Findings of Failure To Submit a Clean Air Act Section 110 State Implementation Plan for Interstate Transport for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), 66612-66616 [2019-26136]
Download as PDF
66612
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 234 / Thursday, December 5, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
and local ventilation) or administrative
control measures (e.g., workplace
policies and procedures) shall be
considered and implemented to prevent
exposure, where feasible.
(ii) Hazard communication.
Requirements as specified in § 721.72(a)
through (e) (concentration set at 1.0%),
(f), (g)(1)(i), (ii) and (iv), (2)(i), (ii) and
(v), (3)(i) and (ii), (4)(iii) (above
concentration of 1 part per billion (ppb),
and (5). Alternative hazard and warning
statements that meet the criteria of the
Globally Harmonized System and OSHA
Hazard Communication Standard may
be used.
(iii) Industrial, commercial, and
consumer activities. Requirements as
specified in § 721.80(g). It is a
significant new use to manufacture,
process, or use the substance that results
in inhalation exposure. It is a significant
new use to manufacture, process and
use the substance other than as stated in
the PMN.
(iv) Disposal. Residuals must be
recycled back into the process as stated
in the PMN.
(v) Release to water. Requirements as
specified in § 721.90(a)(4), (b)(4), (c)(4),
where N=1.
(b) Specific requirements. The
provisions of subpart A of this part
apply to this section except as modified
by this paragraph (b).
(1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping
requirements as specified in
§ 721.125(a) through (k) are applicable
to manufacturers and processors of this
substance.
(2) Limitations or revocation of
certain notification requirements. The
provisions of § 721.185 apply to this
section.
(3) Determining whether a specific use
is subject to this section. The provisions
of § 721.1725(b)(1) apply to paragraphs
(a)(2)(iii) and (iv) of this section.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
§ 721.11246 Substituted alkanediol,
polymer with heteromonocycles, alkenoate,
metal complexes (generic).
(a) Chemical substance and
significant new uses subject to reporting.
(1) The chemical substance identified
generically as substituted alkanediol,
polymer with heteromonocycles,
alkenoate, metal complexes (PMN P–
18–130) is subject to reporting under
this section for the significant new uses
described in paragraph (a)(2) of this
section. The requirements of this section
do not apply to quantities of the
substance after they have been reacted
(cured).
(2) The significant new uses are:
(i) Protection in the workplace.
Requirements as specified in
§ 721.63(a)(1), (2)(i) and (iii), (3) through
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Dec 04, 2019
Jkt 250001
(5) and (6)(v) and (vi) (particulate), and
(c). When determining which persons
are reasonably likely to be exposed as
required for § 721.63(a)(1) and (4)
engineering control measures (e.g.,
enclosure or confinement of the
operation, general and local ventilation)
or administrative control measures (e.g.,
workplace policies and procedures)
shall be considered and implemented to
prevent exposure, where feasible. For
§ 721.63(a)(5), respirators must provide
a National Institute for Occupational
Safety and Health assigned protection
factor (APF) of at least 50, or if spray
applied an APF of 1000.
(ii) Hazard communication.
Requirements as specified in § 721.72(a)
through (d), (f), (g)(1)(i) ((sensitization),
(mutagenicity)), (2)(i) through (v), and
(5). Alternative hazard and warning
statements that meet the criteria of the
Globally Harmonized System and OSHA
Hazard Communication Standard may
be used.
(iii) Industrial, commercial, and
consumer activities. Requirements as
specified in § 721.80(f). It is a significant
new use to use the substance other than
as an adhesion promoter for industrial
applications.
(b) Specific requirements. The
provisions of subpart A of this part
apply to this section except as modified
by this paragraph (b).
(1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping
requirements as specified in
§ 721.125(a) through (i) are applicable to
manufacturers and processors of this
substance.
(2) Limitations or revocation of
certain notification requirements. The
provisions of § 721.185 apply to this
section.
[FR Doc. 2019–26224 Filed 12–4–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2019–0603; FRL–10002–78–
OAR]
Findings of Failure To Submit a Clean
Air Act Section 110 State
Implementation Plan for Interstate
Transport for the 2015 Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS)
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final action.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking final action
finding that seven states have failed to
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
submit infrastructure State
Implementation Plans (SIPs) to satisfy
certain interstate transport requirements
of the Clean Air Act (CAA) with respect
to the 2015 8-hour ozone national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS).
Specifically, these requirements pertain
to prohibiting significant contribution to
nonattainment, or interference with
maintenance, of the 2015 8-hour ozone
NAAQS in other states. These findings
of failure to submit establish a 2-year
deadline for the EPA to promulgate
Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs) to
address these interstate transport
requirements for a given state unless,
prior to the EPA promulgating a FIP, the
state submits, and the EPA approves, a
SIP that meets these requirements.
DATES: Effective date of this action is
January 6, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
General questions concerning this
document should be addressed to Mr.
