Proposed Rule2021-12079
Air Plan Approval; Maine and New Hampshire; 2015 Ozone NAAQS Interstate Transport Requirements
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
June 10, 2021
Issuing agencies
Environmental Protection Agency
Abstract
The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires each State Implementation Plan (SIP) to contain adequate provisions prohibiting emissions that will have certain adverse air quality effects in other states. The States of Maine and New Hampshire each made submissions to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to address these requirements for the 2015 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). EPA is proposing to approve the submissions for each state as meeting the requirement that each SIP contain adequate provisions to prohibit emissions that will significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS in any other state.
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 86 Issue 110 (Thursday, June 10, 2021)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 110 (Thursday, June 10, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30854-30860]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2021-12079]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R01-OAR-2021-0250; FRL-10024-67-Region 1]
Air Plan Approval; Maine and New Hampshire; 2015 Ozone NAAQS
Interstate Transport Requirements
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 30855]]
SUMMARY: The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires each State Implementation
Plan (SIP) to contain adequate provisions prohibiting emissions that
will have certain adverse air quality effects in other states. The
States of Maine and New Hampshire each made submissions to the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to address these requirements for
the 2015 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). EPA is
proposing to approve the submissions for each state as meeting the
requirement that each SIP contain adequate provisions to prohibit
emissions that will significantly contribute to nonattainment or
interfere with maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS in any other state.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before July 12, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-
OAR-2021-0250 at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, or via email to
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f98a90949a9681d79895908a9697b99c8998d79e968f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="790a10141a1601571815100a1617391c0918571e160f">[email protected]</span></a>. For comments submitted at <a href="http://Regulations.gov">Regulations.gov</a>,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from <a href="http://Regulations.gov">Regulations.gov</a>. For either
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit <a href="https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets">https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets</a>. Publicly
available docket materials are available at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>
or at the U.S. 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 <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7d0e14101e1205531c11140e12133d180d1c531a120b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="55263c38363a2d7b34393c263a3b153025347b323a23">[email protected]</span></a>.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our'' is
used, we mean EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
II. Maine Submission
III. New Hampshire Submission
IV. EPA Evaluation of the States' Submittals
V. Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
On October 1, 2015, EPA promulgated a revision to the ozone NAAQS
(2015 ozone NAAQS), lowering the level of both the primary and
secondary standards to 0.070 parts per million (ppm).\1\ Section
110(a)(1) of the CAA requires states to submit, within 3 years after
promulgation of a new or revised standard, SIP submissions meeting the
applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2).\2\ One of these
applicable requirements is found in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I),
otherwise known as the good neighbor provision, which generally
requires SIPs to contain adequate provisions to prohibit in-state
emissions activities from having certain adverse air quality effects on
other states due to interstate transport of pollution. There are four
so-called ``prongs'' within CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i); section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) contains prongs 1 and 2. Under prongs 1 and 2 of the
good neighbor provision, a SIP for a new or revised NAAQS must contain
adequate provisions prohibiting any source or other type of emissions
activity within the state from emitting air pollutants in amounts that
will significantly contribute to nonattainment of the NAAQS in another
state (prong 1) or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in another
state (prong 2). EPA and states must give independent significance to
prong 1 and prong 2 when evaluating downwind air quality problems under
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I).\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone, Final
Rule, 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015). Although the level of the
standard is specified in the units of ppm, ozone concentrations are
also described in parts per billion (ppb). For example, 0.070 ppm is
equivalent to 70 ppb.
\2\ SIP revisions that are intended to meet the applicable
requirements of section 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA are often
referred to as infrastructure SIPs and the applicable elements under
section 110(a)(2) are referred to as infrastructure requirements.
\3\ See North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896, 909-911 (2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We note that EPA has addressed the interstate transport
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to prior
ozone NAAQS in several regional regulatory actions, including the
Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), which addressed interstate
transport with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS as well as the 1997 and
2006 fine particulate matter standards,\4\ the Cross-State Air
Pollution Rule Update (CSAPR Update), and, most recently, the Revised
CSAPR Update for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.<SUP>5 6</SUP>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011).
