Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 30, 2017 / Proposed Rules 41197 

1This requirement applies to both primary and 

secondary NAAQS, but EPA’s approval in this 

notice applies only to the 2010 primary NAAQS for 

SO2 and NO2 because EPA did not establish in 2010 

a new secondary NAAQS for SO2 and NO2. 

The February committee meetings 

will be held at the U.S. Department of 

Education: Barnard Auditorium, 400 

Maryland Ave. SW., Washington, DC 

20202. 

The March committee meetings will 

be held at the U.S. Department of 

Education at: Potomac Center Plaza 

Auditorium, 550 12th Street SW., 

Washington, DC 20202. 

The committee meetings are open to 

the public. 

Accessible Format: Individuals with 

disabilities can obtain this document in 

an accessible format (e.g., braille, large 

print, audiotape, or compact disc) by 

contacting Wendy Macias, U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland 

Ave. SW., Room 6C111, Washington, DC 

20202. Telephone: (202) 203–9155 or by 

email: Wendy.Macias@ed.gov. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

The official version of this document is 

the document published in the Federal 

Register. Free internet access to the 

official edition of the Federal Register 

and the Code of Federal Regulations is 

available via the Federal Digital System 

at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you 

can view this document, as well as all 

other documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Portable Document Format 

(PDF). To use PDF you must have 

Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. You may also 

access documents of the Department 

published in the Federal Register by 

using the article search feature at: 

www.federalregister.gov. Specifically, 

through the advanced search feature at 

this site, you can limit your search to 

documents published by the 

Department. 

Program Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1098a. 

Kathleen A. Smith, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary 

Education. 

[FR Doc. 2017–18510 Filed 8–29–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R01–OAR–2017–0151; FRL–9967–06– 

Region 1] 

Air Plan Approval; Rhode Island; 

Infrastructure Requirement for the 

2010 Sulfur Dioxide and 2010 Nitrogen 

Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

an October 15, 2015 State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the State of Rhode Island. 

This revision addresses the interstate 

transport requirements of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA), referred to as the good 

neighbor provision, with respect to the 

2010 primary sulfur dioxide (SO2) and 

2010 primary nitrogen dioxide (NO2) 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS). This action proposes to 

approve Rhode Island’s demonstration 

that the state is meeting its obligations 

regarding the transport of SO2 and NO2

emissions into other states. This action 

is being taken under the Clean Air Act. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before September 29, 

2017. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R01– 

OAR–2017–0151 at http://

www.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 comment received 

to its public docket. Do not submit 

electronically any information you 

consider to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Multimedia submissions (audio, video, 

etc.) must be accompanied by a written 

comment. The written comment is 

considered the official comment and 

should include discussion of all points 

you wish to make. EPA will generally 

not consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

For the full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Donald Dahl, (617) 918–1657; or by 

email at dahl.donald@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. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. State Submittal 

III. Summary of the Proposed Action 

IV. Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)—Interstate 

Transport 

A. General Requirements and Historical 

Approaches for Criteria Pollutants 

B. Approach for Addressing the Interstate 

Transport Requirements of the 2010 

Primary SO2 NAAQS in Rhode Island 

C. Approach for Addressing the Interstate 

Transport Requirements of the 2010 

Primary NO2 NAAQS in Rhode Island 

V. Interstate Transport Demonstration for SO2

Emissions 

A. Prong 1 Analysis—Significant 

Contribution to SO2 Nonattainment 

1. SO2 Emissions Trends 

2. SO2 Ambient Air Quality 

3. Federally Enforceable Regulations 

Specific to SO2 and Permitting 

Requirements 

4. Conclusion 

B. Prong 2 Analysis—Interference with 

Maintenance of the SO2 NAAQS 

VI. Significant Contribution to 

Nonattainment and Interference with 

Maintenance of the NO2 NAAQS 

VII. Proposed Action 

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On February 9, 2010 (75 FR 6474), 

EPA promulgated a revised primary 

NAAQS for NO2 at a level of 100 ppb, 

based on a 3-year average of the annual 

98th percentile of 1-hour daily 

maximum concentrations. On June 22, 

2010 (75 FR 35520), EPA promulgated a 

revised primary NAAQS for SO2 at a 

level of 75 ppb, based on a 3-year 

average of the annual 99th percentile of 

1-hour daily maximum concentrations. 

Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the 

CAA, states are required to submit SIPs 

meeting the applicable requirements of 

section 110(a)(2) within three years after 

promulgation of a new or revised 

NAAQS, or within such shorter period 

as EPA may prescribe.1 These SIPs, 

which EPA has historically referred to 

as ‘‘infrastructure SIPs,’’ are to provide 

for the ‘‘implementation, maintenance, 

and enforcement’’ of such NAAQS, and 

the 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. A 

detailed history, interpretation, and 

rationale of these SIPs and their 

requirements can be found in, among 

other documents, EPA’s May 13, 2014 

proposed rule titled, ‘‘Infrastructure SIP 

requirements for the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS,’’ in the section ‘‘What is the 

scope of this rulemaking?’’ (see 79 FR 

27241 at 27242–27245). As noted above, 

section 110(a) of the CAA imposes an 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS

41198 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 30, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

2This proposed approval of Rhode Island’s SIP 

submission under CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) is 

based on the information contained in the 

administrative record for this action, and does not 

prejudge any other future EPA action that may 

make other determinations regarding Rhode Island’s 

air quality status. Any such future actions, such as 

area designations under any NAAQS, will be based 

on their own administrative records and EPA’s 

analyses of information that becomes available at 

those times. Future available information may 

include, and is not limited to, monitoring data and 

modeling analyses conducted pursuant to EPA’s 

Data Requirements Rule (80 FR 51052, August 21, 

2015) and information submitted to EPA by states, 

air agencies, and third party stakeholders such as 

citizen groups and industry representatives. 

3See EPA’s Web page https://www.epa.gov/airemissions-inventories/national-emissionsinventory-nei for a description of what types of 

sources of air emissions are considered point and 

nonpoint sources. 

obligation upon states to submit to EPA 

a SIP submission for a new or revised 

NAAQS. The content of individual state 

submissions may vary depending upon 

the facts and circumstances, and may 

also vary depending upon what 

provisions the state’s approved SIP 

already contains. 

On January 2, 2013 and on June 27, 

2014, the Rhode Island Department of 

Environmental Management (RI DEM) 

submitted proposed revisions to its SIP, 

certifying that its SIP meets most of the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the 

CAA with respect to the 2010 primary 

NO2 and 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS, 

respectively. However, these two 

submittals did not address the transport 

elements of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). On April 20, 2016 (81 

FR 23175), EPA approved RI DEM’s 

certification that its SIP was adequate to 

meet most of the program elements 

required by section 110(a)(2) of the 

CAA. However, EPA conditionally 

approved the State’s submission in 

relation to subsections (C), (D), and (J) 

of CAA section 110(a)(2) in relation to 

the prevention of significant 

deterioration permit program, and 

disapproved the State’s submission in 

relation to subsection (H) of CAA 

section 110(a)(2) in relation to the 

requirement to revise its SIP when 

appropriate. On October 15, 2015, RI 

DEM submitted the transport elements 

of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 

2010 primary NO2 and 2010 primary 

SO2 NAAQS. 

