Air Plan Approval; Rhode Island; 2015 Ozone NAAQS Interstate Transport Requirements, 70409-70412 [2021-26674]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 235 / Friday, December 10, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
significant new uses described in
paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(2) The significant new uses are:
(i) Hazard communication.
Requirements as specified in § 721.72(a)
through (f), (g)(1), (g)(2)(i) through (iii),
and (g)(5). For purposes of § 721.72(e),
the concentration is set at 1.0%. For
purposes of § 721.72(g)(1), this
substance may cause: Skin irritation;
eye irritation; respiratory complications;
central nervous system effects; internal
organ effects; reproductive effects;
developmental effects. Alternative
hazard and warning statements that
meet the criteria of the Globally
Harmonized System and OSHA Hazard
Communication Standard may be used.
(ii) Industrial, commercial, and
consumer activities. Requirements as
specified in § 721.80(k) and (q). It is a
significant new use to manufacture or
process the substance without
implementing the engineering controls/
processes described in the TSCA Order
for the substance. It is a significant new
use to manufacture or use the substance
other than in liquid formulations.
(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 (c) and (f) through
(i) are applicable to manufacturers and
processors of this substance.
(2) Limitation 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 paragraph
(a)(2)(ii) of this section.
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
§ 721.11554 Halogenated sodium
alkylbenzoate (generic) (P–19–184).
(a) Chemical substance and
significant new uses subject to reporting.
(1) The chemical substance identified
generically as halogenated sodium
alkylbenzoate (PMN P–19–184) is
subject to reporting under this section
for the significant new uses described in
paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(2) The significant new uses are:
(i) Hazard communication.
Requirements as specified in § 721.72(a)
through (f), (g)(1), (g)(2)(i) through (iii),
and (g)(5). For purposes of § 721.72(e),
the concentration is set at 1.0%. For
purposes of § 721.72(g)(1), this
substance may cause: Skin irritation;
eye irritation; respiratory complications;
central nervous system effects; internal
organ effects; reproductive effects;
developmental effects. Alternative
hazard and warning statements that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:55 Dec 09, 2021
Jkt 256001
meet the criteria of the Globally
Harmonized System and OSHA Hazard
Communication Standard may be used.
(ii) Industrial, commercial, and
consumer activities. Requirements as
specified in § 721.80(k) and (q). It is a
significant new use to manufacture or
process the substance without
implementing the engineering controls/
processes described in the TSCA Order
for the substance. It is a significant new
use to manufacture or use the substance
other than in liquid formulations.
(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 (c) and (f) through
(i) are applicable to manufacturers and
processors of this substance.
(2) Limitation 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 paragraph
(a)(2)(ii) of this section.
§ 721.11555 Halogenated sodium
alkylbenzoate (generic) (P–19–187).
(a) Chemical substance and
significant new uses subject to reporting.
(1) The chemical substance identified
generically as halogenated sodium
alkylbenzoate (PMN P–19–187) is
subject to reporting under this section
for the significant new uses described in
paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(2) The significant new uses are:
(i) Hazard communication.
Requirements as specified in § 721.72(a)
through (f), (g)(1), (g)(2)(i) through (iii),
and (g)(5). For purposes of § 721.72(e),
the concentration is set at 1.0%. For
purposes of § 721.72(g)(1), this
substance may cause: Skin irritation;
eye irritation; respiratory complications;
central nervous system effects; internal
organ effects; reproductive effects;
developmental effects. Alternative
hazard and warning statements that
meet the criteria of the Globally
Harmonized System and OSHA Hazard
Communication Standard may be used.
(ii) Industrial, commercial, and
consumer activities. Requirements as
specified in § 721.80(k) and (q). It is a
significant new use to manufacture or
process the substance without
implementing the engineering controls/
processes described in the TSCA Order
for the substance. It is a significant new
use to manufacture or use the substance
other than in liquid formulations.
(b) Specific requirements. The
provisions of subpart A of this part
PO 00000
Frm 00061
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
70409
apply to this section except as modified
by this paragraph (b).
(1) Recordkeeping. Recordkeeping
requirements as specified in
§ 721.125(a) through (c) and (f) through
(i) are applicable to manufacturers and
processors of this substance.