\5\ Wisconsin v. EPA remanded the CSAPR Update to the extent it
failed to require upwind states to eliminate their significant
contribution by the next applicable attainment date by which
downwind states must come into compliance with the NAAQS, as
established under CAA section 181(a). Wisconsin v. EPA, 938 F.3d
303, 313 (D.C. Cir. 2019).
\6\ The Revised Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Update for the
2008 Ozone NAAQs (86 FR 23054 (April 30, 2021)) was signed by the
EPA Administrator on March 15, 2021, and responded to the remand of
the CSAPR Update (81 FR 74504 October 26, 2016)) and the vacatur of
a separate rule, the CSAPR Close-Out (83 FR 65878 (December 21,
2018)) by the D.C. Circuit. Wisconsin v. EPA, 938 F.3d 303 (D.C.
Cir. 2019); New York v. EPA, 781 F. App'x. 4 (D.C. Cir. 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Through the development and implementation of CSAPR and other
regional rulemakings pursuant to the good neighbor provision,\7\ EPA,
working in partnership with states, developed the following four-step
interstate transport framework to address the requirements of the good
neighbor provision for the ozone NAAQS: (1) Identify downwind air
quality problems; (2) identify upwind states that impact those downwind
air quality problems sufficiently such that they are considered
``linked'' and therefore warrant further review and analysis; (3)
identify the emissions reductions necessary (if any), considering air-
quality and cost factors, to prevent linked upwind states identified in
step 2 from contributing significantly to nonattainment or interfering
with maintenance of the NAAQS at the locations of the downwind air
quality problems; and (4) adopt permanent and enforceable measures
needed to achieve those emissions reductions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ In addition to the CSAPR rulemakings, other regional
rulemakings addressing ozone transport include the NO<INF>X</INF>
SIP Call, 63 FR 57356 (October 27, 1998), and the Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR), 70 FR 25162 (May 12, 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA has released several documents containing information relevant
to evaluating interstate transport with
[[Page 30856]]
respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. First, on January 6, 2017, EPA
published a notice of data availability (NODA) with preliminary
interstate ozone transport modeling with projected ozone design values
(DVs) for 2023 using a 2011 base year platform, on which we requested
public comment.\8\ In the NODA, EPA used the year 2023 as the analytic
year for this preliminary modeling because that year aligns with the
expected attainment year for Moderate ozone nonattainment areas for the
2015 ozone NAAQS.\9\ On October 27, 2017, we released a memorandum
(2017 memorandum) containing updated modeling data for 2023, which
incorporated changes made in response to comments on the NODA, and
noted that the modeling may be useful for states developing SIPs to
address good neighbor obligations for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\10\ On
March 27, 2018, we issued a memorandum (March 2018 memorandum) noting
that the same 2023 modeling data released in the 2017 memorandum could
also be useful for identifying potential downwind air quality problems
with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS at step 1 of the four-step
interstate transport framework. The March 2018 memorandum also included
the then newly available contribution modeling results to assist states
in evaluating their impact on potential downwind air quality problems
for the 2015 ozone NAAQS under step 2 of the interstate transport
framework. EPA subsequently issued two more memoranda in August and
October 2018, providing additional information to states developing
good neighbor SIP submissions for the 2015 ozone NAAQS concerning,
respectively, potential contribution thresholds that may be appropriate
to apply in step 2 of the framework, and considerations for identifying
downwind areas that may have problems maintaining the standard at step
1 of the framework.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Notice of Availability of the Environmental Protection
Agency's Preliminary Interstate Ozone Transport Modeling Data for
the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS), 82 FR
1733 (January 6, 2017).
\9\ 82 FR 1733, 1735 (January 6, 2017).
\10\ See Information on the Interstate Transport State
Implementation Plan Submissions for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards under Clean Air Act Section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), October 27, 2017, available in the docket for
this action or at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/interstate-air-pollution-transport/interstate-air-pollution-transport-memos-and-notices">https://www.epa.gov/interstate-air-pollution-transport/interstate-air-pollution-transport-memos-and-notices</a>.