II. State Submittal 

Rhode Island presented several facts 

in its SIP submission on the effect of 

SO2 and NOX emissions from sources 

within Rhode Island on downwind and 

adjacent states’ SO2 and NO2

nonattainment areas and those states’ 

ability to maintain the 2010 SO2 and 

2010 NO2 NAAQS. With regards to the 

2010 NO2 NAAQS, Rhode Island noted 

that EPA had designated the entire 

country as unclassifiable/attainment for 

the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. Rhode Island 

also stated that recent data from all 

ambient monitors within New England 

continue to show levels less than 50% 

of the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. 

Similarly, the SIP submission notes 

SO2 ambient monitoring data in Rhode 

Island and in downwind and adjacent 

states were substantially below the 2010 

SO2 NAAQS. For the only SO2

nonattainment area within New 

England, Rhode Island noted the 

monitor design value in the Central New 

Hampshire nonattainment area has 

declined over time, with the 2012–2014 

design value being 31% of the NAAQS. 

Rhode Island concludes in its submittal 

that, ‘‘since there are no large sources of 

SO2 emissions in Rhode Island and 

monitored SO2 levels in adjacent and 

downwind states are substantially 

below the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, Rhode 

Island clearly is not contributing to 

nonattainment or interfering with 

maintenance of attainment in 

downwind and adjacent states.’’ 

III. Summary of the Proposed Action 

This proposed approval of Rhode 

Island’s October 15, 2015 SIP 

submission addressing interstate 

transport of SO2 and NO2 is intended to 

show that the State is meeting its 

obligations regarding CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) relative to the 2010 

primary SO2 and 2010 primary NO2

NAAQS.2 Interstate transport 

requirements for all NAAQS pollutants 

prohibit any source, or other type of 

emissions activity, in one state from 

emitting any air pollutant in amounts 

that will contribute significantly to 

nonattainment, or interfere with 

maintenance, of the NAAQS in another 

state. As part of this analysis, and as 

explained in detail below, EPA has 

taken several approaches to addressing 

interstate transport in other actions 

based on the characteristics of the 

pollutant, the interstate problem 

presented by emissions of that 

pollutant, the sources that emit the 

pollutant, and the information available 

to assess transport of that pollutant. 

Despite being emitted from a similar 

universe of point and nonpoint sources, 

interstate transport of SO2 is unlike the 

transport of fine particulate matter 

(PM2.5) or ozone that EPA has addressed 

in other actions, in that SO2 is not a 

regional mixing pollutant that 

commonly contributes to widespread 

nonattainment of the SO2 NAAQS over 

a large, multi-state area. While in certain 

respects transport of SO2 is more 

analogous to the transport of lead (Pb) 

because SO2’s and Pb’s physical 

properties result in localized impacts 

very near the emissions source, in 

another respect the physical properties 

and release height of SO2 are such that 

impacts of SO2 do not experience the 

same sharp decrease in ambient 

concentrations as rapidly and as nearby 

as they do for Pb. While emissions of 

SO2 travel farther and have sufficiently 

wider ranging impacts than emissions of 

Pb such that it is reasonable to require 

a different approach for assessing SO2

transport than assessing Pb transport, 

the differences are not significant 

enough to treat SO2 in a manner similar 

to the way in which EPA treats and 

analyzes regional transport pollutants 

such as ozone or PM2.5. 

Put simply, a different approach is 

needed for interstate transport of SO2

than the approach used for the other 

pollutants identified above: The 

approaches EPA has adopted for Pb 

transport are too tightly circumscribed 

to the source, and the approaches for 

ozone or PM2.5 transport are too 

regionally focused. SO2 transport is 

therefore a unique case, and EPA’s 

evaluation of whether Rhode Island has 

met its transport obligations in relation 

to SO2 was accomplished in several 

discrete steps. 

First, EPA evaluated the universe of 

sources in Rhode Island likely to be 

responsible for SO2 emissions that could 

contribute to interstate transport. An 

assessment of the 2014 National 

Emissions Inventory (NEI) for Rhode 

Island made it clear that the vast 

majority of SO2 emissions in Rhode 

Island are from fuel combustion at point 

and nonpoint sources,3 and therefore it 

would be reasonable to evaluate the 

downwind impacts of emissions from 

these two fuel combustion source 

categories, combined, in order to help 

determine whether the State has met its 

transport obligations. 

Second, EPA selected a spatial scale— 

essentially, the geographic area and 

distance around the point sources in 

which we could reasonably expect SO2

impacts to occur—that would be 

appropriate for its analysis, ultimately 

settling on utilizing an ‘‘urban scale’’ 

with dimensions from 4 to 50 kilometers 

from point and nonpoint sources, given 

the usefulness of that range in assessing 

trends in both area-wide air quality and 

the effectiveness of large-scale pollution 

control strategies. As such, EPA utilized 

an assessment up to 50 kilometers from 

fuel-combustion sources in order to 

assess trends in area-wide air quality 

that might have an impact on the 

transport of SO2 from Rhode Island to 

downwind states. 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 30, 2017 / Proposed Rules 41199 

4The NO2 NAAQS is designed to protect against 

exposure to the entire group of nitrogen oxides 

(NOX). NO2 is the component of greatest concern 

and is used as the indicator for the larger group of 

NOX. 

5At the time the September 13, 2013 guidance 

was issued, EPA was litigating challenges raised 

with respect to its Cross State Air Pollution Rule 

(‘‘CSAPR’’), 76 FR 48208 (Aug. 8, 2011), designed 

to address the CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 

interstate transport requirements with respect to the 

1997 ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

CSAPR was vacated and remanded by the D.C. 

Circuit in 2012 pursuant to EME Homer City 

Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7. EPA 

subsequently sought review of the D.C. Circuit’s 

decision by the Supreme Court, which was granted 

in June 2013. As EPA was in the process of 

litigating the interpretation of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) at the time the infrastructure SIP 

guidance was issued, EPA did not issue guidance 

specific to that provision. The Supreme Court 

subsequently vacated the D.C. Circuit’s decision 

and remanded the case to that court for further 

review. 134 S.Ct. 1584 (2014). On July 28, 2015, the 

D.C. Circuit issued a decision upholding CSAPR, 

but remanding certain elements for reconsideration. 

795 F.3d 118. 

6NOX SIP Call, 63 FR 57371 (October 27, 1998); 

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), 70 FR 25172 (May 

12, 2005); CSAPR, 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). 

