[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 63 (Wednesday, April 1, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18160-18173]
[FR Doc No: 2020-06659]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2020-0057; FRL-10007-24-Region 1]

Air Plan Approval; Vermont; Infrastructure State Implementation
Plan Requirements for the 2015 Ozone Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the
State of Vermont. This revision addresses the infrastructure
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act)--including the
interstate transport provisions--for the 2015 ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The infrastructure requirements are
designed to ensure that the structural components of each state's air-
quality management program, including provisions prohibiting emissions
that will have certain adverse air-quality effects in other states, are
adequate to meet the state's responsibilities under the CAA. EPA is
also proposing to approve State of Vermont Executive Order (E.O.) 19-
17, Executive Code of Ethics, which Vermont submitted with its
infrastructure submission for the 2015 ozone NAAQS to be added to the
SIP. Because E.O. 19-17 supersedes and replaces E.O. 09-11, EPA is also
proposing to remove E.O. 09-11 from the Vermont SIP. This action is
being taken under the Clean Air Act.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before May 1, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R01-
OAR-2020-0057 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>For comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either
manner of submission, the EPA may publish any comment received to its
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person
identified in the For Further Information Contact section. For the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. Publicly
available docket materials are available at https://www.regulations.gov
or at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region 1 Regional
Office, Air and Radiation Division, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100,
Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
legal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alison C. Simcox, Air Quality Branch,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Region 1, 5 Post Office
Square--Suite 100, (Mail code 05-2), Boston, MA 02109-3912, tel. (617)
918-1684, email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background and Purpose
    A. What is the scope of this rulemaking?
    B. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate these SIP submissions?

II. EPA's Evaluation of Vermont's Infrastructure SIP for the 2015
Ozone Standard
    A. Section 110(a)(2)(A)--Emission Limits and Other Control
Measures
    B. Section 110(a)(2)(B)--Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data
System
    C. Section 110(a)(2)(C)--Program for Enforcement of Control
Measures and for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources
    D. Section 110(a)(2)(D)--Interstate Transport
    E. Section 110(a)(2)(E)--Adequate Resources
    F. Section 110(a)(2)(F)--Stationary Source Monitoring System
    G. Section 110(a)(2)(G)--Emergency Powers
    H. Section 110(a)(2)(H)--Future SIP Revisions
    I. Section 110(a)(2)(I)--Nonattainment Area Plan or Plan
Revisions Under Part D
    J. Section 110(a)(2)(J)--Consultation With Government Officials;
Public Notifications; Prevention of Significant Deterioration;
Visibility Protection
    K. Section 110(a)(2)(K)--Air Quality Modeling/Data
    L. Section 110(a)(2)(L)--Permitting Fees
    M. Section 110(a)(2)(M)--Consultation/Participation by Affected
Local Entities
    N. Vermont Executive Order Submitted for Incorporation Into the
SIP
III. Proposed Action
IV. Incorporation by Reference
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background and Purpose

    On October 1, 2015, EPA promulgated a revision to the ozone NAAQS
(2015 ozone NAAQS), lowering the level of both the primary and
secondary standards to 0.070 parts per million (ppm).\1\ Section
110(a)(1) of the CAA requires states to submit, within 3 years after
promulgation of a new or revised standard, SIPs meeting the applicable
requirements of section 110(a)(2).\2\ On November 19, 2019, the Vermont
Air Quality and Climate Division (AQCD) of the Department of
Environmental Conservation (DEC) submitted a revision to its State
Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP revision addresses the
infrastructure requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)--
including the ``Good Neighbor'' or ``transport'' provisions--for the
2015 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone, Final
Rule, 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015). Although the level of the
standard is specified in the units of ppm, ozone concentrations are
also described in parts per billion (ppb). For example, 0.070 ppm is
equivalent to 70 ppb.
    \2\ SIP revisions that are intended to meet the applicable
requirements of section 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA are often
referred to as infrastructure SIPs and the applicable elements under
110(a)(2) are referred to as infrastructure requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. What is the scope of this rulemaking?

    EPA is acting on the SIP submission from Vermont on the
infrastructure requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for
the 2015 ozone NAAQS (including the transport provisions).
    Whenever EPA promulgates a new or revised NAAQS, CAA section
110(a)(1) requires states to make SIP submissions to provide for the
implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of the NAAQS. This
particular type of SIP submission is commonly referred to as an
``infrastructure SIP.'' These submissions must meet the various
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2), as applicable. Due to ambiguity
in some of the language of CAA section 110(a)(2), EPA believes that it
is appropriate to interpret these provisions in the specific context of
acting on infrastructure SIP submissions. EPA has previously provided
comprehensive guidance on the application of these provisions through a
guidance document for infrastructure SIP submissions and through
regional actions on infrastructure submissions.\3\ Unless otherwise
noted below, we are following that existing approach in acting on this
submission. In addition, in the context of acting on such
infrastructure submissions, EPA evaluates the submitting state's SIP
for compliance with statutory and regulatory requirements, not for the
state's implementation of its SIP.\4\ EPA has other authority to
address any issues concerning a state's implementation of the rules,
regulations, consent orders, etc. that comprise its SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ EPA explains and elaborates on these ambiguities and its
approach to address them in its September 13, 2013, Infrastructure
SIP Guidance (available at https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/urbanair/sipstatus/docs/Guidance_on_Infrastructure_SIP_Elements_Multipollutant_FINAL_Sept_2013.pdf), as well as in numerous agency actions, including EPA's prior
action on Vermont's infrastructure SIP to address the 2012
PM2.5 NAAQS. See 83 FR 45194 (September 6, 2018).
    \4\ See Montana Envtl. Info. Ctr. v. Thomas, 902 F.3d 971 (9th
Cir. 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. What guidance is EPA using to evaluate Vermont's infrastructure SIP
submission?

    EPA highlighted the statutory requirement to submit infrastructure
SIPs within 3 years of promulgation of a new NAAQS in an October 2,
2007, guidance document entitled ``Guidance on SIP Elements Required
Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' (2007
memorandum). EPA has issued additional guidance documents and
memoranda, including a September 13, 2013, guidance document entitled
``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements
under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2)'' (2013
memorandum). Additional guidance documents specifically addressing the
interstate-transport (``good neighbor'') provisions of infrastructure
SIPs (CAA Section 110(a)(2)(D)) are given under Section II.D. below.

II. EPA's Evaluation of Vermont's Infrastructure SIP for the 2015 Ozone
Standard

    In this notice of proposed rulemaking, EPA is proposing action on
Vermont's November 19, 2019, infrastructure SIP submission for the 2015
ozone NAAQS, including the interstate transport provisions (CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)). In Vermont's submission, a detailed list of Vermont
Laws and previously SIP-approved Air Quality Regulations show precisely
how the various components of its EPA-approved SIP meet each of the
requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
The following review evaluates the state's submission in light of
section 110(a)(2) requirements and relevant EPA guidance. For the
state's November 2019 submission, we provide an evaluation of the
applicable Section 110(a)(2) elements, including the transport
provisions.

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

    This section (also referred to in this action as an element) of the
Act requires SIPs to include enforceable emission limits and other
control measures, means or techniques, schedules for compliance, and
other related matters. However, EPA has long interpreted emission
limits and control measures for attaining the standards as being due
when nonattainment planning requirements are due.\5\ In the context of
an infrastructure SIP, EPA is not evaluating the existing SIP
provisions for this purpose. Instead, EPA is only evaluating whether
the state's SIP has basic structural provisions for the implementation
of the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See, for example, EPA's final rule on ``National Ambient Air
Quality Standards for Lead,'' 73 FR 66964, 67034 (November 12,
2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In its November 2019 submittal for the 2015 ozone NAAQS, Vermont
cites a number of provisions of Vermont Statutes Annotated (V.S.A.) in
satisfaction of element A: 10 V.S.A. Sec.  554, ``Powers,'' authorizes
the Secretary of the Vermont Agency of

Natural Resources \6\ (ANR) to ``[a]dopt, amend and repeal rules,
implementing the provisions'' of Vermont's air pollution control laws
set forth in 10 V.S.A. chapter 23. It also authorizes the Secretary to
``conduct studies, investigations and research relating to air
contamination and air pollution'' and to ``[d]etermine by appropriate
means the degree of air contamination and air pollution in the state
and the several parts thereof.'' EPA approved 10 V.S.A. Sec.  554 on
June 27, 2017 (82 FR 29005). Vermont also cites 10 V.S.A. Sec.  556,
``Permits for the construction or modification of air contaminant
sources,'' which requires applicants to obtain permits for constructing
or modifying air contaminant sources, and 10 V.S.A. Sec.  558,
``Emission control requirements,'' which authorizes the Secretary ``to
establish emission control requirements . . . necessary to prevent,
abate, or control air pollution.'' In addition, Vermont cites 10 V.S.A.
Sec.  579 ``Vehicle emissions labeling program for new motor vehicles''
for model year 2010 and later vehicles.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation is one
of three departments within the Vermont ANR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under Element A of the November 2019 submittal, the state also
cites more than 20 Vermont Air Pollution Control Regulations (VT APCR)
that it has adopted to control the emissions related to ozone and ozone
precursors (nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile organic
compounds (VOCs)). A few, with their EPA approval citation \7\ are
listed here: Sec.  5-502--Major Stationary Sources and Major
Modifications (81 FR 50342; August 1, 2016); Sec.  5-251--Control of
Nitrogen Oxides Emissions (81 FR 50342; August 1, 2016); Sec.  5-
253.5--Stage I Vapor Recovery Controls at Gasoline Dispensing
Facilities (81 FR 23164; April 20, 2016); 5-253.8--Industrial Adhesives
(84 FR 65009; November 26, 2019); Sec.  5-253.17--Industrial Cleaning
Solvents (84 FR 65009; November 26, 2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The citations reference the most recent EPA approval of the
stated rule or of revisions to the rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA proposes that Vermont meets the infrastructure requirements of
section 110(a)(2)(A) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.