\11\ See Analysis of Contribution Thresholds for Use in Clean
Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) Interstate Transport State
Implementation Plan Submissions for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards, August 31, 2018) (``August 2018
memorandum''), and Considerations for Identifying Maintenance
Receptors for Use in Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
Interstate Transport State Implementation Plan Submissions for the
2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards, October 19, 2018,
available in the docket for this action or at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/meme-and-supplemental-information-regarding-interstate-transport-sips-2015-ozone-naaqs">https://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/meme-and-supplemental-information-regarding-interstate-transport-sips-2015-ozone-naaqs</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 30, 2020, in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the
Revised CSAPR Update, EPA released and accepted public comment on
updated 2023 modeling that used a 2016 emissions platform developed
under EPA/Multi-Jurisdictional Organization (MJO)/state collaborative
project as the primary source for the base year and future year
emissions data.\12\ On March 15, 2021, EPA signed the final Revised
CSAPR Update using the same modeling released at proposal.\13\ Although
Maine and New Hampshire relied on the modeling included in the March
2018 memo to develop their SIP submissions as EPA had suggested, EPA
now proposes to primarily rely on the updated and newly available 2016
base year modeling in evaluating these submissions. By using the
updated modeling results, EPA is using the most current and technically
appropriate information as the primary basis for this proposed
rulemaking. EPA's independent analysis, which also evaluated historical
monitoring data, recent DVs, and emissions trends, found that such
information provides additional support and further substantiates the
results of the 2016 base year modeling as the basis for this proposed
rulemaking. Section III of this notice and the Air Quality Modeling
technical support document (TSD) included in the docket for this
proposal contain additional detail on this modeling.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See 85 FR 68964, 68981. The results of this modeling are
included in a spreadsheet in the docket for this action. The
underlying modeling files are available for public review in the
docket for the Revised CSAPR Update (EPA-HQ-OAR-2020-0272).
\13\ See 86 FR 23054 at 23075, 23164 (April 30, 2021).
\14\ See ``Air Quality Modeling Technical Support Document for
the Revised Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Update,'' 86 FR 23054
(April 30, 2021), available in the docket for this action. This TSD
was originally developed to support EPA's action in the Revised
CSAPR Update, as relating to outstanding good neighbor obligations
under the 2008 ozone NAAQS. While developed in this separate
context, the data and modeling outputs, including interpolated
design values for 2021, may be evaluated with respect to the 2015
ozone NAAQS and used in support of this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the CSAPR, CSAPR Update, and the Revised CSAPR Update, EPA used
a threshold of one percent of the NAAQS to determine whether a given
upwind state was ``linked'' at step 2 of the interstate transport
framework and would, therefore, contribute to downwind nonattainment
and maintenance sites identified in step 1. If a state's impact did not
equal or exceed the one percent threshold, the upwind state was not
``linked'' to a downwind air quality problem, and EPA, therefore,
concluded the state would not significantly contribute to nonattainment
or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in the downwind states.
However, if a state's impact equaled or exceeded the one percent
threshold, the state's emissions were further evaluated in step 3,
considering both air quality and cost considerations, to determine
what, if any, emissions might be deemed ``significant'' and, thus, must
be eliminated under the good neighbor provision. EPA is proposing to
rely on the one percent threshold for the purpose of evaluating Maine
and New Hampshire's contributions to nonattainment or maintenance of
the 2015 ozone NAAQS in downwind areas.
Several D.C. Circuit court decisions address the issue of the
relevant analytic year for the purposes of evaluating ozone transport
air-quality problems. On September 13, 2019, the D.C. Circuit issued a
decision in Wisconsin v. EPA, remanding the CSAPR Update to the extent
that it failed to require upwind states to eliminate their significant
contribution by the next applicable attainment date by which downwind
states must come into compliance with the NAAQS, as established under
CAA section 181(a). 938 F.3d 303, 313.
On May 19, 2020, the D.C. Circuit issued a decision in Maryland v.
