Air Plan Approval; Rhode Island; Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Requirements for the 2012 PM2.5, 1025-1037 [2019-00658]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Proposed Rules Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); • This action is not expected to be an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because this action is not significant 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 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, Regional haze, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 Dated: December 21, 2018. Alexandra Dunn, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1. [FR Doc. 2019–00657 Filed 1–31–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R01–OAR–2017–0443; FRL–9988–28Region 1] Air Plan Approval; Rhode Island; Infrastructure State Implementation Plan Requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve most elements of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission from Rhode Island that addresses the infrastructure requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the 2012 fine particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). We are also proposing to conditionally approve certain elements of this submittal that relate to requirements for the state’s Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program. In addition, EPA is proposing to disapprove the submission with respect to future SIP revisions. However, a federal implementation plan has been in place for this requirement since 1973. 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 with respect to this NAAQS under the CAA. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before March 4, 2019. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R01– OAR–2017–0443 at https:// www.regulations.gov, or via email to simcox.alison@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from 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. SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 1025 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 https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. Publicly available docket materials are available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region 1 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. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean EPA. Table of Contents I. Background and Purpose A. What Rhode Island SIP submission does this rulemaking address? B. What is the scope of this rulemaking? II. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate this SIP submission? 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 E:\FR\FM\01FEP1.SGM 01FEP1 1026 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Proposed Rules 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 Rhode Island SIP submission does this rulemaking address? This rulemaking addresses a December 6, 2017, submission from the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RI DEM) regarding the infrastructure SIP requirements of the CAA for the 2012 fine particle (PM2.5 1) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The primary, health-based annual standard is set at 12.0 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3) and the 24-hour standard is set at 35 mg/m3. See 78 FR 3086. Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA, states are required to provide infrastructure SIP submissions to ensure that state SIPs provide for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS, including the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. B. What is the scope of this rulemaking? EPA is acting on a SIP submission from RI DEP that addresses the infrastructure requirements of the Act 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 made for the purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) as ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ submissions. Although the term ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ 1 PM 2.5 refers to particulate matter of 2.5 microns or less in diameter, often referred to as ‘‘fine’’ particles. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses the term to distinguish this particular 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 rationale for EPA’s approach to infrastructure SIP requirements can be found in EPA’s May 13, 2014, proposed rulemaking 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 this SIP submission? EPA highlighted the statutory requirement to submit infrastructure SIPs within 3 years of promulgation of a new NAAQS in an October 2, 2007, memorandum 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 memorandum). EPA has issued additional guidance documents and memoranda, including a September 25, 2009, memorandum 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 memorandum), and a September 13, 2013, memorandum PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 entitled ‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)’’ (2013 memorandum).2 With respect to the ‘‘Good Neighbor’’ or interstate transport requirements for infrastructure SIPs, the most recent relevant EPA guidance is 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 EPA is soliciting comment on our evaluation of Rhode Island’s infrastructure SIP submission in this notice of proposed rulemaking. In Rhode Island’s submission, a detailed list of Rhode Island Laws and previously SIP-approved Air Quality Regulations show 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. 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 2 These memoranda and other referenced guidance documents and memoranda are included in the docket for today’s action. 3 See, for example, EPA’s final rule on ‘‘National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Lead.’’ 73 FR 66964, 67034 (November 12, 2008). E:\FR\FM\01FEP1.SGM 01FEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Proposed Rules 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. The Rhode Island submittal cites Rhode Island General Laws (RIGL) and RI Air Pollution Control Regulations (APCR) that the state has adopted to control the emissions of criteria pollutants, including PM2.5, and PM2.5 precursors sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOX). RIGL § 23–23–5(12), ‘‘Powers and duties of the director,’’ authorizes the RI DEM Director ‘‘to make, issue, and amend rules and regulations . . . for the prevention, control, abatement, and limitation of air pollution . . . .’’ In addition, this section authorizes the Director to ‘‘prohibit emissions, discharges and/or releases and . . . require specific control technology.’’ The Rhode Island submittal cites more than a dozen specific rules that the state has adopted to control the emissions of PM2.5 and the PM2.5 precursors SO2 and NOX. A few, with their EPA approval citation are listed here: No. 3— Particulate Emissions from Industrial Processes (81 FR 47708; July 22, 2016); No. 5—Fugitive Dust (46 FR 25446; May 7, 1981); No. 8—Sulfur Content of Fuels (83 FR 39888; August 13, 2018); No. 9— Air Pollution Control Permits (78 FR 63383; October 24, 2013); No. 12— Incinerators (07/22/2016; 81 FR 47708); No. 27—Control of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions (83 FR 39888; August 13, 2018); and No. 45—Rhode Island Diesel Engine Anti-Idling Program (73 FR 16203; March 27, 2008). See 40 CFR 52.2070. EPA proposes that Rhode Island 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 emissions 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 establishment and operation of appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to monitor, compile, and analyze ambient air quality data, and make such 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 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. RI DEM operates an air-quality monitoring network, and EPA approved the state’s most recent Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan for PM2.5 on October 25, 2018.4 Furthermore, RI DEM 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 RI DEM meets 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 all SIP measures and the regulation of construction of new or modified stationary sources to meet new source review (NSR) requirements under prevention of significant deterioration (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. 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 The Rhode Island General Laws provide the Director of RI DEM with the legal authority to enforce air pollution control requirements. Such enforcement authority is provided by RIGL § 23–23– 5, which grants the Director of RI DEM general enforcement power, inspection and investigative authority, and the power to issue administrative orders, among other things. In addition, APCR No. 9, ‘‘Air Pollution Control Permits,’’ sets forth requirements for new and modified major and minor stationary sources. Section 9.3 of the regulation 4 See EPA approval letter located in the docket for this action. PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 1027 contains specific requirements for new and modified minor sources. Section 9.4 of the regulation contains specific new source review requirements applicable to major stationary source or major modifications located in nonattainment areas. Section 9.5 contains specific new source review requirements applicable to major stationary sources or major modifications located in attainment or unclassifiable areas (PSD). EPA proposes that Rhode Island 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 major modifications for pollutants where the area in which the source is located is in attainment of, or is unclassifiable with regard to, the relevant NAAQS. RI DEM’s EPAapproved PSD rules, contained at APCR No. 9, contain provisions that address most applicable infrastructure SIP requirements related to all regulated NSR pollutants. EPA’s ‘‘Final Rule to Implement the 8Hour 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’’ (Phase 2 Rule) was published on November 29, 2005 (70 FR 71612). Among other requirements, the Phase 2 Rule obligated states to revise their PSD programs to explicitly identify NOX as a precursor to ozone. See 70 FR 71679. This requirement is codified in 40 CFR 51.166, and requires that states submit SIP revisions incorporating the requirements of the rule, including provisions that would treat NOX as a precursor to ozone provisions. These SIP revisions were to have been submitted to EPA by states by June 15, 2007. See 70 FR 71683. Rhode Island has already incorporated several of the changes required by the Phase 2 Rule but has not made the necessary change to the definition of ‘‘major stationary source’’ identifying NOX as a precursor to ozone. The December 2017 infrastructure submittal states that Rhode Island is amending APCR No. 9 to comply with 40 CFR 51.166 regarding identifying NOX as a precursor to ozone, and on March 26, 2018, Rhode Island submitted a SIP revision to address this deficiency. EPA is currently reviewing this submittal to verify that it satisfies this E:\FR\FM\01FEP1.SGM 01FEP1 1028 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Proposed Rules requirement. Therefore, we are proposing to conditionally approve section 110(a)(2)(C) with respect to this requirement of the Phase 2 Rule for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. On May 16, 2008 (73 FR 28321), EPA issued the Final Rule on the ‘‘Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)’’ (2008 NSR Rule). 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. One of these requirements is for NSR permits to address pollutants responsible for the secondary formation of PM2.5, otherwise known as precursors. In the 2008 rule, EPA identified precursors to PM2.5 for the PSD program to be SO2 and NOX (unless the state demonstrates to the Administrator’s satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that NOX emissions in an area are not a significant contributor to that area’s ambient PM2.5 concentrations). The 2008 NSR Rule also specifies that Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) are not considered to be precursors to PM2.5 in the PSD program unless the state demonstrates to the Administrator’s satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that emissions of VOCs in an area are significant contributors to that area’s ambient PM2.5 concentrations. The explicit references to SO2, NOX, and VOCs as they pertain to secondary PM2.5 formation are codified at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i)(b) and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)(i)(b). As part of identifying pollutants that are 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. Specifically, 40 CFR 51.166(b)(23)(i) and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(23)(i) define ‘‘significant’’ for PM2.5 to mean the following emissions rates: 10 tons per year (tpy) of direct PM2.5; 40 tpy of SO2; and 40 tpy of NOX (unless the state demonstrates to the Administrator’s satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that NOX emissions in an area are not a significant contributor to that area’s ambient PM2.5 concentrations). The deadline for states to submit SIP revisions to their PSD programs incorporating these changes was May 16, 2011. See 73 FR 28321 at 28341.5 5 EPA notes that on January 4, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (DC Cir.), held that EPA should have issued the 2008 NSR Rule in accordance with the CAA’s requirements for PM10 nonattainment areas (Title I, VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 On January 18, 2011, Rhode Island submitted revisions to its PSD program incorporating the necessary changes obligated by the 2008 NSR Rule, with respect to provisions that explicitly identify precursors to PM2.5. EPA approved Rhode Island’s 