Air Quality Designations and Classifications for the Fine Particles (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 944-1019 [05-1]

Agencies

• ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 3 (Wednesday, January 5, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 944-1019]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-1]



[[Page 943]]

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

Part II





Environmental Protection Agency





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



40 CFR Part 81



Air Quality Designations and Classifications for the Fine Particles 
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 3 / Wednesday, January 5, 2005 / 
Rules and Regulations

[[Page 944]]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 81

[OAR-2003-0061; FRL-7856-1]
RIN-2060-AM04


Air Quality Designations and Classifications for the Fine 
Particles (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule sets forth the initial air quality designations and 
classifications for all areas in the United States, including Indian 
country, for the fine particles (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality 
Standards (NAAQS). The EPA is issuing this rule so that citizens will 
know whether the air quality where they live and work is healthful or 
unhealthful. Health studies have shown significant associations between 
exposure to PM2.5 and premature death from heart or lung disease. Fine 
particles can also aggravate heart and lung diseases and have been 
linked to effects such as cardiovascular symptoms, cardiac arrhythmias, 
heart attacks, respiratory symptoms, asthma attacks, and bronchitis. 
These effects can result in increased hospital emissions, emergency 
room visits, absences from school or work, and restricted activity 
days.
    Individuals that may be particularly sensitive to PM2.5 exposure 
include people with heart or lung disease, older adults, and children. 
This rule establishes the boundaries for areas designated as 
nonattainment, unclassifiable, or attainment/unclassifiable. This rule 
does not establish or address State and Tribal obligations for planning 
and control requirements that apply to nonattainment areas for the 
PM2.5 standards. The EPA will publish a separate rule which will set 
forth the planning and control requirements that apply to nonattainment 
areas for the PM2.5 standards.

DATES: The effective date of this rule is April 5, 2005.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under 
Docket ID NO. OAR-2003-0061. All documents in the docket are listed in 
the EDOCKET index at https://www.epa.gov/edocket. Although listed in the 
index, some information is not publicly available i.e., Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted 
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available 
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are 
available either electronically in the EDOCKET or in hard copy at the 
Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., 
Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 
p.m. Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone 
number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone 
number for the Office of Air and Radiation Docket and Information 
Center is (202) 566-1742. In addition, we have placed a copy of the 
rule and a variety of materials regarding designations on EPA's 
designation Web site at: https://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/particles/
designations/index.htm and on the Tribal Web site at: https://www/
epa.gov/air/tribal.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Designations: Mr. Rich Damberg, Office 
of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Mail Code C504-02, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, phone 
number (919) 541-5592 or by e-mail at: damberg.rich@epa.gov.
    Designations and Part 81 Code of Federal Regulations: Dr. Larry D. 
Wallace, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code C504-02, Research Triangle 
Park, NC 27711, phone number (919) 541-0906 or by e-mail at: 
wallace.larry@epa.gov. Technical Issues Related to Designations: Mr. 
Thomas Rosendahl, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Mail Code C504-02, Research Triangle 
Park, NC 27711, phone number (919) 541-5314 or by e-mail at: 
rosendahl.tom@epa.gov.
    PM2.5 Air Quality Data Issues: Mr. Mark Schmidt, Office of Air 
Quality Planning and Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Mail Code C304-01, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, phone number (919) 
541-5314 or by e-mail at: schmidt.mark@epa.gov.
    Regional Office Contacts:
    Region I--Alison Simcox (617) 918-1684,
    Region II--Kenneth Fradkin (212) 637-3702,
    Region III--Denny Lohman (215) 814-2191,
    Region IV--Steve Scofield (404) 562-9034,
    Region V--John Summerhays (312) 886-6067,
    Region VI--Joe Kordzi (214) 665-7186,
    Region VII--Amy Algoe-Eakin (913) 551-7942,
    Region VIII--Libby Faulk (303) 312-6083,
    Region IX--Eleanor Kaplan (415) 744-1286,
    Region X--Keith Rose (206) 553-1949.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The public may inspect the rule and the 
technical support information at the following locations:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Regional offices                          States
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave Conroy, Acting Branch Chief, Air    Connecticut, Maine,
 Programs Branch, EPA New England, I      Massachusetts, New Hampshire,
 Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston,     Rhode Island, and Vermont.
 MA 02114-2023, (617) 918-1661.
Raymond Werner, Chief, Air Programs      New Jersey, New York, Puerto
 Branch, EPA Region II, 290 Broadway,     Rico, and Virgin Islands.
 25th Floor, New York, NY 10007-1866,
 (212) 637-4249.
Makeba Morris, Branch Chief, Air         Delaware, District of Columbia,
 Quality Planning Branch, EPA Region      Maryland, Pennsylvania,
 III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia,     Virginia, and West Virginia.
 PA 19103-2187, (215) 814-2187.
Richard A. Schutt, Chief, Regulatory     Alabama, Florida, Georgia,
 Development Section, EPA Region IV,      Kentucky, Mississippi, North
 Sam Nun Atlanta Federal Center, 61       Carolina, South Carolina, and
 Forsyth, Street, SW, 12th Floor,         Tennessee.
 Atlanta, GA 30303, (404) 562-9033.
Jay Bortzer, Chief, Air Programs         Illinois, Indiana, Michigan,
 Branch, EPA Region V, 77 West Jackson    Minnesota, Ohio, and
 Street, Chicago, IL 60604, (312) 886-    Wisconsin.
 4447.
Donna Ascenzi, Acting Associate          Arkansas, Louisiana, New
 Director, Air Programs, EPA Region VI,   Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas.
 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202,
 (214) 665-2725.
Joshua A. Tapp, Chief, Air Programs      Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, and
 Branch, EPA Region VII, 901 North 5th    Nebraska.
 Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101-
 2907, (913) 551-7606.