EPA that cited the Wisconsin decision in holding that EPA must assess
the impact of interstate transport on air quality at the next downwind
attainment date, including Marginal area attainment dates, in
evaluating the basis for EPA's denial of a petition under CAA section
126(b). Maryland v. EPA, 958 F.3d 1185, 1203-04 (D.C. Cir. 2020). The
court noted that ``section 126(b) incorporates the Good Neighbor
Provision,'' and, therefore, ``EPA must find a violation [of section
126] if an upwind source will significantly contribute to downwind
nonattainment at the next downwind attainment deadline. Therefore, the
agency must evaluate downwind air quality at that deadline, not at some
later date.'' Id. at 1204 (emphasis added). EPA interprets the court's
holding in Maryland as requiring the Agency, under the good neighbor
provision, to assess downwind air quality by the next applicable
attainment date, including a Marginal area attainment date under CAA
section
[[Page 30857]]
181 for ozone nonattainment.\15\ The Marginal area attainment date for
the 2015 ozone NAAQS is August 3, 2021.\16\ Historically, EPA has
considered the full ozone season prior to the attainment as supplying
an appropriate analytic year for assessing good neighbor obligations.
While this would be 2020 for an August 2021 attainment date (which
falls within the 2021 ozone season running from May 1 to September 30),
in this circumstance, when the 2020 ozone season is wholly in the past,
it is appropriate to focus on 2021 to address good neighbor obligations
to the extent possible by the 2021 attainment date. EPA does not
believe it would be appropriate to select an analytical year that is
wholly in the past, because the agency interprets the good neighbor
provision as forward looking. See 86 FR 23054 at 23074; see also
Wisconsin, 938 F.3d at 322. Consequently, in this proposal EPA will use
the analytical year of 2021 to evaluate Maine and New Hampshire's good
neighbor obligations with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ We note that the court in Maryland did not have occasion to
evaluate circumstances in which EPA may determine that an upwind
linkage to a downwind air quality problem exists at steps 1 and 2 of
the interstate transport framework by a particular attainment date,
but for reasons of impossibility or profound uncertainty the Agency
is unable to mandate upwind pollution controls by that date. See
Wisconsin, 938 F.3d at 320. The D.C. Circuit noted in Wisconsin that
upon a sufficient showing, these circumstances may warrant
flexibility in effectuating the purpose of the good neighbor
provision. Such circumstances are not at issue in the present
proposal.
\16\ CAA section 181(a); 40 CFR 51.1303; Additional Air Quality
Designations for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards, 83 FR 25776 (June 4, 2018, effective Aug. 3, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Maine Submission
On February 6, 2020, Maine submitted a SIP revision addressing the
CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) interstate transport requirements for
the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
Maine relied on the results of EPA's modeling for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS contained in the March 2018 memorandum to identify downwind
nonattainment and maintenance receptors that may be impacted by
emissions from sources in Maine in the year 2023. These results
indicate Maine's greatest impact on any potential downwind
nonattainment or maintenance receptor would be 0.01 ppb in Suffolk
County, New York (monitoring site 361030002). Maine compared this value
to a screening threshold of 0.70 ppb, representing one percent of the
2015 ozone NAAQS. Because Maine's impacts to receptors in downwind
states are projected to be less than 0.70 ppb in 2023, Maine concluded
that emissions from sources within the state will not significantly
contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2015
ozone NAAQS in any other state.
III. New Hampshire Submission
On September 5, 2018, New Hampshire submitted a SIP revision
addressing the CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) interstate transport
requirements for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. This ``good neighbor SIP'' was
included as an enclosure in the state's infrastructure SIP for the same
NAAQS.