7See, e.g., Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; State of California; Interstate 

Transport of Pollution; Significant Contribution to 

Nonattainment and Interference With Maintenance 

Requirements, Proposed Rule, 76 FR 146516, 

14616–14626 (March 17, 2011); Final Rule, 76 FR 

34872 (June 15, 2011); Approval and Promulgation 

of State Implementation Plans; State of Colorado; 

Interstate Transport of Pollution for the 2006 24- 

Hour PM2.5 NAAQS, Proposed Rule, 80 FR 27121, 

27124–27125 (May 12, 2015); Final Rule, 80 FR 

47862 (August 10, 2015). 

8https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/aqmguide/ 

collection/cp2/20111014_page_lead_caa_110_

infrastructure_guidance.pdf. 

9 Id. at pp 7–8. 

10See 79 FR 27241 at 27249 (May 13, 2014) and 

79 FR 41439 (July 16, 2014). 

11EPA notes that the evaluation of other states’ 

satisfaction of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2010 

SO2 NAAQS can be informed by similar factors 

found in this proposed rulemaking, but may not be 

identical to the approach taken in this or any future 

rulemaking for Rhode Island, depending on 

available information and state-specific 

circumstances. 

Third, EPA assessed all available data 

at the time of this rulemaking regarding 

SO2 emissions in Rhode Island and their 

possible impacts in downwind states, 

including: (1) SO2 ambient air quality; 

(2) SO2 emissions and SO2 emissions 

trends; (3) SIP-approved SO2 regulations 

and permitting requirements; and (4) 

other SIP-approved or federallypromulgated regulations which may 

yield reductions of SO2 at Rhode 

Island’s fuel-combustion point and 

nonpoint sources. 

Fourth, using the universe of 

information identified in steps 1–3 (i.e., 

emissions sources, spatial scale and 

available data, and enforceable 

regulations), EPA then conducted an 

analysis under CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) to evaluate whether or 

not fuel-combustion sources in Rhode 

Island would significantly contribute to 

SO2 nonattainment in other states, and 

then whether emissions from those 

sources would interfere with 

maintenance of the SO2 NAAQS in 

other states. 

EPA took a different approach that is 

more appropriate for NO2. EPA analyzed 

the effects of transport by taking into 

account: (1) Rhode Island’s and the 

surrounding states’ designations for the 

2010 NO2 NAAQS; (2) ambient 

monitoring of NO2 concentrations in 

Rhode Island and surrounding states; (3) 

the fact that total NOX4 emissions in 

Rhode Island and surrounding states are 

trending downward; and (4) the fact that 

there are SIP-approved state regulations 

in place to control NOX emissions in 

Rhode Island. 

Based on the analysis provided by the 

State in its October 15, 2015 SIP 

submission and EPA’s assessment of the 

information discussed at length below, 

EPA proposes to find that sources or 

other emissions activity within Rhode 

Island will not contribute significantly 

to nonattainment, nor will they interfere 

with maintenance of, the 2010 primary 

SO2 NAAQS and the 2010 primary NO2

NAAQS in any other state. 

IV. Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)—Interstate 

Transport 

A. General Requirements and Historical 

Approaches for Criteria Pollutants 

Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires SIPs 

to include provisions prohibiting any 

source or other type of emissions 

activity in one state from emitting any 

air pollutant in amounts that will 

contribute significantly to 

nonattainment, or interfere with 

maintenance, of the NAAQS in another 

state. The two clauses of this section are 

referred to as prong 1 (significant 

contribution to nonattainment) and 

prong 2 (interference with maintenance 

of the NAAQS). 

EPA’s most recent infrastructure SIP 

guidance, the September 13, 2013 

‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements 

under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) 

and 110(a)(2),’’ did not explicitly 

include criteria for how the Agency 

would evaluate infrastructure SIP 

submissions intended to address section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I).5 With respect to 

certain pollutants, such as ozone and 

particulate matter, EPA has addressed 

interstate transport in eastern states in 

the context of regional rulemaking 

actions that quantify state emission 

reduction obligations.6 In other actions, 

such as EPA action on western state 

SIPs addressing ozone and particulate 

matter, EPA has considered a variety of 

factors on a case-by-case basis to 

determine whether emissions from one 

state interfere with the attainment and 

maintenance of the NAAQS in another 

state. In such actions, EPA has 

considered available information such 

as current air quality, emissions data 

and trends, meteorology, and 

topography.7

For other pollutants such as Pb, EPA 

has suggested the applicable interstate 

transport requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) can be met through a 

state’s assessment as to whether or not 

emissions from Pb sources located in 

close proximity to its borders have 

emissions that impact a neighboring 

state such that they contribute 

significantly to nonattainment or 

interfere with maintenance in that state. 

For example, EPA noted in an October 

14, 2011 memorandum titled, 

‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure SIP 

Elements Required Under Sections 

110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for the 2008 Pb 

NAAQS,’’ 8 that the physical properties 

of Pb prevent its emissions from 

experiencing the same travel or 

formation phenomena as PM2.5 or 

ozone, and there is a sharp decrease in 

Pb concentrations, at least in the coarse 

fraction, as the distance from a Pb 

source increases. Accordingly, while it 

may be possible for a source in a state 

to emit Pb in a location and in 

quantities that may contribute 

significantly to nonattainment in, or 

interfere with maintenance by, any 

other state, EPA anticipates that this 

would be a rare situation, e.g., where 

large sources are in close proximity to 

state boundaries.9 Our rationale and 

explanation for approving the 

applicable interstate transport 

requirements under section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2008 Pb 

NAAQS, consistent with EPA’s 

interpretation of the October 14, 2011 

guidance document, can be found in, 

among other instances, the proposed 

approval and a subsequent final 

approval of interstate transport SIPs 

submitted by Illinois, Michigan, 

Minnesota, and Wisconsin.10

B. Approach for Addressing the 

Interstate Transport Requirements of the 

2010 Primary SO2 NAAQS in Rhode 

Island 

This notice describes EPA’s 

evaluation of Rhode Island’s conclusion 

contained in the State’s October 15, 

2015 infrastructure SIP submission that 

the State satisfies the requirements of 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 

2010 SO2 NAAQS.11

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS

41200 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 30, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

12https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/ 

national-emissions-inventory. 

13The ‘‘other’’ category of fuel combustion in 

Rhode Island is comprised almost entirely of 

residential heating through fuel oil combustion. 

14EPA recognizes in Appendix A.1 titled, 

‘‘AERMOD (AMS/EPA Regulatory Model) –’’ of 

Appendix W to 40 CFR part 51 that the model is 

appropriate for predicting SO2 up to 50 kilometers. 

15https://www.epa.gov/so2-pollution/2010-1- 

hour-sulfur-dioxide-so2-primary-national-ambientair-quality-standards-naaqs 

16EPA notes that the evaluation of other states’ 

satisfaction of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2010 

NO2 NAAQS can be informed by similar factors 

found in this proposed rulemaking, but may not be 

identical to the approach taken in this or any future 

rulemaking for Rhode Island, depending on 

available information and state-specific 

circumstances. 

