[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 126 (Friday, June 29, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 30598-30609]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14068]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2017-0696; FRL-9979-82--Region 1]


 Air Plan Approval; Vermont; Infrastructure State Implementation 
Plan Requirements for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve elements of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission from 
Vermont that addresses the infrastructure requirements of the Clean Air 
Act (CAA or Act)--including the interstate transport provisions--for 
the 2012 fine particle (PM<INF>2.5</INF>) National Ambient Air Quality 
Standards (NAAQS). The infrastructure requirements are designed to 
ensure that the structural components of each state's air quality 
management program are adequate to meet the state's responsibilities 
under the CAA. This action is being taken under the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before July 30, 2018.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-
OAR-2017-0696, to the www.regulations.gov website or via email to 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#33405a5e505c4b1d525f5a405c5d735643521d545c45"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7003191d131f085e111c19031f1e301500115e171f06">[email protected]</span></a>. For comments submitted to the 
www.regulations.gov website, follow the online instructions for 
submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or 
removed from www.regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the 
EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not 
submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must 
be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered 
the official comment and should include discussion of all points you 
wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment 
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, 
cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission 
methods, please contact the person identified in the ``For Further 
Information Contact'' section. For the full EPA public comment policy, 
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance 
on making effective comments, please visit www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. Publicly available docket materials are 
available at www.regulations.gov or at the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem 
Protection, Air Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, 
Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the 
contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of 
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 
legal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alison C. Simcox, Air Quality Unit, 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 
5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, (Mail code OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-
3912, tel. (617) 918-1684; <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#54273d39373b2c7a35383d273b3a143124357a333b22"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f98a90949a9681d79895908a9697b99c8998d79e968f">[email protected]</span></a>.

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

Table of Contents

I. Background and Purpose
    A. What Vermont SIP submissions does this rulemaking address?
    B. What is the scope of this rulemaking?
II. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate these SIP submissions?
III. EPA's Review
    A. Section 110(a)(2)(A)--Emission Limits and Other Control 
Measures
    B. Section 110(a)(2)(B)--Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data 
System
    C. Section 110(a)(2)(C)--Program for Enforcement of Control 
Measures and for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources
    D. Section 110(a)(2)(D)--Interstate Transport
    E. Section 110(a)(2)(E)--Adequate Resources
    F. Section 110(a)(2)(F)--Stationary Source Monitoring System
    G. Section 110(a)(2)(G)--Emergency Powers
    H. Section 110(a)(2)(H)--Future SIP Revisions
    I. Section 110(a)(2)(I)--Nonattainment Area Plan or Plan 
Revisions Under Part D
    J. Section 110(a)(2)(J)--Consultation With Government Officials; 
Public Notifications; Prevention of Significant Deterioration; 
Visibility Protection
    K. Section 110(a)(2)(K)--Air Quality Modeling/Data
    L. Section 110(a)(2)(L)--Permitting Fees
    M. Section 110(a)(2)(M)--Consultation/Participation by Affected 
Local Entities
IV. Proposed Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background and Purpose

A. What Vermont SIP submissions does this rulemaking address?

    This rulemaking addresses a SIP submission from the Vermont 
Department of Environmental Conservation (VT DEC). The state submitted 
its infrastructure SIP for the 2012 fine particle (PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
\1\) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) on October 31, 2017. 
This included an enclosure addressing the ``Good Neighbor'' (or 
``transport'') provisions for the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS (Section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA). Under sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the 
CAA, states are required to submit infrastructure SIPs to ensure that 
SIPs provide for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the 
NAAQS, including the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ PM<INF>2.5</INF> refers to particulate matter of 2.5 microns 
or less in diameter, often referred to as ``fine'' particles.

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

[[Page 30599]]

B. What is the scope of this rulemaking?

    EPA is acting on a SIP submission from Vermont that addresses the 
infrastructure requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for 
the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
    The requirement for states to make a SIP submission of this type 
arises out of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2). Pursuant to these 
sections, each state must submit a SIP that provides for the 
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of each primary or 
secondary NAAQS. States must make such SIP submission ``within 3 years 
(or such shorter period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the 
promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS.'' This requirement is triggered 
by the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS and is not conditioned 
upon EPA's taking any other action. Section 110(a)(2) includes the 
specific elements that ``each such plan'' must address.
    EPA commonly refers to such SIP submissions intended to satisfy the 
requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) as 
``infrastructure SIP'' submissions. Although the term ``infrastructure 
SIP'' does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses the term to distinguish this 
type of SIP submission from submissions that are intended to satisfy 
other SIP requirements under the CAA, such as ``nonattainment SIP'' or 
``attainment plan SIP'' submissions to address the nonattainment 
planning requirements of part D of title I of the CAA.
    This rulemaking will not cover three substantive areas that are not 
integral to acting on a state's infrastructure SIP submission: (i) 
Existing provisions related to excess emissions during periods of 
start-up, shutdown, or malfunction at sources (``SSM'' emissions) that 
may be contrary to the CAA and EPA's policies addressing such excess 
emissions; (ii) existing provisions related to ``director's variance'' 
or ``director's discretion'' that purport to permit revisions to SIP-
approved emissions limits with limited public process or without 
requiring further approval by EPA, that may be contrary to the CAA 
(``director's discretion''); and, (iii) existing provisions for 
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) programs that may be 
inconsistent with current requirements of EPA's ``Final New Source 
Review (NSR) Improvement Rule,'' 67 FR 80186 (December 31, 2002), as 
amended by 72 FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (``NSR Reform''). Instead, EPA 
has the authority to address each one of these substantive areas 
separately. A detailed history, interpretation, and rationale for EPA's 
approach to infrastructure SIP requirements can be found in EPA's May 
13, 2014, proposed rule entitled, ``Infrastructure SIP Requirements for 
the 2008 Lead NAAQS'' in the section, ``What is the scope of this 
rulemaking?'' See 79 FR 27241 at 27242-45.

II. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate these SIP submissions?

    EPA highlighted the statutory requirement to submit infrastructure 
SIPs within 3 years of promulgation of a new NAAQS in an October 2, 
2007, guidance document entitled ``Guidance on SIP Elements Required 
Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' (2007 
Guidance). EPA has issued additional guidance documents and memoranda, 
including a September 13, 2013, guidance document entitled ``Guidance 
on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean 
Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)'' (2013 Guidance) and a 
September 25, 2009, guidance document entitled ``Guidance on SIP 
Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour 
Fine Particle (PM<INF>2.5</INF>) National Ambient Air Quality Standards 
(NAAQS)'' (2009 Guidance).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ This memorandum and other referenced guidance documents and 
memoranda are included in the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    With respect to the Good Neighbor provision, the most recent 
relevant document was a memorandum published on March 17, 2016, 
entitled ``Information on the Interstate Transport `Good Neighbor' 
Provision for the 2012 Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air 
Quality Standards under Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)'' 
(2016 memorandum). The 2016 memorandum describes EPA's past approach to 
addressing interstate transport, and provides EPA's general review of 
relevant modeling data and air quality projections as they relate to 
the 2012 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. The 2016 memorandum provides 
information relevant to EPA Regional office review of the CAA section 
110 (a)(2)(D)(i)(I) ``Good Neighbor'' provision requirements in 
infrastructure SIPs with respect to the 2012 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS. This rulemaking considers information provided in that 
memorandum.

III. EPA's Review

    In this notice of proposed rulemaking, EPA is proposing action on a 
SIP submission from the state of Vermont. In its submission, Vermont 
presents a detailed list of Vermont Laws and previously SIP-approved 
Air Quality Regulations showing how the various components of its EPA-
approved SIP meet each of the requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the 
CAA for the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. The following review evaluates 
the state's submissions in light of section 110(a)(2) requirements and 
relevant EPA guidance.
    For Vermont's October 31, 2017 submission addressing the 2012 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, we reviewed all Section 110(a)(2) elements, 
including the transport provisions, but excluding the three areas 
discussed above under the scope of this rulemaking.