New Hampshire relied on the results of EPA's modeling for the 2015
ozone NAAQS contained in the March 2018 memorandum to identify downwind
nonattainment and maintenance receptors that may be impacted by
emissions from sources in New Hampshire in the year 2023. These results
indicate New Hampshire's greatest impact on any potential downwind
nonattainment or maintenance receptor would be 0.06 ppb in Queens
County, New York (monitoring site 360810124). New Hampshire compared
this value to a screening threshold of 0.70 ppb, representing one
percent of the 2015 ozone NAAQS. Because New Hampshire's impacts to
receptors in downwind states are projected to be less than 0.70 ppb in
2023,\17\ New Hampshire concluded that emissions from sources within
the state will not significantly contribute to nonattainment or
interfere with maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS in any other state.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ New Hampshire incorrectly stated in its September 2018 good
neighbor SIP submission that the state's highest projected
contribution for 2023 to any downwind nonattainment or maintenance
receptor is 6 ppb; the modeled value should be 0.06 ppb as correctly
shown in Table 1 of the submission. New Hampshire also incorrectly
stated in their submission that 7 ppb, rather than 0.70 ppb, is 1%
of the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Hampshire's September 2018 good neighbor SIP submission also
lists New Hampshire's regulations for controlling emissions of ozone
precursors as well as its regional emissions-control strategies. These
include Env-A 619, Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD), and
Env-A 618, Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) (82 FR 24057; May 25,
2017); and Env-A 2300, Mitigation of Regional Haze (77 FR 50602; August
22, 2012).
IV. EPA Evaluation of the States' Submittals
Maine and New Hampshire's SIP submissions both rely on analysis of
the year 2023 to show that each state does not significantly contribute
to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS
in any other state. However, given the holdings in Wisconsin and
Maryland, analysis of that year is no longer sufficient where the next
attainment date for the 2015 ozone NAAQS is in 2021.\18\ Nonetheless,
the analysis EPA conducted for the 2021 analytical year corroborates
the conclusion reached in each state's submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ We recognize that Maine, New Hampshire, and other states
may have been influenced by EPA's 2018 guidance memos (issued prior
to the Wisconsin and Maryland decisions) in making good neighbor
submissions that relied on EPA's modeling of 2023. When there are
intervening changes in relevant law or legal interpretation of CAA
requirements, states are generally free to withdraw, supplement,
and/or re-submit their SIP submissions with new analysis (in
compliance with CAA procedures for SIP submissions). While neither
Maine nor New Hampshire has done this, as explained in this section,
the independent analysis EPA has conducted at its discretion
confirms that the states' submissions in this instance are
ultimately approvable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated in Section I of this notice, in consideration of the
holdings in Wisconsin and Maryland, EPA's analysis relies on 2021 as
the relevant attainment year for evaluating a State's good neighbor
obligations with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS using the four-step
interstate transport framework. In step 1, we identify locations where
the Agency expects there to be nonattainment or maintenance receptors
for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the 2021 analytic future year. Where
EPA's analysis shows that an area or site does not fall under the
definition of a nonattainment or maintenance receptor in 2021, that
site is excluded from further analysis under EPA's four step interstate
transport framework.\19\ For areas that are identified as a
nonattainment or maintenance receptor in 2021, we proceed to the next
step of our four-step framework by identifying the upwind state's
contribution to those receptors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ While EPA has focused its analysis in this notice on the
year 2021, modeling data in the record for years 2023 and 2028
confirm that no new linkages to downwind receptors are projected for
these states in later years. This is not surprising as it is
consistent with an overall, long-term downward trend in emissions
from these states.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA's approach to identifying ozone nonattainment and maintenance
receptors in this action is consistent with the approach used in
previous transport rulemakings. EPA's approach gives independent
consideration to both the ``contribute significantly to nonattainment''
and the ``interfere with maintenance'' prongs of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), consistent with the
[[Page 30858]]
D.C. Circuit's direction in North Carolina.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ 531 F.3d at 910-911 (holding that EPA must give
``independent significance'' to each prong of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the purpose of this proposal, EPA identifies nonattainment
receptors as those monitoring sites that are projected to have average
design values that exceed the NAAQS and that are also measuring
nonattainment based on the most recent monitored design values. This
approach is consistent with prior transport rulemakings, such as CSAPR
Update, where EPA defined nonattainment receptors as those areas that
both currently monitor nonattainment and that EPA projects will be in
nonattainment in the future analytic year.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See 81 FR 74504 (October 26, 2016). Revised CSAPR Update
also used this approach. See 86 FR 23054 (April 30, 2021). This same
concept, relying on both current monitoring data and modeling to
define nonattainment receptor, was also applied in CAIR. See 70 FR
25241 (January 14, 2005). See also North Carolina, 531 F.3d at 913-
914 (affirming as reasonable EPA's approach to defining
nonattainment in CAIR).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, in this proposal, EPA identifies a receptor to be a
``maintenance'' receptor for purposes of defining interference with
maintenance, consistent with the method used in the CSAPR and upheld by
the D.C. Circuit in EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 795 F.3d
118, 136 (D.C. Cir. 2015).\22\ Specifically, monitoring sites with a
projected maximum design value in 2021 that exceeds the NAAQS are
considered maintenance receptors. EPA's method of defining these
receptors takes into account both measured data and reasonable
projections based on modeling analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). CSAPR Update and Revised
CSAPR Update also used this approach. See 81 FR 74504 (October 26,
2016) and See 86 FR 23054 (April 30, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recognizing that nonattainment receptors are also, by definition,
maintenance receptors, EPA often uses the term ``maintenance-only'' to
refer to receptors that are not also nonattainment receptors.