[[Page 945]]

 
Richard R. Long, Director, Air and       Colorado, Montana, North
 Radiation Program, EPA Region VIII,      Dakota, South Dakota, Utah,
 999 18th, Suite 300, Denver, CO 80202,   and Wyoming.
 (303) 312-6005.
Steven Barhite, Air Planning Office,     Arizona, California, Guam,
 EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street,      Hawaii, and Nevada.
 San Francisco, CA 94105, (415) 972-
 3980.
Mahbubul Islam, Manager, State and       Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, and
 Tribal Air Programs, EPA Region X,       Washington.
 Office of Air, Waste, and Toxics, Mail
 Code OAQ-107, 1200 Sixth Avenue,
 Seattle, WA 98101, (206) 553-6985.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table of Contents

    The following is an outline of the Preamble.
I. Preamble Glossary of Terms and Acronyms
II. What is the Purpose of this Document?
III. What are Fine Particles?
IV. What are the Health Concerns Addressed by the PM2.5 Standard?
V. What is the Chronology of Events Leading Up to This Rule?
VI. What are the Clean Air Act (CAA) Requirements for Air Quality 
Designations and What Action has EPA Taken to Meet These 
Requirements?
VII. What Guidance Did EPA Issue and How Did EPA Apply the Statutory 
Requirements and Applicable Guidance To Determine Boundaries for the 
PM2.5 NAAQS?
VIII. Has EPA Used 2004 Air Quality Data?
IX. How Do Designations Affect Indian Country?
X. Where Can I Find Information Forming the Basis for This Rule and 
Exchanges Between EPA, States, and Tribes Related to This Rule?
XI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
    A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
    B. Paperwork Reduction Act
    C. Regulatory Flexibility Act
    D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
    F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination with 
Indian Tribal Governments
    G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
    H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect 
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
    I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act (NTTAA)
    J. Congressional Review Act
    K. Judicial Review

I. Preamble Glossary of Terms and Acronyms

    The following are abbreviations of terms used in the preamble.

CAA Clean Air Act
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CMAQ Congestion Mitigation Air Quality
CMSA Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area
D.C. District of Columbia
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FR Federal Register
MPO Metropolitan Planning Organizations
MSA Metropolitan Statistical Area
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standard
NOX Nitrogen Oxides
NOA Notice of Availability
NPR Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NSR New Source Review
OMB Office of Management and Budget
RTC Response to Comment
SIP State Implementation Plan
TAR Tribal Authority Rule
TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century
TPY Tons Per Year
TSD Technical Support Document
U.S. United States
VOC Volatile Organic Compounds

II. What Is the Purpose of This Document?

    The purpose of this document is to announce and promulgate 
designations and boundaries for areas of the country with respect to 
the PM2.5 NAAQS in accordance with the requirements of the CAA. The 
list of areas in each State, the boundaries of each area, and the 
designation of each area, appear in the table at the end of this final 
rule. This rule was signed by the EPA Administrator, Mike Leavitt, on 
December 17, 2004. Several steps were taken to announce that this rule 
is available. We posted the notice on several EPA Web sites and 
provided a copy of the rule to States and Tribes.

III. What Are Fine Particles?

    Fine particles in the atmosphere are made up of a complex mixture 
of components. Common constituents include: sulfate (SO4); 
nitrate (NO3); ammonium (NH4); elemental carbon; a great 
variety of organic compounds; water; and inorganic material (including 
metals, dust, sea salt, and other trace elements), which often is 
categorized as ``crustal'' material. Airborne particles with a nominal 
aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less (a micrometer is one-
millionth of a meter; 2.5 micrometers is less than about one-thirtieth 
the thickness of a human hair) are considered to be ``fine particles,'' 
and are also known as PM2.5. ``Primary'' particles are emitted directly 
into the air as a solid or liquid particle (e.g., elemental carbon and 
organic particles from diesel engines or burning activities). 
``Secondary'' particles (e.g., sulfate and nitrate) form in the 
atmosphere as a result of various chemical transformations of gaseous 
precursors such as sulfur dioxide (SO2) and oxides of 
nitrogen (NOX).

IV. What Are the Health Concerns Addressed by the PM2.5 Standard?

    Epidemiological studies have shown a significant association 
between elevated PM2.5 levels and a number of serious health effects, 
including premature mortality, aggravation of respiratory and 
cardiovascular disease (as indicated by increased hospital admissions, 
emergency room visits, absences from school or work, and restricted 
activity days), lung disease, decreased lung function, asthma attacks, 
and certain cardiovascular problems such as heart attacks and cardiac 
arrhythmia. Individuals particularly sensitive to PM2.5 exposure 
include older adults, people with heart and lung disease, and children.
    More information on the health effects of PM2.5 can be found at the 
following Web site: https://www.epa.gov/ttn/naaqs/pm/pm25_index.html.

V. What Is the Chronology of Events Leading Up to This Rule?

    This section summarizes the relevant activities leading up to 
today's action, including promulgation of the PM2.5 NAAQS and 
litigation challenging that standard. The CAA establishes a process for 
air quality management through the establishment and implementation of 
the NAAQS. After the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, EPA is 
required to designate areas, pursuant to section 107(d)(1) of the CAA, 
as attainment, nonattainment, or unclassifiable.
    On July 18, 1997, EPA revised the NAAQS for particulate matter to 
add new standards for PM2.5, using PM2.5 as the indicator for the 
pollutant. The EPA established health-based (primary) annual and 24-
hour standards for PM2.5 (62 FR 38652). The annual standard is a level 
of 15 micrograms per cubic meter, based on a 3-year average of annual 
mean PM2.5 concentrations. The

[[Page 946]]