A. Section 110(a)(2)(A)-Emission Limits and Other Control Measures

    This section (also referred to in this action as an element) of the 
Act requires SIPs to include enforceable emission limits and other 
control measures, means or techniques, schedules for compliance, and 
other related matters. However, EPA has long interpreted emission 
limits and control measures for attaining the standards as being due 
when nonattainment planning requirements are due.\3\ In the context of 
an infrastructure SIP, EPA is not evaluating the existing SIP 
provisions for this purpose. Instead, EPA is only evaluating whether 
the state's SIP has basic structural provisions for the implementation 
of the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See, for example, EPA's final rule on ``National Ambient Air 
Quality Standards for Lead.'' 73 FR 66964, 67034 (November 12, 
2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Vermont's infrastructure submittal for this element cites Vermont 
Statutes Annotated (V.S.A) and several Vermont Air Pollution Control 
Regulations (VT APCR) as follows: Vermont's 10 V.S.A. Sec.  554, 
``Powers,'' authorizes the Secretary of the Vermont Agency of Natural 
Resources (ANR) to ``[a]dopt, amend and repeal rules, implementing the 
provisions'' of Vermont's air pollution control laws set forth in 10 
V.S.A. chapter 23. It also authorizes the Secretary to ``conduct 
studies, investigations and research relating to air contamination and 
air pollution'' and to ``[d]etermine by appropriate means the degree of 
air contamination and air pollution in the state and the several parts 
thereof.'' Ten V.S.A. Sec.  556, ``Permits for the construction or 
modification of air contaminant sources,'' requires applicants to 
obtain permits for constructing or modifying air contaminant sources, 
and 10 V.S.A. Sec.  558, ``Emission control requirements,'' authorizes 
the Secretary ``to establish emission control requirements . . . 
necessary to prevent, abate, or control

[[Page 30600]]

air pollution.'' EPA approved 10 V.S.A. Sec.  554 on June 27, 2017 (82 
FR 29005).
    The Vermont submittal cites more than 20 specific rules that the 
state has adopted to control the emissions of PM<INF>2.5</INF> and its 
precursors: sulfur dioxide (SO<INF>2</INF>), volatile organic compounds 
(VOCs), and nitrogen oxides (NO<INF>X</INF>). A few, with their EPA 
approval citation \4\ are listed here: Sec.  5-201--Open Burning 
Prohibited (63 FR 19825; April 22, 1998); Sec.  5-251--Control of 
Nitrogen Oxides Emissions (81 FR 50342; August 1, 2016); Sec.  5-252--
Control of Sulfur Dioxide Emissions (81 FR 50342; August 1, 2016); 
Sec.  5-261--Control of Hazardous Air Contaminants (47 FR 6014; 
February 10, 1982); Sec.  5-502--Major Stationary Sources and Major 
Modifications (81 FR 50342; August 1, 2016); Sec.  5-702--Excessive 
Smoke Emissions from Motor Vehicles (45 FR 10775; February 19, 1980).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ The citations reference the most recent EPA approval of the 
stated rule, or of revisions to the rule. For example, Sec.  5-252 
was initially approved on February 4, 1977 (42 FR 6811), with 
various revisions being approved since then, with the most recent 
approval of revisions to the applicability section occurring on 
August 1, 2016 (81 FR 50342).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based upon EPA's review of the submittals, EPA proposes that 
Vermont meets the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 
110(a)(2)(A) with respect to the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
    As previously noted, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove 
any existing state provisions or rules related to SSM or director's 
discretion in the context of section 110(a)(2)(A).

B. Section 110(a)(2)(B)--Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System

    This section requires SIPs to provide for establishing and 
operating ambient air quality monitors, collecting and analyzing 
ambient air quality data, and making these data available to EPA upon 
request. Each year, states submit annual air monitoring network plans 
to EPA for review and approval. EPA's review of these annual monitoring 
plans includes our evaluation of whether the state: (i) Monitors air 
quality at appropriate locations throughout the state using EPA-
approved Federal Reference Methods or Federal Equivalent Method 
monitors; (ii) submits data to EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) in a 
timely manner; and (iii) provides EPA Regional Offices with prior 
notification of any planned changes to monitoring sites or the network 
plan.
    State law authorizes the Secretary of ANR, or authorized 
representative, to ``conduct studies, investigations and research 
relating to air contamination and air pollution'' and to ``[d]etermine 
by appropriate means the degree of air contamination and air pollution 
in the state and the several parts thereof.'' See 10 V.S.A. Sec.  
554(8), (9). VT DEC, one of several departments within ANR, operates an 
air quality monitoring network, and EPA approved the state's 2017 
Annual Air Monitoring Network Plan for PM<INF>2.5</INF> on August 23, 
2017.\5\ Furthermore, VT DEC populates AQS with air quality monitoring 
data in a timely manner, and provides EPA with prior notification when 
considering a change to its monitoring network or plan. EPA proposes 
that VT DEC has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 
110(a)(2)(B) with respect to the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See EPA approval letter located in the docket for this 
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Section 110(a)(2)(C)--Program for Enforcement of Control Measures 
and for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources

    States are required to include a program providing for enforcement 
of the emission limits and control measures described in section 
110(a)(2)(A) and for the regulation of construction of new or modified 
stationary sources to meet NSR requirements under PSD and nonattainment 
new source review (NNSR) programs. Part C of the CAA (sections 160-
169B) addresses PSD, while part D of the CAA (sections 171-193) 
addresses NNSR requirements.\6\ The evaluation of each state's 
submission addressing the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 
110(a)(2)(C) covers the following: (i) Enforcement of SIP measures; 
(ii) PSD program for major sources and major modifications; and (iii) a 
permit program for minor sources and minor modifications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ EPA considers the evaluation of permit provisions that 
implement Part D to be outside the scope of an infrastructure SIP 
action because SIPs incorporating necessary local nonattainment area 
controls are due on separate schedules, pursuant to CAA section 172 
and the various pollutant-specific subparts 2 through 5 of part D. 
Thus, our review under section 110(a)(2)(C) does not evaluate the 
nonattainment NSR program required by part D of the Act. We are only 
evaluating the state's PSD program as required by part C of the Act 
and the state's minor source program (applicable regardless of 
attainment status) as required by section 110(a)(2)(C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sub-Element 1: Enforcement of SIP Measures
    State law provides the Secretary of ANR with the authority to 
enforce air pollution control requirements, including SIP-approved 10 
V.S.A. Sec.  554, which authorizes the Secretary of ANR to ``[i]ssue 
orders as may be necessary to effectuate the purposes of [the state's 
air pollution control laws] and enforce the same by all appropriate 
administrative and judicial proceedings.'' In addition, Vermont's SIP-
approved regulations VT APCR Sec.  5-501, ``Review of Construction or 
Modification of Air Contaminant Sources,'' and VT APCR Sec.  5-502, 
``Major Stationary Sources and Major Modifications,'' establish 
requirements for permits to construct, modify or operate major air 
contaminant sources.
    EPA proposes that Vermont has met the enforcement of SIP measures 
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the 2012 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: PSD Program for Major Sources and Major Modifications
    PSD applies to new major sources or modifications made to major 
sources for pollutants where the area in which the source is located is 
in attainment of, or unclassifiable with regard to, the relevant NAAQS. 
The EPA interprets the CAA to require each state to make an 
infrastructure SIP submission for a new or revised NAAQS demonstrating 
that the air agency has a complete PSD permitting program in place 
satisfying the current requirements for all regulated NSR pollutants. 
VT DEC's EPA-approved PSD rules, contained at VT APCR Subchapters I, 
IV, and V, contain provisions that address applicable requirements for 
all regulated NSR pollutants, including GHGs.
    With respect to current requirements for PM<INF>2.5</INF>, we 
evaluate Vermont's PSD program for consistency with two EPA rules. The 
first is a final rule issued May 16, 2008, entitled ``Implementation of 
the New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less than 
2.5 Micrometers (PM<INF>2.5</INF>)'' (2008 NSR Rule). See 73 FR 28321. 
The 2008 NSR Rule finalized several new requirements for SIPs to 
address sources that emit direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> and other pollutants 
that contribute to secondary PM<INF>2.5</INF> formation, including 
requirements for NSR permits to address pollutants responsible for the 
secondary formation of PM<INF>2.5,</INF> otherwise known as precursors. 
As part of identifying precursors to PM<INF>2.5</INF>, the 2008 NSR 
Rule also required states to revise the definition of ``significant'' 
as it relates to a net emissions increase or the potential of a source 
to emit pollutants. Finally, the 2008 NSR Rule requires states to 
account for PM<INF>2.5</INF> and PM<INF>10</INF> condensables for 
applicability determinations and in establishing emissions limitations 
for PM<INF>2.5</INF> and PM<INF>10</INF> in PSD permits beginning on or

