Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 160 / Wednesday, August 19, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 50199 

1CAA section 165(a)(3). 

2CAA section 165(a)(4). 3CAA sections 502(a) and 504(a). 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 51, 52, 70, and 71 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2015–0414; FRL–9932–11– 

OAR] 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

and Title V Permitting for Greenhouse 

Gases: Removal of Certain Vacated 

Elements 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is amending its 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD) and title V regulations to remove 

from the Code of Federal Regulations 

portions of those regulations that were 

initially promulgated in 2010 and that 

the Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) 

specifically identified as vacated in the 

April 10, 2015, amended judgment, 

Coalition for Responsible Regulation v. 

EPA. This action is exempt from noticeand-comment rulemaking because it is 

ministerial in nature. 

DATES: This rule is effective on August 

19, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2015–0414. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the EPA Docket Center, Room 3334, 

EPA William Jefferson Clinton West 

Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 

Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20004. 

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 is (202) 566– 

1742. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Questions concerning this final rule 

should be addressed to Mrs. Jessica 

Montan ̃ ez, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, Air Quality 

Planning Division, (C504–03), Research 

Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone 

number (919) 541–3407, email at 

montanez.jessica@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

information in this section of the 

preamble is organized as follows: 

I. Does this action apply to me? 

II. Background and Rationale for This Action 

III. Final Action 

IV. Implementation 

V. Environmental Justice Considerations 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

VII. Judicial Review 

I. Does this action apply to me? 

Entities potentially affected by this 

final action include new and modified 

stationary sources in all industry 

groups. To determine whether your 

facility would be affected by this action, 

you should carefully examine the 

applicability criteria in §§ 51.166 and 

52.21 of title 40 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR). Entities potentially 

affected by this final action also include 

state, local and tribal governments that 

are authorized to implement the PSD 

program through an EPA-approved State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) or Tribal 

Implementation Plan (TIP) or that have 

been authorized to implement the PSD 

program through a delegation of the 

federal PSD regulations. 

II. Background and Rationale for This 

Action 

Part C of title I of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA or the Act) contains the 

requirements for a component of the 

major New Source Review (NSR) 

program known as the PSD program. 

This program sets forth procedures for 

the preconstruction review and 

permitting of new and modified 

stationary sources of air pollution 

locating in areas meeting the National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) (‘‘attainment’’ areas) and areas 

for which there is insufficient 

information to classify an area as either 

attainment or nonattainment 

(‘‘unclassifiable’’ areas). The 

applicability of PSD to a particular 

source must be determined in advance 

of construction of a new source or major 

modification of an existing source and 

is pollutant-specific. Once a source is 

determined to be subject to PSD, among 

other requirements, the source must 

demonstrate that it will not cause or 

contribute to a violation of any NAAQS 

or PSD increment,1 and that it will use 

the Best Available Control Technology 

(BACT).2 The EPA regulations for the 

PSD program are contained in 40 CFR 

51.166 (applicable to air agencies that 

issue permits under EPA-approved SIPs) 

and 40 CFR 52.21 (the federal PSD 

program applicable to permits issued by 

the EPA or air agencies that have 

received delegation to implement the 

federal PSD program). 

Title V of the CAA, on the other hand, 

requires all major stationary sources of 

air pollution and certain other sources 

to apply for a title V operating permit 

that includes emission limitations and 

other conditions as necessary to assure 

compliance with applicable 

requirements of the CAA.3 The title V 

operating permit program is a vehicle 

for ensuring that air quality control 

requirements are appropriately applied 

to facility emission units and for 

assuring compliance with such 

requirements. The title V program does 

not generally impose new substantive 

air quality control requirements, but 

does require permits to contain 

adequate monitoring, recordkeeping, 

reporting and other requirements to 

assure sources’ compliance. The title V 

program is implemented through 

regulations contained in 40 CFR part 70 

(for programs implemented by state or 

local agencies and tribes) and 40 CFR 

part 71 (for programs generally 

implemented by the EPA). 

