[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 204 (Tuesday, October 24, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 73012]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23462]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas and Oil Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: CP24-3-000.
    Applicants: Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC, Columbia Gulf
Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC et. al. submits
Abbreviated Application for Amendment to Order Issuing Certificate and
Authorizing Abandonment.
    Filed Date: 10/10/23.
    Accession Number: 20231010-5338.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 10/31/23.

    Docket Numbers: RP24-43-000.
    Applicants: Southern LNG Company, L.L.C.
    Description: 4(d) Rate Filing: SLNG Electric Power Cost
Adjustment--2023 to be effective 12/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 10/18/23.
    Accession Number: 20231018-5035.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 10/30/23.

    Docket Numbers: RP24-44-000.
    Applicants: Centra Pipelines Minnesota Inc.
    Description: 4(d) Rate Filing: Updated Index of Shippers Dec 2023
to be effective 12/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 10/18/23.
    Accession Number: 20231018-5074.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 10/30/23.

    Any person desiring to intervene, to protest, or to answer a
complaint in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with
Rules 211, 214, or 206 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211,
385.214, or 385.206) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the
specified comment date. Protests may be considered, but intervention is
necessary to become a party to the proceeding.

Filings in Existing Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP23-1104-001.
    Applicants: Trunkline Gas Company, LLC.
    Description: Tariff Amendment: Revised Fuel Filing RP23-1104 to be
effective 11/1/2023.
    Filed Date: 10/18/23.
    Accession Number: 20231018-5058.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. ET 10/30/23.

    Any person desiring to protest in any the above proceedings must
file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18
CFR 385.211) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system
(https://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp) by querying
the docket number. eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information
relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and
qualifying facilities filings can be found at: https://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866)
208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    The Commission's Office of Public Participation (OPP) supports
meaningful public engagement and participation in Commission
proceedings. OPP can help members of the public, including landowners,
environmental justice communities, Tribal members and others, access
publicly available information and navigate Commission processes.
    For public inquiries and assistance with making filings such as
interventions, comments, or requests for rehearing, the public is
encouraged to contact OPP at<PHONE_NUMBER> or [email protected].

    Dated: October 18, 2023.
Debbie-Anne A. Reese,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-23462 Filed 10-23-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 224 (Tuesday, November 20, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58676-58677]
[FR Doc No: 2018-25280]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

[Docket Nos. FMCSA-2011-0389; FMCSA-2012-0294; FMCSA-2013-0109; FMCSA-
2013-0442; FMCSA-2014-0380; FMCSA 2015-0321]

Qualification of Drivers; Exemption Applications; Epilepsy and
Seizure Disorders

AGENCY: Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of final disposition.

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

SUMMARY: FMCSA announces its decision to renew exemptions for 20
individuals from the requirement in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Regulations (FMCSRs) that interstate commercial motor vehicle (CMV)
drivers have ``no established medical history or clinical diagnosis of
epilepsy or any other condition which is likely to cause loss of
consciousness or any loss of ability to control a CMV.'' The exemptions
enable these individuals who have had one or more seizures and are
taking anti-seizure medication to continue to operate CMVs in
interstate commerce.

DATES: Each group of renewed exemptions were applicable on the dates
stated in the discussions below and will expire on the dates stated in
the discussions below.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Christine A. Hydock, Chief,
Medical Programs Division,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected], FMCSA,
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Room W64-224,
Washington, DC 20590-0001. Office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m.,
ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. If you have
questions regarding viewing or submitting material to the docket,
contact Docket Services, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Public Participation

A. Viewing Documents and Comments

    To view comments, as well as any documents mentioned in this notice
as being available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov.
Insert the docket numbers, FMCSA-2011-0389; FMCSA-2012-0294; FMCSA-
2013-0109; FMCSA-2013-0442; FMCSA-2014-0380; FMCSA 2015-0321, in the
keyword box, and click ``Search.'' Next, click the ``Open Docket
Folder'' button and choose the document to review. If you do not have
access to the internet, you may view the docket online by visiting the
Docket Management Facility in Room W12-140 on the ground floor of the
DOT West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590,
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., ET, Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.

B. Privacy Act

    In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.

II. Background

    On August 15, 2018, FMCSA published a notice announcing its
decision to renew exemptions for 20 individuals from the epilepsy and
seizure disorders prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) to operate a CMV
in interstate commerce and requested comments from the public (83 FR
40625). The public comment period ended on September 14, 2018, and no
comments were received.
    As stated in the previous notice, FMCSA has evaluated the
eligibility of these applicants and determined that renewing these
exemptions would achieve a level of safety equivalent to or greater
than the level that would be achieved by complying with the current
regulation 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8).
    The physical qualification standard for drivers regarding epilepsy
found in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8) states that a person is physically
qualified to drive a CMV if that person has no established medical
history or clinical diagnosis of epilepsy or any other condition which
is likely to cause the loss of consciousness or any loss of ability to
control a CMV.
    In addition to the regulations, FMCSA has published advisory
criteria to assist Medical Examiners in determining whether drivers
with certain medical conditions are qualified to operate a CMV in
interstate commerce (49 CFR part 391, APPENDIX A TO PART 391--MEDICAL
ADVISORY CRITERIA, section H. Epilepsy: Sec.  391.41(b)(8), paragraphs
3, 4, and 5).

III. Discussion of Comments

    FMCSA received no comments in this proceeding.

IV. Conclusion

    Based on its evaluation of the 20 renewal exemption applications,
FMCSA announces its decision to exempt the following drivers from the
epilepsy and seizure disorders prohibition in 49 CFR 391.41(b)(8). In
accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and 31315, the following groups of
drivers received renewed exemptions in the month of April and are
discussed below:
    As of April 8, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315, the following four individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the epilepsy and seizure
disorders prohibition in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (83 FR
40625):

Jeffrey F. Ballweg (WI)
Harold J. Durkee (WI)
Michael C. Ranalli (PA)
Lonnie M. Rieker (IL)

    The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2011-0389; FMCSA-
2012-0294; FMCSA-2013-0109; FMCSA-2014-0380. Their exemptions are
applicable as of April 8, 2018, and will expire on April 8, 2020.
    As of April 11, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315, the following 12 individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the epilepsy and seizure
disorders prohibition in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (83 FR
40625):

Robert P. Brackett (ME)
Kelly L. Frederick (LA)
Scott W. Gessner (PA)
Jerry L. Henderson (IN)
Preston R. Kanagy (TN)
Scott A. Lowe (MA)
Steven D. Shirley (UT)
Matthew J. Staley (CO)
Mohammad S. Warrad (IA)
Richard J. Wenner (MN)
John C. Wolfe (PA)
Dennis R. Zayic (MN)

    The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2015-0321. Their
exemptions are applicable as of April 11, 2018, and will expire on
April 11, 2020.
    As of April 23, 2018, and in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31136(e) and
31315, the following four individuals have satisfied the renewal
conditions for obtaining an exemption from the epilepsy and seizure
disorders prohibition in the FMCSRs for interstate CMV drivers (83 FR
40625):

Raymond Lobo (NJ)
Randy L. Pinto (PA)
James M. Spece (PA)
Joseph A. Thomas (MD)

    The drivers were included in docket number FMCSA-2013-0442. Their
exemptions are applicable as of April 23, 2018, and will expire on
April 23, 2020.
    In accordance with 49 U.S.C. 31315, each exemption will be valid
for two years from the effective date unless revoked earlier by FMCSA.
The exemption will be revoked if the following occurs: (1) The person
fails to comply with the terms and conditions of the exemption; (2) the
exemption has resulted in a lower level of safety than was maintained
prior to being granted; or (3) continuation of the exemption would not
be consistent with the goals and objectives of 49 U.S.C. 31136 and
31315.

