Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designations of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Tennessee: Bristol; Determination of Attainment for the 2008 Lead Standards, 35652-35656 [2012-14566]
Download as PDF
35652
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules
confidentiality agreement which has
been duly executed between a statutory
licensee and any other interested party,
or between one or more interested
parties; provided that all such
information shall be made available for
the audit procedure provided for in this
section.
(2) Access to confidential information
under this section shall be limited to:
(i) The auditor; and
(ii) Subject to an appropriate
confidentiality agreement, those
employees, agents, consultants and
independent contractors of the auditor
who are not employees, officers, or
agents of a copyright owner for any
purpose other than the audit, who are
engaged in the audit of a Statement of
Account or activities directly related
hereto, and who require access to the
confidential information for the purpose
of performing such duties during the
ordinary course of their employment.
(3) The auditor and any person
identified in paragraph (m)(2)(ii) of this
section shall implement procedures to
safeguard all confidential information
received from any third party in
connection with an audit, using a
reasonable standard of care, but no less
than the same degree of security used to
protect confidential financial and
business information or similarly
sensitive information belonging to the
auditor or such person.
Dated: June 8, 2012.
David O. Carson,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2012–14454 Filed 6–13–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410–30–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0323; FRL–9686–7]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans and
Designations of Areas for Air Quality
Planning Purposes; Tennessee:
Bristol; Determination of Attainment
for the 2008 Lead Standards
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
AGENCY:
On April 4, 2012, the State of
Tennessee, through the Tennessee
Department of Environment and
Conservation (TDEC), submitted a
request to EPA to make a determination
that the Bristol nonattainment area for
the 2008 lead national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS or standard)
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
11:31 Jun 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
has attained the 2008 lead NAAQS. In
this action, EPA is proposing to
determine that the Bristol
nonattainment area (hereafter also
referred to as the ‘‘Bristol Area’’ or
‘‘Area’’) has attained the 2008 lead
NAAQS. This proposed determination
of attainment is based upon complete,
quality-assured and certified ambient air
monitoring data for the 2009—2011
period showing that the Area has
monitored attainment of the 2008 lead
NAAQS. EPA is further proposing that,
if EPA finalizes this proposed
determination of attainment, the
requirements for the Area to submit an
attainment demonstration, together with
reasonably available control measures
(RACM), a reasonable further progress
(RFP) plan, and contingency measures
for failure to meet RFP and attainment
deadlines shall be suspended for so long
as the Area continues to attain the 2008
lead NAAQS.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before July 16, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OAR–2012–0323, by one of the
following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: R4–RDS@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (404) 562–9040.
4. Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2012–023,
Regulatory Development Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960.
5. Hand Delivery: Lynorae Benjamin,
Chief, Regulatory Development Section,
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Regional Office official
hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding
Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2012–
0323. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit through
www.regulations.gov or email,
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an email comment directly
to EPA without going through
www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., 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 www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person 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 Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steve Scofield or Richard Wong,
Regulatory Development Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960.
E:\FR\FM\14JNP1.SGM
14JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules
Mr. Scofield may be reached by phone
at (404) 562–9034 or via electronic mail
at scofield.steve@epa.gov. Mr. Wong
may be reached by phone at (404) 562–
8726 or via electronic mail at wong.
richard@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. What actions is EPA taking?
II. What is the background for these actions?
III. Application of EPA’s Clean Data Policy to
the 2008 Lead NAAQS
IV. Does the Bristol area meet the 2008 lead
NAAQS?
A. Criteria
B. Bristol Area Air Quality
V. What is the effect of these actions?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What actions is EPA taking?
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
EPA is proposing to determine that
the Bristol Area (comprising the portion
of Sullivan County bounded by a 1.25
kilometer radius surrounding the
Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM)
coordinates 4042923 meters E, 386267
meters N, Zone 17, which surrounds the
Exide Technologies Facility) has
attained the 2008 lead NAAQS. This
proposal is based upon complete,
quality-assured and certified ambient air
monitoring data for the 2009–2011
monitoring period that show that the
Area has monitored attainment of the
2008 lead NAAQS.
Further, EPA is proposing that, if this
proposed determination of attainment is
made final, the requirements for the
Bristol Area to submit an attainment
demonstration together with RACM, a
RFP plan, and contingency measures for
failure to meet RFP and attainment
deadlines would be suspended for so
long as the Area continues to attain the
2008 lead NAAQS. As discussed below,
EPA’s proposal is consistent with EPA’s
regulations and with its longstanding
interpretation of subpart 1 of part D of
the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).
If this proposed rulemaking is
finalized and EPA subsequently
determines, after notice-and-comment
rulemaking in the Federal Register, that
the Area has violated the 2008 lead
NAAQS, the basis for the suspension of
these attainment planning requirements
would no longer exist for the Bristol
Area, and the Area would thereafter
have to address such requirements.
II. What is the background for these
actions?
On November 12, 2008 (73 FR 66964),
EPA established a 2008 primary and
secondary lead NAAQS at 0.15
micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3)
based on a maximum arithmetic 3month mean concentration for a 3-year
period. See 40 CFR 50.16. On November
22, 2010 (75 FR 71033), EPA published
VerDate Mar<15>2010
11:31 Jun 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
its initial air quality designations and
classifications for the 2008 lead NAAQS
based upon air quality monitoring data
from those monitors for calendar years
2007–2009. These designations became
effective on December 31, 2010.1 The
Bristol Area was designated
nonattainment for the 2008 lead
NAAQS. See 40 CFR 81.343.
