Air Plan Approval; District of Columbia; State Implementation Plan for the Interstate Transport Requirements for the 2008 Ozone Standard, 44498-44500 [2018-18855]

Download as PDF 44498 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 170 / Friday, August 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations EPA-APPROVED MICHIGAN REGULATIONS—Continued Michigan citation * * * * * * * * [FR Doc. 2018–18853 Filed 8–30–18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0701; FRL–9983– 11—Region 3] Air Plan Approval; District of Columbia; State Implementation Plan for the Interstate Transport Requirements for the 2008 Ozone Standard Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a state implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the District of Columbia (the District) that pertains to the good neighbor and interstate transport requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 2008 ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). The CAA’s good neighbor provision requires EPA and states to address the interstate transport of air pollution that affects the ability of other states to attain and maintain the NAAQS. Specifically, the good neighbor provision requires each state in its SIP to prohibit emissions that will significantly contribute to nonattainment, or interfere with maintenance, of a NAAQS in another state. The District submitted a SIP revision on June 13, 2014 that addresses the interstate transport requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. On July 5, 2018, EPA published a proposed rule for just the good neighbor provision of the District’s June 13, 2014 submittal. EPA is approving the District’s SIP as having adequate provisions to meet the requirements of the good neighbor provision for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in accordance with section 110 of the CAA. DATES: This final rule is effective on October 1, 2018. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID Number EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0701. All documents in the docket are listed on daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 State effective date Title 16:04 Aug 30, 2018 Jkt 244001 * EPA approval date * the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through https:// www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section for additional availability information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Schmitt, (215) 814–5787, or by email at schmitt.ellen@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background On June 13, 2014, the District Department of the Environment (DDOE) on behalf of the District submitted a revision to its SIP to satisfy the requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. On April 13, 2015 (80 FR 19538), EPA approved all parts of the District’s June 13, 2014 submittal with the exception of the portion of the submittal that addressed section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA. Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), also called the good neighbor provision, consists of two prongs that require that a state’s 1 SIP must contain adequate provisions to prohibit any source or other type of emissions activity within the state from emitting air pollutants that ‘‘contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with maintenance by, any other state with respect to any such national primary or secondary ambient air quality standard.’’ Under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA, EPA gives independent significance to the matter of nonattainment (prong 1) and to that of maintenance (prong 2). On July 5, 2018 (83 FR 31350), EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR) for the District of Columbia, approving the portion of the June 13, 2014 District SIP revision addressing prongs 1 and 2 of the 1 The term state has the same meaning as provided in CAA section 302(d) which specifically includes the District of Columbia. PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Comments * * interstate transport requirements for section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.2 II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis In its June 13, 2014 submittal, the District identified the implemented regulations within its SIP that limit nitrogen dioxide (NOX) and/or volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from District sources.3 The District indicates that there are no electric generating units (EGUs) 4 or other large industrial sources of NOX emissions within the District. In the submittal, the District also included information on non-EGUs and mobile sources and listed the SIP-approved measures that help to reduce NOX and VOC emissions from non-EGU and mobile sources within the District. In the submittal, the District points out that it will continue to rely on federal measures to reduce NOX emissions from onroad and nonroad engines. The District states its sources are already well controlled, and states further reductions beyond the District’s current SIP measures are not economically feasible. EPA evaluated the District’s submittal for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, considering: Ozone precursor emissions; an analysis of District source sectors; and in-place controls and regulations. Due to the District’s small number of sources and the high cost of further reductions, EPA proposed in its July 5, 2018 NPR that the District’s SIP, as presently approved, contains adequate measures to prevent District sources from interfering with maintenance or contributing significantly to nonattainment in another state for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The rationale for EPA’s proposed action was discussed in greater detail in the NPR and accompanying technical support document (TSD) and will not be restated here. 2 All the other infrastructure SIP elements for the District for the 2008 ozone NAAQS were addressed in a separate rulemaking. See 80 FR 19538 (April 13, 2015). 