[[Page 30601]]

after January 1, 2011.\7\ These requirements are codified in 40 CFR 
51.166(b) and 52.21(b). States were required to revise their SIPs 
consistent with these changes to the federal regulations. On August 1, 
2016 (81 FR 50342), EPA approved revisions to Vermont's PSD program 
satisfying these requirements of the 2008 NSR Rule. See also 82 FR 
15671 at 15674-75 (March 30, 2017); 82 FR 29005 (June 27, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ On January 4, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. 
Circuit held that EPA should have issued the 2008 NSR Rule in 
accordance with the CAA's requirements for PM<INF>10</INF> 
nonattainment areas (Title I, Part D, subpart 4), and not the 
general requirements for nonattainment areas under subpart 1. Nat. 
Res. Def. Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428. The EPA's approval of 
Vermont's infrastructure SIP as to elements C, D(i)(II), or J with 
respect to the PSD requirements promulgated by the 2008 NSR Rule 
does not conflict with the court's opinion. For more information, 
see 80 FR 42446, July 17, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The second is a final rule issued October 20, 2010, entitled 
``Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) for Particulate Matter 
Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM<INF>2.5</INF>)--Increments, Significant 
Impact Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC)'' 
(2010 NSR Rule). See 75 FR 64864. This rule established several 
components for making PSD permitting determinations for 
PM<INF>2.5,</INF> including adding the required elements for 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> into a state's existing system of ``increment 
analysis,'' which is the mechanism used in the PSD permitting program 
to estimate significant deterioration of ambient air quality for a 
pollutant in relation to new source construction or modification. The 
2010 NSR Rule revised the existing system for determining increment 
consumption by establishing a new ``major source baseline date'' for 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> and by establishing a trigger date for 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> in relation to the definition of ``minor source 
baseline date.'' Lastly, the 2010 NSR Rule revised the definition of 
``baseline area'' to include a level of significance of 0.3 micrograms 
per cubic meter, annual average, for PM<INF>2.5</INF>. These 
requirements are codified in 40 CFR 51.166(b) and (c) and in 40 CFR 
52.21(b) and (c). States were required to revise their SIPs consistent 
with these changes to the federal regulations.
    On August 1, 2016 (81 FR 50342) and September 14, 2016 (81 FR 
63102), EPA approved revisions to the Vermont SIP that address certain 
aspects of EPA's 2010 NSR rule. In addition, on March 19, 2018, EPA 
approved the state's method for determining the amount of PSD 
increments available to a new or modified major source. See 83 FR 
11884. As a result, Vermont's approved PSD program meets the current 
requirements for PM<INF>2.5.</INF>
    On March 19, 2018 (83 FR 11884), EPA also approved revisions to 
Vermont's PSD program that addressed the PSD requirements of EPA's 
``Final Rule to Implement the 8- Hour Ozone National Ambient Air 
Quality Standard--Phase 2; Final Rule To Implement Certain Aspects of 
the 1990 Amendments Relating to New Source Review and Prevention of 
Significant Deterioration as They Apply in Carbon Monoxide, Particulate 
Matter, and Ozone NAAQS; Final Rule for Reformulated Gasoline,'' which 
obligated states to revise their PSD programs to explicitly identify 
NO<INF>X</INF> as a precursor to ozone. See 70 FR 71612 (November 29, 
2005). Therefore, Vermont's approved PSD program meets the current 
requirements for ozone.
    With respect to GHGs, on June 23, 2014, the United States Supreme 
Court issued a decision addressing the application of PSD permitting 
requirements to GHG emissions. Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Envtl. 
Prot. Agency, 134 S.Ct. 2427. The Supreme Court said that EPA may not 
treat GHGs as an air pollutant for purposes of determining whether a 
source is a major source required to obtain a PSD permit. The Court 
also said that EPA could continue to require that PSD permits, 
otherwise required based on emissions of pollutants other than GHGs, 
contain limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of Best 
Available Control Technology (BACT).
    In accordance with the Supreme Court decision, on April 10, 2015, 
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the 
D.C. Circuit) issued an amended judgment vacating the regulations that 
implemented Step 2 of the EPA's PSD and Title V Greenhouse Gas 
Tailoring Rule, but not the regulations that implement Step 1 of that 
rule. Step 1 of the Tailoring Rule covers sources that are required to 
obtain a PSD permit based on emissions of pollutants other than GHGs. 
Step 2 applied to sources that emitted only GHGs above the thresholds 
triggering the requirement to obtain a PSD permit. The amended judgment 
preserves, without the need for additional rulemaking by EPA, the 
application of the BACT requirement to GHG emissions from Step 1 or 
``anyway'' sources. With respect to Step 2 sources, the D.C. Circuit's 
amended judgment vacated the regulations at issue in the litigation, 
including 40 CFR 51.166(b)(48)(v), ``to the extent they require a 
stationary source to obtain a PSD permit if greenhouse gases are the 
only pollutant (i) that the source emits or has the potential to emit 
above the applicable major source thresholds, or (ii) for which there 
is a significant emission increase from a modification.''
    On August 19, 2015 (80 FR 50199), EPA amended its PSD and Title V 
regulations to remove from the Code of Federal Regulations portions of 
those regulations that the D.C. Circuit specifically identified as 
vacated. EPA intends to further revise the PSD and Title V regulations 
to fully implement the Supreme Court and D.C. Circuit rulings in a 
separate rulemaking. This future rulemaking will include revisions to 
additional definitions in the PSD regulations.
    Some states have begun to revise their existing SIP-approved PSD 
programs in light of these court decisions, and some states may prefer 
not to initiate this process until they have more information about the 
additional planned revisions to EPA's PSD regulations. EPA is not 
expecting states to have revised their PSD programs in anticipation of 
EPA's additional actions to revise its PSD program rules in response to 
the court decisions for purposes of infrastructure SIP submissions. At 
present, EPA has determined that Vermont's SIP is sufficient to satisfy 
element C with respect to GHGs because the PSD permitting program 
previously approved by EPA into the SIP continues to require that PSD 
permits (otherwise required based on emissions of pollutants other than 
GHGs) contain limitations on GHG emissions based on the application of 
BACT. Although the approved Vermont PSD permitting program may 
currently contain provisions that are no longer necessary in light of 
the Supreme Court decision, this does not render the infrastructure SIP 
submission inadequate to satisfy element C. The SIP contains the 
necessary PSD requirements at this time, and the application of those 
requirements is not impeded by the presence of other previously-
approved provisions regarding the permitting of sources of GHGs that 
EPA does not consider necessary at this time in light of the Supreme 
Court decision. Accordingly, the Supreme Court decision does not affect 
EPA's proposed approval of Vermont's infrastructure SIP as to the 
requirements of element C.
    For the purposes of the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS infrastructure 
SIPs, EPA reiterates that NSR Reform regulations are not in the scope 
of these actions. Therefore, we are not taking action on existing NSR 
Reform regulations for Vermont.
    The EPA is proposing to approve Vermont's infrastructure SIP for 
the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS with respect to the requirement in 
section 110(a)(2)(C) to

[[Page 30602]]

include a PSD permitting program in the SIP that covers the 
requirements for all regulated NSR pollutants as required by part C of 
the Act.
Sub-Element 3: Preconstruction Permitting for Minor Sources and Minor 
Modifications
    To address the pre-construction regulation of the modification and 
construction of minor stationary sources and minor modifications of 
major stationary sources, an infrastructure SIP submission should 
identify the existing EPA-approved SIP provisions and/or include new 
provisions that govern the minor source pre-construction program that 
regulate emissions of the relevant NAAQS pollutants. EPA approved 
revisions to Vermont's minor NSR program on August 1, 2016 (81 FR 
50342). Vermont and EPA rely on the existing minor NSR program to 
ensure that new and modified sources not captured by the major NSR 
permitting programs, VT APCR Sec.  5-502, do not interfere with 
attainment and maintenance of the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
    We are proposing to find that Vermont has met the requirement to 
have a SIP-approved minor new source review permit program as required 
under Section 110(a)(2)(C) for the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.