On April 4, 2012, the State of
Tennessee, through TDEC, submitted a
request to EPA to make a determination
that the Bristol Area for the 2008 lead
NAAQS has attained that standard
based on complete, quality-assured,
quality-controlled monitoring data from
2009 through 2011.2
III. Application of EPA’s Clean Data
Policy to the 2008 Lead NAAQS
Following enactment of the CAA
Amendments of 1990, EPA promulgated
its interpretation of the requirements for
implementing the NAAQS in the
general preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the CAA
Amendments of 1990 (General
Preamble) 57 FR 13498, 13564 (April 16,
1992). In 1995, based on the
interpretation of CAA sections 171 and
172, and section 182 in the General
Preamble, EPA set forth what has
become known as its ‘‘Clean Data
Policy’’ for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
See Memorandum from John S. Seitz,
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, ‘‘RFP, Attainment
Demonstration, and Related
Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment
Areas Meeting the Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard’’ (May
10, 1995). In 2004, EPA indicated its
intention to extend the Clean Data
Policy to the PM2.5 NAAQS. See
Memorandum from Steve Page, Director,
EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, ‘‘Clean Data Policy for the
Fine Particle National Ambient Air
Quality Standards’’ (December 14,
2004).
Since 1995, EPA has applied its
interpretation under the Clean Data
Policy in many rulemakings,
suspending certain attainment-related
planning requirements for individual
areas, based on a determination of
attainment. See 60 FR 36723 (July 18,
1995) (Salt Lake and Davis Counties,
1 EPA completed a second and final round of
designations for the 2008 Lead NAAQS on
November 22, 2011. See 76 FR 72097. No additional
areas in Sullivan County, Tennessee were
designated as nonattainment for the 2008 Lead
NAAQS.
2 This Area has ambient air monitoring data for
forty-seven (47) months for the period of February
2008 through December 31, 2011, which show
attainment of the 2008 lead NAAQS. Preliminary
2012 data indicates that this Area is continuing to
attain the 2008 lead NAAQS.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35653
Utah, 1-hour ozone); 61 FR 20458 (May
7, 1996) (Cleveland Akron-Lorain, Ohio,
1-hour ozone); 61 FR 31832 (June 21,
1996) (Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1-hour
ozone); 65 FR 37879 (June 19, 2000)
(Cincinnati-Hamilton, Ohio-Kentucky,
1-hour ozone); 66 FR 53094 (October 19,
2001) (Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley,
Pennsylvania, 1-hour ozone); 68 FR
25418 (May 12, 2003) (St Louis,
Missouri, 1-hour ozone); 69 FR 21717
(April 22, 2004) (San Francisco Bay
Area, 1-hour ozone), 75 FR 6570
(February 10, 2010) (Baton Rouge,
Louisiana, 1-hour ozone), 75 FR 27944
(May 19, 2010) (Coso Junction,
California, PM10).
EPA also incorporated its
interpretation under the Clean Data
Policy in implementation rules. See
Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation
Rule, 72 FR 20586 (April 25, 2007);
Final Rule To Implement the 8-Hour
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standard—Phase 2, 70 FR 71612
(November 29, 2005). The Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit (D.C. Circuit) upheld EPA’s rule
embodying the Clean Data Policy for the
1997 8-hour ozone standard. NRDC v.
EPA, 571 F.3d 1245 (D.C. Cir. 2009).
Other courts have reviewed and
considered rulemakings applying EPA’s
Clean Data Policy, and have consistently
upheld them. Sierra Club v. EPA, 99 F.
3d 1551 (10th Cir. 1996); Sierra Club v.
EPA, 375 F. 3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004); Our
Children’s Earth Foundation v. EPA, No.
04–73032 (9th Cir. June 28, 2005
(Memorandum Opinion)), Latino Issues
Forum v. EPA, Nos. 06–75831 and 08–
71238 (9th Cir. March 2, 2009
(Memorandum Opinion)). EPA sets forth
below a brief explanation of the Clean
Data Policy. EPA also incorporates the
discussions of its interpretation set forth
in prior rulemakings, including the
PM2.5 implementation rulemaking. See
also 75 FR 31288 (June 3, 2010) (Rhode
Island, 1997 8-hour ozone), 75 FR 62470
(October 12, 2010) (Knoxville,
Tennessee, 1997 8-hour ozone), 75 FR
53219 (August 31, 2010) (Greater
Connecticut Area, 1997 8-hour ozone),
75 FR 54778 (September 9, 2010) (Baton
Rouge, Louisiana, 1997 8-hour ozone),
75 FR 64949 (October 21, 2010)
(Providence, Rhode Island, 1997 8-hour
ozone), 76 FR 11080 (March 1, 2011)
(Milwaukee-Racine and Sheboygan
Areas, 1997 8-hour ozone), 76 FR 31273
(May 31, 2011) (Pittsburgh-Beaver
Valley, 1997 8-hour ozone), 76 FR 33647
(June 9, 2011) (St. Louis, MissouriIllinois, 1997 8-hour ozone), 76 FR 7145
(November 15, 2011) (Charlotte, North
Carolina-South Carolina, 1997 8-hour
ozone), 77 FR 31496 (May 29, 2012)
E:\FR\FM\14JNP1.SGM
14JNP1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
35654
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules
(Boston-Lawrence-Worchester,
Massachusetts, 1997 8-hour ozone). See
also, 75 FR 56 (January 4, 2010)
(Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High Point,
1997 PM2.5), 75 FR 230 (January 5, 2010)
(Hickory-Morganton, Lenoir, 1997
PM2.5), 75 FR 57186 (September 20,
2010) (Birmingham, Alabama, 2006
PM2.5) 76 FR 12860 (March 9, 2011)
(Louisville, Kentucky-Indiana, 1997
PM2.5), 76 FR 1850 (April 5, 2011)
(Rome, Georgia, 1997 PM2.5), 76 FR
31239 (May 31, 2011) (Chattanooga,
Tennessee-Georgia-Alabama, 1997
PM2.5), 76 FR 31858 (June 2, 2011)
(Macon, Georgia, 1997 PM2.5), 76 FR
36873 (June 23, 2011) (Atlanta, Georgia
1997 PM2.5), 76 FR 38023 (June 29,
2011) (Birmingham, Alabama 1997
PM2.5), 76 FR 5542 (September 7, 2011)
(Huntington-Ashland, West VirginiaKentucky-Ohio, 1997 PM2.5), 76 FR
60373 (September 29, 2011) (Cincinnati,
Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana, 1997 PM2.5),
(November 18, 2011) (Charleston, West
Virginia, 2006 PM2.5), 77 FR 18922
(March 29, 2012) (Harrisburg-LebononCarlisle-York Allentown, Johnstown and
Lancaster, 1997 PM2.5)
The Clean Data Policy represents
EPA’s interpretation that certain
requirements of subpart 1 of part D of
the Act are by their terms not applicable
to areas that are attaining the NAAQS.3
As explained below, the specific
requirements that are inapplicable to an
area attaining the standard are the
requirements to submit a SIP that
provides for: Attainment of the NAAQS;
implementation of all reasonably
available control measures; reasonable
further progress; and implementation of
contingency measures for failure to meet
deadlines for RFP and attainment.