     Issued on: November 9, 2018.
Larry W. Minor,
Associate Administrator for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2018-25280 Filed 11-19-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4910-EX-P


controls, regionally, for EGUs and non-EGUs would take up to 48 months,
and possibly more in some cases, following promulgation of a final rule
requiring appropriate emissions reductions. This period of time
reflects, among other considerations, the time needed to regionally
develop new post-combustion SCR projects--systems that continue to
represent the engineering gold-standard in terms of reducing
NOX from the U.S. power sector.
    To determine how this feasibility assessment should influence
potential compliance timeframes, the EPA believes it is appropriate to
consider the anticipated date of promulgation of a rule that would set
any appropriate emissions reduction requirements, since regulated
entities cannot be expected or required to take action to comply with a
rule prior to its promulgation. The EPA, therefore, considered the
timeframe in which a future rulemaking that might require such
emissions reductions would likely be finalized.
    The EPA is subject to several statutory and court-ordered deadlines
to issue FIPs (or, alternatively, to fully approve a SIP) to address
the requirements of the good neighbor provision for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS for several states. An August 12, 2017 statutory deadline has
passed for the EPA to act with respect to 13 states.\80\ The EPA also
has several upcoming statutory deadlines in 2018 and 2019 to address
these requirements for eight other CSAPR Update states.\81\ The
timeframe for the EPA's action to resolve the obligation as to five of
those states is the subject of litigation in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York. The EPA is subject to
court-ordered deadlines to sign and disseminate a proposed action fully
addressing the good neighbor obligations under the 2008 ozone NAAQS for
those five states by no later than June 29, 2018, and to promulgate a
final action addressing these requirements by December 6, 2018.\82\ As
noted earlier, the EPA is also subject to a court-ordered deadline of
June 30, 2018, for the EPA to address these requirements for
Kentucky,\83\ which the EPA intends to address in a separate
rulemaking. Considering the EPA's conclusion that four years is an
expeditious timeframe for implementation of any of the control
strategies considered herein, compliance is likely not feasible until
the 2023 ozone season. In other words, 48 months from a final rule
promulgated in December 2018 would be December 2022, after which the
next ozone season begins in May 2023. Considering the time necessary to
implement the controls calculated from a realistic timeframe in which
EPA expects to promulgate a final rule requiring such controls, the EPA
believes that such reductions on a variety of sources across the region
are unlikely to be implemented for a full ozone season until 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \80\ 80 FR 39961 (finding that states failed to make complete
submissions that address the requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) related to the interstate transport of pollution
as to the 2008 ozone NAAQS).
    \81\ The EPA has deadlines to promulgate FIPs for Indiana (81 FR
38957), Ohio (81 FR 38957) and New Jersey (81 FR 38963) by July 15,
2018; for Maryland (81 FR 47040) by August 19, 2018; for Louisiana
(81 FR 53308), Texas (81 FR 53284) and Wisconsin (81 FR 53309) by
September 12, 2018; and for New York (81 FR 58849) by September 26,
2018.
    \82\ Order, New York v. Pruitt, No. 1:18-cv-00406-JGK (S.D.N.Y.
June 12, 2018).
    \83\ Order, Sierra Club v. Pruitt, No. 3:15-cv-04328 (N.D. Cal.
May 23, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Finally, consistent with the court's holding in North Carolina, the
Agency considers this timing in light of upcoming attainment dates for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS. While 2023 is later than the next attainment date
for nonattainment areas classified as Serious (i.e., July 20, 2021),
for the reasons discussed above the EPA does not believe it is
realistically possible that substantial emissions control requirements
could be promulgated and implemented by that Serious area attainment
date. Rather, the most expeditious timeframe in which additional
control strategies could be implemented at both EGUs and non-EGUs is
four years after promulgation of a final rule requiring appropriate
emissions reductions. At the same time, the EPA does not believe that
it should generally take longer than 2023 to install emissions controls
on a regional basis, based on the analysis above. Therefore, there is
no basis to postpone all emissions reductions to the next attainment
date after 2023, which is for nonattainment areas classified as Severe
(i.e., July 20, 2027). Accordingly, the EPA believes implementation of
additional emissions reductions by 2023 is the earliest feasible
timeframe that could be reasonably required of EGU and non-EGU sources
that would be potentially subject to control requirements. Although
this year does not precisely align with a particular attainment date,
it reflects the year that is as expeditious as practicable for region-
wide implementation, while also taking into account the relevant
attainment dates.
    Given the current stage of the 2008 ozone implementation cycle, the
EPA's feasibility analysis set forth above, the relevant attainment
dates, and the courts' holdings in North Carolina and EME Homer City
II, the EPA believes that 2023 is the most appropriate year for all
states covered in this action, to assess downwind air quality and to
evaluate any remaining requirements under the good neighbor provision
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The EPA is requesting comment on the use of
2023 as a reasonable year for this assessment.

C. Air Quality Analysis

    In this section, the Agency describes the air quality modeling
performed consistent with step 1 of the framework described in section
III.A, to identify locations where it expects nonattainment or
maintenance problems with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS in the 2023
analytic year. This section includes information on the air quality
modeling platform used in support of the proposed determination with a
focus on the base year and future base case emissions inventories. The
May 2018

