Daily Rules, Proposed Rules, and Notices of the Federal Government
Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean EPA.
EPA has recently undertaken a series of actions pertaining to the regulation of GHGs that, although for the most part distinct from one another, establish the overall framework for today's final action on the Vermont SIP. Four of these actions include, as they are commonly called, the “Endangerment Finding” and “Cause or Contribute Finding,” which EPA issued in a single final action,
Recognizing that some states had approved SIP PSD programs that do apply PSD to GHGs, but that do so for sources that emit as little as 100 or 250 tons per year of GHG, and do not limit PSD applicability to GHGs to the higher thresholds in the Tailoring Rule, EPA published a final rule on December 30, 2010, narrowing its previous approval of PSD programs as applicable to GHG-emitting sources in SIPs for 24 states, including Vermont (PSD Narrowing Rule).
On February 14, 2011, in response to the Tailoring Rule and earlier GHG-related EPA rules, VT DEC submitted a revision to EPA for approval into the Vermont SIP to establish appropriate emission thresholds for determining which new or modified stationary sources become subject to PSD permitting requirements for GHG emissions. Subsequently, on August 16, 2012 (77 FR 49404), EPA published a proposed approval of this SIP submittal. Specifically, Vermont's February 14, 2011 SIP revision establishes appropriate emissions thresholds for determining PSD applicability to new and modified GHG-emitting sources in accordance with EPA's Tailoring Rule. Detailed background information and EPA's rationale for the proposed approval are provided in EPA's August 16, 2012,
The public comment period on the proposed approval of Vermont's SIP revision ended on September 17, 2012. EPA did not receive any comments on the proposed approval of this SIP revision.
Final approval of Vermont's February 14, 2011 SIP revision incorporates changes to the state's rules to establish the GHG emission thresholds for PSD applicability set forth in EPA's Tailoring Rule, confirming that smaller GHG sources emitting less than these thresholds will not be subject to PSD permitting requirements under the approved Vermont SIP. EPA has determined the SIP revision approved by today's action is consistent with EPA's regulations, including the Tailoring Rule. Furthermore, EPA has determined this SIP revision is consistent with section 110 of the CAA; therefore, EPA is approving this revision into Vermont's SIP.
As a result of today's action approving Vermont's incorporation of the appropriate GHG permitting thresholds into its SIP, paragraph 40 CFR 52.2372(b), as included in EPA's PSD Narrowing Rule, is no longer necessary.
Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, EPA is approving Vermont's February 14, 2011 SIP revision, relating to PSD requirements for GHG-emitting sources. Our approval includes amendments to Subchapter I as follows: new definitions of “Greenhouse Gases” and “Subject to Regulation,” amendments to the definition of “Major Stationary Source,” and the addition of a provision regarding significance levels of greenhouse gases to the definition of “Significant.”
These revisions establish appropriate emissions thresholds for determining PSD applicability with respect to new or modified GHG-emitting stationary sources in accordance with EPA's June 3, 2010, Tailoring Rule. With this approval, EPA also amends 40 CFR 52.2372 by removing subsection (b).
EPA has made the determination this SIP revision is approvable because it is in accordance with the CAA and EPA regulations regarding PSD permitting for GHGs. The detailed rationale for this action is set forth in the proposed rulemaking referenced above, and in this final rule.
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
• Is not a “significant regulatory action” subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions
• 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
• 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, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 4, 2012. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)).
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
The revisions and addition read as follows.
(c) * * *