3 Both NO and VOCs are precursors to ozone X formation. 4 The District’s last remaining EGUs were decommissioned in 2012, in part to meet permit requirements incorporated into the District’s Regional Haze SIP. 77 FR 5191 (February 2, 2012). E:\FR\FM\31AUR1.SGM 31AUR1 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 170 / Friday, August 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations In this rulemaking action, EPA is approving one portion of the District’s June 13, 2014 submittal—the portion addressing prongs 1 and 2 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA. EPA previously acted on other portions of Delaware’s June 13, 2014 SIP submittal for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.5 daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES III. Comments and EPA’s Response EPA received a total of four anonymous comments on the July 5, 2018 NPR. All of the comments received are included in the docket for this action. Three of the comments did not concern any of the specific issues raised in the NPR, nor did they address EPA’s rationale for the proposed approval of the District’s submittal. Therefore, EPA is not responding to those comments. EPA did receive one comment considered to be relevant to this rulemaking action. The commenter indicates that EPA was supposed to take action on the District’s SIP revision within 12 months of receiving the SIP submittal. The commenter also indicates the length of time (4 years) it took for EPA to approve the SIP revision from the time of its submittal and questions if transported pollution could have been eliminated if SIP revisions like this one were approved in a timely manner. The commenter asks what air quality and human health impacts the delay of this action has had on neighboring states. EPA acknowledges that it missed the statutory deadline to take action on the good neighbor portion of the District’s June 13, 2014 SIP submittal.6 However, at this time, EPA is taking final action on this SIP revision, and by doing so it will meet all such outstanding obligations under the CAA. The commenter provided no analysis of the statutory consequences, if any, from the action. Further, EPA disagrees with the commenter’s questioning that the delayed action on the good neighbor portions of the District’s SIP revision has impacted air quality and human health in neighboring states. As explained in the NPR, EPA believes that the District’s SIP, as presently approved, contains adequate measures to prevent District sources from interfering with other states’ attainment and/or 5 On April 13, 2015 (80 FR 19538), EPA approved portions of the District’s June 13, 2014 submittal for the 2008 ozone NAAQS addressing the following: CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). In that action, EPA stated it would take later action on the portion of the June 13, 2014 SIP submittal addressing section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA. 6 For clarification, section 110(k)(2) requires EPA to take action 12 months after a SIP revision becomes complete, not 12 months after it is submitted, as the commenter indicates. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:04 Aug 30, 2018 Jkt 244001 maintenance for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Thus, EPA’s late action on the good neighbor portion of the District of Columbia’s June 13, 2014 SIP submittal did not cause any delay in air quality and human health protections as the SIP relies on already in-place regulations and controls that prevent District sources from significantly contributing to nonattainment, or interfering with maintenance, of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in another state. IV. Final Action EPA is approving the portion of the June 13, 2014 District SIP revision addressing prongs 1 and 2 of the interstate transport requirements for section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. On April 13, 2015 (80 FR 19538), EPA approved the following infrastructure elements or portions thereof from the June 13, 2014 submittal: CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). This action approves the remaining portions of the June 13, 2014 SIP revision, which address prongs 1 and 2 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA, also known as the good neighbor provision. EPA did not take action upon these elements in the Agency’s prior SIP approval action, published on April 13, 2015 (80 FR 19538). V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews A. General Requirements Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA 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 CAA. Accordingly, this 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 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); • is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under Executive Order 12866. • 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 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 44499 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 CAA; 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, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). C. Petitions for Judicial Review Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States E:\FR\FM\31AUR1.SGM 31AUR1 44500 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 170 / Friday, August 31, 2018 / Rules and Regulations Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 30, 2018. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action, addressing the District of Columbia’s good neighbor provision for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R08–OAR–2018–0109; FRL–9982– 81—Region 8] Interstate Transport Prongs 1 and 2 for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Standard for Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving portions of State Implementation Plan (SIP) submissions from Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming addressing the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) interstate transport SIP requirements for the 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). These submissions address the requirement that each SIP contain adequate provisions prohibiting air emissions that will have certain adverse air quality effects in other states. The EPA is approving portions of these infrastructure SIPs for the aforementioned states as containing adequate provisions to ensure that air emissions in the states will not significantly contribute to SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:04 Aug 30, 2018 * 6/13/14 * ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Jkt 244001 * 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: * District of Columbia ......... BILLING CODE 6560–50–P § 52.470 ■ * * Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS. [FR Doc. 2018–18855 Filed 8–30–18; 8:45 am] daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with RULES PART 52—APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS State submittal date * On June 4, 2018, the EPA proposed to approve submissions from Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota Sfmt 4700 * Additional explanation * * This action addresses CAA element 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). * I. Background Fmt 4700 * * (e) * * * * 8/31/18, [Insert Federal Register citation]. * Frm 00052 Identification of plan. EPA approval date nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS in any other state. DATES: This rule is effective on October 1, 2018. ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID Number EPA– EPA–R08–OAR–2018– 0109. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through https:// www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in the ‘‘For Further Information Contact’’ section for additional availability information. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Adam Clark, Air Program, U.S. EPA Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202–1129, (303) 312–7104, or clark.adam@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us’’ and ‘‘our’’ means the EPA. PO 00000 2. In § 52.470, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding a new entry for ‘‘Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS’’ after the existing entry for ‘‘Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS’’ to read as follows: ■ 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: Applicable geographic area * Subpart J—District of Columbia Dated: August 21, 2018. Cecil Rodrigues, Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. Name of non-regulatory SIP revision * Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds. * * and Wyoming as meeting the interstate transport requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS (83 FR 25617). An explanation of the CAA requirements, a detailed analysis of the states’ submissions, and the EPA’s rationale for approval of each submission were all provided in the notice of proposed rulemaking, and will not be restated here. The public comment period for this proposed rule ended on July 5, 2018. The EPA received one comment letter from the North Dakota Department of Health (NDDH), one comment letter from the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality (WDEQ) and six anonymous comments on the proposal. The six anonymous comments lacked the required specificity to the Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota or Wyoming SIP submissions and the interstate transport requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). NDDH and WDEQ’s comments are addressed below, while the anonymous comments are not addressed because they fall outside the scope of our proposed action. II. Response to Comments Comment: NDDH stated that the 2010 and 2016 SO2 emissions levels for their state listed in the proposal rule’s ‘‘Table 1—SO2 Emission Trends’’ (83 FR 25618) appeared too high, and that the 2000– 2016 SO2 reduction in the table for North Dakota should be 79% rather than the 44% listed in this Table 1. In addition to this recommended E:\FR\FM\31AUR1.SGM 31AUR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 170 (Friday, August 31, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44498-44500]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-18855]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0701; FRL-9983-11--Region 3]