Air Quality Modeling Technical Support Document (AQM TSD) in the docket
for this rule contains more detailed information on the air quality
modeling for 2023 used to support this rulemaking.
    The EPA provided an opportunity to comment on the air quality
modeling platform and air quality modeling results that are used in
this proposed determination when it published a Notice of Data
Availability (82 FR 1733) on January 6, 2017, which provided the
preliminary modeling results for the 2023 analytic year. Specifically,
in the NODA the EPA requested comment on the data and methodologies
related to the 2011 and 2023 emissions and the air quality modeling to
project 2023 ozone concentrations and ozone contributions. While the
EPA issued this NODA to provide information to states for the 70 ppb
2015 ozone NAAQS, the modeling approaches and future year projection
methods were also applicable for the 75 ppb 2008 ozone NAAQS. In fact,
commenters explicitly commented on these methods with respect to the
2008 ozone NAAQS. The EPA considered comments received on the NODA in
the development of air quality modeling analysis used in this proposed
determination.
    The modeling results presented here were originally released to the
public with an accompanying memorandum on October 27, 2017.\84\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \84\ Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Director, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, to Regional Air Division Directors,
Regions 1-10, Supplemental Information on the Interstate Transport
State Implementation Plan Submissions for the 2008 Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standards under Clean Air Act Section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) (Oct. 27, 2017), available at https://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/october-2017-memo-and-supplemental-information-interstate-transport-sips-2008-ozone-naaqs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Definition of Nonattainment and Maintenance Receptors
    In this action, the EPA is continuing to apply the CSAPR Update
approach to identifying nonattainment and maintenance receptors for the
2008 ozone NAAQS in the 2023 analytic year. The EPA here describes the
analytical approach pursued in the CSAPR and CSAPR update with regard
to the good neighbor requirement for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. For
consistency's sake, the analysis and discussion underlying and
presented in this proposal adheres to that analytical approach.
However, as noted previously, EPA has identified a number of potential
flexibilities in identifying downwind air quality problems for states
developing good neighbor SIPs for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.\85\ However,
the EPA finds that it is reasonable to use the same methodology that
was used to identify upwind states' good neighbor obligations under the
CSAPR Update because this rule addresses interstate transport with
respect to the same NAAQS and the same states as the ones at issue in
that action.\86\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \85\ See supra note 43. These potential flexibilities include:
evaluation of alternative methodologies to give independent meaning
to the term ``interfere with maintenance under CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I); identification of maintenance receptors at risk
of exceeding the NAAQS using an approach that does not rely on the
projection of maximum design values; assessment of current and
projected emissions reductions and whether downwind areas have
considered and/or utilized available mechanisms for regulatory
relief; and consideration of model performance.
    \86\ 81 FR 74533.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    To give independent effect to both the ``contribute significantly
to nonattainment'' and the ``interfere with maintenance'' prongs of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, consistent with
the D.C. Circuit's opinion in North Carolina, the EPA separately
identified downwind areas expected to be in nonattainment of the 2008
ozone NAAQS and downwind areas expected to have problems maintaining
the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
    Specifically, the EPA has identified as nonattainment receptors
those monitors that both currently measure nonattainment based on
measured 2014-2016 design values \87\ and that the EPA projects will be
in nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in 2023 (i.e., are projected
to have average design values that exceed the NAAQS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \87\ The ozone design value at a particular monitoring site is
the 3-year average of the annual 4th highest daily maximum 8-hour
ozone concentration at that site. See 40 CFR part 50, Appendix P.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA has identified maintenance receptors as those receptors
that would have difficulty maintaining the relevant NAAQS in a scenario
that accounts for historical variability in air quality at that
receptor. The variability in air quality was determined by evaluating
the ``maximum'' future design value at each receptor based on a
projection of the maximum measured design value over the relevant base-
year period. The EPA interprets the projected maximum future design
value to be a potential future air quality outcome consistent with the
meteorology that yielded maximum measured concentrations in the ambient
data set analyzed for that receptor. The EPA also recognizes that
previously experienced meteorological conditions (e.g., dominant wind
direction, temperatures, air mass patterns) promoting ozone formation
that led to maximum concentrations in the measured data may reoccur in
the future. Therefore, the maximum design value gives a reasonable
projection of future air quality at the receptor under a scenario in
which such conditions do, in fact, reoccur. The projected maximum
design value is used to identify downwind areas where emissions from
upwind states could therefore interfere with the area's ability to
maintain the NAAQS. For this proposal, the EPA assesses the magnitude
of the maximum projected design value for 2023 at each receptor in
relation to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Where that value exceeds the NAAQS,
the EPA determines that receptor to be a ``maintenance'' receptor for
purposes of defining interference with maintenance, consistent with the
method used in CSAPR and upheld by the D.C. Circuit in EME Homer City
II.\88\ That is, monitoring sites with a maximum projected design value
that exceeds the NAAQS in 2023 are considered to have a maintenance
problem in 2023.\89\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \88\ See 795 F.3d at 136.
    \89\ All nonattainment receptors also, by definition, meet EPA's
criteria for identifying maintenance receptors--i.e., in addition to
currently measuring nonattainment and having projected average
design values that exceed the NAAQS, the receptors also would have
difficulty maintaining the NAAQS accounting for variability in air
quality at the receptor. The EPA refers to maintenance receptors
that are not also nonattainment receptors as ``maintenance-only''
receptors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Maintenance-only receptors therefore include those sites where the
projected maximum design value exceeds the NAAQS, but the projected
average design value is at or below the NAAQS. In addition, those sites
that are currently measuring clean data (i.e., are at or below the 2008
ozone NAAQS), but are projected to be in nonattainment based on the
average design value (and that, by definition, are projected to have a
maximum design value above the standard) are also identified as
maintenance-only receptors. Unlike nonattainment receptors, the EPA did
not consider current clean monitored data to disqualify a receptor from
being identified as a maintenance receptor in order to account for the
possibility that certain areas would fail to maintain the NAAQS in the
future, even though they may be currently attaining the NAAQS. North
Carolina, 531 F.3d at 910-11 (finding that failure to give independent
significance to the maintenance prong ``provides no protection for
downwind areas that, despite EPA's predictions, still find themselves
struggling to meet NAAQS due to upwind interference'').
    For further details regarding the EPA's identification of receptors
in the CSAPR Update, see 81 FR 74526.

