Approval of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas: Alabama; Redesignation of the Alabama Portion of the Chattanooga, 1997 PM2.5, 67137-67154 [2014-26736]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules
X. What is the effect of EPA’s proposed
actions?
EPA’s proposed actions establish the
basis upon which EPA may take final
action on the issues being proposed for
approval today. Approval of Georgia’s
redesignation request would change the
legal designation of Catoosa and Walker
Counties in Georgia for the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS, found at 40 CFR part 81,
from nonattainment to attainment.
Approval of GA EPD’s request would
also incorporate a plan for maintaining
the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area through 2025
into the Georgia SIP. The maintenance
plan includes contingency measures to
remedy any future violations of the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and procedures
for evaluation of potential violations.
The maintenance plan also includes
NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the Georgia
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area.
Additionally, EPA is notifying the
public of the status of its adequacy
determination for the NOX and PM2.5
MVEBs for 2025 under 40 CFR
93.118(f)(1).
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
XI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, redesignation of an
area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of a
maintenance plan under section
107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the
status of a geographical area and do not
impose any additional regulatory
requirements on sources beyond those
imposed by state law. A redesignation to
attainment does not in and of itself
create any new requirements, but rather
results in the applicability of
requirements contained in the CAA for
areas that have been redesignated to
attainment. Moreover, the Administrator
is required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, these proposed
actions merely approve state law as
meeting federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, these proposed actions:
• Are not ‘‘significant regulatory
action[s]’’ subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• do not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Nov 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
• are certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• do 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);
• do not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• are not economically significant
regulatory actions based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• are not significant regulatory
actions subject to Executive Order
13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• are not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• do not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed rule does
not have tribal implications as specified
by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in Georgia, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: November 3, 2014.
V. Anne Heard
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2014–26735 Filed 11–10–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
67137
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R04–OAR–2014–0674; FRL–9919–17–
Region 4]
Approval of Implementation Plans and
Designation of Areas: Alabama;
Redesignation of the Alabama Portion
of the Chattanooga, 1997 PM2.5
Nonattainment Area to Attainment
Environmental Protection
Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
On April 23, 2013, the
Alabama Department of Environmental
Management (ADEM), submitted a
request to redesignate the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga, TN-GA fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) nonattainment
area (hereafter referred to as the
‘‘Chattanooga TN-GA Area’’ or ‘‘Area’’)
to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) and to approve a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
containing a maintenance plan for the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area. The Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area is comprised
of a portion of Jackson County in
Alabama. The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
the redesignation request and the
related SIP revision, including the plan
for maintaining attainment of the PM2.5
standard, for the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area. EPA is also
proposing to approve the on-road motor
vehicle insignificance determination for
direct PM2.5 and nitrogen oxides (NOX)
for the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area. On
September 14, 2012, Georgia submitted
a request to redesignate the Georgia
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area,
and EPA is expecting Tennessee to
submit a request to redesignate the
Tennessee portion of the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area. EPA will be taking
separate action on the requests from
Georgia and Tennessee.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before December 3, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OAR–2014–0674 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) 562–9019.
4. Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2014–0674,
Regulatory Development Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
67138
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms.
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’s normal hours of
operation. The Regional Office’s official
hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal
holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2014–
0674. 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Nov 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
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 to 4:30,
excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Joydeb Majumder of the Regulatory
Development Section, in the Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Joydeb
Majumder may be reached by phone at
(404) 562–9121, or via electronic mail at
majumder.joydeb@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What are the actions EPA is proposing to
take?
II. What is the background for EPA’s
proposed actions?
III. What are the criteria for redesignation?
IV. Why is EPA proposing these actions?
V. What is EPA’s analysis of the request?
VI. What is the effect of January 4, 2013, D.C.
Circuit decision regarding PM2.5
implementation under subpart 4?
VII. What is EPA’s analysis of Alabama’s
proposed regional on-road motor vehicle
insignificance determination for the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA area?
VIII. What is the status of EPA’s adequacy
determination for the on-road motor
vehicle insignificance determination for
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga
TN-GA area?