As previously noted, section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) requires an evaluation 

of any source or other type of emissions 

activity in one state and how emissions 

from these sources or activities may 

impact air quality in other states. As the 

analysis contained in Rhode Island’s 

submittal demonstrates, a state’s 

obligation to demonstrate that it is 

meeting section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) cannot 

be based solely on the fact that there are 

no DRR sources within the state. 

Therefore, EPA believes that a 

reasonable starting point for 

determining which sources and 

emissions activities in Rhode Island are 

likely to impact downwind air quality 

with respect to the SO2 NAAQS is by 

using information in the NEI.12 The NEI 

is a comprehensive and detailed 

estimate of air emissions of criteria 

pollutants, criteria precursors, and 

hazardous air pollutants from air 

emissions sources, and is updated every 

three years using information provided 

by the states. At the time of this 

rulemaking, the most recently available 

dataset is the 2014 NEI, and the state 

summary for Rhode Island is included 

in the table below. 

TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF 2014 NEI 

SO2 DATA FOR RHODE ISLAND

Category Emissions 

(tons per year) 

Fuel Combustion: Electric 

Utilities ............................... 33 

Fuel Combustion: Industrial .. 599 

Fuel Combustion: Other ....... 2,757 

Petroleum and related Industries ................................... 6 

Waste Disposal and Recycling ................................... 140 

Highway Vehicles ................. 75 

Off-Highway .......................... 178 

Miscellaneous ....................... 2 

Total ............................... 3,790 

The EPA observes that according to 

the 2014 NEI, the vast majority of SO2

emissions in Rhode Island originate 

from fuel combustion at point and 

nonpoint sources. Therefore, an 

assessment of Rhode Island’s 

satisfaction of all applicable 

requirements under section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA for the 2010 

SO2 NAAQS may reasonably be based 

upon evaluating the downwind impacts 

of emissions from the combined fuel 

combustion categories (i.e., electric 

utilities, industrial processes, and other 

sources 13). 

The definitions contained in 

Appendix D to 40 CFR part 58 are 

helpful indicators of the travel and 

formation phenomenon for SO2

originating from stationary sources in its 

stoichiometric gaseous form in the 

context of the 2010 primary SO2

NAAQS. Notably, section 4.4 of this 

appendix titled, ‘‘Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) 

Design Criteria’’ provides definitions for 

SO2 Monitoring Spatial Scales for 

microscale, middle scale, neighborhood, 

and urban scale monitors. The 

microscale includes areas in close 

proximity to SO2 point and area sources, 

and those areas extend approximately 

100 meters from a facility. The middle 

scale generally represents air quality 

levels in areas 100 meters to 500 meters 

from a facility, and may include 

locations of maximum expected shortterm concentrations due to the 

proximity of major SO2 point, area, and 

non-road sources. The neighborhood 

scale characterizes air quality 

conditions between 0.5 kilometers and 4 

kilometers from a facility, and emissions 

from stationary and point sources may 

under certain plume conditions, result 

in high SO2 concentrations at this scale. 

Lastly, the urban scale is used to 

estimate concentrations over large 

portions of an urban area with 

dimensions of 4 to 50 kilometers from 

a facility, and such measurements 

would be useful for assessing trends and 

concentrations in area-wide air quality, 

and hence, the effectiveness of largescale pollution control strategies. Based 

on these definitions contained in EPA’s 

own regulations, we believe that it is 

appropriate to examine the impacts of 

emissions from electric utilities and 

industrial processes in Rhode Island in 

distances ranging from 0 km to 50 km 

from the facility. In other words, SO2

emissions from stationary sources in the 

context of the 2010 primary NAAQS do 

not exhibit the same long-distance 

travel, regional transport or formation 

phenomena as either ozone or PM2.5, but 

rather, these emissions behave more like 

Pb with localized dispersion. Therefore, 

an assessment up to 50 kilometers from 

potential sources would be useful for 

assessing trends and SO2 concentrations 

in area-wide air quality.14

The largest category of SO2 emissions 

in Table 1 is for ‘‘other’’ fuel 

combustion sources. The majority of 

emissions in this category is from 

residential fuel combustion (2,561 tons 

per year), or 68% of the total statewide 

SO2 emissions for 2014. Residential 

homes combusting fuel are considered 

nonpoint sources. For any state where 

the SO2 contribution from nonpoint 

sources make up a majority of all 

statewide SO2 emissions, EPA believes 

it is reasonable to evaluate any 

regulations intended to address fuel oil, 

specifically with respect to the sulfur 

content in order to determine interstate 

transport impacts from the category of 

‘‘other’’ sources of fuel combustion. 

Our current implementation strategy 

for the 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS 

includes the flexibility to characterize 

air quality for stationary sources via 

either data collected at ambient air 

quality monitors sited to capture the 

points of maximum concentration, or air 

dispersion modeling.15 Our assessment 

of SO2 emissions from fuel combustion 

categories in the state and their 

potential on neighboring states are 

informed by all available data at the 

time of this rulemaking, and include: 

SO2 ambient air quality; SO2 emissions 

and SO2 emissions trends; SIP-approved 

SO2 regulations and permitting 

requirements; and, other SIP-approved 

or federally promulgated regulations 

which may yield reductions of SO2. 

C. Approach for Addressing the 

Interstate Transport Requirements of the 

2010 Primary NO2 NAAQS in Rhode 

Island 

This notice also describes EPA’s 

evaluation of Rhode Island’s conclusion 

contained in the State’s October 15, 

2015 infrastructure SIP submission that 

the State satisfies the requirements of 

CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 

2010 NO2 NAAQS.16

EPA and the State’s approach to 

assessing impacts from the 

transportation of NO2 emissions is 

similar, but different, from the approach 

discussed above for SO2 emissions. As 

previously noted, the approach used to 

analyze the effects of transport for NO2

emissions in Rhode Island consists of 

four elements: (1) The area designation 

for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS, (2) ambient 

monitoring of NO2 concentrations; (3) 

the fact that total NOX emissions in the 

State and surrounding states are 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 30, 2017 / Proposed Rules 41201 

17March 24, 2011 guidance document titled, 

‘‘Area Designations for the 2010 Revised Primary 

Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards.’’ See, e.g. http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/Air

Quality/documents/SO2DesignationsGuidance

2011.pdf. 

18On October 7, 2015, EPA approved Rhode 

Island’s low sulfur fuel regulation. See 80 FR 60541. 

On May 25, 2016 and June 3, 2016, EPA approved 

Connecticut’s low sulfur fuel regulations. See 81 FR 

33134 and 81 FR 35636, respectively. On September 

19, 2013, EPA approved Massachusetts’ low sulfur 

fuel regulation. See 78 FR 57487. On August 8, 

2012, EPA approved New York’s low sulfur fuel 

statute. See 77 FR 51915. 

19See Air Pollution Emissions Trend Data at 

https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/airpollutant-emissions-trends-data. 

