47036 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

1Areas designated as mandatory Class I Federal 

areas consist of national parks exceeding 6000 

acres, wilderness areas and national memorial parks 

exceeding 5000 acres, and all international parks 

that were in existence on August 7, 1977 (42 U.S.C. 

7472(a)). 

2On May 22, 2012, EPA approved Rhode Island’s 

August 7, 2009 Regional Haze SIP to address the 

EPA-APPROVED KANSAS SOURCE-SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS

Name of source Permit or case 

No. 

State 

effective date 

EPA 

approval date Explanation 

*******

(5) Exide Technologies ................... 1690035 8/18/14 7/20/16, [Insert Federal Register 

citation].

* * * * * (e) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED KANSAS NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS

Name of nonregulatory 

SIP provision 

Applicable 

geographic or 

nonattainment 

area 

State 

submittal 

date 

EPA 

approval date Explanation 

*******

(43) Attainment plan for 2008 lead 

NAAQS.

Salina ............. 2/3/15 7/20/16, [Insert Federal Register 

citation].

[EPA–R07–OAR–2015–0708; 

9949–13–Region 7]. 

[FR Doc. 2016–17065 Filed 7–19–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2015–0015; A–1–FRL– 

9949–17–Region 1] 

Air Plan Approval; RI; Regional Haze 

Five Year Progress Report 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the State of Rhode Island 

on January 7, 2015. This SIP revision 

includes Rhode Island’s regional haze 

progress report and adequacy 

determination for the first regional haze 

implementation period. This action is 

being taken under the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective September 19, 2016, unless 

EPA receives adverse comments by 

August 19, 2016. If adverse comments 

are received, EPA will publish a timely 

withdrawal of the direct final rule in the 

Federal Register informing the public 

that the rule will not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R01–OAR–2015–0015 by one of the 

following methods at 

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

arnold.anne@epa.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. For either manner of 

submission, the EPA may publish any 

comments 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 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Anne K. McWilliams, Air Quality 

Planning Unit, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, New England 

Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square— 

Suite 100, (Mail code OEP05–2), Boston, 

MA 02109—3912, telephone (617) 918– 

1697, facsimile (617) 918–0697, email 

mcwilliams.anne@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. 

Organization of this document. The 

following outline is provided to aid in 

locating information in this preamble. 

I. Background 

II. Requirements for the Regional Haze 

Progress Report SIPs and Adequacy 

Determinations 

III. EPA’s Evaluation of Rhode Island’s SIP 

Revision 

A. Regional Haze Progress Report 

B. Determination of Adequacy of Existing 

Regional Haze Plan 

IV. Final Action 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

States are required to submit a 

progress report in the form of a SIP 

revision every five years which 

evaluates progress towards the 

Reasonable Progress Goals (RPGs) for 

each mandatory Class I Federal area 

(Class I area) 1 within the state and each 

Class I area outside of the State which 

may be affected by emissions from 

within the state. See 40 CFR 51.308(g). 

States are also required to submit, at the 

same time as the progress report, a 

determination of the adequacy of the 

state’s existing SIP. See 40 CFR 

51.308(h). The first progress report is 

due five years after submittal of the 

initial regional haze SIP. On August 7, 

2009, Rhode Island submitted the 

State’s first Regional Haze SIP in 

accordance with the requirements of 40 

CFR 51.308.2


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 47037 

first implementation period for regional haze. See 

77 FR 30214. 

3Contributions to Regional Haze in the Northeast 

and Mid-Atlantic United States, August 2006 http:// 

www.nescaum.org/documents/contributions-toregional-haze-in-the-northeast-and-mid-atlanticunited-states/mane-vu_haze_contribution_

asessment-2006-0831.pdf/. 

4MANE–VU is a collaborative effort of State 

governments, Tribal governments, and various 

federal agencies established to initiate and 

coordinate activities associated with the 

management of regional haze, visibility and other 

air quality issues in the Northeastern United States. 

Member State and Tribal governments include: 

Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, 

Maine Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, 

New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Penobscot 

Indian Nation, Rhode Island, and Vermont. 

5The MANE–VU ‘‘Ask’’ was structured around 

the finding that sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions were 

the dominate visibility impairing pollutant at the 

Northeastern Class I areas. See ‘‘Regional Haze and 

Visibility in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic States,’’ 

January 31, 2001. 

6EPA approved Rhode Island’s Regulation No. 

8—Sulfur Content of Fuels into the Rhode Island 

SIP on October 7, 2015. See 80 FR 60541. 