CAA section 172(c)(1), the
requirement for an attainment
demonstration, provides in relevant part
that SIPs ‘‘shall provide for attainment
of the [NAAQS].’’ EPA has interpreted
this requirement as not applying to
areas that have attained the standard. If
an area has attained the standard, there
is no need to submit a plan
demonstrating how the area will reach
attainment. In the General Preamble (57
FR 13564), EPA stated that no other
measures to provide for attainment
would be needed by areas seeking
redesignation to attainment since
‘‘attainment will have been reached.’’
See also Memorandum from John
Calcagni, ‘‘Procedures for Processing
Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,’’ (September 4, 1992), at
page 6.
3 This
discussion refers to subpart 1 because
subparts 1 and 5 contain the requirements relating
to attainment of the lead NAAQS.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
11:31 Jun 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
A component of the attainment plan
specified under section 172(c)(1) is the
requirement to provide for ‘‘the
implementation of all reasonably
available control measures as
expeditiously as practicable’’ (RACM).
Since RACM is an element of the
attainment demonstration, see General
Preamble (57 FR 13560), for the same
reason the attainment demonstration no
longer applies by its own terms, RACM
also no longer applies. Furthermore,
EPA has consistently interpreted this
provision to require only
implementation of potential RACM
measures that could advance
attainment.4 Thus, where an area is
already attaining the standard, no
additional RACM measures are
required. EPA’ s interpretation that the
statute requires only implementation of
RACM measures that would advance
attainment was upheld by the United
States Court of Appeals for the Fifth
Circuit (Sierra Club v. EPA, 314 F. 3d
735, 743–745, 5th Cir. 2002) and by the
United States Court of Appeals for the
D.C. Circuit (Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.
3d 155, 162–163, D.C. Cir. 2002). See
also the final rulemakings for
Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, Pennsylvania,
66 FR 53096 (October 19, 2001) and St.
Louis, 68 FR 25418 (May 12, 2003).
CAA section 172(c)(2) provides that
state implementation plan (SIP)
provisions in nonattainment areas must
require ‘‘reasonable further progress.’’
The term ‘‘reasonable further progress’’
is defined in section 171(1) as ‘‘such
annual incremental reductions in
emissions of the relevant air pollutant as
are required by this part or may
reasonably be required by the
Administrator for the purpose of
ensuring attainment of the applicable
NAAQS by the applicable date.’’ Thus,
by definition, the ‘‘reasonable further
progress’’ provision requires only such
reductions in emissions as are necessary
to attain the NAAQS. If an area has
attained the NAAQS, the purpose of the
RFP requirement has been fulfilled, and
since the area has already attained,
showing that the State will make RFP
towards attainment ‘‘[has] no meaning
at that point.’’ General Preamble, 57 FR
13498, 13564 (April 16, 1992).
CAA section 172(c)(9) provides that
SIPs in nonattainment areas ‘‘shall
provide for the implementation of
specific measures to be undertaken if
the area fails to make reasonable further
progress, or to attain the [NAAQS] by
4 This interpretation was adopted in the General
Preamble, see 57 FR 13498, and has been upheld
as applied to the Clean Data Policy, as well as to
nonattainment SIP submissions. See NRDC v. EPA,
571 F.3d 1245 (D.C. Cir. 2009); Sierra Club v. EPA,
294 F.3d 155 (D.C. Cir. 2002).
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the attainment date applicable under
this part. Such measures shall be
included in the plan revision as
contingency measures to take effect in
any such case without further action by
the State or [EPA].’’ This contingency
measure requirement is inextricably tied
to the reasonable further progress and
attainment demonstration requirements.
Contingency measures are implemented
if reasonable further progress targets are
not achieved, or if attainment is not
realized by the attainment date. Where
an area has already achieved attainment
by the attainment date, it has no need
to rely on contingency measures to
come into attainment or to make further
progress to attainment. As EPA stated in
the General Preamble: ‘‘The section
172(c)(9) requirements for contingency
measures are directed at ensuring RFP
and attainment by the applicable date.’’
See 57 FR 13564. Thus these
requirements no longer apply when an
area has attained the standard.
It is important to note that should an
area attain the lead standards based on
3 years of data, its obligation to submit
an attainment demonstration and
related planning submissions is
suspended only for so long as the area
continues to attain the standard. If EPA
subsequently determines, after noticeand-comment rulemaking, that the Area
has violated the 2008 lead NAAQS, the
requirements for the State to submit a
SIP to meet the previously suspended
requirements would be reinstated. It is
likewise important to note that the area
remains designated nonattainment
pending a further redesignation action.
IV. Does the Bristol area meet the 2008
lead NAAQS?
A. Criteria
Today’s proposed rulemaking assesses
whether Bristol Area has attained the
2008 Lead NAAQS, based on the most
recent 3 years of quality-assured data.
The Bristol Area comprises the portion
of Sullivan County bounded by a 1.25
kilometer radius surrounding the UTM
coordinates 4042923 meters E, 386267
meters N, Zone 17, which surrounds the
Exide Technologies Facility.
Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR
50.16, the 2008 primary and secondary
lead standards are met when the
maximum arithmetic 3-month mean
concentration for a 3-year period, as
determined in accordance with 40 CFR
part 50, Appendix R, is less than or
equal to 0.15 mg/m3 at all relevant
monitoring sites in the subject area.