On June 3, 2010, the EPA published 

a final rule, known as the Tailoring 

Rule, which phased in permitting 

requirements for greenhouse gas (GHG) 

emissions from stationary sources under 

the CAA PSD and title V permitting 

programs (75 FR 31514). Under its 

interpretation of the CAA at the time, 

the EPA believed the Tailoring Rule was 

necessary to avoid a sudden and 

unmanageable increase in the number of 

sources that would be required to obtain 

PSD and title V permits under the CAA 

because the sources emitted or had the 

potential to emit GHGs above the 

applicable major source and major 

modification thresholds. In Step 1 of the 

Tailoring Rule, which began on January 

2, 2011, the EPA limited application of 

PSD and title V requirements to sources 

only if they were subject to PSD or title 

V ‘‘anyway’’ due to their emissions of 

non-GHG pollutants. These sources are 

referred to as ‘‘anyway sources.’’ In Step 

2 of the Tailoring Rule, which began on 

July 1, 2011, the EPA applied the PSD 

and title V permitting requirements 

under the CAA to sources that were 

classified as major, and, thus, required 

to obtain a permit, based solely on their 

GHG emissions or potential to emit 

GHGs, and to modifications of otherwise 

major sources that required a PSD 

permit because they increased only 

GHG emissions above the level in the 

EPA regulations. 

On June 23, 2014, the U.S. Supreme 

Court issued a decision in Utility Air 

Regulatory Group (UARG) v. EPA, 134 

S. Ct. 2427, addressing the application 

of stationary source permitting 

requirements to GHGs. The U.S. 

Supreme Court held that the EPA may 

not treat GHGs as an air pollutant for the 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
50200 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 160 / Wednesday, August 19, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

specific purpose of determining whether 

a source is a major source (or a 

modification thereof) and thus required 

to obtain a PSD or title V permit. 

However, the U.S. Supreme Court also 

said that the EPA could continue to 

require that PSD permits, otherwise 

required based on emissions of 

pollutants other than GHGs pollutants, 

contain limitations on GHG emissions 

based on the application of GHG BACT. 

That is, with respect to PSD, the ruling 

effectively upheld PSD permitting 

requirements for GHG emissions under 

Step 1 of the Tailoring Rule for ‘‘anyway 

sources,’’ and invalidated PSD 

permitting requirements for Step 2 

sources. 

Because the Supreme Court decision 

affirmed in part and reversed in part an 

earlier decision of the D.C. Circuit in 

Coalition for Responsible Regulation v. 

EPA, 684 F.3d 102 (D.C. Cir. 2012), on 

April 10, 2015, the D.C. Circuit issued 

an Amended Judgment (Nos. 09–1322, 

10–073, 10–1092 and 10–1167), which 

reflects the UARG v. EPA Supreme 

Court decision. The D.C. Circuit 

simultaneously issued its mandate, 

which means that the Coalition 

Amended Judgment became final and 

effective upon issuance. 

In the Coalition Amended Judgment, 

the D.C. Circuit ordered that the EPA 

regulations under review (including 40 

CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v) and 40 CFR 

52.21(b)(49)(v)) be vacated to the extent 

they require a stationary source to 

obtain a PSD permit if GHGs are the 

only pollutant (i) that the source emits 

or has the potential to emit above the 

applicable major source thresholds, or 

(ii) for which there is a significant 

emissions increase from a modification. 

The D.C. Circuit also ordered that the 

regulations under review be vacated to 

the extent they require (i) a stationary 

source to obtain a title V permit solely 

because the source emits or has the 

potential to emit GHGs above the 

applicable major source thresholds and 

(ii) the EPA to consider further phasingin the GHG permitting requirements at 

lower GHG emission thresholds (in 

particular 40 CFR 52.22 and 40 CFR 

70.12, 71.13). 

Consistent with the Coalition 

Amended Judgment, this action removes 

from the PSD regulations certain 

regulatory provisions that require a 

stationary source to obtain a PSD permit 

solely on the basis of the source’s GHG 

emissions and the regulations that 

require the EPA to consider further 

phasing-in GHG permitting 

requirements into the PSD and title V 

permitting programs at lower GHG 

emissions thresholds. The EPA intends 

to further revise the PSD and title V 

regulations to fully implement the 

Coalition Amended Judgment in a 

separate rulemaking. This future 

rulemaking will include revisions to 

additional definitions in the PSD 

regulations. It will also include further 

revising the title V regulations to 

remove portions of the title V 

regulations that were vacated in the 

Coalition Amended Judgment case— 

those that require a stationary source to 

obtain a title V permit solely because 

the source emits or has the potential to 

emit GHGs above the applicable major 

source thresholds. Those additional 

revisions to the PSD and title V 

regulations, although necessary to 

implement the Coalition Amended 

Judgment, are not purely ministerial in 

nature and will be addressed in this 

separate notice-and-comment 

rulemaking, which would give the 

public an opportunity to comment on 

how the EPA proposes to address those 

portions of the Coalition Amended 

Judgment. 