(2) Limitation 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 paragraph
(a)(2)(ii) of this section.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2021–26683 Filed 12–9–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R01–OAR–2021–0580; FRL–8967–02–
R1]
Air Plan Approval; Rhode Island; 2015
Ozone NAAQS Interstate Transport
Requirements
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the State of Rhode Island
as meeting the Clean Air Act (CAA)
requirement that each State’s SIP
contain adequate provisions to prohibit
emissions that will significantly
contribute to nonattainment or interfere
with maintenance of the 2015 8-hour
ozone national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) in any other state.
This action is being taken in accordance
with the CAA.
DATES: This rule is effective on January
10, 2022.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA–R01–OAR–
2021–0580. All documents in the docket
are listed on the https://
www.regulations.gov website. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., confidential
business information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
is not placed on the internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket
materials are available at https://
www.regulations.gov or at the U.S.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\10DER1.SGM
10DER1
70410
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 235 / Friday, December 10, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
Region 1 Regional Office, Air and
Radiation Division, 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 and
facility closures due to COVID–19.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Alison C. Simcox, Air Quality Branch,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
EPA Region 1, 5 Post Office Square—
Suite 100, (Mail code 05–2), Boston, MA
02109–3912, tel. (617) 918–1684, email
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
II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
I. Background and Purpose
On September 15, 2021, EPA
published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) for the State of
Rhode Island. See 86 FR 51310. The
NPRM proposed approval of a Rhode
Island SIP revision that addresses the
CAA requirement to prohibit emissions
from the state that significantly
contribute to nonattainment or interfere
with maintenance of the 2015 8-hour
ozone NAAQS in other states. See CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) (the ‘‘good
neighbor provision’’). The SIP revision
was submitted to EPA by Rhode Island
on September 23, 2020. The rationale
for EPA’s proposed action is given in
the NPRM and will not be repeated
here. EPA received two public
comments on the NPRM, which are
addressed below.
II. Response to Comments
One anonymous comment supported
the EPA’s proposed action and
suggested that EPA solicit information
from residents of the State of Rhode
Island as well as from residents of
downwind states. We note that, before
providing the submission to EPA, the
Rhode Island Department of
Environmental Management (RIDEM)
distributed it to the public via the
RIDEM website and an electronic
mailing list. RIDEM also gave state
residents and other interested parties a
30-day period to request a public
hearing and provide public comments.
In addition, EPA provided the public
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:55 Dec 09, 2021
Jkt 256001
with a 30-day period to comment in the
Federal Register, the official journal of
the U.S. Government that is available to
all downwind states, on the proposed
approval of Rhode Island’s SIP revision
following publication on September 15,
2021.
The other commenter questioned why
the analyses considered the effects of
emissions from Rhode Island on
Connecticut and New York, but
seemingly not on Massachusetts—
particularly Bristol County,
Massachusetts, parts of which lie
directly east of Rhode Island. The
comment states that ‘‘prevailing winds
[in this region] travel eastward’’ and that
‘‘EPA data shows [sic] that Bristol
County . . . experiences a
disproportionately high ‘Percent of
Total US Anthropogenic Ozone from
Upwind States’ compared to other Mass
counties.’’
EPA acknowledges that the prevailing
winds described by the commenter do
generally move from west to east in the
New England area, and therefore,
Massachusetts is downwind of Rhode
Island. In fact, EPA’s modeling analysis
does consider the impact of emissions
from Rhode Island on all downwind
areas within the contiguous 48 states,
including Bristol County,
Massachusetts, and, indeed, the data
indicate that the highest projected
contribution in 2021 from Rhode Island
sources to an out-of-state area is 2.50
ppb to Bristol County (monitoring site
250051004; line number 242 on the
Design Values and Contributions
spreadsheet).1
As explained in the NPRM for this
action, EPA uses a four-step interstate
transport framework to address the
requirements of the good neighbor
provision for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
The first step is to identify downwind
areas that may have problems attaining
and maintaining the standard (i.e.,
receptors). The Bristol County monitor’s
projected average design value is 63.4
ppb and projected maximum design
value is 65.5 ppb in 2021, which are
both below the 2015 ozone NAAQS of
70 ppb. Using EPA’s definition of a
projected nonattainment or maintenance
receptor provided in the NPRM (a
definition that Rhode Island adopted),
EPA’s analysis indicates that the
monitor in Bristol County,
Massachusetts, is not projected to be a
nonattainment or maintenance receptor
1 The data are given in the ‘‘Air Quality Modeling
Technical Support Document for the Revised CrossState Air Pollution Rule Update’’ and ‘‘Ozone
Design Values and Contributions Revised CSAPR
Update.xlsx,’’ which are included in the docket for
this action.