Air Plan Approval; District of Columbia; State Implementation 
Plan for the Interstate Transport Requirements for the 2008 Ozone 
Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a state 
implementation plan (SIP) revision submitted by the District of 
Columbia (the District) that pertains to the good neighbor and 
interstate transport requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the 
2008 ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). The CAA's 
good neighbor provision requires EPA and states to address the 
interstate transport of air pollution that affects the ability of other 
states to attain and maintain the NAAQS. Specifically, the good 
neighbor provision requires each state in its SIP to prohibit emissions 
that will significantly contribute to nonattainment, or interfere with 
maintenance, of a NAAQS in another state. The District submitted a SIP 
revision on June 13, 2014 that addresses the interstate transport 
requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. On July 5, 2018, EPA published a 
proposed rule for just the good neighbor provision of the District's 
June 13, 2014 submittal. EPA is approving the District's SIP as having 
adequate provisions to meet the requirements of the good neighbor 
provision for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in accordance with section 110 of 
the CAA.

DATES: This final rule is effective on October 1, 2018.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID 
Number EPA-R03-OAR-2014-0701. All documents in the docket are listed on 
the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in the index, 
some information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business 
information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted 
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is 
not placed on the internet and will be publicly available only in hard 
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through 
https://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in 
the For Further Information Contact section for additional availability 
information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Schmitt, (215) 814-5787, or by 
email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    On June 13, 2014, the District Department of the Environment (DDOE) 
on behalf of the District submitted a revision to its SIP to satisfy 
the requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for the 2008 ozone 
NAAQS. On April 13, 2015 (80 FR 19538), EPA approved all parts of the 
District's June 13, 2014 submittal with the exception of the portion of 
the submittal that addressed section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA. 
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), also called the good neighbor provision, 
consists of two prongs that require that a state's \1\ SIP must contain 
adequate provisions to prohibit any source or other type of emissions 
activity within the state from emitting air pollutants that 
``contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with 
maintenance by, any other state with respect to any such national 
primary or secondary ambient air quality standard.'' Under section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA, EPA gives independent significance to 
the matter of nonattainment (prong 1) and to that of maintenance (prong 
2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The term state has the same meaning as provided in CAA 
section 302(d) which specifically includes the District of Columbia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 5, 2018 (83 FR 31350), EPA published a notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPR) for the District of Columbia, approving the portion of 
the June 13, 2014 District SIP revision addressing prongs 1 and 2 of 
the interstate transport requirements for section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ All the other infrastructure SIP elements for the District 
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS were addressed in a separate rulemaking. 
See 80 FR 19538 (April 13, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Summary of SIP Revision and EPA Analysis

    In its June 13, 2014 submittal, the District identified the 
implemented regulations within its SIP that limit nitrogen dioxide 
(NOX) and/or volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from 
District sources.\3\ The District indicates that there are no electric 
generating units (EGUs) \4\ or other large industrial sources of 
NOX emissions within the District. In the submittal, the 
District also included information on non-EGUs and mobile sources and 
listed the SIP-approved measures that help to reduce NOX and 
VOC emissions from non-EGU and mobile sources within the District. In 
the submittal, the District points out that it will continue to rely on 
federal measures to reduce NOX emissions from onroad and 
nonroad engines. The District states its sources are already well 
controlled, and states further reductions beyond the District's current 
SIP measures are not economically feasible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Both NOX and VOCs are precursors to ozone 
formation.
    \4\ The District's last remaining EGUs were decommissioned in 
2012, in part to meet permit requirements incorporated into the 
District's Regional Haze SIP. 77 FR 5191 (February 2, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA evaluated the District's submittal for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, 
considering: Ozone precursor emissions; an analysis of District source 
sectors; and in-place controls and regulations. Due to the District's 
small number of sources and the high cost of further reductions, EPA 
proposed in its July 5, 2018 NPR that the District's SIP, as presently 
approved, contains adequate measures to prevent District sources from 
interfering with maintenance or contributing significantly to 
nonattainment in another state for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The rationale 
for EPA's proposed action was discussed in greater detail in the NPR 
and accompanying technical support document (TSD) and will not be 
restated here.

[[Page 44499]]

    In this rulemaking action, EPA is approving one portion of the 
District's June 13, 2014 submittal--the portion addressing prongs 1 and 
2 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA. EPA previously acted on 
other portions of Delaware's June 13, 2014 SIP submittal for the 2008 
ozone NAAQS.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ On April 13, 2015 (80 FR 19538), EPA approved portions of 
the District's June 13, 2014 submittal for the 2008 ozone NAAQS 
addressing the following: CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), 
(D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), (E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). In 
that action, EPA stated it would take later action on the portion of 
the June 13, 2014 SIP submittal addressing section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Comments and EPA's Response