20A ‘‘Design Value’’ is a statistic that describes 

the air quality status of a given location relative to 

the level of the NAAQS. The interpretation of the 

2010 primary SO2 NAAQS (set at 75 parts per 

billion [ppb]) including the data handling 

conventions and calculations necessary for 

determining compliance with the NAAQS can be 

found in Appendix T to 40 CFR part 50. 

trending downward; and (4) the fact that 

there are SIP-approved state regulations 

in place to control NOX emissions in the 

State. 

V. Interstate Transport Demonstration 

for SO2 Emissions 

A. Prong 1 Analysis—Significant 

Contribution to SO2 Nonattainment 

Prong 1 of the good neighbor 

provision requires state plans to 

prohibit emissions that will 

significantly contribute to 

nonattainment of a NAAQS in another 

state. In order to evaluate Rhode Island’s 

satisfaction of prong 1, EPA evaluated 

the State’s SIP submission in relation to 

the following four factors: (1) SO2

emission trends for Rhode Island and 

neighboring states; (2) SO2 ambient air 

quality; (3) SIP-approved regulations 

specific to SO2 emissions and permit 

requirements; and (4) other SIPapproved or federally-enforceable 

regulations that, while not directly 

intended to address or reduce SO2

emissions, may yield reductions of the 

pollutant. A detailed discussion of each 

of these factors is below. 

1. SO2 Emissions Trends 

As noted above, EPA’s approach for 

addressing the interstate transport of 

SO2 in Rhode Island is based upon 

emissions from fuel combustion at 

electric utilities, industrial sources, and 

residential heating. As part of the SIP 

submittal, Rhode Island observed that, 

in accordance with the most recently 

available designations guidance at the 

time,17 there were no facilities in Rhode 

Island with reported actual emissions 

greater than or equal to 100 tons per 

year (tpy) of SO2 in 2014. 

According to the 2014 NEI data, the 

highest SO2 emissions from a single 

point source was 60 tons from Rhode 

Island Hospital. Also during 2014, the 

largest industrial or electric generating 

facility was Rhode Island LFG Genco, 

LLC which emitted 33 tons of SO2. 

As demonstrated by the data in Table 

2, statewide SO2 emissions in Rhode 

Island and in its three neighboring 

states, Connecticut, Massachusetts and 

New York, have significantly decreased 

over the last several years. This 

decreasing trend should continue into 

the near future as all four states have 

adopted strategies to lower fuel oil’s 

sulfur content by weight.18 By July 1, 

2018, the home heating oil in all four 

states will be limited to 15 parts per 

million (ppm) of sulfur by weight. 

TABLE 2—STATEWIDE SO2 DATA (TONS PER YEAR) FOR RHODE ISLAND, CONNECTICUT, AND MASSACHUSETTS 19

State 2000 2005 2010 2016 

Rhode Island .................................................................................................... 8,976 7,356 4,416 3,639 

Connecticut ...................................................................................................... 60,309 34,638 16,319 10,953 

Massachusetts ................................................................................................. 208,146 139,937 57,892 13,518 

New York ......................................................................................................... 543,868 386,568 170,247 59,520 

2. SO2 Ambient Air Quality 

Data collected at ambient air quality 

monitors indicate the monitored values 

of SO2 in the State have remained below 

the NAAQS. Relevant data from Air 

Quality Standards (AQS) Design Value 

(DV) 20 reports for recent and complete 

3-year periods are summarized in the 

table below. 

TABLE 3—TREND IN SO2 DESIGN VALUES FOR AQS MONITORS IN RHODE ISLAND

AQS Monitor Site Monitor location 2012–2014 DV 

(ppb) 

2013–2015 DV 

(ppb) 

2014–2016 DV 

(ppb) 

44–007–0012 .................................................. Brown University, Providence ........................ 11 8 7 

44–007–1010 .................................................. Francis School, East Providence ................... 14 10 7 

As shown in Table 3 above, the DVs 

for the two monitoring sites for all years 

between 2012 and 2016 have decreased 

between each of the 3-year blocks 

shown in the table. The highest valid 

DV in Rhode Island for 2014–2016 is 7 

ppb, which is 83% below the NAAQS. 

While the monitor (AQS Site ID 44– 

007–0012) closest to Rhode Island 

Hospital (the largest SO2 emitter in 

2014) may not be sited in the area to 

capture points of maximum 

concentration from the facility, the 

monitor is located in the neighborhood 

spatial scale in relation to the facility, 

i.e., emissions from stationary and point 

sources may under certain plume 

conditions, result in high SO2

concentrations at this scale. Forty CFR 

part 58, Appendix D, section 4.4.4(3) 

defines neighborhood scale as ‘‘[t]he 

neighborhood scale would characterize 

air quality conditions throughout some 

relatively uniform land use areas with 

dimensions in the 0.5 to 4.0 kilometer 

range.’’ 

However, the absence of a violating 

ambient air quality monitor within the 

State is insufficient to demonstrate that 

Rhode Island has met its interstate 

transport obligation. While the 

decreasing DVs and their associated 

spatial scales may help to assist in 

characterizing air quality within Rhode 

Island, prong 1 of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) specifically addresses 

the effects that sources within Rhode 

Island have on air quality in 

neighboring states. Therefore, an 

evaluation and analysis of SO2

emissions data from facilities within the 

State, together with the potential effects 

of such emissions on ambient data in 

neighboring states, is appropriate. 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS

41202 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 30, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

21The closest ambient SO2 monitors in 

Connecticut and New York with recent valid design 

values are in New Haven and Suffolk Counties, 

respectively. The 2014–2016 design value at each 

of these monitors (i.e., 09–009–0027 and 36–103– 

0009) is below 10 ppb. See https://www.epa.gov/airtrends/air-quality-design-values. 

22See 80 FR 60541 (October 15, 2015) for Rhode 

Island, 78 FR 57487 (September 19, 2013) for 

Massachusetts, and 81 FR 35636 (June 3, 2016) for 

Connecticut. 

As previously discussed, EPA’s 

definitions of spatial scales for SO2

monitoring networks indicate that the 

maximum impacts from stationary 

sources can be expected within 4 

kilometers of such sources, and that 

distances up to 50 kilometers would be 

useful for assessing trends and 

concentrations in area-wide air quality. 

The only nearby states within 50 km of 

a source in Rhode Island are 

Massachusetts, Connecticut, and New 

York. As a result, no further analysis of 

other Northeast states was conducted for 

assessing the impacts of the interstate 

transport of SO2 pollution from facilities 

located in Rhode Island. 

There are no ambient SO2 monitors 

operating in Connecticut or New York 

within 50 km of Rhode Island’s 

border 21. There are four such monitors 

in Massachusetts, which are identified 

in Table 4, below, along with those 

monitors’ DVs for SO2 for the last three 

year periods. As shown in Table 4, SO2

DVs for these monitors are decreasing, 

with the highest DV for 2014–2016 

being 13% of the NAAQS. 