IX. Proposed Actions on the Redesignation
Request and Maintenance Plan SIP
Revision for the Alabama Portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area
X. What is the effect of EPA’s proposed
actions?
XI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What are the actions EPA is
proposing to take?
In this action, EPA is proposing to
make a determination that Chattanooga
TN-GA Area is continuing to attain the
1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS 1 and to take
additional actions related to Alabama’s
1 On September 8, 2011, at 76 FR 55774, EPA
determined that the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
request to redesignate the Alabama
portion of the Area, which are
summarized as follows and described in
greater detail throughout this notice of
proposed rulemaking. EPA proposes: (1)
To redesignate the Alabama portion of
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area to
attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS; and (2) to approve, under
section 175A of the Clean Air Act (CAA
or Act), Alabama’s 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS maintenance plan for the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area into the Alabama SIP.
First, EPA proposes to determine that
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area has met the requirements
for redesignation under section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. In this action,
EPA is proposing to approve a request
to change the legal designation of the
portion of Jackson County, Alabama,
that is located within the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area from nonattainment to
attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS.
Second, EPA is proposing to approve
Alabama’s 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
maintenance plan for the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
(such approval being one of the CAA
criteria for redesignation to attainment
status). The maintenance plan is
designed to help keep the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area in attainment of the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS through 2025.
The maintenance plan that EPA is
proposing to approve includes an
insignificance determination for the onroad motor vehicle contribution of
direct PM2.5 and NOX to ambient PM2.5
levels in the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area for
transportation conformity purposes.
EPA is proposing to approve the on-road
motor vehicle insignificance
determination into the Alabama SIP that
is included as part of Alabama’s
maintenance plan for the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS.
Further, EPA proposes to make the
determination that the Chattanooga TNGA Area is continuing to attain the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and that all other
redesignation criteria have been met for
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area. The bases for EPA’s
determination for the Area are discussed
in greater detail below.
EPA is also providing the public with
an update on the status of EPA’s
adequacy process for the on-road motor
vehicle insignificance determination for
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga
attained the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS by its applicable
attainment date of April 5, 2010, and that the Area
was continuing to attain the PM2.5 standard with
monitoring data that was currently available.
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules
designated a portion of Jackson County,
Alabama, in association with counties
in Georgia and Tennessee in the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area, as
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS. See 70 FR 944 and 70 FR
19844, respectively. On November 13,
2009, EPA promulgated designations for
the 24-hour standard established in
2006, designating counties in the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area as
unclassifiable/attainment for the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. See 74 FR
58688. That action also clarified that the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area was classified unclassifiable/
II. What is the background for EPA’s
attainment for the 1997 24-hour PM2.5
proposed actions?
NAAQS promulgated. EPA did not
Fine particle pollution can be emitted promulgate designations for the annual
directly or formed secondarily in the
PM2.5 NAAQS promulgated in 2006
atmosphere. The main precursors of
since that NAAQS was essentially
secondary PM2.5 are sulfur dioxide
identical to the 1997 annual PM2.5
(SO2), NOX, ammonia, and volatile
NAAQS. Therefore, the Alabama
organic compounds (VOC). See 72 FR
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
20586, 20589 (April 25, 2007). Sulfates
is designated nonattainment for the
are a type of secondary particle formed
annual PM2.5 NAAQS promulgated in
from SO2 emissions of power plants and
1997, and today’s action only addresses
industrial facilities. Nitrates, another
this designation.
common type of secondary particle, are
All 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS areas were
formed from NOX emissions of power
designated under subpart 1 of title I,
plants, automobiles, and other
part D, of the CAA. Subpart 1 contains
combustion sources.
the general requirements for
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated
nonattainment areas for any pollutant
the first air quality standards for PM2.5.