D. Section 110(a)(2)(D)--Interstate Transport

    This section contains a comprehensive set of air quality management 
elements pertaining to the transport of air pollution with which states 
must comply. It covers the following five topics, categorized as sub-
elements: Sub-element 1, Significant contribution to nonattainment, and 
interference with maintenance of a NAAQS; Sub-element 2, PSD; Sub-
element 3, Visibility protection; Sub-element 4, Interstate pollution 
abatement; and Sub-element 5, International pollution abatement. Sub-
elements 1 through 3 above are found under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of 
the Act, and these items are further categorized into the four prongs 
discussed below, two of which are found within sub-element 1. Sub-
elements 4 and 5 are found under section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) of the Act 
and include provisions insuring compliance with sections 115 and 126 of 
the Act relating to interstate and international pollution abatement.
Sub-Element 1: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)--Contribute to Nonattainment 
(Prong 1) and Interfere With Maintenance of the NAAQS (Prong 2)
    Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA requires a SIP to prohibit 
any emissions activity in the state that will contribute significantly 
to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in any 
downwind state. EPA commonly refers to these requirements as prong 1 
(significant contribution to nonattainment) and prong 2 (interference 
with maintenance), or jointly as the ``Good Neighbor'' or ``transport'' 
provisions of the CAA. This rulemaking proposes action on the portion 
of Vermont's October 31, 2017 SIP submission that addresses the prong 1 
and 2 requirements with respect to the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
    EPA has developed a consistent framework for addressing the prong 1 
and 2 interstate-transport requirements with respect to the 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in several previous federal rulemakings. The 
four basic steps of that framework include: (1) Identifying downwind 
receptors that are expected to have problems attaining or maintaining 
the NAAQS; (2) identifying which upwind states contribute to these 
identified problems in amounts sufficient to warrant further review and 
analysis; (3) for states identified as contributing to downwind air 
quality problems, identifying upwind emissions reductions necessary to 
prevent an upwind state from significantly contributing to 
nonattainment or interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS downwind; 
and (4) for states that are found to have emissions that significantly 
contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS 
downwind, reducing the identified upwind emissions through adoption of 
permanent and enforceable measures. This framework was most recently 
applied with respect to PM<INF>2.5</INF> in the Cross-State Air 
Pollution Rule (CSAPR), which addressed both the 1997 and 2006 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> standards, as well as the 1997 ozone standard. See 76 
FR 48208 (August 8, 2011).
    EPA's analysis for CSAPR, conducted consistent with the four-step 
framework, included air-quality modeling that evaluated the impacts of 
38 eastern states on identified receptors in the eastern United States. 
EPA indicated that, for step 2 of the framework, states with impacts on 
downwind receptors that are below the contribution threshold of 1% of 
the relevant NAAQS would not be considered to significantly contribute 
to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the relevant NAAQS, 
and would, therefore, not be included in CSAPR. See 76 FR 48220, August 
8, 2011. EPA further indicated that such states could rely on EPA's 
analysis for CSAPR as technical support in order to demonstrate that 
their existing or future interstate transport SIP submittals are 
adequate to address the transport requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 
with regard to the relevant NAAQS. Id.
    In addition, as noted above, on March 17, 2016, EPA released the 
2016 memorandum to provide information to states as they develop SIPs 
addressing the Good Neighbor provision as it pertains to the 2012 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. Consistent with step 1 of the framework, the 
2016 memorandum provides projected future-year annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
design values for monitors throughout the country based on quality-
assured and certified ambient-monitoring data and recent air-quality 
modeling and explains the methodology used to develop these projected 
design values. The memorandum also describes how the projected values 
can be used to help determine which monitors should be further 
evaluated to potentially address if emissions from other states 
significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance 
of the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS at these monitoring sites. The 2016 
memorandum explained that the pertinent year for evaluating air quality 
for purposes of addressing interstate transport for the 2012 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS is 2021, the attainment deadline for 2012 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS nonattainment areas classified as Moderate. 
Accordingly, because the available data included 2017 and 2025 
projected average and maximum PM<INF>2.5</INF> design values calculated 
through the CAMx photochemical model, the memorandum suggests 
approaches states might use to interpolate PM<INF>2.5</INF> values at 
sites in 2021.
    For all, but one, monitoring sites in the eastern United States, 
the modeling data provided in the 2016 memorandum showed that monitors 
were expected to both attain and maintain the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS in both 2017 and 2025. The modeling results project that this one 
monitor, the Liberty monitor, (ID number 420030067), located in 
Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, will be above the 2012 annual 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in 2017, but only under the model's maximum 
projected conditions, which are used in EPA's interstate transport 
framework to identify maintenance receptors. The Liberty monitor (along 
with all the other Allegheny County

[[Page 30603]]

monitors) is projected to both attain and maintain the NAAQS in 2025. 
The 2016 memorandum suggests that under such a condition (again, where 
EPA's photochemical modeling indicates an area will maintain the 2012 
annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in 2025, but not in 2017), further 
analysis of the site should be performed to determine if the site may 
be a nonattainment or maintenance receptor in 2021 (which, again, is 
the attainment deadline for moderate PM<INF>2.5</INF> areas). The 
memorandum also indicates that for certain states with incomplete 
ambient monitoring data, additional information including the latest 
available data, should be analyzed to determine whether there are 
potential downwind air quality problems that may be impacted by 
transported emissions. This rulemaking considers these analyses for 
Vermont, as well as additional analysis conducted by EPA during review 
of Vermont's submittal.
    To develop the projected values presented in the memorandum, EPA 
used the results of nationwide photochemical air-quality modeling that 
it recently performed to support several rulemakings related to the 
ozone NAAQS. Base-year modeling was performed for 2011. Future-year 
modeling was performed for 2017 to support the proposed CSAPR Update 
for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS. See 80 FR 75705 (December 3, 2015). Future-
year modeling was also performed for 2025 to support the Regulatory 
Impact Assessment of the final 2015 Ozone NAAQS.\8\ The outputs from 
these model runs included hourly concentrations of PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
that were used in conjunction with measured data to project annual 
average PM<INF>2.5</INF> design values for 2017 and 2025. Areas that 
were designated as moderate PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment areas for 
the 2012 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in 2014 must attain the NAAQS by 
December 31, 2021, or as expeditiously as practicable. Although neither 
the available 2017 nor 2025 future-year modeling data correspond 
directly to the future-year attainment deadline for moderate 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment areas, EPA believes that the modeling 
information is still helpful for identifying potential nonattainment 
and maintenance receptors in the 2017-2021 period. Assessing downwind 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> air-quality problems based on estimates of air-quality 
concentrations in a future year aligned with the relevant attainment 
deadline is consistent with the instructions from the United States 
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in North Carolina 
v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896, 911-12 (D.C. Cir. 2008), that upwind emission 
reductions should be harmonized, to the extent possible, with the 
attainment deadlines for downwind areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See 2015 ozone NAAQS RIA at: www3.epa.gov/ttnecas1/docs/20151001ria.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Vermont's Submissions for Prongs 1 and 2
    On October 31, 2017, VT DEC submitted an infrastructure SIP for the 
2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS that addressed prongs 1 and 2 for the 2012 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. Vermont's SIP submittal relied in part on EPA's 
analysis performed for the CSAPR rulemaking to conclude that the state 
will not significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with 
maintenance of the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in any downwind area.
    EPA analyzed the state's October 2017 submittal to determine 
whether it fully addressed the prong 1 and 2 transport provisions with 
respect to the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. As discussed below, EPA 
concludes that emissions of PM<INF>2.5</INF> and PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
precursors (NO<INF>X</INF> and SO<INF>2</INF>) in Vermont will not 
significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance 
of the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in any other state.
    As noted, the modeling discussed in EPA's 2016 memorandum 
identified one potential maintenance receptor for the 2012 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS at the Liberty monitor (ID number 420030067), 
located in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. The memorandum also 
identified certain states with incomplete ambient monitoring data as 
areas that may require further analysis to determine whether there are 
potential downwind air quality problems that may be impacted by 
transported emissions.
    While developing the 2011 CSAPR rulemaking, EPA modeled the impacts 
of all 38 eastern states in its modeling domain on fine particulate 
matter concentrations at downwind receptors in other states in the 2012 
analysis year in order to evaluate the contribution of upwind states on 
downwind states with respect to the 1997 and 2006 PM<INF>2.5</INF>. 
Although the modeling was not conducted for purposes of analyzing 
upwind states' impacts on downwind receptors with respect to the 2012 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, the contribution analysis for the 1997 and 2006 
standards can be informative for evaluating Vermont's compliance with 
the Good Neighbor provision for the 2012 standard.
    This CSAPR modeling showed that Vermont had a very small impact 
(0.002 [mu]g/m\3\ annual PM<INF>2.5</INF>) on the Liberty monitor in 
Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, which is the only out-of-state monitor 
that may be a nonattainment or maintenance receptor in 2021. (A 
spreadsheet showing CSAPR contributions for ozone and PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
is included in docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491-4228.) Although EPA has not 
proposed a particular threshold for evaluating the 2012 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, EPA notes that Vermont's impact on the Liberty 
monitor is far below the threshold of 1% for the annual 2012 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS (i.e., 0.12 [mu]g/m\3\) that EPA previously used 
to evaluate the contribution of upwind states to downwind air-quality 
monitors. Therefore, even if the Liberty monitor were considered a 
receptor for purposes of transport, the EPA proposes to conclude that 
Vermont will not significantly contribute to nonattainment, or 
interfere with maintenance, of the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS at that 
monitor.
    In addition, the Liberty monitor is already close to attaining the 
2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS, and expected emissions reductions in the 
next four years will lead to additional reductions in measured 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> concentrations. There are both local and regional 
components to measured PM<INF>2.5</INF> levels. All monitors in 
Allegheny County have a regional component, with the Liberty monitor 
most strongly influenced by local sources. This is confirmed by the 
fact that annual average measured concentrations at the Liberty monitor 
have consistently been 2-4 [mu]g/m\3\ higher than other monitors in 
Allegheny County.
    Specifically, previous CSAPR modeling showed that regional 
emissions from upwind states, particularly SO<INF>2</INF> and NOx 
emissions, contribute to PM<INF>2.5</INF> nonattainment at the Liberty 
monitor. In recent years, large SO<INF>2</INF> and NO<INF>X</INF> 
reductions from power plants have occurred in Pennsylvania and states 
upwind from the Greater Pittsburgh region. Pennsylvania's energy sector 
emissions of SO<INF>2</INF> will have decreased 166,000 tons between 
2015-2017 as a result of CSAPR implementation. This is due to both the 
installation of emissions controls and retirements of electric 
generating units (EGUs). Projected power plant closures and additional 
emissions controls in Pennsylvania and upwind states will help further 
reduce both direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> and PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursors. 
Regional emission reductions will continue to occur from current on-
the-books federal and state regulations such as the federal on-road and 
non-road vehicle programs, and various rules for major stationary 
emissions sources. See proposed approval of the Ohio Infrastructure SIP 
for the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS (82 FR 57689; December 7, 2017).
    In addition to regional emissions reductions and plant closures,