Thomas Uher, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Air Quality
Policy Division, Mail Code C539–04,
109 TW Alexander Drive, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone
(919) 541–5534; email: uher.thomas@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Notice and Comment Under the
Administrative Procedures Act (APA)
Section 553 of the APA, 5 U.S.C.
553(b)(3)(B), provides that, when an
agency for good cause finds that notice
and public procedure are impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest, the agency may issue a rule
without providing notice and an
opportunity for public comment. The
EPA has determined that there is good
cause for making this final agency
action without prior proposal and
opportunity for comment because no
significant EPA judgment is involved in
making a finding of failure to submit
SIPs, or elements of SIPs, required by
the CAA, where states have made no
submissions or incomplete submissions,
to meet the requirement. Thus, notice
and public procedure are unnecessary.
The EPA finds that this constitutes good
cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).
B. How can I get copies of this document
and other related information?
The EPA has established a docket for
this action under Docket ID No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2019–0603. All documents in
the docket are listed and publicly
available at https://www.regulations.gov.
Publicly available docket materials are
also available in hard copy at the Air
and Radiation Docket and Information
E:\FR\FM\05DER1.SGM
05DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 234 / Thursday, December 5, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
Center, EPA/DC, William Jefferson
Clinton West Building, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Avenue NW,
Washington, DC. The Public Reading
Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number
for the Public Reading Room is (202)
566–1744 and the telephone number for
the Office of Air and Radiation Docket
and Information Center is (202) 566–
1742. For additional information about
the EPA’s public docket, visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at: https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
C. How is the preamble organized?
Table of Contents
I. General Information
A. Notice and Comment Under the
Administrative Procedures Act (APA)
B. How can I get copies of this document
and other related information?
C. How is the preamble organized?
D. Where do I go if I have state specific
questions?
II. Background and Overview
A. Interstate Transport SIPs
B. Background on 2015 Ozone NAAQS and
Related Matters
III. Findings of Failure To Submit for States
That Failed To Make an Interstate
Transport SIP Submission for the 2015
Ozone NAAQS
IV. Environmental Justice Considerations
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Executive Order 13563:
Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing
Regulations and Controlling Regulatory
Costs
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(UMRA)
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks.
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution or Use
J. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA)
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions
To Address Environmental Justice in
Minority and Low Income Populations
L. Congressional Review Act
M. Judicial Review
D. Where do I go if I have state specific
questions?
The table below lists the states that
failed to make a complete interstate
transport SIP submittal addressing CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirements
for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. For
questions related to specific states
mentioned in this document, please
contact the appropriate EPA Regional
office:
Regional offices
States
EPA Region 1: Alison Simcox, Manager, Air Quality Branch, EPA Region I, 5 Post Office
Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109–3912.
EPA Region 3: Joseph Schulingkamp, Air Protection Division, EPA Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103–2187.
EPA Region 6: Mary Stanton, Chief, Infrastructure and Ozone Section, EPA Region VI, 1201
Elm Street, Suite 500, Dallas, TX 75270.
EPA Region 8: Adam Clark, EPA Region VIII, Air and Radiation Division, 1595 Wynkoop St.,
Denver, CO 80202.
II. Background and Overview
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
A. Interstate Transport SIPs
CAA section 110(a) imposes an
obligation upon states to submit SIPs
that provide for the implementation,
maintenance, and enforcement of a new
or revised NAAQS within 3 years
following the promulgation of that
NAAQS. CAA section 110(a)(2) lists
specific requirements that states must
meet in these SIP submissions, as
applicable. The EPA refers to this type
of SIP submission as an ‘‘infrastructure’’
SIP because it ensures that states can
implement, maintain and enforce the
new or revised air standards. Within
these requirements, CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) contains requirements to
address interstate transport of NAAQS
pollutants. A SIP revision submitted for
this sub-section is referred to as an
‘‘interstate transport SIP.’’ In turn, CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires that
such a plan contain adequate provisions
to prohibit emissions from the state that
will contribute significantly to
nonattainment of the NAAQS in any
other state (‘‘prong 1’’) or interfere with
maintenance of the NAAQS in any other
state (‘‘prong 2’’). Interstate transport
prongs 1 and 2, also called collectively
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Dec 04, 2019
Jkt 250001
the ‘‘good neighbor’’ provision, are the
requirements relevant to this findings
document.
Pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(1)(B),
the EPA must determine no later than 6
months after the date by which a state
is required to submit a SIP whether a
state has made a submission that meets
the minimum completeness criteria
established pursuant to CAA section
110(k)(1)(A). These criteria are set forth
at 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. The EPA
refers to the determination that a state
has not submitted a SIP submission that
meets the minimum completeness
criteria as a ‘‘finding of failure to
submit.’’ If the EPA finds a state has
failed to submit a SIP to meet its
statutory obligation to address CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), then pursuant
to CAA section 110(c)(1), the EPA has
not only the authority, but the
obligation, to promulgate a FIP within 2
years to address the CAA requirement.