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

    This section requires SIPs to provide for establishment and
operation of appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures
necessary to monitor, compile, and analyze ambient air quality data,
and to make these data available to EPA upon request. Each year, states
submit annual air monitoring network plans to EPA for review and
approval. EPA's review of these annual monitoring plans includes our
evaluation of whether the state: (i) Monitors air quality at
appropriate locations throughout the state using EPA-approved Federal
Reference Methods or Federal Equivalent Method monitors; (ii) submits
data to EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) in a timely manner; and (iii)
provides EPA Regional Offices with prior notification of any planned
changes to monitoring sites or the network plan.
    State law authorizes the Secretary of ANR, or authorized
representative, to ``conduct studies, investigations and research
relating to air contamination and air pollution'' and to ``[d]etermine
by appropriate means the degree of air contamination and air pollution
in the state and the several parts thereof.'' See 10 V.S.A. Sec.
554(8), (9). Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC),
one of several departments within ANR, operates an air quality
monitoring network, and EPA approved the state's 2019 Annual Air
Monitoring Network Plan on August 15, 2019.\8\ Furthermore, Vermont
populates EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) with air-quality monitoring
data in a timely manner and provides EPA with prior notification when
considering a change to its monitoring network or plan. EPA proposes
that Vermont has met the infrastructure SIP requirements of section
110(a)(2)(B) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See EPA approval letter located in the docket for this
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

    States are required to include a program providing for enforcement
of all SIP measures and for the regulation of construction of new or
modified stationary sources to meet new source review (NSR)
requirements under prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) and
nonattainment new source review (NNSR) programs. Part C of the CAA
(sections 160-169B) addresses PSD, while part D of the CAA (sections
171-193) addresses NNSR requirements.
    The evaluation of each state's submission addressing the
infrastructure SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) covers the
following: (i) Enforcement of SIP measures; (ii) PSD program for major
sources and major modifications; and (iii) a permit program for minor
sources and minor modifications.
Sub-Element 1: Enforcement of SIP Measures
    State law provides the Secretary of ANR with the authority to
enforce air pollution control requirements, including SIP-approved 10
V.S.A. Sec.  554, which authorizes the Secretary of ANR to ``[i]ssue
orders as may be necessary to effectuate the purposes of [the state's
air pollution control laws] and enforce the same by all appropriate
administrative and judicial proceedings.'' In addition, Vermont's SIP-
approved regulations VT APCR Sec.  5-501, ``Review of Construction or
Modification of Air Contaminant Sources,'' and VT APCR Sec.  5-502,
``Major Stationary Sources and Major Modifications,'' establish
requirements for permits to construct, modify or operate major air
contaminant sources.
    EPA proposes that Vermont has met the enforcement of SIP measures
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(C) with respect to the 2015 ozone
NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2--PSD Program for Major Sources and Major Modifications
    PSD applies to new major sources or modifications made to major
sources for pollutants where the area in which the source is located is
in attainment of, or unclassifiable with regard to, the relevant NAAQS.
EPA interprets the CAA as requiring each state to make an
infrastructure SIP submission for a new or revised NAAQS demonstrating
that the air agency has a complete PSD permitting program in place
satisfying the current requirements for all regulated NSR pollutants.
VT DEC's EPA-approved PSD rules, contained at VT APCR Subchapters I,
IV, and V, contain provisions that address applicable requirements for
all regulated NSR pollutants, including greenhouse gases (GHGs).
    In 2018, EPA evaluated Vermont's PSD permitting program in the
context of an infrastructure SIP submission under CAA Sec.
110(a)(2)(C) and determined that it satisfies the current requirements
for all regulated NSR pollutants. See 83 FR 45194 (September 6, 2018).
For a detailed analysis, see EPA's proposal in that rulemaking. See 83
FR 30598 (June 29, 2018). No new or revised PSD permitting program
requirements have become due since that time. Therefore, for the
reasons provided in the June 29, 2018, notice, EPA proposes to approve
Vermont's infrastructure SIP for the 2015 ozone NAAQS for the
requirement in section 110(a)(2)(C) to include a PSD permitting program
in the SIP that covers the requirements for all regulated NSR

pollutants as required by part C of the Act.
Sub-Element 3: Preconstruction Permitting for Minor Sources and Minor
Modifications
    To address the pre-construction regulation of the modification and
construction of minor stationary sources and minor modifications of
major stationary sources, an infrastructure SIP submission should
identify the existing EPA-approved SIP provisions and/or include new
provisions that govern the minor source pre-construction program that
regulate emissions of the relevant NAAQS pollutants. On August 1, 2016,
EPA approved revisions to Vermont's minor NSR program. See 81 FR 50342.
Vermont and EPA rely on the existing minor NSR program to ensure that
new and modified sources not captured by the major NSR permitting
programs, VT APCR Sec.  5-502, do not interfere with attainment and
maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
    We are proposing to find that Vermont has met the requirement to
have a SIP-approved minor new source review permit program as required
under Section 110(a)(2)(C) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.

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

    This section contains a comprehensive set of air-quality-management
elements pertaining to the transport of air pollution with which states
must comply. It covers the following five topics, categorized as sub-
elements: Sub-element 1, Significant contribution to nonattainment, and
interference with maintenance of a NAAQS; Sub-element 2, PSD; Sub-
element 3, Visibility protection; Sub-element 4, Interstate pollution
abatement; and Sub-element 5, International pollution abatement. Sub-
elements 1 through 3 above are found under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of
the Act, and these items are further categorized into the four prongs
discussed below. Sub-elements 4 and 5 are found under section
110(a)(2)(D)(ii) of the Act and include provisions insuring compliance
with sections 115 and 126 of the Act relating to interstate and
international pollution abatement.
Sub-Element 1: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)--Significant Contribution to
Nonattainment (Prong 1) and Interference With Maintenance of the NAAQS
(Prong 2)
Background
    Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i), known as the ``good neighbor'' provision,
generally requires SIPs to contain adequate provisions to prohibit in-
state emissions activities from having certain adverse air-quality
effects on other states due to interstate transport of pollution. There
are four so-called ``prongs'' within CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i):
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) contains prongs 1 and 2, while section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) includes prongs 3 and 4. This sub-element addresses
the first two prongs.
    Under prongs 1 and 2 of the good neighbor provision, a SIP for a
new or revised NAAQS must contain adequate provisions prohibiting any
source or other type of emissions activity within the state from
emitting air pollutants in amounts that will significantly contribute
to nonattainment of the NAAQS in another state (prong 1) or from
interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS in another state (prong 2).
EPA and states must give independent significance to prong 1 and prong
2 when evaluating downwind air-quality problems under section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I).\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896, 909-911 (2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We note that EPA has addressed the interstate transport
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to prior
ozone NAAQS in several regional regulatory actions, including the
Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), which addressed interstate
transport with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS as well as the 1997 and
2006 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) standards, and the
CSAPR Update for the 2008 ozone NAAQS (CSAPR Update).\10\ These actions
only addressed interstate transport in the eastern United States \11\
and did not address the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011) (i.e., CSAPR); 81 FR 74504
(October 26, 2016) (i.e., CSAPR Update).
    \11\ For purposes of CSAPR and the CSAPR Update action, the
Western U.S. (or the West) was considered to consist of the 11
western contiguous states of Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho,
Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming.
The Eastern U.S. (or the East) was considered to consist of the 37
states east of the 11 Western states.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Through the development and implementation of CSAPR, the CSAPR
Update and previous regional rulemakings pursuant to the good neighbor
provision,\12\ the EPA, working in partnership with states, developed
the following four-step interstate transport framework to address the
requirements of the good neighbor provision for the ozone NAAQS: \13\
(1) Identify downwind air quality problems; (2) identify upwind states
that impact those downwind air quality problems sufficiently such that
they are considered ``linked'' and therefore warrant further review and
analysis; (3) identify the emissions reductions necessary (if any),
considering cost and air quality factors, to prevent linked upwind
states identified in step 2 from contributing significantly to
nonattainment or interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS at the
locations of the downwind air quality problems; and (4) adopt permanent
and enforceable measures needed to achieve those emissions reductions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ Other regional rulemakings addressing ozone transport
include the NOX SIP Call, 63 FR 57356 (October 27, 1998),
and the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), 70 FR 25162 (May 12,
2005).
    \13\ The four-step interstate framework has also been used to
address requirements of the good neighbor provision for some
previous particulate matter and ozone NAAQS, including in the
Western United States. See, e.g., 83 FR 30380 (June 28, 2018); 83 FR
5375, 5376-77 (February 7, 2018).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has released several documents containing information relevant
to evaluating interstate transport with respect to the 2015 ozone
NAAQS. First, on January 6, 2017, EPA published a notice of data
availability (NODA) with preliminary interstate ozone transport
modeling with projected ozone design values for 2023, on which we
requested comment.\14\ The year 2023 was used as the analytic year for
this preliminary modeling because that year aligns with the expected
attainment year for Moderate ozone nonattainment areas.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ See Notice of Availability of the EPA's Preliminary
Interstate Ozone Transport Modeling Data for the 2015 Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). 82 FR 1733 (January 6, 2017).
    \15\ 82 FR 1735 (January 6, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On October 27, 2017, we released a memorandum (2017 memorandum)
containing updated modeling data for 2023, which incorporated changes
made in response to comments on the NODA.\16\ Although the 2017
memorandum also released data for a 2023 modeling year, we specifically
stated that the modeling may be useful for states developing SIPs to
address remaining good neighbor obligations for the 2008 ozone NAAQS,
but did not address the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On March 27, 2018, we issued
a memorandum (March 2018 memorandum) indicating the same 2023 modeling
data released in the 2017 memorandum would also be useful for
evaluating potential downwind air-quality problems with respect to the