EPA promulgated an annual standard at governed by a NAAQS and is less
a level of 15 micrograms per cubic meter prescriptive than the other subparts of
title I, part D. On April 25, 2007, EPA
(mg/m3), based on a 3-year average of
promulgated its PM2.5 Implementation
annual mean PM2.5 concentrations. In
the same rulemaking, EPA promulgated Rule, codified at 40 CFR part 51, subpart
Z, in which the Agency provided
a 24-hour standard of 65 mg/m3, based
guidance for state and tribal plans to
on a 3-year average of the 98th
percentile of 24-hour concentrations. On implement the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See
72 FR 20664. That rule, at 40 CFR
October 17, 2006, EPA retained the
annual average NAAQS at 15 mg/m3 but 51.1004(c), specifies some of the
regulatory results of attaining the
revised the 24-hour NAAQS to 35 mg/
m3, based again on the 3-year average of NAAQS, as discussed below. The
United States Court of Appeals for the
the 98th percentile of 24-hour
concentrations.2 See 71 FR 61144. Under District of Columbia Circuit (D.C.
Circuit) remanded the Clean Air Fine
EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the
Particle Implementation Rule and the
primary and secondary 1997 Annual
final rule entitled ‘‘Implementation of
PM2.5 NAAQS are attained when the
the New Source Review (NSR) Program
annual arithmetic mean concentration,
for Particulate Matter Less than 2.5
as determined in accordance with 40
Micrometers (PM2.5)’’ final rule (73 FR
CFR part 50, Appendix N, is less than
28321, May 16, 2008) (collectively,
or equal to 15.0 mg/m3 at all relevant
monitoring sites in the subject area over ‘‘1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule’’) to
EPA on January 4, 2013, in Natural
a 3-year period.
Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 706
On January 5, 2005, and
F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013). The court
supplemented on April 14, 2005, EPA
found that EPA erred in implementing
2 In response to legal challenges of the annual
the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS pursuant to the
standard promulgated in 2006, the United States
general implementation provisions of
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
subpart 1 of Part D of Title I of the CAA,
Circuit (D.C. Cir.) remanded this NAAQS to EPA for
rather than the particulate matterfurther consideration. See American Farm Bureau
Federation and National Pork Producers Council, et specific provisions of subpart 4 of part
al. v. EPA, 559 F.3d 512 (D.C. Cir. 2009). However,
D of title I. The effect of the court’s
given that the 1997 and 2006 Annual NAAQS are
ruling on this proposed redesignation
essentially identical, attainment of the 1997 Annual
action is discussed in detail in Section
NAAQS would also indicate attainment of the
remanded 2006 Annual NAAQS.
VI of this notice.
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
TN-GA Area. Please see section VIII of
this proposed rulemaking for further
explanation of this process and for
details.
Today’s notice of proposed
rulemaking is in response to Alabama’s
April 23, 2013, SIP revision, which
requests redesignation of the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS and addresses the specific
issues summarized above and the
necessary elements for redesignation
described in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the
CAA.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Nov 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
67139
The 3-year ambient air quality data for
2007–2009 indicated no violations of
the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area. As a result,
on April 23, 2013, Alabama requested
redesignation of the Alabama portion of
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area to
attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS. The redesignation request
includes three years of complete,
quality-assured ambient air quality data
for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS for
2007–2009, indicating that this NAAQS
had been achieved for the entire
Chattanooga TN-GA Area. Under the
CAA, nonattainment areas may be
redesignated to attainment if sufficient,
complete, quality-assured data is
available for the Administrator to
determine that the area has attained the
standard and the area meets the other
CAA redesignation requirements in
section 107(d)(3)(E). The Chattanooga
TN-GA Area’s design value, based on
data from 2007 through 2009, is below
15.0 mg/m3, which demonstrates
attainment of the standards. While
annual PM2.5 concentrations are
dependent on a variety of conditions,
the overall improvement in annual
PM2.5 concentrations in the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area can be attributed to the
reduction of pollutant emissions, as will
be discussed in more detail in section V
of this proposed rulemaking.
The D.C. Circuit and the United States
Supreme Court have issued a number of
decisions and orders regarding the
status of EPA’s regional trading
programs for transported air pollution,
CAIR and CSAPR, that impact this
proposed redesignation action. The
effect of those court actions on this
rulemaking is discussed in detail in
Section V of this notice.