This finding, therefore, starts a 2-year
‘‘clock’’ for promulgation by the EPA of
a FIP, in accordance with CAA section
110(c)(1), unless prior to such
promulgation the state submits, and the
EPA approves, a submittal from the state
to meet the requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). Even where the EPA
PO 00000
Frm 00053
66613
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Maine, Rhode Island.
Pennsylvania, Virginia.
New Mexico.
South Dakota, Utah.
has promulgated a FIP, the EPA will
withdraw that FIP if a state submits and
the EPA approves a SIP satisfying the
relevant requirements. The EPA notes
this action does not start a mandatory
sanctions clock pursuant to CAA section
179 because this finding of failure to
submit does not pertain to a part D plan
for nonattainment areas required under
CAA section 110(a)(2)(I) or a SIP call
pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(5).
B. Background on 2015 Ozone NAAQS
and Related Matters
On October 1, 2015, the EPA
promulgated a new 8-hour primary and
secondary ozone NAAQS of 70 parts per
billion (ppb), which is met when the 3year average of the annual fourth
highest daily maximum 8-hour
concentration does not exceed 70 ppb.1
Pursuant to the 3-year period provided
in CAA section 110(a)(1), infrastructure
SIPs addressing the revised standard
were due on October 1, 2018.
On September 5, 2019, the EPA
announced via its website its intention
to make findings that certain states have
failed to submit complete interstate
1 See Final Rule, National Ambient Air Quality
Standards for Ozone, 80 FR 65292 (October 26,
2015).
E:\FR\FM\05DER1.SGM
05DER1
66614
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 234 / Thursday, December 5, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
transport SIPs for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS by November 22, 2019.2
On September 30, 2019, the Sierra
Club filed a complaint in the United
States District Court for the District of
Columbia (D.C. District Court) alleging
that the EPA had not fulfilled its
mandatory duty to make findings of
failure to submit interstate transport
SIPs pursuant to CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the
2015 ozone NAAQS for twelve states:
Arkansas, Hawaii, Louisiana, Maine,
Maryland, Mississippi, New Mexico,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah,
Vermont, and Virginia.3 On October 29,
2019, the States of New Jersey and
Connecticut filed a complaint in the
D.C. District Court alleging that the EPA
had not fulfilled its mandatory duty to
make findings of failure to submit
interstate transport SIPs addressing
interstate transport in CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the
2015 ozone NAAQS for two states:
Virginia and Pennsylvania.4
To fulfill its statutory obligations, the
EPA is taking this action for all states
that have failed to submit complete SIPs
addressing CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS, not just those states named in
the complaints. As explained below, in
total, seven states have failed to submit
complete SIPs while forty-three states
and the District of Columbia have
submitted complete SIPs addressing
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the
2015 ozone NAAQS.
The EPA has included in the docket
for this action its correspondence with
states regarding the completeness of
their SIP submissions. SIPs may be
considered complete by either of two
methods. First, the EPA may make a
determination that a SIP is complete
under the ‘‘completeness criteria’’ set
out at 40 CFR part 51, appendix V. See
CAA section 110(k)(1). Second, a SIP
may be deemed complete by operation
of law if the EPA has failed to make
such a determination by 6 months after
receipt of the SIP submission. See CAA
section 110(k)(1)(B).
Five states failed to make any SIP
submittal addressing interstate transport
for the 2015 ozone NAAQS: Maine, New
Mexico, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,
and Virginia. All of these states were
identified in the Sierra Club complaint.
The EPA has evaluated the SIP
submittals of two states, South Dakota
2 U.S. EPA, Interstate Air Pollution Transport,
https://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/interstate-airpollution-transport.
3 Complaint, Sierra Club v. Wheeler, No. 1:19–cv–
02923 (D.D.C. filed Sept. 30, 2019).
4 Complaint, State of New Jersey v. Wheeler, No.
1:19–cv–03247 (D.D.C. filed Oct. 29, 2019).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Dec 04, 2019
Jkt 250001
and Utah, for completeness pursuant to
the criteria in 40 CFR part 51, appendix
V, and concluded that these are
incomplete SIP submissions.5 On
November 21, 2019, the EPA sent letters
to these two states explaining our
incompleteness determination. These
letters are included in the docket for
this action. As explained in those
letters, the completeness criteria under
40 CFR part 51, appendix V, section
2.1(g), require a certification that public
hearing(s) were held in accordance with
the information provided in the state’s
public notice and the State’s laws and
constitution, if applicable and
consistent with the public hearing
requirements in 40 CFR 51.102. Under
§ 51.102(a), states must either hold a
public hearing or provide the public the
opportunity to request a public hearing.
South Dakota and Utah did not provide
the necessary certification under section
2.1(g) of appendix V that a public
hearing was held or that they had
provided the opportunity for the public
to request a public hearing in
accordance with 40 CFR 51.102(a). As a
result, the EPA determined that these
SIP submissions are incomplete. Where
the EPA determines that a SIP
submission does not meet the appendix
V completeness criteria, ‘‘the State shall
be treated as not having made the
submission. . . .’’ CAA section
110(k)(1)(C). Accordingly, the EPA is
finding in this document that South
Dakota and Utah have failed to submit
complete SIP revisions addressing CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) as to the 2015
ozone NAAQS. These states may, if they
choose, resubmit to the EPA complete
SIPs, which the EPA will review and act
upon at a later date.