2011 SIP revision on April 21, 2015 (80 FR 22106). The 2008 NSR Rule did not require states to immediately account for gases that could condense to form particulate matter, known as condensables, in PM2.5 and PM10 emission limits in NSR permits. Instead, EPA determined that states had 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 after January 1, 2011. See 73 FR 28321 at 28334. This requirement is codified in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i)(a) and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)(i)(a). Revisions to states’ PSD programs incorporating the inclusion of condensables were required be submitted to EPA by May 16, 2011 (See 73 FR 28321 at 28341). Rhode Island’s SIP-approved PSD program does not contain the exact language in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i)(a). However, EPA has previously determined that Rhode Island’s SIPapproved regulations define PM2.5 and PM10 such that the state’s PSD program adequately accounts for the condensable fraction of PM2.5 and PM10. See 78 FR 63383 at 63386 (October 24, 2013). Therefore, we are proposing that Rhode Island meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS regarding the requirements of the 2008 NSR Rule. part D, subpart 4), and not the general requirements for nonattainment areas under subpart 1 (Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, No. 08–1250). As the subpart 4 provisions apply only to nonattainment areas, EPA does not consider the portions of the 2008 rule that address requirements for PM2.5 attainment and unclassifiable areas to be affected by the court’s opinion. Moreover, EPA does not anticipate the need to revise any PSD requirements promulgated by the 2008 NSR rule in order to comply with the court’s decision. Accordingly, EPA’s action on Rhode Island’s infrastructure SIP in regard to Elements (C), D(i)(II), or J with respect to the PSD requirements promulgated by the 2008 implementation rule does not conflict with the court’s opinion. The Court’s decision with respect to the nonattainment NSR requirements promulgated by the 2008 implementation rule also does not affect EPA’s action on the present infrastructure action. EPA interprets the CAA to exclude nonattainment area requirements, including requirements associated with a nonattainment NSR program, from infrastructure SIP submissions due three years after adoption or revision of a NAAQS. Instead, these elements are typically referred to as nonattainment SIP or attainment plan elements, which would be due by the dates statutorily prescribed under subpart 2 through 5 under part D, extending as far as 10 years following designations for some elements. PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 On October 20, 2010 (75 FR 64864), EPA issued the final rule on the ‘‘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). This rule established several components for making PSD permitting determinations for PM2.5, including a system of ‘‘increments,’’ which is the mechanism used to estimate significant deterioration of ambient air quality for a pollutant. These increments are codified in 40 CFR 51.166(c) and 40 CFR 52.21(c). The 2010 NSR Rule also established a new ‘‘major source baseline date’’ for PM2.5 as October 20, 2010, and a new trigger date for PM2.5 of October 20, 2011, in the definition of ‘‘minor source baseline date.’’ These revisions are codified in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(14)(i)(c) and (b)(14)(ii)(c), and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(14)(i)(c) and (b)(14)(ii)(c). Lastly, the 2010 NSR Rule revised the definition of ‘‘baseline area’’ to include a level of significance (SIL) of 0.3 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3), annual average, for PM2.5. This change is codified in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(15)(i) and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(15)(i). The December 2017 infrastructure submittal states that Rhode Island is amending APCR No. 9 to comply with the 2010 NSR Rule, and Rhode Island subsequently submitted the March 26, 2018 SIP revision to address these additional elements of PM2.5 implementation in PSD permitting. EPA is currently reviewing the March 2018 submittal to verify that it satisfies the requirements of the 2010 NSR Rule. Therefore, we are proposing to conditionally approve this part of sub-element 2 of section 110(a)(2)(C) relating to requirements for state NSR regulations outlined within our 2010 NSR regulation for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. With respect to Elements (C) and (J), EPA interprets the Clean Air Act to require each state to make an infrastructure SIP submission for a new or revised NAAQS that demonstrates that the air agency has a complete PSD permitting program meeting the current requirements for all regulated NSR pollutants. The requirements of Element (D)(i)(II) may also be satisfied by demonstrating the air agency has a complete PSD permitting program correctly addressing all regulated NSR pollutants. Rhode Island has shown that it currently has a PSD program in place that covers all regulated NSR pollutants, including GHGs, with the exception of the deficiencies described elsewhere in this document. E:\FR\FM\01FEP1.SGM 01FEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Proposed Rules 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, 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 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. Instead, EPA is only evaluating such submissions to assure that the state’s program addresses GHGs consistent with both the court decision, and the revisions to PSD regulations that EPA has completed at this time. At present, EPA has determined that Rhode Island’s SIP is sufficient to satisfy Elements (C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) with respect to GHGs. This is because the PSD permitting program previously approved by EPA into the SIP continues to require that PSD permits issued to ‘‘anyway sources’’ contain limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of BACT. Rhode Island has, however, removed step 2 from its PSD permitting program and has submitted these changes to EPA in its March 26, 2018 SIP submittal, which EPA is reviewing to verify that it is consistent with the D.C. Circuit’s vacated provisions at 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v). Nevertheless, the presence of these provisions in the previously-approved plan does not render the infrastructure SIP submission inadequate to satisfy Elements (C), (D)(i)(II), and (J). The SIP contains the PSD requirements for applying the BACT requirement to GHG emissions from ‘‘anyway sources’’ that are necessary at this time. The application of those requirements is not impeded by the presence of other previously-approved provisions regarding the permitting of Step 2 sources. Accordingly, the Supreme Court decision and subsequent D.C. Circuit judgment do not prevent EPA’s approval of Rhode Island’s infrastructure SIP as to the requirements of Elements (C), (as well as sub-elements (D)(i)(II), and (J)(iii)). For the purposes of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS infrastructure SIPs, EPA reiterates that NSR Reform is not in the scope of these actions. In summary, we are proposing to approve the majority of Rhode Island’s submittal for this sub-element with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, but to conditionally approve the submittal regarding the identification of NOX as a precursor to ozone in the definition of major stationary source and regarding the revisions required by the 2010 NSR Rule, as described above. PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 1029 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 regulates emissions of the relevant NAAQS pollutants. EPA last approved Rhode Island’s minor NSR program, on May 7, 1981 (46 FR 25446) as well as updates to that program. Since this date, Rhode Island and EPA have relied on the existing minor NSR program to ensure that new and modified sources not captured by the major NSR permitting programs do not interfere with attainment and maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. We are proposing to find that Rhode Island meets 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 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. 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 E:\FR\FM\01FEP1.SGM 01FEP1 1030 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Proposed Rules 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 Rhode Island’s December 6, 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. 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 VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 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 420030064), 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 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 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 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 Rhode Island, as well as additional analysis conducted by EPA during review of Rhode Island’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.6 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 through 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. Rhode Island’s Submission for Prongs 1 and 2 On December 6, 2017, RI DEM submitted an infrastructure SIP for the 6 See 2015 ozone NAAQS RIA at: www3.epa.gov/ ttnecas1/docs/20151001ria.pdf. E:\FR\FM\01FEP1.SGM 01FEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Proposed Rules 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS that addressed prongs 1 and 2. The state’s SIP submission 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 December 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 Rhode Island will not significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in any other state. Analysis of Rhode Island’s Submission for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS As noted above, 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 420030064), located in Allegheny County. 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 Rhode Island’s compliance with the Good Neighbor provision for the 2012 standard. This CSAPR modeling showed that Rhode Island had no discernable impact (0.000 mg/m3) on the Liberty monitor in Allegheny County, which is the only out-of-state monitor that may be a nonattainment or maintenance receptor in 2021. Although EPA has not proposed a specific threshold for evaluating the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, EPA notes that Rhode Island’s impact on the Liberty monitor is far below the threshold of 1% for the annual PM2.5 VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 NAAQS (i.e., 0.12 mg/m3) that EPA previously used to evaluate the contribution of upwind states to downwind air-quality monitors. (A spreadsheet showing CSAPR contributions for ozone and PM2.5 is included in docket EPA–HQ–OAR– 2009–0491–4228.) Therefore, even if the Liberty monitor were considered a receptor for purposes of transport, the EPA proposes to conclude that Rhode Island 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 mg/m3 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 through 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, 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. PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 1031 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.7 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 and final approval of the Ohio Infrastructure SIP (82 FR 57689, December 7, 2017and 83 FR 4845, February 2, 2018). 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, as mentioned above, EPA’s analysis for the 2011 CSAPR rulemaking with respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS determined that Rhode Island’s impact to all these downwind receptors would be well below the 1% contribution threshold for this NAAQS. That conclusion informs the analysis of Rhode Island’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 2007 through 2009 period to the 2013 through 2015 period, EPA concludes that it is highly unlikely that Rhode Island significantly 7 www.achd.net/air/pubs/SIPs/SO2_2010_ NAAQS_SIP_9-14-2017.pdf. E:\FR\FM\01FEP1.SGM 01FEP1 1032 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Proposed Rules contributes to nonattainment or interferes with maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in areas with data-quality issues.8 Information in Rhode Island’s December 2017 SIP submission corroborates EPA’s proposed conclusion that Rhode Island’s SIP meets its Good Neighbor obligations. The state’s technical analysis in that submission includes 24-hour and annual PM2.5 values for 2013 through 2015 for the six official monitors in Rhode Island as well as for monitors in the neighboring states of Massachusetts and Connecticut, a list of Rhode Island’s 10 largest point sources of PM2.5, and results of EPA’s CSAPR modeling. As mentioned above, the state’s PM2.5 design values for all ambient monitors have been well below the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS since 2007 through 2009. In addition, the 24-hour and annual design values for all monitors in the neighboring states of Massachusetts and Connecticut also have been below the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS since 2007 through 2009. At specific monitors in Rhode Island, the highest 24-hour and annual mean values satisfying minimum data completion criteria were 49 mg/m3 in 1999 and 14.9 mg/m3 in 2000, respectively, at a monitor in Providence.9 However, since 2004, all monitors in the state have been below the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. Second, Rhode Island’s sources are well-controlled. Rhode Island’s 2017 submission indicates that the state has many SIP-approved regulations and programs that limit emissions of PM2.5 and the PM2.5 precursors SO2 and NOX.10 Among others, these regulations include APCR No. 3 ‘‘Particulate Emissions from Industrial Processes’’ (81 FR 47708; July 22, 2016); APCR No. 8 ‘‘Sulfur Content of Fuels’’ (83 FR 39888; August 13, 2018); APCR No. 9 ‘‘Air Pollution Control Permits’’ (78 FR 63383; October 24, 2013); APCR No. 13 ‘‘Particulate Emissions from Fossil Fuel Fired Steam or Hot Water Generating Units’’ (48 FR 13026; March 29, 1983); and APCR No. 27 ‘‘Control of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions’’ (83 FR 39888; August 13, 2018). It should also be noted that Rhode Island is not in the CSAPR program because EPA analyses show that the 8 Rhode Island’s PM2.5 design values for all ambient monitors are available in the Design Value Reports at https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/ air-trends/air-quality-design-values_.html. 9 24-hour and annual PM 2.5 monitor values for individual monitoring sites throughout Rhode Island are available at https://www.epa.gov/ outdoor-air-quality-data/monitor-values-report. 