TABLE 4—TREND IN SO2 DESIGN VALUES FOR AQS MONITORS IN MASSACHUSETTS WITHIN 50 KM OF RHODE ISLAND

AQS Monitor Site Monitor Location 2012–2014 DV 

(ppb) 

2013–2015 DV 

(ppb) 

2014–2016 DV 

(ppb) 

25–025–0042 .................................................. Dudley Square, Roxbury ................................ 12 11 9 

25–025–0002 .................................................. Kenmore Square, Boston ............................... 12 9 6 

25–027–0023 .................................................. Worcester ....................................................... 9 7 6 

25–005–1004 .................................................. Fall River ........................................................ 47 28 10 

3. Federally Enforceable Regulations 

Specific to SO2 and Permitting 

Requirements 

The State has various regulations to 

ensure that SO2 emissions are not 

expected to substantially increase in the 

future. One notable example consists of 

the federally-enforceable conditions 

contained in Rhode Island’s Air 

Pollution Control Regulation (APCR) 

No. 8, ‘‘Sulfur Content of Fuels.’’ This 

regulation, last approved by EPA into 

the SIP on October 7, 2015 (80 FR 

60541) limits the amount of sulfur by 

weight in fuel oil. As discussed earlier 

in this notice, the 2014 NEI indicates 

that the single largest, albeit diffuse, 

source category of SO2 emissions in 

Rhode Island is from fuel combustion 

for residential heating (2,561 tpy). 

Starting on July 1, 2014 the sulfur 

content for home heating oil in Rhode 

Island was lowered to 500 parts per 

million (ppm), or 0.05% by weight. An 

additional reduction in the amount of 

SO2 emissions from the use of home 

heating oil will occur after July 1, 2018 

when the sulfur content will be reduced 

from 500 ppm to 15 ppm or 0.0015% by 

weight, representing a 97% decrease in 

SO2 emissions from this source 

category. 

In addition, for the purposes of 

ensuring that SO2 emissions at new or 

modified stationary sources in Rhode 

Island do not adversely impact air 

quality, the State’s SIP-approved 

nonattainment new source review 

(NNSR) and prevention of significant 

deterioration (PSD) programs are 

contained in APCR, No. 9, ‘‘Air 

Pollution Control Permits.’’ This 

regulation ensures that SO2 emissions 

due to new facility construction or to 

modifications at existing facilities will 

not adversely impact air quality in 

Rhode Island and will likely not 

adversely impact air quality in 

neighboring states. 

Finally, in addition to the State’s SIPapproved regulations, EPA observes that 

facilities in Rhode Island are also 

subject to the federal requirements 

contained in regulations such as the 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants for Major 

Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and 

Institutional Boilers and Process 

Heaters. This regulation reduces acid 

gases, which includes reductions in SO2

emissions. 

4. Conclusion 

As discussed in more detail above, 

EPA has considered the following 

information in evaluating the State’s 

satisfaction of the requirements of prong 

1 of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I): 

(1) EPA has not identified any current 

air quality problems in neighboring 

states (i.e., Connecticut, Massachusetts 

and New York) relative to the 2010 

primary SO2 NAAQS; 

(2) Past and projected future SO2

emission trends demonstrate that SO2

air quality problems in other 

neighboring states are unlikely to occur 

due to sources in Rhode Island; and 

(3) Current SIP provisions and other 

federal programs will further reduce 

SO2 emissions from sources within 

Rhode Island. 

Based on the analysis provided by the 

State in its October 15, 2015 SIP 

submission and based on each of the 

factors listed above, EPA proposes to 

find that any sources or other emissions 

activity within the State will not 

contribute significantly to 

nonattainment of the 2010 primary SO2

NAAQS in any other state. 

B. Prong 2 Analysis—Interference With 

Maintenance of the SO2 NAAQS 

Prong 2 of the good neighbor 

provision requires state plans to 

prohibit emissions that will interfere 

with maintenance of a NAAQS in 

another state. Given the continuing 

trend of decreased emissions from 

sources within Rhode Island, EPA 

believes that reasonable criteria to 

ensure that sources or other emissions 

activity originating within Rhode Island 

do not interfere with its neighboring 

states’ ability to maintain the NAAQS 

consists of evaluating whether these 

decreases in emissions can be 

maintained over time. 

As shown in Table 2, above, statewide SO2 emissions in Rhode Island, 

and the three neighboring states, 

Massachusetts, Connecticut and New 

York, have significantly decreased since 

2000. All four of these states have 

adopted low sulfur fuel oil 

requirements, requiring the sulfur 

content in home heating oil and other 

sources using distillate oil to be lowered 

by 97% by July 1, 2018.22 According to 

the 2014 NEI data, home heating oil is 

the largest category of SO2 emissions in 

three of the states, Rhode Island, 

Massachusetts, and Connecticut. Home 

heating oil in 2014 was not the largest 

category of SO2 emissions in New York 

because the sulfur content in home 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 30, 2017 / Proposed Rules 41203 

23https://www3.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/ch01/ 

final/c01s03.pdf. 

24https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/ 

census/historic/fuels.html. 

25See 82 FR 21351 (May 8, 2017). 

26See https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/sulfurdioxide-trends. 

27See https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-qualitydesign-values for NO2 design values. 

heating oil was reduced to 15 ppm as of 

July 1, 2012. 

Utilizing United States census data 

and EPA emission factors, future SO2

emissions from home heating oil can be 

forecasted in each of the three states 

where the reduction in sulfur content to 

15 ppm does not take effect until 2018. 

According to EPA’s guidance titled ‘‘Air 

Emission Factors and Quantification AP 

42, Compilation of Air Pollutant 

Emission Factors’’ Chapter 1.3 titled, 

‘‘Fuel Oil Combustion,’’ 23 more than 

95% of the sulfur in fuel is converted to 

SO2. The Census Bureau provides state 

specific data for the year 2000 regarding 

the number of homes using oil for 

heating purposes.24 Finally, it is not 

uncommon for typical households in 

the southern New England states to use 

800 gallons of fuel oil per season.25

Table 5 provides both the census data 

and current and future SO2 emission 

estimates for each of the three relevant 

states. 

TABLE 5—ESTIMATED FUTURE SO2 EMISSIONS FROM HOME HEATING OIL

State 

Number of 

households 

using oil 

for heat 

Estimate of 

SO2 emissions 

(tons) from 

households 

using oil 

(2016) 

Estimate of 

SO2 emissions 

(tons) from 

households 

using oil 

(2019) 

Rhode Island ............................................................................................ 168,400 478.2 14 

Connecticut .............................................................................................. 681,200 1,935 58 

Massachusetts ......................................................................................... 945,600 2,686 81 

While EPA does not currently have a 

way to quantify the impacts of multiple 

small sources of SO2 (the current 

estimate is approximately 6 pounds of 

SO2 per year per household that uses 

800 gallons of fuel oil) in neighboring 

states, the drastic decrease in the 

allowable sulfur content in fuel oil and 

the associated reductions in SO2

emissions, combined with the diffuse 

nature of these emissions, make it 

unlikely that the current and future 

emissions from residential combustion 

of fuel oil are likely to lead to an 

exceedance of the NAAQS in a 

neighboring state. Specifically, by 2018, 

the yearly SO2 emissions per household 

using fuel oil will drop to under 0.20 

pounds per year. 