In all other cases, the EPA has
determined that the SIP submittals are
complete or they have been deemed
complete by operation of law. In
particular, the six remaining states
identified in Sierra Club’s complaint
filed in the D.C. District Court have
made complete SIP submittals
addressing the good neighbor provision
for the 2015 ozone NAAQS: Arkansas,
Hawaii, Louisiana, Maryland,
Mississippi, and Vermont. As a result,
there is no longer a basis to make
findings of failure to submit for these
states.
The EPA is issuing national findings
of failure to submit interstate transport
SIPs addressing the requirements of
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) as to the
2015 ozone NAAQS, for all states that
have not made complete submissions as
of the date of this document.
5 Utah was identified in the Sierra Club
complaint, but South Dakota was not.
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
III. Findings of Failure To Submit for
States That Failed To Make an
Interstate Transport SIP Submission for
the 2015 Ozone NAAQS
The EPA is making findings of failure
to submit for seven states. The EPA
finds the following states have not
submitted complete interstate transport
SIPs to meet the requirements of CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2015
ozone NAAQS: Maine, New Mexico,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South
Dakota, Utah, and Virginia.
Notwithstanding these findings, and the
associated obligation of the EPA to
promulgate FIPs for these states within
two years of this finding, the EPA
intends to continue to work with states
subject to these findings in order to
provide assistance as necessary to help
them develop approvable SIP submittals
in a timely manner.
IV. Environmental Justice
Considerations
This document is making a
procedural finding that certain states
have failed to submit a SIP to address
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the
2015 ozone NAAQS. The EPA did not
conduct an environmental analysis for
this action because it would not directly
affect the air emissions of particular
sources. Because this action will not
directly affect the air emissions of
particular sources, it does not affect the
level of protection provided to human
health or the environment. Therefore,
this action will not have potential
disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects
on minority, low-income or indigenous
populations.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Orders 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Executive Order 13563:
Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review
This action is not a significant
regulatory action and was, therefore, not
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review.
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing
Regulations and Controlling Regulatory
Costs
This action is not an Executive Order
13771 regulatory action because it finds
that seven states failed to submit a SIP
to meet their statutory obligation to
address CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
E:\FR\FM\05DER1.SGM
05DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 234 / Thursday, December 5, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act. This final action does not establish
any new information collection
requirement apart from what is already
required by law. This finding relates to
the requirement in the CAA for states to
submit SIPs under section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA for the 2015
ozone NAAQS.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
This action is not subject to the RFA.
The RFA applies only to rules subject to
notice and comment rulemaking
requirements under the Administrative
Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553 or
any other statute. This action is not
subject to notice and comment
requirements because the agency has
invoked the APA ‘‘good cause’’
exemption under 5 U.S.C. 553(b). I
certify that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the RFA. This action will not
impose any requirements on small
entities. The action is a finding that the
named states have not made the
necessary SIP submission for interstate
transport to meet the requirements
under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the
CAA.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995 (UMRA)
This action does not contain any
unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538 and does not
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The action imposes no
enforceable duty on any state, local or
tribal governments or the private sector.
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism
implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the states, on the
relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13175. This action finds that
seven states have failed to complete the
requirement in the CAA to submit SIPs
under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the
CAA for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. No
tribe is subject to the requirement to
submit a transport SIP under section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA for the 2015
ozone NAAQS. Thus, Executive Order
13175 does not apply to this action.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Dec 04, 2019
Jkt 250001
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order
13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern health or
safety risks that the EPA has reason to
believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ‘‘covered
regulatory action’’ in section 2–202 of
the Executive Order. This action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045
because it is a finding that certain states
have failed to submit a complete SIP
that satisfies interstate transport
requirements under section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA for the 2015
ozone NAAQS and does not directly or
disproportionately affect children.
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution or Use
This action is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, because it is not a
significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
J. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
This rulemaking does not involve
technical standards.
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes the human health or
environmental risk addressed by this
action will not have potential
disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects
on minority, low-income, or indigenous
populations. In finding that certain
states have failed to submit a complete
SIP that satisfies the interstate transport
requirements under section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA for the 2015
ozone NAAQS, this action does not
adversely affect the level of protection
provided to human health or the
environment.
L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, and
the EPA will submit a rule report to
each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United
States. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
M. Judicial Review
Section 307(b)(l) of the CAA indicates
which federal Courts of Appeal have
venue for petitions of review of final
actions by the EPA under the CAA. This
section provides, in part, that petitions
for review must be filed in the Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
66615
Circuit if: (i) The agency action consists
of ‘‘nationally applicable regulations
promulgated, or final action taken, by
the Administrator,’’ or (ii) such action is
locally or regionally applicable, but
‘‘such action is based on a
determination of nationwide scope or
effect and if in taking such action the
Administrator finds and publishes that
such action is based on such a
determination.’’