10 SO and NO contribute to the formation of 2 X PM2.5. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 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 Rhode Island’s conclusions and proposes to determine that Rhode Island will not significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in any other state. Therefore, EPA proposes to approve the December 2017 infrastructure SIP submission from Rhode Island with regard to 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. One way for a state to meet this requirement, specifically with respect to in-state sources and pollutants that are subject to PSD permitting, is through a comprehensive PSD permitting program that applies to all regulated NSR pollutants and that satisfies the requirements of EPA’s PSD implementation rules. 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 approved Rhode Island’s latest NNSR regulations on April 21, 2015 (80 FR 22106). These regulations contain provisions for how the state must treat and control sources in nonattainment areas, consistent with 40 CFR 51.165, or appendix S to 40 CFR 51. As noted above and in Element (C), Rhode Island’s PSD program does not fully satisfy the requirements of EPA’s PSD implementation rules. As stated previously, Rhode Island submitted, on March 26, 2018, a SIP revision to address these deficiencies, and EPA is reviewing this submittal to verify that it satisfies the required provisions. Consequently, we are proposing to conditionally approve Rhode Island’s infrastructure SIP submission for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS related to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) Prong 3 for the reasons discussed under Element (C). Sub-Element 3: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)—Visibility Protection (Prong 4) Regarding the applicable requirements for visibility protection of PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 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, 2011, and 2013 memoranda 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. Rhode Island’s Regional Haze SIP was approved by EPA on May 22, 2012 (77 FR 30214). Accordingly, EPA proposes that Rhode Island meets the 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. EPA approved Rhode Island’s PSD program, as well as updates to that program, with the most recent approval occurring on April 21, 2015 (80 FR 22106), which includes a provision requiring notice to neighboring states of RI DEM’s intention to either issue a draft PSD permit or deny a permit application. See APCR No. 9, section 9.12.3(e). Therefore, we propose to approve Rhode Island’s compliance with the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 126(a) with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. Rhode Island has no obligations under any other provision of section 126. 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. Rhode Island does not have any pending E:\FR\FM\01FEP1.SGM 01FEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Proposed Rules obligations under section 115 for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. Therefore, EPA is proposing that Rhode Island meets the applicable infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) related to section 115 of the CAA (international pollution abatement) 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 retains 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 Rhode Island 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 Rhode Island, through its infrastructure SIP submittals, has documented that its air agency has the requisite authority and resources to carry out its SIP obligations. Rhode Island cites to RIGL § 23–23–5, which provides the Director of DEM with the legal authority to enforce air pollution control requirements. Additionally, this statute provides the Director with the authority to assess preconstruction permit fees and annual operating permit fees from air emissions sources and establishes a general revenue reserve account within the general fund to finance the state clean air programs. RI DEM further cites APCR No. 28, ‘‘Operating Permit Fees,’’ which requires that major sources pay annual operating permit fees. Finally, Section III of the 1972 RI SIP specifies RI DEM’s legal authority to implement SIP measures, and Section VII of the 1972 SIP describes the resources and manpower estimates for RI DEM. EPA proposes that Rhode Island meets the infrastructure SIP requirements of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(E) with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 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 Rhode Island, no board or body approves permits or enforcement orders; these are approved by the Director of RI DEM. Thus, with respect to this subelement, Rhode Island is subject only to the requirements of paragraph (a)(2) of section 128 of the CAA (regarding conflicts of interest). The Rhode Island Code of Ethics (RIGL § 36–14) applies to state employees and public officials and requires disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. It also provides that ‘‘No person subject to this Code of Ethics shall have any interest, financial or otherwise, direct or indirect, or engage in any business, employment, transaction, or professional activity, or incur any obligation of any nature, which is in substantial conflict with the proper discharge of his or her duties or employment in the public interest and of his or her responsibilities.’’ See RIGL § 36–14–5(a). RIGL §§ 36–14–1 through –7 were approved by EPA into the Rhode Island SIP on April 20, 2016 (81 FR 23175). Consequently, EPA proposes that Rhode Island 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 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 1033 by each state agency with any emission limitations or standards. Lastly, the reports shall be available at reasonable times for public inspection. Rhode Island’s infrastructure submittal references existing state laws and regulations previously approved by EPA that require sources to monitor emissions and submit reports and that provide for the correlation of emissions data with emission limitations and for the public availability of emission data. For example, Rhode Island’s submittal references RIGL § 23–23–5(16), which authorizes RI DEM to require a source to install, maintain, and use air pollution emission monitoring devices and to submit periodic reports on the nature and amounts of emissions. In addition, under RIGL § 23–23–13 and the Rhode Island public records act, see RIGL Title 38, emissions data are made available to the public and are not protected as ‘‘trade secret or proprietary information.’’ With respect to state regulations, APCR No. 9, ‘‘Air Pollution Control Permits,’’ requires emissions testing of permitted processes within 180 days of full operation and specifies that preconstruction permits issued contain an emissions testing section. In addition, APCR No. 6, ‘‘Continuous Emission Monitors,’’ requires certain sources to install, calibrate, operate, and maintain a continuous emission monitoring system and to report certain emissions-related data to RI DEM. Finally, APCR No. 14, ‘‘Record Keeping and Reporting,’’ requires emission sources to report emissions and other data to RI DEM annually, and provides that information in certain reports obtained pursuant to APCR No. 14 ‘‘will be correlated with applicable emission and other limitations and will be available for public inspection.’’ Therefore, EPA proposes that Rhode Island meets the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F) with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. G. Section 110(a)(2)(G)—Emergency Powers This section requires that a plan provide for state authority comparable 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 E:\FR\FM\01FEP1.SGM 01FEP1 1034 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Proposed Rules health or welfare or the environment’’ in the event that ‘‘it is not practicable to assure prompt protection . . . by commencement of such civil action.’’ We propose to find that a combination of state statutes and regulations discussed in RI DEM’s submittal provides for authority comparable to that in CAA section 303. The statutes and regulations are: RIGL §§ 10–20, 23– 23–16, 23–23.1–5, 23–23.1–7, 23–23.1– 8, 42–17.1–2, and APCR No. 7. In our proposal to approve this requirement for Rhode Island’s infrastructure SIP submissions for the 1997 PM2.5, 2006 PM2.5, 2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS (81 FR 10168; February 29, 2016), we explained how this combination of authorities provides Rhode Island with authority comparable to that in CAA § 303. See 81 FR 10168, 10177 (February 29, 2016). These statutes and the regulation apply in the same manner to particulate matter emissions as they do to emissions of the other NAAQS pollutants. Accordingly, for the reasons contained in our proposal to approve this element for the 1997 PM2.5, 2006 PM2.5, 2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 NO2, and 2010 SO2 infrastructure SIPs, we propose to find that this combination of state statutes and regulations provide for authority comparable to that in CAA § 303 for the 2012 PM2.5 infrastructure SIP. Section 110(a)(2)(G) also requires a state to submit for EPA approval a contingency plan (also known as an emergency episode plan) to implement the air agency’s emergency episode authority for any Air Quality Control Region (AQCR) within the state that is classified as Priority I, IA, or II. See 40 CFR 51.152(c). A contingency plan is not required if the entire state is classified as Priority III for a particular pollutant. Id. There is only one AQCR in Rhode Island—the Metropolitan Providence Interstate AQCR—and Rhode Island’s portion thereof is classified as a Priority I area for PM, SOX, carbon monoxide, and ozone and as a Priority III area for NO2. See 40 CFR 52.2071. 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 promulgated regulations that provide the ambient levels to classify different priority levels for the 2012 standard (or any PM2.5 NAAQS). See 40 CFR 51.150. Consequently, Rhode Island’s SIP is not required to contain an emergency contingency plan meeting the specific VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 requirements of 40 CFR 51.151 and 51.152 with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. Although PM2.5 is not explicitly included in the contingency plan requirements of 40 CFR subpart H, the EPA 2009 memorandum recommends in the context of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS 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 Rhode Island’s certified air-quality data in EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS) indicates that the highest 24-hour PM2.5 concentration since 2006 (i.e., data through 2017) is 92.5 mg/m3, which occurred in 2015 at a monitor in Providence. Although not expected, if PM2.5 conditions were to change, Rhode Island does have general authority, as noted previously (81 FR 10168; February 29, 2016), to order a source to cease operations if it is determined that emissions from the source pose an immediate danger, or unreasonable and emergency risk, to public health or safety or to the environment. In addition, Rhode Island posts near realtime air-quality data, air-quality predictions and historical data on the RI DEM website. RI DEM’s predictions are also displayed daily in the Providence Journal. Alerts are sent by email to many affected parties, including emissions sources, concerned individuals, schools, health and environmental agencies and the media. Alerts include information about the health implications of elevated pollutant levels and list actions to reduce emissions. Furthermore, daily forecasted ozone and fine-particle levels are made available on the internet through the EPA AirNow and EnviroFlash systems. Information about these two systems is available on EPA’s website at www.airnow.gov. Notices are sent to EnviroFlash participants when levels are forecast to exceed the current 8-hour ozone or 24-hour PM2.5 standard. EPA proposes that Rhode Island meets the applicable infrastructure SIP requirements for section 110(a)(2)(G) with respect to 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 in response to: Changes in the NAAQS, availability of improved methods for attaining the NAAQS, or an EPA finding that the SIP is substantially inadequate. In 1973, it was determined that Rhode Island’s original SIP did not fully satisfy section 110(a)(2)(H) and EPA promulgated federal regulations to address the gap in the SIP. See 40 CFR 52.2080. Since PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Rhode Island’s December 6, 2017, submittal does not address the gap in the SIP that led to a disapproval in 1973, EPA proposes to find that Rhode Island has not met applicable infrastructure SIP requirements for element (H) with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA proposes to disapprove the state’s submittal for element (H). No further action by EPA or the state is required, however, because remedying federal regulations are already in place. Moreover, mandatory sanctions under CAA section 179 are inapplicable, because the submittal is not required under CAA title I part D nor in response to a SIP call under CAA section 110(k)(5). 