B. Bristol Area Air Quality
EPA has reviewed the ambient air
monitoring data for the Bristol Area in
E:\FR\FM\14JNP1.SGM
14JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules
accordance with the provisions of 40
CFR part 50, Appendix R. All data
considered are complete, qualityassured, certified, and recorded in
EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS)
database. This review addresses air
quality data collected in 3-year period of
2009–2011 which are the most recent
quality-assured data available.
40 CFR part 58, Appendix D, Section
4.5, states that ‘‘At a minimum, there
must be one source-oriented State and
Local Air Monitoring Station site
located to measure the maximum Pb
[lead] concentration in ambient air
resulting from each non-airport Pb
source which emits 0.50 or more tons
per year * * *.’’ The Exide
Technologies facility in Bristol is
responsible for operating the monitors
that meet this requirement. EPA’s
review shows that Exide has been
exceeding the minimum monitoring
requirement of one monitor, and is
currently operating three Federal
reference method (FRM) source-oriented
monitors at the facility, which meet the
quality assurance requirements of 40
CFR part 58, Appendix A. In addition,
the State of Tennessee is also operating
one additional source-oriented FRM
monitor (AQS ID 47–163–3004,
identified in Table 1) at the Exide
facility. The State’s monitor originally
35655
operated from January 1, 2009 through
December 31, 2009 (AQS ID 47–163–
4002). Beginning January 1, 2010,
Tennessee’s monitor was relocated 0.3
miles to its current location,
approximately 10 feet from Exide’s
design value monitor (47–163–3001),
which is an area of expected maximum
concentration at the site.
Table 1 shows the 2009–2011 design
values at the Bristol Area monitors (the
metrics calculated in accordance with
40 CFR part 50, Appendix R, for
determining compliance with the
NAAQS) for the 2008 lead NAAQS. It
also shows the maximum 3-month
rolling average for each individual year.
TABLE 1—DESIGN VALUE FOR MONITORS IN THE BRISTOL NONATTAINMENT AREA FOR THE 2008 LEAD NAAQS
Location
2009 Max 3month rolling avg
(μg/m3)
AQS site ID
364 Exide Drive ...............................................
5 47–163–3001
47–163–3002
47–163–3003
47–163–3004
47–163–4002
EPA’s review of these data indicates
that the Bristol Area has attained and
continues to attain the 2008 Lead
NAAQS, with a design value of 0.09 mg/
m3 for the period of 2009–2011. EPA is
soliciting public comments on the
issues discussed in this document.
These comments will be considered
before taking final action.
V. What is the effect of these actions?
EPA is proposing to determine that
the Bristol Area has attained the 2008
lead NAAQS, based on complete,
quality-assured and certified data for
2009–2011. Preliminary data available
for 2012 indicates that the area
continues to be in attainment. EPA
further proposes that, if its proposed
determination of attainment is made
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
5 According
to 40 CFR 58.12(b) ‘‘For Pb manual
methods, at least one 24-hour sample must be
collected every 6 days except during periods or
seasons exempted by the Regional Administrator.’’
All three Exide monitors met and exceeded this
requirement, and collected a sample every three
days. EPA also publishes an annual recommended
national sampling calendar, which contains
suggested days of the week for sampling. While this
schedule is recommended, it is not a CFR
requirement. From March 30, 2011–November 23,
2011, the Exide facility’s monitors inadvertently
operated on a schedule that deviated from the
recommended national schedule by one day of the
week. However, since the monitors still collected a
sample every six days, the data collection
requirements were met by all three Exide monitors
for the Area. EPA has thus counted the samples
collected using the alternate sampling schedule as
creditable samples and calculated valid design
values supporting a clean data determination for the
Area.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
11:31 Jun 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
2010 Max 3month rolling avg
(μg/m3)
2011 Max 3month rolling avg
(μg/m3)
2009–2011
design value
(μg/m3)
0.09
0.06
0.06
............................
0.04
0.08
0.04
0.04
0.05
............................
0.06
0.04
0.05
0.08
............................
0.09
0.06
0.06
............................
............................
final, the requirements for the Bristol
Area to submit an attainment
demonstration and associated RACM, a
RFP plan, contingency measures, and
any other planning SIPs related to
attainment of the 2008 lead NAAQS
would be suspended for so long as the
Area continues to attain the 2008 lead
NAAQS. EPA’s proposal is consistent
and in keeping with its long-held
interpretation of CAA requirements, as
well as with EPA’s regulations for
similar determinations for ozone (see 40
CFR 51.918) and fine particulate matter
(see 40 CFR 51.1004(c)). As described
below, any such determination would
not be equivalent to the redesignation of
the Area to attainment for the 2008 Lead
NAAQS.