This final action is nationally
applicable. To the extent a court finds
this final action to be locally or
regionally applicable, the EPA finds that
this action is based on a determination
of ‘‘nationwide scope or effect’’ within
the meaning of CAA section 307(b)(1).
This final action consists of findings of
failure to submit required interstate
transport SIPs for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS from seven states located in
four of the ten EPA Regional offices and
five different federal judicial circuits.
This final action is also based on a
common core of factual findings
concerning the receipt and
completeness of the relevant SIP
submittals. For these reasons, this final
action is nationally applicable or,
alternatively, to the extent a court finds
this action to be locally or regionally
applicable, the Administrator has
determined that this final action is
based on a determination of nationwide
scope or effect for purposes of CAA
section 307(b)(1).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit within 60 days from
the date this final action is published in
the Federal Register. Filing a petition
for reconsideration by the Administrator
of this final action does not affect the
finality of the action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the
time within which a petition for judicial
review must be filed and shall not
postpone the effectiveness of such rule
or action. Thus, any petitions for review
of this action must be filed in the Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit within 60 days from the date this
final action is published in the Federal
Register.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
E:\FR\FM\05DER1.SGM
05DER1
66616
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 234 / Thursday, December 5, 2019 / Rules and Regulations
Dated: November 22, 2019.
Anne L. Idsal,
Acting Assistant Administrator.
I. General Information
[FR Doc. 2019–26136 Filed 12–4–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2018–0623; FRL–10000–33]
Propamocarb; Pesticide Tolerances
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes
tolerances for residues of propamocarb
(also referred to as propamocarb
hydrochloride (HCl) in this document)
in or on guava, starfruit, the leafy greens
subgroup 4–16A, the tuberous and corm
vegetable subgroup 1C, and the fruiting
vegetable group 8–10. Interregional
Research Project Number 4 (IR–4)
requested these tolerances under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act
(FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
December 5, 2019. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before February 3, 2020, and must
be filed in accordance with the
instructions provided in 40 CFR part
178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2018–0623, is
available at https://www.regulations.gov
or at the Office of Pesticide Programs
Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket)
in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William
Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460–0001. The Public Reading Room
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744,
and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review
the visitor instructions and additional
information about the docket available
at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Goodis, Registration Division
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington, DC
20460–0001; main telephone number:
(703) 305–7090; email address:
RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Dec 04, 2019
Jkt 250001
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. The following
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Publishing Office’s eCFR site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/
text-idx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/
Title40/40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2018–0623 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
objections and requests for a hearing
must be in writing, and must be
received by the Hearing Clerk on or
before February 3, 2020. Addresses for
mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40
CFR 178.25(b).
In addition to filing an objection or
hearing request with the Hearing Clerk
as described in 40 CFR part 178, please
submit a copy of the filing (excluding
any Confidential Business Information
(CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket.
Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be
disclosed publicly by EPA without prior
notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your
objection or hearing request, identified
by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2018–0623, by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
instructions for submitting comments.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be CBI or
other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW, Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on commenting
or visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is
available at https://www.epa.gov/
dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerance
In the Federal Register of December
21, 2018 (83 FR 65660) (FRL–9985–67),
EPA issued a document pursuant to
FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a
pesticide petition (PP 8E8692) by IR–4,
IR–4 Project Headquarters, Rutgers, The
State University of New Jersey, 500
College Road East, Suite 201 W,
Princeton, NJ 08540. The petition
requested that 40 CFR part 180 be
amended by establishing tolerances for
residues of the propamocarb (propyl N[3-(dimethylamino)propyl]carbamate in
or on the following raw agricultural
commodities: Guava at 0.05 parts per
million (ppm); starfruit at 0.05 ppm;
leafy greens subgroup 4–16A at 150
ppm; vegetable, tuberous and corm,
subgroup 1C at 0.30 ppm; and vegetable,
fruiting, group 8–10 at 4.0 ppm. The
petition also requested to amend 40 CFR
180.499 by removing the established
tolerances for the residues of
propamocarb in or on lettuce, head at 50
ppm; lettuce, leaf at 90 ppm; potato at
0.30 ppm; and vegetable, fruiting, group
8 at 2.0 ppm. That document referenced
a summary of the petition prepared by
Bayer CropScience, the registrant,
which is available in the docket, https://
www.regulations.gov. There were no
comments received in response to the
notice of filing.
EPA is establishing tolerances that
vary slightly from what was requested to
be consistent with Organization for
Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) Rounding Class
Practice.
III. Aggregate Risk Assessment and
Determination of Safety
Section 408(b)(2)(A)(i) of FFDCA
allows EPA to establish a tolerance (the
legal limit for a pesticide chemical
residue in or on a food) only if EPA
E:\FR\FM\05DER1.SGM
05DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 234 (Thursday, December 5, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 66612-66616]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-26136]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0603; FRL-10002-78-OAR]
Findings of Failure To Submit a Clean Air Act Section 110 State
Implementation Plan for Interstate Transport for the 2015 Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final action.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking final
action finding that seven states have failed to submit infrastructure
State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to satisfy certain interstate
transport requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) with respect to the
2015 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS).