24-hour standard is a level 65 micrograms per cubic meter, based on a 
3-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations. The 
EPA established the standards based on significant evidence and 
numerous health studies demonstrating that serious health effects are 
associated with exposures to particulate matter.
    The PM2.5 NAAQS were challenged by numerous litigants and in May 
1999, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a decision 
remanding, but not vacating, the standards. American Trucking Assoc. v. 
EPA, 175 F.3d 1027, 1047-48, on rehearing 195 F.3d 4 (D.C. Cir., 1999). 
The EPA sought review of two aspects of that decision in the U.S. 
Supreme Court. The Supreme Court upheld the PM2.5 standards. EPA v. 
American Trucking Assoc., 531 U.S. 457 (2001). In March 2002, the D.C. 
Circuit rejected all remaining challenges to the PM2.5 standards, 
American Trucking Assoc. v. EPA, 283 F.3d 355 (D.C. Cir., 2002). Since 
final resolution of the litigation over the PM2.5 NAAQS, EPA has been 
acting to implement the standards.
    The process for designating areas following promulgation of a new 
or revised NAAQS is contained in section 107(d)(1) of the CAA. In June 
1998, Congress adopted the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st 
Century (TEA-21). Section 6102(c)(1)(d) of TEA-21 amended section 107 
of the CAA by extending the time period for EPA to initiate the 
designations process for the PM2.5 NAAQS until 3 calendar years of air 
quality data, measured at Federal Reference Method monitors, were 
gathered. The EPA and State air quality agencies initiated the 
monitoring process for the PM2.5 NAAQS in 1999, and deployed all air 
quality monitors by January 2001. The EPA is designating areas across 
the country for the PM2.5 NAAQS based upon air quality monitoring data 
from these monitors for calendar years 2001-2003.

VI. What Are the Clean Air Act (CAA) Requirements for Air Quality 
Designations and What Action has EPA Taken to Meet These Requirements?

    This section summarizes the provisions of section 107(d)(1) of the 
CAA which governs the process that States and EPA must follow in order 
to recommend and promulgate designations. Following the promulgation of 
a new or revised standard, each State Governor or Tribal leader has an 
opportunity to recommend air quality designations, including the 
appropriate boundaries for areas, to EPA. By no later than 120 days 
prior to promulgating designations, EPA is required to notify States or 
Tribes of any intended modifications to their boundaries that EPA deems 
necessary. States and Tribes then have an opportunity to provide a 
demonstration as to why the proposed modification indicated by EPA is 
inappropriate. Whether or not a State or Tribe provides a 
recommendation, EPA must promulgate the designation that it deems 
appropriate.
    In April 2003, EPA requested that States and Tribes submit their 
designation recommendations and supporting documentation to EPA by 
February 15, 2004. After receiving recommendations from the States and 
Tribes and carefully reviewing and evaluating each recommendation, EPA 
on June 28 and 29, 2004, provided a response to each State and Tribe 
indicating whether or not EPA intended to make modifications to the 
initial recommendations, and explaining EPA's reasons for making any 
such modifications. The EPA provided an opportunity for States and 
Tribes to respond to any proposed modifications to their initial 
boundary recommendations until September 1, 2004. In response to our 
June 28 and 29, 2004 letters, EPA received letters from many States and 
Tribes suggesting changes to EPA's modifications and providing 
additional information. The EPA evaluated each supplemental letter, and 
all of the timely technical support information provided, before 
arriving at the final designation decisions reflected in today's 
action. Some of the designations reflect our modifications to the State 
and Tribal recommendations. We have placed these State and Tribal 
letters, and our responses to the issues contained in them, in the EPA 
docket for this action.
    Tribal designation activities are covered under the authority of 
section 301(d) of the CAA. This provision of the CAA authorizes EPA to 
treat eligible Indian Tribes in the same manner as States. Pursuant to 
section 301(d)(2), we promulgated regulations, known as the Tribal 
Authority Rule (TAR), on February 12, 1999. 63 FR 7254, codified at 40 
CFR 49 (1999). This rule specifies those provisions of the CAA for 
which it is appropriate to treat Tribes as States. Under the TAR, 
Tribes may choose to develop and implement their own CAA programs, but 
are not required to do so. The TAR also establishes procedures and 
criteria by which Tribes may request from EPA a determination of 
eligibility for such treatment. The designations process contained in 
section 107(d) of the CAA is included among those provisions determined 
to be appropriate by EPA for treatment of Tribes in the same manner as 
States. As authorized by the TAR, Tribes may request an opportunity to 
submit designation recommendations to us. In cases where Tribes do not 
make their own recommendations, EPA, in consultation with the Tribes, 
will promulgate the designation that EPA deems appropriate on their 
behalf. All Tribes were invited to submit recommendations concerning 
designations for PM2.5.
    The EPA worked with the Tribes that requested an opportunity to 
submit designation recommendations. Eligible Tribes were provided an 
opportunity to submit their own recommendations and supporting 
documentation. The EPA reviewed the recommendations made by Tribes and, 
in consultation with the Tribes, made modifications as deemed necessary 
and appropriate. Under the TAR, Tribes generally are not subject to the 
same submission schedules imposed by the CAA on States.

VII. What Guidance Did EPA Issue and How Did EPA Apply the Statutory 
Requirements and Applicable Guidance To Determine Boundaries for the 
PM2.5 NAAQS?