[[Page 30604]]

additional local reductions to both direct PM<INF>2.5</INF> and 
SO<INF>2</INF> emissions are expected to occur and should contribute to 
further declines in Allegheny County's PM<INF>2.5</INF> monitor 
concentrations. For example, significant SO<INF>2</INF> reductions have 
recently occurred at US Steel's integrated steel mill facilities in 
southern Allegheny County as part of a 1-hr SO<INF>2</INF> NAAQS 
SIP.\9\ Reductions are largely due to declining sulfur content in the 
Clairton Coke Work's coke oven gas (COG). Because this COG is burned at 
US Steel's Clairton Coke Works, Irvin Mill, and Edgar Thompson Steel 
Mill, these reductions in sulfur content should contribute to much 
lower PM<INF>2.5</INF> precursor emissions in the immediate future. The 
Allegheny SO<INF>2</INF> SIP also projects lower SO<INF>2</INF> 
emissions resulting from vehicle fuel standards, reductions in general 
emissions due to declining population in the Greater Pittsburgh region, 
and several shutdowns of significant sources of emissions in Allegheny 
County.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ www.achd.net/air/pubs/SIPs/SO2_2010_NAAQS_SIP_9-14-2017.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA modeling projections, the recent downward trend in local and 
upwind emissions reductions, the expected continued downward trend in 
emissions between 2017 and 2021, and the downward trend in monitored 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> concentrations all indicate that the Liberty monitor 
will attain and be able to maintain the 2012 annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS by 2021. See proposed approval of the Ohio Infrastructure SIP (82 
FR 57689, December 7, 2017).
    As noted in the 2016 memorandum, several states have had recent 
data-quality issues identified as part of the PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
designations process. In particular, some ambient PM<INF>2.5</INF> data 
for certain time periods between 2009 and 2013 in Florida, Illinois, 
Idaho, Tennessee, and Kentucky did not meet all data-quality 
requirements under 40 CFR part 50, appendix L. The lack of data means 
that the relevant areas in those states could potentially be in 
nonattainment or be maintenance receptors in 2021. However, EPA's 
analysis for the 2011 CSAPR rulemaking with respect to the 2006 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS determined that Vermont's impact to all these 
downwind receptors would be well below the 1% contribution threshold 
for this NAAQS. That conclusion informs the analysis of Vermont's 
contributions for purposes of the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS as well. 
Given this, and the fact, discussed below, that the state's 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> design values for all ambient monitors have been well 
below the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS during the period from 2009 to 
2013, EPA concludes that it is highly unlikely that Vermont 
significantly contributes to nonattainment or interferes with 
maintenance of the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in areas with data-
quality issues.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Vermont's PM<INF>2.5</INF> design values for all ambient 
monitors from 2004-2006 through 2013-2015 are available on Table 6 
of the 2015 Design Value Report at https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-design-values_.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Information in Enclosure 5 of Vermont's October 2017 SIP submission 
(Vermont Good Neighbor SIP) corroborates EPA's proposed conclusion that 
Vermont's SIP meets its obligations under CAA section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). This enclosure includes 2011-2015 design values for 
the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in the bordering states of 
Massachusetts, New Hampshire and New York, which are all well below the 
annual standard (12.0 [mu]g/m\3\). In addition, the analysis includes a 
graph showing that the design-value trend at the four ambient 
monitoring locations in Vermont declined from 2005 to 2016.
    This technical analysis is supported by additional indications that 
air quality is improving and emissions are falling in Vermont. 
Specifically, certified annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> monitor values (for 
monitors meeting minimum data completeness criteria) recorded since 
2014 show that the highest value in 2015 was 9.1 [mu]g/m\3\ at a 
monitor in Rutland, and the highest value in 2016 was 6.8 [mu]g/m\3\ at 
the same monitor in Rutland.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ 24-hour and annual PM<INF>2.5</INF> monitor values for 
individual monitoring sites throughout Vermont are available at 
www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data/monitor-values-report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Second, Vermont's sources are well-controlled. Vermont's 2017 
submission indicates that the state has many SIP-approved rules and 
programs that limit emissions of PM<INF>2.5</INF>, including rules to 
control emissions of SO<INF>2</INF>, PM<INF>2.5,</INF> VOCs and 
NO<INF>X</INF> \12\; Vermont's PSD program contained in VT APCR 
Subchapters I, IV, and V; Vermont's Regional Haze SIP; and Vermont's 
Title V program contained in Subchapter X of VT APCR. In addition, 
Vermont adopted limitations on sulfur in fuel (VT APCR Sec.  5-221(1)) 
on September 28, 2011.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ SO<INF>2</INF>, NO<INF>X</INF> and VOCs contribute to the 
formation of PM<INF>2.5</INF>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    It should also be noted that Vermont is not in the CSAPR program 
because EPA analyses show that the state does not emit ozone-season 
NO<INF>X</INF> at a level that contributes significantly to non-
attainment or interferes with maintenance of the 1997 and 2006 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in any other state.
    For the reasons explained herein, EPA agrees with Vermont's 
conclusions and proposes to determine that Vermont will not 
significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance 
of the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS in any other state. Therefore, EPA 
is proposing to approve the October 2017 infrastructure SIP submission 
from Vermont addressing prongs 1 and 2 of CAA section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--PSD (Prong 3)
    To prevent significant deterioration of air quality, this sub-
element requires SIPs to include provisions that prohibit any source or 
other type of emissions activity in one state from interfering with 
measures that are required in any other state's SIP under Part C of the 
CAA. As explained in the 2013 Guidance, a state may meet this 
requirement with respect to in-state sources and pollutants that are 
subject to PSD permitting through a comprehensive PSD permitting 
program that applies to all regulated NSR pollutants and that satisfies 
the requirements of EPA's PSD implementation rules. As discussed above 
under element C, Vermont has such a PSD permitting program. For in-
state sources not subject to PSD, this requirement can be satisfied 
through a fully-approved nonattainment new source review (NNSR) program 
with respect to any previous NAAQS. EPA's latest approval of some 
revisions to Vermont's NNSR regulations was on August 1, 2016 (81 FR 
50342). Therefore, we are proposing to approve this sub-element for the 
2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
Sub-Element 3: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--Visibility Protection 
(Prong 4)
    With regard to applicable requirements for visibility protection of 
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), states are subject to visibility and 
regional-haze program requirements under part C of the CAA (which 
includes sections 169A and 169B). The 2009 Guidance, 2011 Guidance, and 
2013 Guidance recommend that these requirements can be satisfied by an 
approved SIP addressing reasonably attributable visibility impairment, 
if required, or an approved SIP addressing regional haze. A fully 
approved regional haze SIP meeting the requirements of 40 CFR 51.308 
will ensure that emissions from sources under an air agency's 
jurisdiction are not interfering with measures required to be included 
in other air agencies' plans to protect visibility. Vermont's Regional 
Haze SIP was approved by EPA on May 22, 2012 (77 FR 30212). 
Accordingly, EPA proposes that Vermont has met the