PO 00000
Frm 00062
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
in 2021 or later years for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS.
While Bristol County is considered
downwind of, and impacted by, Rhode
Island’s emissions, EPA’s analysis in
this first step did not identify Bristol
County as a receptor expected to have
problems maintaining the 2015 ozone
NAAQS. Thus, EPA concluded that
emissions from Rhode Island sources,
while having an impact on ozone levels
in Bristol County, do not contribute to
nonattainment or interfere with
maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS
in Bristol County (or elsewhere in
Massachusetts), which is the relevant
inquiry under CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I).
By comparison, EPA’s analysis at step
one identified other receptors, including
monitoring sites west of Rhode Island in
Connecticut and in New York that are
projected to have problems attaining
and maintaining the 2015 ozone
NAAQS. For these receptors, EPA
proceeded to step 2 of the four-step
interstate transport framework, which
considers whether emissions from
Rhode Island impact air-quality
problems at those receptors sufficiently
such that the state is considered
‘‘linked’’ to those receptors and
therefore warrants further review and
analysis.
Based on the results of EPA’s airquality analysis described in the
proposal of this action, EPA determined
that Rhode Island contributes well
below the screening threshold of one
percent of the 2015 ozone NAAQS (0.70
ppb) to any of these Connecticut or New
York receptors, and is, therefore, not
linked to downwind nonattainment
and/or maintenance receptors.2 3 EPA
also analyzed emissions trends for
ozone precursors, concluding that
emissions from sources in Rhode Island
will continue to decline, which lends
further support to the findings from the
air-quality analysis.
In sum, EPA’s analysis considered the
impact of emissions from Rhode Island
sources on Massachusetts (including
Bristol County) but found that Rhode
Island does not contribute to
nonattainment or interfere with
maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS
in Massachusetts, because that state is
not expected to have problems
2 See Section I of the NPRM for an explanation
of EPA’s use of a one percent screening threshold
at step 2 of the four-step interstate transport
framework.
3 For instance, and as noted in the NPRM, the
data indicate that the highest contribution in 2021
from Rhode Island to an area projected to have
problems maintaining the NAAQS is 0.09 ppb to
the maintenance receptor in Fairfield County,
Connecticut.
E:\FR\FM\10DER1.SGM
10DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 235 / Friday, December 10, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
maintaining ozone concentrations below
the NAAQS. Furthermore, EPA’s entire
analysis concluded that Rhode Island
does not significantly contribute to
nonattainment or interfere with
maintenance in any other state for the
2015 ozone NAAQS.
III. Final Action
EPA is approving a Rhode Island SIP
revision, which was submitted on
September 23, 2020. This submission is
approved as meeting CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirements that
Rhode Island’s SIP includes adequate
provisions prohibiting any source or
other type of emissions activity within
the State from emitting any air pollutant
in amounts that will contribute
significantly to nonattainment or
interfere with maintenance of the 2015
ozone NAAQS in any other state.
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
IV. 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 action merely
approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
this action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:55 Dec 09, 2021
Jkt 256001
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).
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
PO 00000
Frm 00063
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
70411
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by February 8, 2022.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
the Administrator of this final rule does
not affect the finality of this action for
the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a
petition for judicial review may be filed
and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may
not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: December 3, 2021.
Deborah Szaro,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region
1.
Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended
as follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart OO—Rhode Island
2. In § 52.2070(e), amend the table by
adding an entry for ‘‘Transport SIP for
the 2015 Ozone Standard’’ to the end of
the table to read as follows:
■
§ 52.2070
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
E:\FR\FM\10DER1.SGM
10DER1
*
*
70412
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 235 / Friday, December 10, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
RHODE ISLAND NON REGULATORY
Name of non
regulatory SIP
provision
Applicable
geographic or
nonattainment
area
State submittal date/effective date
*
Transport SIP for the
2015 Ozone Standard.
*
*
Statewide ......................
