Overview
Title
Reference Measurement Principle and Calibration Procedure for the Measurement of Ozone in the Atmosphere (Chemiluminescence Method); Correction
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The EPA made a small fix to a rule about measuring ozone in the air because they got the dates mixed up; now, they say all the areas need to follow the new rule by the end of December 2026. This fix doesn’t change what the rule does, so you don’t need to say anything about it.
Summary AI
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued corrections to a previously published final rule about ozone measurement standards. The original rule updated the value for measuring ozone in the air but contained errors about when certain monitoring agencies should fully implement this change. Now, the EPA clarifies that full implementation by state, local, and Tribal monitoring agencies should be completed by December 31, 2026, rather than January 1, 2026. These updates do not change the rule's substance, so the EPA concluded that the corrections don't require public comments.
Abstract
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is correcting a final rule published in the Federal Register on October 12, 2023, that became effective on November 13, 2023. The final rule updated the current ozone absorption cross-section to the recommended consensus- based value of 1.1329x10<SUP>-17</SUP> cm\2\ molecule<SUP>-1</SUP> or 304.39 atm<SUP>-1</SUP> cm<SUP>-1</SUP>. After publication, the EPA became aware of an error in the preamble text regarding the date for State, local, and Tribal monitoring agencies to complete implementation of the new ozone cross-section value, as well as a lack of clarity as to which entities the 2025 and 2026 implementation dates apply. With this action, the EPA is updating the final rule preamble and regulatory text to clarify the applicable implementation dates and the specific entities to which they apply. These corrections do not include any substantive changes to the final rule.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
Summary of the Document
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has taken steps to correct a previous final rule concerning the measurement of ozone in the atmosphere. Originally published in the Federal Register on October 12, 2023, the rule aimed to update the ozone measurement standards based on recent scientific consensus. However, it contained errors regarding the completion dates for the implementation by State, local, and Tribal monitoring agencies. The EPA clarifies that the full implementation of this updated measurement standard should be achieved by December 31, 2026, instead of the previously stated January 1, 2026. The corrections are technical in nature and do not change the essence of the original rule. This has prompted the EPA to forgo the usual procedures for public comment, as it deemed the changes minor and non-substantive.
Significant Issues and Concerns
One notable issue with the document is its use of technical language that might not be easily understood by the general public. Terms like "ozone absorption cross-section" might bewilder readers who are not familiar with scientific or regulatory jargon. Furthermore, the initial mistake regarding the implementation dates highlights a communication error by the EPA that required correction. Moreover, the document’s legal references, such as the Administrative Procedure Act, may not be clear to individuals without a background in legal studies.
Public Impact
For the broader public, the corrected rule ensures that there is a clear and uniform timeline for updating ozone measurement practices across various monitoring agencies. This is crucial for maintaining the integrity of air quality assessments, which, in turn, affects public health and environmental policy. By standardizing these practices, the EPA aims to promote more accurate and reliable data on which future environmental decisions can be based.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
The corrections specifically impact State, local, and Tribal monitoring agencies responsible for implementing the updated ozone measurement standard. These entities now have an extended timeline, until the end of 2026, to adapt to the new standards. This extension may alleviate potential pressures on these agencies, allowing them more time to arrange for the necessary updates without the burden of additional costs. On the other hand, the decision to bypass the public commenting process might raise concerns among stakeholders who prefer more opportunities for input, particularly when it comes to modifications that affect regulatory frameworks.
Overall, while the rule correction seeks to rectify previous inaccuracies, it also underscores the need for clear and consistent communication from regulatory bodies to ensure that all affected parties are on the same page. The straightforward resolution of these issues should reassure stakeholders of the EPA's commitment to improving air quality standards through precision and clarity in its regulations.
Issues
• The document contains some complex technical language, such as 'ozone absorption cross-section value of 1.1329x10−17 cm2 molecule−1 or 304.39 atm−1 cm−1', which may be difficult for general readers to understand.
• The summary mentions 'an error in the preamble text regarding the date for State, local, and Tribal monitoring agencies to complete implementation', but does not clearly specify what the original incorrect dates were. This might lead to some confusion.
• The document addresses a correction due to a previous lack of clarity regarding the entities to which certain dates apply, which indicates that previous communications were ambiguous.
• There is no mention of potential costs associated with the time needed to implement the changes across all the relevant entities, which might be of interest to stakeholders.
• The justification for evading the usual notice and comment rulemaking process by citing 'good cause' could be seen as bypassing public input, especially when the necessity for immediate implementation versus fairness is a matter of interpretation.
• The heavy use of legal and bureaucratic terminology may pose comprehension challenges for individuals not familiar with regulatory processes, such as references to specific sections of the Administrative Procedure Act.