    Section 107(d)(1)(A)(I) of the CAA defines a nonattainment area as 
an area that is violating an ambient standard or is contributing to air 
quality in a nearby area that is violating the standard. If an area 
meets either prong of this definition, then EPA is obligated to 
designate the area as nonattainment. Section 107(d)(1)(A)(iii) provides 
that any area which EPA cannot designate on the basis of available 
information as meeting or not meeting the standards should be 
designated unclassifiable.
    In April 2003, EPA issued designation guidance concerning how to 
determine the boundaries for PM2.5 nonattainment areas.\1\ The guidance 
provided that EPA would use the 3 most recent calendar years of 
monitoring data for PM2.5 to determine each county's designation. For 
today's PM2.5 designations, we are basing our decision on air quality 
monitoring data from calendar years 2001-2003. When evaluating 
individual areas, we started with the premise that data recorded by a 
PM2.5 monitor in most cases represents air quality throughout the area 
in which it is located. In addition, we considered the county boundary 
as the basic jurisdictional boundary for determining the extent of the 
area reflected by the PM2.5 monitor. As a result, if a PM2.5

[[Page 947]]

monitor was violating the standard based on the 2001-2003 data, at a 
minimum we designated the entire county where that monitor is located 
as nonattainment. We made exceptions to this approach in a few very 
large western counties where a significant geographic feature such as a 
mountain range divided a county, resulting in different air quality in 
different parts of the county. In such cases, we considered 
designations of partial counties to be appropriate. After identifying 
the counties with violating monitors, we then proceeded to identify 
nearby counties that were potentially contributing to the violation(s) 
at the monitors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See ``Designations for the Fine Particle National Ambient 
Air Quality Standards.'' memorandum to Regional Administrators, 
Regions I-X, from Jeffrey R. Holmstead, Assistant Administrator, 
OAR, dated April 1, 2003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In assessing whether nearby areas contributed to a violation, EPA 
started with the Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area (CMSA) and 
the Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) as the presumptive boundaries 
for PM2.5 nonattainment areas. A metropolitan area, as defined by the 
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in 1999, consisted of a single 
MSA in some cases, or a CMSA in other cases. These metropolitan areas 
provide boundaries for the geographic extent of urban areas. We 
suggested the use of metropolitan area boundaries as the presumptive 
boundaries for urban nonattainment areas for air quality purposes, 
based upon evidence that violations of the PM2.5 air quality standards 
generally include a significant urban-scale contribution as well as a 
regional contribution. The actual size of each nonattainment area may 
be larger or smaller than the presumptive boundaries, depending upon 
the application of the nine factors contained in the April 2003 
designations guidance for PM2.5.
    In June 2003, OMB released a new list of metropolitan area 
descriptions. Because we had already issued the April 2003 designations 
guidance which recommended use of the 1999 OMB metropolitan definitions 
as a starting point, and because States and Tribes were already 
actively using this guidance in their planning efforts, we decided that 
it would be disruptive to recommend the use of the 2003 OMB definitions 
as the presumptive boundaries. Instead, we issued a second guidance 
memorandum in February 2004, which indicated that we would continue to 
consider the 1999 MSA boundaries as the presumptive boundaries, but 
that States should nevertheless take into consideration the 2003 OMB 
revised MSA boundaries. We particularly urged consideration of the 2003 
MSA boundaries for those counties that OMB added to an existing 
metropolitan area due to growth, or because of a high degree of social 
and economic integration with the primary urban area.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See ``Additional Guidiance on Defining Area Boundaries for 
PM-2.5 Designations,'' memorandum to Air Division Directors. Regions 
I-X, from Lydia N. Wegman, Director, AQSSD, dated February 13, 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The April 2003 guidance memorandum described nine factors that EPA 
would take into consideration in determining appropriate nonattainment 
area boundaries, whether larger or smaller than the presumptive 
boundaries: (1) Emissions and air quality in adjacent areas (including 
adjacent CMSAs and MSAs), (2) air quality in potentially included 
versus excluded areas, (3) population density and degree of 
urbanization including commercial development in included versus 
excluded areas, (4) traffic and commuting patterns, (5) expected growth 
(including extent, pattern and rate of growth), (6) meteorology 
(weather/transport patterns), (7) geography/topography (e.g., mountain 
ranges or other air basin boundaries), (8) jurisdictional boundaries 
(e.g., counties, air districts, Reservations, etc.), and (9) level of 
existing controls on emission sources.
    In assessing emissions under the first factor, we developed a 
``weighted emissions score'' that valued the effect of direct emissions 
of PM2.5 and its precursors that contribute to ``urban excess'' PM2.5 
concentrations at monitor sites. The ``urban excess'' concentrations 
for each PM2.5 component (direct or precursor emissions) are calculated 
from two PM2.5 speciation monitors by subtracting the regional 
concentration from the urban concentration for each component. The 
methodology we used to calculate urban excess concentration and the 
weighted emission score is explained in more detail in the technical 
support document (TSD).
    We used this metric to compare the relative emissions contribution 
of different counties in and around each metropolitan area. Using this 
approach, we were able to take into consideration, in a single metric, 
the county-level emissions of carbonaceous particles, inorganic 
particles, SO2, and NOX (all of which contribute 
to PM2.5 formation) in the vicinity of each violating monitor. By 
comparing weighted emissions scores across counties in a metropolitan 
area, EPA was able to identify those counties having the highest 
estimated emissions contribution to the local nonattainment problem. In 
addition, by examining the data from the urban speciation monitors, we 
could draw some conclusions concerning the likely sources of emissions 
contributing to the violation. Knowing the likely sources of the 
emissions, we could better evaluate which of the nearby counties had 
emissions likely to be contributing to the ambient concentrations at 
the violating monitor.
    Evaluation of the weighted emissions score and speciation data was 
an important element in our nine factor analysis, and we believe that 
it provided a reasonable tool for evaluating the relative contribution 
of nearby areas to violations at a monitor, given the variety of 
precursors and sources that participate in the formation of PM2.5. 
Further discussion of the weighted emissions score, and area-specific 
explanations of its application, appear in the TSD.
    In some cases, considering the factors and additional information 
provided by the State, we determined that only part of a nearby county 
(e.g., the part of the county that contained the significant sources of 
contributing emissions) should be considered as contributing to the 
violation at the monitor, and therefore included only a portion of that 
adjacent county in the nonattainment area. In other cases, we 
determined that the emissions from an identifiable large power plant in 
a county were contributing to the violations in a nearby area. In these 
cases, we concluded that it was appropriate to designate only the 
portion of the county where the source is located, even if that portion 
is not contiguous with the remainder of the nonattainment area. We 
adopted this approach where we determined, following the nine factor 
analysis, that it would be inappropriate to include other portions of a 
county, merely because those portions lay between the large stationary 
source and the remainder of the designated nonattainment area. We 
selected the boundaries for these noncontiguous portions of 
nonattainment areas by relying on legally recognized governmental 
boundaries (e.g., townships, tax districts, or census blocks) in which 
the source is located.
    We believe that the individual facts and circumstances of each area 
must be considered in determining whether to include a county as 
contributing to a particular nonattainment problem. Thus, our guidance 
does not establish bright lines or cut-points for how a particular 
factor is applied. For example, the guidance does not identify a set 
amount of a pollutant, or a specific level of commuting between 
counties, that would automatically require a county to be included in a 
nonattainment area as a contributing

