E.O.s) 12866 and
13563 direct agencies to assess all costs
and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). E.O. 13563 emphasizes the
importance of quantifying both costs
and benefits, of reducing costs, of
harmonizing rules, and of promoting
flexibility. This is not a significant
regulatory action and, therefore, was not
subject to review under section 6(b) of
E.O. 12866, Regulatory Planning and
Review, dated September 30, 1993. This
rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C.
804.
V. Executive Order 13771
This rule is not subject to Executive
Order (E.O.) 13771, Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs, because the rule relates to agency
organization, management, or
personnel.
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Because a notice of proposed
rulemaking and an opportunity for
public comment are not required to be
given for this rule under 41 U.S.C.
1707(a)(1) (see section III. of this
preamble), the analytical requirements
of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) are not applicable.
Accordingly, no regulatory flexibility
analysis is required and none has been
prepared.
VII. Paperwork Reduction Act
The rule does not contain any
information collection requirements that
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
19641
require the approval of the Office of
Management and Budget under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
chapter 35).
List of Subjects in 48 CFR Part 201
Government procurement.
Amy G. Williams,
Deputy, Defense Acquisition Regulations
System.
Therefore, 48 CFR part 201 is
amended as follows:
PART 201—FEDERAL ACQUISITION
REGULATIONS SYSTEM
1. The authority citation for part 201
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR
chapter 1.
2. Add section 201.101 to subpart
201.1 to read as follows:
■
201.101
Purpose.
(1) The defense acquisition system, as
defined in 10 U.S.C. 2545, exists to
manage the investments of the United
States in technologies, programs, and
product support necessary to achieve
the national security strategy prescribed
by the President pursuant to section 108
of the National Security Act of 1947 (50
U.S.C. 3043) and to support the United
States Armed Forces.
(2) The investment strategy of DoD
shall be postured to support not only
the current United States armed forces,
but also future armed forces of the
United States.
(3) The primary objective of DoD
acquisition is to acquire quality supplies
and services that satisfy user needs with
measurable improvements to mission
capability and operational support at a
fair and reasonable price.
[FR Doc. 2018–09488 Filed 5–3–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001–06–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Defense Acquisition Regulations
System
48 CFR Parts 212, 246, and 252
[Docket DARS–2016–0014]
RIN 0750–AI92
Defense Federal Acquisition
Regulation Supplement: Amendments
Related to Sources of Electronic Parts
(DFARS Case 2016–D013)
Defense Acquisition
Regulations System, Department of
Defense (DoD).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\04MYR1.SGM
04MYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 87 (Friday, May 4, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 19637-19641]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-09412]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0315; FRL-9977-49-Region 4]
Air Plan Approval; Georgia; Regional Haze Plan and Prong 4
(Visibility) for the 2012 PM2.5, 2010 NO2, 2010 SO2, and 2008 Ozone
NAAQS
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving the
portion of Georgia's July 26, 2017, State Implementation Plan (SIP)
submittal changing reliance from the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)
to the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) for certain regional haze
requirements. EPA is also converting the previous limited approval/
limited disapproval of Georgia's regional haze plan to a full approval
and is removing the Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) for Georgia which
replaced reliance on CAIR with reliance on CSAPR. Finally, EPA is
converting the conditional approvals to full approvals for the
visibility prong of Georgia's infrastructure SIP submittals for the
2012 Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5), 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide
(NO2), 2010 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2), and 2008 8-hour
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS).
DATES: This rule will be effective June 4, 2018.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0315. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the
index, some information may not be publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michele Notarianni, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Ms. Notarianni can be reached by telephone at (404) 562-
9031 or via electronic mail at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
A. Regional Haze Plans and Their Relationship With CAIR and CSAPR
Section 169A(b)(2)(A) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) requires
states to submit regional haze plans that contain such measures as may
be necessary to make reasonable progress towards the natural visibility
goal, including a requirement that certain categories of existing major
stationary sources built between 1962 and 1977 procure, install, and
operate Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) as determined by the
state. Under the Regional Haze Rule (RHR), states are directed to
conduct BART determinations for such ``BART-eligible'' sources that may
be anticipated to cause or contribute to any visibility impairment in a
Class I area. Rather than requiring source-specific BART controls,
states also have the flexibility to adopt an emissions trading program
or other alternative program as long as the alternative provides
greater reasonable progress towards improving visibility than BART. See
40 CFR 51.308(e)(2). EPA provided states with this flexibility in the
RHR, adopted in 1999, and further refined the criteria for assessing
whether an alternative program provides for greater reasonable progress
in two subsequent rulemakings. See 64 FR 35714 (July 1, 1999); 70 FR
39104 (July 6, 2005); 71 FR 60612 (October 13, 2006).
EPA demonstrated that CAIR would achieve greater reasonable
progress than BART in revisions to the regional haze program made in
2005.\1\ See 70 FR 39104 (July 6, 2005). In those revisions, EPA
amended its regulations to provide that states participating in the
CAIR cap-and-trade programs pursuant to an EPA-approved CAIR SIP or
states that remain subject to a CAIR FIP need not require affected
BART-eligible electric generating units (EGUs) to install, operate, and
maintain BART for emissions of SO2 and nitrogen oxides
(NOX). As a result of EPA's determination that CAIR was
``better-than-BART,'' a number of states in the CAIR region, including
Georgia, relied on the CAIR cap-and-trade programs as an alternative to
BART for EGU emissions of SO2 and NOX in
designing their regional haze plans. These states also relied on CAIR
as an element of a long-term strategy (LTS) for achieving their
reasonable progress goals (RPGs) for their regional haze programs.
However, in 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the District
of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) remanded CAIR to EPA without vacatur
to preserve the environmental benefits provided by CAIR. North Carolina
v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008). On August 8, 2011 (76 FR
48208), acting on the D.C. Circuit's remand, EPA promulgated CSAPR to
replace CAIR and issued FIPs to implement the rule in CSAPR-subject
states.\2\ Implementation of CSAPR was scheduled to begin on January 1,
2012,
[[Page 19638]]
when CSAPR would have superseded the CAIR program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ CAIR created regional cap-and-trade programs to reduce
SO2 and NOX emissions in 27 eastern states
(and the District of Columbia), including Georgia, that contributed
to downwind nonattainment or interfered with maintenance of the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS or the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.
\2\ CSAPR requires 28 eastern states to limit their statewide
emissions of SO2 and/or NOX in order to
mitigate transported air pollution unlawfully impacting other
states' ability to attain or maintain four NAAQS: the 1997 ozone
NAAQS, the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The CSAPR
emissions limitations are defined in terms of maximum statewide
``budgets'' for emissions of annual SO2, annual
NOX, and/or ozone-season NOX by each covered
state's large EGUs. The CSAPR state budgets are implemented in two
phases of generally increasing stringency, with the Phase 1 budgets
applying to emissions in 2015 and 2016 and the Phase 2 budgets
applying to emissions in 2017 and later years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Due to the D.C. Circuit's 2008 ruling that CAIR was ``fatally
flawed'' and its resulting status as a temporary measure following that
ruling, EPA could not fully approve regional haze plans to the extent
that they relied on CAIR to satisfy the BART requirement and the
requirement for a LTS sufficient to achieve the state-adopted RPGs. On
these grounds, EPA finalized a limited disapproval of Georgia's
regional haze plan on June 7, 2012 (77 FR 33642), and in the same
action, promulgated a FIP to replace reliance on CAIR with reliance on
CSAPR to address the deficiencies in Georgia's regional haze plan. EPA
finalized a limited approval of Georgia's regional haze plan on June
28, 2012 (77 FR 38501), as meeting the remaining applicable regional
haze requirements set forth in the CAA and the RHR.
In the June 7, 2012, limited disapproval action, EPA also amended
the RHR to provide that participation by a state's EGUs in a CSAPR
trading program for a given pollutant--either a CSAPR federal trading
program implemented through a CSAPR FIP or an integrated CSAPR state
trading program implemented through an approved CSAPR SIP revision--
qualifies as a BART alternative for those EGUs for that pollutant. See
40 CFR 51.308(e)(4). Since EPA promulgated this amendment, numerous
states covered by CSAPR have come to rely on the provision through
either SIPs or FIPs.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ EPA has promulgated FIPs relying on CSAPR participation for
BART purposes for Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan,
Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia,
and West Virginia, 77 FR at 33654, and Nebraska, 77 FR 40150, 40151
(July 6, 2012). EPA has approved SIPs from several states relying on
CSAPR participation for BART purposes. See, e.g., 82 FR 47393
(October 12, 2017) for Alabama; 77 FR 34801 (June 12, 2012) for
Minnesota; and 77 FR 46952 (August 7, 2012) for Wisconsin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Numerous parties filed petitions for review of CSAPR in the D.C.