[[Page 30605]]

visibility protection requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 2012 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
Sub-Element 4: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii)--Interstate Pollution Abatement
    This sub-element requires that each SIP contain provisions 
requiring compliance with requirements of section 126 relating to 
interstate pollution abatement. Section 126(a) requires new or modified 
sources to notify neighboring states of potential impacts from the 
source. The statute does not specify the method by which the source 
should provide the notification. States with SIP-approved PSD programs 
must have a provision requiring such notification by new or modified 
sources.
    On August 1, 2016 (81 FR 50342), EPA approved revisions to VT APCR 
Sec.  5-501, which includes a provision that requires VT ANR to provide 
notice of a draft PSD permit to, among other entities, any state whose 
lands may be affected by emissions from the source. VT APCR Sec.  5-
501(7)(c). Vermont's public notice requirements are consistent with the 
Federal PSD program's public notice requirements for affected states 
under 40 CFR 51.166(q). Therefore, we propose to approve Vermont's 
compliance with the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 126(a) 
with respect to with respect to the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. 
Vermont has no obligations under any other provision of section 126, 
and no source or sources within the state are the subject of an active 
finding under section 126 of the CAA with respect to the 2012 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
Sub-Element 5: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii)--International Pollution 
Abatement
    This sub-element also requires each SIP to contain provisions 
requiring compliance with the applicable requirements of section 115 
relating to international pollution abatement. There are no final 
findings under section 115 of the CAA against Vermont with respect to 
the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS. Therefore, EPA is proposing that 
Vermont has met the applicable infrastructure SIP requirements of 
section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) related to section 115 of the CAA for the 2012 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.

E. Section 110(a)(2)(E)--Adequate Resources

    Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) requires each SIP to provide assurances 
that the state will have adequate personnel, funding, and legal 
authority under state law to carry out its SIP. In addition, section 
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires each state to comply with the requirements 
under CAA section 128 about state boards. Finally, section 
110(a)(2)(E)(iii) requires that, where a state relies upon local or 
regional governments or agencies for the implementation of its SIP 
provisions, the state retain responsibility for ensuring implementation 
of SIP obligations with respect to relevant NAAQS. Section 
110(a)(2)(E)(iii), however, does not apply to this action because 
Vermont does not rely upon local or regional governments or agencies 
for the implementation of its SIP provisions.
Sub-Element 1: Adequate Personnel, Funding, and Legal Authority Under 
State Law To Carry Out Its SIP, and Related Issues
    Vermont, through its infrastructure SIP submittals, has documented 
that its air agency has the requisite authority and resources to carry 
out its SIP obligations. Vermont cites 10 V.S.A. Sec.  553, which 
designates ANR as the air pollution control agency of the state, and 10 
V.S.A Sec.  554, which provides the Secretary of ANR with the power to 
``[a]dopt, amend and repeal rules, implementing the provisions'' of 10 
V.S.A. Chapter 23, Air Pollution Control, and to ``[a]ppoint and employ 
personnel and consultants as may be necessary for the administration 
of'' 10 V.S.A. Chapter 23. Section 554 also authorizes the Secretary of 
ANR to ``[a]ccept, receive and administer grants or other funds or 
gifts from public and private agencies, including the federal 
government, for the purposes of carrying out any of the functions of'' 
10 V.S.A. Chapter 23. Additionally, 3 V.S.A. Sec.  2822 provides the 
Secretary of ANR with the authority to assess air permit and 
registration fees, which fund state air programs. In addition to 
Federal funding and permit and registration fees, Vermont notes that 
the Vermont Air Quality and Climate Division (AQCD) receives state 
funding to implement its air programs.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ VT ANR's authority to carry out the provisions of the SIP 
identified in 40 CFR 51.230 is discussed in the sections of this 
document assessing elements A, C, F, and G, as applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA proposes that Vermont has met the infrastructure SIP 
requirements of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(E) with respect to 
the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: State Board Requirements Under Section 128 of the CAA
    Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires each SIP to contain provisions 
that comply with the state board requirements of section 128 of the 
CAA. That provision contains two explicit requirements: (1) That any 
board or body which approves permits or enforcement orders under this 
chapter shall have at least a majority of members who represent the 
public interest and do not derive any significant portion of their 
income from persons subject to permits and enforcement orders under 
this chapter, and (2) that any potential conflicts of interest by 
members of such board or body or the head of an executive agency with 
similar powers be adequately disclosed.
    In Vermont, no board or body approves permits or enforcement 
orders; these are approved by the Secretary of Vermont ANR. Thus, with 
respect to this sub-element, Vermont is subject only to the 
requirements of paragraph (a)(2) of section 128 of the CAA (regarding 
conflicts of interest). On June 27, 2017, EPA approved Vermont's SIP 
revision addressing the conflict of interest requirements of section 
128. See 82 FR 29005. For a detailed analysis explaining how Vermont 
meets these requirements, see EPA's notice of proposed rulemaking for 
that action. 82 FR 15671, 15678 (March 30, 2017).
    EPA proposes that Vermont has met the applicable infrastructure SIP 
requirements for this sub-element for the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.

F. Section 110(a)(2)(F)--Stationary Source Monitoring System

    States must establish a system to monitor emissions from stationary 
sources and submit periodic emissions reports. Each plan shall also 
require the installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment, 
and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or operators 
of stationary sources to monitor emissions from such sources. The state 
plan shall also require periodic reports on the nature and amounts of 
emissions and emissions-related data from such sources, and correlation 
of such reports by each state agency with any emission limitations or 
standards. Lastly, the reports shall be available at reasonable times 
for public inspection.
    Vermont's infrastructure submittal references existing state 
regulations previously approved by EPA that require sources to monitor 
emissions and submit reports. In particular, VT APCR Sec.  5-405, 
Required Air Monitoring, (45 FR 10775, February 19, 1980), provides 
that ANR ``may require the owner or operator of any air contaminant 
source to install, use and maintain such monitoring equipment and 
records, establish and maintain such records, and make such periodic

[[Page 30606]]