As shown in Table 2, above, statewide 

SO2 emissions in Rhode Island have 

decreased over time. A number of 

factors are involved that caused this 

decrease in emissions, including the 

effective date of APCR No. 8, ‘‘Sulfur 

Content of Fuels,’’ and the change in 

capacity factors at EGUs over time due 

to increased usage of natural gas to 

generate electricity. The EPA believes 

that since actual SO2 emissions from the 

facilities currently operating in Rhode 

Island have decreased between 2000 

and 2015, this trend shows that 

emissions originating in Rhode Island 

are not expected to interfere with the 

neighboring states’ ability to maintain 

the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. 

EPA expects SO2 from point sources 

combusting fuel oil in Rhode Island will 

be lower in the future. In 2014, the state 

adopted lower sulfur-in-fuel limits for 

all stationary sources (APCR No. 8). 

These new limits were approved by EPA 

into the SIP in 2015. The sulfur-in-fuel 

limits contained in APCR No. 8 will 

limit stationary sources combusting 

residual fuel oil with a sulfur content of 

0.5% or less by weight and distillate 

fuel oil of 0.0015% or less by weight as 

of July 1, 2018. 

Lastly, any future large sources of SO2

emissions will be addressed by Rhode 

Island’s SIP-approved Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) program. 

Future minor sources of SO2 emissions 

will be addressed by the State’s minor 

new source review permit program. The 

permitting regulations contained within 

these programs, along with the other 

factors already discussed, are expected 

to help ensure that ambient 

concentrations of SO2 in Massachusetts 

or Connecticut are not exceeded as a 

result of new facility construction or 

modification occurring in Rhode Island. 

It is also worth noting air quality 

trends for concentrations of SO2 in the 

Northeastern United States.26 This 

region has experienced a 77% decrease 

in the annual 99th percentile of daily 

maximum 1-hour averages between 

2000 and 2015 based on 46 monitoring 

sites, and the most recently available 

data for 2015 indicates that the mean 

value at these sites was 17.4 ppb, or less 

than 25% of the NAAQS. When this 

trend is evaluated alongside the 

monitored SO2 concentrations within 

the State of Rhode Island as well as the 

SO2 concentrations recorded at monitors 

in Massachusetts and Connecticut, EPA 

does not believe that sources or 

emissions activity from within Rhode 

Island are significantly different than 

the overall decreasing monitored SO2

concentration trend in the Northeast 

region. As a result, EPA finds it unlikely 

that sources or emissions activity from 

within Rhode Island will interfere with 

other states’ ability to maintain the 2010 

primary SO2 NAAQS. 

Based on each of factors contained in 

the prong 2 maintenance analysis above, 

EPA proposes to find that sources or 

other emissions activity within the State 

will not interfere with maintenance of 

the 2010 primary SO2 NAAQS in any 

other state. 

VI. Significant Contribution to 

Nonattainment and Interference With 

Maintenance of the NO2 NAAQS 

Rhode Island’s October 15, 2015 

infrastructure SIP submission 

addressing the good neighbor 

requirements of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) notes that on January 

20, 2012, EPA designated all areas of the 

country as ‘‘unclassifiable/attainment’’ 

for the 2010 primary NO2 NAAQS. EPA 

did this because DVs for the 2008–2010 

period at all monitored sites met the 

NAAQS. Measurements from 2013–2015 

indicate continued attainment of the 

2010 primary NO2 NAAQS throughout 

the country.27 Rhode Island currently 

operates four NO2 monitors, two in 

Providence, one in East Providence, and 

one in West Greenwich. The DV is 

based on the 3-year average of the 98th 

percentile of the yearly distribution of 1- 

hour daily maximum concentrations. 

Table 6 contains the design values for 

the two monitors with complete, valid 

data. 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS

41204 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 30, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 6—NO2 DESIGN VALUES IN RHODE ISLAND

AQS Monitor site Monitor location 2013–2015 DV 

(ppb) 

2014–2016 DV 

(ppb) 

44–007–0012 ................................................................ Brown University, Providence ...................................... 46 45 

44–007–1010 ................................................................ Francis School, East Providence ................................. 39 38 

As shown in Table 6, the DVs are 

significantly less than the national 

ambient air quality standard for NO2, 

which is 100 ppb. However, the absence 

of a violating ambient air quality 

monitor within the State is insufficient 

by itself to demonstrate that Rhode 

Island has met its interstate transport 

obligation. While the DV may help to 

assist in characterizing air quality 

within Rhode Island, section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) specifically addresses 

the effects that sources within Rhode 

Island have on air quality in 

neighboring states. Therefore, an 

evaluation and analysis of DV’s in 

neighboring states is appropriate. 

Table 7 contains the highest NO2 DVs 

for the three states neighboring Rhode 

Island, i.e., Massachusetts, Connecticut, 

and New York. 

TABLE 7—HIGHEST NO2 DESIGN VALUES IN PPB FOR AQS MONITORS IN MASSACHUSETTS AND CONNECTICUT

State AQS monitor 

site Monitor location Design value (2014–2016) 

Connecticut ...................................... 09–009–0027 Criscuolo Park-New Haven ....................................................................... 53 

Massachusetts ................................. 25–025–0002 

25–025–0042 

25–027–0023 

Kenmore Square, Boston ..........................................................................

Dudley Square, Roxbury ...........................................................................

Worcester ..................................................................................................

51 

51 

51 

New York ......................................... 36–005–0110 Bronx ......................................................................................................... 64 

As shown by the chart above, the 

highest NO2 DV in each neighboring 

state is significantly less than the NO2

NAAQS. 

Lastly, APCR No. 27 ‘‘Control of 

Nitrogen Oxide Emissions,’’ among 

other regulations, contains NOX

emissions limits for existing sources. 

For ensuring that new or modified 

sources of NO2 emissions in Rhode 

Island do not adversely impact air 

quality, the State’s SIP-approved 

nonattainment new source review 

(NNSR) and prevention of significant 

deterioration (PSD) programs are 

contained in APCR, No. 9, ‘‘Air 

Pollution Control Permits.’’ This 

regulation ensures that NO2 emissions 

due to new facility construction or 

modifications at existing facilities will 

not adversely impact air quality in 

Rhode Island or in neighboring states. 

EPA also notes that NOX emissions 

have been declining, with total 

statewide NOX emissions from Rhode 

Island sources dropping from 38,308 

tons in 2000 to 19,680 tons in 2016. In 

light of the above analysis, EPA is 

approving Rhode Island’s October 15, 

2015 infrastructure submittal for the 

2010 primary NO2 NAAQS as it pertains 

to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA. 