2015 ozone NAAQS (step 1 of the four-step framework).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See 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), October 27, 2017, available in the docket for
this action or at https://www.epa.gov/interstate-air-pollution-transport/interstate-air-pollution-transport-memos-and-notices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The March 2018 memorandum included newly available contribution-
modeling results to assist states in evaluating their impact on
potential downwind air-quality problems (step 2 of the four-step
framework) in their efforts to develop good neighbor SIPs for the 2015
ozone NAAQS to address their interstate transport obligations.\17\ EPA
subsequently issued two more memoranda in August and October 2018,
providing guidance to states developing good neighbor SIPs for the 2015
ozone NAAQS concerning, respectively, potential contribution thresholds
that may be appropriate to apply in step 2 and considerations for
identifying downwind areas that may have problems maintaining the
standard (under prong 2 of the good neighbor provision) at step 1 of
the framework.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\ See 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), March 27, 2018, available in the docket for this
action or at https://www.epa.gov/interstate-air-pollution-transport/interstate-air-pollution-transport-memos-and-notices.
    \18\ See Analysis of Contribution Thresholds for Use in Clean
Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) Interstate Transport State
Implementation Plan Submissions for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards, August 31, 2018) (``August 2018
memorandum''), and Considerations for Identifying Maintenance
Receptors for Use in Clean Air Act Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)
Interstate Transport State Implementation Plan Submissions for the
2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards, October 19, 2018,
available in the docket for this action or at https://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/memo-and-supplemental-information-regarding-interstate-transport-sips-2015-ozone-naaqs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The March 2018 memorandum describes the process and results of the
updated photochemical and source-apportionment modeling used to project
ambient ozone concentrations for the year 2023 and the state-by-state
impacts on those concentrations. The March 2018 memorandum also
explains that the selection of the 2023 analytic year aligns with the
2015 ozone NAAQS attainment year for Moderate nonattainment areas. As
described in the 2017 and March 2018 memoranda, EPA used the
Comprehensive Air Quality Model with Extensions (CAMx version 6.40) to
model average and maximum design values in 2023 to identify potential
nonattainment and maintenance receptors (i.e., monitoring sites that
are projected to have problems attaining or maintaining the 2015 ozone
NAAQS).
    The March 2018 memorandum presents design values calculated in two
ways: first, following the EPA's historic ``3 x 3'' approach \19\ to
evaluating all sites, and second, following a modified approach for
coastal monitoring sites in which ``overwater'' modeling data were not
included in the calculation of future-year design values (referred to
as the ``no water'' approach).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See March 2018 memorandum, p. 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For purposes of identifying potential nonattainment and maintenance
receptors in 2023, EPA applied the same approach used in the CSAPR
Update, wherein EPA considered a combination of monitoring data and
modeling projections to identify monitoring sites that are projected to
have problems attaining or maintaining the NAAQS. Specifically, EPA
identified nonattainment receptors as those monitoring sites with
measured values \20\ exceeding the NAAQS that also have projected
(i.e., in 2023) average design values exceeding the NAAQS. EPA
identified maintenance receptors as those monitoring sites with
projected maximum design values exceeding the NAAQS. This included
sites with measured values below the NAAQS, but with projected average
and maximum design values exceeding the NAAQS, and monitoring sites
with projected average design values below the NAAQS, but with
projected maximum design values exceeding the NAAQS. EPA included the
design values and monitoring data for all monitoring sites projected to
be potential nonattainment or maintenance receptors based on the
updated 2023 modeling in Attachment B to the March 2018 memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ EPA used 2016 ozone design values, based on 2014-2016
measured data, which were the most current data at the time of the
analysis. See attachment B of the March 2018 memorandum, p. B-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After identifying potential downwind nonattainment and maintenance
receptors, EPA performed nationwide, state-level ozone source-
apportionment modeling to estimate the expected impact from each state
to each nonattainment and maintenance receptor.\21\ EPA included
contribution information resulting from the source-apportionment
modeling in Attachment C to the March 2018 memorandum. For more
information on the modeling and analysis, please see the 2017 and March
2018 memoranda, the NODA for the preliminary interstate transport
assessment, and the supporting technical documents included in the
docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ As discussed in the March 2018 memorandum, EPA performed
source-apportionment model runs for a modeling domain that covers
the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia, and
adjacent portions of Canada and Mexico.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the CSAPR and the CSAPR Update, the EPA used a threshold of one
percent of the NAAQS to determine whether a given upwind state was
``linked'' at step 2 of the four-step framework and would, therefore,
contribute to downwind nonattainment and maintenance sites identified
in step 1. If a state's impact did not equal or exceed the one-percent
threshold, the upwind state was not ``linked'' to a downwind air
quality problem, and the EPA, therefore, concluded the state will not
significantly contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance
of the NAAQS in the downwind states. However, if a state's impact
equaled or exceeded the one-percent threshold, the state's emissions
were further evaluated in step 3, taking into account both air-quality
and cost considerations, to determine what, if any, emissions
reductions might be necessary to address the good neighbor provision.
    As noted previously, on August 31, 2018, the EPA issued a
memorandum (the August 2018 memorandum) providing guidance concerning
potential contribution thresholds that may be appropriate to apply with
respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS in step 2. Consistent with the process
for selecting the one-percent threshold in CSAPR and the CSAPR Update,
the memorandum included analytical information regarding the degree to
which potential air-quality thresholds would capture the collective
amount of upwind contribution from upwind states to downwind receptors
for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The August 2018 memorandum indicated that,
based on the EPA's analysis of its most recent modeling data, the
amount of upwind collective contribution captured using a 1 parts per
billion (ppb) threshold is generally comparable, overall, to the amount
captured using a threshold equivalent to one percent of the 2015 ozone
NAAQS. Accordingly, the EPA indicated that it may be reasonable and
appropriate for states to use a 1 ppb contribution threshold, as an
alternative to the one-percent threshold, at step 2 of the four-step
framework in developing their SIP revisions addressing the good
neighbor provision for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See August 2018 memorandum, p. 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While the March 2018 memorandum presented information regarding the
EPA's latest analysis of ozone transport following the approaches the
EPA has taken in prior regional rulemaking actions, the EPA has not
made any final