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 the CAA (relating to consultation), section 127 of the CAA (relating to public notification), and part C of subchapter I of the CAA (relating to PSD and visibility protection). The evaluation of the submission from Rhode Island 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. Rhode Island General Law § 23–23–5, authorizes the RI DEM Director ‘‘[t]o advise, consult, and cooperate with the cities and towns and other agencies of the state, federal government, and other states and interstate agencies, and with effective groups in industries in furthering the purposes of this chapter.’’ EPA approved this statute into Rhode Island’s SIP on April 20, 2016. See 81 FR 23175. In addition, APCR No. 9, E:\FR\FM\01FEP1.SGM 01FEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Proposed Rules which is in Rhode Island’s SIP, see 78 FR 63383 (October 24, 2013), directs RI DEM to notify relevant municipal officials and FLMs, among others, of tentative determinations by RI DEM with respect to permit applications for major stationary sources and major modifications. EPA proposes that Rhode Island 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. Rhode Island’s APCR No. 10, ‘‘Air Pollution Episodes,’’ specifies criteria for, and measures to be implemented during, air pollution alerts, warnings, and episodes. In addition, the RI DEM website includes near real-time air quality data, air quality predictions and a record of historical data. DEM’s predictions are also displayed daily in the Providence Journal, a newspaper with statewide circulation. Alerts are sent by email to many affected parties, including emissions sources, concerned individuals, schools, health and environmental agencies and the media. Alerts include information about the health implications of elevated pollutant levels and list actions to reduce emissions. In addition, AQS summaries of the year’s air-qualitymonitoring results are issued annually. The summaries are sent to a mailing list of interested parties and posted on the RI DEM website. Rhode Island is also an active partner in EPA’s AirNow and EnviroFlash air-quality alert programs. EPA proposes that Rhode Island meets 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 State plans must meet applicable requirements of part C of the CAA related to PSD. Rhode Island’s PSD program in the context of infrastructure SIPs has already been discussed in the paragraphs addressing sections 110(a)(2)(C) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) and, as we have noted, does not fully satisfy the requirements of EPA’s PSD implementation rules. However, the December 2017 infrastructure submittal states that Rhode Island is amending APCR No. 9 to comply with 40 CFR VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 51.166 regarding PM2.5 emissions and identifying NOX as a precursor to ozone. As stated previously, Rhode Island submitted, on March 26, 2018, a SIP to address these deficiencies, which EPA is currently reviewing to verify that it satisfies the required provisions. Consequently, we are proposing to conditionally approve the PSD subelement of section 110(a)(2)(J) for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, consistent with the actions we are proposing for sections 110(a)(2)(C) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Sub-Element 4: Visibility Protection Regarding 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 memorandum, 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 Rhode Island meets 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 the Guideline on Air Quality Models (‘‘Guideline’’) at 40 CFR part 51, Appendix W, for predicting the effects of emissions of criteria pollutants on ambient air quality. The Guideline is used by EPA, other federal, state, territorial, local, and tribal air quality agencies, and industry to prepare and review new or modified source permits, SIP submittals or revisions, conformity, and other air quality assessments required under the CAA and EPA regulations. EPA has interpreted section 110(a)(2)(K) to require 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 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 1035 modeling data to EPA upon request. See 2013 Memorandum at 55. Rhode Island state law implicitly authorizes RI DEM to perform air quality modeling and to provide such modeling data to EPA upon request. See RIGL §§ 23–23–2, 23–23–5. In addition, Rhode Island APCR No. 9, ‘‘Air Pollution Control Permits,’’ requires permit applicants to submit air quality modeling based on applicable air quality models, data bases, and other requirements specified in the Guideline in Appendix W to demonstrate impacts of new and modified major sources. The modeling data are sent to EPA along with the draft major permit. The state also collaborates with the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) and the Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association and EPA to perform large-scale urban airshed modeling for ozone and PM, if necessary. EPA proposes that Rhode Island meets 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. Section 23–23–5 of the RIGL provides RI DEM with the authority to collect fees for preconstruction permits and operating permits for air emissions sources. In addition, RI DEM’s ‘‘Rules and Regulations Governing the Establishment of Various Fees’’ sets forth permit fee requirements for air emissions sources and the legal authority to collect those fees. These rules and regulations are promulgated pursuant to RIGL Chapter 23–23 Air Pollution, and Chapter 42–35, Administrative Procedures. Rhode Island’s infrastructure SIP submittal also refers to its regulations implementing its operating permit program pursuant to 40 CFR part 70. Rhode Island’s title V permitting program, APCR No. 28, ‘‘Operating Permit Fees,’’ requires major sources to pay annual operating permit fees. EPA’s full approval of Rhode Island’s title V program (APCR No. 28) became effective on November 30, 2001. See 66 FR 49839 (October 1, 2001). To gain this approval, Rhode Island demonstrated the ability to collect sufficient fees to run the program. The fees collected from title V sources are above the presumptive minimum in accordance with 40 CFR 70.9(b)(2)(i). EPA proposes that Rhode Island meets the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(L) for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. E:\FR\FM\01FEP1.SGM 01FEP1 1036 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Proposed Rules 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. Rhode Island’s infrastructure submittals reference RIGL § 23–23–5, which provides for consultation with affected local political subdivisions and authorizes the RI DEM Director ‘‘to advise, consult, and cooperate with the cities and towns and other agencies of the state . . . and other states and interstate agencies . . . in furthering the purposes of’’ the state Clean Air Act (i.e., RIGL chapter 23–23). EPA proposes that Rhode Island meets 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 Rhode Island on December 6, 2017, for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, with the exception of certain aspects relating to the state’s PSD program, including 110(a)(2)(C)2, (D)2, and (J)3, which we are proposing to conditionally approve, and section 110(a)(2)(H), which we are proposing to disapprove. In regard to section (H), no further action by EPA or the state is required, however, since federal regulations are already in place that address the gap in the state’s submittal with respect to element (H). Specifically, EPA’s proposed action regarding each infrastructure SIP requirement is contained in Table 1 below. TABLE 1—PROPOSED ACTION ON RHODE ISLAND’S INFRASTRUCTURE SIP SUBMITTAL FOR THE 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS Element (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 D + A A A* + A A A In the above table, the key is as follows: A ..................... A* .................... D ..................... + ...................... NA ................... Approve. Approve but conditionally approve aspect of PSD program relating to the identification of NOX as a precursor of ozone and the revisions required by the 2010 NSR rule. Disapprove, but no further action required because federal regulations already in place. Not germane to infrastructure SIPs. Not applicable. As noted in Table 1, we are proposing to conditionally approve portions of Rhode Island’s infrastructure SIP submittals pertaining to the state’s PSD program for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. Under section 110(k)(4) of the Act, EPA may conditionally approve a plan based on a commitment from the State to adopt specific enforceable measures by a date certain, but not later than 1 year from the date of approval. If EPA conditionally approves the commitment in a final rulemaking action, the State VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 must meet its commitment to submit an update to its PSD program that fully remedies the deficiencies mentioned above under element (C). If the State fails to do so, this action will become a disapproval one year from the date of final approval. EPA will notify the State by letter that this action has occurred. At that time, this commitment will no longer be a part of the approved Rhode Island SIP. EPA subsequently will publish a document in the Federal Register notifying the public that the PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 conditional approval automatically converted to a disapproval. If the State meets its commitment, within the applicable time frame, the conditionally approved submission will remain a part of the SIP until EPA takes final action approving or disapproving the new submittal. If EPA disapproves the new submittal, the conditionally approved infrastructure SIP elements for all affected pollutants will be disapproved. In addition, a final disapproval triggers the Federal Implementation Plan E:\FR\FM\01FEP1.SGM 01FEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 22 / Friday, February 1, 2019 / Proposed Rules requirement under section 110(c). If EPA approves the new submittal, the PSD program and relevant infrastructure SIP elements will be fully approved and replace the conditionally approved program in the SIP. 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 Orders12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011); • This action is not expected to be an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action because this action is not significant 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); VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:27 Jan 31, 2019 Jkt 247001 • 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: December 19, 2018. Alexandra Dunn, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1. [FR Doc. 2019–00658 Filed 1–31–19; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R04–OAR–2018–0064; FRL–9988–81– Region 4] Air Plan Approval; Georgia: Permit Exemption for Fire Fighting Equipment Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or Agency) is proposing to approve two revisions to the Georgia State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted by the State of Georgia, through the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (Georgia EPD), with two letters dated November 13, 2017, and July 31, 2018. Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve changes that SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 1037 revise existing exemptions for firefighting equipment. EPA is proposing to approve this SIP revision because the Agency believes that it is consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 4, 2019. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– OAR–2018–0064 at http:// 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 http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Andres Febres, 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. The telephone number is (404) 562–8966. Mr. Febres can also be reached via electronic mail at febres-martinez.andres@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. What action is the Agency proposing? Through a letter dated November 13, 2017, Georgia EPD submitted a SIP revision for EPA’s approval that included several miscellaneous rule amendments.1 Specifically, the November 13, 2017, SIP revision included changes to Georgia’s Air Quality Control Rule 391–3–1–.01— ‘‘Definitions,’’ Rule 391–3–1–.02(4)— ‘‘Ambient Air Standards,’’ Rule 391–3– 1–.02(7)—‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality,’’ Rule 391– 3–1–.03(6)—‘‘Exemptions,’’ Rule 391–3– 1 EPA notes that the Agency received this submittal on November 29, 2017. E:\FR\FM\01FEP1.SGM 01FEP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 22 (Friday, February 1, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 1025-1037]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-00658]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2017-0443; FRL-9988-28-Region 1]