Based on the analysis provided by the 

State in its October 15, 2015 SIP 

submission and based on each of the 

factors listed above, for the 2010 

primary NO2 NAAQS EPA proposes to 

find that any sources or other emissions 

activity within the State will not 

contribute significantly to 

nonattainment in, or interfere with 

maintenance by, any other state. 

VII. Proposed Action 

In light of the above analysis, EPA is 

proposing to approve Rhode Island’s 

October 15, 2015 infrastructure 

submittal for the 2010 primary SO2 and 

2010 primary NO2 NAAQS as it pertains 

to Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA. 

EPA is soliciting public comments on 

the issues discussed in this notice. 

These comments will be considered 

before taking final action. Interested 

parties may participate in the Federal 

rulemaking procedure by submitting 

written comments to the EPA New 

England Regional Office listed in the 

ADDRESSES section of this Federal 

Register or by submitting comments 

electronically, by mail, or through hand 

delivery/courier following the 

directions in the ADDRESSES section of 

this Federal Register. 

VIII. 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: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

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

January 21, 2011); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 167 / Wednesday, August 30, 2017 / Proposed Rules 41205 

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, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Sulfur oxides, Nitrogen oxides. 

Dated: August 15, 2017. 

Deborah A. Szaro, 

Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New 

England. 

[FR Doc. 2017–18419 Filed 8–29–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 622 

RIN 0648–BG87 

Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of 

Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish 

Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Gray 

Triggerfish Management Measures; 

Amendment 46 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Notification of availability; 

request for comments. 

SUMMARY: The Gulf of Mexico (Gulf) 

Fishery Management Council (Council) 

has submitted Amendment 46 to the 

Fishery Management Plan for the Reef 

Fish Resources of the Gulf of Mexico 

(FMP), for review, approval, and 

implementation by NMFS. Amendment 

46 would establish the rebuilding time 

period for the Gulf gray triggerfish stock. 

Amendment 46 would also revise the 

recreational fixed closed season, 

recreational bag limit, recreational 

minimum size limit, and commercial 

trip limit. The purpose of Amendment 

46 is to implement management 

measures to assist in rebuilding the Gulf 

gray triggerfish stock and to achieve 

optimum yield (OY). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before October 30, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on the amendment identified by 

‘‘NOAA–NMFS–2017–0080’’ by either 

of the following methods: 

• Electronic Submission: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal e-Rulemaking Portal. Go to 

www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=

NOAA-NMFS-2017-0080, click the 

‘‘Comment Now!’’ icon, complete the 

required fields, and enter or attach your 

comments. 

• Mail: Submit written comments to 

Lauren Waters, Southeast Regional 

Office, NMFS, 263 13th Avenue South, 

St. Petersburg, FL 33701. 

Instructions: Comments sent by any 

other method, to any other address or 

individual, or received after the end of 

the comment period, may not be 

considered by NMFS. All comments 

received are a part of the public record 

and will generally be posted for public 

viewing on www.regulations.gov 

without change. All personal identifying 

information (e.g., name, address, etc.), 

confidential business information, or 

otherwise sensitive information 

submitted voluntarily by the sender will 

be publicly accessible. NMFS will 

accept anonymous comments (enter 

‘‘N/A’’ in the required fields if you wish 

to remain anonymous). 

Electronic copies of Amendment 46, 

which includes an environmental 

assessment, a fishery impact statement, 

a Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

analysis, and a regulatory impact 

review, may be obtained from the 

Southeast Regional Office Web site at: 

http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/sustainable_

fisheries/gulf_fisheries/reef_fish/2017/ 

am46_gray_trigger/documents/pdfs/ 

gulf_reef_am46_gray_trigg_final.pdf. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Lauren Waters, Southeast Regional 

Office, NMFS, telephone: 727–824– 

5305; email: Lauren.Waters@noaa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act 

(Magnuson-Stevens Act) requires each 

regional fishery management council to 

submit any FMP or amendment to 

NMFS for review and approval, partial 

approval, or disapproval. The 

Magnuson-Stevens Act also requires 

that NMFS, upon receiving an FMP or 

amendment, publish an announcement 

in the Federal Register notifying the 

public that the FMP or amendment is 

available for review and comment. 

The FMP being revised by 

Amendment 46 was prepared by the 

Council and implemented by NMFS 

through regulations at 50 CFR part 622 

under the authority of the MagnusonStevens Act. 

Background 

The Magnuson-Stevens Act requires 

NMFS and regional fishery management 

councils to prevent overfishing and 

achieve, on a continuing basis, the OY 

from Federally managed fish stocks. 

These mandates are intended to ensure 

that fishery resources are managed for 

the greatest overall benefit to the nation, 

particularly with respect to providing 

food production and recreational 

opportunities, and protecting marine 

ecosystems. To further this goal, the 

Magnuson-Stevens Act requires fishery 

managers to rebuild overfished stocks. 

The first Southeast Data, Assessment, 

and Review (SEDAR) benchmark stock 

assessment for gray triggerfish was 

completed in 2006 (SEDAR 9). SEDAR 

9 indicated that the gray triggerfish 

stock was both overfished and possibly 

undergoing overfishing. Subsequently, 

Amendment 30A to the FMP established 

a gray triggerfish rebuilding plan 

beginning in the 2008 fishing year (73 

FR 3813; July 3, 2008). In 2011, a 

SEDAR 9 update stock assessment for 

gray triggerfish determined that the gray 

triggerfish stock was still overfished and 

was undergoing overfishing, and had 

not made adequate progress toward 

rebuilding. As a result of the SEDAR 9 

update and to end overfishing, the final 

rule for Amendment 37 to the FMP 

revised the gray triggerfish commercial 

and recreational sector annual catch 

limits (ACLs) and annual catch targets 

(ACTs), revised the gray triggerfish 

recreational sector accountability 

measures (AMs), revised the gray 

triggerfish recreational bag limit, 

established a commercial trip limit for 

gray triggerfish, and established a fixed 

closed season for the gray triggerfish 

commercial and recreational sectors (78 

FR 27084; May 5, 2013). Additionally, 

Amendment 37 revised the rebuilding 

plan and projected that the stock would 

be rebuilt in 5 years, or by the end of 

2017 fishing year. 

Since implementation of Amendment 

37 in 2013, commercial harvest has not 

exceeded the commercial ACL, while 

the recreational sector has exceeded the 

recreational ACL or adjusted 

recreational ACL (that resulted from a 

ACL overage adjustment) in the 2013, 

2014, 2015, and 2016 fishing years. The 

most recent stock assessment for gray 

triggerfish was completed and reviewed 

by the Council’s Scientific and 

Statistical Committee (SSC) in October 

2015 (SEDAR 43). SEDAR 43 indicated 

that the gray triggerfish stock was not 

experiencing overfishing but remained 

overfished and would not be rebuilt by 

mstockstill on DSK30JT082PROD with PROPOSALS