Finalizing this proposed action would
not constitute a redesignation of the
Area to attainment of the 2008 Lead
NAAQS under section 107(d)(3) of the
CAA. Further, finalizing this proposed
action does not involve approving a
maintenance plan for the Area as
required under section 175A of the
CAA, nor would it find that the Area
has met all other requirements for
redesignation. Even if EPA finalizes the
proposed action, the Bristol Area would
remain designated nonattainment for
the 2008 Lead NAAQS until such time
as EPA determines that the Area meets
the CAA requirements for redesignation
to attainment and takes action to
redesignate the Area.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
If the Bristol Area continues to
monitor attainment of the 2008 lead
NAAQS, EPA proposes that the
requirements for the Bristol Area to
submit an attainment demonstration
and associated RACM, a RFP plan,
contingency measures, and any other
planning SIPs related to attainment of
the annual PM2.5 NAAQS will remain
suspended. If this proposed rulemaking
is finalized and EPA subsequently
determines, after notice-and-comment
rulemaking in the Federal Register, that
the Area has violated the 2008 Lead
NAAQS, the basis for the suspension of
these attainment planning requirements
would no longer exist for the Bristol
Area, and the Area would thereafter
have to address such requirements.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed
action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ and therefore is not subject to
review by the Office of Management and
Budget. For this reason, this action is
also not subject to Executive Order
13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations
that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). This action proposes to make
a determination based on air quality
data and to suspend certain Federal
requirements. Accordingly, the
Administrator certifies that this rule
will not have a significant economic
E:\FR\FM\14JNP1.SGM
14JNP1
35656
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.). Because this
rule proposes to make a determination
based on air quality data and to suspend
certain Federal requirements, it 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). This proposed rule also
does not have tribal implications
because it will not have a substantial
direct effect on one or more Indian
tribes, on the relationship between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
proposed action also does not have
Federalism implications because it does
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
11:31 Jun 13, 2012
Jkt 226001
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999), because it only
proposes to make a determination based
on air quality data and suspend certain
Federal requirements, and does not alter
the relationship or the distribution of
power and responsibilities established
in the CAA. This proposed rule also is
not subject to Executive Order 13045
‘‘Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997),
because it proposes to determine that air
quality in the affected area is meeting
Federal standards. The requirements of
section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not
apply because it would be inconsistent
with applicable law for EPA, when
determining the attainment status of an
area, to use voluntary consensus
standards in place of promulgated air
quality standards and monitoring
procedures that otherwise satisfy the
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
provisions of the CAA. This proposed
rule does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.). Under
Executive Order 12898, EPA finds that
this rule involves a proposed
determination of attainment based on
air quality data and will not have
disproportionately high and adverse
human health or environmental effects
on any communities in the area,
including minority and low-income.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Lead, Reporting and
Recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: June 5, 2012.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2012–14566 Filed 6–13–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\14JNP1.SGM
14JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 115 (Thursday, June 14, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35652-35656]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-14566]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0323; FRL-9686-7]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and
Designations of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Tennessee:
Bristol; Determination of Attainment for the 2008 Lead Standards
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On April 4, 2012, the State of Tennessee, through the
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), submitted
a request to EPA to make a determination that the Bristol nonattainment
area for the 2008 lead national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or
standard) has attained the 2008 lead NAAQS. In this action, EPA is
proposing to determine that the Bristol nonattainment area (hereafter
also referred to as the ``Bristol Area'' or ``Area'') has attained the
2008 lead NAAQS. This proposed determination of attainment is based
upon complete, quality-assured and certified ambient air monitoring
data for the 2009--2011 period showing that the Area has monitored
attainment of the 2008 lead NAAQS. EPA is further proposing that, if
EPA finalizes this proposed determination of attainment, the
requirements for the Area to submit an attainment demonstration,
together with reasonably available control measures (RACM), a
reasonable further progress (RFP) plan, and contingency measures for
failure to meet RFP and attainment deadlines shall be suspended for so
long as the Area continues to attain the 2008 lead NAAQS.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 16, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2012-0323, by one of the following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. Email: R4-RDS@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (404) 562-9040.
4. Mail: EPA-R04-OAR-2012-023, Regulatory Development Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
5. Hand Delivery: Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory Development
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed
information. The Regional Office official hours of business are Monday
through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2012-0323. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov or
email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email
comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your
email address will be automatically captured and included as part of
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center
homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., 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 www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person 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 Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Scofield or Richard Wong,
Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides
and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
[[Page 35653]]
Mr. Scofield may be reached by phone at (404) 562-9034 or via
electronic mail at scofield.steve@epa.gov. Mr. Wong may be reached by
phone at (404) 562-8726 or via electronic mail at wong.richard@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. What actions is EPA taking?
II. What is the background for these actions?
III. Application of EPA's Clean Data Policy to the 2008 Lead NAAQS
IV. Does the Bristol area meet the 2008 lead NAAQS?
A. Criteria
B. Bristol Area Air Quality
V. What is the effect of these actions?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What actions is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to determine that the Bristol Area (comprising the
portion of Sullivan County bounded by a 1.25 kilometer radius
surrounding the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates 4042923
meters E, 386267 meters N, Zone 17, which surrounds the Exide
Technologies Facility) has attained the 2008 lead NAAQS. This proposal
is based upon complete, quality-assured and certified ambient air
monitoring data for the 2009-2011 monitoring period that show that the
Area has monitored attainment of the 2008 lead NAAQS.
Further, EPA is proposing that, if this proposed determination of
attainment is made final, the requirements for the Bristol Area to
submit an attainment demonstration together with RACM, a RFP plan, and
contingency measures for failure to meet RFP and attainment deadlines
would be suspended for so long as the Area continues to attain the 2008
lead NAAQS. As discussed below, EPA's proposal is consistent with EPA's
regulations and with its longstanding interpretation of subpart 1 of
part D of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).
If this proposed rulemaking is finalized and EPA subsequently
determines, after notice-and-comment rulemaking in the Federal
Register, that the Area has violated the 2008 lead NAAQS, the basis for
the suspension of these attainment planning requirements would no
longer exist for the Bristol Area, and the Area would thereafter have
to address such requirements.