Air Plan Approval; Rhode Island; 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 most elements of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission 
from Rhode Island that addresses the infrastructure requirements of the 
Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the 2012 fine particle 
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). We 
are also proposing to conditionally approve certain elements of this 
submittal that relate to requirements for the state's Prevention of 
Significant Deterioration (PSD) program. In addition, EPA is proposing 
to disapprove the submission with respect to future SIP revisions. 
However, a federal implementation plan has been in place for this 
requirement since 1973. 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 
with respect to this NAAQS under the CAA.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before March 4, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-
OAR-2017-0443 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to 
simcox.alison@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, 
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, 
comments cannot be edited or removed from 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 https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. Publicly 
available docket materials are available at https://www.regulations.gov 
or at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region 1 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.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background and Purpose
    A. What Rhode Island SIP submission does this rulemaking 
address?
    B. What is the scope of this rulemaking?
II. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate this SIP submission?
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

[[Page 1026]]

    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 Rhode Island SIP submission does this rulemaking address?

    This rulemaking addresses a December 6, 2017, submission from the 
Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RI DEM) regarding 
the infrastructure SIP requirements of the CAA for the 2012 fine 
particle (PM2.5 \1\) National Ambient Air Quality Standard 
(NAAQS). The primary, health-based annual standard is set at 12.0 
micrograms per cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\) and the 24-hour standard is 
set at 35 [micro]g/m\3\. See 78 FR 3086. Under sections 110(a)(1) and 
(2) of the CAA, states are required to provide infrastructure SIP 
submissions to ensure that state 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. What is the scope of this rulemaking?

    EPA is acting on a SIP submission from RI DEP that addresses the 
infrastructure requirements of the Act 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 made for the purpose of 
satisfying 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 
particular 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 rulemaking 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 this SIP submission?

    EPA highlighted the statutory requirement to submit infrastructure 
SIPs within 3 years of promulgation of a new NAAQS in an October 2, 
2007, memorandum 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 
memorandum). EPA has issued additional guidance documents and 
memoranda, including a September 25, 2009, memorandum 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 memorandum), and a September 13, 
2013, memorandum entitled ``Guidance on Infrastructure State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 
110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)'' (2013 memorandum).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ These memoranda and other referenced guidance documents and 
memoranda are included in the docket for today's action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the ``Good Neighbor'' or interstate transport 
requirements for infrastructure SIPs, the most recent relevant EPA 
guidance is 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

    EPA is soliciting comment on our evaluation of Rhode Island's 
infrastructure SIP submission in this notice of proposed rulemaking. In 
Rhode Island's submission, a detailed list of Rhode Island Laws and 
previously SIP-approved Air Quality Regulations show 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.

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

[[Page 1027]]

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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Rhode Island submittal cites Rhode Island General Laws (RIGL) 
and RI Air Pollution Control Regulations (APCR) that the state has 
adopted to control the emissions of criteria pollutants, including 
PM2.5, and PM2.5 precursors sulfur dioxide 
(SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOX).
    RIGL Sec.  23-23-5(12), ``Powers and duties of the director,'' 
authorizes the RI DEM Director ``to make, issue, and amend rules and 
regulations . . . for the prevention, control, abatement, and 
limitation of air pollution . . . .'' In addition, this section 
authorizes the Director to ``prohibit emissions, discharges and/or 
releases and . . . require specific control technology.'' The Rhode 
Island submittal cites more than a dozen specific rules that the state 
has adopted to control the emissions of PM2.5 and the 
PM2.5 precursors SO2 and NOX. A few, 
with their EPA approval citation are listed here: No. 3--Particulate 
Emissions from Industrial Processes (81 FR 47708; July 22, 2016); No. 
5--Fugitive Dust (46 FR 25446; May 7, 1981); No. 8--Sulfur Content of 
Fuels (83 FR 39888; August 13, 2018); No. 9--Air Pollution Control 
Permits (78 FR 63383; October 24, 2013); No. 12--Incinerators (07/22/
2016; 81 FR 47708); No. 27--Control of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions (83 FR 
39888; August 13, 2018); and No. 45--Rhode Island Diesel Engine Anti-
Idling Program (73 FR 16203; March 27, 2008). See 40 CFR 52.2070.
    EPA proposes that Rhode Island 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 emissions 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 establishment and 
operation of appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures 
necessary to monitor, compile, and analyze ambient air quality data, 
and make such 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.
    RI DEM operates an air-quality monitoring network, and EPA approved 
the state's most recent Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan for 
PM2.5 on October 25, 2018.\4\ Furthermore, RI DEM 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 RI DEM meets the infrastructure SIP 
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(B) with respect to the 2012 
PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 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 all SIP measures and the regulation of construction of new or 
modified stationary sources to meet new source review (NSR) 
requirements under prevention of significant deterioration (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.
    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
    The Rhode Island General Laws provide the Director of RI DEM with 
the legal authority to enforce air pollution control requirements. Such 
enforcement authority is provided by RIGL Sec.  23-23-5, which grants 
the Director of RI DEM general enforcement power, inspection and 
investigative authority, and the power to issue administrative orders, 
among other things. In addition, APCR No. 9, ``Air Pollution Control 
Permits,'' sets forth requirements for new and modified major and minor 
stationary sources. Section 9.3 of the regulation contains specific 
requirements for new and modified minor sources. Section 9.4 of the 
regulation contains specific new source review requirements applicable 
to major stationary source or major modifications located in 
nonattainment areas. Section 9.5 contains specific new source review 
requirements applicable to major stationary sources or major 
modifications located in attainment or unclassifiable areas (PSD).
    EPA proposes that Rhode Island 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 major modifications for 
pollutants where the area in which the source is located is in 
attainment of, or is unclassifiable with regard to, the relevant NAAQS. 
RI DEM's EPA-approved PSD rules, contained at APCR No. 9, contain 
provisions that address most applicable infrastructure SIP requirements 
related to all regulated NSR pollutants.
    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'' (Phase 
2 Rule) was published on November 29, 2005 (70 FR 71612). Among other 
requirements, the Phase 2 Rule obligated states to revise their PSD 
programs to explicitly identify NOX as a precursor to ozone. 
See 70 FR 71679. This requirement is codified in 40 CFR 51.166, and 
requires that states submit SIP revisions incorporating the 
requirements of the rule, including provisions that would treat 
NOX as a precursor to ozone provisions. These SIP revisions 
were to have been submitted to EPA by states by June 15, 2007. See 70 
FR 71683.
    Rhode Island has already incorporated several of the changes 
required by the Phase 2 Rule but has not made the necessary change to 
the definition of ``major stationary source'' identifying 
NOX as a precursor to ozone. The December 2017 
infrastructure submittal states that Rhode Island is amending APCR No. 
9 to comply with 40 CFR 51.166 regarding identifying NOX as 
a precursor to ozone, and on March 26, 2018, Rhode Island submitted a 
SIP revision to address this deficiency. EPA is currently reviewing 
this submittal to verify that it satisfies this

[[Page 1028]]