[[Page 948]]

county. We analyzed the information provided by each State or Tribe in 
its recommendation letter, subsequently submitted information, and any 
other pertinent information available to EPA, in order to determine 
whether a county should be designated nonattainment. We evaluated each 
State's or Tribe's designation recommendation in light of the nine 
factors, bringing to bear our best technical and policy judgement. If 
the result of the evaluation showed that a county, whether inside or 
outside of the CMSA or MSA contributes to the violation in a nearby 
area with a violating monitor, we designated the area as nonattainment.
    In a small number of areas, EPA concluded that there was 
insufficient information to designate a given area as either 
nonattainment or attainment/unclassifiable. In these instances, we have 
designated the area as unclassifiable. In each instance, these areas 
had violating monitors for the years 2000-2002, but incomplete data or 
other data issues for the years 2001-2003. Further explanation of the 
unclassifiable designations may be found in the TSD for this action.
    The EPA did not rely on planned or potential regional PM2.5 
reduction strategies in making decisions regarding nonattainment 
designations, even if those strategies predict that an area may attain 
the standard in the future. We recognize that some areas with a 
violating monitor may be projected to come into attainment in the 
future without additional local emission controls because of State and/
or national programs that will reduce transported emissions. However, 
the CAA requires EPA to make nonattainment designations based on 
current data. While we cannot consider projected future attainment in 
determining current designations, we intend to expedite the 
redesignation of areas to attainment once they monitor clean air 
quality. We also intend to apply our policy which streamlines the 
planning process for nonattainment areas that are meeting the NAAQS but 
are not yet redesignated to attainment.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ See ``Clean Data Policy for the Fine Particle National 
Ambient Air Quality Standards'' memorandum to Air Division 
Directors, Regions I-X from Steve Page, Director, Office of Air 
Quality Planning and Standards, December 14, 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Today's designation action is a final rule which establishes 
designations for all areas of the country for the PM2.5 NAAQS. In this 
action, we have added regulatory text to provide for the amendment of 
40 CFR part 81 to identify the designation of areas across the country 
for the PM2.5 standard.

VIII. Has EPA Used 2004 Air Quality Data?

    The final PM2.5 designations announced in today's action are based 
upon air quality data for calendar years 2001 through 2003. Over the 
course of the designations process, a number of States have provided 
comments to EPA suggesting that the agency should delay designations in 
order to permit consideration of additional air quality data from 2004 
as a part of the designation decision. As discussed above, EPA must by 
law make the designations by December 31, 2004. This statutory deadline 
and the practical difficulties of obtaining complete,\4\ quality 
assured, certified data for calendar year 2004 by December 31, 2004, 
have precluded EPA from using 2004 data for today's action. Under 
normal circumstances, we would not expect such data to be available for 
some time following the end of the calendar year, and under the 
applicable regulations States would not be required to have submitted 
such data until April 1, 2005, and would not be required to have 
certified such data until July 1, 2005. However, because we are 
promulgating the designations so near the end of calendar year 2004, 
and because complete, quality assured, certified 2004 data may become 
available for some areas quickly, we are interested in providing a 
process by which we could utilize 2004 data where possible in the 
designation process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Fine particle monitoring data is to be determined as 
``complete'' according to data handling regulations for the PM2.5 
standards in 40 CFR Part 50, Appendix N (62 FR 138, July 18, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We have provided that the final PM2.5 designations announced in 
today's action will be effective on the date 90 days following the date 
of publication. If any State submits complete, quality assured, 
certified 2004 data to EPA by February 22, 2005, that suggest that a 
change of designation status is appropriate for any area within that 
State, and we agree that a change of designation status is appropriate, 
then we will withdraw the designation announced in today's action for 
such area and issue another designation that reflects the inclusion of 
2004 data. We emphasize that we will conduct this process only for 
those States that submit the necessary complete, quality assured, 
certified data by the deadline and in those instances where we can 
complete the analysis and effect the change of designation status 
before the original effective date established by today's final action.
    If inclusion of 2004 data causes an area to change from 
nonattainment to attainment, EPA will change the designation if every 
county in the area is neither monitoring a violation of the standards 
nor contributing to a violation of the standards in another nearby 
area. If inclusion of 2004 data results in nonattainment in an area 
that was designated attainment, we will evaluate the reasons for the 
violation in the area and determine the appropriate course of action, 
which could include redesignation of the area to nonattainment. Also, 
EPA commits to evaluate 2004 data for unclassifiable areas when it 
receives complete, quality assured, certified data from the State, 
which is due no later than July 2005. At that time, EPA will determine 
whether a change of designation for an unclassifiable area is 
appropriate.