On January 7, 2015, the Rhode Island 

Department of Environmental 

Management (RI DEM) submitted a 

revision to the Rhode Island SIP 

detailing the progress made in the first 

planning period toward implementing 

the Long Term Strategy (LTS) outlined 

in the 2009 Regional Haze submittal. 

Because Rhode Island is not home to a 

Class I area, the State’s Regional Haze 

SIP for the first planning period does 

not establish RPGs. During the 

consultation process with nearby States 

with Class I areas, it was determined 

that Rhode Island’s emissions do not 

cause or contribute to the visibility 

impairment at any Class I area. See 77 

FR 30214. However, the State still 

adopted a LTS to reduce emissions 

during the first regional haze planning 

period. The January 7, 2015 SIP also 

included a determination that the 

State’s existing Regional Haze SIP 

requires no substantial revision to 

achieve the established regional haze 

visibility improvements and emission 

reduction goals for 2018. 

II. Requirements for the Regional Haze 

Progress Report SIPs and Adequacy 

Determination 

Under 40 CFR 51.308(g), States must 

submit a regional haze progress report, 

as a SIP revision, every five years and 

must address the seven elements found 

in 40 CFR 51.308(g). As described in 

further detail in section III of this 

rulemaking, 40 CFR 51.308(g) requires: 

(1) A description of the status of 

measures in the approved regional haze 

SIP; (2) a summary of emissions 

reductions achieved; (3) an assessment 

of the visibility conditions for each 

Class I area in the state; (4) an analysis 

of changes in emissions from sources 

and activities within the state; (5) an 

assessment of any significant changes in 

anthropogenic emissions within or 

outside the state that have limited or 

impeded progress in Class I areas 

impacted by the state’s sources; (6) an 

assessment of the sufficiency of the 

approved regional haze SIP; and (7) a 

review of the state’s visibility 

monitoring strategy. 

Under 40 CFR 51.308(h), states are 

required to submit, at the same time as 

the progress report SIP, a determination 

of the adequacy of their existing 

regional haze SIP and to take one of the 

following four possible actions based on 

information in the progress report: (1) 

Submit a negative declaration to EPA 

that no further substantive revision to 

the state’s existing regional haze SIP is 

needed; (2) provide notification to EPA 

(and other state(s) that participated in 

the regional planning process) if the 

state determines that the existing 

regional haze SIP is, or may be, 

inadequate to ensure reasonable 

progress at one or more Class I areas due 

to emissions from sources in other 

state(s) that participated in the regional 

haze planning process, and collaborated 

with these other state(s) to develop 

additional strategies to address 

deficiencies; (3) provide notification 

with supporting information to EPA if 

the state determines that its existing 

regional haze SIP is, or may be, 

inadequate to ensure reasonable 

progress at one or more Class I areas due 

to emissions from sources in another 

county; or (4) revise its regional haze 

SIP to address deficiencies within one 

year if the state determines that its 

existing regional haze SIP is or may be 

inadequate to ensure reasonable 

progress in one or more Class I areas 

due to emission from sources within the 

state. 

III. EPA’s Analysis of Rhode Island’s 

SIP Revision 

On January 7, 2015, Rhode Island 

submitted the ‘‘Rhode Island Regional 

Haze Five Year Progress Report’’ 

(Progress Report) to EPA as a SIP 

revision. 

A. Regional Haze Progress Report 

This section summarizes each of the 

seven elements that must be addressed 

by the Progress Report under 40 CFR 

51.308(g); how Rhode Island’s Progress 

Report addressed each element; and 

EPA’s analysis and determination as to 

whether the State satisfied each 

element. 

The provision under 40 CFR 

51.308(g)(1) requires a description of the 

status of implementation of all measures 

included in the regional haze SIP for 

achieving RPGs for Class I areas both 

within and outside the state which may 

be impacted by emissions from the 

State. During the regional haze planning 

process, an area-of-influence modeling 

analysis based on back trajectories was 

used to assess Rhode Island’s 

contribution to visibility impairment in 

other states.3 Based on this analysis, 

Rhode Island was found to not influence 

visibility impairment at any Class I area. 

In the 2009 Rhode Island Regional Haze 

SIP, however, the State agreed to pursue 

the coordinated course of action agreed 

to by the Mid-Atlantic/Northeast 

Visibility Union (MANE–VU) 4 to assure 

reasonable progress toward preventing 

any future, and remedying any existing, 

impairment of visibility in the 

mandatory Class I areas within the 

MANE–VU region. Those measures are: 

Implementation of best available retrofit 

technology (BART) requirements; a lowsulfur fuel oil strategy; a targeted 

electricity generating unit (EGU) 

strategy; and continued evaluation of 

other control measures.5

In its Progress Report, Rhode Island 

summarized the status of these 

measures in accordance with the 

requirements under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1). 