*
Submitted 9/23/2020 .....
[FR Doc. 2021–26674 Filed 12–9–21; 8:45 a.m.]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services
42 CFR Parts 422, 431, 435, 438, 440,
and 457
[CMS–9115–N2]
Medicare and Medicaid Programs;
Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act; Interoperability and Patient
Access for Medicare Advantage
Organizations and Medicaid Managed
Care Plans, State Medicaid Agencies,
CHIP Agencies and CHIP Managed
Care Entities, Issuers of Qualified
Health Plans on the FederallyFacilitated Exchanges, and Health Care
Providers
Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS), Department
of Health and Human Services (HHS).
ACTION: Notification of enforcement
discretion.
AGENCY:
This notification is to inform
the public that CMS is exercising its
discretion in how it enforces the payerto-payer data exchange provisions. As a
matter of enforcement discretion, CMS
does not expect to take action to enforce
compliance with these specific
provisions until we are able to address
certain implementation challenges.
DATES: The notification of enforcement
discretion is effective on December 10,
2021.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Alexandra Mugge, (410) 786–4457; or
Lorraine Doo, (443) 615–1309.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 1,
2020, we published the CMS
Interoperability and Patient Access final
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with RULES1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:55 Dec 09, 2021
Jkt 256001
EPA approved date
*
*
*
12/10/2021, [Insert Fed- State submitted a transport SIP for
eral Register citation].
the 2015 ozone standard which
shows that it does not significantly
contribute to ozone nonattainment
or maintenance in any other state.
EPA approved this submittal as
meeting the requirements of
Clean
Air
Act
Section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I).
rule (85 FR 25510) to establish policies
that advance interoperability and
patient access to health information.
The rule required Medicare Advantage
(MA) organizations, Medicaid managed
care plans, Children’s Health Insurance
Program (CHIP) managed care entities,
and Qualified Health Plan (QHP) issuers
on the Federally-facilitated Exchanges
(FFEs) (collectively referred to as
‘‘impacted payers’’), to facilitate
enhanced data sharing by exchanging
data with other payers at the patient’s
request, starting January 1, 2022, for:
• MA organizations (42 CFR
422.119(f)); or
• Medicaid managed care plans (42
CFR 438.62(b)(1)(vi)); and CHIP
managed care entities (42 CFR
457.1216).
For plan or policy years beginning on
or after January 1, 2022, for QHP issuers
on the FFEs (45 CFR 156.221(f)), as
applicable. We also required these
impacted payers to incorporate and
maintain the data they receive through
this payer-to-payer data exchange into
the enrollee’s record, with the goal of
increasing transparency for patients,
promoting better coordinated care,
reducing administrative burden, and
enabling patients to establish a
collective patient health care record as
they move throughout the health care
system (see applicable regulations at
(§ 422.119(f) for MA organizations;
§ 438.62(b)(1)(vi) for Medicaid managed
care plans (and by extension under
existing rules at § 457.1216, to CHIP
managed care entities); and
§ 156.221(f)(i) through (iii) for QHP
issuers on the FFEs). These policies are
collectively referred to as the payer-topayer data exchange requirement.
To provide payers with flexibility to
support timely adoption and rapid
implementation, CMS did not require an
application programming interface (API)
or any a specific mechanism for the
payer-to-payer data exchange. Rather,
PO 00000
Frm 00064
Fmt 4700
Explanations
Sfmt 4700
we required impacted payers to receive
data in whatever format it was sent and
to send data in the form and format it
was received, which ultimately
complicated implementation by
requiring payers to accept data in
different formats.
Since the rule was finalized in May
2020, multiple impacted payers have
indicated to CMS that the absence of a
required standard or specification for
the payer-to-payer data exchange
requirement is creating challenges for
implementation and may lead to
differences in implementation across
industry, poor data quality, operational
challenges, and increased
administrative burden. For example,
payers expressed concerns about
receiving volumes of portable document
format (pdf) documents and files from
other payers using a variety of technical
approaches—from file transfer protocols
(FTP), to email, to Fast Healthcare
Interoperability Resources (FHIR).
Payers explained that differences in
implementation approaches may create
gaps in patient health information that
conflict directly with the intended goal
of an interoperable payer-to-payer data
exchange.