III. What are the criteria for
redesignation?
The CAA provides the requirements
for redesignating a nonattainment area
to attainment. Specifically, section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA allows for
redesignation provided the following
criteria are met: (1) The Administrator
determines that the area has attained the
applicable NAAQS; (2) the
Administrator has fully approved the
applicable implementation plan for the
area under section 110(k); (3) the
Administrator determines that the
improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions
in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP
and applicable federal air pollutant
control regulations and other permanent
and enforceable reductions; (4) the
Administrator has fully approved a
maintenance plan for the area as
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
67140
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules
meeting the requirements of section
175A; and (5) the state containing such
area has met all requirements applicable
to the area under section 110 and part
D of title I of the CAA.
EPA has provided guidance on
redesignation in the General Preamble
for the Implementation of title I of the
CAA Amendments of 1990 (April 16,
1992 (57 FR 13498) and supplemented
on April 28, 1992 (57 FR 18070)) and
has provided further guidance on
processing redesignation requests in the
following documents:
1. ‘‘Procedures for Processing
Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,’’ Memorandum from John
Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4,
1992 (hereafter referred to as the
‘‘Calcagni Memorandum’’);
2. ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Actions Submitted in Response to Clean
Air Act (CAA) Deadlines,’’
Memorandum from John Calcagni,
Director, Air Quality Management
Division, October 28, 1992; and
3. ‘‘Part D New Source Review (Part
D NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to
Attainment,’’ Memorandum from Mary
D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for
Air and Radiation, October 14, 1994.
IV. Why is EPA proposing these
actions?
On April 23, 2013, ADEM requested
the redesignation of the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS. The Chattanooga TN-GA Area
has attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS, and EPA’s preliminary
evaluation indicates that the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
has met the requirements for
redesignation set forth in section
107(d)(3)(E), including the maintenance
plan requirements under section 175A
of the CAA. EPA is also announcing the
status of its adequacy determination for
the insignificance determinations for
both NOX and direct PM2.5 for the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area. Additionally, EPA is also
approving the insignificance
determinations for both NOX and direct
PM2.5 that were included in Alabama’s
maintenance plan.
V. What is EPA’s analysis of the
request?
As stated above, in accordance with
the CAA, EPA proposes in today’s
action to: (1) Redesignate the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS; and (2) approve, into the
Alabama SIP, the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS maintenance plan, including
the mobile source emissions
insignificance determination under
transportation conformity, for the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area. Further, EPA proposes to
make the determination that the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area continues to
attain the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
and that all other redesignation criteria
have been met for the Alabama portion
of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. The
five redesignation criteria provided
under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) are
discussed in greater detail for the Area
in the following paragraphs of this
section.
Criteria (1)—The Chattanooga TN-GA
Area has attained the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS.
For redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment, the CAA requires
EPA to determine that the area has
attained the applicable NAAQS (CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). EPA is
proposing to determine that the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area continues to
attain the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
since the May 31, 2011, attainment
determination. See 76 FR 31239. For
PM2.5, an area may be considered to be
attaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS if it meets the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS, as determined in
accordance with 40 CFR 50.13 and
Appendix N of part 50, based on three
complete, consecutive calendar years of
quality-assured air quality monitoring
data. To attain these NAAQS, the 3-year
average of the annual arithmetic mean
concentration, as determined in
accordance with 40 CFR part 50,
Appendix N, must be less than or equal
to 15.0 mg/m3 at all relevant monitoring
sites in the subject area over a 3-year
period. The relevant data must be
collected and quality-assured in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and
recorded in the EPA Air Quality System
(AQS) database. The monitors generally
should have remained at the same
location for the duration of the
monitoring period required for
demonstrating attainment.
On May 31, 2011, EPA determined
that the Chattanooga TN-GA Area was
attaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS. See 76 FR 31239. For that
action, EPA reviewed PM2.5 monitoring
data from monitoring stations in the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area for the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS for 2007–2009.