III. Final Action 

This final action removes from the 

CFR several provisions of the PSD and 

title V permitting regulations that were 

originally promulgated as part of the 

Tailoring Rule and that the D.C. Circuit 

specifically identified as vacated in the 

Coalition Amended Judgment. Because 

the D.C. Circuit specifically identified 

the Tailoring Rule Step 2 PSD 

permitting requirements in 40 CFR 

51.166(b)(48)(v) and 40 CFR 

52.21(b)(49)(v) and the regulations that 

require the EPA to consider further 

phasing-in the GHG permitting 

requirements at lower GHG emission 

thresholds in 40 CFR 52.22, 70.12, and 

71.13 as vacated, the EPA is taking the 

ministerial action of removing these 

provisions from the CFR. 

Furthermore, and since the D.C. 

Circuit’s Coalition Amended Judgment 

further ordered ‘‘the EPA to take steps 

to rescind and/or revise the applicable 

provisions of the CFR as expeditiously 

as practicable’’ to reflect its vacatur of 

certain provisions from the Tailoring 

Rule, this rulemaking addresses only 

those provisions specifically identified 

in the Coalition Amended Judgment that 

can be removed from the CFR without 

the need for any further changes. In a 

subsequent notice-and-comment 

rulemaking, the EPA will need to make 

additional changes to its PSD and title 

V permitting regulations in order to 

fully implement the Coalition Amended 

Judgment. 

The EPA is taking this action as a 

final rule without providing an 

opportunity for public comment or a 

public hearing because the EPA finds 

that the Administrative Procedure Act 

(APA) good cause exemption applies 

here. In general, the APA requires that 

general notice of proposed rulemaking 

shall be published in the Federal 

Register. Such notice must provide an 

opportunity for public participation in 

the rulemaking process. However, the 

APA also provides a way for an agency 

to directly issue a final rulemaking in 

certain specific instances. This may 

occur, in particular, when an agency for 

good cause finds (and incorporates the 

finding and a brief statement of reasons 

in the rule issued) that notice and 

public procedure thereon are 

impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary 

to the public interest. See 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(3)(B). The EPA has determined 

that it is not necessary to provide a 

public hearing or an opportunity for 

public comment on this action because 

the removal of the affected PSD and title 

V Tailoring Rule provisions from the 

CFR is a necessary ministerial act. The 

D.C. Circuit specifically identified as 

vacated the PSD and title V regulations 

this rule removes, and ordered that the 

EPA take steps to rescind and/or revise 

the applicable provisions of the CFR as 

expeditiously as practicable. The EPA 

no longer has the authority to require 

any source to obtain a PSD or title V 

permit based solely on the source 

having GHG emissions above applicable 

thresholds. Thus, EPA may not 

implement the vacated provisions at 40 

CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v) and 52.21(b)(49)(v) 

that applied PSD to this population of 

sources. Further, the EPA is no longer 

required to take the actions specified in 

the vacated regulations at 40 CFR 52.22, 

70.12, and 71.13 to consider further 

phasing in GHG PSD and title V 

permitting requirements at lower GHG 

emissions thresholds. Therefore, 

removing the affected regulatory text 

simply implements the decision of the 

Supreme Court and D.C. Circuit and it 

would serve no useful purpose to 

provide an opportunity for public 

comment or a public hearing on this 

issue. 

In addition, notice-and-comment 

would be contrary to the public interest 

because it would unnecessarily delay 

the removal from the CFR of the 

Tailoring Rule Step 2 PSD permitting 

provisions that the Supreme Court held 

were invalid and the regulations that 

require the EPA to consider further 

phasing-in the GHG permitting 

requirements for lower GHG emissions 

thresholds in 40 CFR 52.22, 70.12, and 

71.13 that the D.C. Circuit’s Coalition 

Amended Judgment specifically 

identified as vacated. Such delay could 

result in confusion on the part of the 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 160 / Wednesday, August 19, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 50201 

4http://epa.gov/nsr/documents/

20140724memo.pdf. 