Rhode Island is not home to any BART 

sources or targeted EGUs. Although 

Rhode Island did not include a low 

sulfur fuel oil strategy in its 2009 

Regional Haze SIP, the State committed 

to adopt a low-sulfur fuel strategy 

during the first planning period. The 

2015 Progress Report details the 

adoption and implementation of the 

State’s revised low sulfur fuel oil 

regulation 6 that requires fuel sold in the 

state meet a sulfur in fuel limit of 0.05% 

for distillate oil by 2014, 0.015% for 

distillate oil by 2018, and 0.5% for 

residual oil by 2018. With respect to the 

continued evaluation of other control 

measures, Rhode Island reiterates the 

State’s continued participation in 

MANE–VU consultations. 

EPA finds that Rhode Island’s 

analysis adequately addresses the 

provision under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1). 

The State documents the 

implementation of a low sulfur fuel 

strategy which the State committed to 

adopt in the 2009 Regional Haze SIP. 

The provision under 40 CFR 

51.308(g)(2) requires a summary of the 

emission reductions achieved in the 

state through the measures subject to the 

requirements under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(1). 

In the Progress Report, RI DEM presents 

the State’s annual sulfur dioxide (SO2) 

emissions from the 2002 RI Regional 

Haze SIP baseline and from the 2011 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
47038 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

7The 2011 data is the 2011 National Emission 

Inventory (NEI) data. NEI inventory uses statesupplied data or model inputs for area and nonroad estimates. The following adjustments were 

submitted by the state: Emissions for area source 

industrial and commercial boilers were recalculated 

using a residual oil sulfur content of 1%, rather 

than 2.25% to reflect the actual sulfur content of oil 

sold in the State and sources that RI DEM 

inventories as point sources were subtracted from 

the appropriate categories in EPA’s non-point (area 

source) inventory to avoid double counting of those 

emissions. 

8The ‘‘most impaired days’’ and ‘‘least impaired’’ 

days in the regional haze rule refers to the average 

visibility impairment (measured in deciviews) for 

twenty percent of monitored days in a calendar year 

with the highest and lowest amount of visibility 

impairment, respectively, averaged over a five-year 

period. See 40 CFR 51.301. 

9NESCAUM for MANE–VU, ‘‘Tracking Visibility 

Progress 2004–2011,’’ revised May 24, 2013. http:// 

www.nescaum.org/documents/manevu-trends2004-2011-report-final-20130430.pdf/view. 

emission inventory.7 SO2 emissions 

decreased from 8,026 tons per year (tpy) 

in 2002 to 4,839 tpy in 2011, i.e., 

approximately a 40% reduction. RI DEM 

estimates that the adoption of the low 

sulfur fuel rule, which has compliance 

dates in 2014 and 2018, will result in an 

additional 3,000 tpy SO2 reduction in 

the point and area sectors by 2018. 

Thus, current projections from 2011 to 

2018 would be 4,839 tpy minus 3,000 

tpy, or approximately 1,839 tpy. This 

compares well with the original RI 

Regional Haze SIP projection of 1,703 

tons of SO2 emissions in 2018. 

EPA finds that Rhode Island has 

adequately addressed the provision 

under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(2). As discussed 

above, Rhode Island was not found to be 

contributing to the visibility impairment 

at any Class I area. However, the State 

has demonstrated a 40% reduction in 

the predominant visibility impairing 

pollutant (SO2) and has adopted a low 

sulfur fuel strategy to further reduce SO2

emissions from area and point sources 

by 2018. 

The provisions under 40 CFR 

51.308(g)(3) require that states with 

Class I areas within their borders 

provide the following information for 

the most impaired days and least 

impaired days 8 for each area, with 

values expressed in terms of five-year 

averages of these annual values: (1) 

Current visibility conditions; (2) the 

difference between current visibility 

conditions and baseline visibility 

conditions; and (3) the change in 

visibility impairment over the past five 

years. 

Because Rhode Island does not have 

any Class I areas within its borders and 

the state was found not to contribute to 

any other Class I area, EPA concludes 

that Rhode Island’s progress report is 

not required to address 40 CFR 

51.308(g)(3). 