Consistent with the methodology described above, monitoring sites with
a projected maximum design value that exceeds the NAAQS, but with a
projected average design value that is below the NAAQS, are identified
as maintenance-only receptors. In addition, those sites that are
currently measuring ozone concentrations below the level of the
applicable NAAQS, but are projected to be nonattainment based on the
average design value and that, by definition, are projected to have a
maximum design value above the standard are also identified as
maintenance-only receptors.
To evaluate future air quality in steps 1 and 2 of the interstate
transport framework, EPA is using the 2016 and 2023 base case emissions
developed under EPA/MJO/state collaborative emissions modeling platform
project as the primary source for base year and 2023 future year
emissions data for this proposal.\23\ Because this platform does not
include emissions for 2021, EPA developed an interpolation technique
based on modeling for 2023 and measured ozone data to determine ozone
concentrations for 2021. To estimate average and maximum design values
for 2021, EPA first performed air quality modeling for 2016 and 2023 to
obtain design values in 2023. The 2023 design values were then coupled
with the corresponding 2016 measured design values to estimate design
values in 2021. Details on the modeling, including the interpolation
methodology, can be found in the Air Quality Modeling TSD, found in the
docket of this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See 86 FR 23054 (April 30, 2021). The results of this
modeling are included in a spreadsheet in the docket for this
action. The underlying modeling files are available for public
access in the docket for the Revised CSAPR Update (EPA-HQ-OAR-2020-
0272).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To quantify the contribution of emissions from specific upwind
states on 2021 8-hour design values for the identified downwind
nonattainment and maintenance receptors, EPA first performed
nationwide, state-level ozone source apportionment modeling for 2023.
The source apportionment modeling provided contributions to ozone from
precursor emissions of anthropogenic nitrogen oxides (NO<INF>X</INF>)
and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in each state, individually. The
modeled contributions were then applied in a relative sense to the 2021
average design value to estimate the contributions in 2021 from each
state to each receptor. Details on the source apportionment modeling
and the methods for determining contributions in 2021 are in the Air
Quality Modeling TSD in the docket.