emission reports as [ANR] shall prescribe.'' Moreover, section 5-402, 
Written Reports When Requested (81 FR 50342; August 1, 2016), 
authorizes ANR to ``require written reports from the person operating 
or responsible for any proposed or existing air contaminant source, 
which reports shall contain,'' among other things, information 
concerning the ``nature and amount and time periods or durations of 
emissions and such other information as may be relevant to the air 
pollution potential of the source. These reports shall also include the 
results of such source testing as may be required under Section 5-404 
herein.'' Section 5-404, Methods for Sampling and Testing of Sources 
(45 FR 10775 February 19, 1980) in turn authorizes ANR to ``require the 
owner or operator of [a] source to conduct tests to determine the 
quantity of particulate and/or gaseous matter being emitted'' and 
requires a source to allow access, should ANR have reason to believe 
that emission limits are being violated by the source, and allows ANR 
``to conduct tests of [its] own to determine compliance.'' In addition, 
operators of sources that emit more than five tons of any and all air 
contaminants per year are required to register the source with the 
Secretary of ANR and to submit emissions data annually, pursuant to 
Sec.  5-802, Requirement for Registration, and Sec.  5-803, 
Registration Procedure (60 FR 2524 January 10, 1995). Vermont also 
certifies that nothing in its SIP would preclude the use, including the 
exclusive use, of any credible evidence or information, relevant to 
whether a source would have been in compliance with applicable 
requirements if the appropriate performance or compliance test or 
procedure had been performed. See 40 CFR 51.212(c).
    Vermont's infrastructure SIP submittal for the 2012 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS provides for correlation by VT DEC of emissions 
reports by sources with applicable emission limitations or standards, 
as required by CAA Sec.  110(a)(2)(F)(iii). Vermont receives emissions 
data through its annual registration program. Currently, VT DEC 
analyzes a portion of these data manually to correlate a facility's 
actual emissions with permit conditions, NAAQS, and, if applicable, 
hazardous air contaminant action levels. VT DEC reports that it is in 
the process of setting up an integrated electronic database that will 
merge all air contaminant source information across permitting, 
compliance and registration programs, so that information concerning 
permit conditions, annual emissions data, and compliance data will be 
accessible in one location for a particular air contaminant source. The 
database will be capable of correlating certain emissions data with 
permit conditions and other applicable standards electronically, where 
feasible, to allow VT DEC to complete this correlation more efficiently 
and accurately.
    Regarding the section 110(a)(2)(F) requirement that the SIP ensure 
that the public has availability to emission reports, Vermont certified 
in its October 31, 2017 submittal for the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS 
that the Vermont Public Records Act, 1 V.S.A. Sec. Sec.  315-320, 
provides for the free and open examination of public records, including 
emissions reports. Furthermore, 10 V.S.A. Sec.  563 specifically 
provides that the ANR ``Secretary shall not withhold emissions data and 
emission monitoring data from public inspection or review'' and ``shall 
keep confidential any record or other information furnished to or 
obtained by the Secretary concerning an air contaminant source, other 
than emissions data and emission monitoring data, that qualifies as a 
trade secret pursuant to 1 V.S.A. Sec.  317(c)(9).'' (emphasis added). 
EPA approved section 563 into the Vermont SIP on June 27, 2017 (82 FR 
29005).
    Consequently, EPA proposes that Vermont has met the infrastructure 
SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F) for the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS.

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

    This section requires that a plan provide for state authority 
analogous to that provided to the EPA Administrator in section 303 of 
the CAA, and adequate contingency plans to implement such authority. 
Section 303 of the CAA provides authority to the EPA Administrator to 
seek a court order to restrain any source from causing or contributing 
to emissions that present an ``imminent and substantial endangerment to 
public health or welfare, or the environment.'' Section 303 further 
authorizes the Administrator to issue ``such orders as may be necessary 
to protect public health or welfare or the environment'' in the event 
that ``it is not practicable to assure prompt protection . . . by 
commencement of such civil action.''
    On June 27, 2017, EPA approved a Vermont SIP revision addressing 
the requirement that the plan provide for state authority comparable to 
that in section 303 of the CAA. See 82 FR 29005. For a detailed 
analysis explaining how Vermont meets this requirement, see EPA's March 
30, 2017 (82 FR 15671, 15679) notice of proposed rulemaking for that 
action. Therefore, we are proposing to approve the state's submittals 
with respect to this requirement of Section 110(a)(2)(G) for 2012 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
    Section 110(a)(2)(G) also requires that Vermont have an approved 
contingency plan for any Air Quality Control Region (AQCR) within the 
state that is classified as Priority I, IA, or II for certain 
pollutants. See 40 CFR 51.150, 51.152(c). In general, contingency plans 
for Priority I, IA, and II areas must meet the applicable requirements 
of 40 CFR part 51, subpart H (40 CFR 51.150 through 51.153) 
(``Prevention of Air Pollution Emergency Episodes'') for the relevant 
NAAQS, if the NAAQS is covered by those regulations. In the case of 
PM<INF>2.5</INF>, EPA has not issued regulations that provide the 
ambient levels to classify different priority levels for the 2012 
standard (or any PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS). EPA's 2009 Guidance 
recommends that states develop emergency episode plans for any area 
that has monitored and recorded 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> levels greater 
than 140 [micro]g/m\3\ since 2006. EPA's review of Vermont's certified 
air quality data in AQS indicates that the highest 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> level since 2006 was 43.5 [micro]g/m\3\, which 
occurred in 2015 at the ambient monitor in Rutland.\14\ Thus, an 
emergency episode plan for PM<INF>2.5</INF> is not necessary. Although 
not expected, if PM<INF>2.5</INF> conditions were to change, Vermont 
does have general authority, as noted previously (i.e., 10 V.S.A. Sec.  
560 and 10 V.S.A. Sec.  8009), to order a source to cease operations if 
it is determined that emissions from the source pose an imminent danger 
to human health or safety or an immediate threat of substantial harm to 
the environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ 24-hour PM<INF>2.5</INF> monitor values for individual 
monitoring sites throughout Vermont are available at www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data/monitor-values-report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, as stated in Vermont's infrastructure SIP submittal 
under the discussion of public notification (Element J), Vermont posts 
near real-time air quality data, air quality predictions and a record 
of historical data on the VT DEC website and distributes air quality 
alerts by email to many parties, including the media. Alerts include 
information about the health implications of elevated pollutant levels 
and list actions to reduce emissions and to reduce the public's 
exposure. In addition, daily forecasted fine particle levels are also 
made available on the internet through the EPA AirNow and EnviroFlash 
systems. Information regarding these two systems is available on EPA's

[[Page 30607]]

website at www.airnow.gov. Notices are sent out to EnviroFlash 
participants when levels are forecast to exceed the current 24-hour 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> standard.
    EPA proposes that Vermont has met the applicable infrastructure SIP 
requirements for section 110(a)(2)(G) with respect to contingency plans 
for the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.

H. Section 110(a)(2)(H)--Future SIP Revisions

    This section requires that a state's SIP provide for revision from 
time to time as may be necessary to take account of changes in the 
NAAQS or availability of improved methods for attaining the NAAQS and 
whenever the EPA finds that the SIP is substantially inadequate. To 
address this requirement, Vermont's infrastructure submittal references 
10 V.S.A Sec.  554, which provides the Secretary of Vermont ANR with 
the power to ``[p]repare and develop a comprehensive plan or plans for 
the prevention, abatement and control of air pollution in this state'' 
and to ``[a]dopt, amend and repeal rules, implementing the provisions'' 
of Vermont's air pollution control laws set forth in 10 V.S.A. chapter 
23. EPA approved 10 V.S.A. Sec.  554 on June 27, 2017 (82 FR 29005). 
EPA proposes that Vermont has met the infrastructure SIP requirements 
of CAA section 110(a)(2)(H) with respect to the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS.

I. Section 110(a)(2)(I)--Nonattainment Area Plan or Plan Revisions 
Under Part D

    The CAA requires that each plan or plan revision for an area 
designated as a nonattainment area meet the applicable requirements of 
part D of the CAA. Part D relates to nonattainment areas. EPA has 
determined that section 110(a)(2)(I) is not applicable to the 
infrastructure SIP process. Instead, EPA takes action on part D 
attainment plans through separate processes.

J. Section 110(a)(2)(J)--Consultation With Government Officials; Public 
Notifications; Prevention of Significant Deterioration; Visibility 
Protection