These data had been quality-assured by
the respective state agencies and are
recorded in AQS. In addition, on
September 8, 2011, at 76 FR 55774, EPA
finalized a determination that the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area attained the
1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the
applicable attainment date of April 5,
2010. As summarized in Table 1, below,
the 3-year averages of annual arithmetic
mean concentrations (i.e., design values)
for the years 2009 through 2013 for the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area are below the
1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
TABLE 1—DESIGN VALUE CONCENTRATIONS FOR THE CHATTANOOGA TN-GA AREA FOR THE 1997 ANNUAL PM2.5
NAAQS (μG/M3)
3-year design values
Location
County
Site ID
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
2007–2009
Rossville—Maple
St., Georgia.
Siskin Drive/UTC,
Tennessee.
Maxwell Road/East
Ridge, Tennessee.
Soddy-Daisy High
School, Tennessee.
2008–2010
2009–2011
2011–2013
Walker County,
Georgia.
Hamilton County,
Tennessee.
Hamilton County,
Tennessee.
132950002
* 12.3
10.6
10.1
10.0
10.5
470654002
12.9
11.6
11.1
10.9
10.0
470650031
12.7
11.7
11.2
11.1
10.1
Hamilton County,
Tennessee.
470651011
11.8
11.4
11.0
11.2
9.8
* Values subject to data substitution (76 FR 15895)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
2010–2012
17:13 Nov 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules
As discussed above, the design value
for an area is the highest 3-year average
of annual mean concentrations recorded
at any monitor in the Area. Therefore,
the 3-year design value for the period on
which Alabama based its redesignation
request (2007–2009) for the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area is 12.9 mg/m3, which is
below the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
Additional details can be found in
EPA’s final clean data determination for
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. See 76 FR
31239 (May 31, 2011). EPA has
reviewed more recent data which
indicate that the Chattanooga TN-GA
Area continues to attain the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS beyond the
submitted 3-year attainment period of
2007–2009. If the Area does not
continue to attain before EPA finalizes
the redesignation, EPA will not go
forward with the redesignation. As
discussed in more detail below, the four
PM2.5 monitors in the Area will
continue to operate in accordance with
40 CFR part 58 unless a change is
approved by EPA.
Criteria (5)—Alabama has met all
Applicable Requirements under Section
110 and part D of the CAA; and Criteria
(2)—Alabama has a fully approved SIP
under section 110(k) for the Alabama
Portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area.
For redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment, the CAA requires
EPA to determine that the state has met
all applicable requirements under
section 110 and part D of title I of the
CAA (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(v)) and
that the state has a fully approved SIP
under section 110(k) for the area (CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)). EPA proposes
to find that Alabama has met all
applicable SIP requirements for the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area under section 110 of the CAA
(general SIP requirements) for purposes
of redesignation. Additionally, EPA
proposes to find that the Alabama SIP
satisfies the criterion that it meets
applicable SIP requirements for
purposes of redesignation under part D
of title I of the CAA (requirements
specific to 1997 Annual PM2.5
nonattainment areas) in accordance
with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). Further,
EPA proposes to determine that the SIP
is fully approved with respect to all
requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation in accordance with
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these
determinations, EPA ascertained which
requirements are applicable to the Area
and, if applicable, that they are fully
approved under section 110(k). SIPs
must be fully approved only with
respect to requirements that were
applicable prior to submittal of the
complete redesignation request.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Nov 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
a. The Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area has met all
applicable requirements under section
110 and part D of the CAA.
General SIP requirements. Section
110(a)(2) of title I of the CAA delineates
the general requirements for a SIP,
which include enforceable emissions
limitations and other control measures,
means, or techniques; provisions for the
establishment and operation of
appropriate devices necessary to collect
data on ambient air quality; and
programs to enforce the limitations.