determinations regarding how states should identify downwind receptors
with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS at step 1 of the four-step
framework. Rather, the EPA noted that states have flexibility in
developing their own SIPs to follow different analytical approaches
than the EPA's, so long as their chosen approach has an adequate
technical justification and is consistent with the requirements of the
CAA.
Vermont's Submission for Prongs 1 and 2
    On November 19, 2019, Vermont submitted a SIP revision addressing
the CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) interstate transport requirements
for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. This ``good neighbor SIP'' was included as an
enclosure in the state's infrastructure SIP for the same NAAQS.
    Vermont relied on the results of the EPA's modeling for the 2015
ozone NAAQS contained in the March 2018 memorandum to identify downwind
nonattainment and maintenance receptors that may be impacted by
emissions from sources in Vermont. These results indicate Vermont's
greatest impact on any potential downwind nonattainment or maintenance
receptor would be 0.07 ppb. Vermont compared these values to a
screening threshold of 0.70 ppb, representing one percent of the 2015
ozone NAAQS. Because Vermont's impacts to neighboring states are
projected to be less than 0.70 ppb, Vermont concluded that emissions
from sources within the state will not significantly contribute to
nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS in
any other state.
    Vermont also reviewed ozone concentrations and trends measured at
the state's three ambient air-quality monitors and noted that no
concentrations at these monitors has exceeded the 2015 ozone NAAQS
since 2010. Vermont also looked at EPA's projected emissions of ozone
precursors performed in support of the CSAPR Update. This modeling
included annual total NOx and VOC emissions by state for the years 2011
through 2017 and projected emissions for 2023.\23\ For Vermont,
emissions of ozone precursors have decreased for the period 2011-2017
and are projected to be lower in 2023 than in 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-modeling/2011-version-63-platform.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Vermont's November 2019 Good Neighbor submission also lists and
discusses Vermont's regulations for controlling emissions of ozone
precursors, and its regional emissions-control strategies, including
those it has implemented as a member of the Ozone Transport Commission.
EPA's Evaluation of Vermont's Submission
    The EPA is proposing to rely on the 2023 modeling data identifying
downwind receptors and upwind state contributions, as released in the
March 2018 memorandum, to evaluate Vermont's good neighbor obligation
with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS. On September 13, 2019, the United
States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C.
Circuit) issued its decision in Wisconsin v. EPA addressing legal
challenges to the CSAPR Update, in which the EPA partially addressed
certain upwind states' good neighbor obligations for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS. 938 F.3d 303. While the court generally upheld the rule as to
most of the challenges raised in the litigation, the court remanded the
CSAPR Update to the extent it failed to require upwind states to
eliminate their significant contributions in accordance with the
attainment dates found in CAA section 181 by which downwind states must
come into compliance with the NAAQS. Id. at 313. In light of the
court's decision, the EPA is providing further explanation regarding
why it proposes to find that it is appropriate and consistent with the
statute--as well as the legal precedent--to use the 2023 analytic year
for assessing good neighbor obligations for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
    The EPA believes that 2023 is an appropriate year for analysis of
good neighbor obligations for the 2015 ozone NAAQS because the 2023
ozone season is the last relevant ozone season during which achieved
emissions reductions in linked upwind states could assist downwind
states with meeting the August 2, 2024, Moderate area attainment date
for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The EPA recognizes that the attainment date
for nonattainment areas classified as Marginal for the 2015 ozone NAAQS
is August 2, 2021, which currently applies in several downwind
nonattainment areas evaluated in the EPA's modeling.\24\ However, as
explained below, the EPA does not believe that either the statute or
applicable case law requires the evaluation of good neighbor
obligations in a future year aligned with the attainment date for
nonattainment areas classified as Marginal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ The Marginal area attainment date is not applicable for
nonattainment areas already classified as Moderate or higher, such
as the New York Metropolitan Area. For the status of all
nonattainment areas under the 2015 ozone NAAQS, see U.S. EPA, 8-Hour
Ozone (2015) Designated Area/State Information, https://www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/jbtc.html (last updated Sept. 30,
2019).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The good neighbor provision instructs the EPA and states to apply
its requirements ``consistent with the provisions of'' title I of the
CAA. CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i); see also North Carolina v. EPA, 531
F.3d 896, 911-12 (D.C. Circuit 2008). This consistency instruction
follows the requirement that plans ``contain adequate provisions
prohibiting'' certain emissions in the good neighbor provision. As the
D.C. Circuit held in North Carolina, and more recently in Wisconsin,
the good neighbor provision must be applied in a manner consistent with
the designation and planning requirements in title I that apply in
downwind states and, in particular, the timeframe within which downwind
states are required to implement specific emissions control measures in
nonattainment areas and submit plans demonstrating how those areas will
attain, relative to the applicable attainment dates. See North
Carolina, 896 F.3d at 912 (holding that the good neighbor provision's
reference to title I requires consideration of both procedural and
substantive provisions in title I); Wisconsin, 938 F.3d at 313-18.
    While the EPA recognizes, as the court held in North Carolina and
Wisconsin, that upwind emissions-reduction obligations, therefore, must
generally be aligned with downwind receptors' attainment dates, unique
features of the statutory requirements associated with the Marginal
area planning requirements and attainment date under CAA section 182
lead the EPA to conclude that it is more reasonable and appropriate to
require the alignment of upwind good neighbor obligations with later
attainment dates applicable for Moderate or higher classifications.
Under the Clean Air Act, states with areas designated nonattainment are
generally required to submit, as part of their state implementation
plan, an ``attainment demonstration'' that shows, usually through air-
quality modeling, how an area will attain the NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date. See CAA section 172(c)(1).\25\ Such plans must also
include, among other things, the adoption of all ``reasonably
available''

control measures on existing sources, a demonstration of ``reasonable
further progress'' toward attainment, and contingency measures, which
are specific controls that will take effect if the area fails to attain
by its attainment date or fails to make reasonable further progress
toward attainment. See, e.g., CAA section 172(c)(1); 172(c)(2);
172(c)(9).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ Part D of title I of the Clean Air Act provides the plan
requirements for all nonattainment areas. Subpart 1, which includes
section 172(c), applies to all nonattainment areas. Congress
provided in subparts 2-5 additional requirements specific to the
various NAAQS pollutants that nonattainment areas must meet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ozone nonattainment areas classified as Marginal are excepted from
these general requirements under the CAA--unlike other areas designated
nonattainment under the Act (including for other NAAQS pollutants),
Marginal ozone nonattainment areas are specifically exempted from
submitting an attainment demonstration and are not required to
implement any specific emissions controls at existing sources in order
to meet the planning requirements applicable to such areas. See CAA
section 182(a): ``The requirements of this subsection shall apply in
lieu of any requirement that the State submit a demonstration that the
applicable implementation plan provides for attainment of the ozone
standard by the applicable attainment date in any Marginal Area.'' \26\
Marginal ozone nonattainment areas are also exempted from demonstrating
reasonable further progress towards attainment and submitting
contingency measures. See CAA section 182(a), which does not include a
reasonable further progress requirement and specifically notes that
``Section [172(c)(9)] of this title (relating to contingency measures)
shall not apply to Marginal Areas.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ States with Marginal nonattainment areas are required to
implement new source review permitting for new and modified sources,
but the purpose of those requirements is to ensure that potential
emissions increases do not interfere with progress towards
attainment, as opposed to reducing existing emissions. Moreover, EPA
acknowledges that states within ozone transport regions must
implement certain emission control measures at existing sources in
accordance with CAA section 184, but those requirements apply
regardless of the applicable area designation or classification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Existing regulations--either local, state, or federal--are
typically part of the reason why ``additional'' local controls are not
needed to bring Marginal nonattainment areas into attainment. As
described in EPA's record for its final rule defining area
classifications for the 2015 ozone NAAQS and establishing associated
attainment dates, history has shown that most areas classified as
Marginal for prior ozone standards attained the respective standards by
the Marginal area attainment date (i.e., without being re-classified to
a Moderate designation). See 83 FR 10376.
    As part of a historical lookback, EPA calculated that by the
relevant attainment date for areas classified as Marginal, 85 percent
of such areas attained the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS, and 64 percent
attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS. See Response to Comments, section
A.2.4.\27\ Based on these historical data, EPA expects that many areas
classified Marginal for the 2015 ozone NAAQS will also attain by the
relevant attainment date as a result of emissions reductions that are
already expected to occur through implementation of existing local,
state, and federal emissions reduction programs. To the extent states
have concerns about meeting their attainment date for a Marginal area,
the CAA under section 181(b)(3) provides authority for them to
voluntarily request a higher classification for individual areas, if
needed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \27\ Available at https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0202-0122.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Areas that are classified as Moderate typically have more
pronounced air-quality problems than Marginal areas or have been unable
to attain the NAAQS under the minimal requirements that apply to
Marginal areas. See CAA sections 181(a)(1) (classifying areas based on
the degree of nonattainment relative to the NAAQS), and 181(b)(2)
(providing for reclassification to the next highest designation upon
failure to attain the standard by the attainment date). Thus, unlike
Marginal areas, the statute explicitly requires a state with an ozone
nonattainment area classified as Moderate or higher to develop an
attainment plan demonstrating how the state will address the more
significant air-quality problem, which generally requires the
application of various control measures to existing sources of
emissions located in the nonattainment area. See generally CAA sections
172(c) and 182(b)-(e).
    Given that downwind states are not required to demonstrate
attainment by the attainment date or impose additional controls on
existing sources in a Marginal nonattainment area, EPA believes that it
would be inconsistent to interpret the good neighbor provision as
requiring EPA to evaluate the necessity for upwind state emissions
reductions based on air quality modeled in a future year aligned with
the Marginal area attainment date. Rather, EPA believes it is more
appropriate and consistent with the nonattainment planning provisions
in title I to evaluate downwind air quality and upwind state
contributions, and, therefore, the necessity for upwind state emissions
reductions, in a year aligned with an area classification in connection
with which downwind states are also required to demonstrate attainment
and implement controls on existing sources--i.e., with the Moderate
area attainment date, rather than the Marginal area date. With respect
to the 2015 ozone NAAQS, the Moderate area attainment date will be in
the summer of 2024, and the last full year of monitored ozone-season
data that will inform attainment demonstrations is, therefore, 2023.
    The EPA's interpretation of the good neighbor requirements in
relation to the Marginal area attainment date is consistent with the
Wisconsin opinion. For the reasons explained below, the court's holding
does not contradict the EPA's view that 2023 is an appropriate analytic
year in evaluating good neighbor SIPs for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The
court in Wisconsin was concerned that allowing upwind emission
reductions to be implemented after the applicable attainment date would
require downwind states to obtain more emissions reductions than the
Act requires of them, to make up for the absence of sufficient
emissions reductions from upwind states. See 938 F.3d at 316. As
discussed previously, however, this equitable concern only arises for
nonattainment areas classified as Moderate or higher for which downwind
states are required by the CAA to develop attainment plans securing
reductions from existing sources and demonstrating how such areas will
attain by the attainment date. See, e.g., CAA section 182(b)(1) & (2)
(establishing ``reasonable further progress'' and ``reasonably
available control technology'' requirements for Moderate nonattainment
areas). Ozone nonattainment areas classified as Marginal are not
required to meet these same planning requirements, and thus the
equitable concerns raised by the Wisconsin court do not arise with
respect to downwind areas subject to the Marginal area attainment date.
    The distinction between planning obligations for Marginal
nonattainment areas and higher classifications was not before the court
in Wisconsin. Rather, the court was considering whether the EPA, in
implementing its obligation to promulgate federal implementation plans
under CAA section 110(c), was required to fully resolve good neighbor
obligations by the 2018 Moderate area attainment date for the 2008
ozone NAAQS. See 938 F.3d at 312-13. Although the court noted that
petitioners had not ``forfeited'' an argument with respect to the
Marginal area attainment date, see id. at 314, the court did not
address whether its holding with respect to the 2018