    Section 110(a)(2)(J) of the CAA requires that each SIP ``meet the 
applicable requirements of section 121 of this title (relating to 
consultation), section 127 of this title (relating to public 
notification), and part C of this subchapter (relating to PSD of air 
quality and visibility protection).'' The evaluation of the submission 
from Vermont with respect to these requirements is described below.
Sub-Element 1: Consultation With Government Officials
    Pursuant to CAA section 121, a state must provide a satisfactory 
process for consultation with local governments and Federal Land 
Managers (FLMs) in carrying out its NAAQS implementation requirements.
    Vermont's 10 V.S.A Sec.  554 specifies that the Secretary of 
Vermont ANR shall have the power to ``[a]dvise, consult, contract and 
cooperate with other agencies of the state, local governments, 
industries, other states, interstate or interlocal agencies, and the 
federal government, and with interested persons or groups.'' EPA 
approved 10 V.S.A. Sec.  554 on June 27, 2017 (82 FR 29005). In 
addition, VT APCR Sec.  5-501(7)(c) requires VT ANR to provide notice 
to local governments and federal land managers of a determination by 
ANR to issue a draft PSD permit for a major stationary source or major 
modification. On August 1, 2016 (81 FR 50342), EPA approved VT APCR 
Sec.  5-501(7)(c) into Vermont's SIP. Therefore, EPA proposes that 
Vermont has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of this portion of 
section 110(a)(2)(J) with respect to the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: Public Notification
    Pursuant to CAA section 127, states must notify the public if NAAQS 
are exceeded in an area, advise the public of health hazards associated 
with exceedances, and enhance public awareness of measures that can be 
taken to prevent exceedances and of ways in which the public can 
participate in regulatory and other efforts to improve air quality.
    Vermont's 10 V.S.A Sec.  554 authorizes the Secretary of Vermont 
ANR to ``[c]ollect and disseminate information and conduct educational 
and training programs relating to air contamination and air 
pollution.'' In addition, the VT DEC Air Quality and Climate Division 
website includes near real-time air quality data, and a record of 
historical data. Air quality forecasts are distributed daily via email 
to interested parties. Air quality alerts are sent by email to a large 
number of affected parties, including the media. Alerts include 
information about the health implications of elevated pollutant levels 
and list actions to reduce emissions and to reduce the public's 
exposure. Also, Air Quality Data Summaries of the year's air quality 
monitoring results are issued annually and posted on the VT DEC Air 
Quality and Climate Division website. Vermont is also an active partner 
in EPA's AirNow and EnviroFlash air quality alert programs.
    EPA proposes that Vermont has met the infrastructure SIP 
requirements of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(J) with respect to 
the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
Sub-Element 3: PSD
    EPA has already discussed Vermont's PSD program in the context of 
infrastructure SIPs in the paragraphs addressing section 110(a)(2)(C) 
and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) and determined that it satisfies the 
requirements of EPA's PSD implementation rules. Therefore, the SIP also 
satisfies the PSD sub-element of section 110(a)(2)(J) for the 2012 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
Sub-Element 4: Visibility Protection
    With regard to the applicable requirements for visibility 
protection, states are subject to visibility and regional haze program 
requirements under part C of the CAA (which includes sections 169A and 
169B). In the event of the establishment of a new NAAQS, however, the 
visibility and regional haze program requirements under part C do not 
change. Thus, as noted in EPA's 2013 guidance, we find that there is no 
new visibility obligation ``triggered'' under section 110(a)(2)(J) when 
a new NAAQS becomes effective. In other words, the visibility 
protection requirements of section 110(a)(2)(J) are not germane to 
infrastructure SIPs for the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.
    Based on the above analysis, EPA proposes that Vermont has met the 
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(J) with respect to 
the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.

K. Section 110(a)(2)(K)--Air Quality Modeling/Data

    Section 110(a)(2)(K) of the Act requires that a SIP provide for the 
performance of such air quality modeling as the EPA Administrator may 
prescribe for the purpose of predicting the effect on ambient air 
quality of any emissions of any air pollutant for which EPA has 
established a NAAQS, and the submission, upon request, of data related 
to such air quality modeling. EPA has published modeling guidelines at 
40 CFR part 51, appendix W, for predicting the effects of emissions of 
criteria pollutants on ambient air quality. EPA also recommends in the 
2013 Guidance that, to meet section 110(a)(2)(K), a state submit or 
reference the statutory or regulatory provisions that provide the air 
agency with the authority to conduct such air quality modeling and to 
provide such modeling data to EPA upon request. See 2013 Guidance at 
55.
    In its submittal, Vermont cites to VT APCR Sec.  5-406, Required 
Air Modeling,

[[Page 30608]]

which authorizes ``[t]he Air Pollution Control Officer [to] require the 
owner or operator of any proposed air contaminant source . . . to 
conduct . . . air quality modeling and to submit an air quality impact 
evaluation to demonstrate that operation of the proposed source . . . 
will not directly or indirectly result in a violation of any ambient 
air quality standard, interfere with the attainment of any ambient air 
quality standard, or violate any applicable prevention of significant 
deterioration increment . . . .'' Vermont reviews the potential impact 
of such sources consistent with EPA's ``Guidelines on Air Quality 
Models'' at 40 CFR part 51, appendix W. See VT APCR Sec.  5-406(2). 
Vermont also cites to VT APCR Sec.  5-502, Major Stationary Sources and 
Major Modifications, which requires the submittal of an air quality 
impact evaluation or air quality modeling to ANR to demonstrate impacts 
of new and modified major sources, in accordance with VT APCR Sec.  5-
406. The modeling data are sent to EPA along with the draft major 
permit. As a result, the SIP provides for such air quality modeling as 
the Administrator has prescribed and for the submission, upon request, 
of data related to such modeling.
    The state also collaborates with the Ozone Transport Commission 
(OTC) and the Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association and EPA 
in order to perform large-scale urban air shed modeling for ozone and 
PM, if necessary. EPA proposes that Vermont has met the infrastructure 
SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(K) with respect to the 2012 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.

L. Section 110(a)(2)(L)--Permitting Fees

    This section requires SIPs to mandate that each major stationary 
source pay permitting fees to cover the costs of reviewing, approving, 
implementing, and enforcing a permit.
    Vermont implements and operates a Title V permit program. See 
Subchapter X of VT APCR, which was approved by EPA on November 29, 2001 
(66 FR 59535). To gain this approval, Vermont demonstrated the ability 
to collect sufficient fees to run the program. Vermont also notes in 
its submittals that the costs of all CAA permitting, implementation, 
and enforcement for new or modified sources are covered by Title V 
fees, and that Vermont state law provides for the assessment of 
application fees from air emissions sources for permits for the 
construction or modification of air contaminant sources, and sets forth 
permit fees. See 10 V.S.A Sec.  556, 3 V.S.A Sec.  2822(j).
    EPA proposes that Vermont has met the infrastructure SIP 
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(L) for the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS.

M. Section 110(a)(2)(M)--Consultation/Participation by Affected Local 
Entities

    To satisfy Element M, states must provide for consultation with, 
and participation by, local political subdivisions affected by the SIP. 
Vermont's infrastructure submittal references 10 V.S.A Sec.  554, which 
was approved into the VT SIP on June 27, 2017 (82 FR 29005). This 
statute authorizes the Secretary of Vermont ANR to ``[a]dvise, consult, 
contract and cooperate with other agencies of the state, local 
governments, industries, other states, interstate or interlocal 
agencies, and the federal government, and with interested persons or 
groups.'' In addition, VT APCR Sec.  5-501(7) provides for notification 
to local officials and agencies about the opportunity for participating 
in permitting determinations for the construction or modification of 
major sources. EPA proposes that Vermont has met the infrastructure SIP 
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(M) with respect to the 2012 
PM<INF>2.5</INF> NAAQS.

IV. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the elements of the infrastructure SIP 
submitted by Vermont on October 31, 2017 for the 2012 PM<INF>2.5</INF> 
NAAQS. Specifically, EPA's proposed action regarding each 
infrastructure SIP requirement is contained in Table 1 below.

 Table 1--Proposed Action on Vermont's Infrastructure SIP Submittal for
                          the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Element                             2012 PM2.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A): Emission limits and other control measures........               A
(B): Ambient air quality monitoring and data system....               A
(C)1: Enforcement of SIP measures......................               A
(C)2: PSD program for major sources and major                         A
 modifications.........................................
(C)3: PSD program for minor sources and minor                         A
 modifications.........................................
(D)1: Contribute to nonattainment/interfere with                      A
 maintenance of NAAQS..................................
(D)2: PSD..............................................               A
(D)3: Visibility Protection............................               A
(D)4: Interstate Pollution Abatement...................               A
(D)5: International Pollution Abatement................               A
(E)1: Adequate resources...............................               A
(E)2: State boards.....................................               A
(E)3: Necessary assurances with respect to local                     NA
 agencies..............................................
(F): Stationary source monitoring system...............               A
(G): Emergency power...................................               A
(H): Future SIP revisions..............................               A
(I): Nonattainment area plan or plan revisions under                  +
 part D................................................
(J)1: Consultation with government officials...........               A
(J)2: Public notification..............................               A
(J)3: PSD..............................................               A
(J)4: Visibility protection............................               +
(K): Air quality modeling and data.....................               A
(L): Permitting fees...................................               A
(M): Consultation and participation by affected local                 A
 entities..............................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the above table, the key is as follows: A, Approve; NA, Not
  applicable; +, Not germane to infrastructure SIPs.


[[Page 30609]]

    EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this 
proposal or on other relevant matters. These comments will be 
considered before EPA takes final action. Interested parties may 
participate in the Federal rulemaking procedure by submitting comments 
to this proposed rule by following the instructions listed in the 
ADDRESSES section of this Federal Register.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a 
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and 
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. 
Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves state law as meeting 
Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond 
those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
    <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 22, 2018.
Alexandra Dunn,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2018-14068 Filed 6-28-18; 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>