    EPA received a total of four anonymous comments on the July 5, 2018 
NPR. All of the comments received are included in the docket for this 
action. Three of the comments did not concern any of the specific 
issues raised in the NPR, nor did they address EPA's rationale for the 
proposed approval of the District's submittal. Therefore, EPA is not 
responding to those comments. EPA did receive one comment considered to 
be relevant to this rulemaking action.
    The commenter indicates that EPA was supposed to take action on the 
District's SIP revision within 12 months of receiving the SIP 
submittal. The commenter also indicates the length of time (4 years) it 
took for EPA to approve the SIP revision from the time of its submittal 
and questions if transported pollution could have been eliminated if 
SIP revisions like this one were approved in a timely manner. The 
commenter asks what air quality and human health impacts the delay of 
this action has had on neighboring states.
    EPA acknowledges that it missed the statutory deadline to take 
action on the good neighbor portion of the District's June 13, 2014 SIP 
submittal.\6\ However, at this time, EPA is taking final action on this 
SIP revision, and by doing so it will meet all such outstanding 
obligations under the CAA. The commenter provided no analysis of the 
statutory consequences, if any, from the action. Further, EPA disagrees 
with the commenter's questioning that the delayed action on the good 
neighbor portions of the District's SIP revision has impacted air 
quality and human health in neighboring states. As explained in the 
NPR, EPA believes that the District's SIP, as presently approved, 
contains adequate measures to prevent District sources from interfering 
with other states' attainment and/or maintenance for the 2008 ozone 
NAAQS. Thus, EPA's late action on the good neighbor portion of the 
District of Columbia's June 13, 2014 SIP submittal did not cause any 
delay in air quality and human health protections as the SIP relies on 
already in-place regulations and controls that prevent District sources 
from significantly contributing to nonattainment, or interfering with 
maintenance, of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in another state.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ For clarification, section 110(k)(2) requires EPA to take 
action 12 months after a SIP revision becomes complete, not 12 
months after it is submitted, as the commenter indicates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Final Action

    EPA is approving the portion of the June 13, 2014 District SIP 
revision addressing prongs 1 and 2 of the interstate transport 
requirements for section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA for the 2008 
ozone NAAQS.
    On April 13, 2015 (80 FR 19538), EPA approved the following 
infrastructure elements or portions thereof from the June 13, 2014 
submittal: CAA section 110(a)(2)(A), (B), (C), (D)(i)(II), (D)(ii), 
(E), (F), (G), (H), (J), (K), (L), and (M). This action approves the 
remaining portions of the June 13, 2014 SIP revision, which address 
prongs 1 and 2 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA, also known as 
the good neighbor provision. EPA did not take action upon these 
elements in the Agency's prior SIP approval action, published on April 
13, 2015 (80 FR 19538).

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

A. General Requirements

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA 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 CAA. Accordingly, this 
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 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);
     is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under 
Executive Order 12866.
     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 CAA; 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, this rule does not have tribal implications as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in 
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).

C. Petitions for Judicial Review

    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States

[[Page 44500]]

Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 30, 2018. 
Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this 
final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes 
of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition 
for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the 
effectiveness of such rule or action. This action, addressing the 
District of Columbia's good neighbor provision for the 2008 ozone 
NAAQS, may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its 
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: August 21, 2018.
Cecil Rodrigues,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.

    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart J--District of Columbia

0
2. In Sec.  52.470, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding a 
new entry for ``Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure Requirements for the 
2008 Ozone NAAQS'' after the existing entry for ``Section 110(a)(2) 
Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS'' to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.470  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Name of non-regulatory SIP          Applicable           State                                Additional
             revision                geographic area    submittal date   EPA approval date       explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure   District of                 6/13/14  8/31/18, [Insert     This action
 Requirements for the 2008 Ozone    Columbia.                            Federal Register     addresses CAA
 NAAQS.                                                                  citation].           element
                                                                                              110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
                                                                                              .
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2018-18855 Filed 8-30-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.