II. What is the background for these actions?
On November 12, 2008 (73 FR 66964), EPA established a 2008 primary
and secondary lead NAAQS at 0.15 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/
m\3\) based on a maximum arithmetic 3-month mean concentration for a 3-
year period. See 40 CFR 50.16. On November 22, 2010 (75 FR 71033), EPA
published its initial air quality designations and classifications for
the 2008 lead NAAQS based upon air quality monitoring data from those
monitors for calendar years 2007-2009. These designations became
effective on December 31, 2010.\1\ The Bristol Area was designated
nonattainment for the 2008 lead NAAQS. See 40 CFR 81.343.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ EPA completed a second and final round of designations for
the 2008 Lead NAAQS on November 22, 2011. See 76 FR 72097. No
additional areas in Sullivan County, Tennessee were designated as
nonattainment for the 2008 Lead NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 4, 2012, the State of Tennessee, through TDEC, submitted a
request to EPA to make a determination that the Bristol Area for the
2008 lead NAAQS has attained that standard based on complete, quality-
assured, quality-controlled monitoring data from 2009 through 2011.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ This Area has ambient air monitoring data for forty-seven
(47) months for the period of February 2008 through December 31,
2011, which show attainment of the 2008 lead NAAQS. Preliminary 2012
data indicates that this Area is continuing to attain the 2008 lead
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Application of EPA's Clean Data Policy to the 2008 Lead NAAQS
Following enactment of the CAA Amendments of 1990, EPA promulgated
its interpretation of the requirements for implementing the NAAQS in
the general preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the CAA
Amendments of 1990 (General Preamble) 57 FR 13498, 13564 (April 16,
1992). In 1995, based on the interpretation of CAA sections 171 and
172, and section 182 in the General Preamble, EPA set forth what has
become known as its ``Clean Data Policy'' for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
See Memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, ``RFP, Attainment Demonstration, and Related
Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard'' (May 10, 1995). In 2004, EPA indicated
its intention to extend the Clean Data Policy to the PM2.5
NAAQS. See Memorandum from Steve Page, Director, EPA Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, ``Clean Data Policy for the Fine
Particle National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' (December 14, 2004).
Since 1995, EPA has applied its interpretation under the Clean Data
Policy in many rulemakings, suspending certain attainment-related
planning requirements for individual areas, based on a determination of
attainment. See 60 FR 36723 (July 18, 1995) (Salt Lake and Davis
Counties, Utah, 1-hour ozone); 61 FR 20458 (May 7, 1996) (Cleveland
Akron-Lorain, Ohio, 1-hour ozone); 61 FR 31832 (June 21, 1996) (Grand
Rapids, Michigan, 1-hour ozone); 65 FR 37879 (June 19, 2000)
(Cincinnati-Hamilton, Ohio-Kentucky, 1-hour ozone); 66 FR 53094
(October 19, 2001) (Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, Pennsylvania, 1-hour
ozone); 68 FR 25418 (May 12, 2003) (St Louis, Missouri, 1-hour ozone);
69 FR 21717 (April 22, 2004) (San Francisco Bay Area, 1-hour ozone), 75
FR 6570 (February 10, 2010) (Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 1-hour ozone), 75
FR 27944 (May 19, 2010) (Coso Junction, California, PM10).
EPA also incorporated its interpretation under the Clean Data
Policy in implementation rules. See Clean Air Fine Particle
Implementation Rule, 72 FR 20586 (April 25, 2007); Final Rule To
Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard--Phase
2, 70 FR 71612 (November 29, 2005). The Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) upheld EPA's rule embodying
the Clean Data Policy for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. NRDC v. EPA,
571 F.3d 1245 (D.C. Cir. 2009). Other courts have reviewed and
considered rulemakings applying EPA's Clean Data Policy, and have
consistently upheld them. Sierra Club v. EPA, 99 F. 3d 1551 (10th Cir.
1996); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F. 3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004); Our
Children's Earth Foundation v. EPA, No. 04-73032 (9th Cir. June 28,
2005 (Memorandum Opinion)), Latino Issues Forum v. EPA, Nos. 06-75831
and 08-71238 (9th Cir. March 2, 2009 (Memorandum Opinion)). EPA sets
forth below a brief explanation of the Clean Data Policy. EPA also
incorporates the discussions of its interpretation set forth in prior
rulemakings, including the PM2.5 implementation rulemaking.
See also 75 FR 31288 (June 3, 2010) (Rhode Island, 1997 8-hour ozone),
75 FR 62470 (October 12, 2010) (Knoxville, Tennessee, 1997 8-hour
ozone), 75 FR 53219 (August 31, 2010) (Greater Connecticut Area, 1997
8-hour ozone), 75 FR 54778 (September 9, 2010) (Baton Rouge, Louisiana,
1997 8-hour ozone), 75 FR 64949 (October 21, 2010) (Providence, Rhode
Island, 1997 8-hour ozone), 76 FR 11080 (March 1, 2011) (Milwaukee-
Racine and Sheboygan Areas, 1997 8-hour ozone), 76 FR 31273 (May 31,
2011) (Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, 1997 8-hour ozone), 76 FR 33647 (June
9, 2011) (St. Louis, Missouri-Illinois, 1997 8-hour ozone), 76 FR 7145
(November 15, 2011) (Charlotte, North Carolina-South Carolina, 1997 8-
hour ozone), 77 FR 31496 (May 29, 2012)
[[Page 35654]]
(Boston-Lawrence-Worchester, Massachusetts, 1997 8-hour ozone). See
also, 75 FR 56 (January 4, 2010) (Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High Point,
1997 PM2.5), 75 FR 230 (January 5, 2010) (Hickory-Morganton,
Lenoir, 1997 PM2.5), 75 FR 57186 (September 20, 2010)
(Birmingham, Alabama, 2006 PM2.5) 76 FR 12860 (March 9,
2011) (Louisville, Kentucky-Indiana, 1997 PM2.5), 76 FR 1850
(April 5, 2011) (Rome, Georgia, 1997 PM2.5), 76 FR 31239
(May 31, 2011) (Chattanooga, Tennessee-Georgia-Alabama, 1997
PM2.5), 76 FR 31858 (June 2, 2011) (Macon, Georgia, 1997
PM2.5), 76 FR 36873 (June 23, 2011) (Atlanta, Georgia 1997
PM2.5), 76 FR 38023 (June 29, 2011) (Birmingham, Alabama
1997 PM2.5), 76 FR 5542 (September 7, 2011) (Huntington-
Ashland, West Virginia-Kentucky-Ohio, 1997 PM2.5), 76 FR
60373 (September 29, 2011) (Cincinnati, Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana, 1997
PM2.5), (November 18, 2011) (Charleston, West Virginia, 2006
PM2.5), 77 FR 18922 (March 29, 2012) (Harrisburg-Lebonon-
Carlisle-York Allentown, Johnstown and Lancaster, 1997
PM2.5)
The Clean Data Policy represents EPA's interpretation that certain
requirements of subpart 1 of part D of the Act are by their terms not
applicable to areas that are attaining the NAAQS.\3\ As explained
below, the specific requirements that are inapplicable to an area
attaining the standard are the requirements to submit a SIP that
provides for: Attainment of the NAAQS; implementation of all reasonably
available control measures; reasonable further progress; and
implementation of contingency measures for failure to meet deadlines
for RFP and attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ This discussion refers to subpart 1 because subparts 1 and 5
contain the requirements relating to attainment of the lead NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAA section 172(c)(1), the requirement for an attainment
demonstration, provides in relevant part that SIPs ``shall provide for
attainment of the [NAAQS].'' EPA has interpreted this requirement as
not applying to areas that have attained the standard. If an area has
attained the standard, there is no need to submit a plan demonstrating
how the area will reach attainment. In the General Preamble (57 FR
13564), EPA stated that no other measures to provide for attainment
would be needed by areas seeking redesignation to attainment since
``attainment will have been reached.'' See also Memorandum from John
Calcagni, ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' (September 4, 1992), at page 6.