2. Overview of Air Quality Modeling Platform
    The EPA performed nationwide photochemical modeling for 2023 to
identify nonattainment and maintenance receptors relevant for the 2008
ozone NAAQS. For this proposed rule, the EPA performed air quality
modeling for two emissions scenarios: (1) a 2011 base year; and (2) the
2023 analytic year (i.e., a business-as-usual scenario in 2023: One
without any additional interstate ozone transport requirements beyond
those imposed by the CSAPR Update).
    The 2011 base year has previously been used to support the CSAPR
Update proposal and final rule. The EPA chose to continue using 2011 as
the base year because when EPA's analyses commenced, 2011 was the most
recent emissions modeling platform available that included future year
projected inventories, as are needed for transport analyses. Using 2011
as a base year also remains appropriate from the standpoint of good
modeling practice. The meteorological conditions during the summer of
2011 were generally conducive for ozone formation across much of the
U.S., particularly the eastern U.S. As described in the AQM TSD, the
EPA's guidance for ozone attainment demonstration modeling, hereafter
referred to as the modeling guidance, recommends modeling a time period
with meteorology conducive to ozone formation for purposes of
projecting future year design values.\90\ The EPA therefore believes
that meteorological conditions and emissions during the summer of 2011
provide an appropriate basis for projecting 2023 ozone concentrations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \90\ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2014. Modeling
Guidance for Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals for
Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional Haze, Research Triangle Park,
NC, available at http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/guidance/guide/Draft_O3-PM-RH_Modeling_Guidance-2014.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For this proposal, the EPA used the Comprehensive Air Quality Model
with Extensions (CAMx) version 6.40 \91\ to simulate pollutant
concentrations for the 2011 base year and the 2023 future year
scenarios. This version of CAMx was the most recent publicly available
version of this model at the time that the EPA performed air quality
modeling for this proposed rule. CAMx is a grid cell-based, multi-
pollutant photochemical model that simulates the formation and fate of
ozone and fine particles in the atmosphere. The CAMx model applications
were performed for a modeling region (i.e., modeling domain) that
covers the contiguous 48 United States, the District of Columbia, and
adjacent portions of Canada and Mexico using grid cells with a
horizontal resolution of 12 km x 12 km. A map of the air quality
modeling domain is provided in the AQM TSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \91\ CAMx v6.40 was the most recent public release version of
CAMx at the time the EPA updated its modeling in fall 2017.
Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions version 6.40 User's
Guide. Ramboll Environ, December 2016, available at http://www.camx.com/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 2011-based air quality modeling platform includes 2011 base
year emissions, 2023 future year projections of these emissions, and
2011 meteorology for air quality modeling with CAMx. In the remainder
of this section, the EPA provides an overview of the 2011 and 2023
emissions inventories and the methods for identifying nonattainment and
maintenance receptors along with a list of 2023 baseline nonattainment
and maintenance receptors in the U.S.
    To ensure the reliability of its modeling results, the EPA
conducted an operational model performance evaluation of the 2011
modeling platform by comparing the 8-hour daily maximum ozone
concentrations predicted during the May through September ozone season
to the corresponding measured concentrations in 2011. This evaluation
generally followed the approach described in the modeling guidance.
Details of the model performance evaluation are described in the AQM
TSD. The model performance results indicate that the 8-hour daily
maximum ozone concentrations predicted by the 2011 CAMx modeling
platform generally reflect the corresponding magnitude of observed 8-
hour ozone concentrations on high ozone days in the 12-km U.S. modeling
domain. These results provide confidence in the ability of the modeling
platform to provide a reasonable projection of expected future year
ozone concentrations and contributions.
3. Emissions Inventories
    The EPA developed emissions inventories for this rule, including
emissions estimates for EGUs, non-EGU point sources, stationary
nonpoint sources, onroad mobile sources, nonroad mobile sources,
wildfires, prescribed fires, and biogenic emissions. The EPA's air
quality modeling relies on this comprehensive set of emissions
inventories because emissions from multiple source categories are
needed to model ambient air quality and to facilitate comparison of
model outputs with ambient measurements.
    To prepare the emissions inventories for air quality modeling, the
EPA processed the emissions inventories using the Sparse Matrix
Operator Kernel Emissions (SMOKE) Modeling System version 3.7 to
produce the gridded, hourly, speciated, model-ready emissions for input
to the CAMx air quality model. Additional information on the
development of the emissions inventories and on datasets used during
the emissions modeling process for this proposed rule is provided in
the October 2017 Technical Support Document ``Additional Updates to
Emissions Inventories for the Version 6.3, 2011 Emissions Modeling
Platform for the Year 2023'' (Proposed Rule Emissions Modeling
TSD).\92\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \92\ This TSD is also available in the docket for this proposed
rule and at https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-modeling/additional-updates-2011-and-2023-emissions-version-63-platform-technical.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The emissions inventories, methodologies, and data used for the air
quality modeling for this proposed rule incorporate public comments
received on the January 2017 NODA. The updates resulting from comments
received on this NODA are documented in the Proposed Rule Emissions
Modeling TSD. The emissions inventories for this proposed rule were the
result of several iterations of comments on the data and methods used
in the 2011 emissions modeling platform. The initial modeling platform
based on the 2011 National Emissions Inventory (NEI) was released for
public comment in November 2013 through a NODA (78 FR 70935). Future
year inventories for 2018 were released shortly thereafter through a
separate NODA in January 2014 (79 FR 2437). Updated inventories for
2011 and the year 2017 were released for public comment in August 2015
through a notice prior to the proposed CSAPR Update. 80 FR 46271. The
comments were incorporated into inventories used for the proposal
modeling in this action. During 2016, the comments received on the
proposal inventories were incorporated into the final CSAPR Update
inventories for years 2011 and 2017. 81 FR 74527. In late 2016,
inventories for the year 2023 were developed using methods similar to
those of the CSAPR Update, and the resulting inventories were released
in the January 2017 NODA described above.\93\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \93\ Technical support documents are available for each
iteration of the inventories on EPA's emissions modeling website:
https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-modeling/2011-version-6-air-emissions-modeling-platforms.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA emissions data representing the year 2011 supports air
quality modeling of a base year from which future air quality could be
forecasted. The 2011 emissions inventories used in

the air quality modeling were based on the inventories released with
the January 2017 NODA with updates incorporated as a result of comments
on the NODA and as a result of improved data and methods that became
available after the NODA modeling was completed. The future base case
scenario modeled for 2023 includes a representation of changes in
activity data and of predicted emissions reductions from on-the-books
actions, including planned emissions control installations and
promulgated federal measures that affect anthropogenic emissions.\94\
The emissions inventories for air quality modeling include sources that
are held constant between the base and future years, such as biogenic
emissions and emissions from agricultural, wild and prescribed
fires.\95\ The emissions inventories used for Canada were received from
Environment and Climate Change Canada in April 2017 and were provided
for the years 2013 and 2025. This was the first time that future year
projected inventories for Canada were provided directly by Environment
and Climate Change Canada and the new inventories are thought to be an
improvement over inventories projected by EPA. The EPA used the
Canadian emissions inventories without adjusting the emissions to the
represented year because the EPA lacks specific knowledge regarding
Canadian emissions trends and because the interval of years (i.e., 12)
was the same as that used for the U.S. modeling which relied on 2011 to
2023 interval. For Mexico, inventory data was based on a 2023 run of
MOVES-Mexico. For area, nonroad, and point source emissions in Mexico,
EPA used the Inventario Nacional de Emisiones de Mexico using 2018 and
2025 data projections to interpolate 2023 estimates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \94\ Biogenic emissions and emissions from wildfires and
prescribed fires were held constant between 2011 and 2023 since: (1)
These emissions are tied to the 2011 meteorological conditions; and
(2) the focus of this rule is on the contribution from anthropogenic
emissions to projected ozone nonattainment and maintenance.
    \95\ As recommended in the modeling guidance, the acceptability
of model performance was judged by considering the 2011 CAMx
performance results in light of the range of performance found in
recent regional ozone model applications. These other modeling
studies represent a wide range of modeling analyses that cover
various models, model configurations, domains, years and/or
episodes, and chemical mechanisms. Overall, the ozone model
performance results for the 2011 CAMx simulations are within the
range found in other recent peer-reviewed and regulatory
applications. The model performance results, as described in the AQM
TSD, demonstrate that the predictions from the 2011 modeling
platform correspond to measured data in terms of the magnitude,
temporal fluctuations, and spatial differences for 8-hour daily
maximum ozone.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The modeled annual NOX and SO2 emissions for
EGUs for the year 2011 are based primarily on data from continuous
emissions monitoring systems (CEMS), with other EGU pollutants
estimated using emissions factors and annual heat input data reported
to the EPA. For EGUs without CEMS, the EPA used data submitted to the
NEI by the states. The modeled 2011 inventories include some updates to
2011 EGU stack parameters and emissions made in response to comments on
the January 2017 NODA. For more information on the details of how the
2011 EGU emissions were developed and prepared for air quality
modeling, see the Proposed Rule Emissions Modeling TSD.
    As summarized in the October memo, and described in detail in the
Proposed Rule Emissions Modeling TSD, the EPA projected future 2023
baseline EGU emissions using an approach that is consistent with the
EGU projections that the EPA used in the CSAPR Update, specifically
using the EGU projection methodology used to develop the ``budget-
setting base case.'' 81 FR 74543.\96\ The EGU projection begins with
2016 reported SO2 and NOX data for units
reporting under the Acid Rain and CSAPR programs under 40 CFR part 75.
These were the most recent ozone season data available at the time of
the EPA's analysis. The EPA first held these observed emissions levels
constant for its 2023 estimates, but then made some unit-specific
adjustments to emissions to account for upcoming retirements, post-
combustion control retrofits, coal-to-gas conversions, combustion
controls upgrades, new units, CSAPR Update compliance, state rules, and
Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) requirements under the
regional haze program of the CAA.\97\ The resulting estimated EGU
emissions values are therefore based on the latest reported operational
data combined with known and anticipated fleet and pollution controls
changes. For emissions from EGUs not reporting under 40 CFR part 75,
the EPA largely relied on unadjusted 2011 NEI data for its 2023
assumptions.\98\ Additional details are provided in the Proposed Rule
Emissions Modeling TSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \96\ Also see the Ozone Transport Policy Analysis Final Rule
Technical Support Document. EPA. August 2016. Available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-05/documents/ozone_transport_policy_analysis_final_rule_tsd.pdf.
    \97\ The EPA uses the U.S. EIA Form 860 as a source for upcoming
controls, retirements, and new units.
    \98\ Available at https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-modeling/2011-version-63-platform.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 2011 non-EGU point source emissions in the 2011 base case
inventory generally match those in the 2011 NEI version 2.\99\ Prior to
air quality modeling, the emissions inventories must be processed into
a format that is appropriate for the air quality model to use. Details
on the development and processing of the emissions for 2011 and on the
development of the 2023 non-EGU emissions inventories are available in
the Proposed Rule Emissions Modeling TSD. Projection factors and
percent reductions used in this proposal to estimate 2023 emissions
inventories reflect comments received through the January 2017 NODA,
along with emissions reductions due to national and local rules,
control programs, plant closures, consent decrees and settlements. The
Proposed Rule Emissions Modeling TSD contains details on the factors
used and on their respective impacts on the emissions inventories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \99\ For more information on the 2011 National Emissions
Inventory version 2, see https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/2011-national-emissions-inventory-nei-technical-support-document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A recent and important methodological update to the emissions
inventory implemented after the release of the January 2017 NODA is a
revised methodology for estimating point and nonpoint 2023 emissions
from the oil and gas sector. The projection factors used in the updated
2023 oil and gas emissions inventory incorporate state-level factors
based on historical growth from 2011-2015 and region-specific factors
that represent projected growth from 2015 to 2023. The 2011-2015 state-
level factors were based on historical state oil and gas production
data published by the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Information
Administration (EIA), while the 2015-2023 factors are based on
projected oil and gas production in EIA's 2017 Annual Energy Outlook
(AEO) Reference Case without the Clean Power Plan for the six EIA
supply regions. The 2017 AEO was the latest available at the time the
modeling was performed. Details on the revised methodology that the EPA
used to project oil and gas emissions to 2023, as well as changes to
the base year 2011 and future year 2023 emissions inventories for other
sectors, can be found in the Proposed Rule Emissions Modeling TSD.
    The EPA developed the onroad mobile source emissions using the
EPA's Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator, version 2014a (MOVES2014a).
The agency computed