5For purposes of this rule, the phrases ‘‘EPAissued PSD permits that were issued under Step 2 

of the Tailoring Rule’’ and ‘‘EPA-issued Step 2 PSD 

permits’’ are intended to have the same meaning. 

The use of the term ‘‘EPA-issued’’ in both phrases 

includes PSD permits issued by the EPA as well as 

permits issued by state or local reviewing 

authorities exercising federal law authority 

delegated by an EPA Regional Office under 40 CFR 

52.21(u). 

6http://www.epa.gov/nsr/ghgdocs/

Step2PermitRescissionMemoFinal_12-19-14.pdf. 

7http://epa.gov/nsr/ghgdocs/

OECANoActionAssuranceMemo_

December192014.pdf. 

regulated industry and state, local and 

tribal air agencies about how the D.C. 

Circuit’s decision affects the PSD and 

title V regulations as well as PSD 

permitting. Promulgation of this rule 

soon after the D.C. Circuit decision 

serves to clarify that sources are no 

longer required to obtain PSD permits 

under the preconstruction permitting 

regulations associated with Step 2 of the 

Tailoring Rule and that the EPA will not 

be required under 40 CFR 52.22, 70.12, 

and 71.13 to take further steps to 

consider further phasing in PSD and 

title V permitting requirements at lower 

GHG emissions thresholds. Given the 

substantial costs to the owner/operator 

of projects associated with delays and 

uncertainty, it is in the public interest 

for the EPA to amend the CFR without 

delay. Furthermore, and as stated 

previously, the D.C. Circuit’s Coalition 

Amended Judgment ordered the EPA to 

take steps to undertake these revisions 

as expeditiously as practicable. 

For these reasons, the EPA finds good 

cause to issue a final rulemaking 

pursuant to section 553 of the APA, 5 

U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B). The requirements of 

CAA section 307(d), including the 

requirement for public comment and 

hearing on proposed rulemakings, do 

not apply to this action because 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(3)(B) applies. In addition, this 

rule relieves a restriction on 

construction of some stationary sources 

and therefore is not subject to the 

requirement for a 30-day delay in 

effective date. 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1). 

Moreover, the agency finds that the 

problems outlined above regarding the 

effects of delaying issuance of the rule 

also provide good cause for not delaying 

its effective date. 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3). 

Accordingly, the requirement for a delay 

in effective date does not apply and the 

rule will take effect upon publication in 

the Federal Register. 5 U.S.C. 553(d). 

IV. Implementation 

The D.C. Circuit’s vacatur of the 

Tailoring Rule Step 2 PSD permitting 

requirements in 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v) 

and 40 CFR 52.21(b)(49)(v) and the 

provisions that required further action 

to consider phasing-in GHG permitting 

requirements into the PSD and title V 

programs at lower GHG emission 

thresholds at 40 CFR 52.22, 70.12, and 

71.13 means that these provisions can 

no longer be relied upon by the EPA, 

permit applicants or permitting 

authorities as a basis for issuing PSD 

permits. Further, this means that the 

EPA will not be required to take the 

actions specified in the regulations at 40 

CFR 52.22, 70.12, and 71.13 to consider 

further phasing in GHG PSD and title V 

permitting requirements at lower GHG 

emissions thresholds. 

Permit reviewing authorities with 

EPA-approved SIPs containing any or 

all of the affected provisions previously 

allowed by 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v) may 

request to remove their corresponding 

Tailoring Rule Step 2 provisions as soon 

as feasible, which may be in 

conjunction with the next otherwise 

planned SIP revision. Permit reviewing 

authorities also have the option to retain 

the Tailoring Rule Step 2 permitting 

requirements solely as a requirement of 

state law, but these requirements will 

not be approved as part of their 

federally-enforceable SIP. As we 

explained in a memorandum issued by 

the agency on July 24, 2014, titled, 

‘‘Next Steps and Preliminary Views on 

the Application of Clean Air Act 

Permitting Programs to Greenhouse 

Gases Following the Supreme Court’s 

Decision in UARG v. EPA’’ (Preliminary 

Views Memo),4 we again note that the 

‘‘[EPA does] not read the [U.S.] Supreme 

Court decision to preclude states from 

retaining permitting requirements for 

sources of GHG emissions that apply 

independently under state law even 

where those requirements are no longer 

required under federal law.’’ 