Circuit, and on August 21, 2012, the court issued its ruling, vacating
and remanding CSAPR to EPA and ordering continued implementation of
CAIR. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7, 38 (D.C. Cir.
2012). The D.C. Circuit's vacatur of CSAPR was reversed by the United
States Supreme Court on April 29, 2014, and the case was remanded to
the D.C. Circuit to resolve remaining issues in accordance with the
high court's ruling. EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct.
1584 (2014). On remand, the D.C. Circuit affirmed CSAPR in most
respects, but invalidated without vacating some of the CSAPR budgets as
to a number of states. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 795 F.3d
118 (D.C. Cir. 2015). The remanded budgets include the Phase 2
SO2 emissions budgets for Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina,
and Texas and the Phase 2 ozone-season NOX budgets for 11
states. This litigation ultimately delayed implementation of CSAPR for
three years, from January 1, 2012, when CSAPR's cap-and-trade programs
were originally scheduled to replace the CAIR cap-and-trade programs,
to January 1, 2015. Thus, the rule's Phase 2 budgets that were
originally promulgated to begin on January 1, 2014, began on January 1,
2017.
On September 29, 2017 (82 FR 45481), EPA issued a final rule
affirming the continued validity of the Agency's 2012 determination
that participation in CSAPR meets the RHR's criteria for an alternative
to the application of source-specific BART.\4\ EPA has determined that
changes to CSAPR's geographic scope resulting from the actions EPA has
taken or expects to take in response to the D.C. Circuit's budget
remand do not affect the continued validity of participation in CSAPR
as a BART alternative, because the changes in geographic scope would
not have adversely affected the results of the air quality modeling
analysis upon which the EPA based the 2012 determination. EPA's
September 29, 2017, determination was based, in part, on EPA's final
action approving a SIP revision from Alabama (81 FR 59869 (August 31,
2016)) adopting Phase 2 annual NOX and SO2
budgets equivalent to the federally-developed budgets and on SIP
revisions submitted by Georgia and South Carolina to also adopt Phase 2
annual NOX and SO2 budgets equivalent to the
federally-developed budgets.\5\ Since that time, EPA has approved the
SIP revisions from Georgia and South Carolina. See 82 FR 47930 (October
13, 2017) and 82 FR 47936 (October 13, 2017), respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Legal challenges to this rule are pending. Nat'l Parks
Conservation Ass'n v. EPA, No. 17-1253 (D.C. Cir. filed November 28,
2017).
\5\ EPA proposed to approve the Georgia and South Carolina SIP
revisions adopting CSAPR budgets on August 16, 2017 (82 FR 38866),
and August 10, 2017 (82 FR 37389), respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A portion of Georgia's July 26, 2017, SIP submittal seeks to
correct the deficiencies identified in the June 7, 2012, limited
disapproval of its regional haze plan submitted on February 11, 2010,
and supplemented on November 19, 2010, by replacing reliance on CAIR
with reliance on CSAPR.\6\ Specifically, Georgia requests that EPA
amend the State's regional haze plan by replacing its reliance on CAIR
with CSAPR to satisfy SO2 and NOX BART
requirements and first implementation period SO2 reasonable
progress requirements for EGUs formerly subject to CAIR,\7\ and to
support the RPGs for the Class I areas in Georgia for the first
implementation period. EPA is approving the regional haze plan portion
of the SIP submittal and amending the SIP accordingly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ On October 13, 2017, (82 FR 47930), EPA approved the
portions of the July 26, 2017, SIP submission incorporating into
Georgia's SIP the State's regulations requiring Georgia EGUs to
participate in CSAPR state trading programs for annual
NOX and SO2 emissions integrated with the
CSAPR federal trading programs and thus replacing the corresponding
FIP requirements. In the October 13, 2017, action, EPA did not take
any action regarding Georgia's request in this July 26, 2017, SIP
submission to revise the State's regional haze plan nor regarding
the prong 4 element of the 2008 8-hour ozone, 2010 1-hour
NO2, 2010 1-hour SO2, and 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.