these emissions within SMOKE by multiplying the MOVES-based emissions
factors with the activity data appropriate to each year of modeling.
MOVES2014a reflects projected changes to fuel usage and onroad mobile
control programs finalized as of March 2014. Impacts of rules that were
in effect in 2011 are reflected in the 2011 base year emissions at a
level that corresponds to the extent to which each rule had penetrated
the fleet and fuel supply by that year. Local control programs such as
the California Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) III program, also implemented
in states other than California, are included in the onroad mobile
source emissions. Activity data for onroad mobile sources, such as the
vehicle miles traveled in 2023, were projected for future year using
trends identified in AEO 2016.
    The commercial marine category 3 vessel (``C3 marine'') emissions
in the 2011 base case emissions inventory for this rule are equivalent
to those in the 2011NEIv2 with the inclusion of updated emissions for
California. These emissions reflect reductions associated with the
Emissions Control Area proposal to the International Maritime
Organization control strategy (EPA-420-F-10-041, August 2010);
reductions of NOX, VOC, and CO emissions for new C3 engines
that went into effect in 2011; and fuel sulfur limits that went into
effect as early as 2010. The cumulative impacts of these rules through
2023 are incorporated in the 2023 projected emissions for C3 marine
sources. An update made for this modeling was to treat the larger C3
marine sources with plume rise in the modeling, thereby putting the
emissions into model layers higher than ground-level. This was done
because the ships have stacks that release emissions higher than the
20-meter threshold for the ground-level layer in the air quality model.
The height at which the emissions are inserted into the model impacts
how the emissions are transported within the model. The emissions from
the smaller category 1 (C1) and category 2 (C2) vessels are still
released into the ground-level layer of the model.
    To develop the nonroad mobile source emissions inventories other
than C3 marine for the modeling platform, the EPA used monthly, county,
and process level emissions output from the National Mobile Inventory
Model (NMIM) (http://www.epa.gov/otaq/nmim.htm). The nonroad mobile
emissions control programs include reductions to locomotives, diesel
engines, and marine engines, along with standards for fuel sulfur
content and evaporative emissions. A comprehensive list of control
programs included for mobile sources is available in the Proposed Rule
Emissions Modeling TSD.
    The emissions for stationary nonpoint sources in the 2011 base case
emissions inventory are largely consistent with those in the 2011NEIv2.
2023 estimates were projected using a variety of factors, including AEO
2017 projections for 2023 and state projection factors using EIA data
from 2011-2015. For more information on the nonpoint sources in the
2011 base case inventory, see the Proposed Rule Emissions Modeling TSD
and the 2011NEIv2 TSD. Based on comments from the January 2017 NODA,
where states provided the EPA with information about projected control
measures or changes in nonpoint source emissions, the EPA incorporated
that information into its projections. These changes were limited and
are discussed in the Proposed Rule Emissions Modeling TSD.
4. Air Quality Modeling To Identify Nonattainment and Maintenance
Receptors
    The following summarizes the procedures for projecting future-year
8-hour ozone average and maximum design values to 2023 to determine
nonattainment and maintenance receptors. Consistent with the EPA's
modeling guidance, the agency uses the air quality modeling results in
a ``relative'' sense to project future concentrations. That is, the
ratios of future year model predictions to base year model predictions
are used to adjust ambient ozone design values up or down depending on
the relative (percent) change in model predictions for each location.
The modeling guidance recommends using measured ozone concentrations
for the 5-year period centered on the base year as the air quality data
starting point for future year projections. This average design value
is used to dampen the effects of inter-annual variability in
meteorology on ozone concentrations and to provide a reasonable
projection of future air quality at the receptor under ``average''
conditions. Because the base year for this rule is 2011, the EPA is
using the base period 2009-2013 ambient ozone design value data to
project 2023 average design values in a manner consistent with the
modeling guidance.
    The approach for projecting future ozone design values involved the
projection of an average of up to three design value periods, which
include the years 2009-2013 (design values for 2009-2011, 2010-2012,
and 2011-2013). The 2009-2011, 2010-2012, and 2011-2013 design values
are accessible at www.epa.gov/airtrends/values.html. The average of the
three design values creates a ``5-year weighted average'' value. The 5-
year weighted average values were then projected to 2023. To project 8-
hour ozone design values, the agency used the 2011 base year and 2023
future base-case model-predicted ozone concentrations to calculate
relative response factors (RRFs) for the location of each monitoring
site. The RRFs were then applied to actual monitored data, i.e., the
2009-2013 average ozone design values (to generate the projected
average design values) and the individual design values for 2009-2011,
2010-2012, and 2011-2013 (to generate potential maximum design values).
Details of this approach are provided in the Proposed Rule AQM TSD.
    The EPA considers projected design values that are greater than or
equal to 76.0 ppb to be violating the 2008 ozone NAAQS in 2023. As
noted previously, nonattainment receptors are those sites that have
projected average design values greater than the 2008 ozone NAAQS and
are also violating the NAAQS based on the most recent measured air
quality data. Therefore, as an additional step, for those sites that
are projected to be violating the NAAQS based on the average design
values in 2023, the EPA examined the most recent measured design value
data to determine if the site was currently violating the NAAQS. For
this proposal, the agency examined ambient data for the 2014-2016
period, which are the most recent available, certified measured design
values at the time of this rule.
    As discussed above, maintenance-only receptors include both: (1)
Those sites with projected average and maximum design values above the
NAAQS that are currently measuring clean data; and (2) those sites with
projected average design values below the level of the NAAQS, but with
projected maximum design values of 76.0 ppb or greater.
    In projecting these future year design values, the EPA applied its
own modeling guidance,\100\ which recommends using model predictions
from the ``3 x 3'' array of grid cells surrounding the location of the
monitoring site to calculate the relative response factors and identify
future areas of nonattainment. In addition, in