With regard to PSD Step 2 permits 

already issued, the Preliminary Views 

Memo explained that the EPA ‘‘will no 

longer require PSD . . . permits for Step 

2 sources’’ (Preliminary Views Memo at 

2) and that the EPA expected ‘‘to 

provide additional views in the future 

with respect to Step 2 sources that had 

already obtained a PSD permit . . .’’ 

(Preliminary Views Memo at 4). The 

EPA provided additional views 

regarding EPA-issued Step 2 PSD 

permits 5 when it issued two 

memoranda on December 19, 2014. In 

the first memorandum issued by the 

Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) and 

titled, ‘‘Next Steps for Addressing EPAIssued Step 2 Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration Greenhouse Gas Permits 

and Associated Requirements’’ (OAR 

Next Steps Memo),6 the EPA explained 

that it intended to complete a 

rulemaking ‘‘authorizing the rescission 

of Step 2 PSD permits.’’ In the second 

memorandum, which was issued by the 

Office of Enforcement and Compliance 

Assurance (OECA) and titled, ‘‘No 

Action Assurance Regarding EPA-Issued 

Step 2 Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration Permits and Related Title 

V Requirements Following Utility Air 

Regulatory Group v. Environmental 

Protection Agency’’ (OECA No Action 

Assurance Memo),7 OECA issued a 

narrowly tailored No Action Assurance 

for sources with EPA-issued Step 2 PSD 

permits. The OECA No Action 

Assurance Memo establishes that the 

EPA will exercise its enforcement 

discretion not to pursue enforcement of 

the terms and conditions relating to 

GHGs in a source’s EPA-issued Step 2 

PSD permit, and for related GHG terms 

and conditions that are contained in the 

source’s title V permit, if any, until 

11:59 p.m. EDT, September 30, 2016. 

The No Action Assurance ceases to 

apply to a source once its EPA-issued 

Step 2 PSD permit is rescinded, and, if 

applicable, its title V permit is 

accordingly revised, whichever is later. 

Consistent with the plan described in 

the OAR Next Steps Memo, the EPA 

completed the rulemaking that allows 

for rescission of Step 2 permits. 

‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

Permitting for Greenhouse Gases: 

Providing Option for Rescission of EPAIssued Tailoring Rule Step 2 Prevention 

of Significant Deterioration Permits’’ (80 

FR 26183; May 7, 2015). This rule 

provides a mechanism for the EPA and 

delegated reviewing authorities to 

rescind EPA-issued Step 2 PSD permits 

in response to requests from applicants 

who can demonstrate that they are 

eligible for permit rescission and as 

further discussed in that rule. EPA 

received no comments on this rule, and 

it is now in effect. Sources with 

questions on PSD permitting obligations 

arising from Step 2 PSD permits issued 

by state, local or tribal permitting 

authorities under permitting programs 

approved into the state or tribal 

implementation plans should review the 

governing statutory provisions and the 

provisions in the applicable state or 

tribal implementation plans to 

determine how to address these Step 2 

permits and consult with the EPA, states 

and tribes, as necessary. 

In the case of sources that trigger PSD 

based on emissions of pollutants other 

than GHG (‘‘anyway sources’’), the PSD 

BACT requirement continues to apply to 

GHG emissions from such sources. This 

rulemaking does not change 

§§ 51.166(j), 51.166(b)(48)(iv), 52.21(j), 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
50202 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 160 / Wednesday, August 19, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

or 52.21(b)(48)(iv) of EPA’s regulations, 

which remain in effect. Under these 

provisions, the BACT requirement 

applies to GHG emissions from ‘‘anyway 

sources’’ when a new source emits or 

has the potential to emit 75,000 tons per 

year (tpy) or more of GHG on a carbon 

dioxide equivalent (‘‘CO2e’’) basis. 