The provision under 40 CFR 

51.308(g)(4) requires an analysis 

tracking emissions changes of visibilityimpairing pollutants from the state’s 

sources by type or category over the past 

five years based on the most recent 

updated emissions inventory. In its 

Progress Report to address the 

requirements of 40 CFR 51.308(g)(4), 

Rhode Island presents data from the 

baseline 2002 and 2011 NEI statewide 

emissions inventories for SO2, oxides of 

nitrogen (NOX), and fine particulate 

(PM2.5) for Point, Area, Onroad, and 

Nonroad sectors. Overall, during this 

period, SO2 emissions have decreased 

by 40% and NOX emissions have 

decreased by 17%. There was a 770 tpy 

or 26% increase in the PM2.5 inventory 

during this same time period. RI DEM 

explained that the increased Area PM2.5

inventory was due to the utilization of 

a wood combustion calculation tool 

used for the 201l inventory which was 

not available for the 2002 inventory. 

Thus, the resulting emissions for this 

sub-category is not comparable between 

the 2002 and 2011 inventory. 

EPA finds that Rhode Island’s 

Progress Report adequately addresses 

the provision under 40 CFR 

51.308(g)(4). RI DEM compared the most 

recent updated emission inventory data 

available at the time of the development 

of the Progress Report with the baseline 

emissions from the Regional Haze SIP. 

The Progress Report appropriately 

details the 2011 SO2, NOX, and PM2.5

reductions achieved, by sector, thus far 

in the first Regional Haze planning 

period. 

The provision under 40 CFR 

51.308(g)(5) requires an assessment of 

any significant changes in 

anthropogenic emissions within or 

outside the state that have occurred over 

the past five years that have limited or 

impeded progress in reducing pollutant 

emissions and improving visibility in 

the Class I areas impacted by the state’s 

sources. In the Progress Report, RI DEM 

reiterated that Rhode Island was found 

not to be causing or contributing to the 

visibility impairment at any Class I area, 

and that the State was implementing a 

low-sulfur fuel oil strategy which will 

lead to additional reductions in SO2 and 

PM2.5 emissions. The RI DEM also cited 

a Northeast States for Coordinated Air 

Use Management (NESCAUM) report 

which indicates that the MANE–VU 

Class I areas are on track to meet all of 

the 2018 visibility goals.9

EPA finds that Rhode Island 

adequately addressed the provision 

under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(5). There have 

not been any significant changes in 

anthropogenic emissions within the 

state which has limited or impeded 

progress in reducing pollutant 

emissions and improving visibility at 

the nearby Class I areas. 

The provision under 40 CFR 

51.308(g)(6) requires an assessment of 

whether the current regional haze SIP is 

sufficient to enable the state, or other 

states, to meet the RPGs for the Class I 

areas affected by emissions from the 

state. In the Progress Report, Rhode 

Island reiterated that the State is not 

home to any Class I area nor were the 

emissions from Rhode Island found to 

cause or contribute to the visibility 

impairment at any nearby Class I area. 

Rhode Island also showed that SO2

emissions have decreased by 40% as of 

2011 and that additional SO2 reductions 

are expected with the implementation of 

the adopted low-sulfur fuel oil strategy. 

Rhode Island found that the Regional 

Haze SIP submittal was sufficient. 

EPA finds that the state has 

adequately addressed the provision 

under 40 CFR 51.308(g)(6) which 

requires an assessment of whether the 

Rhode Island Regional Haze SIP 

submittal is sufficient to enable the 

state, or other states, to meet the RPGs 

for the Class I areas affected by 

emissions from the state. 

The provision under 40 CFR 

51.308(g)(7) requires the review of a 

state’s visibility monitoring strategy for 

Class I areas and an assessment of 

whether any modifications to the 

monitoring strategy are necessary. 

Because Rhode Island does not have any 

Class I areas within its borders, EPA 

concludes that Rhode Island’s Progress 

Report is not required to address 40 CFR 

51.308(g)(7). 

B. Determination of Adequacy of the 

Existing Regional Haze Plan 

Under 40 CFR 51.308(h), states are 

required to take one of four possible 

actions based on the information 

gathered and conclusions made in the 

progress report SIP. 