Specifically, these requirements pertain to prohibiting significant
contribution to nonattainment, or interference with maintenance, of the
2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS in other states. These findings of failure to
submit establish a 2-year deadline for the EPA to promulgate Federal
Implementation Plans (FIPs) to address these interstate transport
requirements for a given state unless, prior to the EPA promulgating a
FIP, the state submits, and the EPA approves, a SIP that meets these
requirements.
DATES: Effective date of this action is January 6, 2020.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: General questions concerning this
document should be addressed to Mr. Thomas Uher, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Air Quality Policy Division, Mail Code C539-04,
109 TW Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; telephone
(919) 541-5534; email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Notice and Comment Under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA)
Section 553 of the APA, 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B), provides that, when
an agency for good cause finds that notice and public procedure are
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest, the
agency may issue a rule without providing notice and an opportunity for
public comment. The EPA has determined that there is good cause for
making this final agency action without prior proposal and opportunity
for comment because no significant EPA judgment is involved in making a
finding of failure to submit SIPs, or elements of SIPs, required by the
CAA, where states have made no submissions or incomplete submissions,
to meet the requirement. Thus, notice and public procedure are
unnecessary. The EPA finds that this constitutes good cause under 5
U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B).
B. How can I get copies of this document and other related information?
The EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2019-0603. All documents in the docket are listed and
publicly available at https://www.regulations.gov. Publicly available
docket materials are also available in hard copy at the Air and
Radiation Docket and Information
[[Page 66613]]
Center, EPA/DC, William Jefferson Clinton West Building, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566-1744 and the telephone number for the Office of Air and
Radiation Docket and Information Center is (202) 566-1742. For
additional information about the EPA's public docket, visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at: https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
C. How is the preamble organized?
Table of Contents
I. General Information
A. Notice and Comment Under the Administrative Procedures Act
(APA)
B. How can I get copies of this document and other related
information?
C. How is the preamble organized?
D. Where do I go if I have state specific questions?
II. Background and Overview
A. Interstate Transport SIPs
B. Background on 2015 Ozone NAAQS and Related Matters
III. Findings of Failure To Submit for States That Failed To Make an
Interstate Transport SIP Submission for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS
IV. Environmental Justice Considerations
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks.
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution or Use
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA)
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority and Low Income Populations
L. Congressional Review Act
M. Judicial Review
D. Where do I go if I have state specific questions?
The table below lists the states that failed to make a complete
interstate transport SIP submittal addressing CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirements for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. For questions
related to specific states mentioned in this document, please contact
the appropriate EPA Regional office:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regional offices States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA Region 1: Alison Simcox, Manager, Air Maine, Rhode Island.
Quality Branch, EPA Region I, 5 Post Office
Square, Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109-3912.
EPA Region 3: Joseph Schulingkamp, Air Pennsylvania, Virginia.
Protection Division, EPA Region III, 1650
Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-2187.
EPA Region 6: Mary Stanton, Chief, New Mexico.
Infrastructure and Ozone Section, EPA Region
VI, 1201 Elm Street, Suite 500, Dallas, TX
75270.
EPA Region 8: Adam Clark, EPA Region VIII, South Dakota, Utah.
Air and Radiation Division, 1595 Wynkoop
St., Denver, CO 80202.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Background and Overview
A. Interstate Transport SIPs
CAA section 110(a) imposes an obligation upon states to submit SIPs
that provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of a
new or revised NAAQS within 3 years following the promulgation of that
NAAQS. CAA section 110(a)(2) lists specific requirements that states
must meet in these SIP submissions, as applicable. The EPA refers to
this type of SIP submission as an ``infrastructure'' SIP because it
ensures that states can implement, maintain and enforce the new or
revised air standards. Within these requirements, CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i) contains requirements to address interstate transport
of NAAQS pollutants. A SIP revision submitted for this sub-section is
referred to as an ``interstate transport SIP.'' In turn, CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires that such a plan contain adequate
provisions to prohibit emissions from the state that will contribute
significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS in any other state (``prong
1'') or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in any other state
(``prong 2''). Interstate transport prongs 1 and 2, also called
collectively the ``good neighbor'' provision, are the requirements
relevant to this findings document.
Pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(1)(B), the EPA must determine no
later than 6 months after the date by which a state is required to
submit a SIP whether a state has made a submission that meets the
minimum completeness criteria established pursuant to CAA section
110(k)(1)(A). These criteria are set forth at 40 CFR part 51, appendix
V. The EPA refers to the determination that a state has not submitted a
SIP submission that meets the minimum completeness criteria as a
``finding of failure to submit.'' If the EPA finds a state has failed
to submit a SIP to meet its statutory obligation to address CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), then pursuant to CAA section 110(c)(1), the EPA has
not only the authority, but the obligation, to promulgate a FIP within
2 years to address the CAA requirement. This finding, therefore, starts
a 2-year ``clock'' for promulgation by the EPA of a FIP, in accordance
with CAA section 110(c)(1), unless prior to such promulgation the state
submits, and the EPA approves, a submittal from the state to meet the
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). Even where the EPA has
promulgated a FIP, the EPA will withdraw that FIP if a state submits
and the EPA approves a SIP satisfying the relevant requirements. The
EPA notes this action does not start a mandatory sanctions clock
pursuant to CAA section 179 because this finding of failure to submit
does not pertain to a part D plan for nonattainment areas required
under CAA section 110(a)(2)(I) or a SIP call pursuant to CAA section
110(k)(5).
B. Background on 2015 Ozone NAAQS and Related Matters
On October 1, 2015, the EPA promulgated a new 8-hour primary and
secondary ozone NAAQS of 70 parts per billion (ppb), which is met when
the 3-year average of the annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour
concentration does not exceed 70 ppb.\1\ Pursuant to the 3-year period
provided in CAA section 110(a)(1), infrastructure SIPs addressing the
revised standard were due on October 1, 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Final Rule, National Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Ozone, 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On September 5, 2019, the EPA announced via its website its
intention to make findings that certain states have failed to submit
complete interstate
[[Page 66614]]
transport SIPs for the 2015 ozone NAAQS by November 22, 2019.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ U.S. EPA, Interstate Air Pollution Transport, https://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/interstate-air-pollution-transport.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On September 30, 2019, the Sierra Club filed a complaint in the
United States District Court for the District of Columbia (D.C.
District Court) alleging that the EPA had not fulfilled its mandatory
duty to make findings of failure to submit interstate transport SIPs
pursuant to CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015
ozone NAAQS for twelve states: Arkansas, Hawaii, Louisiana, Maine,
Maryland, Mississippi, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah,
Vermont, and Virginia.\3\ On October 29, 2019, the States of New Jersey
and Connecticut filed a complaint in the D.C. District Court alleging
that the EPA had not fulfilled its mandatory duty to make findings of
failure to submit interstate transport SIPs addressing interstate
transport in CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to the 2015
ozone NAAQS for two states: Virginia and Pennsylvania.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Complaint, Sierra Club v. Wheeler, No. 1:19-cv-02923 (D.D.C.
filed Sept. 30, 2019).
\4\ Complaint, State of New Jersey v. Wheeler, No. 1:19-cv-03247
(D.D.C. filed Oct. 29, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To fulfill its statutory obligations, the EPA is taking this action
for all states that have failed to submit complete SIPs addressing CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS, not just those
states named in the complaints. As explained below, in total, seven
states have failed to submit complete SIPs while forty-three states and
the District of Columbia have submitted complete SIPs addressing CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
The EPA has included in the docket for this action its
correspondence with states regarding the completeness of their SIP
submissions. SIPs may be considered complete by either of two methods.
First, the EPA may make a determination that a SIP is complete under
the ``completeness criteria'' set out at 40 CFR part 51, appendix V.
See CAA section 110(k)(1). Second, a SIP may be deemed complete by
operation of law if the EPA has failed to make such a determination by
6 months after receipt of the SIP submission. See CAA section
110(k)(1)(B).
Five states failed to make any SIP submittal addressing interstate
transport for the 2015 ozone NAAQS: Maine, New Mexico, Pennsylvania,
Rhode Island, and Virginia. All of these states were identified in the
Sierra Club complaint.
The EPA has evaluated the SIP submittals of two states, South
Dakota and Utah, for completeness pursuant to the criteria in 40 CFR
part 51, appendix V, and concluded that these are incomplete SIP
submissions.\5\ On November 21, 2019, the EPA sent letters to these two
states explaining our incompleteness determination. These letters are
included in the docket for this action. As explained in those letters,
the completeness criteria under 40 CFR part 51, appendix V, section
2.1(g), require a certification that public hearing(s) were held in
accordance with the information provided in the state's public notice
and the State's laws and constitution, if applicable and consistent
with the public hearing requirements in 40 CFR 51.102. Under Sec.
51.102(a), states must either hold a public hearing or provide the
public the opportunity to request a public hearing. South Dakota and
Utah did not provide the necessary certification under section 2.1(g)
of appendix V that a public hearing was held or that they had provided
the opportunity for the public to request a public hearing in
accordance with 40 CFR 51.102(a). As a result, the EPA determined that
these SIP submissions are incomplete. Where the EPA determines that a
SIP submission does not meet the appendix V completeness criteria,
``the State shall be treated as not having made the submission. . . .''