IX. How Do Designations Affect Indian Country?

    All counties, partial counties or Air Quality Control Regions 
listed in the table at the end of this document are designated as 
indicated, and include Indian Country geographically located within 
such areas, except as otherwise indicated in the table.
    As mentioned earlier in this document, EPA's guidance for 
determining nonattainment area boundaries presumes that the CMSA or MSA 
monitor forms the presumptive boundary of the nonattainment areas but 
that the size of the area can be larger or smaller depending on 
contribution to the violation from nearby areas and other air quality-
related technical factors. In general, and consistent with relevant air 
quality information, EPA intends to include Indian country encompassed 
within the presumptive CMSA or MSA boundaries as within the boundaries 
of the area for designation purposes, in order to protect public health 
and welfare. The EPA anticipates that in most cases, relevant air 
quality information will indicate that areas of Indian country located 
within CMSAs or MSAs should have the same designation as the 
surrounding area. However, based on the nine factors outlined in our 
guidance, there may be instances where a different designation is 
appropriate.
    A State recommendation for a designation of an area that surrounds 
Indian country does not indicate the designation for Indian country. 
However, the conditions that support a State's designation 
recommendation, such as air quality data at the location of the 
sources, may indicate the likelihood that similar conditions exists for 
the Indian country located in that

[[Page 949]]

area. States generally have neither the responsibility nor the 
authority for planning and regulatory activities under the CAA in 
Indian country.

X. Where Can I Find Information Forming the Basis for This Rule and 
Exchanges Between EPA, States, and Tribes Related to This Rule?

    Information providing the basis for today's action and related 
decisions are provided in the TSD. The TSD, applicable EPA guidance 
memoranda, copies of correspondence regarding this process between EPA 
and the States, Tribes, and other parties, and EPA's responses to 
comments, are available for review at the EPA Docket Center listed 
above in the addresses section of this document and on our designation 
Web site at https://www.epa.gov/oar/oaqps/particles/designations/
index.htm. State specific information is available at the EPA Regional 
Offices.

XI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Upon promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the CAA requires EPA 
to designate areas as attaining or not attaining the NAAQS. The CAA 
then specifies requirements for areas based on whether such areas are 
attaining or not attaining the NAAQS. In this final rule, EPA assigns 
designations to areas as required.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), EPA 
must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and, 
therefore, subject to OMB review and the requirements of the Executive 
Order. The order defines ``significant regulatory action'' as one that 
is likely to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect on 
the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a material 
way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, 
jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or 
Tribal governments or communities; (2) create a serious inconsistency 
or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another 
agency; (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, 
grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of 
recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy issues arising 
out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles 
set forth in the Executive Order.
    Pursuant to the terms of Executive Order 12866, it has been 
determined that this rule is not a ``significant regulatory action'' 
because none of the above factors apply. As such, this final rule was 
not formally submitted to OMB for review.

B. Paperwork Reduction Act

    This action does not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. 
This rule responds to the requirement to promulgate air quality 
designations after promulgation of a NAAQS. This requirement is 
prescribed in the CAA section 107 of title 1. The present final rule 
does not establish any new information collection apart from that 
required by law. Burden means that total time, effort, or financial 
resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or 
disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This 
includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, 
install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of 
collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and 
maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; 
adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable 
instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to 
a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review 
the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the 
information. An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 
required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's 
regulations in the CFR are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency 
to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to 
notice and comment rulemaking requirements under the Administrative 
Procedures Act or any other statute unless the agency certifies that 
the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities. Small entities include small businesses, 
small organizations, and small governmental jurisdictions.
    For the purpose of assessing the impacts of today's final rule on 
small entities, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business that 
is a small industry entity as defined in the United States Small 
Business Administration (SBA) size standards (See 13 CFR part 121); (2) 
a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, 
county, town, school district or special district with a population of 
less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-
profit enterprise which is independently owned and operated and is not 
dominate in its field.
    The rule designating nonattainment areas for the PM2.5 NAAQS is not 
subject to RFA because it was not subject to notice and comment 
rulemaking requirements. See CAA section 107(d)(2)(B).
    After considering the economic impacts of today's final rule on 
small entities, I certify that this rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public 
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal Agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local and Tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, EPA 
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-benefit 
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandate'' that 
may result in expenditures to State, local, and Tribal governments, in 
the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 million or more in any 
1 year. Before promulgating an EPA rule for which a written statement 
is needed, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires EPA to identify 
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt 
the least costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative 
that achieves the objectives of the rule. The provisions of section 205 
do not apply when they are inconsistent with applicable law. Moreover, 
section 205 allows EPA to adopt an alternative other than the least 
costly, most cost-effective or least burdensome alternative if the 
Administrator publishes with the final rule an explanation of why that 
alternative was not adopted. Before EPA establishes any regulatory 
requirements that may significantly or uniquely affect small 
governments, including Tribal governments, it must have developed under 
section 203 of the UMRA a small government agency plan. The plan must 
provide for notifying potentially affected small governments to have 
meaningful and timely input in the development of EPA regulatory 
proposals with significant Federal intergovernmental mandates, and 
informing, educating, and advising small government on compliance with 
regulatory requirements.
    Today's final action does not include a Federal mandate within the 
meaning of UMRA that may result in expenditures of $100 million or more 
in any 1 year by either State, local, or

[[Page 950]]