Moderate area date would have applied with equal force to the Marginal
area attainment date because that date had already passed. Thus, the
court did not have the opportunity to consider these differential
planning obligations in reaching its decision regarding the EPA's
obligations relative to the then-applicable 2018 Moderate area
attainment date, because such considerations were not applicable to the
case before the court.\28\ For the reasons discussed here, the
equitable concerns supporting the Wisconsin court's holding as to
upwind state obligations relative to the Moderate area attainment date
also support the EPA's interpretation of the good neighbor provision
relative to the Marginal area attainment date. Thus, EPA proposes to
conclude that its reliance on an evaluation of air quality in the 2023
analytical year for purposes of assessing good neighbor obligations
with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS is based on a reasonable
interpretation of the CAA and legal precedent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \28\ The D.C. Circuit, in a short judgment, subsequently vacated
and remanded the EPA's action purporting to fully resolve good
neighbor obligations for certain states for the 2008 ozone NAAQS,
referred to as the CSAPR Close-Out, 83 FR 65878 (Dec. 21, 2018). New
York v. EPA, No. 19-1019 (Oct. 1, 2019). That result necessarily
followed from the Wisconsin decision, because as the EPA conceded,
the Close-Out ``relied upon the same statutory interpretation of the
Good Neighbor Provision'' rejected in Wisconsin. Id. slip op. at 3.
In the Close-Out, the EPA had analyzed the year 2023, which was two
years after the Serious area attainment date for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS and not aligned with any attainment date for that NAAQS. Id.
at 2. In New York, as in Wisconsin, the court was not faced with
addressing specific issues associated with the unique planning
requirements associated with the Marginal area attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As previously discussed, the March 2018 memorandum identifies
potential downwind nonattainment and maintenance receptors, using the
definitions applied in the CSAPR Update and using both the ``3 x 3''
and the ``no water'' approaches to calculating future year design
values. The March 2018 memorandum identifies 57 potential nonattainment
and maintenance receptors in the West in Arizona (2), California (49),
and Colorado (6).\29\ The March 2018 memorandum also provides
contribution data regarding the impact of other states on the potential
receptors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ The number of receptors in the identified western states is
57, irrespective of whether the ``3 x 3'' or ``no water'' approach
is used. Further, although the EPA has indicated that states may
have flexibilities to apply a different analytic approach to
evaluating interstate transport, including identifying downwind air
quality problems, because the EPA is also concluding in this
proposed action that Vermont will have an insignificant impact on
any potential receptors identified in its analysis, Vermont need not
definitively determine whether the identified monitoring sites
should be treated as receptors for the 2015 ozone standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For purposes of evaluating Vermont's 2015 ozone NAAQS interstate
transport SIP submission, given that the state contributes less than
one percent to downwind nonattainment and maintenance sites, it is
reasonable to conclude that the state's impact will not significantly
contribute to nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS
in any other state. This is consistent with our October 13, 2016,
action on Vermont's SIP with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS (81 FR
70631) and with the EPA's approach to both the 1997 and 2008 ozone
NAAQS in CSAPR and the CSAPR Update. EPA notes, nonetheless, that
consistent with the August 2018 memorandum, it may be reasonable and
appropriate for states to use a 1 ppb contribution threshold, as an
alternative to a one-percent threshold, at step 2 of the four-step
framework in developing their SIP revisions addressing the good
neighbor provision for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. However, for the reasons
discussed below, it is unnecessary for EPA to determine whether it may
be appropriate to apply a 1 ppb threshold for purposes of this action.
    The EPA's updated 2023 modeling discussed in the March 2018
memorandum indicates that Vermont's largest impact on any potential
downwind nonattainment and maintenance receptor is 0.07 ppb.\30\ This
value is less than 0.70 ppb (one percent of the 2015 ozone NAAQS),\31\
and demonstrates that emissions from Vermont are not linked to any 2023
downwind potential nonattainment and maintenance receptors identified
in the March 2018 memorandum. Accordingly, we propose to conclude that
emissions from Vermont will not contribute to any potential receptors,
and, thus, the state will not significantly contribute to nonattainment
or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS in any other state.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \30\ The EPA's analysis indicates that Vermont will have a 0.07
ppb impact at the potential nonattainment receptor in Queens, NY
(Site ID 360810124), which has a 2023 projected average design value
of 70.2 ppb, a 2023 projected maximum design value of 72.0 ppb, and
had a 2014-2016 design value of 69 ppb. The EPA's analysis further
indicates that Vermont will have a 0.02 ppb impact at a potential
nonattainment receptor in Suffolk, NY (Site ID 361030002), which has
a projected 2023 average design value of 74.0 ppb, a 2023 projected
maximum design value of 75.5 ppb, and had a 2014-2016 design value
of 72 ppb. In addition, Vermont will have a 0.02 ppb impact at a
potential nonattainment receptor in New Haven, CT (Site ID
90099002), which has a projected 2023 average design value of 69.9
ppb, a 2023 projected maximum design value of 72.6 ppb, and had a
2014-2016 design value of 76 ppb. See the March 2018 memorandum,
attachment C.
    \31\ Because none of Vermont's impacts equal or exceed 0.70 ppb,
they necessarily also do not equal or exceed the 1 ppb contribution
threshold discussed in the August 2018 memorandum.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sub-Element 2: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--PSD (Prong 3)
    To prevent significant deterioration of air quality, this sub-
element requires SIPs to include provisions that prohibit any source or
other type of emissions activity in one state from interfering with
measures that are required in any other state's SIP under Part C of the
CAA. As explained in the 2013 memorandum, a state may meet this
requirement with respect to in-state sources and pollutants that are
subject to PSD permitting through a comprehensive PSD permitting
program that applies to all regulated NSR pollutants and that satisfies
the requirements of EPA's PSD implementation rules. As discussed above
under element C, Vermont has such a PSD permitting program. For in-
state sources not subject to PSD, this requirement can be satisfied
through a fully-approved nonattainment new source review (NNSR) program
with respect to any previous NAAQS. EPA's latest approval of some
revisions to Vermont's NNSR regulations was on August 1, 2016. See 81
FR 50342. Therefore, we are proposing to approve this sub-element for
the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
Sub-Element 3: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--Visibility Protection
(Prong 4)
    With regard to applicable requirements for visibility protection of
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), states are subject to visibility and
regional haze program requirements under part C of the CAA (which
includes sections 169A and 169B). The 2009 memorandum, 2011 memorandum,
and 2013 memorandum recommend that these requirements can be satisfied
by an approved SIP addressing reasonably attributable visibility
impairment, if required, or an approved SIP addressing regional haze. A
fully approved regional haze SIP meeting the requirements of 40 CFR
51.308 will include all measures needed to achieve the state's
apportionment of emission reduction obligations agreed upon through a
regional planning process and will therefore ensure that emissions from
sources under the air agency's jurisdiction are not interfering with
measures required to be included in other air agencies' plans to
protect visibility. EPA approved Vermont's Regional Haze SIP on May 22,
2012. See

77 FR 30212. Accordingly, EPA proposes that Vermont meets the
visibility protection requirements of 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) for the 2015
ozone NAAQS.
Sub-Element 4: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii)--Interstate Pollution Abatement
    This sub-element requires that each SIP contain provisions
requiring compliance with requirements of section 126 relating to
interstate pollution abatement. Section 126(a) requires new or modified
sources to notify neighboring states of potential impacts from the
source. The statute does not specify the method by which the source
should provide the notification. States with SIP-approved PSD programs
must have a provision requiring such notification by new or modified
sources.
    On August 1, 2016 (81 FR 50342), EPA approved revisions to VT APCR
Sec.  5-501, which includes a provision that requires VT ANR to provide
notice of a draft PSD permit to, among other entities, any state whose
lands may be affected by emissions from the source. VT APCR Sec.  5-
501(7)(c). Vermont's public notice requirements are consistent with the
Federal PSD program's public notice requirements for affected states
under 40 CFR 51.166(q). Therefore, we propose to approve Vermont's
compliance with the infrastructure SIP requirements of section 126(a)
for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. Vermont has no obligations under any other
provision of section 126, and no source or sources within the state are
the subject of an active finding under section 126 of the CAA with
respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
Sub-Element 5: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii)--International Pollution
Abatement
    This sub-element also requires each SIP to contain provisions
requiring compliance with the applicable requirements of section 115
relating to international pollution abatement. Section 115 authorizes
the Administrator to require a state to revise its SIP to alleviate
international transport into another country where the Administrator
has made a finding with respect to emissions of the particular NAAQS
pollutant and its precursors, if applicable. There are no final
findings under section 115 of the CAA against Vermont with respect to
the 2015 ozone NAAQS. Therefore, EPA is proposing that Vermont has met
the applicable infrastructure SIP requirements of section
110(a)(2)(D)(ii) related to section 115 of the CAA for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS.