CAA section 110(k)(1)(C). Accordingly, the EPA is finding in this
document that South Dakota and Utah have failed to submit complete SIP
revisions addressing CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) as to the 2015
ozone NAAQS. These states may, if they choose, resubmit to the EPA
complete SIPs, which the EPA will review and act upon at a later date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Utah was identified in the Sierra Club complaint, but South
Dakota was not.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In all other cases, the EPA has determined that the SIP submittals
are complete or they have been deemed complete by operation of law. In
particular, the six remaining states identified in Sierra Club's
complaint filed in the D.C. District Court have made complete SIP
submittals addressing the good neighbor provision for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS: Arkansas, Hawaii, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, and Vermont.
As a result, there is no longer a basis to make findings of failure to
submit for these states.
The EPA is issuing national findings of failure to submit
interstate transport SIPs addressing the requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) as to the 2015 ozone NAAQS, for all states that have
not made complete submissions as of the date of this document.
III. Findings of Failure To Submit for States That Failed To Make an
Interstate Transport SIP Submission for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS
The EPA is making findings of failure to submit for seven states.
The EPA finds the following states have not submitted complete
interstate transport SIPs to meet the requirements of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS: Maine, New Mexico,
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Utah, and Virginia.
Notwithstanding these findings, and the associated obligation of the
EPA to promulgate FIPs for these states within two years of this
finding, the EPA intends to continue to work with states subject to
these findings in order to provide assistance as necessary to help them
develop approvable SIP submittals in a timely manner.
IV. Environmental Justice Considerations
This document is making a procedural finding that certain states
have failed to submit a SIP to address CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The EPA did not conduct an environmental
analysis for this action because it would not directly affect the air
emissions of particular sources. Because this action will not directly
affect the air emissions of particular sources, it does not affect the
level of protection provided to human health or the environment.
Therefore, this action will not have potential disproportionately high
and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-
income or indigenous populations.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Orders 12866: Regulatory Planning and Executive Order
13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and was,
therefore, not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action
because it finds that seven states failed to submit a SIP to meet their
statutory obligation to address CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the
2015 ozone NAAQS.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the
[[Page 66615]]
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act. This final action does not
establish any new information collection requirement apart from what is
already required by law. This finding relates to the requirement in the
CAA for states to submit SIPs under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the
CAA for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
This action is not subject to the RFA. The RFA applies only to
rules subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. 553 or any other statute.
This action is not subject to notice and comment requirements because
the agency has invoked the APA ``good cause'' exemption under 5 U.S.C.
553(b). I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. The action
is a finding that the named states have not made the necessary SIP
submission for interstate transport to meet the requirements under
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538 and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The action imposes no enforceable duty on any state,
local or tribal governments or the private sector.
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. This action finds that seven states have failed
to complete the requirement in the CAA to submit SIPs under section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. No tribe is
subject to the requirement to submit a transport SIP under section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. Thus, Executive
Order 13175 does not apply to this action.
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern health or safety risks that the EPA has
reason to believe may disproportionately affect children, per the
definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in section 2-202 of the
Executive Order. This action is not subject to Executive Order 13045
because it is a finding that certain states have failed to submit a
complete SIP that satisfies interstate transport requirements under
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA for the 2015 ozone NAAQS and does
not directly or disproportionately affect children.
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution or Use
This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, because it is
not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866.
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed
by this action will not have potential disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental effects on minority, low-income,
or indigenous populations. In finding that certain states have failed
to submit a complete SIP that satisfies the interstate transport
requirements under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA for the 2015
ozone NAAQS, this action does not adversely affect the level of
protection provided to human health or the environment.
L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
M. Judicial Review
Section 307(b)(l) of the CAA indicates which federal Courts of
Appeal have venue for petitions of review of final actions by the EPA
under the CAA. This section provides, in part, that petitions for
review must be filed in the Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit if: (i) The agency action consists of ``nationally
applicable regulations promulgated, or final action taken, by the
Administrator,'' or (ii) such action is locally or regionally
applicable, but ``such action is based on a determination of nationwide
scope or effect and if in taking such action the Administrator finds
and publishes that such action is based on such a determination.''
This final action is nationally applicable. To the extent a court
finds this final action to be locally or regionally applicable, the EPA
finds that this action is based on a determination of ``nationwide
scope or effect'' within the meaning of CAA section 307(b)(1). This
final action consists of findings of failure to submit required
interstate transport SIPs for the 2015 ozone NAAQS from seven states
located in four of the ten EPA Regional offices and five different
federal judicial circuits. This final action is also based on a common
core of factual findings concerning the receipt and completeness of the
relevant SIP submittals. For these reasons, this final action is
nationally applicable or, alternatively, to the extent a court finds
this action to be locally or regionally applicable, the Administrator
has determined that this final action is based on a determination of
nationwide scope or effect for purposes of CAA section 307(b)(1).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit within 60 days from the date this
final action is published in the Federal Register. Filing a petition
for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final action does not
affect the finality of the action for the purposes of judicial review
nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review
must be filed and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. Thus, any petitions for review of this action must be filed in
the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit within 60
days from the date this final action is published in the Federal
Register.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
[[Page 66616]]
Dated: November 22, 2019.
Anne L. Idsal,
Acting Assistant Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2019-26136 Filed 12-4-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P