light of comments on the January 2017 NODA and other analyses, the EPA
also projected 2023 design values based on a modified version of this
approach for those monitoring sites located in coastal areas. In brief,
in the alternative approach, the EPA eliminated from the design value
calculations those modeling data in grid cells not containing a
monitoring site that are dominated by water (i.e., more than 50 percent
of the land use in the grid cell is water).\101\ For each individual
monitoring site, the EPA is providing the base period 2009-2013 average
and maximum design values, 2023 projected average and maximum design
values based on both the ``3 x 3'' approach and the alternative
approach affecting coastal sites, and 2014-2016 measured design values.
As discussed further below, under both the 3 x 3 approach and the
alternative approach all monitoring sites in the Eastern U.S. are
modeled to be clean for the 2008 ozone NAAQS in 2023. Thus, according
to the EPA's findings, there will be no remaining nonattainment or
maintenance receptors in the eastern U.S. in 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \100\ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2014. Modeling
Guidance for Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals for
Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional Haze. http://www.epa.gov/ttn/scram/guidance/guide/Draft_O3-PM-RH_Modeling_Guidance-2014.pdf.
    \101\ A model grid cell is identified as a ``water'' cell if
more than 50 percent of the grid cell is water based on the 2006
National Land Cover Database. Grid cells that meet this criterion
are treated as entirely over water in the Weather Research Forecast
(WRF) modeling used to develop the 2011 meteorology for EPA's air
quality modeling.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Tables III.C-1 and III.C-2 contain the ambient 2009-2013 base
period average and maximum 8-hour ozone design values, the 2023
projected baseline average and maximum design values, and the ambient
2014-2016 design values for the air quality monitors that were
identified in the CSAPR Update as having remaining problems attaining
or maintaining the 2008 ozone NAAQS in 2017, even with CSAPR Update
implementation. Table III.C-1 contains data for the monitors identified
as remaining nonattainment receptors in 2017 in the CSAPR Update and
Table III.C-2 contains data for the monitors identified as remaining
maintenance-only receptors in 2017 in the CSAPR Update.\102\ The design
values for all monitoring sites in the contiguous U.S. are provided in
the docket. According to the EPA's findings, there are no remaining
nonattainment or maintenance receptors in the eastern U.S. in 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \102\ The EPA recognizes that the modeling results indicate a
substantial projected improvement in ozone air quality (compared to
current measured ozone levels) at several locations, including three
monitors in Connecticut located near the sea--i.e., on the order of
10-12 ppb.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA solicits public comment on the reliability of the modeling
data, including any information which may support or not support these
results.\103\ \104\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \103\ From 40 CFR 50.15(b): ``The 8-hour primary and secondary
ambient air quality standards are met at an ambient air quality
monitoring site when the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest
daily maximum 8-hour average O3 concentration is less
than or equal to 0.075 ppm, as determined in accordance with
appendix P to this part.''
    \104\ From section 2.2 of appendix P to 40 CFR part 50: ``The
computed 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum
8-hour average O3 concentrations shall be reported to
three decimal places (the digits to the right of the third decimal
place are truncated, consistent with the data handling procedures
for the reported data).''

 Table III.C-1--Base Period, Current (2014-2016), and 2023 Projected Design Values (ppb) for Monitors Identified as Remaining Nonattainment Receptors in
                                                            2017 in the CSAPR Update 103 104
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                2023en     2023en
                                                                             2009-2013  2009-2013               2023en     2023en      ``No       ``No
           Monitor ID                     State                County            Avg        Max    2014-2016  ``3 x 3''  ``3 x 3''   Water''    Water''
                                                                                Avg        Max       Avg        Max
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
090019003.......................  Connecticut.........  Fairfield..........       83.7         87         85       72.7       75.6       73.0       75.9
090099002.......................  Connecticut.........  New Haven..........       85.7         89         76       71.2       73.9       69.9       72.6
480391004.......................  Texas...............  Brazoria...........       88.0         89         75       74.0       74.9       74.0       74.9
484392003.......................  Texas...............  Tarrant............       87.3         90         73       72.5       74.8       72.5       74.8
484393009.......................  Texas...............  Tarrant............       86.0         86         75       70.6       70.6       70.6       70.6
551170006.......................  Wisconsin...........  Sheboygan..........       84.3         87         79       70.8       73.1       72.8       75.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 Table III.C-2--Base Period, Current (2014-2016), and 2023 Projected Design Values (ppb) for Monitors Identified as Remaining Maintenance-Only Receptors
                                                               in 2017 in the CSAPR Update
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                2023en     2023en
                                                                             2009-2013  2009-2013               2023en     2023en      ``No       ``No
           Monitor ID                     State                County            Avg        Max    2014-2016  ``3 x 3''  ``3 x 3''   Water''    Water''
                                                                                Avg        Max       Avg        Max
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
090010017.......................  Connecticut.........  Fairfield..........       80.3         83         80       69.8       72.1       68.9       71.2
090013007.......................  Connecticut.........  Fairfield..........       84.3         89         81       71.2       75.2       71.0       75.0
240251001.......................  Maryland............  Harford............       90.0         93         73       71.4       73.8       70.9       73.3
260050003.......................  Michigan............  Allegan............       82.7         86         75       69.0       71.8       69.0       71.7
360850067.......................  New York............  Richmond...........       81.3         83         76       71.9       73.4       67.1       68.5
361030002.......................  New York............  Suffolk............       83.3         85         72       72.5       74.0       74.0       75.5
481210034.......................  Texas...............  Denton.............       84.3         87         80       69.7       72.0       69.7       72.0
482010024.......................  Texas...............  Harris.............       80.3         83         79       70.4       72.8       70.4       72.8
482011034.......................  Texas...............  Harris.............       81.0         82         73       70.8       71.6       70.8       71.6
482011039.......................  Texas...............  Harris.............       82.0         84         67       71.8       73.6       71.8       73.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Pollutant Transport From Upwind States
    Although the EPA has conducted nationwide contribution modeling for
2023, the EPA does not believe this information is necessary for
evaluating remaining good neighbor obligations for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
downwind because there are no ozone monitoring sites in the Eastern
U.S. that are expected to have problems attaining or maintaining the
2008 ozone NAAQS in 2023. Nonetheless, the results of EPA's state-by-
state ozone contribution modeling were released in a memorandum on
March 27, 2018 and are also available in the docket for this

action.\105\ The EPA notes that, while the air quality modeling did
identify potential remaining problem receptors in California in 2023,
none of EPA's prior analysis nor its current contribution modeling have
linked any of the CSAPR Update states in the eastern U.S. to any of
those potential remaining problem receptors. Therefore, the EPA does
not believe there is a need to further evaluate the contributions of
the 20 CSAPR Update states to any downwind receptors identified in
EPA's 2017 modeling conducted for the CSAPR Update.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \105\ Information on the Interstate Transport State
Implementation Plan Submissions for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards under Clean Air Act Section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). EPA Memorandum to Regional Air Division
Directors. March 27, 2018. Available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-03/documents/transport_memo_03_27_18_1.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