requirement. Therefore, we are proposing to conditionally approve 
section 110(a)(2)(C) with respect to this requirement of the Phase 2 
Rule for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
    On May 16, 2008 (73 FR 28321), EPA issued the Final Rule on the 
``Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate 
Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)'' (2008 NSR Rule). 
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. One of these 
requirements is for NSR permits to address pollutants responsible for 
the secondary formation of PM2.5, otherwise known as 
precursors. In the 2008 rule, EPA identified precursors to 
PM2.5 for the PSD program to be SO2 and 
NOX (unless the state demonstrates to the Administrator's 
satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that NOX emissions in an 
area are not a significant contributor to that area's ambient 
PM2.5 concentrations). The 2008 NSR Rule also specifies that 
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) are not considered to be precursors 
to PM2.5 in the PSD program unless the state demonstrates to 
the Administrator's satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that emissions of 
VOCs in an area are significant contributors to that area's ambient 
PM2.5 concentrations.
    The explicit references to SO2, NOX, and VOCs 
as they pertain to secondary PM2.5 formation are codified at 
40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i)(b) and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)(i)(b). As part of 
identifying pollutants that are 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. Specifically, 40 CFR 
51.166(b)(23)(i) and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(23)(i) define ``significant'' for 
PM2.5 to mean the following emissions rates: 10 tons per 
year (tpy) of direct PM2.5; 40 tpy of SO2; and 40 
tpy of NOX (unless the state demonstrates to the 
Administrator's satisfaction or EPA demonstrates that NOX 
emissions in an area are not a significant contributor to that area's 
ambient PM2.5 concentrations). The deadline for states to 
submit SIP revisions to their PSD programs incorporating these changes 
was May 16, 2011. See 73 FR 28321 at 28341.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ EPA notes that on January 4, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals 
for the D.C. Circuit, in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 
706 F.3d 428 (DC Cir.), 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 (Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, No. 08-1250). 
As the subpart 4 provisions apply only to nonattainment areas, EPA 
does not consider the portions of the 2008 rule that address 
requirements for PM2.5 attainment and unclassifiable 
areas to be affected by the court's opinion. Moreover, EPA does not 
anticipate the need to revise any PSD requirements promulgated by 
the 2008 NSR rule in order to comply with the court's decision. 
Accordingly, EPA's action on Rhode Island's infrastructure SIP in 
regard to Elements (C), D(i)(II), or J with respect to the PSD 
requirements promulgated by the 2008 implementation rule does not 
conflict with the court's opinion.
    The Court's decision with respect to the nonattainment NSR 
requirements promulgated by the 2008 implementation rule also does 
not affect EPA's action on the present infrastructure action. EPA 
interprets the CAA to exclude nonattainment area requirements, 
including requirements associated with a nonattainment NSR program, 
from infrastructure SIP submissions due three years after adoption 
or revision of a NAAQS. Instead, these elements are typically 
referred to as nonattainment SIP or attainment plan elements, which 
would be due by the dates statutorily prescribed under subpart 2 
through 5 under part D, extending as far as 10 years following 
designations for some elements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On January 18, 2011, Rhode Island submitted revisions to its PSD 
program incorporating the necessary changes obligated by the 2008 NSR 
Rule, with respect to provisions that explicitly identify precursors to 
PM2.5. EPA approved Rhode Island's 2011 SIP revision on 
April 21, 2015 (80 FR 22106).
    The 2008 NSR Rule did not require states to immediately account for 
gases that could condense to form particulate matter, known as 
condensables, in PM2.5 and PM10 emission limits 
in NSR permits. Instead, EPA determined that states had 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 
after January 1, 2011. See 73 FR 28321 at 28334. This requirement is 
codified in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i)(a) and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(50)(i)(a). 
Revisions to states' PSD programs incorporating the inclusion of 
condensables were required be submitted to EPA by May 16, 2011 (See 73 
FR 28321 at 28341).
    Rhode Island's SIP-approved PSD program does not contain the exact 
language in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(49)(i)(a). However, EPA has previously 
determined that Rhode Island's SIP-approved regulations define 
PM2.5 and PM10 such that the state's PSD program 
adequately accounts for the condensable fraction of PM2.5 
and PM10. See 78 FR 63383 at 63386 (October 24, 2013). 
Therefore, we are proposing that Rhode Island meets the requirements of 
section 110(a)(2)(C) for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS regarding the 
requirements of the 2008 NSR Rule.
    On October 20, 2010 (75 FR 64864), EPA issued the final rule on the 
``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). This rule established several components for making 
PSD permitting determinations for PM2.5, including a system 
of ``increments,'' which is the mechanism used to estimate significant 
deterioration of ambient air quality for a pollutant. These increments 
are codified in 40 CFR 51.166(c) and 40 CFR 52.21(c).
    The 2010 NSR Rule also established a new ``major source baseline 
date'' for PM2.5 as October 20, 2010, and a new trigger date 
for PM2.5 of October 20, 2011, in the definition of ``minor 
source baseline date.'' These revisions are codified in 40 CFR 
51.166(b)(14)(i)(c) and (b)(14)(ii)(c), and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(14)(i)(c) 
and (b)(14)(ii)(c). Lastly, the 2010 NSR Rule revised the definition of 
``baseline area'' to include a level of significance (SIL) of 0.3 
micrograms per cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\), annual average, for 
PM2.5. This change is codified in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(15)(i) 
and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(15)(i). The December 2017 infrastructure submittal 
states that Rhode Island is amending APCR No. 9 to comply with the 2010 
NSR Rule, and Rhode Island subsequently submitted the March 26, 2018 
SIP revision to address these additional elements of PM2.5 
implementation in PSD permitting. EPA is currently reviewing the March 
2018 submittal to verify that it satisfies the requirements of the 2010 
NSR Rule. Therefore, we are proposing to conditionally approve this 
part of sub-element 2 of section 110(a)(2)(C) relating to requirements 
for state NSR regulations outlined within our 2010 NSR regulation for 
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
    With respect to Elements (C) and (J), EPA interprets the Clean Air 
Act to require each state to make an infrastructure SIP submission for 
a new or revised NAAQS that demonstrates that the air agency has a 
complete PSD permitting program meeting the current requirements for 
all regulated NSR pollutants. The requirements of Element (D)(i)(II) 
may also be satisfied by demonstrating the air agency has a complete 
PSD permitting program correctly addressing all regulated NSR 
pollutants. Rhode Island has shown that it currently has a PSD program 
in place that covers all regulated NSR pollutants, including GHGs, with 
the exception of the deficiencies described elsewhere in this document.

[[Page 1029]]

    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, 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. 
Instead, EPA is only evaluating such submissions to assure that the 
state's program addresses GHGs consistent with both the court decision, 
and the revisions to PSD regulations that EPA has completed at this 
time.
    At present, EPA has determined that Rhode Island's SIP is 
sufficient to satisfy Elements (C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) with respect to 
GHGs. This is because the PSD permitting program previously approved by 
EPA into the SIP continues to require that PSD permits issued to 
``anyway sources'' contain limitations on GHG emissions based on the 
application of BACT. Rhode Island has, however, removed step 2 from its 
PSD permitting program and has submitted these changes to EPA in its 
March 26, 2018 SIP submittal, which EPA is reviewing to verify that it 
is consistent with the D.C. Circuit's vacated provisions at 40 CFR 
51.166(b)(48)(v). Nevertheless, the presence of these provisions in the 
previously-approved plan does not render the infrastructure SIP 
submission inadequate to satisfy Elements (C), (D)(i)(II), and (J). The 
SIP contains the PSD requirements for applying the BACT requirement to 
GHG emissions from ``anyway sources'' that are necessary at this time. 
The application of those requirements is not impeded by the presence of 
other previously-approved provisions regarding the permitting of Step 2 
sources. Accordingly, the Supreme Court decision and subsequent D.C. 
Circuit judgment do not prevent EPA's approval of Rhode Island's 
infrastructure SIP as to the requirements of Elements (C), (as well as 
sub-elements (D)(i)(II), and (J)(iii)).
    For the purposes of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS infrastructure 
SIPs, EPA reiterates that NSR Reform is not in the scope of these 
actions.
    In summary, we are proposing to approve the majority of Rhode 
Island's submittal for this sub-element with respect to the 2012 
PM2.5 NAAQS, but to conditionally approve the submittal 
regarding the identification of NOX as a precursor to ozone 
in the definition of major stationary source and regarding the 
revisions required by the 2010 NSR Rule, as described above.
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 
regulates emissions of the relevant NAAQS pollutants. EPA last approved 
Rhode Island's minor NSR program, on May 7, 1981 (46 FR 25446) as well 
as updates to that program. Since this date, Rhode Island and EPA have 
relied on the existing minor NSR program to ensure that new and 
modified sources not captured by the major NSR permitting programs do 
not interfere with attainment and maintenance of the 2012 
PM2.5 NAAQS.
    We are proposing to find that Rhode Island meets 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

[[Page 1030]]

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 Rhode Island's December 6, 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. 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 420030064), 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 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 Rhode Island, as well as additional 
analysis conducted by EPA during review of Rhode Island'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.\6\ 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 through 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See 2015 ozone NAAQS RIA at: www3.epa.gov/ttnecas1/docs/20151001ria.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Rhode Island's Submission for Prongs 1 and 2
    On December 6, 2017, RI DEM submitted an infrastructure SIP for the

[[Page 1031]]

2012 PM2.5 NAAQS that addressed prongs 1 and 2. The state's 
SIP submission 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 December 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 Rhode Island will not 
significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance 
of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in any other state.
Analysis of Rhode Island's Submission for the 2012 PM2.5 
NAAQS
    As noted above, 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 420030064), 
located in Allegheny County. 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 Rhode Island's compliance 
with the Good Neighbor provision for the 2012 standard.
    This CSAPR modeling showed that Rhode Island had no discernable 
impact (0.000 [mu]g/m\3\) on the Liberty monitor in Allegheny County, 
which is the only out-of-state monitor that may be a nonattainment or 
maintenance receptor in 2021. Although EPA has not proposed a specific 
threshold for evaluating the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, EPA notes 
that Rhode Island's impact on the Liberty monitor is far below the 
threshold of 1% for the annual 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. (A spreadsheet showing 
CSAPR contributions for ozone and PM2.5 is included in 
docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-4228.) Therefore, even if the Liberty 
monitor were considered a receptor for purposes of transport, the EPA 
proposes to conclude that Rhode Island 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 through 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, 
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.\7\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ 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 and final approval of the Ohio 
Infrastructure SIP (82 FR 57689, December 7, 2017and 83 FR 4845, 
February 2, 2018).
    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, as 
mentioned above, EPA's analysis for the 2011 CSAPR rulemaking with 
respect to the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS determined that Rhode 
Island's impact to all these downwind receptors would be well below the 
1% contribution threshold for this NAAQS. That conclusion informs the 
analysis of Rhode Island'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 2007 through 2009 period to the 2013 through 2015 period, EPA 
concludes that it is highly unlikely that Rhode Island significantly

[[Page 1032]]

contributes to nonattainment or interferes with maintenance of the 2012 
PM2.5 NAAQS in areas with data-quality issues.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ Rhode Island's PM2.5 design values for all 
ambient monitors are available in the Design Value Reports at 
https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-design-values_.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Information in Rhode Island's December 2017 SIP submission 
corroborates EPA's proposed conclusion that Rhode Island's SIP meets 
its Good Neighbor obligations. The state's technical analysis in that 
submission includes 24-hour and annual PM2.5 values for 2013 
through 2015 for the six official monitors in Rhode Island as well as 
for monitors in the neighboring states of Massachusetts and 
Connecticut, a list of Rhode Island's 10 largest point sources of 
PM2.5, and results of EPA's CSAPR modeling. As mentioned 
above, the state's PM2.5 design values for all ambient 
monitors have been well below the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS since 
2007 through 2009. In addition, the 24-hour and annual design values 
for all monitors in the neighboring states of Massachusetts and 
Connecticut also have been below the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS since 
2007 through 2009.
    At specific monitors in Rhode Island, the highest 24-hour and 
annual mean values satisfying minimum data completion criteria were 49 
[mu]g/m\3\ in 1999 and 14.9 [mu]g/m\3\ in 2000, respectively, at a 
monitor in Providence.\9\ However, since 2004, all monitors in the 
state have been below the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 24-hour and annual PM2.5 monitor values for 
individual monitoring sites throughout Rhode Island are available at 
https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data/monitor-values-report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, Rhode Island's sources are well-controlled. Rhode Island's 
2017 submission indicates that the state has many SIP-approved 
regulations and programs that limit emissions of PM2.5 and 
the PM2.5 precursors SO2 and NOX.\10\ 
Among others, these regulations include APCR No. 3 ``Particulate 
Emissions from Industrial Processes'' (81 FR 47708; July 22, 2016); 
APCR No. 8 ``Sulfur Content of Fuels'' (83 FR 39888; August 13, 2018); 
APCR No. 9 ``Air Pollution Control Permits'' (78 FR 63383; October 24, 
2013); APCR No. 13 ``Particulate Emissions from Fossil Fuel Fired Steam 
or Hot Water Generating Units'' (48 FR 13026; March 29, 1983); and APCR 
No. 27 ``Control of Nitrogen Oxide Emissions'' (83 FR 39888; August 13, 
2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ SO2 and NOX contribute to the 
formation of PM2.5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It should also be noted that Rhode Island 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 Rhode Island's 
conclusions and proposes to determine that Rhode Island will not 
significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance 
of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in any other state. Therefore, EPA 
proposes to approve the December 2017 infrastructure SIP submission 
from Rhode Island with regard to 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. One way for a state to meet this requirement, specifically with 
respect to in-state sources and pollutants that are subject to PSD 
permitting, is through a comprehensive PSD permitting program that 
applies to all regulated NSR pollutants and that satisfies the 
requirements of EPA's PSD implementation rules. 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 approved Rhode Island's latest NNSR regulations 
on April 21, 2015 (80 FR 22106). These regulations contain provisions 
for how the state must treat and control sources in nonattainment 
areas, consistent with 40 CFR 51.165, or appendix S to 40 CFR 51.
    As noted above and in Element (C), Rhode Island's PSD program does 
not fully satisfy the requirements of EPA's PSD implementation rules. 
As stated previously, Rhode Island submitted, on March 26, 2018, a SIP 
revision to address these deficiencies, and EPA is reviewing this 
submittal to verify that it satisfies the required provisions. 
Consequently, we are proposing to conditionally approve Rhode Island's 
infrastructure SIP submission for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 
related to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) Prong 3 for the reasons 
discussed under Element (C).
Sub-Element 3: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--Visibility Protection 
(Prong 4)
    Regarding the 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, 2011, and 2013 memoranda 
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.
    Rhode Island's Regional Haze SIP was approved by EPA on May 22, 
2012 (77 FR 30214). Accordingly, EPA proposes that Rhode Island meets 
the 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.
    EPA approved Rhode Island's PSD program, as well as updates to that 
program, with the most recent approval occurring on April 21, 2015 (80 
FR 22106), which includes a provision requiring notice to neighboring 
states of RI DEM's intention to either issue a draft PSD permit or deny 
a permit application. See APCR No. 9, section 9.12.3(e). Therefore, we 
propose to approve Rhode Island's compliance with the infrastructure 
SIP requirements of section 126(a) with respect to the 2012 
PM2.5 NAAQS. Rhode Island has no obligations under any other 
provision of section 126.
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. Rhode Island does not 
have any pending

[[Page 1033]]

obligations under section 115 for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 
Therefore, EPA is proposing that Rhode Island meets the applicable 
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) related to 
section 115 of the CAA (international pollution abatement) 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 retains 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 Rhode Island 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
    Rhode Island, through its infrastructure SIP submittals, has 
documented that its air agency has the requisite authority and 
resources to carry out its SIP obligations. Rhode Island cites to RIGL 
Sec.  23-23-5, which provides the Director of DEM with the legal 
authority to enforce air pollution control requirements. Additionally, 
this statute provides the Director with the authority to assess 
preconstruction permit fees and annual operating permit fees from air 
emissions sources and establishes a general revenue reserve account 
within the general fund to finance the state clean air programs. RI DEM 
further cites APCR No. 28, ``Operating Permit Fees,'' which requires 
that major sources pay annual operating permit fees. Finally, Section 
III of the 1972 RI SIP specifies RI DEM's legal authority to implement 
SIP measures, and Section VII of the 1972 SIP describes the resources 
and manpower estimates for RI DEM.
    EPA proposes that Rhode Island meets 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 Rhode Island, no board or body approves permits or enforcement 
orders; these are approved by the Director of RI DEM. Thus, with 
respect to this sub-element, Rhode Island is subject only to the 
requirements of paragraph (a)(2) of section 128 of the CAA (regarding 
conflicts of interest). The Rhode Island Code of Ethics (RIGL Sec.  36-
14) applies to state employees and public officials and requires 
disclosure of potential conflicts of interest. It also provides that 
``No person subject to this Code of Ethics shall have any interest, 
financial or otherwise, direct or indirect, or engage in any business, 
employment, transaction, or professional activity, or incur any 
obligation of any nature, which is in substantial conflict with the 
proper discharge of his or her duties or employment in the public 
interest and of his or her responsibilities.'' See RIGL Sec.  36-14-
5(a). RIGL Sec. Sec.  36-14-1 through -7 were approved by EPA into the 
Rhode Island SIP on April 20, 2016 (81 FR 23175).
    Consequently, EPA proposes that Rhode Island 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.
    Rhode Island's infrastructure submittal references existing state 
laws and regulations previously approved by EPA that require sources to 
monitor emissions and submit reports and that provide for the 
correlation of emissions data with emission limitations and for the 
public availability of emission data. For example, Rhode Island's 
submittal references RIGL Sec.  23-23-5(16), which authorizes RI DEM to 
require a source to install, maintain, and use air pollution emission 
monitoring devices and to submit periodic reports on the nature and 
amounts of emissions. In addition, under RIGL Sec.  23-23-13 and the 
Rhode Island public records act, see RIGL Title 38, emissions data are 
made available to the public and are not protected as ``trade secret or 
proprietary information.'' With respect to state regulations, APCR No. 
9, ``Air Pollution Control Permits,'' requires emissions testing of 
permitted processes within 180 days of full operation and specifies 
that preconstruction permits issued contain an emissions testing 
section. In addition, APCR No. 6, ``Continuous Emission Monitors,'' 
requires certain sources to install, calibrate, operate, and maintain a 
continuous emission monitoring system and to report certain emissions-
related data to RI DEM. Finally, APCR No. 14, ``Record Keeping and 
Reporting,'' requires emission sources to report emissions and other 
data to RI DEM annually, and provides that information in certain 
reports obtained pursuant to APCR No. 14 ``will be correlated with 
applicable emission and other limitations and will be available for 
public inspection.''
    Therefore, EPA proposes that Rhode Island meets the infrastructure 
SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F) with respect to the 2012 
PM2.5 NAAQS.

G. Section 110(a)(2)(G)--Emergency Powers

    This section requires that a plan provide for state authority 
comparable 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

[[Page 1034]]

health or welfare or the environment'' in the event that ``it is not 
practicable to assure prompt protection . . . by commencement of such 
civil action.''
    We propose to find that a combination of state statutes and 
regulations discussed in RI DEM's submittal provides for authority 
comparable to that in CAA section 303. The statutes and regulations 
are: RIGL Sec. Sec.  10-20, 23-23-16, 23-23.1-5, 23-23.1-7, 23-23.1-8, 
42-17.1-2, and APCR No. 7. In our proposal to approve this requirement 
for Rhode Island's infrastructure SIP submissions for the 1997 
PM2.5, 2006 PM2.5, 2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 
NO2, and 2010 SO2 NAAQS (81 FR 10168; February 
29, 2016), we explained how this combination of authorities provides 
Rhode Island with authority comparable to that in CAA Sec.  303. See 81 
FR 10168, 10177 (February 29, 2016). These statutes and the regulation 
apply in the same manner to particulate matter emissions as they do to 
emissions of the other NAAQS pollutants. Accordingly, for the reasons 
contained in our proposal to approve this element for the 1997 
PM2.5, 2006 PM2.5, 2008 lead, 2008 ozone, 2010 
NO2, and 2010 SO2 infrastructure SIPs, we propose 
to find that this combination of state statutes and regulations provide 
for authority comparable to that in CAA Sec.  303 for the 2012 
PM2.5 infrastructure SIP.
    Section 110(a)(2)(G) also requires a state to submit for EPA 
approval a contingency plan (also known as an emergency episode plan) 
to implement the air agency's emergency episode authority for any Air 
Quality Control Region (AQCR) within the state that is classified as 
Priority I, IA, or II. See 40 CFR 51.152(c). A contingency plan is not 
required if the entire state is classified as Priority III for a 
particular pollutant. Id. There is only one AQCR in Rhode Island--the 
Metropolitan Providence Interstate AQCR--and Rhode Island's portion 
thereof is classified as a Priority I area for PM, SOX, 
carbon monoxide, and ozone and as a Priority III area for 
NO2. See 40 CFR 52.2071. 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 promulgated regulations that provide the ambient levels to 
classify different priority levels for the 2012 standard (or any 
PM2.5 NAAQS). See 40 CFR 51.150. Consequently, Rhode 
Island's SIP is not required to contain an emergency contingency plan 
meeting the specific requirements of 40 CFR 51.151 and 51.152 with 
respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
    Although PM2.5 is not explicitly included in the 
contingency plan requirements of 40 CFR subpart H, the EPA 2009 
memorandum recommends in the context of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS 
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 Rhode Island's certified air-
quality data in EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) indicates that the 
highest 24-hour PM2.5 concentration since 2006 (i.e., data 
through 2017) is 92.5 [micro]g/m\3\, which occurred in 2015 at a 
monitor in Providence. Although not expected, if PM2.5 
conditions were to change, Rhode Island does have general authority, as 
noted previously (81 FR 10168; February 29, 2016), to order a source to 
cease operations if it is determined that emissions from the source 
pose an immediate danger, or unreasonable and emergency risk, to public 
health or safety or to the environment. In addition, Rhode Island posts 
near real-time air-quality data, air-quality predictions and historical 
data on the RI DEM website. RI DEM's predictions are also displayed 
daily in the Providence Journal. Alerts are sent by email to many 
affected parties, including emissions sources, concerned individuals, 
schools, health and environmental agencies and the media. Alerts 
include information about the health implications of elevated pollutant 
levels and list actions to reduce emissions. Furthermore, daily 
forecasted ozone and fine-particle levels are made available on the 
internet through the EPA AirNow and EnviroFlash systems. Information 
about these two systems is available on EPA's website at 
www.airnow.gov. Notices are sent to EnviroFlash participants when 
levels are forecast to exceed the current 8-hour ozone or 24-hour 
PM2.5 standard.
    EPA proposes that Rhode Island meets the applicable infrastructure 
SIP requirements for section 110(a)(2)(G) with respect to 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 in 
response to: Changes in the NAAQS, availability of improved methods for 
attaining the NAAQS, or an EPA finding that the SIP is substantially 
inadequate. In 1973, it was determined that Rhode Island's original SIP 
did not fully satisfy section 110(a)(2)(H) and EPA promulgated federal 
regulations to address the gap in the SIP. See 40 CFR 52.2080. Since 
Rhode Island's December 6, 2017, submittal does not address the gap in 
the SIP that led to a disapproval in 1973, EPA proposes to find that 
Rhode Island has not met applicable infrastructure SIP requirements for 
element (H) with respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 
Accordingly, EPA proposes to disapprove the state's submittal for 
element (H). No further action by EPA or the state is required, 
however, because remedying federal regulations are already in place. 
Moreover, mandatory sanctions under CAA section 179 are inapplicable, 
because the submittal is not required under CAA title I part D nor in 
response to a SIP call under CAA section 110(k)(5).