A component of the attainment plan specified under section
172(c)(1) is the requirement to provide for ``the implementation of all
reasonably available control measures as expeditiously as practicable''
(RACM). Since RACM is an element of the attainment demonstration, see
General Preamble (57 FR 13560), for the same reason the attainment
demonstration no longer applies by its own terms, RACM also no longer
applies. Furthermore, EPA has consistently interpreted this provision
to require only implementation of potential RACM measures that could
advance attainment.\4\ Thus, where an area is already attaining the
standard, no additional RACM measures are required. EPA' s
interpretation that the statute requires only implementation of RACM
measures that would advance attainment was upheld by the United States
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (Sierra Club v. EPA, 314 F. 3d
735, 743-745, 5th Cir. 2002) and by the United States Court of Appeals
for the D.C. Circuit (Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F. 3d 155, 162-163, D.C.
Cir. 2002). See also the final rulemakings for Pittsburgh-Beaver
Valley, Pennsylvania, 66 FR 53096 (October 19, 2001) and St. Louis, 68
FR 25418 (May 12, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ This interpretation was adopted in the General Preamble, see
57 FR 13498, and has been upheld as applied to the Clean Data
Policy, as well as to nonattainment SIP submissions. See NRDC v.
EPA, 571 F.3d 1245 (D.C. Cir. 2009); Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d
155 (D.C. Cir. 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAA section 172(c)(2) provides that state implementation plan (SIP)
provisions in nonattainment areas must require ``reasonable further
progress.'' The term ``reasonable further progress'' is defined in
section 171(1) as ``such annual incremental reductions in emissions of
the relevant air pollutant as are required by this part or may
reasonably be required by the Administrator for the purpose of ensuring
attainment of the applicable NAAQS by the applicable date.'' Thus, by
definition, the ``reasonable further progress'' provision requires only
such reductions in emissions as are necessary to attain the NAAQS. If
an area has attained the NAAQS, the purpose of the RFP requirement has
been fulfilled, and since the area has already attained, showing that
the State will make RFP towards attainment ``[has] no meaning at that
point.'' General Preamble, 57 FR 13498, 13564 (April 16, 1992).
CAA section 172(c)(9) provides that SIPs in nonattainment areas
``shall provide for the implementation of specific measures to be
undertaken if the area fails to make reasonable further progress, or to
attain the [NAAQS] by the attainment date applicable under this part.
Such measures shall be included in the plan revision as contingency
measures to take effect in any such case without further action by the
State or [EPA].'' This contingency measure requirement is inextricably
tied to the reasonable further progress and attainment demonstration
requirements. Contingency measures are implemented if reasonable
further progress targets are not achieved, or if attainment is not
realized by the attainment date. Where an area has already achieved
attainment by the attainment date, it has no need to rely on
contingency measures to come into attainment or to make further
progress to attainment. As EPA stated in the General Preamble: ``The
section 172(c)(9) requirements for contingency measures are directed at
ensuring RFP and attainment by the applicable date.'' See 57 FR 13564.
Thus these requirements no longer apply when an area has attained the
standard.
It is important to note that should an area attain the lead
standards based on 3 years of data, its obligation to submit an
attainment demonstration and related planning submissions is suspended
only for so long as the area continues to attain the standard. If EPA
subsequently determines, after notice-and-comment rulemaking, that the
Area has violated the 2008 lead NAAQS, the requirements for the State
to submit a SIP to meet the previously suspended requirements would be
reinstated. It is likewise important to note that the area remains
designated nonattainment pending a further redesignation action.
IV. Does the Bristol area meet the 2008 lead NAAQS?
A. Criteria
Today's proposed rulemaking assesses whether Bristol Area has
attained the 2008 Lead NAAQS, based on the most recent 3 years of
quality-assured data. The Bristol Area comprises the portion of
Sullivan County bounded by a 1.25 kilometer radius surrounding the UTM
coordinates 4042923 meters E, 386267 meters N, Zone 17, which surrounds
the Exide Technologies Facility.
Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR 50.16, the 2008 primary and
secondary lead standards are met when the maximum arithmetic 3-month
mean concentration for a 3-year period, as determined in accordance
with 40 CFR part 50, Appendix R, is less than or equal to 0.15
[micro]g/m\3\ at all relevant monitoring sites in the subject area.
B. Bristol Area Air Quality
EPA has reviewed the ambient air monitoring data for the Bristol
Area in
[[Page 35655]]
accordance with the provisions of 40 CFR part 50, Appendix R. All data
considered are complete, quality-assured, certified, and recorded in
EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) database. This review addresses air
quality data collected in 3-year period of 2009-2011 which are the most
recent quality-assured data available.