D. Proposed Determination

    The EPA proposes to determine that, with CSAPR Update
implementation, 20 eastern states' good neighbor obligations for the
2008 ozone NAAQS are fully addressed.\106\ The states covered by this
action are listed in table III.D-1. The EPA's proposed determination is
based on proposed findings that: (1) 2023 is a reasonable future
analytic year for evaluating ozone transport problems with respect to
the 2008 ozone NAAQS; and (2) that interstate ozone transport air
quality modeling projections for 2023 indicate that no further air
quality problems will remain in the east in 2023.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \106\ See Table III.D-1 for a list of states covered by this
proposal. EPA has also already separately proposed to approve
Kentucky's draft SIP submittal demonstrating that the CSAPR Update
is a full remedy for Kentucky's good neighbor obligation for the
2008 ozone NAAQS. 83 FR 17123 (Apr. 18, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As a result, the EPA proposes to conclude that, after
implementation of the CSAPR Update, none of the states analyzed will
significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance
of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in downwind states, and therefore that the
CSAPR update fully addresses those states' good neighbor obligations
with respect to that NAAQS. In accord with this determination, the EPA
has no remaining obligation issue FIPs nor are states required to
submit SIPs that would establish additional requirements for sources in
these states to further reduce transported ozone pollution with regard
to the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
    As explained in more detail in section III.B, the EPA's selection
of 2023 as a reasonable future analytic year is supported by an
assessment of attainment dates for the 2008 ozone NAAQS and feasibility
for control strategies to reduce NOX in CSAPR Update states.
The EPA's NOX control strategy feasibility assessment
prioritizes NOX control strategies in CSAPR Update states
that would be additional to those strategies that were already
quantified into CSAPR Update emissions budgets. The EPA believes that
2023 is an appropriate future analytic year, taking into consideration
relevant attainment dates, because it is the first ozone season for
which significant new controls to reduce NOX could be
feasibly installed across the CSAPR Update region, and thus represents
the timeframe that is as expeditious as practicable for upwind states
to implement additional emissions reductions. Furthermore, as described
in section III.C, the EPA's analysis of step 1 for the 2023 analytic
year indicates that there are no monitoring sites in the east that are
projected to have nonattainment or maintenance problems with respect to
the 2008 ozone NAAQS in 2023. Together, these findings lead to EPA's
proposed determination that--with CSAPR Update implementation--CSAPR
Update states are not expected to significantly contribute to
nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in
downwind states in 2023.
    As a result of this proposed determination, the EPA proposes to
find that the promulgation of the CSAPR Update for these states fully
satisfies the requirements of the good neighbor provision for the 2008
ozone NAAQS, and therefore also satisfies the Agency's obligation
pursuant to CAA section 110(c) for these states. Accordingly, the EPA
would have no remaining obligation to issue FIPs nor are the states
required to submit SIPs that would further reduce transported ozone
pollution, beyond the existing CSAPR Update requirements, with regard
to the 2008 ozone NAAQS.

  Table III.D-1--States Covered by the Proposed Determination Regarding
           Good Neighbor Obligations for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               State name
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama.
Arkansas.
Illinois.
Indiana.
Iowa.
Kansas.
Louisiana.
Maryland.
Michigan.
Mississippi.
Missouri.
New Jersey.
New York.
Ohio.
Oklahoma.
Pennsylvania.
Texas.
Virginia.
West Virginia.
Wisconsin.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with this proposed determination, this action also
proposes minor revisions to the existing state-specific sections of the
CSAPR Update regulations for states other than Kentucky and Tennessee.
The revisions will remove the current statements indicating that the
CSAPR Update FIP for each such state only partially addresses the
state's good neighbor obligation under CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Because states can replace the CSAPR Update
FIPs with SIPs, these revisions will also mean that a SIP that is
approved through notice-and-comment rulemaking to fully replace the
CSAPR Update FIP for one of these states would also fully address the
state's good neighbor obligation for this NAAQS. In particular, the EPA
proposes to find that the Agency's previous approval of Alabama's CSAPR
Update SIP fully satisfies the state's good neighbor obligation for the
2008 ozone NAAQS. Thus, Alabama would have no obligation to submit any
additional SIP revision addressing this obligation.
    The EPA seeks comments on this proposal, including the legal,
technical, and policy decisions informing the EPA's proposed
determination that the CSAPR Update fully addresses the good neighbor
obligation with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS for 20 eastern states.
Note that the EPA in this proposal is not reconsidering or reopening
the determinations made in the CSAPR Update, which was finalized in
2016, regarding the obligations of upwind states pursuant to the good
neighbor provision for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Those determinations have
already been subject to notice and comment rulemaking processes, and
the FIPs promulgated in that action are already being implemented. The
analysis conducted in this action does not reconsider any analysis
conducted or determinations made in that action.

Thus, the EPA is not requesting comment on any of the legal, technical,
or policy decisions informing that the CSAPR Update.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at http://www2.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review, and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

    This action is a significant regulatory action that was submitted
to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. Any changes
made in response to OMB recommendations have been documented in the
docket.

B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs

    This action is not expected to be subject to Executive Order 13771
because this proposed rule is expected to result in no more than de
minimis costs.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose any new information collection burden
under the Paperwork Reduction Act. The OMB has previously approved the
information collection activities contained in the existing regulations
and has assigned OMB control number 2060-0667. The minor revisions to
the FIP provisions proposed in this action would have no impact on
monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements for affected EGUs
in the CSAPR NOX Ozone Season Group 2 Trading Program.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act. In making this determination, the impact of concern is
any significant adverse economic impact on small entities. An agency
may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities if the rule relieves regulatory
burden, has no net burden, or otherwise has a positive economic effect
on the small entities subject to the rule. This action makes a minor
modification to existing CSAPR Update FIPs and does not impose new
requirements on any entity. The EPA has therefore concluded that this
action will have no net regulatory burden for all directly regulated
small entities.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not
significantly or uniquely affect small governments. The action imposes
no enforceable duty on any state, local, or tribal governments or the
private sector. This action simply updates the existing CSAPR Update
FIPs to establish that no further federal regulatory requirements are
necessary.

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government. This
action simply updates the existing CSAPR Update FIPs to establish that
no further federal regulatory requirements are necessary.