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

    Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) requires each SIP to provide assurances
that the state will have adequate personnel, funding, and legal
authority under state law to carry out its SIP. In addition, section
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires each state to comply with the requirements
for state boards in CAA section 128. Finally, section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii)
requires that, where a state relies upon local or regional governments
or agencies for the implementation of its SIP provisions, the state
retain responsibility for ensuring implementation of SIP obligations
with respect to relevant NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2)(E)(iii), however,
does not apply to this action because Vermont does not rely upon local
or regional governments or agencies for the implementation of its SIP
provisions.
Sub-Element 1: Adequate Personnel, Funding, and Legal Authority Under
State Law To Carry Out its SIP, and Related Issues
    Vermont, through its infrastructure SIP submittal, has documented
that its air agency has the requisite authority and resources to carry
out its SIP obligations. Vermont cites 10 V.S.A. Sec.  553, which
designates ANR as the air pollution control agency of the state, and 10
V.S.A. Sec.  554, which provides the Secretary of ANR with the power to
``[a]dopt, amend and repeal rules, implementing the provisions'' of 10
V.S.A. Chapter 23, Air Pollution Control, and to ``[a]ppoint and employ
personnel and consultants as may be necessary for the administration
of'' 10 V.S.A. Chapter 23. Section 554 also authorizes the Secretary of
ANR to ``[a]ccept, receive and administer grants or other funds or
gifts from public and private agencies, including the federal
government, for the purposes of carrying out any of the functions of''
10 V.S.A. Chapter 23. Additionally, 3 V.S.A. Sec.  2822 provides the
Secretary of ANR with the authority to assess air permit and
registration fees, which fund state air programs. In addition to
Federal funding and permit and registration fees, Vermont notes that
the Vermont DEC Air Quality and Climate Division (AQCD) receives state
funding to implement its air programs.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ VT ANR's authority to carry out the provisions of the SIP
identified in 40 CFR 51.230 is discussed in the sections of this
document assessing elements A, C, F, and G, as applicable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA proposes that Vermont meets the infrastructure SIP requirements
of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(E) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: State Board Requirements Under Section 128 of the CAA
    Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires each SIP to contain provisions
that comply with the state board requirements of section 128 of the
CAA. That provision contains two explicit requirements: (1) That any
board or body which approves permits or enforcement orders under this
chapter shall have at least a majority of members who represent the
public interest and do not derive any significant portion of their
income from persons subject to permits and enforcement orders under
this chapter, and (2) that any potential conflicts of interest by
members of such board or body or the head of an executive agency with
similar powers be adequately disclosed. Section 128 further provides
that a state may adopt more stringent conflicts of interest
requirements and requires EPA to approve any such requirements
submitted as part of a SIP.
    In Vermont, no board or body approves permits or enforcement
orders; these are approved by the Secretary of Vermont ANR. Thus, with
respect to this sub-element, Vermont is subject only to the
requirements of paragraph (a)(2) of section 128 of the CAA (regarding
conflicts of interest).
    Vermont's November 19, 2019, infrastructure SIP included State of
Vermont Executive Order (E.O.) 19-17, Executive Code of Ethics, and
requested that we approve it into the SIP and remove E.O. 09-11, which
E.O. 19-17 supersedes and replaces. EPA originally approved E.O. 09-11
into the SIP on June 27, 2017. See 82 FR 29005.
    The submitted Order, E.O. 19-17, prohibits all Vermont executive
branch appointees (including the ANR Secretary) from taking ``any
action in any matter in which he or she has either a Conflict of
Interest or the appearance of a Conflict of Interest, until the
Conflict is resolved.'' \33\ The Order also

prohibits a full-time appointee from being ``the owner of, or
financially interested, directly or indirectly, in any Private Entity
or private interest subject to the supervision of his or her respective
Public Body, except as a policy holder in an insurance company or a
depositor in a bank.'' \34\ Additionally, the Order requires an
appointee to ``take all reasonable steps to avoid any action or
circumstances, including acts or circumstances which may not be
specifically prohibited by th[e] Code [of Ethics], which might result
in (1) [u]ndermining his or her independence or impartiality or action;
(2) [t]aking official action based on unfair considerations; (3)
[g]iving preferential treatment to any private interest or Private
Entity based on unfair considerations; (4) [g]iving preferential
treatment to any family member or member of the Appointee's household;
(5) [u]sing public office for the advancement of personal interest; (6)
[u]sing public office to secure special privileges or exemptions; (7)
[a]dversely affecting the confidence of the public in the integrity of
State government; or (8) undermining the climate of civility and
respect required for every open, democratic government to thrive.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \33\ The Order defines ``Conflict of Interest'' as ``a
significant interest of an Appointee or such an interest, known to
the Appointee, of a member of his or her immediate family or
household, or of a business associate, in the outcome of a
particular matter pending before the Appointee or his or her Public
Body. `Conflict of Interest' does not include any interest that (i)
is no greater than that of other persons generally affected by the
outcome of a matter (such as a policyholder in an insurance company
or a depositor in a bank), or (ii) has been disclosed to the
Secretary and found not to be significant.'' ``Appearance of a
Conflict of Interest'' is defined in the Order as ``the impression
that a reasonable person might have, after full disclosure of the
facts, that an Appointee's judgment might be significantly
influenced by outside interests, even though there may be no actual
Conflict of Interest.''
    \34\ The Order defines ``a direct or indirect financial
interest'' to exclude ``any insignificant interest held individually
or by a member of the Appointee's immediate household or by a
business associate'' and ``any interest which is no greater than
that of other persons who might be generally affected by the
Supervision of the Appointee's Public Body.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Order also includes specific disclosure requirements. Every
appointee earning $30,000 or more per year, which includes the ANR
Secretary, must file annually with the Vermont Secretary of Civil and
Military Affairs an ``Ethics Questionnaire'' identifying ``significant
personal interests'' that ``might conflict with the best interests of
the state.'' Agency Secretaries must also disclose certain additional
financial and contractual interests to the State Ethics Commission
biennially. EPA proposes to find that E.O. 19-17 satisfies the CAA
Sec.  128 requirement applicable to Vermont that potential conflicts of
interest by the head of an executive agency that approves permits or
enforcement orders under the CAA be ``adequately disclosed.''
Consequently, EPA proposes to approve E.O. 19-17 into the Vermont SIP
and, concurrently, to remove E.O. 09-11 from the Vermont SIP.
    EPA proposes that Vermont meets the infrastructure SIP requirements
of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(E) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.