\7\ In its regional haze plan, Georgia concluded and EPA found
acceptable the State's determination that no additional controls
beyond CAIR are reasonable for SO2 for affected Georgia
EGUs for the first implementation period, with the exception of five
EGUs at three facilities owned by Georgia Power. See 77 FR 11464
(February 27, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Infrastructure SIPs
By statute, plans meeting the requirements of sections 110(a)(1)
and (2) of the CAA are to be submitted by states within three years (or
less, if the Administrator so prescribes) after promulgation of a new
or revised NAAQS to provide for the implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement of the new or revised NAAQS. EPA has historically referred
to these SIP submissions made for the purpose of satisfying the
requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) as ``infrastructure
SIP'' submissions. Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) require states to address
basic SIP elements such as for monitoring, basic program requirements,
and legal authority that are designed to assure attainment and
maintenance of the newly established or revised NAAQS. More
specifically, section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and timing
requirements for infrastructure SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific
elements that states must meet for the infrastructure SIP requirements
related to a newly established or revised NAAQS. The contents of an
infrastructure SIP submission may vary depending upon the data and
analytical tools available to the state, as well as the provisions
already contained in the state's implementation plan at the time in
which the state develops and submits
[[Page 19639]]
the submission for a new or revised NAAQS.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ For additional information regarding EPA's approach to the
review of infrastructure SIP submissions, see, e.g., 81 FR 57544
(August 23, 2016) (proposal to approve portions of Georgia's
infrastructure SIP for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 110(a)(2)(D) has two components: 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and
110(a)(2)(D)(ii). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) includes four distinct
components, commonly referred to as ``prongs,'' that must be addressed
in infrastructure SIP submissions. The first two prongs, which are
codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), are provisions that prohibit
any source or other type of emissions activity in one state from
contributing significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS in another
state (prong 1) and from interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS in
another state (prong 2). The third and fourth prongs, which are
codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are provisions that prohibit
emissions activity in one state from interfering with measures required
to prevent significant deterioration of air quality in another state
(prong 3) or from interfering with measures to protect visibility in
another state (prong 4). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires SIPs to
include provisions ensuring compliance with sections 115 and 126 of the
Act, relating to interstate and international pollution abatement.
A state can meet prong 4 requirements via confirmation in its
infrastructure SIP submission that the state has an approved regional
haze plan that fully meets the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308 or 51.309.
40 CFR 51.308 and 51.309 specifically require that a state
participating in a regional planning process include all measures
needed to achieve its apportionment of emission reduction obligations
agreed upon through that process. A fully approved regional haze plan
will ensure that emissions from sources under an air agency's
jurisdiction are not interfering with measures required to be included
in other air agencies' plans to protect visibility.
Georgia's May 14, 2012, 2008 8-hour Ozone submission; March 25,
2013, 2010 1-hour NO2 submission; October 22, 2013, 2010 1-
hour SO2 submission as supplemented on July 25, 2014; and
December 14, 2015, 2012 annual PM2.5 submission rely on the
State having a fully approved regional haze plan to satisfy its prong 4
requirements. EPA is approving the regional haze plan portion of the
State's July 26, 2017, SIP revision and converting EPA's previous
action on Georgia's regional haze plan from a limited approval/limited
disapproval to a full approval because final approval of this portion
of the SIP revision would correct the deficiencies that led to EPA's
limited approval/limited disapproval of the State's regional haze plan.
Specifically, EPA's approval of this portion of Georgia's July 26,
2017, SIP revision would satisfy the SO2 and NOX
BART requirements and SO2 reasonable progress requirements
for EGUs formerly subject to CAIR and the requirement that a LTS
include measures as necessary to achieve the State-adopted RPGs.
Because a state may satisfy prong 4 requirements through a fully
approved regional haze plan, EPA is also converting the Agency's
September 26, 2016, conditional approvals to full approvals of the
prong 4 portion of Georgia's May 14, 2012, 2008 8-hour Ozone
submission; March 25, 2013, 2010 1-hour NO2 submission;
October 22, 2013, 2010 1-hour SO2 submission as supplemented
on July 25, 2014; and December 14, 2015, 2012 annual PM2.5
submission.