After listening to stakeholder
concerns about implementing the payerto-payer data exchange requirement and
considering the potential for negative
outcomes that impede, rather than
support, interoperable payer-to-payer
data exchange, CMS published three
frequently asked questions (FAQs) on
the CMS and HHS Good Guidance
websites 1 to announce that it would be
exercising enforcement discretion for
the payer-to-payer data exchange
requirement. In one of the FAQs, CMS
encouraged payers that have already
developed FHIR-based application API
1 Link to CMS website with FAQs for
interoperability rule, and enforcement discretion:
https://www.cms.gov/about-cms/healthinformatics-and-interoperability-group/faqs#122.
E:\FR\FM\10DER1.SGM
10DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 235 (Friday, December 10, 2021)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 70409-70412]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-26674]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R01-OAR-2021-0580; FRL-8967-02-R1]
Air Plan Approval; Rhode Island; 2015 Ozone NAAQS Interstate
Transport Requirements
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Rhode
Island as meeting the Clean Air Act (CAA) requirement that each State's
SIP contain adequate provisions to prohibit emissions that will
significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance
of the 2015 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS)
in any other state. This action is being taken in accordance with the
CAA.
DATES: This rule is effective on January 10, 2022.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R01-OAR-2021-0580. All documents in the docket
are listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed
in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e.,
confidential business information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on the internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available at https://www.regulations.gov or at the U.S.
[[Page 70410]]
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region 1 Regional Office, Air and
Radiation Division, 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 and facility
closures due to COVID-19.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alison C. Simcox, Air Quality Branch,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region 1, 5 Post Office
Square--Suite 100, (Mail code 05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912, tel. (617)
918-1684, email [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background and Purpose
II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background and Purpose
On September 15, 2021, EPA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPRM) for the State of Rhode Island. See 86 FR 51310. The
NPRM proposed approval of a Rhode Island SIP revision that addresses
the CAA requirement to prohibit emissions from the state that
significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance
of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS in other states. See CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) (the ``good neighbor provision''). The SIP revision
was submitted to EPA by Rhode Island on September 23, 2020. The
rationale for EPA's proposed action is given in the NPRM and will not
be repeated here. EPA received two public comments on the NPRM, which
are addressed below.
II. Response to Comments
One anonymous comment supported the EPA's proposed action and
suggested that EPA solicit information from residents of the State of
Rhode Island as well as from residents of downwind states. We note
that, before providing the submission to EPA, the Rhode Island
Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM) distributed it to the
public via the RIDEM website and an electronic mailing list. RIDEM also
gave state residents and other interested parties a 30-day period to
request a public hearing and provide public comments. In addition, EPA
provided the public with a 30-day period to comment in the Federal
Register, the official journal of the U.S. Government that is available
to all downwind states, on the proposed approval of Rhode Island's SIP
revision following publication on September 15, 2021.
The other commenter questioned why the analyses considered the
effects of emissions from Rhode Island on Connecticut and New York, but
seemingly not on Massachusetts--particularly Bristol County,
Massachusetts, parts of which lie directly east of Rhode Island. The
comment states that ``prevailing winds [in this region] travel
eastward'' and that ``EPA data shows [sic] that Bristol County . . .
experiences a disproportionately high `Percent of Total US
Anthropogenic Ozone from Upwind States' compared to other Mass
counties.''
EPA acknowledges that the prevailing winds described by the
commenter do generally move from west to east in the New England area,
and therefore, Massachusetts is downwind of Rhode Island. In fact,
EPA's modeling analysis does consider the impact of emissions from
Rhode Island on all downwind areas within the contiguous 48 states,
including Bristol County, Massachusetts, and, indeed, the data indicate
that the highest projected contribution in 2021 from Rhode Island
sources to an out-of-state area is 2.50 ppb to Bristol County
(monitoring site 250051004; line number 242 on the Design Values and
Contributions spreadsheet).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The data are given in the ``Air Quality Modeling Technical
Support Document for the Revised Cross-State Air Pollution Rule
Update'' and ``Ozone Design Values and Contributions Revised CSAPR
Update.xlsx,'' which are included in the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As explained in the NPRM for this action, EPA uses a four-step
interstate transport framework to address the requirements of the good
neighbor provision for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The first step is to
identify downwind areas that may have problems attaining and
maintaining the standard (i.e., receptors). The Bristol County
monitor's projected average design value is 63.4 ppb and projected
maximum design value is 65.5 ppb in 2021, which are both below the 2015
ozone NAAQS of 70 ppb. Using EPA's definition of a projected
nonattainment or maintenance receptor provided in the NPRM (a
definition that Rhode Island adopted), EPA's analysis indicates that
the monitor in Bristol County, Massachusetts, is not projected to be a
nonattainment or maintenance receptor in 2021 or later years for the
2015 ozone NAAQS.