When an anyway source is modified, 

under these provisions, the BACT 

requirement applies to GHGs if (1) the 

modification is otherwise subject to PSD 

for a pollutant other than GHG; and (2) 

the modification results in a GHG 

emissions increase and a net GHG 

emission increase equal to or greater 

than 75,000 tpy or more on a CO2e basis 

and greater than zero on a mass basis. 

With respect to title V, the D.C. 

Circuit’s Amended Judgment in 

Coalition means that the provisions at 

40 CFR 70.12 and 71.13 addressing 

further consideration of phasing-in of 

title V permitting program requirements 

at lower GHG emission thresholds are 

no longer in effect. The obligations that 

they contain for the EPA to further 

study and take further action to consider 

regulating GHGs at lower GHG 

emissions thresholds under the title V 

program no longer exist. 

V. Environmental Justice 

Considerations 

This action removes sections and 

paragraphs of the PSD and title V GHG 

Tailoring Rule regulations that the D.C. 

Circuit specifically identified as vacated 

in the Coalition Amended Judgment. In 

accordance with the changes made by 

this action, permit applicants are no 

longer required to request PSD permits 

if GHGs are the only pollutant (i) that 

the source emits or has the potential to 

emit above the major source thresholds, 

or (ii) for which there is a significant 

emissions increase and a significant net 

emissions increase from a modification. 

In addition, the EPA will not be 

required to take the actions specified in 

the regulations at 40 CFR 52.22, 70.12, 

and 71.13 to consider further phasing in 

GHG PSD and title V permitting 

requirements at lower GHG emissions 

thresholds. Therefore, this action itself 

does not compel any specific permit 

action that will affect the fair treatment 

and meaningful involvement of all 

people. Rather, it makes clear that a 

portion of the Coalition Amended 

Judgment is efficiently implemented 

and permit applicants are no longer 

required to submit PSD permit 

applications if GHGs are the only 

pollutant that the sources emits above 

the applicable major source thresholds. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 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. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This action does not impose any new 

information collection burden under the 

PRA. OMB has previously approved the 

information collection activities 

contained in the existing regulations 

and has assigned OMB control number 

2060–0003. To the extent this rule has 

any substantive effect, it relieves 

regulatory burdens by removing 

regulations that purport to require 

permit applicants to request PSD 

permits if GHGs are the only pollutant 

emitted by the new source or 

modification to an existing source above 

the applicable major source thresholds 

and regulations that required the EPA to 

consider further phasing-in the GHG 

permitting requirements at lower GHG 

emission thresholds. This action is 

taken in light of the D.C. Circuit’s 

Coalition Amended Judgment that 

vacated those regulations. 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

I certify that this action will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the RFA. In making this 

determination, the impact of concern is 

any significant adverse economic 

impact on small entities. An agency may 

certify that a rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities if 

the rule relieves regulatory burden, has 

no net burden or otherwise has a 

positive economic effect on the small 

entities subject to the rule. To the extent 

this rule has any substantive effect, it 

relieves regulatory burdens by removing 

regulations that purport to require 

permit applicants to request PSD 

permits if GHGs are the only pollutant 

emitted by the new source or 

modification to an existing source above 

the applicable major source thresholds 

and regulations that required the EPA to 

consider further phasing-in the GHG 

permitting requirements at lower GHG 

emission thresholds. This action is 

taken in light of the D.C. Circuit’s 

Coalition Amended Judgment that 

vacated those regulations. We have 

therefore concluded that this action will 

relieve regulatory burden for all directly 

regulated small entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(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. 

E. 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. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action does not have tribal 

implications, as specified in Executive 

Order 13175. Although the Tribal Air 

Rule (76 FR 38748, July 1, 2011) under 

the CAA gives tribes the opportunity to 

request and be granted delegation of the 

federal PSD program found at 40 CFR 

52.21 to issue PSD permits, there are no 

tribal agencies currently implementing 

the federal PSD permitting program. As 

a result, the removal of the PSD 

provisions that the D.C. Circuit vacated 

will not affect any tribal reviewing 

authorities and any tribally-owned 

sources with EPA-issued Step 2 PSD 

permits have the discretion to request 

the EPA to rescind their permit. In 

addition, the D.C. Circuit vacatur of the 

requirements for the EPA to consider 

further phasing in GHG permitting 

requirements into the PSD and title V 

programs at lower GHG emission 

thresholds provides relief to triballyowned sources that could have been 

subject to GHG permitting regulations at 

lower GHG emission thresholds if the 

EPA would have taken steps to apply 

GHG permitting requirements to such 

sources at such thresholds. Thus, 

Executive Order 13175 does not apply 

to this action. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks 

The EPA interprets Executive Order 

13045 as applying only to those 

regulatory actions that concern 

environmental 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 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 160 / Wednesday, August 19, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 50203 

because it does not concern an 

environmental health risk or safety risk. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations 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. 