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

    States must establish a system to monitor emissions from stationary
sources and submit periodic emissions reports. Each plan shall also
require the installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment,
and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or operators
of stationary sources to monitor emissions from such sources. The state
plan shall also require periodic reports on the nature and amounts of
emissions and emissions-related data from such sources, and correlation
of such reports by each state agency with any emission limitations or
standards. Lastly, the reports shall be available at reasonable times
for public inspection.
    Vermont's infrastructure submittal references existing state
regulations previously approved by EPA that require sources to monitor
emissions and submit reports. In particular, VT APCR Sec.  5-405,
Required Air Monitoring, provides that ANR ``may require the owner or
operator of any air contaminant source to install, use and maintain
such monitoring equipment and records, establish and maintain such
records, and make such periodic emission reports as [ANR] shall
prescribe.'' See 45 FR 10775 (February 19, 1980). Moreover, section 5-
402, Written Reports When Requested, authorizes ANR to ``require
written reports from the person operating or responsible for any
proposed or existing air contaminant source, which reports shall
contain,'' among other things, information concerning the ``nature and
amount and time periods or durations of emissions and such other
information as may be relevant to the air pollution potential of the
source. These reports shall also include the results of such source
testing as may be required under Section 5-404 herein.'' See 81 FR
50342 (August 1, 2016).
    Section 5-404, Methods for Sampling and Testing of Sources
authorizes ANR to ``require the owner or operator of [a] source to
conduct tests to determine the quantity of particulate and/or gaseous
matter being emitted'' and requires a source to allow access, should
ANR have reason to believe that emission limits are being violated by
the source, and allows ANR ``to conduct tests of [its] own to determine
compliance.'' See 45 FR 10775 (February 19, 1980). In addition,
operators of sources that emit more than five tons of any and all air
contaminants per year are required to register the source with the
Secretary of ANR and to submit emissions data annually, pursuant to
Sec.  5-802, Requirement for Registration, and Sec.  5-803,
Registration Procedure. See 60 FR 2524 (January 10, 1995).
    Vermont also certifies that nothing in its SIP would preclude the
use, including the exclusive use, of any credible evidence or
information, relevant to whether a source would have been in compliance
with applicable requirements if the appropriate performance or
compliance test or procedure had been performed. See 40 CFR 51.212(c).
    Vermont provides for correlation by VT DEC of emissions reports by
sources with applicable emission limitations or standards, as required
by CAA Sec.  110(a)(2)(F)(iii). Vermont receives emissions data through
its annual registration program. Currently, VT DEC analyzes a portion
of these data manually to correlate a facility's reported data with
permit conditions, including hours of operation, fuel usage, and annual
emissions limits for both criteria emissions and hazardous air
contaminant emissions. VT DEC reports that it has finished the process
of setting up an integrated electronic database that merges all air
contaminant source information across permitting, compliance and
registration programs, so that information concerning permit
conditions, annual emissions data, and compliance data are accessible
in one location for a particular air contaminant source. VT DEC further
reports that it is working on a database function that would
automatically correlate emissions data with permit conditions and other
applicable standards electronically to enable VT DEC to complete
correlation more efficiently and accurately.
    Regarding the section 110(a)(2)(F) requirement that the SIP ensure
that the public has availability to emission reports, Vermont certified
in its November 19, 2019, submittal for the 2015 ozone NAAQS that the
Vermont Public Records Act, 1 V.S.A. Sec. Sec.  315-320, provides for
the free and open examination of public records, including emissions
reports. Furthermore, 10 V.S.A. Sec.  563 specifically provides that
the ANR ``Secretary shall not withhold emissions data and emission
monitoring data from public inspection or review'' and ``shall keep
confidential any record or other information furnished to or obtained
by the Secretary concerning an air contaminant source, other than
emissions data and emission monitoring data, that qualifies as a trade
secret pursuant to 1 V.S.A. Sec.  317(c)(9).'' (emphasis added). EPA
approved section 563 into the Vermont SIP on June 27, 2017. See 82 FR
29005.

    Consequently, EPA proposes that Vermont meets the infrastructure
SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(F) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.

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

    This section requires that a plan provide for state authority
analogous to that provided to the EPA Administrator in section 303 of
the CAA, and adequate contingency plans to implement such authority.
Section 303 of the CAA provides authority to the EPA Administrator to
seek a court order to restrain any source from causing or contributing
to emissions that present an ``imminent and substantial endangerment to
public health or welfare, or the environment.'' Section 303 further
authorizes the Administrator to issue ``such orders as may be necessary
to protect public health or welfare or the environment'' in the event
that ``it is not practicable to assure prompt protection . . . by
commencement of such civil action.''
    On June 27, 2017, EPA approved a Vermont SIP revision addressing
the requirement that the plan provide for state authority comparable to
that in section 303 of the CAA. See 82 FR 29005. For a detailed
analysis explaining how Vermont meets this requirement, see EPA's
notice of proposed rulemaking for that action. See 82 FR 15671, 15679
(March 30, 2017). For the reasons provided in the March 2017 notice, we
are proposing to approve the state's submittal for this requirement of
Section 110(a)(2)(G) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
    Section 110(a)(2)(G) also requires that Vermont have an approved
contingency plan for any Air Quality Control Region (AQCR) within the
state that is classified as Priority I, IA, or II for certain
pollutants. See 40 CFR 51.150, 51.152(c). In general, contingency plans
for Priority I, IA, and II areas must meet the applicable requirements
of 40 CFR part 51, subpart H (40 CFR 51.150 through 51.153)
(``Prevention of Air Pollution Emergency Episodes'') for the relevant
NAAQS, if the NAAQS is covered by those regulations. Both AQCRs in
Vermont are classified as Priority III for ozone, 40 CFR 52.2371, and,
therefore, Vermont does not need to submit a contingency plan to
implement its emergency episode authority.\35\ Although not expected,
if ozone conditions were to change, Vermont does have general
authority, as noted previously (i.e., 10 V.S.A. Sec.  560 and 10 V.S.A.
Sec.  8009), to order a source to cease operations if it is determined
that emissions from the source pose an imminent danger to human health
or safety or an immediate threat of substantial harm to the
environment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \35\ Classification of regions in Vermont is available at
https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=73d43a45cf13909292d606aad27c9cc6&mc=true&node=se40.5.52_12371&rgn=div8 and ozone monitor values for individual monitoring sites
throughout Vermont are available at www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data/monitor-values-report.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, as stated in Vermont's infrastructure SIP submittal
under the discussion of public notification (Element J), Vermont posts
near real-time air quality data, air quality predictions and a record
of historical data on the VT DEC website and, when forecast or measured
ozone concentrations exceed the level of the 2015 ozone NAAQS,
distributes air quality alerts by email to many parties, including the
media and the National Weather Service. Alerts include information
about the health implications of elevated pollutant levels and list
actions to reduce emissions and to reduce the public's exposure. In
addition, daily forecasted ozone levels are also made available on the
internet through the EPA AirNow and EnviroFlash systems. Information
regarding these two systems is available on EPA's website at
www.airnow.gov. Notices are sent out to EnviroFlash participants when
levels are forecast to exceed the current ozone standard.
    EPA proposes that Vermont meets the applicable infrastructure SIP
requirements for section 110(a)(2)(G) with respect to contingency plans
for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.

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

    This section requires that a state's SIP provide for revision from
time to time as may be necessary to take account of changes in the
NAAQS or availability of improved methods for attaining the NAAQS and
whenever EPA finds that the SIP is substantially inadequate. To address
this requirement, Vermont's infrastructure submittal references 10
V.S.A. Sec.  554, which provides the Secretary of Vermont ANR with the
power to ``[p]repare and develop a comprehensive plan or plans for the
prevention, abatement and control of air pollution in this state'' and
to ``[a]dopt, amend and repeal rules, implementing the provisions'' of
Vermont's air pollution control laws set forth in 10 V.S.A. chapter 23.
EPA approved 10 V.S.A. Sec.  554 into the SIP on June 27, 2017. See 82
FR 29005. EPA proposes that Vermont meets the infrastructure SIP
requirements of CAA section 110(a)(2)(H) with respect to the 2015 ozone
NAAQS.

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

    Section 110(a)(2)(I) provides that each plan or plan revision for
an area designated as a nonattainment area shall meet the applicable
requirements of part D of the CAA. EPA interprets section 110(a)(2)(I)
to be inapplicable to the infrastructure SIP process because specific
SIP submissions for designated nonattainment areas, as required under
part D, are subject to a different submission schedule under subparts 2
through 5 of part D, extending as far as 10 years following area
designations for some elements, whereas infrastructure SIP submissions
are due within three years after adoption or revision of a NAAQS.
Accordingly, EPA takes action on part D attainment plans through
separate processes.

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

    Section 110(a)(2)(J) of the CAA requires that each SIP ``meet the
applicable requirements of section 121 of this title (relating to
consultation), section 127 of this title (relating to public
notification), and part C of this subchapter (relating to PSD of air
quality and visibility protection).'' The evaluation of the submission
from Vermont with respect to these requirements is described below.
Sub-Element 1: Consultation With Government Officials
    Pursuant to CAA section 121, a state must provide a satisfactory
process for consultation with local governments and Federal Land
Managers (FLMs) in carrying out its NAAQS implementation requirements.
    Vermont's 10 V.S.A. Sec.  554 specifies that the Secretary of
Vermont ANR shall have the power to ``[a]dvise, consult, contract and
cooperate with other agencies of the state, local governments,
industries, other states, interstate or interlocal agencies, and the
federal government, and with interested persons or groups.'' EPA
approved 10 V.S.A. Sec.  554 into the SIP on June 27, 2017. See 82 FR
29005. In addition, VT APCR Sec.  5-501(7)(c) requires VT ANR to
provide notice to local governments and federal land managers of a
determination by ANR to issue a draft PSD permit for a major stationary
source or major modification. On August 1, 2016, EPA approved VT APCR
Sec.  5-501(7)(c) into Vermont's SIP. See 81 FR