In a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published on February 2,
2018 (83 FR 4886), EPA proposed to take the following actions: (1)
Approve the regional haze plan portion of Georgia's July 26, 2017, SIP
submission to change reliance from CAIR to CSAPR; (2) convert EPA's
limited approval/limited disapproval of Georgia's February 11, 2010,
regional haze plan as supplemented on November 19, 2010, to a full
approval; (3) remove EPA's FIP for Georgia which replaced reliance on
CAIR with reliance on CSAPR to address the deficiencies identified in
the limited disapproval of Georgia's regional haze plan; and (4)
convert EPA's September 26, 2016, conditional approvals to full
approvals of the prong 4 portion of Georgia's May 14, 2012, 2008 8-hour
Ozone submission; March 25, 2013, 2010 1-hour NO2
submission; the State's October 22, 2013, 2010 1-hour SO2
submission as supplemented on July 25, 2014; and the State's December
14, 2015, 2012 annual PM2.5 submission. The details of
Georgia's submission and the rationale for EPA's actions are explained
in the NPRM. Comments on the proposed rulemaking were due on or before
March 5, 2018. EPA received no adverse comments on the proposed action.
II. Final Actions
As described above, EPA is taking the following actions: (1)
Approving the regional haze plan portion of Georgia's July 26, 2017,
SIP submission to change reliance from CAIR to CSAPR; (2) converting
EPA's limited approval/limited disapproval of Georgia's February 11,
2010, regional haze plan as supplemented on November 19, 2010, to a
full approval; (3) removing EPA's FIP for Georgia which replaced
reliance on CAIR with reliance on CSAPR to address the deficiencies
identified in the limited disapproval of Georgia's regional haze plan;
and (4) converting EPA's September 26, 2016, conditional approvals to
full approvals of the prong 4 portion of Georgia's May 14, 2012, 2008
8-hour Ozone submission; March 25, 2013, 2010 1-hour NO2
submission; the State's October 22, 2013, 2010 1-hour SO2
submission as supplemented on July 25, 2014; and the State's December
14, 2015, 2012 annual PM2.5 submission. All other applicable
infrastructure requirements for the infrastructure SIP submissions have
been or will be addressed in separate rulemakings.
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. These actions merely
approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and do not impose
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that
reason, these actions:
Are not significant regulatory actions subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
Are not Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory actions because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
Do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Are certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Do not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Are not economically significant regulatory actions based
on health or
[[Page 19640]]
safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997);
Are not significant regulatory actions subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Are not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Do not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing these actions and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register.These actions are not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of these actions must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals
for the appropriate circuit by July 3, 2018. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of these actions 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. These actions may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate Matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides.
Dated: April 20, 2018.
Onis ``Trey'' Glenn, III,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart L--Georgia
Sec. 52.569 [Removed and Reserved]
0
2. Section 52.569 is removed and reserved.
0
3. Section 52.570(e) is amended by adding entries for ``110(a)(1) and
(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 1-hour NO2
NAAQS'', ``110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010
1-hour SO2 NAAQS'', ``110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure
Requirements for the 2012 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS'', ``110(a)(1)
and (2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 8-hour Ozone NAAQS'',
and ``Regional Haze Plan Revision'' at the end of the table to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.570 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
EPA-Approved Georgia Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State
submittal
Name of nonregulatory SIP Applicable geographic or date/ EPA approval date Explanation
provision nonattainment area effective
date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Georgia................. 3/25/2013 5/4/2018,.......... Addressing Prong 4
Requirements for the 2010 1- [Insert Federal only.
hour NO2 NAAQS. Register citation].
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Georgia................. 7/25/2014 5/4/2018,.......... Addressing Prong 4
Requirements for the 2010 1- [Insert Federal only.
hour SO2 NAAQS. Register citation].
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Georgia................. 12/14/2015 5/4/2018,.......... Addressing Prong 4
Requirements for the 2012 [Insert Federal only.
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Register citation].
110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure Georgia................. 5/14/2012 5/4/2018,.......... Addressing Prong 4
Requirements for the 2008 8- [Insert Federal only.
hour Ozone NAAQS. Register citation].
Regional Haze Plan Revision..... Georgia................. 7/26/2017 5/4/2018,.......... ..................
[Insert Federal
Register citation].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 19641]]
Sec. 52.580 [Removed and Reserved]
0
4. Section 52.580 is removed and reserved.
[FR Doc. 2018-09412 Filed 5-3-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
