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