Tribal governments in the aggregate or to the private sector, and 
therefore, is not subject to the requirements of sections 202 and 205 
of the UMRA. It does not create any additional requirements beyond 
those of the PM2.5 NAAQS (62 FR 38652; July 18, 1997), therefore, no 
UMRA analysis is needed. This rule establishes the application of the 
PM2.5 standard and the designation for each area of the country for the 
PM2.5 NAAQS. The CAA requires States to develop plans, including 
control measures, based on their designations and classifications.
    One mandate that may apply as a consequence of this action to all 
designated nonattainment areas is the requirement under CAA section 
176(c) and associated regulations to demonstrate conformity of Federal 
actions to State Implementation Plans (SIPs). These rules apply to 
Federal agencies and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) making 
conformity determinations. The EPA concludes that such conformity 
determinations will not cost $100 million or more in the aggregate.
    The EPA believes that any new controls imposed as a result of this 
action will not cost in the aggregate $100 million or more annually. 
Thus, this Federal action will not impose mandates that will require 
expenditures of $100 million or more in the aggregate in any 1 year.
    Nonetheless, EPA carried out consultation with government entities 
affected by this rule, including States, Tribal governments, and local 
air pollution control agencies.

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    Executive Order 13132, entitled ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999), requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure 
``meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' 
``Policies that have federalism implications'' is defined in the 
Executive Order to include regulations that have ``substantial direct 
effects on the States, or the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government.''
    This final rule does not have federalism implications. It will not 
have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship 
between the national government and the States, or on the distribution 
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, 
as specified in Executive Order 13132. The CAA establishes the scheme 
whereby States take the lead in developing plans to meet the NAAQS. 
This rule will not modify the relationship of the States and EPA for 
purposes of developing programs to implement the NAAQS. Thus, Executive 
Order 13132 does not apply to this rule.

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

    Executive Order 13175, entitled ``Consultation and Coordination 
with Indian Tribal Governments'' (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
requires EPA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful 
and timely input by Tribal officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have Tribal implications.'' This final rule does not have 
``Tribal implications'' as specified in Executive Order 13175. This 
rule concerns the designation and classification of areas as attainment 
and nonattainment for the PM2.5 air quality standard. The CAA provides 
for States to develop plans to regulate emissions of air pollutants 
within their jurisdictions. The TAR provides Tribes the opportunity to 
develop and implement CAA programs such as programs to attain and 
maintain the PM2.5 NAAQS, but it leaves to the discretion of the Tribe 
the decision of whether to develop these programs and which programs, 
or appropriate elements of a program, the Tribe will adopt.
    This final rule does not have Tribal implications as defined by 
Executive Order 13175. It does not have a substantial direct effect on 
one or more Indian Tribes, since no Tribe has implemented a CAA program 
to attain the PM2.5 NAAQS at this time. Furthermore, this rule does not 
affect the relationship or distribution of power and responsibilities 
between the Federal government and Indian Tribes. The CAA and the TAR 
establish the relationship of the Federal government and Tribes in 
developing plans to attain the NAAQS, and this rule does nothing to 
modify that relationship. Because this rule does not have Tribal 
implications, Executive Order 13175 does not apply.
    Although Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this rule, EPA did 
outreach to Tribal leaders and environmental staff regarding the 
designations process. The EPA supports a national ``Tribal Designations 
and Implementation Work Group'' which provides an open forum for all 
Tribes to voice concerns to EPA about the designations and 
implementation process for the NAAQS, including the PM2.5 NAAQS. These 
discussions informed EPA about key Tribal concerns regarding 
designations as the rule was under development and gave Tribes the 
opportunity to express concerns about designations to EPA. Furthermore, 
EPA sent individualized letters to all federally recognized Tribes 
about EPA's intention to designate areas for the PM2.5 standard and 
gave Tribal leaders the opportunity for consultation.

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

    Executive Order 13045: ``Protection of Children From Environmental 
Health and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997) applies to any 
rule that (1) is determined to be ``economically significant'' as 
defined under Executive Order 12866, and (2) concerns an environmental 
health and safety risk that EPA has reason to believe may have a 
disproportionate effect on children. If the regulatory action meets 
both criteria, EPA must evaluate the environmental health or safety 
effects of the planned rule on children, and explain why the planned 
regulation is preferable to other potentially effective and reasonably 
feasible alternatives considered by the EPA.
    The final rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045 because it 
is not economically significant as defined in Executive Order 12866, 
and because EPA does not have reason to believe that the environmental 
health risks or safety risks addressed by this rule present a 
disproportionate risk or safety risk to children. Nonetheless, we have 
evaluated the environmental health or safety effects of the PM2.5 NAAQS 
on children. The results of this risk assessment are contained in the 
NAAQS for PM2.5, Final Rule (July 18, 1997, 62 FR 38652).

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

    This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use,'' (66 FR 
28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action 
under Executive Order 12866.
    Information on the methodology and data regarding the assessment of 
potential energy impacts is found in Chapter 6 of U.S. EPA 2002, Cost, 
Emission Reduction, Energy, and the Implementation Framework for the 
PM2.5 NAAQS, prepared by the Innovative Strategies and Economics Group, 
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, 
NC, April 24, 2003.

[[Page 951]]

I. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act (NTTAA)

    Section 12(d) of the NTTAA of 1995, Public Law No. 104-113, section 
12(d) (15 U.S.C. 272 note) directs EPA to use voluntary consensus 
standards (VCS) in its regulatory activities unless to do so would be 
inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impracticable. Voluntary 
consensus standards are technical standards (e.g., materials 
specifications, test methods, sampling procedures, and business 
practices) that are developed or adopted by VCS bodies. The NTTAA 
directs EPA to provide Congress, through OMB, explanations when the 
Agency decides not to use available and applicable VCS.
    This action does not involve technical standards. Therefore, EPA 
did not consider the use of any VCS.

J. Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. The EPA will submit a report containing this rule and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2). This rule will be effective April 5, 2005.