The 2021 design values and contributions were examined to determine
if Maine and New Hampshire, considered separately, contribute at or
above the threshold of one percent of the 2015 ozone NAAQS (0.70 ppb)
to any downwind nonattainment or maintenance receptor. The data \24\
indicate that the highest contribution in 2021 from Maine to a downwind
nonattainment or maintenance receptor is 0.01 ppb to a maintenance
receptor in Fairfield County, Connecticut (monitoring site 90013007),
and, from New Hampshire, is 0.10 ppb to the same downwind receptor. The
data also show modeled ozone contributions from Maine and New Hampshire
to the design values of a larger set of monitoring sites (independent
of attainment status) and indicate that the highest projected
contribution in 2021 from Maine to any of these sites is 0.12 ppb to
monitors in Putnam and Westchester Counties in New York (monitoring
sites 360790005 and 361192004; #307 and #314 on the Design Values and
Contributions spreadsheet), and, from New Hampshire, is 1.46 ppb to the
monitor in Knox County, Maine (monitoring site 230130004; #226 on the
Design Values and Contributions spreadsheet). While New Hampshire's
modeled contribution to the Knox County monitor exceeds one percent of
the 2015 ozone NAAQS, EPA's analysis at step 1 does not identify the
Knox County monitor as a downwind area that may have problems
maintaining the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The Knox County monitor's projected
design value in 2021 is 57.4 ppb.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA also analyzed emissions trends for ozone precursors in Maine
and New Hampshire to support the findings from the air quality
analysis. In evaluating emissions trends, we first reviewed the
information submitted by each state and then reviewed additional
information available to the Agency. We focused on state-wide emissions
of nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds.<SUP>25 26</SUP>
Emissions from mobile sources, electric generating units (``EGUs''),
industrial facilities, gasoline vapors, and chemical solvents are some
of the major anthropogenic sources of ozone precursors. This evaluation
looks at both past emissions trends, as well as projected trends.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ This is because ground-level ozone is not emitted directly
into the air but is formed by chemical reactions between ozone
precursors, chiefly NO<INF>X</INF> and non-methane VOCs, in the
presence of sunlight.
\26\ 81 FR 74504, 74513-14.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As shown in Table 1, for Maine, between 2016 and 2023, annual total
NO<INF>X</INF> and VOC emissions are projected to decline by 38 percent
and 20 percent, respectively. For New Hampshire, between 2016 and 2023,
annual total NO<INF>X</INF> and VOC emissions are projected to decline
by 36 percent and 15 percent, respectively. The projected reductions
are a result of the implementation of existing control programs that
will continue to decrease NO<INF>X</INF> and VOC emissions in Maine and
New
[[Page 30859]]
Hampshire, as indicated by EPA's most recent 2021 and 2023 projected
emissions.
As shown in Table 2, onroad and nonroad mobile source emissions
collectively comprise a large portion of each state's total
anthropogenic NO<INF>X</INF> and VOC. For example, in 2019,
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions from mobile sources in Maine comprised 52
percent of total NO<INF>X</INF> emissions and 48 percent of total VOC
emissions. In New Hampshire for that same year, NO<INF>X</INF>
emissions from mobile sources comprised 54 percent of total
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions and 45 percent of total VOC emissions.
The large decrease in NO<INF>X</INF> emissions between 2016
emissions and projected 2023 emissions in each state is primarily
driven by reductions in emissions from onroad and nonroad mobile
sources. EPA projects that both VOC and NO<INF>X</INF> emissions will
continue declining out to 2023 as newer vehicles and engines that are
subject to the most recent, stringent mobile source standards replace
older vehicles and engines.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Tier 3 Motor Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards (79 FR
23414, April 28, 2014); Mobile Source Air Toxics Rule (MSAT2) (72 FR
8428, February 26, 2007), Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle Standards
and Highway Diesel Fuel Sulfur Control Requirements (66 FR 5002,
January 18, 2001); Clean Air Nonroad Diesel Rule (69 FR 38957, June
29, 2004); Locomotive and Marine Rule (73 FR 25098, May 6, 2008);
Marine Spark-Ignition and Small Spark-Ignition Engine Rule (73 FR
59034, October 8, 2008); New Marine Compression-Ignition Engines at
or Above 30 Liters per Cylinder Rule (75 FR 22895, April 30, 2010);
and Aircraft and Aircraft Engine Emissions Standards (77 FR 36342,
June 18, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In summary, there is no evidence to suggest that the overall
emissions trend demonstrated in Table 1 in either state will suddenly
reverse or spike in 2021 compared to historical emissions levels or
those projected for 2023. Further, there is no evidence that the
projected ozone precursor emissions trends out to 2023 and beyond would
not continue to show a decline in emissions. In addition, EPA's normal
practice is to include in our modeling only changes in NO<INF>X</INF>
or VOC emissions that result from final regulatory actions. Any
potential changes in NO<INF>X</INF> or VOC emissions that may result
from possible future or proposed regulatory actions are speculative.