I. National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act 

This rulemaking does not involve 

technical standards. 

J. 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. The results of this 

evaluation are contained in the section 

V titled, ‘‘Environmental Justice 

Considerations’’ for this action. 

K. 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. The CRA allows the issuing 

agency to make a rule effective sooner 

than otherwise provided by the CRA if 

the agency makes a good cause finding 

that notice-and-comment rulemaking 

procedures are impracticable, 

unnecessary or contrary to the public 

interest (5 U.S.C. 808(2)). The EPA has 

made a good cause finding for this rule 

as discussed in the Final Action section 

of this rulemaking, including the basis 

for that finding. 

L. Determination Under Section 307(d) 

Pursuant to CAA section 307(d)(1)(V), 

the Administrator determines that this 

action is subject to provisions of section 

307(d). Section 307(d) establishes 

procedural requirements specific to 

rulemaking under the CAA. Section 

307(d)(1)(V) provides that the 

provisions of section 307(d) apply to 

‘‘such other actions as the Administrator 

may determine.’’ 

VII. Judicial Review 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the U.S. Court of 

Appeals for the D.C. Circuit within 60 

days from August 19, 2015. 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) of the CAA). 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Parts 51 and 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Greenhouse gases, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Lead, National ambient air quality 

standards, New source review, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, 

Preconstruction permitting, Prevention 

of significant deterioration, Reviewing 

authorities, Sulfur oxides, Tailoring 

rule, Volatile organic compounds. 

40 CFR Parts 70 and 71 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Greenhouse gases, Intergovernmental 

relations, Lead, National ambient air 

quality standards, Nitrogen dioxide, 

Operating permits, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Permitting authorities, Sulfur 

oxides, Tailoring rule, Title V, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: August 12, 2015. 

Gina McCarthy, 

Administrator. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, title 40, Chapter I of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is amended as 

follows: 

PART 51—REQUIREMENTS FOR 

PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND 

SUBMITTAL OF IMPLEMENTATION 

PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 51 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101; 42 U.S.C. 7401– 

7671q. 

Subpart I—Review of New Sources and 

Modifications 

§ 51.166 [Amended] 

■ 2. Section 51.166 is amended by 

removing paragraph (b)(48)(v). 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 3. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et. seq. 

Subpart A—General Provisions 

§ 52.21 [Amended] 

■ 4. Section 52.21 is amended by 

removing paragraph (b)(49)(v). 

§ 52.22 [Removed] 

■ 5. Section 52.22 is removed. 

PART 70—STATE OPERATING PERMIT 

PROGRAMS 

■ 6. The authority citation for part 70 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et. seq. 

§ 70.12 [Removed] 

■ 7. Section 70.12 is removed. 

PART 71—FEDERAL OPERATING 

PERMIT PROGRAMS 

■ 8. The authority citation for part 71 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et. seq. 

§ 71.13 [Removed] 

■ 9. Section 71.13 is removed. 

[FR Doc. 2015–20501 Filed 8–18–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2009–0541; A–1–FRL– 

9932–46–Region 1] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Rhode 

Island; Rhode Island Low Emission 

Vehicle Program 

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 

Department of Environmental 

Management. The regulations adopted 

by Rhode Island include the California 

Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) II lightduty motor vehicle emission standards 

effective in model year 2008, the 

California LEV II medium-duty vehicle 

standards effective in model year 2009, 

and greenhouse gas emission standards 

for light-duty motor vehicles and 

medium-duty vehicles effective with 

model year 2009. The Rhode Island LEV 

regulation submitted also includes a 

zero emission vehicle (ZEV) provision. 

Rhode Island has adopted these 

revisions to reduce emissions of volatile 

organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen 


rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES