Air Plan Approval; Vermont; Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Requirements for the 2012 PM2.5, 30598-30609 [2018-14068]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
30598
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
IV. Notice of Hearing Under 21 CFR
Part 15
The Commissioner is announcing that
the public hearing will be held in
accordance with 21 CFR part 15. The
hearing will be conducted by a
presiding officer, who will be
accompanied by FDA senior
management from the Office of the
Commissioner and the relevant Centers/
Offices. Under § 15.30(f), the hearing is
informal and the rules of evidence do
not apply. No participant may interrupt
the presentation of another participant.
Only the presiding officer and panel
members can pose questions; they can
question any person during or after each
presentation. Public hearings under part
15 are subject to FDA’s policy and
procedures for electronic media
coverage of FDA’s public administrative
proceedings (21 CFR part 10, subpart C).
Under § 10.205, representatives of the
media may be permitted, subject to
certain limitations, to videotape, film, or
otherwise record FDA’s public
administrative proceedings, including
presentations by participants. The
hearing will be transcribed as stipulated
in § 15.30(b) (see Transcripts). To the
extent that the conditions for the
hearing, as described in this notice,
conflict with any provisions set out in
part 15, this notice acts as a waiver of
those provisions as specified in
§ 15.30(h).
Dated: June 26, 2018.
Leslie Kux,
Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018–14052 Filed 6–28–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4164–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R01–OAR–2017–0696; FRL–9979–
82—Region 1]
Air Plan Approval; Vermont;
Infrastructure State Implementation
Plan Requirements for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
elements of a State Implementation Plan
(SIP) submission from Vermont that
addresses the infrastructure
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA
or Act)—including the interstate
transport provisions—for the 2012 fine
particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jun 28, 2018
Jkt 244001
Quality Standards (NAAQS). The
infrastructure requirements are designed
to ensure that the structural components
of each state’s air quality management
program are adequate to meet the state’s
responsibilities under the CAA. This
action is being taken under the Clean
Air Act.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before July 30, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R01–
OAR–2017–0696, to the
www.regulations.gov website or via
email to simcox.alison@epa.gov. For
comments submitted to the
www.regulations.gov website, follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be edited or removed from
www.regulations.gov. For either manner
of submission, the EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please
contact the person identified in the ‘‘For
Further Information Contact’’ section.
For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epadockets. Publicly available docket
materials are available at
www.regulations.gov or at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, Office of
Ecosystem Protection, Air Quality
Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square—
Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA requests
that if at all possible, you contact the
contact 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 legal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Alison C. Simcox, Air Quality Unit, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, 5 Post
Office Square—Suite 100, (Mail code
OEP05–2), Boston, MA 02109–3912, tel.
(617) 918–1684; simcox.alison@epa.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background and Purpose
A. What Vermont SIP submissions does
this rulemaking address?
B. What is the scope of this rulemaking?
II. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate
these SIP submissions?
III. EPA’s Review
A. Section 110(a)(2)(A)—Emission Limits
and Other Control Measures
B. Section 110(a)(2)(B)—Ambient Air
Quality Monitoring/Data System
C. Section 110(a)(2)(C)—Program for
Enforcement of Control Measures and for
Construction or Modification of
Stationary Sources
D. Section 110(a)(2)(D)—Interstate
Transport
E. Section 110(a)(2)(E)—Adequate
Resources
F. Section 110(a)(2)(F)—Stationary Source
Monitoring System
G. Section 110(a)(2)(G)—Emergency
Powers
H. Section 110(a)(2)(H)—Future SIP
Revisions
I. Section 110(a)(2)(I)—Nonattainment Area
Plan or Plan Revisions Under Part D
J. Section 110(a)(2)(J)—Consultation With
Government Officials; Public
Notifications; Prevention of Significant
Deterioration; Visibility Protection
K. Section 110(a)(2)(K)—Air Quality
Modeling/Data
L. Section 110(a)(2)(L)—Permitting Fees
M. Section 110(a)(2)(M)—Consultation/
Participation by Affected Local Entities
IV. Proposed Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background and Purpose
A. What Vermont SIP submissions does
this rulemaking address?
This rulemaking addresses a SIP
submission from the Vermont
Department of Environmental
Conservation (VT DEC). The state
submitted its infrastructure SIP for the
2012 fine particle (PM2.5 1) National
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)
on October 31, 2017. This included an
enclosure addressing the ‘‘Good
Neighbor’’ (or ‘‘transport’’) provisions
for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS (Section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA). Under
sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA,
states are required to submit
infrastructure SIPs to ensure that SIPs
provide for implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement of the
NAAQS, including the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS.
1 PM
2.5 refers to particulate matter of 2.5 microns
or less in diameter, often referred to as ‘‘fine’’
particles.
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
B. What is the scope of this rulemaking?
EPA is acting on a SIP submission
from Vermont that addresses the
infrastructure requirements of CAA
sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
The requirement for states to make a
SIP submission of this type arises out of
CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2).
Pursuant to these sections, each state
must submit a SIP that provides for the
implementation, maintenance, and
enforcement of each primary or
secondary NAAQS. States must make
such SIP submission ‘‘within 3 years (or
such shorter period as the Administrator
may prescribe) after the promulgation of
a new or revised NAAQS.’’ This
requirement is triggered by the
promulgation of a new or revised
NAAQS and is not conditioned upon
EPA’s taking any other action. Section
110(a)(2) includes the specific elements
that ‘‘each such plan’’ must address.
EPA commonly refers to such SIP
submissions intended to satisfy the
requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1)
and 110(a)(2) as ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’
submissions. Although the term
‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ does not appear in
the CAA, EPA uses the term to
distinguish this type of SIP submission
from submissions that are intended to
satisfy other SIP requirements under the
CAA, such as ‘‘nonattainment SIP’’ or
‘‘attainment plan SIP’’ submissions to
address the nonattainment planning
requirements of part D of title I of the
CAA.
This rulemaking will not cover three
substantive areas that are not integral to
acting on a state’s infrastructure SIP
submission: (i) Existing provisions
related to excess emissions during
periods of start-up, shutdown, or
malfunction at sources (‘‘SSM’’
emissions) that may be contrary to the
CAA and EPA’s policies addressing
such excess emissions; (ii) existing
provisions related to ‘‘director’s
variance’’ or ‘‘director’s discretion’’ that
purport to permit revisions to SIPapproved emissions limits with limited
public process or without requiring
further approval by EPA, that may be
contrary to the CAA (‘‘director’s
discretion’’); and, (iii) existing
provisions for Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) programs that may
be inconsistent with current
requirements of EPA’s ‘‘Final New
Source Review (NSR) Improvement
Rule,’’ 67 FR 80186 (December 31,
2002), as amended by 72 FR 32526 (June
13, 2007) (‘‘NSR Reform’’). Instead, EPA
has the authority to address each one of
these substantive areas separately. A
detailed history, interpretation, and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jun 28, 2018
Jkt 244001
rationale for EPA’s approach to
infrastructure SIP requirements can be
found in EPA’s May 13, 2014, proposed
rule entitled, ‘‘Infrastructure SIP
Requirements for the 2008 Lead
NAAQS’’ in the section, ‘‘What is the
scope of this rulemaking?’’ See 79 FR
27241 at 27242–45.
II. What guidance is EPA using to
evaluate these SIP submissions?
EPA highlighted the statutory
requirement to submit infrastructure
SIPs within 3 years of promulgation of
a new NAAQS in an October 2, 2007,
guidance document entitled ‘‘Guidance
on SIP Elements Required Under
Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997
8-hour Ozone and PM2.5 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards’’ (2007
Guidance). EPA has issued additional
guidance documents and memoranda,
including a September 13, 2013,
guidance document entitled ‘‘Guidance
on Infrastructure State Implementation
Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act
Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)’’ (2013
Guidance) and a September 25, 2009,
guidance document entitled ‘‘Guidance
on SIP Elements Required Under
Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006
24-Hour Fine Particle (PM2.5) National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS)’’ (2009 Guidance).2
With respect to the Good Neighbor
provision, the most recent relevant
document was a memorandum
published on March 17, 2016, entitled
‘‘Information on the Interstate Transport
‘Good Neighbor’ Provision for the 2012
Fine Particulate Matter National
Ambient Air Quality Standards under
Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)’’
(2016 memorandum). The 2016
memorandum describes EPA’s past
approach to addressing interstate
transport, and provides EPA’s general
review of relevant modeling data and air
quality projections as they relate to the
2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The 2016
memorandum provides information
relevant to EPA Regional office review
of the CAA section 110 (a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
‘‘Good Neighbor’’ provision
requirements in infrastructure SIPs with
respect to the 2012 annual PM2.5
NAAQS. This rulemaking considers
information provided in that
memorandum.
30599
detailed list of Vermont Laws and
previously SIP-approved Air Quality
Regulations showing how the various
components of its EPA-approved SIP
meet each of the requirements of section
110(a)(2) of the CAA for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS. The following review evaluates
the state’s submissions in light of
section 110(a)(2) requirements and
relevant EPA guidance.
For Vermont’s October 31, 2017
submission addressing the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS, we reviewed all Section
110(a)(2) elements, including the
transport provisions, but excluding the
three areas discussed above under the
scope of this rulemaking.
III. EPA’s Review
In this notice of proposed rulemaking,
EPA is proposing action on a SIP
submission from the state of Vermont.
In its submission, Vermont presents a
A. Section 110(a)(2)(A)–Emission Limits
and Other Control Measures
This section (also referred to in this
action as an element) of the Act requires
SIPs to include enforceable emission
limits and other control measures,
means or techniques, schedules for
compliance, and other related matters.
However, EPA has long interpreted
emission limits and control measures
for attaining the standards as being due
when nonattainment planning
requirements are due.3 In the context of
an infrastructure SIP, EPA is not
evaluating the existing SIP provisions
for this purpose. Instead, EPA is only
evaluating whether the state’s SIP has
basic structural provisions for the
implementation of the NAAQS.
Vermont’s infrastructure submittal for
this element cites Vermont Statutes
Annotated (V.S.A) and several Vermont
Air Pollution Control Regulations (VT
APCR) as follows: Vermont’s 10 V.S.A.
§ 554, ‘‘Powers,’’ authorizes the
Secretary of the Vermont Agency of
Natural Resources (ANR) to ‘‘[a]dopt,
amend and repeal rules, implementing
the provisions’’ of Vermont’s air
pollution control laws set forth in 10
V.S.A. chapter 23. It also authorizes the
Secretary to ‘‘conduct studies,
investigations and research relating to
air contamination and air pollution’’
and to ‘‘[d]etermine by appropriate
means the degree of air contamination
and air pollution in the state and the
several parts thereof.’’ Ten V.S.A. § 556,
‘‘Permits for the construction or
modification of air contaminant
sources,’’ requires applicants to obtain
permits for constructing or modifying
air contaminant sources, and 10 V.S.A.
§ 558, ‘‘Emission control requirements,’’
authorizes the Secretary ‘‘to establish
emission control requirements . . .
necessary to prevent, abate, or control
2 This memorandum and other referenced
guidance documents and memoranda are included
in the docket for this action.
3 See, for example, EPA’s final rule on ‘‘National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for Lead.’’ 73 FR
66964, 67034 (November 12, 2008).
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
30600
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
air pollution.’’ EPA approved 10 V.S.A.
§ 554 on June 27, 2017 (82 FR 29005).
The Vermont submittal cites more
than 20 specific rules that the state has
adopted to control the emissions of
PM2.5 and its precursors: sulfur dioxide
(SO2), volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), and nitrogen oxides (NOX). A
few, with their EPA approval citation 4
are listed here: § 5–201—Open Burning
Prohibited (63 FR 19825; April 22,
1998); § 5–251—Control of Nitrogen
Oxides Emissions (81 FR 50342; August
1, 2016); § 5–252—Control of Sulfur
Dioxide Emissions (81 FR 50342;
August 1, 2016); § 5–261—Control of
Hazardous Air Contaminants (47 FR
6014; February 10, 1982); § 5–502—
Major Stationary Sources and Major
Modifications (81 FR 50342; August 1,
2016); § 5–702—Excessive Smoke
Emissions from Motor Vehicles (45 FR
10775; February 19, 1980).
Based upon EPA’s review of the
submittals, EPA proposes that Vermont
meets the infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A)
with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
As previously noted, EPA is not
proposing to approve or disapprove any
existing state provisions or rules related
to SSM or director’s discretion in the
context of section 110(a)(2)(A).
B. Section 110(a)(2)(B)—Ambient Air
Quality Monitoring/Data System
This section requires SIPs to provide
for establishing and operating ambient
air quality monitors, collecting and
analyzing ambient air quality data, and
making these data available to EPA
upon request. Each year, states submit
annual air monitoring network plans to
EPA for review and approval. EPA’s
review of these annual monitoring plans
includes our evaluation of whether the
state: (i) Monitors air quality at
appropriate locations throughout the
state using EPA-approved Federal
Reference Methods or Federal
Equivalent Method monitors; (ii)
submits data to EPA’s Air Quality
System (AQS) in a timely manner; and
(iii) provides EPA Regional Offices with
prior notification of any planned
changes to monitoring sites or the
network plan.
State law authorizes the Secretary of
ANR, or authorized representative, to
‘‘conduct studies, investigations and
research relating to air contamination
and air pollution’’ and to ‘‘[d]etermine
4 The citations reference the most recent EPA
approval of the stated rule, or of revisions to the
rule. For example, § 5–252 was initially approved
on February 4, 1977 (42 FR 6811), with various
revisions being approved since then, with the most
recent approval of revisions to the applicability
section occurring on August 1, 2016 (81 FR 50342).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jun 28, 2018
Jkt 244001
by appropriate means the degree of air
contamination and air pollution in the
state and the several parts thereof.’’ See
10 V.S.A. § 554(8), (9). VT DEC, one of
several departments within ANR,
operates an air quality monitoring
network, and EPA approved the state’s
2017 Annual Air Monitoring Network
Plan for PM2.5 on August 23, 2017.5
Furthermore, VT DEC populates AQS
with air quality monitoring data in a
timely manner, and provides EPA with
prior notification when considering a
change to its monitoring network or
plan. EPA proposes that VT DEC has
met the infrastructure SIP requirements
of section 110(a)(2)(B) with respect to
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
C. Section 110(a)(2)(C)—Program for
Enforcement of Control Measures and
for Construction or Modification of
Stationary Sources
States are required to include a
program providing for enforcement of
the emission limits and control
measures described in section
110(a)(2)(A) and for the regulation of
construction of new or modified
stationary sources to meet NSR
requirements under PSD and
nonattainment new source review
(NNSR) programs. Part C of the CAA
(sections 160–169B) addresses PSD,
while part D of the CAA (sections 171–
193) addresses NNSR requirements.6
The evaluation of each state’s
submission addressing the
infrastructure SIP requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(C) covers the
following: (i) Enforcement of SIP
measures; (ii) PSD program for major
sources and major modifications; and
(iii) a permit program for minor sources
and minor modifications.
Sub-Element 1: Enforcement of SIP
Measures
State law provides the Secretary of
ANR with the authority to enforce air
pollution control requirements,
including SIP-approved 10 V.S.A. § 554,
which authorizes the Secretary of ANR
to ‘‘[i]ssue orders as may be necessary
to effectuate the purposes of [the state’s
5 See EPA approval letter located in the docket for
this action.
6 EPA considers the evaluation of permit
provisions that implement Part D to be outside the
scope of an infrastructure SIP action because SIPs
incorporating necessary local nonattainment area
controls are due on separate schedules, pursuant to
CAA section 172 and the various pollutant-specific
subparts 2 through 5 of part D. Thus, our review
under section 110(a)(2)(C) does not evaluate the
nonattainment NSR program required by part D of
the Act. We are only evaluating the state’s PSD
program as required by part C of the Act and the
state’s minor source program (applicable regardless
of attainment status) as required by section
110(a)(2)(C).
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
air pollution control laws] and enforce
the same by all appropriate
administrative and judicial
proceedings.’’ In addition, Vermont’s
SIP-approved regulations VT APCR § 5–
501, ‘‘Review of Construction or
Modification of Air Contaminant
Sources,’’ and VT APCR § 5–502, ‘‘Major
Stationary Sources and Major
Modifications,’’ establish requirements
for permits to construct, modify or
operate major air contaminant sources.
EPA proposes that Vermont has met
the enforcement of SIP measures
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C)
with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: PSD Program for Major
Sources and Major Modifications
PSD applies to new major sources or
modifications made to major sources for
pollutants where the area in which the
source is located is in attainment of, or
unclassifiable with regard to, the
relevant NAAQS. The EPA interprets
the CAA to require each state to make
an infrastructure SIP submission for a
new or revised NAAQS demonstrating
that the air agency has a complete PSD
permitting program in place satisfying
the current requirements for all
regulated NSR pollutants. VT DEC’s
EPA–approved PSD rules, contained at
VT APCR Subchapters I, IV, and V,
contain provisions that address
applicable requirements for all regulated
NSR pollutants, including GHGs.
With respect to current requirements
for PM2.5, we evaluate Vermont’s PSD
program for consistency with two EPA
rules. The first is a final rule issued May
16, 2008, entitled ‘‘Implementation of
the New Source Review (NSR) Program
for Particulate Matter Less than 2.5
Micrometers (PM2.5)’’ (2008 NSR Rule).
See 73 FR 28321. The 2008 NSR Rule
finalized several new requirements for
SIPs to address sources that emit direct
PM2.5 and other pollutants that
contribute to secondary PM2.5
formation, including requirements for
NSR permits to address pollutants
responsible for the secondary formation
of PM2.5, otherwise known as
precursors. As part of identifying
precursors to PM2.5, the 2008 NSR Rule
also required states to revise the
definition of ‘‘significant’’ as it relates to
a net emissions increase or the potential
of a source to emit pollutants. Finally,
the 2008 NSR Rule requires states to
account for PM2.5 and PM10
condensables for applicability
determinations and in establishing
emissions limitations for PM2.5 and
PM10 in PSD permits beginning on or
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
after January 1, 2011.7 These
requirements are codified in 40 CFR
51.166(b) and 52.21(b). States were
required to revise their SIPs consistent
with these changes to the federal
regulations. On August 1, 2016 (81 FR
50342), EPA approved revisions to
Vermont’s PSD program satisfying these
requirements of the 2008 NSR Rule. See
also 82 FR 15671 at 15674–75 (March
30, 2017); 82 FR 29005 (June 27, 2017).
The second is a final rule issued
October 20, 2010, entitled ‘‘Prevention
of Significant Deterioration (PSD) for
Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5
Micrometers (PM2.5)—Increments,
Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and
Significant Monitoring Concentration
(SMC)’’ (2010 NSR Rule). See 75 FR
64864. This rule established several
components for making PSD permitting
determinations for PM2.5, including
adding the required elements for PM2.5
into a state’s existing system of
‘‘increment analysis,’’ which is the
mechanism used in the PSD permitting
program to estimate significant
deterioration of ambient air quality for
a pollutant in relation to new source
construction or modification. The 2010
NSR Rule revised the existing system for
determining increment consumption by
establishing a new ‘‘major source
baseline date’’ for PM2.5 and by
establishing a trigger date for PM2.5 in
relation to the definition of ‘‘minor
source baseline date.’’ Lastly, the 2010
NSR Rule revised the definition of
‘‘baseline area’’ to include a level of
significance of 0.3 micrograms per cubic
meter, annual average, for PM2.5. These
requirements are codified in 40 CFR
51.166(b) and (c) and in 40 CFR 52.21(b)
and (c). States were required to revise
their SIPs consistent with these changes
to the federal regulations.
On August 1, 2016 (81 FR 50342) and
September 14, 2016 (81 FR 63102), EPA
approved revisions to the Vermont SIP
that address certain aspects of EPA’s
2010 NSR rule. In addition, on March
19, 2018, EPA approved the state’s
method for determining the amount of
PSD increments available to a new or
modified major source. See 83 FR
11884. As a result, Vermont’s approved
PSD program meets the current
requirements for PM2.5.
7 On January 4, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the D.C. Circuit held that EPA should have
issued the 2008 NSR Rule in accordance with the
CAA’s requirements for PM10 nonattainment areas
(Title I, Part D, subpart 4), and not the general
requirements for nonattainment areas under subpart
1. Nat. Res. Def. Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428. The
EPA’s approval of Vermont’s infrastructure SIP as
to elements C, D(i)(II), or J with respect to the PSD
requirements promulgated by the 2008 NSR Rule
does not conflict with the court’s opinion. For more
information, see 80 FR 42446, July 17, 2015).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jun 28, 2018
Jkt 244001
On March 19, 2018 (83 FR 11884),
EPA also approved revisions to
Vermont’s PSD program that addressed
the PSD requirements of EPA’s ‘‘Final
Rule to Implement the 8- Hour Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality
Standard—Phase 2; Final Rule To
Implement Certain Aspects of the 1990
Amendments Relating to New Source
Review and Prevention of Significant
Deterioration as They Apply in Carbon
Monoxide, Particulate Matter, and
Ozone NAAQS; Final Rule for
Reformulated Gasoline,’’ which
obligated states to revise their PSD
programs to explicitly identify NOX as
a precursor to ozone. See 70 FR 71612
(November 29, 2005). Therefore,
Vermont’s approved PSD program meets
the current requirements for ozone.
With respect to GHGs, on June 23,
2014, the United States Supreme Court
issued a decision addressing the
application of PSD permitting
requirements to GHG emissions. Utility
Air Regulatory Group v. Envtl. Prot.
Agency, 134 S.Ct. 2427. The Supreme
Court said that EPA may not treat GHGs
as an air pollutant for purposes of
determining whether a source is a major
source required to obtain a PSD permit.
The Court also said that EPA could
continue to require that PSD permits,
otherwise required based on emissions
of pollutants other than GHGs, contain
limitations on GHG emissions based on
the application of Best Available
Control Technology (BACT).
In accordance with the Supreme
Court decision, on April 10, 2015, the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit (the D.C. Circuit)
issued an amended judgment vacating
the regulations that implemented Step 2
of the EPA’s PSD and Title V
Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule, but not
the regulations that implement Step 1 of
that rule. Step 1 of the Tailoring Rule
covers sources that are required to
obtain a PSD permit based on emissions
of pollutants other than GHGs. Step 2
applied to sources that emitted only
GHGs above the thresholds triggering
the requirement to obtain a PSD permit.
The amended judgment preserves,
without the need for additional
rulemaking by EPA, the application of
the BACT requirement to GHG
emissions from Step 1 or ‘‘anyway’’
sources. With respect to Step 2 sources,
the D.C. Circuit’s amended judgment
vacated the regulations at issue in the
litigation, including 40 CFR
51.166(b)(48)(v), ‘‘to the extent they
require a stationary source to obtain a
PSD permit if greenhouse gases are the
only pollutant (i) that the source emits
or has the potential to emit above the
applicable major source thresholds, or
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30601
(ii) for which there is a significant
emission increase from a modification.’’
On August 19, 2015 (80 FR 50199),
EPA amended its PSD and Title V
regulations to remove from the Code of
Federal Regulations portions of those
regulations that the D.C. Circuit
specifically identified as vacated. EPA
intends to further revise the PSD and
Title V regulations to fully implement
the Supreme Court and D.C. Circuit
rulings in a separate rulemaking. This
future rulemaking will include revisions
to additional definitions in the PSD
regulations.
Some states have begun to revise their
existing SIP-approved PSD programs in
light of these court decisions, and some
states may prefer not to initiate this
process until they have more
information about the additional
planned revisions to EPA’s PSD
regulations. EPA is not expecting states
to have revised their PSD programs in
anticipation of EPA’s additional actions
to revise its PSD program rules in
response to the court decisions for
purposes of infrastructure SIP
submissions. At present, EPA has
determined that Vermont’s SIP is
sufficient to satisfy element C with
respect to GHGs because the PSD
permitting program previously
approved by EPA into the SIP continues
to require that PSD permits (otherwise
required based on emissions of
pollutants other than GHGs) contain
limitations on GHG emissions based on
the application of BACT. Although the
approved Vermont PSD permitting
program may currently contain
provisions that are no longer necessary
in light of the Supreme Court decision,
this does not render the infrastructure
SIP submission inadequate to satisfy
element C. The SIP contains the
necessary PSD requirements at this
time, and the application of those
requirements is not impeded by the
presence of other previously-approved
provisions regarding the permitting of
sources of GHGs that EPA does not
consider necessary at this time in light
of the Supreme Court decision.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court
decision does not affect EPA’s proposed
approval of Vermont’s infrastructure SIP
as to the requirements of element C.
For the purposes of the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS infrastructure SIPs, EPA
reiterates that NSR Reform regulations
are not in the scope of these actions.
Therefore, we are not taking action on
existing NSR Reform regulations for
Vermont.
The EPA is proposing to approve
Vermont’s infrastructure SIP for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS with respect to the
requirement in section 110(a)(2)(C) to
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
30602
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
include a PSD permitting program in the
SIP that covers the requirements for all
regulated NSR pollutants as required by
part C of the Act.
Sub-Element 3: Preconstruction
Permitting for Minor Sources and Minor
Modifications
To address the pre-construction
regulation of the modification and
construction of minor stationary sources
and minor modifications of major
stationary sources, an infrastructure SIP
submission should identify the existing
EPA-approved SIP provisions and/or
include new provisions that govern the
minor source pre-construction program
that regulate emissions of the relevant
NAAQS pollutants. EPA approved
revisions to Vermont’s minor NSR
program on August 1, 2016 (81 FR
50342). Vermont and EPA rely on the
existing minor NSR program to ensure
that new and modified sources not
captured by the major NSR permitting
programs, VT APCR § 5–502, do not
interfere with attainment and
maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
We are proposing to find that
Vermont has met the requirement to
have a SIP-approved minor new source
review permit program as required
under Section 110(a)(2)(C) for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
D. Section 110(a)(2)(D)—Interstate
Transport
This section contains a
comprehensive set of air quality
management elements pertaining to the
transport of air pollution with which
states must comply. It covers the
following five topics, categorized as subelements: Sub-element 1, Significant
contribution to nonattainment, and
interference with maintenance of a
NAAQS; Sub-element 2, PSD; Subelement 3, Visibility protection; Subelement 4, Interstate pollution
abatement; and Sub-element 5,
International pollution abatement. Subelements 1 through 3 above are found
under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the Act,
and these items are further categorized
into the four prongs discussed below,
two of which are found within subelement 1. Sub-elements 4 and 5 are
found under section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) of
the Act and include provisions insuring
compliance with sections 115 and 126
of the Act relating to interstate and
international pollution abatement.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jun 28, 2018
Jkt 244001
Sub-Element 1: Section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)—Contribute to
Nonattainment (Prong 1) and Interfere
With Maintenance of the NAAQS (Prong
2)
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA
requires a SIP to prohibit any emissions
activity in the state that will contribute
significantly to nonattainment or
interfere with maintenance of the
NAAQS in any downwind state. EPA
commonly refers to these requirements
as prong 1 (significant contribution to
nonattainment) and prong 2
(interference with maintenance), or
jointly as the ‘‘Good Neighbor’’ or
‘‘transport’’ provisions of the CAA. This
rulemaking proposes action on the
portion of Vermont’s October 31, 2017
SIP submission that addresses the prong
1 and 2 requirements with respect to the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
EPA has developed a consistent
framework for addressing the prong 1
and 2 interstate-transport requirements
with respect to the PM2.5 NAAQS in
several previous federal rulemakings.
The four basic steps of that framework
include: (1) Identifying downwind
receptors that are expected to have
problems attaining or maintaining the
NAAQS; (2) identifying which upwind
states contribute to these identified
problems in amounts sufficient to
warrant further review and analysis; (3)
for states identified as contributing to
downwind air quality problems,
identifying upwind emissions
reductions necessary to prevent an
upwind state from significantly
contributing to nonattainment or
interfering with maintenance of the
NAAQS downwind; and (4) for states
that are found to have emissions that
significantly contribute to
nonattainment or interfere with
maintenance of the NAAQS downwind,
reducing the identified upwind
emissions through adoption of
permanent and enforceable measures.
This framework was most recently
applied with respect to PM2.5 in the
Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR),
which addressed both the 1997 and
2006 PM2.5 standards, as well as the
1997 ozone standard. See 76 FR 48208
(August 8, 2011).
EPA’s analysis for CSAPR, conducted
consistent with the four-step framework,
included air-quality modeling that
evaluated the impacts of 38 eastern
states on identified receptors in the
eastern United States. EPA indicated
that, for step 2 of the framework, states
with impacts on downwind receptors
that are below the contribution
threshold of 1% of the relevant NAAQS
would not be considered to significantly
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
contribute to nonattainment or interfere
with maintenance of the relevant
NAAQS, and would, therefore, not be
included in CSAPR. See 76 FR 48220,
August 8, 2011. EPA further indicated
that such states could rely on EPA’s
analysis for CSAPR as technical support
in order to demonstrate that their
existing or future interstate transport
SIP submittals are adequate to address
the transport requirements of
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with regard to the
relevant NAAQS. Id.
In addition, as noted above, on March
17, 2016, EPA released the 2016
memorandum to provide information to
states as they develop SIPs addressing
the Good Neighbor provision as it
pertains to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Consistent with step 1 of the framework,
the 2016 memorandum provides
projected future-year annual PM2.5
design values for monitors throughout
the country based on quality-assured
and certified ambient-monitoring data
and recent air-quality modeling and
explains the methodology used to
develop these projected design values.
The memorandum also describes how
the projected values can be used to help
determine which monitors should be
further evaluated to potentially address
if emissions from other states
significantly contribute to
nonattainment or interfere with
maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
at these monitoring sites. The 2016
memorandum explained that the
pertinent year for evaluating air quality
for purposes of addressing interstate
transport for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS is
2021, the attainment deadline for 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS nonattainment areas
classified as Moderate. Accordingly,
because the available data included
2017 and 2025 projected average and
maximum PM2.5 design values
calculated through the CAMx
photochemical model, the
memorandum suggests approaches
states might use to interpolate PM2.5
values at sites in 2021.
For all, but one, monitoring sites in
the eastern United States, the modeling
data provided in the 2016 memorandum
showed that monitors were expected to
both attain and maintain the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS in both 2017 and 2025. The
modeling results project that this one
monitor, the Liberty monitor, (ID
number 420030067), located in
Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, will
be above the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS
in 2017, but only under the model’s
maximum projected conditions, which
are used in EPA’s interstate transport
framework to identify maintenance
receptors. The Liberty monitor (along
with all the other Allegheny County
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
monitors) is projected to both attain and
maintain the NAAQS in 2025. The 2016
memorandum suggests that under such
a condition (again, where EPA’s
photochemical modeling indicates an
area will maintain the 2012 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS in 2025, but not in 2017),
further analysis of the site should be
performed to determine if the site may
be a nonattainment or maintenance
receptor in 2021 (which, again, is the
attainment deadline for moderate PM2.5
areas). The memorandum also indicates
that for certain states with incomplete
ambient monitoring data, additional
information including the latest
available data, should be analyzed to
determine whether there are potential
downwind air quality problems that
may be impacted by transported
emissions. This rulemaking considers
these analyses for Vermont, as well as
additional analysis conducted by EPA
during review of Vermont’s submittal.
To develop the projected values
presented in the memorandum, EPA
used the results of nationwide
photochemical air-quality modeling that
it recently performed to support several
rulemakings related to the ozone
NAAQS. Base-year modeling was
performed for 2011. Future-year
modeling was performed for 2017 to
support the proposed CSAPR Update for
the 2008 Ozone NAAQS. See 80 FR
75705 (December 3, 2015). Future-year
modeling was also performed for 2025
to support the Regulatory Impact
Assessment of the final 2015 Ozone
NAAQS.8 The outputs from these model
runs included hourly concentrations of
PM2.5 that were used in conjunction
with measured data to project annual
average PM2.5 design values for 2017
and 2025. Areas that were designated as
moderate PM2.5 nonattainment areas for
the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in 2014
must attain the NAAQS by December
31, 2021, or as expeditiously as
practicable. Although neither the
available 2017 nor 2025 future-year
modeling data correspond directly to
the future-year attainment deadline for
moderate PM2.5 nonattainment areas,
EPA believes that the modeling
information is still helpful for
identifying potential nonattainment and
maintenance receptors in the 2017–2021
period. Assessing downwind PM2.5 airquality problems based on estimates of
air-quality concentrations in a future
year aligned with the relevant
attainment deadline is consistent with
the instructions from the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit in North Carolina v.
8 See 2015 ozone NAAQS RIA at: www3.epa.gov/
ttnecas1/docs/20151001ria.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jun 28, 2018
Jkt 244001
30603
contributions for ozone and PM2.5 is
included in docket EPA–HQ–OAR–
2009–0491–4228.) Although EPA has
not proposed a particular threshold for
evaluating the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, EPA
notes that Vermont’s impact on the
Vermont’s Submissions for Prongs 1 and
Liberty monitor is far below the
2
threshold of 1% for the annual 2012
On October 31, 2017, VT DEC
PM2.5 NAAQS (i.e., 0.12 mg/m3) that
submitted an infrastructure SIP for the
EPA previously used to evaluate the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS that addressed
contribution of upwind states to
prongs 1 and 2 for the 2012 PM2.5
downwind air-quality monitors.
NAAQS. Vermont’s SIP submittal relied Therefore, even if the Liberty monitor
in part on EPA’s analysis performed for
were considered a receptor for purposes
the CSAPR rulemaking to conclude that of transport, the EPA proposes to
the state will not significantly
conclude that Vermont will not
contribute to nonattainment or interfere significantly contribute to
with maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5
nonattainment, or interfere with
NAAQS in any downwind area.
maintenance, of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
EPA analyzed the state’s October 2017 at that monitor.
submittal to determine whether it fully
In addition, the Liberty monitor is
addressed the prong 1 and 2 transport
already close to attaining the 2012 PM2.5
provisions with respect to the 2012
NAAQS, and expected emissions
PM2.5 NAAQS. As discussed below, EPA reductions in the next four years will
concludes that emissions of PM2.5 and
lead to additional reductions in
PM2.5 precursors (NOX and SO2) in
measured PM2.5 concentrations. There
Vermont will not significantly
are both local and regional components
contribute to nonattainment or interfere to measured PM2.5 levels. All monitors
with maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5
in Allegheny County have a regional
NAAQS in any other state.
component, with the Liberty monitor
As noted, the modeling discussed in
most strongly influenced by local
EPA’s 2016 memorandum identified one sources. This is confirmed by the fact
potential maintenance receptor for the
that annual average measured
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS at the Liberty
concentrations at the Liberty monitor
monitor (ID number 420030067), located have consistently been 2–4 mg/m3 higher
in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. The than other monitors in Allegheny
memorandum also identified certain
County.
states with incomplete ambient
Specifically, previous CSAPR
monitoring data as areas that may
modeling showed that regional
require further analysis to determine
emissions from upwind states,
whether there are potential downwind
particularly SO2 and NOx emissions,
air quality problems that may be
contribute to PM2.5 nonattainment at the
impacted by transported emissions.
Liberty monitor. In recent years, large
While developing the 2011 CSAPR
SO2 and NOX reductions from power
rulemaking, EPA modeled the impacts
plants have occurred in Pennsylvania
of all 38 eastern states in its modeling
and states upwind from the Greater
domain on fine particulate matter
Pittsburgh region. Pennsylvania’s energy
concentrations at downwind receptors
sector emissions of SO2 will have
in other states in the 2012 analysis year
decreased 166,000 tons between 2015–
in order to evaluate the contribution of
2017 as a result of CSAPR
upwind states on downwind states with implementation. This is due to both the
respect to the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5.
installation of emissions controls and
Although the modeling was not
retirements of electric generating units
conducted for purposes of analyzing
(EGUs). Projected power plant closures
upwind states’ impacts on downwind
and additional emissions controls in
receptors with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 Pennsylvania and upwind states will
NAAQS, the contribution analysis for
help further reduce both direct PM2.5
the 1997 and 2006 standards can be
and PM2.5 precursors. Regional emission
informative for evaluating Vermont’s
reductions will continue to occur from
compliance with the Good Neighbor
current on-the-books federal and state
provision for the 2012 standard.
regulations such as the federal on-road
This CSAPR modeling showed that
and non-road vehicle programs, and
Vermont had a very small impact (0.002 various rules for major stationary
mg/m3 annual PM2.5) on the Liberty
emissions sources. See proposed
monitor in Allegheny County,
approval of the Ohio Infrastructure SIP
Pennsylvania, which is the only out-offor the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS (82 FR
state monitor that may be a
57689; December 7, 2017).
nonattainment or maintenance receptor
In addition to regional emissions
in 2021. (A spreadsheet showing CSAPR reductions and plant closures,
EPA, 531 F.3d 896, 911–12 (D.C. Cir.
2008), that upwind emission reductions
should be harmonized, to the extent
possible, with the attainment deadlines
for downwind areas.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
30604
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
additional local reductions to both
direct PM2.5 and SO2 emissions are
expected to occur and should contribute
to further declines in Allegheny
County’s PM2.5 monitor concentrations.
For example, significant SO2 reductions
have recently occurred at US Steel’s
integrated steel mill facilities in
southern Allegheny County as part of a
1-hr SO2 NAAQS SIP.9 Reductions are
largely due to declining sulfur content
in the Clairton Coke Work’s coke oven
gas (COG). Because this COG is burned
at US Steel’s Clairton Coke Works, Irvin
Mill, and Edgar Thompson Steel Mill,
these reductions in sulfur content
should contribute to much lower PM2.5
precursor emissions in the immediate
future. The Allegheny SO2 SIP also
projects lower SO2 emissions resulting
from vehicle fuel standards, reductions
in general emissions due to declining
population in the Greater Pittsburgh
region, and several shutdowns of
significant sources of emissions in
Allegheny County.
EPA modeling projections, the recent
downward trend in local and upwind
emissions reductions, the expected
continued downward trend in emissions
between 2017 and 2021, and the
downward trend in monitored PM2.5
concentrations all indicate that the
Liberty monitor will attain and be able
to maintain the 2012 annual PM2.5
NAAQS by 2021. See proposed approval
of the Ohio Infrastructure SIP (82 FR
57689, December 7, 2017).
As noted in the 2016 memorandum,
several states have had recent dataquality issues identified as part of the
PM2.5 designations process. In
particular, some ambient PM2.5 data for
certain time periods between 2009 and
2013 in Florida, Illinois, Idaho,
Tennessee, and Kentucky did not meet
all data-quality requirements under 40
CFR part 50, appendix L. The lack of
data means that the relevant areas in
those states could potentially be in
nonattainment or be maintenance
receptors in 2021. However, EPA’s
analysis for the 2011 CSAPR rulemaking
with respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS
determined that Vermont’s impact to all
these downwind receptors would be
well below the 1% contribution
threshold for this NAAQS. That
conclusion informs the analysis of
Vermont’s contributions for purposes of
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS as well. Given
this, and the fact, discussed below, that
the state’s PM2.5 design values for all
ambient monitors have been well below
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS during the
period from 2009 to 2013, EPA
9 www.achd.net/air/pubs/SIPs/SO2_2010_
NAAQS_SIP_9-14-2017.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jun 28, 2018
Jkt 244001
concludes that it is highly unlikely that
Vermont significantly contributes to
nonattainment or interferes with
maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
in areas with data-quality issues.10
Information in Enclosure 5 of
Vermont’s October 2017 SIP submission
(Vermont Good Neighbor SIP)
corroborates EPA’s proposed conclusion
that Vermont’s SIP meets its obligations
under CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I).
This enclosure includes 2011–2015
design values for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS in the bordering states of
Massachusetts, New Hampshire and
New York, which are all well below the
annual standard (12.0 mg/m3). In
addition, the analysis includes a graph
showing that the design-value trend at
the four ambient monitoring locations in
Vermont declined from 2005 to 2016.
This technical analysis is supported
by additional indications that air quality
is improving and emissions are falling
in Vermont. Specifically, certified
annual PM2.5 monitor values (for
monitors meeting minimum data
completeness criteria) recorded since
2014 show that the highest value in
2015 was 9.1 mg/m3 at a monitor in
Rutland, and the highest value in 2016
was 6.8 mg/m3 at the same monitor in
Rutland.11
Second, Vermont’s sources are wellcontrolled. Vermont’s 2017 submission
indicates that the state has many SIPapproved rules and programs that limit
emissions of PM2.5, including rules to
control emissions of SO2, PM2.5, VOCs
and NOX 12; Vermont’s PSD program
contained in VT APCR Subchapters I,
IV, and V; Vermont’s Regional Haze SIP;
and Vermont’s Title V program
contained in Subchapter X of VT APCR.
In addition, Vermont adopted
limitations on sulfur in fuel (VT APCR
§ 5–221(1)) on September 28, 2011.
It should also be noted that Vermont
is not in the CSAPR program because
EPA analyses show that the state does
not emit ozone-season NOX at a level
that contributes significantly to nonattainment or interferes with
maintenance of the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS in any other state.
For the reasons explained herein, EPA
agrees with Vermont’s conclusions and
proposes to determine that Vermont will
not significantly contribute to
10 Vermont’s PM
2.5 design values for all ambient
monitors from 2004–2006 through 2013–2015 are
available on Table 6 of the 2015 Design Value
Report at https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/
air-trends/air-quality-design-values_.html.
11 24-hour and annual PM
2.5 monitor values for
individual monitoring sites throughout Vermont are
available at www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data/
monitor-values-report.
12 SO , NO and VOCs contribute to the
2
X
formation of PM2.5.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
nonattainment or interfere with
maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
in any other state. Therefore, EPA is
proposing to approve the October 2017
infrastructure SIP submission from
Vermont addressing prongs 1 and 2 of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: Section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)—PSD (Prong 3)
To prevent significant deterioration of
air quality, this sub-element requires
SIPs to include provisions that prohibit
any source or other type of emissions
activity in one state from interfering
with measures that are required in any
other state’s SIP under Part C of the
CAA. As explained in the 2013
Guidance, a state may meet this
requirement with respect to in-state
sources and pollutants that are subject
to PSD permitting through a
comprehensive PSD permitting program
that applies to all regulated NSR
pollutants and that satisfies the
requirements of EPA’s PSD
implementation rules. As discussed
above under element C, Vermont has
such a PSD permitting program. For instate sources not subject to PSD, this
requirement can be satisfied through a
fully-approved nonattainment new
source review (NNSR) program with
respect to any previous NAAQS. EPA’s
latest approval of some revisions to
Vermont’s NNSR regulations was on
August 1, 2016 (81 FR 50342).
Therefore, we are proposing to approve
this sub-element for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS.
Sub-Element 3: Section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)—Visibility Protection
(Prong 4)
With regard to applicable
requirements for visibility protection of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), states are
subject to visibility and regional-haze
program requirements under part C of
the CAA (which includes sections 169A
and 169B). The 2009 Guidance, 2011
Guidance, and 2013 Guidance
recommend that these requirements can
be satisfied by an approved SIP
addressing reasonably attributable
visibility impairment, if required, or an
approved SIP addressing regional haze.
A fully approved regional haze SIP
meeting the requirements of 40 CFR
51.308 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. Vermont’s Regional Haze SIP
was approved by EPA on May 22, 2012
(77 FR 30212). Accordingly, EPA
proposes that Vermont has met the
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
visibility protection requirements of
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Sub-Element 4: Section
110(a)(2)(D)(ii)—Interstate Pollution
Abatement
This sub-element requires that each
SIP contain provisions requiring
compliance with requirements of
section 126 relating to interstate
pollution abatement. Section 126(a)
requires new or modified sources to
notify neighboring states of potential
impacts from the source. The statute
does not specify the method by which
the source should provide the
notification. States with SIP-approved
PSD programs must have a provision
requiring such notification by new or
modified sources.
On August 1, 2016 (81 FR 50342),
EPA approved revisions to VT APCR
§ 5–501, which includes a provision that
requires VT ANR to provide notice of a
draft PSD permit to, among other
entities, any state whose lands may be
affected by emissions from the source.
VT APCR § 5–501(7)(c). Vermont’s
public notice requirements are
consistent with the Federal PSD
program’s public notice requirements
for affected states under 40 CFR
51.166(q). Therefore, we propose to
approve Vermont’s compliance with the
infrastructure SIP requirements of
section 126(a) with respect to with
respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Vermont has no obligations under any
other provision of section 126, and no
source or sources within the state are
the subject of an active finding under
section 126 of the CAA with respect to
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 5: Section
110(a)(2)(D)(ii)—International Pollution
Abatement
This sub-element also requires each
SIP to contain provisions requiring
compliance with the applicable
requirements of section 115 relating to
international pollution abatement.
There are no final findings under
section 115 of the CAA against Vermont
with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Therefore, EPA is proposing that
Vermont has met the applicable
infrastructure SIP requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) related to section
115 of the CAA for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS.
E. Section 110(a)(2)(E)—Adequate
Resources
Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) requires each
SIP to provide assurances that the state
will have adequate personnel, funding,
and legal authority under state law to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jun 28, 2018
Jkt 244001
carry out its SIP. In addition, section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires each state to
comply with the requirements under
CAA section 128 about state boards.
Finally, section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii) requires
that, where a state relies upon local or
regional governments or agencies for the
implementation of its SIP provisions,
the state retain responsibility for
ensuring implementation of SIP
obligations with respect to relevant
NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii),
however, does not apply to this action
because Vermont does not rely upon
local or regional governments or
agencies for the implementation of its
SIP provisions.
Sub-Element 1: Adequate Personnel,
Funding, and Legal Authority Under
State Law To Carry Out Its SIP, and
Related Issues
Vermont, through its infrastructure
SIP submittals, has documented that its
air agency has the requisite authority
and resources to carry out its SIP
obligations. Vermont cites 10 V.S.A.
§ 553, which designates ANR as the air
pollution control agency of the state,
and 10 V.S.A § 554, which provides the
Secretary of ANR with the power to
‘‘[a]dopt, amend and repeal rules,
implementing the provisions’’ of 10
V.S.A. Chapter 23, Air Pollution
Control, and to ‘‘[a]ppoint and employ
personnel and consultants as may be
necessary for the administration of’’ 10
V.S.A. Chapter 23. Section 554 also
authorizes the Secretary of ANR to
‘‘[a]ccept, receive and administer grants
or other funds or gifts from public and
private agencies, including the federal
government, for the purposes of carrying
out any of the functions of’’ 10 V.S.A.
Chapter 23. Additionally, 3 V.S.A.
§ 2822 provides the Secretary of ANR
with the authority to assess air permit
and registration fees, which fund state
air programs. In addition to Federal
funding and permit and registration
fees, Vermont notes that the Vermont
Air Quality and Climate Division
(AQCD) receives state funding to
implement its air programs.13
EPA proposes that Vermont has met
the infrastructure SIP requirements of
this portion of section 110(a)(2)(E) with
respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: State Board
Requirements Under Section 128 of the
CAA
Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires each
SIP to contain provisions that comply
with the state board requirements of
13 VT ANR’s authority to carry out the provisions
of the SIP identified in 40 CFR 51.230 is discussed
in the sections of this document assessing elements
A, C, F, and G, as applicable.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30605
section 128 of the CAA. That provision
contains two explicit requirements: (1)
That any board or body which approves
permits or enforcement orders under
this chapter shall have at least a
majority of members who represent the
public interest and do not derive any
significant portion of their income from
persons subject to permits and
enforcement orders under this chapter,
and (2) that any potential conflicts of
interest by members of such board or
body or the head of an executive agency
with similar powers be adequately
disclosed.
In Vermont, no board or body
approves permits or enforcement orders;
these are approved by the Secretary of
Vermont ANR. Thus, with respect to
this sub-element, Vermont is subject
only to the requirements of paragraph
(a)(2) of section 128 of the CAA
(regarding conflicts of interest). On June
27, 2017, EPA approved Vermont’s SIP
revision addressing the conflict of
interest requirements of section 128. See
82 FR 29005. For a detailed analysis
explaining how Vermont meets these
requirements, see EPA’s notice of
proposed rulemaking for that action. 82
FR 15671, 15678 (March 30, 2017).
EPA proposes that Vermont has met
the applicable infrastructure SIP
requirements for this sub-element for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
F. Section 110(a)(2)(F)—Stationary
Source Monitoring System
States must establish a system to
monitor emissions from stationary
sources and submit periodic emissions
reports. Each plan shall also require the
installation, maintenance, and
replacement of equipment, and the
implementation of other necessary
steps, by owners or operators of
stationary sources to monitor emissions
from such sources. The state plan shall
also require periodic reports on the
nature and amounts of emissions and
emissions-related data from such
sources, and correlation of such reports
by each state agency with any emission
limitations or standards. Lastly, the
reports shall be available at reasonable
times for public inspection.
Vermont’s infrastructure submittal
references existing state regulations
previously approved by EPA that
require sources to monitor emissions
and submit reports. In particular, VT
APCR § 5–405, Required Air
Monitoring, (45 FR 10775, February 19,
1980), provides that ANR ‘‘may require
the owner or operator of any air
contaminant source to install, use and
maintain such monitoring equipment
and records, establish and maintain
such records, and make such periodic
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
30606
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
emission reports as [ANR] shall
prescribe.’’ Moreover, section 5–402,
Written Reports When Requested (81 FR
50342; August 1, 2016), authorizes ANR
to ‘‘require written reports from the
person operating or responsible for any
proposed or existing air contaminant
source, which reports shall contain,’’
among other things, information
concerning the ‘‘nature and amount and
time periods or durations of emissions
and such other information as may be
relevant to the air pollution potential of
the source. These reports shall also
include the results of such source
testing as may be required under
Section 5–404 herein.’’ Section 5–404,
Methods for Sampling and Testing of
Sources (45 FR 10775 February 19,
1980) in turn authorizes ANR to
‘‘require the owner or operator of [a]
source to conduct tests to determine the
quantity of particulate and/or gaseous
matter being emitted’’ and requires a
source to allow access, should ANR
have reason to believe that emission
limits are being violated by the source,
and allows ANR ‘‘to conduct tests of
[its] own to determine compliance.’’ In
addition, operators of sources that emit
more than five tons of any and all air
contaminants per year are required to
register the source with the Secretary of
ANR and to submit emissions data
annually, pursuant to § 5–802,
Requirement for Registration, and § 5–
803, Registration Procedure (60 FR 2524
January 10, 1995). Vermont also certifies
that nothing in its SIP would preclude
the use, including the exclusive use, of
any credible evidence or information,
relevant to whether a source would have
been in compliance with applicable
requirements if the appropriate
performance or compliance test or
procedure had been performed. See 40
CFR 51.212(c).
Vermont’s infrastructure SIP
submittal for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
provides for correlation by VT DEC of
emissions reports by sources with
applicable emission limitations or
standards, as required by CAA
§ 110(a)(2)(F)(iii). Vermont receives
emissions data through its annual
registration program. Currently, VT DEC
analyzes a portion of these data
manually to correlate a facility’s actual
emissions with permit conditions,
NAAQS, and, if applicable, hazardous
air contaminant action levels. VT DEC
reports that it is in the process of setting
up an integrated electronic database that
will merge all air contaminant source
information across permitting,
compliance and registration programs,
so that information concerning permit
conditions, annual emissions data, and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jun 28, 2018
Jkt 244001
compliance data will be accessible in
one location for a particular air
contaminant source. The database will
be capable of correlating certain
emissions data with permit conditions
and other applicable standards
electronically, where feasible, to allow
VT DEC to complete this correlation
more efficiently and accurately.
Regarding the section 110(a)(2)(F)
requirement that the SIP ensure that the
public has availability to emission
reports, Vermont certified in its October
31, 2017 submittal for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS that the Vermont Public
Records Act, 1 V.S.A. §§ 315–320,
provides for the free and open
examination of public records,
including emissions reports.
Furthermore, 10 V.S.A. § 563
specifically provides that the ANR
‘‘Secretary shall not withhold emissions
data and emission monitoring data from
public inspection or review’’ and ‘‘shall
keep confidential any record or other
information furnished to or obtained by
the Secretary concerning an air
contaminant source, other than
emissions data and emission monitoring
data, that qualifies as a trade secret
pursuant to 1 V.S.A. § 317(c)(9).’’
(emphasis added). EPA approved
section 563 into the Vermont SIP on
June 27, 2017 (82 FR 29005).
Consequently, EPA proposes that
Vermont has met the infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F) for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
G. Section 110(a)(2)(G)—Emergency
Powers
This section requires that a plan
provide for state authority analogous to
that provided to the EPA Administrator
in section 303 of the CAA, and adequate
contingency plans to implement such
authority. Section 303 of the CAA
provides authority to the EPA
Administrator to seek a court order to
restrain any source from causing or
contributing to emissions that present
an ‘‘imminent and substantial
endangerment to public health or
welfare, or the environment.’’ Section
303 further authorizes the Administrator
to issue ‘‘such orders as may be
necessary to protect public health or
welfare or the environment’’ in the
event that ‘‘it is not practicable to assure
prompt protection . . . by
commencement of such civil action.’’
On June 27, 2017, EPA approved a
Vermont SIP revision addressing the
requirement that the plan provide for
state authority comparable to that in
section 303 of the CAA. See 82 FR
29005. For a detailed analysis
explaining how Vermont meets this
requirement, see EPA’s March 30, 2017
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(82 FR 15671, 15679) notice of proposed
rulemaking for that action. Therefore,
we are proposing to approve the state’s
submittals with respect to this
requirement of Section 110(a)(2)(G) for
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Section 110(a)(2)(G) also requires that
Vermont have an approved contingency
plan for any Air Quality Control Region
(AQCR) within the state that is
classified as Priority I, IA, or II for
certain pollutants. See 40 CFR 51.150,
51.152(c). In general, contingency plans
for Priority I, IA, and II areas must meet
the applicable requirements of 40 CFR
part 51, subpart H (40 CFR 51.150
through 51.153) (‘‘Prevention of Air
Pollution Emergency Episodes’’) for the
relevant NAAQS, if the NAAQS is
covered by those regulations. In the case
of PM2.5, EPA has not issued regulations
that provide the ambient levels to
classify different priority levels for the
2012 standard (or any PM2.5 NAAQS).
EPA’s 2009 Guidance recommends that
states develop emergency episode plans
for any area that has monitored and
recorded 24-hour PM2.5 levels greater
than 140 mg/m3 since 2006. EPA’s
review of Vermont’s certified air quality
data in AQS indicates that the highest
24-hour PM2.5 level since 2006 was 43.5
mg/m3, which occurred in 2015 at the
ambient monitor in Rutland.14 Thus, an
emergency episode plan for PM2.5 is not
necessary. Although not expected, if
PM2.5 conditions were to change,
Vermont does have general authority, as
noted previously (i.e., 10 V.S.A. § 560
and 10 V.S.A. § 8009), to order a source
to cease operations if it is determined
that emissions from the source pose an
imminent danger to human health or
safety or an immediate threat of
substantial harm to the environment.
In addition, as stated in Vermont’s
infrastructure SIP submittal under the
discussion of public notification
(Element J), Vermont posts near realtime air quality data, air quality
predictions and a record of historical
data on the VT DEC website and
distributes air quality alerts by email to
many parties, including the media.
Alerts include information about the
health implications of elevated
pollutant levels and list actions to
reduce emissions and to reduce the
public’s exposure. In addition, daily
forecasted fine particle levels are also
made available on the internet through
the EPA AirNow and EnviroFlash
systems. Information regarding these
two systems is available on EPA’s
14 24-hour PM
2.5 monitor values for individual
monitoring sites throughout Vermont are available
at www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data/monitorvalues-report.
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
website at www.airnow.gov. Notices are
sent out to EnviroFlash participants
when levels are forecast to exceed the
current 24-hour PM2.5 standard.
EPA proposes that Vermont has met
the applicable infrastructure SIP
requirements for section 110(a)(2)(G)
with respect to contingency plans for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
H. Section 110(a)(2)(H)—Future SIP
Revisions
This section requires that a state’s SIP
provide for revision from time to time
as may be necessary to take account of
changes in the NAAQS or availability of
improved methods for attaining the
NAAQS and whenever the EPA finds
that the SIP is substantially inadequate.
To address this requirement, Vermont’s
infrastructure submittal references 10
V.S.A § 554, which provides the
Secretary of Vermont ANR with the
power to ‘‘[p]repare and develop a
comprehensive plan or plans for the
prevention, abatement and control of air
pollution in this state’’ and to ‘‘[a]dopt,
amend and repeal rules, implementing
the provisions’’ of Vermont’s air
pollution control laws set forth in 10
V.S.A. chapter 23. EPA approved 10
V.S.A. § 554 on June 27, 2017 (82 FR
29005). EPA proposes that Vermont has
met the infrastructure SIP requirements
of CAA section 110(a)(2)(H) with respect
to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
I. Section 110(a)(2)(I)—Nonattainment
Area Plan or Plan Revisions Under Part
D
The CAA requires that each plan or
plan revision for an area designated as
a nonattainment area meet the
applicable requirements of part D of the
CAA. Part D relates to nonattainment
areas. EPA has determined that section
110(a)(2)(I) is not applicable to the
infrastructure SIP process. Instead, EPA
takes action on part D attainment plans
through separate processes.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
J. Section 110(a)(2)(J)—Consultation
With Government Officials; Public
Notifications; Prevention of Significant
Deterioration; Visibility Protection
Section 110(a)(2)(J) of the CAA
requires that each SIP ‘‘meet the
applicable requirements of section 121
of this title (relating to consultation),
section 127 of this title (relating to
public notification), and part C of this
subchapter (relating to PSD of air
quality and visibility protection).’’ The
evaluation of the submission from
Vermont with respect to these
requirements is described below.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jun 28, 2018
Jkt 244001
Sub-Element 1: Consultation With
Government Officials
Pursuant to CAA section 121, a state
must provide a satisfactory process for
consultation with local governments
and Federal Land Managers (FLMs) in
carrying out its NAAQS implementation
requirements.
Vermont’s 10 V.S.A § 554 specifies
that the Secretary of Vermont ANR shall
have the power to ‘‘[a]dvise, consult,
contract and cooperate with other
agencies of the state, local governments,
industries, other states, interstate or
interlocal agencies, and the federal
government, and with interested
persons or groups.’’ EPA approved 10
V.S.A. § 554 on June 27, 2017 (82 FR
29005). In addition, VT APCR § 5–
501(7)(c) requires VT ANR to provide
notice to local governments and federal
land managers of a determination by
ANR to issue a draft PSD permit for a
major stationary source or major
modification. On August 1, 2016 (81 FR
50342), EPA approved VT APCR § 5–
501(7)(c) into Vermont’s SIP. Therefore,
EPA proposes that Vermont has met the
infrastructure SIP requirements of this
portion of section 110(a)(2)(J) with
respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: Public Notification
Pursuant to CAA section 127, states
must notify the public if NAAQS are
exceeded in an area, advise the public
of health hazards associated with
exceedances, and enhance public
awareness of measures that can be taken
to prevent exceedances and of ways in
which the public can participate in
regulatory and other efforts to improve
air quality.
Vermont’s 10 V.S.A § 554 authorizes
the Secretary of Vermont ANR to
‘‘[c]ollect and disseminate information
and conduct educational and training
programs relating to air contamination
and air pollution.’’ In addition, the VT
DEC Air Quality and Climate Division
website includes near real-time air
quality data, and a record of historical
data. Air quality forecasts are
distributed daily via email to interested
parties. Air quality alerts are sent by
email to a large number of affected
parties, including the media. Alerts
include information about the health
implications of elevated pollutant levels
and list actions to reduce emissions and
to reduce the public’s exposure. Also,
Air Quality Data Summaries of the
year’s air quality monitoring results are
issued annually and posted on the VT
DEC Air Quality and Climate Division
website. Vermont is also an active
partner in EPA’s AirNow and
EnviroFlash air quality alert programs.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30607
EPA proposes that Vermont has met
the infrastructure SIP requirements of
this portion of section 110(a)(2)(J) with
respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 3: PSD
EPA has already discussed Vermont’s
PSD program in the context of
infrastructure SIPs in the paragraphs
addressing section 110(a)(2)(C) and
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) and determined that it
satisfies the requirements of EPA’s PSD
implementation rules. Therefore, the
SIP also satisfies the PSD sub-element of
section 110(a)(2)(J) for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS.
Sub-Element 4: Visibility Protection
With regard to the applicable
requirements for visibility protection,
states are subject to visibility and
regional haze program requirements
under part C of the CAA (which
includes sections 169A and 169B). In
the event of the establishment of a new
NAAQS, however, the visibility and
regional haze program requirements
under part C do not change. Thus, as
noted in EPA’s 2013 guidance, we find
that there is no new visibility obligation
‘‘triggered’’ under section 110(a)(2)(J)
when a new NAAQS becomes effective.
In other words, the visibility protection
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(J) are
not germane to infrastructure SIPs for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Based on the above analysis, EPA
proposes that Vermont has met the
infrastructure SIP requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(J) with respect to the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
K. Section 110(a)(2)(K)—Air Quality
Modeling/Data
Section 110(a)(2)(K) of the Act
requires that a SIP provide for the
performance of such air quality
modeling as the EPA Administrator may
prescribe for the purpose of predicting
the effect on ambient air quality of any
emissions of any air pollutant for which
EPA has established a NAAQS, and the
submission, upon request, of data
related to such air quality modeling.
EPA has published modeling guidelines
at 40 CFR part 51, appendix W, for
predicting the effects of emissions of
criteria pollutants on ambient air
quality. EPA also recommends in the
2013 Guidance that, to meet section
110(a)(2)(K), a state submit or reference
the statutory or regulatory provisions
that provide the air agency with the
authority to conduct such air quality
modeling and to provide such modeling
data to EPA upon request. See 2013
Guidance at 55.
In its submittal, Vermont cites to VT
APCR § 5–406, Required Air Modeling,
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
30608
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
which authorizes ‘‘[t]he Air Pollution
Control Officer [to] require the owner or
operator of any proposed air
contaminant source . . . to conduct . . .
air quality modeling and to submit an
air quality impact evaluation to
demonstrate that operation of the
proposed source . . . will not directly
or indirectly result in a violation of any
ambient air quality standard, interfere
with the attainment of any ambient air
quality standard, or violate any
applicable prevention of significant
deterioration increment . . . .’’
Vermont reviews the potential impact of
such sources consistent with EPA’s
‘‘Guidelines on Air Quality Models’’ at
40 CFR part 51, appendix W. See VT
APCR § 5–406(2). Vermont also cites to
VT APCR § 5–502, Major Stationary
Sources and Major Modifications, which
requires the submittal of an air quality
impact evaluation or air quality
modeling to ANR to demonstrate
impacts of new and modified major
sources, in accordance with VT APCR
§ 5–406. The modeling data are sent to
EPA along with the draft major permit.
As a result, the SIP provides for such air
quality modeling as the Administrator
has prescribed and for the submission,
upon request, of data related to such
modeling.
The state also collaborates with the
Ozone Transport Commission (OTC)
and the Mid-Atlantic Regional Air
Management Association and EPA in
order to perform large-scale urban air
shed modeling for ozone and PM, if
necessary. EPA proposes that Vermont
has met the infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(K)
with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
L. Section 110(a)(2)(L)—Permitting Fees
This section requires SIPs to mandate
that each major stationary source pay
permitting fees to cover the costs of
reviewing, approving, implementing,
and enforcing a permit.
Vermont implements and operates a
Title V permit program. See Subchapter
X of VT APCR, which was approved by
EPA on November 29, 2001 (66 FR
59535). To gain this approval, Vermont
demonstrated the ability to collect
sufficient fees to run the program.
Vermont also notes in its submittals that
the costs of all CAA permitting,
implementation, and enforcement for
new or modified sources are covered by
Title V fees, and that Vermont state law
provides for the assessment of
application fees from air emissions
sources for permits for the construction
or modification of air contaminant
sources, and sets forth permit fees. See
10 V.S.A § 556, 3 V.S.A § 2822(j).
EPA proposes that Vermont has met
the infrastructure SIP requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(L) for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS.
M. Section 110(a)(2)(M)—Consultation/
Participation by Affected Local Entities
To satisfy Element M, states must
provide for consultation with, and
participation by, local political
subdivisions affected by the SIP.
Vermont’s infrastructure submittal
references 10 V.S.A § 554, which was
approved into the VT SIP on June 27,
2017 (82 FR 29005). This statute
authorizes the Secretary of Vermont
ANR to ‘‘[a]dvise, consult, contract and
cooperate with other agencies of the
state, local governments, industries,
other states, interstate or interlocal
agencies, and the federal government,
and with interested persons or groups.’’
In addition, VT APCR § 5–501(7)
provides for notification to local
officials and agencies about the
opportunity for participating in
permitting determinations for the
construction or modification of major
sources. EPA proposes that Vermont has
met the infrastructure SIP requirements
of section 110(a)(2)(M) with respect to
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
IV. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the
elements of the infrastructure SIP
submitted by Vermont on October 31,
2017 for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Specifically, EPA’s proposed action
regarding each infrastructure SIP
requirement is contained in Table 1
below.
TABLE 1—PROPOSED ACTION ON VERMONT’S INFRASTRUCTURE SIP SUBMITTAL FOR THE 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Element
2012 PM2.5
(A): Emission limits and other control measures ................................................................................................................................
(B): Ambient air quality monitoring and data system ..........................................................................................................................
(C)1: Enforcement of SIP measures ...................................................................................................................................................
(C)2: PSD program for major sources and major modifications .........................................................................................................
(C)3: PSD program for minor sources and minor modifications .........................................................................................................
(D)1: Contribute to nonattainment/interfere with maintenance of NAAQS .........................................................................................
(D)2: PSD ............................................................................................................................................................................................
(D)3: Visibility Protection .....................................................................................................................................................................
(D)4: Interstate Pollution Abatement ...................................................................................................................................................
(D)5: International Pollution Abatement ..............................................................................................................................................
(E)1: Adequate resources ....................................................................................................................................................................
(E)2: State boards ...............................................................................................................................................................................
(E)3: Necessary assurances with respect to local agencies ..............................................................................................................
(F): Stationary source monitoring system ...........................................................................................................................................
(G): Emergency power ........................................................................................................................................................................
(H): Future SIP revisions .....................................................................................................................................................................
(I): Nonattainment area plan or plan revisions under part D ..............................................................................................................
(J)1: Consultation with government officials ........................................................................................................................................
(J)2: Public notification ........................................................................................................................................................................
(J)3: PSD .............................................................................................................................................................................................
(J)4: Visibility protection .......................................................................................................................................................................
(K): Air quality modeling and data .......................................................................................................................................................
(L): Permitting fees ..............................................................................................................................................................................
(M): Consultation and participation by affected local entities .............................................................................................................
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
NA
A
A
A
+
A
A
A
+
A
A
A
In the above table, the key is as follows: A, Approve; NA, Not applicable; +, Not germane to infrastructure SIPs.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jun 28, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 126 / Friday, June 29, 2018 / Proposed Rules
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
EPA is soliciting public comments on
the issues discussed in this proposal or
on other relevant matters. These
comments will be considered before
EPA takes final action. Interested parties
may participate in the Federal
rulemaking procedure by submitting
comments to this proposed rule by
following the instructions listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this Federal
Register.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 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 Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action
merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
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);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is 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.);
• Does 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);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is 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 Clean Air Act;
and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:09 Jun 28, 2018
Jkt 244001
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, 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 and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: June 22, 2018.
Alexandra Dunn,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2018–14068 Filed 6–28–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2017–0626; FRL–9980–18–
Region 4]
Air Plan Approval; Tennessee;
Attainment Plan for Sullivan County
SO2 Nonattainment Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of
Tennessee, through the Tennessee
Department of Environment and
Conservation (TDEC), to EPA on May
12, 2017, for attaining the 2010 1-hour
sulfur dioxide (SO2) primary national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS)
for the Sullivan County SO2
nonattainment area (hereafter referred to
as the ‘‘Sullivan County Area’’ or
‘‘Area’’). The Sullivan County Area is
comprised of a portion of Sullivan
County in Tennessee surrounding the
Eastman Chemical Company (hereafter
referred to as ‘‘Eastman’’). This plan
(herein called a ‘‘nonattainment plan or
SIP’’ or ‘‘attainment plan or SIP’’)
includes Tennessee’s attainment
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
30609
demonstration and other elements
required under the Clean Air Act (CAA
or Act). In addition to an attainment
demonstration, the plan addresses the
requirement for meeting reasonable
further progress (RFP) toward
attainment of the NAAQS, reasonably
available control measures and
reasonably available control technology
(RACM/RACT), base-year and
projection-year emissions inventories,
enforceable emissions limitations and
control measures, and contingency
measures. EPA proposes to conclude
that Tennessee has appropriately
demonstrated that the plan’s provisions
provide for attainment of the 2010 1hour primary SO2 NAAQS in the
Sullivan County Area and that the plan
meets the other applicable requirements
under the CAA.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before July 30, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OAR–2017–0626 at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
EPA may publish any comment received
to its public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points
you wish to make. EPA will generally
not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: D.
Brad Akers, 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. Mr. Akers can be
reached via telephone at (404) 562–9089
or via electronic mail at akers.brad@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Requirement for Tennessee to Submit an
SO2 Attainment Plan for the Sullivan
County Area
E:\FR\FM\29JNP1.SGM
29JNP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 126 (Friday, June 29, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30598-30609]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14068]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R01-OAR-2017-0696; FRL-9979-82--Region 1]
Air Plan Approval; Vermont; Infrastructure State Implementation
Plan Requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve elements of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission from
Vermont that addresses the infrastructure requirements of the Clean Air
Act (CAA or Act)--including the interstate transport provisions--for
the 2012 fine particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality
Standards (NAAQS). The infrastructure requirements are designed to
ensure that the structural components of each state's air quality
management program are adequate to meet the state's responsibilities
under the CAA. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before July 30, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-
OAR-2017-0696, to the www.regulations.gov website or via email to
[email protected]. For comments submitted to the
www.regulations.gov website, follow the online instructions for
submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or
removed from www.regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the
EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must
be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered
the official comment and should include discussion of all points you
wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, please contact the person identified in the ``For Further
Information Contact'' section. For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance
on making effective comments, please visit www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. Publicly available docket materials are
available at www.regulations.gov or at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem
Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100,
Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
contact 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
legal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alison C. Simcox, Air Quality Unit,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office,
5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, (Mail code OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-
3912, tel. (617) 918-1684; [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background and Purpose
A. What Vermont SIP submissions does this rulemaking address?
B. What is the scope of this rulemaking?
II. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate these SIP submissions?
III. EPA's Review
A. Section 110(a)(2)(A)--Emission Limits and Other Control
Measures
B. Section 110(a)(2)(B)--Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data
System
C. Section 110(a)(2)(C)--Program for Enforcement of Control
Measures and for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources
D. Section 110(a)(2)(D)--Interstate Transport
E. Section 110(a)(2)(E)--Adequate Resources
F. Section 110(a)(2)(F)--Stationary Source Monitoring System
G. Section 110(a)(2)(G)--Emergency Powers
H. Section 110(a)(2)(H)--Future SIP Revisions
I. Section 110(a)(2)(I)--Nonattainment Area Plan or Plan
Revisions Under Part D
J. Section 110(a)(2)(J)--Consultation With Government Officials;
Public Notifications; Prevention of Significant Deterioration;
Visibility Protection
K. Section 110(a)(2)(K)--Air Quality Modeling/Data
L. Section 110(a)(2)(L)--Permitting Fees
M. Section 110(a)(2)(M)--Consultation/Participation by Affected
Local Entities
IV. Proposed Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background and Purpose
A. What Vermont SIP submissions does this rulemaking address?
This rulemaking addresses a SIP submission from the Vermont
Department of Environmental Conservation (VT DEC). The state submitted
its infrastructure SIP for the 2012 fine particle (PM2.5
\1\) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) on October 31, 2017.
This included an enclosure addressing the ``Good Neighbor'' (or
``transport'') provisions for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS (Section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA). Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the
CAA, states are required to submit infrastructure SIPs to ensure that
SIPs provide for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the
NAAQS, including the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ PM2.5 refers to particulate matter of 2.5 microns
or less in diameter, often referred to as ``fine'' particles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 30599]]
B. What is the scope of this rulemaking?
EPA is acting on a SIP submission from Vermont that addresses the
infrastructure requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
The requirement for states to make a SIP submission of this type
arises out of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2). Pursuant to these
sections, each state must submit a SIP that provides for the
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of each primary or
secondary NAAQS. States must make such SIP submission ``within 3 years
(or such shorter period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the
promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS.'' This requirement is triggered
by the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS and is not conditioned
upon EPA's taking any other action. Section 110(a)(2) includes the
specific elements that ``each such plan'' must address.
EPA commonly refers to such SIP submissions intended to satisfy the
requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) as
``infrastructure SIP'' submissions. Although the term ``infrastructure
SIP'' does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses the term to distinguish this
type of SIP submission from submissions that are intended to satisfy
other SIP requirements under the CAA, such as ``nonattainment SIP'' or
``attainment plan SIP'' submissions to address the nonattainment
planning requirements of part D of title I of the CAA.
This rulemaking will not cover three substantive areas that are not
integral to acting on a state's infrastructure SIP submission: (i)
Existing provisions related to excess emissions during periods of
start-up, shutdown, or malfunction at sources (``SSM'' emissions) that
may be contrary to the CAA and EPA's policies addressing such excess
emissions; (ii) existing provisions related to ``director's variance''
or ``director's discretion'' that purport to permit revisions to SIP-
approved emissions limits with limited public process or without
requiring further approval by EPA, that may be contrary to the CAA
(``director's discretion''); and, (iii) existing provisions for
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) programs that may be
inconsistent with current requirements of EPA's ``Final New Source
Review (NSR) Improvement Rule,'' 67 FR 80186 (December 31, 2002), as
amended by 72 FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (``NSR Reform''). Instead, EPA
has the authority to address each one of these substantive areas
separately. A detailed history, interpretation, and rationale for EPA's
approach to infrastructure SIP requirements can be found in EPA's May
13, 2014, proposed rule entitled, ``Infrastructure SIP Requirements for
the 2008 Lead NAAQS'' in the section, ``What is the scope of this
rulemaking?'' See 79 FR 27241 at 27242-45.
II. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate these SIP submissions?
EPA highlighted the statutory requirement to submit infrastructure
SIPs within 3 years of promulgation of a new NAAQS in an October 2,
2007, guidance document entitled ``Guidance on SIP Elements Required
Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' (2007
Guidance). EPA has issued additional guidance documents and memoranda,
including a September 13, 2013, guidance document entitled ``Guidance
on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean
Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)'' (2013 Guidance) and a
September 25, 2009, guidance document entitled ``Guidance on SIP
Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour
Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS)'' (2009 Guidance).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ This memorandum and other referenced guidance documents and
memoranda are included in the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the Good Neighbor provision, the most recent
relevant document was a memorandum published on March 17, 2016,
entitled ``Information on the Interstate Transport `Good Neighbor'
Provision for the 2012 Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air
Quality Standards under Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)''
(2016 memorandum). The 2016 memorandum describes EPA's past approach to
addressing interstate transport, and provides EPA's general review of
relevant modeling data and air quality projections as they relate to
the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The 2016 memorandum provides
information relevant to EPA Regional office review of the CAA section
110 (a)(2)(D)(i)(I) ``Good Neighbor'' provision requirements in
infrastructure SIPs with respect to the 2012 annual PM2.5
NAAQS. This rulemaking considers information provided in that
memorandum.
III. EPA's Review
In this notice of proposed rulemaking, EPA is proposing action on a
SIP submission from the state of Vermont. In its submission, Vermont
presents a detailed list of Vermont Laws and previously SIP-approved
Air Quality Regulations showing how the various components of its EPA-
approved SIP meet each of the requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the
CAA for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. The following review evaluates
the state's submissions in light of section 110(a)(2) requirements and
relevant EPA guidance.
For Vermont's October 31, 2017 submission addressing the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS, we reviewed all Section 110(a)(2) elements,
including the transport provisions, but excluding the three areas
discussed above under the scope of this rulemaking.
A. Section 110(a)(2)(A)-Emission Limits and Other Control Measures
This section (also referred to in this action as an element) of the
Act requires SIPs to include enforceable emission limits and other
control measures, means or techniques, schedules for compliance, and
other related matters. However, EPA has long interpreted emission
limits and control measures for attaining the standards as being due
when nonattainment planning requirements are due.\3\ In the context of
an infrastructure SIP, EPA is not evaluating the existing SIP
provisions for this purpose. Instead, EPA is only evaluating whether
the state's SIP has basic structural provisions for the implementation
of the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See, for example, EPA's final rule on ``National Ambient Air
Quality Standards for Lead.'' 73 FR 66964, 67034 (November 12,
2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vermont's infrastructure submittal for this element cites Vermont
Statutes Annotated (V.S.A) and several Vermont Air Pollution Control
Regulations (VT APCR) as follows: Vermont's 10 V.S.A. Sec. 554,
``Powers,'' authorizes the Secretary of the Vermont Agency of Natural
Resources (ANR) to ``[a]dopt, amend and repeal rules, implementing the
provisions'' of Vermont's air pollution control laws set forth in 10
V.S.A. chapter 23. It also authorizes the Secretary to ``conduct
studies, investigations and research relating to air contamination and
air pollution'' and to ``[d]etermine by appropriate means the degree of
air contamination and air pollution in the state and the several parts
thereof.'' Ten V.S.A. Sec. 556, ``Permits for the construction or
modification of air contaminant sources,'' requires applicants to
obtain permits for constructing or modifying air contaminant sources,
and 10 V.S.A. Sec. 558, ``Emission control requirements,'' authorizes
the Secretary ``to establish emission control requirements . . .
necessary to prevent, abate, or control
[[Page 30600]]
air pollution.'' EPA approved 10 V.S.A. Sec. 554 on June 27, 2017 (82
FR 29005).
The Vermont submittal cites more than 20 specific rules that the
state has adopted to control the emissions of PM2.5 and its
precursors: sulfur dioxide (SO2), volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), and nitrogen oxides (NOX). A few, with their EPA
approval citation \4\ are listed here: Sec. 5-201--Open Burning
Prohibited (63 FR 19825; April 22, 1998); Sec. 5-251--Control of
Nitrogen Oxides Emissions (81 FR 50342; August 1, 2016); Sec. 5-252--
Control of Sulfur Dioxide Emissions (81 FR 50342; August 1, 2016);
Sec. 5-261--Control of Hazardous Air Contaminants (47 FR 6014;
February 10, 1982); Sec. 5-502--Major Stationary Sources and Major
Modifications (81 FR 50342; August 1, 2016); Sec. 5-702--Excessive
Smoke Emissions from Motor Vehicles (45 FR 10775; February 19, 1980).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The citations reference the most recent EPA approval of the
stated rule, or of revisions to the rule. For example, Sec. 5-252
was initially approved on February 4, 1977 (42 FR 6811), with
various revisions being approved since then, with the most recent
approval of revisions to the applicability section occurring on
August 1, 2016 (81 FR 50342).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based upon EPA's review of the submittals, EPA proposes that
Vermont meets the infrastructure SIP requirements of section
110(a)(2)(A) with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
As previously noted, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove
any existing state provisions or rules related to SSM or director's
discretion in the context of section 110(a)(2)(A).
B. Section 110(a)(2)(B)--Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System
This section requires SIPs to provide for establishing and
operating ambient air quality monitors, collecting and analyzing
ambient air quality data, and making these data available to EPA upon
request. Each year, states submit annual air monitoring network plans
to EPA for review and approval. EPA's review of these annual monitoring
plans includes our evaluation of whether the state: (i) Monitors air
quality at appropriate locations throughout the state using EPA-
approved Federal Reference Methods or Federal Equivalent Method
monitors; (ii) submits data to EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) in a
timely manner; and (iii) provides EPA Regional Offices with prior
notification of any planned changes to monitoring sites or the network
plan.
State law authorizes the Secretary of ANR, or authorized
representative, to ``conduct studies, investigations and research
relating to air contamination and air pollution'' and to ``[d]etermine
by appropriate means the degree of air contamination and air pollution
in the state and the several parts thereof.'' See 10 V.S.A. Sec.
554(8), (9). VT DEC, one of several departments within ANR, operates an
air quality monitoring network, and EPA approved the state's 2017
Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan for PM2.5 on August 23,
2017.\5\ Furthermore, VT DEC populates AQS with air quality monitoring
data in a timely manner, and provides EPA with prior notification when
considering a change to its monitoring network or plan. EPA proposes
that VT DEC has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of section
110(a)(2)(B) with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See EPA approval letter located in the docket for this
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Section 110(a)(2)(C)--Program for Enforcement of Control Measures
and for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources
States are required to include a program providing for enforcement
of the emission limits and control measures described in section
110(a)(2)(A) and for the regulation of construction of new or modified
stationary sources to meet NSR requirements under PSD and nonattainment
new source review (NNSR) programs. Part C of the CAA (sections 160-
169B) addresses PSD, while part D of the CAA (sections 171-193)
addresses NNSR requirements.\6\ The evaluation of each state's
submission addressing the infrastructure SIP requirements of section
110(a)(2)(C) covers the following: (i) Enforcement of SIP measures;
(ii) PSD program for major sources and major modifications; and (iii) a
permit program for minor sources and minor modifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ EPA considers the evaluation of permit provisions that
implement Part D to be outside the scope of an infrastructure SIP
action because SIPs incorporating necessary local nonattainment area
controls are due on separate schedules, pursuant to CAA section 172
and the various pollutant-specific subparts 2 through 5 of part D.
Thus, our review under section 110(a)(2)(C) does not evaluate the
nonattainment NSR program required by part D of the Act. We are only
evaluating the state's PSD program as required by part C of the Act
and the state's minor source program (applicable regardless of
attainment status) as required by section 110(a)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sub-Element 1: Enforcement of SIP Measures
State law provides the Secretary of ANR with the authority to
enforce air pollution control requirements, including SIP-approved 10
V.S.A. Sec. 554, which authorizes the Secretary of ANR to ``[i]ssue
orders as may be necessary to effectuate the purposes of [the state's
air pollution control laws] and enforce the same by all appropriate
administrative and judicial proceedings.'' In addition, Vermont's SIP-
approved regulations VT APCR Sec. 5-501, ``Review of Construction or
Modification of Air Contaminant Sources,'' and VT APCR Sec. 5-502,
``Major Stationary Sources and Major Modifications,'' establish
requirements for permits to construct, modify or operate major air
contaminant sources.
EPA proposes that Vermont has met the enforcement of SIP measures
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: PSD Program for Major Sources and Major Modifications
PSD applies to new major sources or modifications made to major
sources for pollutants where the area in which the source is located is
in attainment of, or unclassifiable with regard to, the relevant NAAQS.
The EPA interprets the CAA to require each state to make an
infrastructure SIP submission for a new or revised NAAQS demonstrating
that the air agency has a complete PSD permitting program in place
satisfying the current requirements for all regulated NSR pollutants.
VT DEC's EPA-approved PSD rules, contained at VT APCR Subchapters I,
IV, and V, contain provisions that address applicable requirements for
all regulated NSR pollutants, including GHGs.
With respect to current requirements for PM2.5, we
evaluate Vermont's PSD program for consistency with two EPA rules. The
first is a final rule issued May 16, 2008, entitled ``Implementation of
the New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less than
2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)'' (2008 NSR Rule). See 73 FR 28321.
The 2008 NSR Rule finalized several new requirements for SIPs to
address sources that emit direct PM2.5 and other pollutants
that contribute to secondary PM2.5 formation, including
requirements for NSR permits to address pollutants responsible for the
secondary formation of PM2.5, otherwise known as precursors.
As part of identifying precursors to PM2.5, the 2008 NSR
Rule also required states to revise the definition of ``significant''
as it relates to a net emissions increase or the potential of a source
to emit pollutants. Finally, the 2008 NSR Rule requires states to
account for PM2.5 and PM10 condensables for
applicability determinations and in establishing emissions limitations
for PM2.5 and PM10 in PSD permits beginning on or
[[Page 30601]]
after January 1, 2011.\7\ These requirements are codified in 40 CFR
51.166(b) and 52.21(b). States were required to revise their SIPs
consistent with these changes to the federal regulations. On August 1,
2016 (81 FR 50342), EPA approved revisions to Vermont's PSD program
satisfying these requirements of the 2008 NSR Rule. See also 82 FR
15671 at 15674-75 (March 30, 2017); 82 FR 29005 (June 27, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ On January 4, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C.
Circuit held that EPA should have issued the 2008 NSR Rule in
accordance with the CAA's requirements for PM10
nonattainment areas (Title I, Part D, subpart 4), and not the
general requirements for nonattainment areas under subpart 1. Nat.
Res. Def. Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428. The EPA's approval of
Vermont's infrastructure SIP as to elements C, D(i)(II), or J with
respect to the PSD requirements promulgated by the 2008 NSR Rule
does not conflict with the court's opinion. For more information,
see 80 FR 42446, July 17, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The second is a final rule issued October 20, 2010, entitled
``Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) for Particulate Matter
Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)--Increments, Significant
Impact Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC)''
(2010 NSR Rule). See 75 FR 64864. This rule established several
components for making PSD permitting determinations for
PM2.5, including adding the required elements for
PM2.5 into a state's existing system of ``increment
analysis,'' which is the mechanism used in the PSD permitting program
to estimate significant deterioration of ambient air quality for a
pollutant in relation to new source construction or modification. The
2010 NSR Rule revised the existing system for determining increment
consumption by establishing a new ``major source baseline date'' for
PM2.5 and by establishing a trigger date for
PM2.5 in relation to the definition of ``minor source
baseline date.'' Lastly, the 2010 NSR Rule revised the definition of
``baseline area'' to include a level of significance of 0.3 micrograms
per cubic meter, annual average, for PM2.5. These
requirements are codified in 40 CFR 51.166(b) and (c) and in 40 CFR
52.21(b) and (c). States were required to revise their SIPs consistent
with these changes to the federal regulations.
On August 1, 2016 (81 FR 50342) and September 14, 2016 (81 FR
63102), EPA approved revisions to the Vermont SIP that address certain
aspects of EPA's 2010 NSR rule. In addition, on March 19, 2018, EPA
approved the state's method for determining the amount of PSD
increments available to a new or modified major source. See 83 FR
11884. As a result, Vermont's approved PSD program meets the current
requirements for PM2.5.
On March 19, 2018 (83 FR 11884), EPA also approved revisions to
Vermont's PSD program that addressed the PSD requirements of EPA's
``Final Rule to Implement the 8- Hour Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standard--Phase 2; Final Rule To Implement Certain Aspects of
the 1990 Amendments Relating to New Source Review and Prevention of
Significant Deterioration as They Apply in Carbon Monoxide, Particulate
Matter, and Ozone NAAQS; Final Rule for Reformulated Gasoline,'' which
obligated states to revise their PSD programs to explicitly identify
NOX as a precursor to ozone. See 70 FR 71612 (November 29,
2005). Therefore, Vermont's approved PSD program meets the current
requirements for ozone.
With respect to GHGs, on June 23, 2014, the United States Supreme
Court issued a decision addressing the application of PSD permitting
requirements to GHG emissions. Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Envtl.
Prot. Agency, 134 S.Ct. 2427. The Supreme Court said that EPA may not
treat GHGs as an air pollutant for purposes of determining whether a
source is a major source required to obtain a PSD permit. The Court
also said that EPA could continue to require that PSD permits,
otherwise required based on emissions of pollutants other than GHGs,
contain limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of Best
Available Control Technology (BACT).
In accordance with the Supreme Court decision, on April 10, 2015,
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the
D.C. Circuit) issued an amended judgment vacating the regulations that
implemented Step 2 of the EPA's PSD and Title V Greenhouse Gas
Tailoring Rule, but not the regulations that implement Step 1 of that
rule. Step 1 of the Tailoring Rule covers sources that are required to
obtain a PSD permit based on emissions of pollutants other than GHGs.
Step 2 applied to sources that emitted only GHGs above the thresholds
triggering the requirement to obtain a PSD permit. The amended judgment
preserves, without the need for additional rulemaking by EPA, the
application of the BACT requirement to GHG emissions from Step 1 or
``anyway'' sources. With respect to Step 2 sources, the D.C. Circuit's
amended judgment vacated the regulations at issue in the litigation,
including 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v), ``to the extent they require a
stationary source to obtain a PSD permit if greenhouse gases are the
only pollutant (i) that the source emits or has the potential to emit
above the applicable major source thresholds, or (ii) for which there
is a significant emission increase from a modification.''
On August 19, 2015 (80 FR 50199), EPA amended its PSD and Title V
regulations to remove from the Code of Federal Regulations portions of
those regulations that the D.C. Circuit specifically identified as
vacated. EPA intends to further revise the PSD and Title V regulations
to fully implement the Supreme Court and D.C. Circuit rulings in a
separate rulemaking. This future rulemaking will include revisions to
additional definitions in the PSD regulations.
Some states have begun to revise their existing SIP-approved PSD
programs in light of these court decisions, and some states may prefer
not to initiate this process until they have more information about the
additional planned revisions to EPA's PSD regulations. EPA is not
expecting states to have revised their PSD programs in anticipation of
EPA's additional actions to revise its PSD program rules in response to
the court decisions for purposes of infrastructure SIP submissions. At
present, EPA has determined that Vermont's SIP is sufficient to satisfy
element C with respect to GHGs because the PSD permitting program
previously approved by EPA into the SIP continues to require that PSD
permits (otherwise required based on emissions of pollutants other than
GHGs) contain limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of
BACT. Although the approved Vermont PSD permitting program may
currently contain provisions that are no longer necessary in light of
the Supreme Court decision, this does not render the infrastructure SIP
submission inadequate to satisfy element C. The SIP contains the
necessary PSD requirements at this time, and the application of those
requirements is not impeded by the presence of other previously-
approved provisions regarding the permitting of sources of GHGs that
EPA does not consider necessary at this time in light of the Supreme
Court decision. Accordingly, the Supreme Court decision does not affect
EPA's proposed approval of Vermont's infrastructure SIP as to the
requirements of element C.
For the purposes of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS infrastructure
SIPs, EPA reiterates that NSR Reform regulations are not in the scope
of these actions. Therefore, we are not taking action on existing NSR
Reform regulations for Vermont.
The EPA is proposing to approve Vermont's infrastructure SIP for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS with respect to the requirement in
section 110(a)(2)(C) to
[[Page 30602]]
include a PSD permitting program in the SIP that covers the
requirements for all regulated NSR pollutants as required by part C of
the Act.
Sub-Element 3: Preconstruction Permitting for Minor Sources and Minor
Modifications
To address the pre-construction regulation of the modification and
construction of minor stationary sources and minor modifications of
major stationary sources, an infrastructure SIP submission should
identify the existing EPA-approved SIP provisions and/or include new
provisions that govern the minor source pre-construction program that
regulate emissions of the relevant NAAQS pollutants. EPA approved
revisions to Vermont's minor NSR program on August 1, 2016 (81 FR
50342). Vermont and EPA rely on the existing minor NSR program to
ensure that new and modified sources not captured by the major NSR
permitting programs, VT APCR Sec. 5-502, do not interfere with
attainment and maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
We are proposing to find that Vermont has met the requirement to
have a SIP-approved minor new source review permit program as required
under Section 110(a)(2)(C) for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
D. Section 110(a)(2)(D)--Interstate Transport
This section contains a comprehensive set of air quality management
elements pertaining to the transport of air pollution with which states
must comply. It covers the following five topics, categorized as sub-
elements: Sub-element 1, Significant contribution to nonattainment, and
interference with maintenance of a NAAQS; Sub-element 2, PSD; Sub-
element 3, Visibility protection; Sub-element 4, Interstate pollution
abatement; and Sub-element 5, International pollution abatement. Sub-
elements 1 through 3 above are found under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of
the Act, and these items are further categorized into the four prongs
discussed below, two of which are found within sub-element 1. Sub-
elements 4 and 5 are found under section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) of the Act
and include provisions insuring compliance with sections 115 and 126 of
the Act relating to interstate and international pollution abatement.
Sub-Element 1: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)--Contribute to Nonattainment
(Prong 1) and Interfere With Maintenance of the NAAQS (Prong 2)
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA requires a SIP to prohibit
any emissions activity in the state that will contribute significantly
to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in any
downwind state. EPA commonly refers to these requirements as prong 1
(significant contribution to nonattainment) and prong 2 (interference
with maintenance), or jointly as the ``Good Neighbor'' or ``transport''
provisions of the CAA. This rulemaking proposes action on the portion
of Vermont's October 31, 2017 SIP submission that addresses the prong 1
and 2 requirements with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
EPA has developed a consistent framework for addressing the prong 1
and 2 interstate-transport requirements with respect to the
PM2.5 NAAQS in several previous federal rulemakings. The
four basic steps of that framework include: (1) Identifying downwind
receptors that are expected to have problems attaining or maintaining
the NAAQS; (2) identifying which upwind states contribute to these
identified problems in amounts sufficient to warrant further review and
analysis; (3) for states identified as contributing to downwind air
quality problems, identifying upwind emissions reductions necessary to
prevent an upwind state from significantly contributing to
nonattainment or interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS downwind;
and (4) for states that are found to have emissions that significantly
contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS
downwind, reducing the identified upwind emissions through adoption of
permanent and enforceable measures. This framework was most recently
applied with respect to PM2.5 in the Cross-State Air
Pollution Rule (CSAPR), which addressed both the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 standards, as well as the 1997 ozone standard. See 76
FR 48208 (August 8, 2011).
EPA's analysis for CSAPR, conducted consistent with the four-step
framework, included air-quality modeling that evaluated the impacts of
38 eastern states on identified receptors in the eastern United States.
EPA indicated that, for step 2 of the framework, states with impacts on
downwind receptors that are below the contribution threshold of 1% of
the relevant NAAQS would not be considered to significantly contribute
to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the relevant NAAQS,
and would, therefore, not be included in CSAPR. See 76 FR 48220, August
8, 2011. EPA further indicated that such states could rely on EPA's
analysis for CSAPR as technical support in order to demonstrate that
their existing or future interstate transport SIP submittals are
adequate to address the transport requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
with regard to the relevant NAAQS. Id.
In addition, as noted above, on March 17, 2016, EPA released the
2016 memorandum to provide information to states as they develop SIPs
addressing the Good Neighbor provision as it pertains to the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS. Consistent with step 1 of the framework, the
2016 memorandum provides projected future-year annual PM2.5
design values for monitors throughout the country based on quality-
assured and certified ambient-monitoring data and recent air-quality
modeling and explains the methodology used to develop these projected
design values. The memorandum also describes how the projected values
can be used to help determine which monitors should be further
evaluated to potentially address if emissions from other states
significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance
of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS at these monitoring sites. The 2016
memorandum explained that the pertinent year for evaluating air quality
for purposes of addressing interstate transport for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS is 2021, the attainment deadline for 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS nonattainment areas classified as Moderate.
Accordingly, because the available data included 2017 and 2025
projected average and maximum PM2.5 design values calculated
through the CAMx photochemical model, the memorandum suggests
approaches states might use to interpolate PM2.5 values at
sites in 2021.
For all, but one, monitoring sites in the eastern United States,
the modeling data provided in the 2016 memorandum showed that monitors
were expected to both attain and maintain the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS in both 2017 and 2025. The modeling results project that this one
monitor, the Liberty monitor, (ID number 420030067), located in
Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, will be above the 2012 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS in 2017, but only under the model's maximum
projected conditions, which are used in EPA's interstate transport
framework to identify maintenance receptors. The Liberty monitor (along
with all the other Allegheny County
[[Page 30603]]
monitors) is projected to both attain and maintain the NAAQS in 2025.
The 2016 memorandum suggests that under such a condition (again, where
EPA's photochemical modeling indicates an area will maintain the 2012
annual PM2.5 NAAQS in 2025, but not in 2017), further
analysis of the site should be performed to determine if the site may
be a nonattainment or maintenance receptor in 2021 (which, again, is
the attainment deadline for moderate PM2.5 areas). The
memorandum also indicates that for certain states with incomplete
ambient monitoring data, additional information including the latest
available data, should be analyzed to determine whether there are
potential downwind air quality problems that may be impacted by
transported emissions. This rulemaking considers these analyses for
Vermont, as well as additional analysis conducted by EPA during review
of Vermont's submittal.
To develop the projected values presented in the memorandum, EPA
used the results of nationwide photochemical air-quality modeling that
it recently performed to support several rulemakings related to the
ozone NAAQS. Base-year modeling was performed for 2011. Future-year
modeling was performed for 2017 to support the proposed CSAPR Update
for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS. See 80 FR 75705 (December 3, 2015). Future-
year modeling was also performed for 2025 to support the Regulatory
Impact Assessment of the final 2015 Ozone NAAQS.\8\ The outputs from
these model runs included hourly concentrations of PM2.5
that were used in conjunction with measured data to project annual
average PM2.5 design values for 2017 and 2025. Areas that
were designated as moderate PM2.5 nonattainment areas for
the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in 2014 must attain the NAAQS by
December 31, 2021, or as expeditiously as practicable. Although neither
the available 2017 nor 2025 future-year modeling data correspond
directly to the future-year attainment deadline for moderate
PM2.5 nonattainment areas, EPA believes that the modeling
information is still helpful for identifying potential nonattainment
and maintenance receptors in the 2017-2021 period. Assessing downwind
PM2.5 air-quality problems based on estimates of air-quality
concentrations in a future year aligned with the relevant attainment
deadline is consistent with the instructions from the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in North Carolina
v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896, 911-12 (D.C. Cir. 2008), that upwind emission
reductions should be harmonized, to the extent possible, with the
attainment deadlines for downwind areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See 2015 ozone NAAQS RIA at: www3.epa.gov/ttnecas1/docs/20151001ria.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vermont's Submissions for Prongs 1 and 2
On October 31, 2017, VT DEC submitted an infrastructure SIP for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS that addressed prongs 1 and 2 for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS. Vermont's SIP submittal relied in part on EPA's
analysis performed for the CSAPR rulemaking to conclude that the state
will not significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with
maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in any downwind area.
EPA analyzed the state's October 2017 submittal to determine
whether it fully addressed the prong 1 and 2 transport provisions with
respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. As discussed below, EPA
concludes that emissions of PM2.5 and PM2.5
precursors (NOX and SO2) in Vermont will not
significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance
of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in any other state.
As noted, the modeling discussed in EPA's 2016 memorandum
identified one potential maintenance receptor for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS at the Liberty monitor (ID number 420030067),
located in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. The memorandum also
identified certain states with incomplete ambient monitoring data as
areas that may require further analysis to determine whether there are
potential downwind air quality problems that may be impacted by
transported emissions.
While developing the 2011 CSAPR rulemaking, EPA modeled the impacts
of all 38 eastern states in its modeling domain on fine particulate
matter concentrations at downwind receptors in other states in the 2012
analysis year in order to evaluate the contribution of upwind states on
downwind states with respect to the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5.
Although the modeling was not conducted for purposes of analyzing
upwind states' impacts on downwind receptors with respect to the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS, the contribution analysis for the 1997 and 2006
standards can be informative for evaluating Vermont's compliance with
the Good Neighbor provision for the 2012 standard.
This CSAPR modeling showed that Vermont had a very small impact
(0.002 [mu]g/m\3\ annual PM2.5) on the Liberty monitor in
Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, which is the only out-of-state monitor
that may be a nonattainment or maintenance receptor in 2021. (A
spreadsheet showing CSAPR contributions for ozone and PM2.5
is included in docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-4228.) Although EPA has not
proposed a particular threshold for evaluating the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS, EPA notes that Vermont's impact on the Liberty
monitor is far below the threshold of 1% for the annual 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS (i.e., 0.12 [mu]g/m\3\) that EPA previously used
to evaluate the contribution of upwind states to downwind air-quality
monitors. Therefore, even if the Liberty monitor were considered a
receptor for purposes of transport, the EPA proposes to conclude that
Vermont will not significantly contribute to nonattainment, or
interfere with maintenance, of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS at that
monitor.
In addition, the Liberty monitor is already close to attaining the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, and expected emissions reductions in the
next four years will lead to additional reductions in measured
PM2.5 concentrations. There are both local and regional
components to measured PM2.5 levels. All monitors in
Allegheny County have a regional component, with the Liberty monitor
most strongly influenced by local sources. This is confirmed by the
fact that annual average measured concentrations at the Liberty monitor
have consistently been 2-4 [mu]g/m\3\ higher than other monitors in
Allegheny County.
Specifically, previous CSAPR modeling showed that regional
emissions from upwind states, particularly SO2 and NOx
emissions, contribute to PM2.5 nonattainment at the Liberty
monitor. In recent years, large SO2 and NOX
reductions from power plants have occurred in Pennsylvania and states
upwind from the Greater Pittsburgh region. Pennsylvania's energy sector
emissions of SO2 will have decreased 166,000 tons between
2015-2017 as a result of CSAPR implementation. This is due to both the
installation of emissions controls and retirements of electric
generating units (EGUs). Projected power plant closures and additional
emissions controls in Pennsylvania and upwind states will help further
reduce both direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors.
Regional emission reductions will continue to occur from current on-
the-books federal and state regulations such as the federal on-road and
non-road vehicle programs, and various rules for major stationary
emissions sources. See proposed approval of the Ohio Infrastructure SIP
for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS (82 FR 57689; December 7, 2017).
In addition to regional emissions reductions and plant closures,
[[Page 30604]]
additional local reductions to both direct PM2.5 and
SO2 emissions are expected to occur and should contribute to
further declines in Allegheny County's PM2.5 monitor
concentrations. For example, significant SO2 reductions have
recently occurred at US Steel's integrated steel mill facilities in
southern Allegheny County as part of a 1-hr SO2 NAAQS
SIP.\9\ Reductions are largely due to declining sulfur content in the
Clairton Coke Work's coke oven gas (COG). Because this COG is burned at
US Steel's Clairton Coke Works, Irvin Mill, and Edgar Thompson Steel
Mill, these reductions in sulfur content should contribute to much
lower PM2.5 precursor emissions in the immediate future. The
Allegheny SO2 SIP also projects lower SO2
emissions resulting from vehicle fuel standards, reductions in general
emissions due to declining population in the Greater Pittsburgh region,
and several shutdowns of significant sources of emissions in Allegheny
County.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ www.achd.net/air/pubs/SIPs/SO2_2010_NAAQS_SIP_9-14-2017.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA modeling projections, the recent downward trend in local and
upwind emissions reductions, the expected continued downward trend in
emissions between 2017 and 2021, and the downward trend in monitored
PM2.5 concentrations all indicate that the Liberty monitor
will attain and be able to maintain the 2012 annual PM2.5
NAAQS by 2021. See proposed approval of the Ohio Infrastructure SIP (82
FR 57689, December 7, 2017).
As noted in the 2016 memorandum, several states have had recent
data-quality issues identified as part of the PM2.5
designations process. In particular, some ambient PM2.5 data
for certain time periods between 2009 and 2013 in Florida, Illinois,
Idaho, Tennessee, and Kentucky did not meet all data-quality
requirements under 40 CFR part 50, appendix L. The lack of data means
that the relevant areas in those states could potentially be in
nonattainment or be maintenance receptors in 2021. However, EPA's
analysis for the 2011 CSAPR rulemaking with respect to the 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS determined that Vermont's impact to all these
downwind receptors would be well below the 1% contribution threshold
for this NAAQS. That conclusion informs the analysis of Vermont's
contributions for purposes of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS as well.
Given this, and the fact, discussed below, that the state's
PM2.5 design values for all ambient monitors have been well
below the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS during the period from 2009 to
2013, EPA concludes that it is highly unlikely that Vermont
significantly contributes to nonattainment or interferes with
maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in areas with data-
quality issues.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Vermont's PM2.5 design values for all ambient
monitors from 2004-2006 through 2013-2015 are available on Table 6
of the 2015 Design Value Report at https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-design-values_.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information in Enclosure 5 of Vermont's October 2017 SIP submission
(Vermont Good Neighbor SIP) corroborates EPA's proposed conclusion that
Vermont's SIP meets its obligations under CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). This enclosure includes 2011-2015 design values for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in the bordering states of
Massachusetts, New Hampshire and New York, which are all well below the
annual standard (12.0 [mu]g/m\3\). In addition, the analysis includes a
graph showing that the design-value trend at the four ambient
monitoring locations in Vermont declined from 2005 to 2016.
This technical analysis is supported by additional indications that
air quality is improving and emissions are falling in Vermont.
Specifically, certified annual PM2.5 monitor values (for
monitors meeting minimum data completeness criteria) recorded since
2014 show that the highest value in 2015 was 9.1 [mu]g/m\3\ at a
monitor in Rutland, and the highest value in 2016 was 6.8 [mu]g/m\3\ at
the same monitor in Rutland.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 24-hour and annual PM2.5 monitor values for
individual monitoring sites throughout Vermont are available at
www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data/monitor-values-report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, Vermont's sources are well-controlled. Vermont's 2017
submission indicates that the state has many SIP-approved rules and
programs that limit emissions of PM2.5, including rules to
control emissions of SO2, PM2.5, VOCs and
NOX \12\; Vermont's PSD program contained in VT APCR
Subchapters I, IV, and V; Vermont's Regional Haze SIP; and Vermont's
Title V program contained in Subchapter X of VT APCR. In addition,
Vermont adopted limitations on sulfur in fuel (VT APCR Sec. 5-221(1))
on September 28, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ SO2, NOX and VOCs contribute to the
formation of PM2.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It should also be noted that Vermont is not in the CSAPR program
because EPA analyses show that the state does not emit ozone-season
NOX at a level that contributes significantly to non-
attainment or interferes with maintenance of the 1997 and 2006
PM2.5 NAAQS in any other state.
For the reasons explained herein, EPA agrees with Vermont's
conclusions and proposes to determine that Vermont will not
significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance
of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in any other state. Therefore, EPA
is proposing to approve the October 2017 infrastructure SIP submission
from Vermont addressing prongs 1 and 2 of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--PSD (Prong 3)
To prevent significant deterioration of air quality, this sub-
element requires SIPs to include provisions that prohibit any source or
other type of emissions activity in one state from interfering with
measures that are required in any other state's SIP under Part C of the
CAA. As explained in the 2013 Guidance, a state may meet this
requirement with respect to in-state sources and pollutants that are
subject to PSD permitting through a comprehensive PSD permitting
program that applies to all regulated NSR pollutants and that satisfies
the requirements of EPA's PSD implementation rules. As discussed above
under element C, Vermont has such a PSD permitting program. For in-
state sources not subject to PSD, this requirement can be satisfied
through a fully-approved nonattainment new source review (NNSR) program
with respect to any previous NAAQS. EPA's latest approval of some
revisions to Vermont's NNSR regulations was on August 1, 2016 (81 FR
50342). Therefore, we are proposing to approve this sub-element for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 3: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--Visibility Protection
(Prong 4)
With regard to applicable requirements for visibility protection of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), states are subject to visibility and
regional-haze program requirements under part C of the CAA (which
includes sections 169A and 169B). The 2009 Guidance, 2011 Guidance, and
2013 Guidance recommend that these requirements can be satisfied by an
approved SIP addressing reasonably attributable visibility impairment,
if required, or an approved SIP addressing regional haze. A fully
approved regional haze SIP meeting the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308
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. Vermont's Regional
Haze SIP was approved by EPA on May 22, 2012 (77 FR 30212).
Accordingly, EPA proposes that Vermont has met the
[[Page 30605]]
visibility protection requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 4: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii)--Interstate Pollution Abatement
This sub-element requires that each SIP contain provisions
requiring compliance with requirements of section 126 relating to
interstate pollution abatement. Section 126(a) requires new or modified
sources to notify neighboring states of potential impacts from the
source. The statute does not specify the method by which the source
should provide the notification. States with SIP-approved PSD programs
must have a provision requiring such notification by new or modified
sources.
On August 1, 2016 (81 FR 50342), EPA approved revisions to VT APCR
Sec. 5-501, which includes a provision that requires VT ANR to provide
notice of a draft PSD permit to, among other entities, any state whose
lands may be affected by emissions from the source. VT APCR Sec. 5-
501(7)(c). Vermont's public notice requirements are consistent with the
Federal PSD program's public notice requirements for affected states
under 40 CFR 51.166(q). Therefore, we propose to approve Vermont's
compliance with the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 126(a)
with respect to with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Vermont has no obligations under any other provision of section 126,
and no source or sources within the state are the subject of an active
finding under section 126 of the CAA with respect to the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 5: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii)--International Pollution
Abatement
This sub-element also requires each SIP to contain provisions
requiring compliance with the applicable requirements of section 115
relating to international pollution abatement. There are no final
findings under section 115 of the CAA against Vermont with respect to
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. Therefore, EPA is proposing that
Vermont has met the applicable infrastructure SIP requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) related to section 115 of the CAA for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.
E. Section 110(a)(2)(E)--Adequate Resources
Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) requires each SIP to provide assurances
that the state will have adequate personnel, funding, and legal
authority under state law to carry out its SIP. In addition, section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires each state to comply with the requirements
under CAA section 128 about state boards. Finally, section
110(a)(2)(E)(iii) requires that, where a state relies upon local or
regional governments or agencies for the implementation of its SIP
provisions, the state retain responsibility for ensuring implementation
of SIP obligations with respect to relevant NAAQS. Section
110(a)(2)(E)(iii), however, does not apply to this action because
Vermont does not rely upon local or regional governments or agencies
for the implementation of its SIP provisions.
Sub-Element 1: Adequate Personnel, Funding, and Legal Authority Under
State Law To Carry Out Its SIP, and Related Issues
Vermont, through its infrastructure SIP submittals, has documented
that its air agency has the requisite authority and resources to carry
out its SIP obligations. Vermont cites 10 V.S.A. Sec. 553, which
designates ANR as the air pollution control agency of the state, and 10
V.S.A Sec. 554, which provides the Secretary of ANR with the power to
``[a]dopt, amend and repeal rules, implementing the provisions'' of 10
V.S.A. Chapter 23, Air Pollution Control, and to ``[a]ppoint and employ
personnel and consultants as may be necessary for the administration
of'' 10 V.S.A. Chapter 23. Section 554 also authorizes the Secretary of
ANR to ``[a]ccept, receive and administer grants or other funds or
gifts from public and private agencies, including the federal
government, for the purposes of carrying out any of the functions of''
10 V.S.A. Chapter 23. Additionally, 3 V.S.A. Sec. 2822 provides the
Secretary of ANR with the authority to assess air permit and
registration fees, which fund state air programs. In addition to
Federal funding and permit and registration fees, Vermont notes that
the Vermont Air Quality and Climate Division (AQCD) receives state
funding to implement its air programs.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ VT ANR's authority to carry out the provisions of the SIP
identified in 40 CFR 51.230 is discussed in the sections of this
document assessing elements A, C, F, and G, as applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA proposes that Vermont has met the infrastructure SIP
requirements of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(E) with respect to
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: State Board Requirements Under Section 128 of the CAA
Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires each SIP to contain provisions
that comply with the state board requirements of section 128 of the
CAA. That provision contains two explicit requirements: (1) That any
board or body which approves permits or enforcement orders under this
chapter shall have at least a majority of members who represent the
public interest and do not derive any significant portion of their
income from persons subject to permits and enforcement orders under
this chapter, and (2) that any potential conflicts of interest by
members of such board or body or the head of an executive agency with
similar powers be adequately disclosed.
In Vermont, no board or body approves permits or enforcement
orders; these are approved by the Secretary of Vermont ANR. Thus, with
respect to this sub-element, Vermont is subject only to the
requirements of paragraph (a)(2) of section 128 of the CAA (regarding
conflicts of interest). On June 27, 2017, EPA approved Vermont's SIP
revision addressing the conflict of interest requirements of section
128. See 82 FR 29005. For a detailed analysis explaining how Vermont
meets these requirements, see EPA's notice of proposed rulemaking for
that action. 82 FR 15671, 15678 (March 30, 2017).
EPA proposes that Vermont has met the applicable infrastructure SIP
requirements for this sub-element for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
F. Section 110(a)(2)(F)--Stationary Source Monitoring System
States must establish a system to monitor emissions from stationary
sources and submit periodic emissions reports. Each plan shall also
require the installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment,
and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or operators
of stationary sources to monitor emissions from such sources. The state
plan shall also require periodic reports on the nature and amounts of
emissions and emissions-related data from such sources, and correlation
of such reports by each state agency with any emission limitations or
standards. Lastly, the reports shall be available at reasonable times
for public inspection.
Vermont's infrastructure submittal references existing state
regulations previously approved by EPA that require sources to monitor
emissions and submit reports. In particular, VT APCR Sec. 5-405,
Required Air Monitoring, (45 FR 10775, February 19, 1980), provides
that ANR ``may require the owner or operator of any air contaminant
source to install, use and maintain such monitoring equipment and
records, establish and maintain such records, and make such periodic
[[Page 30606]]
emission reports as [ANR] shall prescribe.'' Moreover, section 5-402,
Written Reports When Requested (81 FR 50342; August 1, 2016),
authorizes ANR to ``require written reports from the person operating
or responsible for any proposed or existing air contaminant source,
which reports shall contain,'' among other things, information
concerning the ``nature and amount and time periods or durations of
emissions and such other information as may be relevant to the air
pollution potential of the source. These reports shall also include the
results of such source testing as may be required under Section 5-404
herein.'' Section 5-404, Methods for Sampling and Testing of Sources
(45 FR 10775 February 19, 1980) in turn authorizes ANR to ``require the
owner or operator of [a] source to conduct tests to determine the
quantity of particulate and/or gaseous matter being emitted'' and
requires a source to allow access, should ANR have reason to believe
that emission limits are being violated by the source, and allows ANR
``to conduct tests of [its] own to determine compliance.'' In addition,
operators of sources that emit more than five tons of any and all air
contaminants per year are required to register the source with the
Secretary of ANR and to submit emissions data annually, pursuant to
Sec. 5-802, Requirement for Registration, and Sec. 5-803,
Registration Procedure (60 FR 2524 January 10, 1995). Vermont also
certifies that nothing in its SIP would preclude the use, including the
exclusive use, of any credible evidence or information, relevant to
whether a source would have been in compliance with applicable
requirements if the appropriate performance or compliance test or
procedure had been performed. See 40 CFR 51.212(c).
Vermont's infrastructure SIP submittal for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS provides for correlation by VT DEC of emissions
reports by sources with applicable emission limitations or standards,
as required by CAA Sec. 110(a)(2)(F)(iii). Vermont receives emissions
data through its annual registration program. Currently, VT DEC
analyzes a portion of these data manually to correlate a facility's
actual emissions with permit conditions, NAAQS, and, if applicable,
hazardous air contaminant action levels. VT DEC reports that it is in
the process of setting up an integrated electronic database that will
merge all air contaminant source information across permitting,
compliance and registration programs, so that information concerning
permit conditions, annual emissions data, and compliance data will be
accessible in one location for a particular air contaminant source. The
database will be capable of correlating certain emissions data with
permit conditions and other applicable standards electronically, where
feasible, to allow VT DEC to complete this correlation more efficiently
and accurately.
Regarding the section 110(a)(2)(F) requirement that the SIP ensure
that the public has availability to emission reports, Vermont certified
in its October 31, 2017 submittal for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
that the Vermont Public Records Act, 1 V.S.A. Sec. Sec. 315-320,
provides for the free and open examination of public records, including
emissions reports. Furthermore, 10 V.S.A. Sec. 563 specifically
provides that the ANR ``Secretary shall not withhold emissions data and
emission monitoring data from public inspection or review'' and ``shall
keep confidential any record or other information furnished to or
obtained by the Secretary concerning an air contaminant source, other
than emissions data and emission monitoring data, that qualifies as a
trade secret pursuant to 1 V.S.A. Sec. 317(c)(9).'' (emphasis added).
EPA approved section 563 into the Vermont SIP on June 27, 2017 (82 FR
29005).
Consequently, EPA proposes that Vermont has met the infrastructure
SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F) for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS.
G. Section 110(a)(2)(G)--Emergency Powers
This section requires that a plan provide for state authority
analogous to that provided to the EPA Administrator in section 303 of
the CAA, and adequate contingency plans to implement such authority.
Section 303 of the CAA provides authority to the EPA Administrator to
seek a court order to restrain any source from causing or contributing
to emissions that present an ``imminent and substantial endangerment to
public health or welfare, or the environment.'' Section 303 further
authorizes the Administrator to issue ``such orders as may be necessary
to protect public health or welfare or the environment'' in the event
that ``it is not practicable to assure prompt protection . . . by
commencement of such civil action.''
On June 27, 2017, EPA approved a Vermont SIP revision addressing
the requirement that the plan provide for state authority comparable to
that in section 303 of the CAA. See 82 FR 29005. For a detailed
analysis explaining how Vermont meets this requirement, see EPA's March
30, 2017 (82 FR 15671, 15679) notice of proposed rulemaking for that
action. Therefore, we are proposing to approve the state's submittals
with respect to this requirement of Section 110(a)(2)(G) for 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.
Section 110(a)(2)(G) also requires that Vermont have an approved
contingency plan for any Air Quality Control Region (AQCR) within the
state that is classified as Priority I, IA, or II for certain
pollutants. See 40 CFR 51.150, 51.152(c). In general, contingency plans
for Priority I, IA, and II areas must meet the applicable requirements
of 40 CFR part 51, subpart H (40 CFR 51.150 through 51.153)
(``Prevention of Air Pollution Emergency Episodes'') for the relevant
NAAQS, if the NAAQS is covered by those regulations. In the case of
PM2.5, EPA has not issued regulations that provide the
ambient levels to classify different priority levels for the 2012
standard (or any PM2.5 NAAQS). EPA's 2009 Guidance
recommends that states develop emergency episode plans for any area
that has monitored and recorded 24-hour PM2.5 levels greater
than 140 [micro]g/m\3\ since 2006. EPA's review of Vermont's certified
air quality data in AQS indicates that the highest 24-hour
PM2.5 level since 2006 was 43.5 [micro]g/m\3\, which
occurred in 2015 at the ambient monitor in Rutland.\14\ Thus, an
emergency episode plan for PM2.5 is not necessary. Although
not expected, if PM2.5 conditions were to change, Vermont
does have general authority, as noted previously (i.e., 10 V.S.A. Sec.
560 and 10 V.S.A. Sec. 8009), to order a source to cease operations if
it is determined that emissions from the source pose an imminent danger
to human health or safety or an immediate threat of substantial harm to
the environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 24-hour PM2.5 monitor values for individual
monitoring sites throughout Vermont are available at www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data/monitor-values-report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, as stated in Vermont's infrastructure SIP submittal
under the discussion of public notification (Element J), Vermont posts
near real-time air quality data, air quality predictions and a record
of historical data on the VT DEC website and distributes air quality
alerts by email to many parties, including the media. Alerts include
information about the health implications of elevated pollutant levels
and list actions to reduce emissions and to reduce the public's
exposure. In addition, daily forecasted fine particle levels are also
made available on the internet through the EPA AirNow and EnviroFlash
systems. Information regarding these two systems is available on EPA's
[[Page 30607]]
website at www.airnow.gov. Notices are sent out to EnviroFlash
participants when levels are forecast to exceed the current 24-hour
PM2.5 standard.
EPA proposes that Vermont has met the applicable infrastructure SIP
requirements for section 110(a)(2)(G) with respect to contingency plans
for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
H. Section 110(a)(2)(H)--Future SIP Revisions
This section requires that a state's SIP provide for revision from
time to time as may be necessary to take account of changes in the
NAAQS or availability of improved methods for attaining the NAAQS and
whenever the EPA finds that the SIP is substantially inadequate. To
address this requirement, Vermont's infrastructure submittal references
10 V.S.A Sec. 554, which provides the Secretary of Vermont ANR with
the power to ``[p]repare and develop a comprehensive plan or plans for
the prevention, abatement and control of air pollution in this state''
and to ``[a]dopt, amend and repeal rules, implementing the provisions''
of Vermont's air pollution control laws set forth in 10 V.S.A. chapter
23. EPA approved 10 V.S.A. Sec. 554 on June 27, 2017 (82 FR 29005).
EPA proposes that Vermont has met the infrastructure SIP requirements
of CAA section 110(a)(2)(H) with respect to the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS.
I. Section 110(a)(2)(I)--Nonattainment Area Plan or Plan Revisions
Under Part D
The CAA requires that each plan or plan revision for an area
designated as a nonattainment area meet the applicable requirements of
part D of the CAA. Part D relates to nonattainment areas. EPA has
determined that section 110(a)(2)(I) is not applicable to the
infrastructure SIP process. Instead, EPA takes action on part D
attainment plans through separate processes.
J. Section 110(a)(2)(J)--Consultation With Government Officials; Public
Notifications; Prevention of Significant Deterioration; Visibility
Protection
Section 110(a)(2)(J) of the CAA requires that each SIP ``meet the
applicable requirements of section 121 of this title (relating to
consultation), section 127 of this title (relating to public
notification), and part C of this subchapter (relating to PSD of air
quality and visibility protection).'' The evaluation of the submission
from Vermont with respect to these requirements is described below.
Sub-Element 1: Consultation With Government Officials
Pursuant to CAA section 121, a state must provide a satisfactory
process for consultation with local governments and Federal Land
Managers (FLMs) in carrying out its NAAQS implementation requirements.
Vermont's 10 V.S.A Sec. 554 specifies that the Secretary of
Vermont ANR shall have the power to ``[a]dvise, consult, contract and
cooperate with other agencies of the state, local governments,
industries, other states, interstate or interlocal agencies, and the
federal government, and with interested persons or groups.'' EPA
approved 10 V.S.A. Sec. 554 on June 27, 2017 (82 FR 29005). In
addition, VT APCR Sec. 5-501(7)(c) requires VT ANR to provide notice
to local governments and federal land managers of a determination by
ANR to issue a draft PSD permit for a major stationary source or major
modification. On August 1, 2016 (81 FR 50342), EPA approved VT APCR
Sec. 5-501(7)(c) into Vermont's SIP. Therefore, EPA proposes that
Vermont has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of this portion of
section 110(a)(2)(J) with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: Public Notification
Pursuant to CAA section 127, states must notify the public if NAAQS
are exceeded in an area, advise the public of health hazards associated
with exceedances, and enhance public awareness of measures that can be
taken to prevent exceedances and of ways in which the public can
participate in regulatory and other efforts to improve air quality.
Vermont's 10 V.S.A Sec. 554 authorizes the Secretary of Vermont
ANR to ``[c]ollect and disseminate information and conduct educational
and training programs relating to air contamination and air
pollution.'' In addition, the VT DEC Air Quality and Climate Division
website includes near real-time air quality data, and a record of
historical data. Air quality forecasts are distributed daily via email
to interested parties. Air quality alerts are sent by email to a large
number of affected parties, including the media. Alerts include
information about the health implications of elevated pollutant levels
and list actions to reduce emissions and to reduce the public's
exposure. Also, Air Quality Data Summaries of the year's air quality
monitoring results are issued annually and posted on the VT DEC Air
Quality and Climate Division website. Vermont is also an active partner
in EPA's AirNow and EnviroFlash air quality alert programs.
EPA proposes that Vermont has met the infrastructure SIP
requirements of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(J) with respect to
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 3: PSD
EPA has already discussed Vermont's PSD program in the context of
infrastructure SIPs in the paragraphs addressing section 110(a)(2)(C)
and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) and determined that it satisfies the
requirements of EPA's PSD implementation rules. Therefore, the SIP also
satisfies the PSD sub-element of section 110(a)(2)(J) for the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.
Sub-Element 4: Visibility Protection
With regard to the applicable requirements for visibility
protection, states are subject to visibility and regional haze program
requirements under part C of the CAA (which includes sections 169A and
169B). In the event of the establishment of a new NAAQS, however, the
visibility and regional haze program requirements under part C do not
change. Thus, as noted in EPA's 2013 guidance, we find that there is no
new visibility obligation ``triggered'' under section 110(a)(2)(J) when
a new NAAQS becomes effective. In other words, the visibility
protection requirements of section 110(a)(2)(J) are not germane to
infrastructure SIPs for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Based on the above analysis, EPA proposes that Vermont has met the
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(J) with respect to
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
K. Section 110(a)(2)(K)--Air Quality Modeling/Data
Section 110(a)(2)(K) of the Act requires that a SIP provide for the
performance of such air quality modeling as the EPA Administrator may
prescribe for the purpose of predicting the effect on ambient air
quality of any emissions of any air pollutant for which EPA has
established a NAAQS, and the submission, upon request, of data related
to such air quality modeling. EPA has published modeling guidelines at
40 CFR part 51, appendix W, for predicting the effects of emissions of
criteria pollutants on ambient air quality. EPA also recommends in the
2013 Guidance that, to meet section 110(a)(2)(K), a state submit or
reference the statutory or regulatory provisions that provide the air
agency with the authority to conduct such air quality modeling and to
provide such modeling data to EPA upon request. See 2013 Guidance at
55.
In its submittal, Vermont cites to VT APCR Sec. 5-406, Required
Air Modeling,
[[Page 30608]]
which authorizes ``[t]he Air Pollution Control Officer [to] require the
owner or operator of any proposed air contaminant source . . . to
conduct . . . air quality modeling and to submit an air quality impact
evaluation to demonstrate that operation of the proposed source . . .
will not directly or indirectly result in a violation of any ambient
air quality standard, interfere with the attainment of any ambient air
quality standard, or violate any applicable prevention of significant
deterioration increment . . . .'' Vermont reviews the potential impact
of such sources consistent with EPA's ``Guidelines on Air Quality
Models'' at 40 CFR part 51, appendix W. See VT APCR Sec. 5-406(2).
Vermont also cites to VT APCR Sec. 5-502, Major Stationary Sources and
Major Modifications, which requires the submittal of an air quality
impact evaluation or air quality modeling to ANR to demonstrate impacts
of new and modified major sources, in accordance with VT APCR Sec. 5-
406. The modeling data are sent to EPA along with the draft major
permit. As a result, the SIP provides for such air quality modeling as
the Administrator has prescribed and for the submission, upon request,
of data related to such modeling.
The state also collaborates with the Ozone Transport Commission
(OTC) and the Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association and EPA
in order to perform large-scale urban air shed modeling for ozone and
PM, if necessary. EPA proposes that Vermont has met the infrastructure
SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(K) with respect to the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.
L. Section 110(a)(2)(L)--Permitting Fees
This section requires SIPs to mandate that each major stationary
source pay permitting fees to cover the costs of reviewing, approving,
implementing, and enforcing a permit.
Vermont implements and operates a Title V permit program. See
Subchapter X of VT APCR, which was approved by EPA on November 29, 2001
(66 FR 59535). To gain this approval, Vermont demonstrated the ability
to collect sufficient fees to run the program. Vermont also notes in
its submittals that the costs of all CAA permitting, implementation,
and enforcement for new or modified sources are covered by Title V
fees, and that Vermont state law provides for the assessment of
application fees from air emissions sources for permits for the
construction or modification of air contaminant sources, and sets forth
permit fees. See 10 V.S.A Sec. 556, 3 V.S.A Sec. 2822(j).
EPA proposes that Vermont has met the infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(L) for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS.
M. Section 110(a)(2)(M)--Consultation/Participation by Affected Local
Entities
To satisfy Element M, states must provide for consultation with,
and participation by, local political subdivisions affected by the SIP.
Vermont's infrastructure submittal references 10 V.S.A Sec. 554, which
was approved into the VT SIP on June 27, 2017 (82 FR 29005). This
statute authorizes the Secretary of Vermont ANR to ``[a]dvise, consult,
contract and cooperate with other agencies of the state, local
governments, industries, other states, interstate or interlocal
agencies, and the federal government, and with interested persons or
groups.'' In addition, VT APCR Sec. 5-501(7) provides for notification
to local officials and agencies about the opportunity for participating
in permitting determinations for the construction or modification of
major sources. EPA proposes that Vermont has met the infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(M) with respect to the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS.
IV. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the elements of the infrastructure SIP
submitted by Vermont on October 31, 2017 for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS. Specifically, EPA's proposed action regarding each
infrastructure SIP requirement is contained in Table 1 below.
Table 1--Proposed Action on Vermont's Infrastructure SIP Submittal for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Element 2012 PM2.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A): Emission limits and other control measures........ A
(B): Ambient air quality monitoring and data system.... A
(C)1: Enforcement of SIP measures...................... A
(C)2: PSD program for major sources and major A
modifications.........................................
(C)3: PSD program for minor sources and minor A
modifications.........................................
(D)1: Contribute to nonattainment/interfere with A
maintenance of NAAQS..................................
(D)2: PSD.............................................. A
(D)3: Visibility Protection............................ A
(D)4: Interstate Pollution Abatement................... A
(D)5: International Pollution Abatement................ A
(E)1: Adequate resources............................... A
(E)2: State boards..................................... A
(E)3: Necessary assurances with respect to local NA
agencies..............................................
(F): Stationary source monitoring system............... A
(G): Emergency power................................... A
(H): Future SIP revisions.............................. A
(I): Nonattainment area plan or plan revisions under +
part D................................................
(J)1: Consultation with government officials........... A
(J)2: Public notification.............................. A
(J)3: PSD.............................................. A
(J)4: Visibility protection............................ +
(K): Air quality modeling and data..................... A
(L): Permitting fees................................... A
(M): Consultation and participation by affected local A
entities..............................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the above table, the key is as follows: A, Approve; NA, Not
applicable; +, Not germane to infrastructure SIPs.
[[Page 30609]]
EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this
proposal or on other relevant matters. These comments will be
considered before EPA takes final action. Interested parties may
participate in the Federal rulemaking procedure by submitting comments
to this proposed rule by following the instructions listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this Federal Register.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 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 Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
Is not a significant regulatory action 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);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is 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.);
Does 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);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is 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 Clean Air Act; and
Does 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).
In addition, 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 and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: June 22, 2018.
Alexandra Dunn,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2018-14068 Filed 6-28-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