50342. Therefore, EPA proposes that Vermont meets the infrastructure
SIP requirements of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(J) for the 2015
ozone NAAQS.
Sub-Element 2: Public Notification
    Pursuant to CAA section 127, states must notify the public if NAAQS
are exceeded in an area, advise the public of health hazards associated
with exceedances, and enhance public awareness of measures that can be
taken to prevent exceedances and of ways in which the public can
participate in regulatory and other efforts to improve air quality.
    Vermont's 10 V.S.A. Sec.  554 authorizes the Secretary of Vermont
ANR to ``[c]ollect and disseminate information and conduct educational
and training programs relating to air contamination and air
pollution.'' In addition, the VT DEC Air Quality and Climate Division
website includes near real-time air quality data, and a record of
historical data. Air quality forecasts are distributed daily via email
to interested parties. Air quality alerts are sent by email to a large
number of affected parties, including the media. Alerts include
information about the health implications of elevated pollutant levels
and list actions to reduce emissions and to reduce the public's
exposure. Also, Air Quality Data Summaries of the year's air quality
monitoring results are issued annually and posted on the VT DEC Air
Quality and Climate Division website. Vermont is also an active partner
in EPA's AirNow and EnviroFlash air quality alert programs.
    EPA proposes that Vermont meets the infrastructure SIP requirements
of this portion of section 110(a)(2)(J) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
Sub-Element 3: PSD
    EPA has already discussed Vermont's PSD program in the context of
infrastructure SIPs in the paragraphs addressing section 110(a)(2)(C)
and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) and determined that it satisfies the
requirements of EPA's PSD implementation rules. Therefore, the SIP also
satisfies the PSD sub-element of section 110(a)(2)(J) for the 2015
ozone NAAQS.
Sub-Element 4: Visibility Protection
    With regard to the applicable requirements for visibility
protection, states are subject to visibility and regional haze program
requirements under part C of the CAA (which includes sections 169A and
169B). In the event of the establishment of a new NAAQS, however, the
visibility and regional haze program requirements under part C do not
change. Thus, as noted in EPA's 2013 memorandum, we find that there is
no new visibility obligation ``triggered'' under section 110(a)(2)(J)
when a new NAAQS becomes effective. In other words, the visibility
protection requirements of section 110(a)(2)(J) are not germane to
infrastructure SIPs for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
    Based on the above analysis, EPA proposes that Vermont meets the
infrastructure SIP requirements of sub-elements 1-3 of section
110(a)(2)(J) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. We are not proposing action on
sub-element 4 because, as noted above, it is not germane to
infrastructure SIPs.

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

    Section 110(a)(2)(K) of the Act requires that a SIP provide for the
performance of such air quality modeling as the EPA Administrator may
prescribe for the purpose of predicting the effect on ambient air
quality of any emissions of any air pollutant for which EPA has
established a NAAQS, and the submission, upon request, of data related
to such air quality modeling. EPA has published modeling guidelines at
40 CFR part 51, Appendix W, for predicting the effects of emissions of
criteria pollutants on ambient air quality. EPA also recommends in the
2013 memorandum that, to meet section 110(a)(2)(K), a state submit or
reference the statutory or regulatory provisions that provide the air
agency with the authority to conduct such air quality modeling and to
provide such modeling data to EPA upon request.
    In its submittal, Vermont cites to VT APCR Sec.  5-406, Required
Air Modeling, which authorizes ``[t]he Air Pollution Control Officer
[to] require the owner or operator of any proposed air contaminant
source . . . to conduct . . . air quality modeling and to submit an air
quality impact evaluation to demonstrate that operation of the proposed
source . . . will not directly or indirectly result in a violation of
any ambient air quality standard, interfere with the attainment of any
ambient air quality standard, or violate any applicable prevention of
significant deterioration increment . . . .'' Vermont reviews the
potential impact of such sources consistent with EPA's ``Guidelines on
Air Quality Models'' at 40 CFR part 51, appendix W. See VT APCR Sec.
5-406(2). Vermont also cites to VT APCR Sec.  5-502, Major Stationary
Sources and Major Modifications, which requires the submittal of an air
quality impact evaluation or air quality modeling to ANR to demonstrate
impacts of new and modified major sources, in accordance with VT APCR
Sec.  5-406. The modeling data are sent to EPA along with the draft
major permit. As a result, the SIP provides for such air quality
modeling as the Administrator has prescribed and for the submission,
upon request, of data related to such modeling.
    The state also collaborates with the Ozone Transport Commission
(OTC) and the Mid-Atlantic Regional Air Management Association and EPA
in order to perform large-scale urban air shed modeling for ozone and
PM, if necessary. EPA proposes that Vermont meets the infrastructure
SIP requirements of section 110(a)(2)(K) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.

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

    This section requires SIPs to mandate that each major stationary
source pay permitting fees to cover the costs of reviewing, approving,
implementing, and enforcing a permit.
    Vermont state law requires application fees for construction or
modification permits for major stationary sources, 10 V.S.A. Sec.  556;
VT APCR Sec.  5-504, and sets forth fee amounts, 3 V.S.A. Sec.
2822(j)(1)(A)(ii)(I). State law also requires major stationary sources
to pay annual registration renewal fees. Id. Sec.  2822(j)(1)(B); VT
APCR Sec. Sec.  5-802, 5-806. Moreover, EPA fully approved Vermont's
Title V permit program, see VT APCR subchapter X, on November 29, 2001.
See 66 FR 59535; see also 40 CFR part 70, appendix A. To gain this
approval, Vermont demonstrated that the annual fees required of Title V
sources (which includes major stationary sources) under State law are
sufficient to cover the costs of reviewing, approving, implementing,
and enforcing the permits. See 61 FR 26145 (May 24, 1996).
    Therefore, EPA proposes that Vermont meets the infrastructure SIP
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(L) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.

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

    To satisfy Element M, states must provide for consultation with,
and participation by, local political subdivisions affected by the SIP.
Vermont's infrastructure submittal references 10 V.S.A. Sec.  554,
which was approved into the VT SIP on June 27, 2017. See 82 FR 29005.
This statute authorizes the Secretary of Vermont ANR to ``[a]dvise,
consult, contract and cooperate with other agencies of the state, local
governments, industries, other states, interstate or interlocal
agencies, and the federal government,

and with interested persons or groups.'' In addition, VT APCR Sec.  5-
501(7) provides for notification to local officials and agencies about
the opportunity for participating in permitting determinations for the
construction or modification of major sources. EPA proposes that
Vermont meets the infrastructure SIP requirements of section
110(a)(2)(M) with respect to the 2015 ozone NAAQS.

N. Vermont Executive Order Submitted for Incorporation Into the SIP

    Vermont's November 19, 2019, infrastructure SIP submittal for the
2015 ozone NAAQS included State of Vermont Executive Order (E.O.) 19-
17, Executive Code of Ethics. As requested by Vermont, EPA is proposing
to approve E.O. 19-17 into the Vermont SIP and, because E.O. 19-17
supersedes and replaces E.O. 09-11, to remove E.O. 09-11 from the
Vermont SIP.

III. Proposed Action.

    EPA is proposing to approve the elements of the infrastructure SIP
submitted by Vermont on November 19, 2019, for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
Specifically, EPA's proposed action regarding each infrastructure SIP
requirement is contained in Table 1 below.

 Table 1--Proposed Action on Vermont's Infrastructure SIP Submittal for
                          the 2015 Ozone NAAQS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                  Element                            2015 Ozone
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(A): Emission limits and other control      A
 measures.
(B): Ambient air quality monitoring and     A
 data system.
(C)1: Enforcement of SIP measures.........  A
(C)2: PSD program for major sources and     A
 major modifications.
(C)3: PSD program for minor sources and     A
 minor modifications.
(D)1: Contribute to nonattainment/          A
 interfere with maintenance of NAAQS.
(D)2: PSD.................................  A
(D)3: Visibility Protection...............  A
(D)4: Interstate Pollution Abatement......  A
(D)5: International Pollution Abatement...  A
(E)1: Adequate resources..................  A
(E)2: State boards........................  A
(E)3: Necessary assurances with respect to  NA
 local agencies.
(F): Stationary source monitoring system..  A
(G): Emergency power......................  A
(H): Future SIP revisions.................  A
(I): Nonattainment area plan or plan        +
 revisions under part D.
(J)1: Consultation with government          A
 officials.
(J)2: Public notification.................  A
(J)3: PSD.................................  A
(J)4: Visibility protection...............  +
(K): Air quality modeling and data........  A
(L): Permitting fees......................  A
(M): Consultation and participation by      A
 affected local entities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the above table, the key is as follows:

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
A......................................  Approve
NA.....................................  Not applicable
+......................................  Not germane to infrastructure
                                          SIPs
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, EPA is proposing to approve, and incorporate into the
Vermont SIP, the following Executive Order, which was included for
approval in Vermont's infrastructure SIP submittal:
    State of Vermont Executive Order No. 19-17, Executive Code of
Ethics, effective December 4, 2017.
    EPA is also proposing to remove State of Vermont Executive Order
No. 09-11, Executive Code of Ethics, which has been superseded and
replaced by Executive Order No. 19-17.
    EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this
notice or on other relevant matters. These comments will be considered
before taking final action. Interested parties may participate in the
Federal rulemaking procedure by submitting written comments to this
proposed rule by following the instructions listed in the ADDRESSES
section of this Federal Register.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the Vermont executive order regarding the State's executive
code of ethics discussed in Section II of this preamble. EPA has made,
and will continue to make, these documents generally available through
https://www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 1 Office (please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this preamble for more information).

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     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);
     Is not expected to be an Executive Order 13771 regulatory
action because this action is not significant under Executive Order
12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: March 24, 2020.
Dennis Deziel,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1.
[FR Doc. 2020-06659 Filed 3-31-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P