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 the CAA (relating to 
consultation), section 127 of the CAA (relating to public 
notification), and part C of subchapter I of the CAA (relating to PSD 
and visibility protection). The evaluation of the submission from Rhode 
Island 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.
    Rhode Island General Law Sec.  23-23-5, authorizes the RI DEM 
Director ``[t]o advise, consult, and cooperate with the cities and 
towns and other agencies of the state, federal government, and other 
states and interstate agencies, and with effective groups in industries 
in furthering the purposes of this chapter.'' EPA approved this statute 
into Rhode Island's SIP on April 20, 2016. See 81 FR 23175. In 
addition, APCR No. 9,

[[Page 1035]]

which is in Rhode Island's SIP, see 78 FR 63383 (October 24, 2013), 
directs RI DEM to notify relevant municipal officials and FLMs, among 
others, of tentative determinations by RI DEM with respect to permit 
applications for major stationary sources and major modifications.
    EPA proposes that Rhode Island 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.
    Rhode Island's APCR No. 10, ``Air Pollution Episodes,'' specifies 
criteria for, and measures to be implemented during, air pollution 
alerts, warnings, and episodes. In addition, the RI DEM website 
includes near real-time air quality data, air quality predictions and a 
record of historical data. DEM's predictions are also displayed daily 
in the Providence Journal, a newspaper with statewide circulation. 
Alerts are sent by email to many affected parties, including emissions 
sources, concerned individuals, schools, health and environmental 
agencies and the media. Alerts include information about the health 
implications of elevated pollutant levels and list actions to reduce 
emissions. In addition, AQS summaries of the year's air-quality-
monitoring results are issued annually. The summaries are sent to a 
mailing list of interested parties and posted on the RI DEM website. 
Rhode Island is also an active partner in EPA's AirNow and EnviroFlash 
air-quality alert programs. EPA proposes that Rhode Island meets 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
    State plans must meet applicable requirements of part C of the CAA 
related to PSD. Rhode Island's PSD program in the context of 
infrastructure SIPs has already been discussed in the paragraphs 
addressing sections 110(a)(2)(C) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) and, as we 
have noted, does not fully satisfy the requirements of EPA's PSD 
implementation rules. However, the December 2017 infrastructure 
submittal states that Rhode Island is amending APCR No. 9 to comply 
with 40 CFR 51.166 regarding PM2.5 emissions and identifying 
NOX as a precursor to ozone. As stated previously, Rhode 
Island submitted, on March 26, 2018, a SIP to address these 
deficiencies, which EPA is currently reviewing to verify that it 
satisfies the required provisions. Consequently, we are proposing to 
conditionally approve the PSD sub-element of section 110(a)(2)(J) for 
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, consistent with the actions we are 
proposing for sections 110(a)(2)(C) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II).
Sub-Element 4: Visibility Protection
    Regarding 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 
memorandum, 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 Rhode Island meets 
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 the Guideline on Air 
Quality Models (``Guideline'') at 40 CFR part 51, Appendix W, for 
predicting the effects of emissions of criteria pollutants on ambient 
air quality. The Guideline is used by EPA, other federal, state, 
territorial, local, and tribal air quality agencies, and industry to 
prepare and review new or modified source permits, SIP submittals or 
revisions, conformity, and other air quality assessments required under 
the CAA and EPA regulations. EPA has interpreted section 110(a)(2)(K) 
to require 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 Memorandum at 55.
    Rhode Island state law implicitly authorizes RI DEM to perform air 
quality modeling and to provide such modeling data to EPA upon request. 
See RIGL Sec. Sec.  23-23-2, 23-23-5. In addition, Rhode Island APCR 
No. 9, ``Air Pollution Control Permits,'' requires permit applicants to 
submit air quality modeling based on applicable air quality models, 
data bases, and other requirements specified in the Guideline in 
Appendix W to demonstrate impacts of new and modified major sources. 
The modeling data are sent to EPA along with the draft major permit.
    The state also collaborates with the Ozone Transport Commission 
(OTC) and the Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association and EPA 
to perform large-scale urban airshed modeling for ozone and PM, if 
necessary. EPA proposes that Rhode Island meets 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.
    Section 23-23-5 of the RIGL provides RI DEM with the authority to 
collect fees for preconstruction permits and operating permits for air 
emissions sources. In addition, RI DEM's ``Rules and Regulations 
Governing the Establishment of Various Fees'' sets forth permit fee 
requirements for air emissions sources and the legal authority to 
collect those fees. These rules and regulations are promulgated 
pursuant to RIGL Chapter 23-23 Air Pollution, and Chapter 42-35, 
Administrative Procedures. Rhode Island's infrastructure SIP submittal 
also refers to its regulations implementing its operating permit 
program pursuant to 40 CFR part 70. Rhode Island's title V permitting 
program, APCR No. 28, ``Operating Permit Fees,'' requires major sources 
to pay annual operating permit fees. EPA's full approval of Rhode 
Island's title V program (APCR No. 28) became effective on November 30, 
2001. See 66 FR 49839 (October 1, 2001). To gain this approval, Rhode 
Island demonstrated the ability to collect sufficient fees to run the 
program. The fees collected from title V sources are above the 
presumptive minimum in accordance with 40 CFR 70.9(b)(2)(i). EPA 
proposes that Rhode Island meets the infrastructure SIP requirements of 
section 110(a)(2)(L) for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.

[[Page 1036]]

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. 
Rhode Island's infrastructure submittals reference RIGL Sec.  23-23-5, 
which provides for consultation with affected local political 
subdivisions and authorizes the RI DEM Director ``to advise, consult, 
and cooperate with the cities and towns and other agencies of the state 
. . . and other states and interstate agencies . . . in furthering the 
purposes of'' the state Clean Air Act (i.e., RIGL chapter 23-23). EPA 
proposes that Rhode Island meets 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 Rhode Island on December 6, 2017, for the 2012 
PM2.5 NAAQS, with the exception of certain aspects relating 
to the state's PSD program, including 110(a)(2)(C)2, (D)2, and (J)3, 
which we are proposing to conditionally approve, and section 
110(a)(2)(H), which we are proposing to disapprove. In regard to 
section (H), no further action by EPA or the state is required, 
however, since federal regulations are already in place that address 
the gap in the state's submittal with respect to element (H).
    Specifically, EPA's proposed action regarding each infrastructure 
SIP requirement is contained in Table 1 below.

 Table 1--Proposed Action on Rhode Island's Infrastructure SIP Submittal
                        for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Element                         2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A): Emission limits and other control        A
 measures.
(B): Ambient air quality monitoring and data  A
 system.
(C)1: Enforcement of SIP measures...........  A
(C)2: PSD program for major sources and       A*
 major modifications.
(C)3: PSD program for minor sources and       A
 minor modifications.
(D)1: Contribute to nonattainment/interfere   A
 with 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    NA
 local agencies.
(F): Stationary source monitoring system....  A
(G): Emergency power........................  A
(H): Future SIP revisions...................  D
(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        A
 affected local entities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the above table, the key is as follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
A.......................  Approve.
A*......................  Approve but conditionally approve aspect of
                           PSD program relating to the identification of
                           NOX as a precursor of ozone and the revisions
                           required by the 2010 NSR rule.
D.......................  Disapprove, but no further action required
                           because federal regulations already in place.
+.......................  Not germane to infrastructure SIPs.
NA......................  Not applicable.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As noted in Table 1, we are proposing to conditionally approve 
portions of Rhode Island's infrastructure SIP submittals pertaining to 
the state's PSD program for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. Under 
section 110(k)(4) of the Act, EPA may conditionally approve a plan 
based on a commitment from the State to adopt specific enforceable 
measures by a date certain, but not later than 1 year from the date of 
approval. If EPA conditionally approves the commitment in a final 
rulemaking action, the State must meet its commitment to submit an 
update to its PSD program that fully remedies the deficiencies 
mentioned above under element (C). If the State fails to do so, this 
action will become a disapproval one year from the date of final 
approval. EPA will notify the State by letter that this action has 
occurred. At that time, this commitment will no longer be a part of the 
approved Rhode Island SIP. EPA subsequently will publish a document in 
the Federal Register notifying the public that the conditional approval 
automatically converted to a disapproval. If the State meets its 
commitment, within the applicable time frame, the conditionally 
approved submission will remain a part of the SIP until EPA takes final 
action approving or disapproving the new submittal. If EPA disapproves 
the new submittal, the conditionally approved infrastructure SIP 
elements for all affected pollutants will be disapproved. In addition, 
a final disapproval triggers the Federal Implementation Plan

[[Page 1037]]

requirement under section 110(c). If EPA approves the new submittal, 
the PSD program and relevant infrastructure SIP elements will be fully 
approved and replace the conditionally approved program in the SIP.
    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 Orders12866 (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     This action is not expected to be an Executive Order 13771 
regulatory action because this action is not significant 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 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: December 19, 2018.
Alexandra Dunn,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2019-00658 Filed 1-31-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P