40 CFR part 58, Appendix D, Section 4.5, states that ``At a
minimum, there must be one source-oriented State and Local Air
Monitoring Station site located to measure the maximum Pb [lead]
concentration in ambient air resulting from each non-airport Pb source
which emits 0.50 or more tons per year * * *.'' The Exide Technologies
facility in Bristol is responsible for operating the monitors that meet
this requirement. EPA's review shows that Exide has been exceeding the
minimum monitoring requirement of one monitor, and is currently
operating three Federal reference method (FRM) source-oriented monitors
at the facility, which meet the quality assurance requirements of 40
CFR part 58, Appendix A. In addition, the State of Tennessee is also
operating one additional source-oriented FRM monitor (AQS ID 47-163-
3004, identified in Table 1) at the Exide facility. The State's monitor
originally operated from January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009 (AQS
ID 47-163-4002). Beginning January 1, 2010, Tennessee's monitor was
relocated 0.3 miles to its current location, approximately 10 feet from
Exide's design value monitor (47-163-3001), which is an area of
expected maximum concentration at the site.
Table 1 shows the 2009-2011 design values at the Bristol Area
monitors (the metrics calculated in accordance with 40 CFR part 50,
Appendix R, for determining compliance with the NAAQS) for the 2008
lead NAAQS. It also shows the maximum 3-month rolling average for each
individual year.
Table 1--Design Value for Monitors in the Bristol Nonattainment Area for the 2008 Lead NAAQS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009 Max 3-month 2010 Max 3-month 2011 Max 3-month 2009-2011 design
Location AQS site ID rolling avg rolling avg rolling avg value ([micro]g/
([micro]g/m\3\) ([micro]g/m\3\) ([micro]g/m\3\) m\3\)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
364 Exide Drive............................................... \5\ 47-163-3001 0.09 0.08 0.06 0.09
47-163-3002 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.06
47-163-3003 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.06
47-163-3004 ................ 0.05 0.08 ................
47-163-4002 0.04 ................ ................ ................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA's review of these data indicates that the Bristol Area has
attained and continues to attain the 2008 Lead NAAQS, with a design
value of 0.09 [micro]g/m\3\ for the period of 2009-2011. EPA is
soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this document.
These comments will be considered before taking final action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ According to 40 CFR 58.12(b) ``For Pb manual methods, at
least one 24-hour sample must be collected every 6 days except
during periods or seasons exempted by the Regional Administrator.''
All three Exide monitors met and exceeded this requirement, and
collected a sample every three days. EPA also publishes an annual
recommended national sampling calendar, which contains suggested
days of the week for sampling. While this schedule is recommended,
it is not a CFR requirement. From March 30, 2011-November 23, 2011,
the Exide facility's monitors inadvertently operated on a schedule
that deviated from the recommended national schedule by one day of
the week. However, since the monitors still collected a sample every
six days, the data collection requirements were met by all three
Exide monitors for the Area. EPA has thus counted the samples
collected using the alternate sampling schedule as creditable
samples and calculated valid design values supporting a clean data
determination for the Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. What is the effect of these actions?
EPA is proposing to determine that the Bristol Area has attained
the 2008 lead NAAQS, based on complete, quality-assured and certified
data for 2009-2011. Preliminary data available for 2012 indicates that
the area continues to be in attainment. EPA further proposes that, if
its proposed determination of attainment is made final, the
requirements for the Bristol Area to submit an attainment demonstration
and associated RACM, a RFP plan, contingency measures, and any other
planning SIPs related to attainment of the 2008 lead NAAQS would be
suspended for so long as the Area continues to attain the 2008 lead
NAAQS. EPA's proposal is consistent and in keeping with its long-held
interpretation of CAA requirements, as well as with EPA's regulations
for similar determinations for ozone (see 40 CFR 51.918) and fine
particulate matter (see 40 CFR 51.1004(c)). As described below, any
such determination would not be equivalent to the redesignation of the
Area to attainment for the 2008 Lead NAAQS.
Finalizing this proposed action would not constitute a
redesignation of the Area to attainment of the 2008 Lead NAAQS under
section 107(d)(3) of the CAA. Further, finalizing this proposed action
does not involve approving a maintenance plan for the Area as required
under section 175A of the CAA, nor would it find that the Area has met
all other requirements for redesignation. Even if EPA finalizes the
proposed action, the Bristol Area would remain designated nonattainment
for the 2008 Lead NAAQS until such time as EPA determines that the Area
meets the CAA requirements for redesignation to attainment and takes
action to redesignate the Area.
If the Bristol Area continues to monitor attainment of the 2008
lead NAAQS, EPA proposes that the requirements for the Bristol Area to
submit an attainment demonstration and associated RACM, a RFP plan,
contingency measures, and any other planning SIPs related to attainment
of the annual PM2.5 NAAQS will remain suspended. If this
proposed rulemaking is finalized and EPA subsequently determines, after
notice-and-comment rulemaking in the Federal Register, that the Area
has violated the 2008 Lead NAAQS, the basis for the suspension of these
attainment planning requirements would no longer exist for the Bristol
Area, and the Area would thereafter have to address such requirements.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
proposed action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and
therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and
Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This
action proposes to make a determination based on air quality data and
to suspend certain Federal requirements. Accordingly, the Administrator
certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic
[[Page 35656]]
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.). Because this rule proposes to
make a determination based on air quality data and to suspend certain
Federal requirements, it 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). This proposed
rule also does not have tribal implications because it will not have a
substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This proposed action also does not have
Federalism implications because it does 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 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it
only proposes to make a determination based on air quality data and
suspend certain Federal requirements, and does not alter the
relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities
established in the CAA. This proposed rule also is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children from Environmental
Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because
it proposes to determine that air quality in the affected area is
meeting Federal standards. The requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) do not apply because it would be inconsistent with applicable law
for EPA, when determining the attainment status of an area, to use
voluntary consensus standards in place of promulgated air quality
standards and monitoring procedures that otherwise satisfy the
provisions of the CAA. This proposed rule does not impose an
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.). Under Executive Order
12898, EPA finds that this rule involves a proposed determination of
attainment based on air quality data and will not have
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects on any communities in the area, including minority and low-
income.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Lead, Reporting
and Recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: June 5, 2012.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2012-14566 Filed 6-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P