While Bristol County is considered downwind of, and impacted by,
Rhode Island's emissions, EPA's analysis in this first step did not
identify Bristol County as a receptor expected to have problems
maintaining the 2015 ozone NAAQS. Thus, EPA concluded that emissions
from Rhode Island sources, while having an impact on ozone levels in
Bristol County, do not contribute to nonattainment or interfere with
maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS in Bristol County (or elsewhere in
Massachusetts), which is the relevant inquiry under CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I).
By comparison, EPA's analysis at step one identified other
receptors, including monitoring sites west of Rhode Island in
Connecticut and in New York that are projected to have problems
attaining and maintaining the 2015 ozone NAAQS. For these receptors,
EPA proceeded to step 2 of the four-step interstate transport
framework, which considers whether emissions from Rhode Island impact
air-quality problems at those receptors sufficiently such that the
state is considered ``linked'' to those receptors and therefore
warrants further review and analysis.
Based on the results of EPA's air-quality analysis described in the
proposal of this action, EPA determined that Rhode Island contributes
well below the screening threshold of one percent of the 2015 ozone
NAAQS (0.70 ppb) to any of these Connecticut or New York receptors, and
is, therefore, not linked to downwind nonattainment and/or maintenance
receptors.2 3 EPA also analyzed emissions trends for ozone
precursors, concluding that emissions from sources in Rhode Island will
continue to decline, which lends further support to the findings from
the air-quality analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See Section I of the NPRM for an explanation of EPA's use of
a one percent screening threshold at step 2 of the four-step
interstate transport framework.
\3\ For instance, and as noted in the NPRM, the data indicate
that the highest contribution in 2021 from Rhode Island to an area
projected to have problems maintaining the NAAQS is 0.09 ppb to the
maintenance receptor in Fairfield County, Connecticut.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In sum, EPA's analysis considered the impact of emissions from
Rhode Island sources on Massachusetts (including Bristol County) but
found that Rhode Island does not contribute to nonattainment or
interfere with maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS in Massachusetts,
because that state is not expected to have problems
[[Page 70411]]
maintaining ozone concentrations below the NAAQS. Furthermore, EPA's
entire analysis concluded that Rhode Island does not significantly
contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance in any other
state for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
III. Final Action
EPA is approving a Rhode Island SIP revision, which was submitted
on September 23, 2020. This submission is approved as meeting CAA
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requirements that Rhode Island's SIP
includes adequate provisions prohibiting any source or other type of
emissions activity within the State from emitting any air pollutant in
amounts that will contribute significantly to nonattainment or
interfere with maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS in any other state.
IV. 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 action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
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).
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 8, 2022. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: December 3, 2021.
Deborah Szaro,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations
is amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart OO--Rhode Island
0
2. In Sec. 52.2070(e), amend the table by adding an entry for
``Transport SIP for the 2015 Ozone Standard'' to the end of the table
to read as follows:
Sec. 52.2070 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
[[Page 70412]]
Rhode Island Non Regulatory
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable
Name of non regulatory SIP geographic or State submittal
provision nonattainment date/effective EPA approved date Explanations
area date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Transport SIP for the 2015 Ozone Statewide......... Submitted 9/23/ 12/10/2021, State submitted a
Standard. 2020. [Insert Federal transport SIP for
Register the 2015 ozone
citation]. standard which
shows that it
does not
significantly
contribute to
ozone
nonattainment or
maintenance in
any other state.
EPA approved this
submittal as
meeting the
requirements of
Clean Air Act
Section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I
).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 2021-26674 Filed 12-9-21; 8:45 a.m.]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P