In the Progress Report SIP, Rhode 

Island took the action provided for by 

the provisions under 40 CFR 

51.308(h)(1), which allow a state to 

submit a negative declaration to EPA if 

the state determines that the existing 

SIP requires no further substantive 

revision at this time to achieve the RPGs 

at nearby Class I areas. The basis for the 

State’s negative declaration is the 

determination that emissions from 

Rhode Island do not cause or contribute 

to the visibility impairment at any Class 

I area. In addition, the State 

demonstrated SO2 emission reductions 

achieved since the 2002 baseline of the 

Rhode Island Regional Haze SIP and 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 47039 

outlined projected additional SO2

emission reductions expected by 2018. 

EPA finds that Rhode Island has 

adequately addressed the requirements 

of 40 CFR 51.308(h). Even though Rhode 

Island does not impact the visibility at 

any nearby Class I areas, the State has 

reduced emissions of visibility 

impairing pollutants and is on track to 

achieve the long term strategy detailed 

in its 2009 Regional Haze SIP for the 

first regional haze planning period. 

Therefore, the existing Rhode Island 

Regional Haze SIP requires no 

substantive revisions to achieve the 

RPGs for nearby Class I areas. 

IV. Final Action 

EPA is approving Rhode Island’s 

Regional Haze Five Year Progress Report 

SIP revision, submitted by RI DEM on 

January 7, 2015, as meeting the 

applicable regional haze requirements 

set forth in 40 CFR 51.308(g) and (h). 

The EPA is publishing this action 

without prior proposal because the 

Agency views this as a noncontroversial 

amendment and anticipates no adverse 

comments. However, in the proposed 

rules section of this Federal Register 

publication, EPA is publishing a 

separate document that will serve as the 

proposal to approve the SIP revision 

should relevant adverse comments be 

filed. This rule will be effective 

September 19, 2016 without further 

notice unless the Agency receives 

relevant adverse comments by August 

19, 2016. 

If the EPA receives such comments, 

then EPA will publish a notice 

withdrawing the final rule and 

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. All public comments 

received will then be addressed in a 

subsequent final rule based on the 

proposed rule. The EPA will not 

institute a second comment period on 

the proposed rule. All parties interested 

in commenting on the proposed rule 

should do so at this time. If no such 

comments are received, the public is 

advised that this rule will be effective 

on September 19, 2016 and no further 

action will be taken on the proposed 

rule. Please note that if EPA receives 

adverse comment on an amendment, 

paragraph, or section of this rule and if 

that provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. 

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 action merely 

approves state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and does not impose 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by state law. For that reason, 

this action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where EPA or an 

Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

tribal implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

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, Regional haze, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

oxides, Volatile organic compounds. 

Dated: July 5, 2016. 

H. Curtis Spalding, 

Regional Administrator, EPA New England. 

Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the 

Code of Federal Regulations is amended 

as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart OO—Rhode Island 

■ 2. In § 52.2070, paragraph (e) table is 

amended by adding a new entry at the 

end of the table to read as follows: 

§ 52.2070 Identification of plan. 

(e) * * * 

RHODE ISLAND NON REGULATORY

Name of non regulatory SIP provision 

Applicable 

geographic or 

nonattainment 

area 

State submittal 

date/effective date EPA approved date Explanations 

*******

Rhode Island Regional Haze Five Year Progress 

Report.

Statewide ...... Submitted 1/7/2015 7/20/2016 [Insert Federal Register 

citation].


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES
47040 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 139 / Wednesday, July 20, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 

1This finding is included in the docket for this 

action and available online at www.regulations.gov. 

[FR Doc. 2016–16941 Filed 7–19–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2016–0270; FRL–9949–34– 

Region 3] 

Finding of Failure To Submit a State 

Implementation Plan; Maryland; 

Interstate Transport Requirements for 

the 2008 8-Hour National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards for Ozone 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking final action 

finding that Maryland has failed to 

submit an infrastructure state 

implementation plan (SIP) to satisfy 

certain interstate transport requirements 

of the Clean Air Act (CAA) with respect 

to the 2008 8-hour ozone national 

ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). 

Specifically, these requirements pertain 

to the obligation to prohibit emissions 

which significantly contribute to 

nonattainment, or interfere with 

maintenance, of the 2008 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS in other states. This finding of 

failure to submit establishes a 2-year 

deadline for EPA to promulgate a 

federal implementation plan (FIP) to 

address the interstate transport SIP 

requirements pertaining to significant 

contribution to nonattainment and 

interference with maintenance of the 

2008 ozone NAAQS in other states 

unless, prior to EPA promulgating a FIP, 

the state submits, and EPA approves, a 

SIP that meets these requirements. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