K. Judicial Review

    Section 307 (b) (1) of the CAA indicates which Federal Courts of 
Appeal have venue for petitions of review of final actions by EPA. This 
section provides, in part, that petitions for review must be filed in 
the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (i) when the 
agency action consists of ``nationally applicable regulations 
promulgated, or final actions taken, by the Administrator,'' or (ii) 
when such action is locally or regionally applicable, if ``such action 
is based on a determination of nationwide scope or effect and if in 
taking such action the Administrator finds and publishes that such 
action is based on such a determination.''
    This rule designating areas for the PM2.5 NAAQS is ``nationally 
applicable'' within the meaning of section 307(b)(1). This rule 
establishes designations for all areas of the United States for the 
PM2.5 NAAQS. At the core of this rulemaking is EPA's interpretation of 
the definition of nonattainment under section 107(d)(1) of the CAA. In 
determining which areas should be designated nonattainment (or 
conversely, should be designated attainment/unclassifiable), EPA used a 
set of nine technical factors that it applied consistently across the 
United States.
    For the same reasons, the Administrator also is determining that 
the final designations are of nationwide scope and effect for the 
purposes of section 307(b)(1). This is particularly appropriate because 
in the report on the 1977 Amendments that revised section 307(b)(1) of 
the CAA, Congress noted that the Administrator's determination that an 
action is of `` nationwide scope or effect'' would be appropriate for 
any action that has ``scope or effect beyond a single judicial 
circuit.'' H.R. Rep. No. 95-294 at 323, 324, reprinted in 1977 
U.S.C.C.A.N. 1402-03. Here, the scope and effect of this rulemaking 
extends to numerous judicial circuits since the designations apply to 
all areas of the country. In these circumstances, section 307(b)(1) and 
its legislative history calls for the Administrator to find the rule to 
be of ``nationwide scope or effect'' and for venue to be in the D.C. 
Circuit.
    Thus, any petitions for review of final designations must be filed 
in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit within 60 
days from the date final action is published in the Federal Register.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks, 
Wilderness areas.

    Dated: December 17, 2004.
Michael O. Leavitt,
EPA Administrator.


0
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 40 CFR Part 81, Subpart C is 
amended as follows:

PART 81--DESIGNATIONS OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES

0
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart C--Section 107 Attainment Status Designations

0
2. Section 81.300 is amended by revising paragraph (a) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  81.300  Scope.

    (a) Attainment status designations as approved or designated by the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) pursuant to section 107 of the 
CAA are listed in this subpart. Area designations are subject to 
revision whenever sufficient data becomes available to warrant a 
redesignation. Both the State and EPA can initiate changes to these 
designations, but any State redesignation must be submitted to EPA for 
concurrence. The EPA has replaced the national ambient air quality 
standards for particulate matter measured as total suspended 
particulate with standards measured as particulate matter with an 
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers 
(PM-10). Accordingly, area designations for PM-10 are included in the 
lists in subpart C of this part. However, the TSP area designations 
will also remain in effect until the Administrator determines that the 
designations are no longer necessary for implementing the maximum 
allowable increases in concentrations of particulate matter pursuant to 
section 163(b) of the CAA, as explained in paragraph (b) of this 
section. The EPA has also added national ambient air quality standards 
for fine particulate matter measured as particulate matter with an 
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometers 
(PM2.5). Accordingly, area designations for PM2.5 are included in the 
lists in subpart C of this part.
* * * * *

0
2a. In Sec.  81.301, the table entitled ``Alabama--PM2.5'' is added to 
the end of the section to read as follows:


Sec.  81.301  Alabama.

* * * * *

[[Page 952]]



                                                 Alabama.--PM2.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Designation \a\
            Designated area             ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Date \1\                              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Birmingham, AL:
    Jefferson County...................  ...................  Nonattainment.
    Shelby County......................  ...................  Nonattainment.
    Walker County (part)...............  ...................  Nonattainment.
        The area described by U.S.
         Census 2000 block group
         identifiers 01-127-0214-5, 01-
         127-0215-4, and 01-127-0216-2
Chattanooga, TN-GA:
    Jackson County (part)..............  ...................  Nonattainment.
        The area described by U.S.
         Census 2000 block block group
         identifier 01-071-9503-1
Columbus, GA-AL:
    Russell County.....................  ...................  Nonattainment.
DeKalb County, AL:
    DeKalb County......................  ...................  Unclassifiable
Gadsden, AL:
    Etowah County......................  ...................  Unclassifiable
Rest of State:
    Autauga County.....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Baldwin County.....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Barbour County.....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Bibb County........................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Blount County......................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Bullock County.....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Butler County......................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Calhoun County.....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Chambers County....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Cherokee County....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Chilton County.....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Choctaw County.....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Clarke County......................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Clay County........................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Cleburne County....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Coffee County......................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Colbert County.....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Conecuh County.....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Coosa County.......................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Covington County...................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Crenshaw County....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Cullman County.....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Dale County........................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Dallas County......................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Elmore County......................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Escambia County....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Fayette County.....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Franklin County....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Geneva County......................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Greene County......................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Hale County........................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Henry County.......................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Houston County.....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Jackson County (remainder).........  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Lamar County.......................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Lauderdale County..................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Lawrence County....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Lee County.........................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Limestone County...................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Lowndes County.....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Macon County.......................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Madison County.....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Marengo County.....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Marion County......................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Marshall County....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Mobile County......................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Monroe County......................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Montgomery County..................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Morgan County......................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Perry County.......................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Pickens County.....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Pike County........................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Randolph County....................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    St. Clair County...................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.

[[Page 953]]

 
    Sumter County......................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Talladega County...................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Tallapoosa County..................  ...................  Unclassifiable/Attainment.
    Tuscaloosa County............