This downward trend in emissions in Maine and New Hampshire adds
support to the air quality analyses presented above for each state, and
indicates that the contributions from emissions from sources in Maine
and New Hampshire to ozone receptors in downwind states will continue
to decline and, for each state, remain below one percent of the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ The annual emissions data for the years 2011 through 2019
were obtained from EPA's National Emissions Inventory website:
<a href="https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/air-pollutant-emissions-trends-data">https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/air-pollutant-emissions-trends-data</a>. Note that emissions from miscellaneous
sources are not included in the state totals. The emissions for 2021
and 2023 are based on the 2016 emissions modeling platform. See
``2005 thru 2019 + 2021_2023_2028 Annual State Tier1 Emissions'' and
the Emissions Modeling TSD in the docket for this action.
Table 1--Annual Emissions of NOX and VOC From Anthropogenic Sources in Maine and New Hampshire
[Tons per year] \28\
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Projected 2021 Projected 2023
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ME NOx....................................................... 59,773 57,292 54,812 52,332 51,871 49,148 49,889 48,440 46,542 33,996 30,536
ME VOC....................................................... 64,079 61,860 59,641 57,422 54,686 49,630 48,284 47,024 45,665 41,197 39,562
NH NOx....................................................... 36,554 37,065 37,577 38,086 35,025 30,775 28,530 27,408 25,680 21,822 19,579
NH VOC....................................................... 45,859 44,159 42,459 40,731 38,275 34,234 33,026 31,928 31,193 29,640 28,872
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2--Annual Emissions of NOX and VOC From Onroad and Nonroad Vehicles in Maine and New Hampshire
[Tons per year]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Projected 2021 Projected 2023
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ME........................................................... 41,601 38,861 36,122 33,382 31,465 27,286 26,570 25,714 24,005 17,841 16,214
NOx..........................................................
ME VOC....................................................... 40,376 38,091 35,805 33,519 30,884 25,929 24,683 23,423 22,064 18,037 16,499
NH NOx....................................................... 26,038 24,979 23,921 22,862 20,835 17,619 16,408 15,022 13,970 10,776 9,878
NH VOC....................................................... 25,314 24,184 23,054 21,924 20,027 16,544 15,895 14,796 14,062 11,947 11,277
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus, EPA's air quality and emissions analyses indicate that
emissions from Maine or from New Hampshire, with each state considered
individually, will not significantly contribute to nonattainment or
interfere with maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS in any other state
in 2021.
V. Proposed Action
As discussed in Sections II and III, Maine and New Hampshire have
each concluded that emissions from sources in their individual state
will not contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of
the 2015 ozone NAAQS in any other state. Each state submission reached
this conclusion by relying on information for the analytic year 2023.
As discussed above, the Wisconsin and Maryland decisions of the D.C.
Circuit have made clear that the good neighbor analysis for the 2015
ozone NAAQS must focus on the next attainment date, and that date is
the Marginal area attainment date in 2021. Therefore, EPA conducted
additional analysis to determine whether each state's conclusions would
remain valid in 2021 rather than 2023. EPA's evaluation of measured and
monitored data, including interpolating values to generate a reasonable
expectation of air quality and contribution values in 2021, as
discussed in Section IV, is consistent with conclusions made by Maine
and New Hampshire that, with each state considered separately,
emissions from sources in each state will not contribute to
nonattainment or interference with maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS
in any other state. Because our analysis corroborates each state's
conclusion that emissions from within its state do not contribute to
nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS in
another state, we propose to approve the Maine and New Hampshire
submissions as meeting CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I).
EPA is soliciting public comments on this notice. These comments
will be considered before taking final action. Interested parties may
participate in the
[[Page 30860]]
Federal rulemaking procedure by submitting written comments to this
proposed rule by following the instructions listed in the ADDRESSES
section of this Federal Register.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
<bullet> 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);
<bullet> Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
<bullet> 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.);
<bullet> 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);
<bullet> Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
<bullet> Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
<bullet> Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
<bullet> 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
<bullet> Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: June 3, 2021.
Deborah Szaro,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2021-12079 Filed 6-9-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on June 10, 2021.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.