August 19, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

Number EPA–R03–OAR–2016–0270. All 

documents in the docket are listed in 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the electronic docket, 

some information is not publicly 

available, i.e., confidential business 

information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available through www.regulations.gov 

or may be viewed during normal 

business hours at the Air Protection 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Marilyn Powers, (215) 814–2308, or by 

email at powers.marilyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Notice and Comment Under the 

Administrative Procedure Act (APA) 

Section 553 of the APA, 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(3)(B), provides that, when an 

agency for good cause finds that notice 

and public procedure are impracticable, 

unnecessary or contrary to the public 

interest, the agency may issue a rule 

without providing notice and an 

opportunity for public comment. EPA 

has determined that there is good cause 

for making this final agency action 

without prior proposal and opportunity 

for comment because no significant EPA 

judgment is involved in making a 

finding of failure to submit SIPs, or 

elements of SIPs, required by the CAA, 

where states have made no submissions, 

or incomplete submissions, to meet the 

requirement. Thus, notice and public 

procedures are unnecessary. EPA finds 

that this constitutes good cause under 5 

U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B). 

I. Background and Overview 

A. Interstate Transport SIPs 

CAA section 110(a) imposes an 

obligation upon states to submit SIPs 

that provide for the implementation, 

maintenance and enforcement of a new 

or revised NAAQS within 3 years 

following the promulgation of that 

NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific 

requirements that states must meet in 

these SIP submissions, as applicable. 

EPA refers to this type of SIP 

submission as the ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP 

because it ensures that states can 

implement, maintain and enforce the air 

standards. Within these requirements, 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) contains 

requirements to address interstate 

transport of NAAQS pollutants. A SIP 

revision submitted for this sub-section 

is referred to as an ‘‘interstate transport 

SIP.’’ In turn, section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 

requires that such a plan contain 

adequate provisions to prohibit 

emissions from the state that will 

contribute significantly to 

nonattainment of the NAAQS in any 

other state (prong 1) or interfere with 

maintenance of the NAAQS in any other 

state (prong 2). Interstate transport 

prongs 1 and 2, also called the ‘‘good 

neighbor’’ provisions, are the 

requirements relevant to this findings 

document. 

Pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(1)(B), 

EPA must determine no later than 6 

months after the date by which a state 

is required to submit a SIP whether a 

state has made a submission that meets 

the minimum completeness criteria 

established per section 110(k)(1)(A). 

EPA refers to the determination that a 

state has not submitted a SIP that meets 

the minimum completeness criteria as a 

‘‘finding of failure to submit.’’ If EPA 

finds a state has failed to submit a SIP 

to meet its statutory obligation to 

address 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), pursuant to 

section 110(c)(1) EPA has not only the 

authority, but the obligation, to 

promulgate a FIP within 2 years to 

address the CAA requirement. This 

finding therefore starts a 2-year clock for 

promulgation by EPA of a FIP, in 

accordance with CAA section 110(c)(1), 

unless prior to such promulgation the 

state submits, and EPA approves, a 

submittal from the state to meet the 

requirements of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2008 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. EPA notes this action 

does not start a mandatory sanctions 

clock pursuant to CAA section 179 

because this finding of failure to submit 

does not pertain to a part D plan for 

nonattainment areas required under 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(I) or a SIP call 

pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(5). 

B. Finding of Failure To Submit for 

States That Did Not Submit a SIP 

On March 12, 2008, EPA strengthened 

the NAAQS for ozone. EPA revised the 

8-hour primary ozone standard from 

0.08 parts per millions (ppm) to 0.075 

ppm. EPA also revised the secondary 8- 

hour standard to the level of 0.075 ppm 

making it identical to the revised 

primary standard. Infrastructure SIPs 

addressing the revised standard, 

including the interstate transport 

requirements, were due March 12, 2011. 

On December 27, 2012, Maryland 

submitted an infrastructure SIP for the 

2008 ozone NAAQS. EPA determined 

the December 27, 2012 SIP submittal as 

complete on January 2, 2013. On May 2, 

2014, EPA proposed approval of 

Maryland’s infrastructure SIP submittal 

for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, but did not 

propose to take action on the portion of 

the submittal related to section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), stating that EPA would 

take separate action on this part of the 

submittal. See 79 FR 25054. 

On July 13, 2015, EPA published a 

rule finding that 24 states failed to 

submit complete SIPs that addressed the 

‘‘good neighbor’’ provision for the 2008 

Ozone NAAQS. See 80 FR 39961 (July 

13, 2015).1 The finding action triggered 

a 2-year clock for the EPA to issue FIPs 

to address the ‘‘good neighbor’’ 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with RULES