G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

    This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. It will not have substantial direct effects on
tribal governments, on the relationship between the federal government
and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the federal government and Indian tribes. This action simply
updates the existing CSAPR Update FIPs to establish that no further
federal regulatory requirements are necessary. Thus, Executive Order
13175 does not apply to this action. Consistent with the EPA Policy on
Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes, the EPA consulted
with tribal officials while developing the CSAPR Update. A summary of
that consultation is provided in the preamble for the CSAPR Update, 81
FR 74584 (October 26, 2016).

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks

    The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it simply updates the existing CSAPR
Update FIPs to establish that no further federal regulatory
requirements are necessary.

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    This action is not a ``significant energy action'' because it is
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. This action simply updates the existing
CSAPR Update FIPs to establish that no further federal regulatory
requirements are necessary.

J. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations

    The EPA believes that this action is not subject to Executive Order
12898 because it does not establish an environmental health or safety
standard. This action simply updates the existing CSAPR Update FIPs to
establish that no further federal regulatory requirements are
necessary. Consistent with Executive Order 12898 and the EPA's
environmental justice policies, the EPA considered effects on low-
income populations, minority populations, and indigenous peoples while
developing the CSAPR Update. The process and results of that
consideration are described in the preamble for the CSAPR Update, 81 FR
74585 (October 26, 2016).

L. Determinations Under Section 307(b)(1) and (d)

    Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA indicates which Federal Courts of
Appeal have venue for petitions of review of final actions by EPA. This
section provides, in part, that petitions for review must be filed in
the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit if (i) the
agency action consists of ``nationally applicable regulations
promulgated, or final action taken, by the Administrator,'' or (ii)
such action is locally or regionally applicable, but ``such action is
based on a determination of nationwide scope or effect and if in taking
such action the Administrator finds and publishes that such action is
based on such a determination.''
    The EPA proposes to find that any final action related to this
rulemaking is ``nationally applicable'' or, in the alternative, is
based on a determination of ``nationwide scope and effect'' within the
meaning of section 307(b)(1).

Through this rulemaking action, the EPA is interpreting section 110 of
the CAA, a statutory provision that applies to all states and
territories in the United States. In addition, the proposed rule
addresses emissions impacts and sources located in 20 States, which are
located in multiple EPA Regions and federal circuits. The proposed rule
is also based on a common core of factual findings and analyses
concerning the transport of pollutants between the different states.
Courts have found similar actions to be nationally applicable.\107\
Furthermore, EPA intends this interpretation and approach to be
consistently implemented nationwide with respect to section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \107\ See, e.g., Texas v. EPA, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 5654 (5th
Cir. 2011) (finding SIP call to 13 states to be nationally
applicable and thus transferring the case to the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in accordance with CAA section
307(b)(1)); W. Va. Chamber of Commerce v. Browner, No. 98 1013, 1998
U.S. App. LEXIS 30621, at *24 (4th Cir. 1998) (finding the
NOX SIP Call to be nationally applicable based on ``the
nationwide scope and interdependent nature of the problem, the large
number of states, spanning most of the country, being regulated, the
common core of knowledge and analysis involved in formulating the
rule, and the common legal interpretation advanced of section 110 of
the Clean Air Act''). Cf. Judgment, Cedar Falls Utilities v. EPA,
No. 16-4504 (8th Cir. Feb. 22, 2017) (transferring petition to
review CSAPR Update to D.C. Circuit).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For these reasons, the Administrator proposes to determine that any
final action related to this proposal is nationally applicable or, in
the alternative, is based on a determination of nationwide scope and
effect for purposes of section 307(b)(1). Thus, pursuant to section
307(b) any petitions for review of any final actions regarding the
rulemaking must be filed in the Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit within 60 days from the date any final action is
published in the Federal Register.
    In addition, pursuant to sections 307(d)(1)(C) and 307(d)(1)(V) of
the CAA, the Administrator proposes to determine that this action is
subject to the provisions of section 307(d). CAA section 307(d)(1)(B)
provides that section 307(d) applies to, among other things, ``the
promulgation or revision of an implementation plan by the Administrator
under CAA section 110(c).'' 42 U.S.C. 7407(d)(1)(B). Under section
307(d)(1)(V), the provisions of section 307(d) also apply to ``such
other actions as the Administrator may determine.'' 42 U.S.C.
7407(d)(1)(V). The Agency has complied with procedural requirements of
CAA section 307(d) during the course of this rulemaking.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Particulate matter, Regional haze,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur dioxide.

    Dated: June 29, 2018.
E. Scott Pruitt,
Administrator.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52 of chapter I of
title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is proposed to be amended
as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Sec. Sec.  52.54, 52.184, 52.731, 52.789, 52.840, 52.882, 52.984,
52.1084, 52.1186, 52.1284, 52.1326, 52.1584, 52.1684, 52.1882, 52.1930,
52.2040, 52.2283, 52.2440, 52.2540, and 52.2587   [Amended]

0
2. In 40 CFR part 52 remove the text ``, provided that because the
CSAPR FIP was promulgated as a partial rather than full remedy for an
obligation of the State to address interstate air pollution, the SIP
revision likewise will constitute a partial rather than full remedy for
the State's obligation unless provided otherwise in the Administrator's
approval of the SIP revision'' from the second sentence in each of the
following paragraphs:
0
a. Section 52.54(b)(2);
0
b. Section 52.184(b);
0
c. Section 52.731(b)(2);
0
d. Section 52.789(b)(2);
0
e. Section 52.840(b)(2);
0
f. Section 52.882(b)(1);
0
g. Section 52.984(d)(2);
0
h. Section 52.1084(b)(2);
0
i. Section 52.1186(e)(2);
0
j. Section 52.1284(b);
0
k. Section 52.1326(b)(2);
0
l. Section 52.1584(e)(2);
0
m. Section 52.1684(b)(2);
0
n. Section 52.1882(b)(2);
0
o. Section 52.1930(b);
0
p. Section 52.2040(b)(2);
0
q. Section 52.2283(d)(2);
0
r. Section 52.2440(b)(2);
0
s. Section 52.2540(b)(2); and
0
t. Section 52.2587(e)(2).

[FR Doc. 2018-14737 Filed 7-9-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 156 (Monday, August 13, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 40032]
[FR Doc No: 2018-17352]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP10-996-000.
    Applicants: Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP.
    Description: Report Filing: DECP--2018 Report of Operational Sales
and Purchases of Gas.
    Filed Date: 7/31/18.
    Accession Number: 20180731-5146.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/13/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1045-000.
    Applicants: Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Pooling Charges--Zones 5 and 6
to be effective 10/1/2018.
    Filed Date: 8/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180803-5034.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/15/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1046-000.
    Applicants: Texas Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Sec.  4(d) Rate Filing: Cap Rel Neg Rate Agmt (EM
Energy OH 35451 to BP 37304) to be effective 8/3/2018.
    Filed Date: 8/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180803-5133.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/15/18.

    Docket Numbers: RP18-1047-000.
    Applicants: Global LNG S.A.S.,Total Gas & Power North America, Inc.
    Description: Joint Petition for Temporary Waivers of Capacity
Release Regulations and Policies, et al. of Global LNG S.A.S., et al.
    Filed Date: 8/3/18.
    Accession Number: 20180803-5158.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 8/15/18.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. Protests may be
considered, but intervention is necessary to become a party to the
proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call<PHONE_NUMBER>
(toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: August 7, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-17352 Filed 8-10-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P