General SIP elements and requirements
are delineated in section 110(a)(2) of
title I, part A of the CAA. These
requirements include, but are not
limited to, the following: submittal of a
SIP that has been adopted by the state
after reasonable public notice and
hearing; provisions for establishment
and operation of appropriate procedures
needed to monitor ambient air quality;
implementation of a source permit
program; provisions for the
implementation of part C requirements
(Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD)) and provisions for the
implementation of part D requirements
(New Source Review (NSR) permit
programs); provisions for air pollution
modeling; and provisions for public and
local agency participation in planning
and emission control rule development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs
contain certain measures to prevent
sources in a state from significantly
contributing to air quality problems in
another state. To implement this
provision, EPA has required certain
states to establish programs to address
the interstate transport of air pollutants.
The section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements
for a state are not linked with a
particular nonattainment area’s
designation and classification in that
state. EPA believes that the
requirements linked with a particular
nonattainment area’s designation and
classifications are the relevant measures
to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation
request. The transport SIP submittal
requirements, where applicable,
continue to apply to a state regardless of
the designation of any one particular
area in the state. Thus, EPA does not
believe that the CAA’s interstate
transport requirements should be
construed to be applicable requirements
for purposes of redesignation.
In addition, EPA believes other
section 110 elements that are neither
connected with nonattainment plan
submissions nor linked with an area’s
attainment status are not applicable
requirements for purposes of
redesignation. The area will still be
subject to these requirements after the
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
67141
area is redesignated. The section 110
and part D requirements which are
linked with a particular area’s
designation and classification are the
relevant measures to evaluate in
reviewing a redesignation request. This
approach is consistent with EPA’s
existing policy on applicability (i.e., for
redesignations) of conformity and
oxygenated fuels requirements, as well
as with section 184 ozone transport
requirements. See Reading,
Pennsylvania, proposed and final
rulemakings (61 FR 53174–53176,
October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7,
1997); Cleveland-Akron-Loraine, Ohio,
final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7,
1996); and Tampa, Florida, final
rulemaking at (60 FR 62748, December
7, 1995). See also the discussion on this
issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio,
redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19,
2000), and in the Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania, redesignation (66 FR
50399, October 19, 2001).
On October 1, 2012, April 12, 2013,
and May 7, 2014, EPA approved all
infrastructure SIP elements required
under section 110(a)(2) for the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS with the
exception of the section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii)
element that requires the State to
comply with section 128 of the CAA.
See 77 FR 59755 (October 1, 2012), 77
FR 62452 (October 15, 2012), 78 FR
21841 (April 12, 2013), and 79 FR 26143
(May 7, 2014). These requirements are,
however, statewide requirements that
are not linked to the PM2.5
nonattainment status of the Area. As
stated above, EPA believes that section
110 elements not linked to an area’s
nonattainment status are not applicable
for purposes of redesignation. Therefore,
EPA believes it has approved all SIP
elements under section 110 that must be
approved as a prerequisite for the
redesignation to attainment of the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area.
Title I, Part D, subpart 1 applicable
SIP requirements. EPA proposes to
determine that the Alabama SIP meets
the applicable SIP requirements for the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area for purposes of redesignation
under part D of the CAA. Subpart 1 of
part D, found in sections 172–176 of the
CAA, sets forth the basic nonattainment
requirements applicable to all
nonattainment areas. All areas that were
designated nonattainment for the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS were designated
under subpart 1 of the CAA. For
purposes of evaluating this
redesignation request, the applicable
part D, subpart 1 SIP requirements for
all nonattainment areas are contained in
sections 172(c)(1)–(9) and in section
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
67142
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules
176. A thorough discussion of the
requirements contained in section 172
can be found in the General Preamble
for Implementation of title I. See 57 FR
13498 (April 16, 1992). Section VI of
this proposed rulemaking notice
discusses the relationship between this
proposed redesignation action and
subpart 4 of Part D.
Subpart 1 Section 172 Requirements.
Section 172(c)(1) requires the plans for
all nonattainment areas to provide for
the implementation of all reasonably
available control measures (RACM) as
expeditiously as practicable and to
provide for attainment of the NAAQS.
EPA interprets this requirement to
impose a duty on all nonattainment
areas to consider all available control
measures and to adopt and implement
such measures as are reasonably
available for implementation in each
area as components of the area’s
attainment demonstration. Under
section 172, states with nonattainment
areas must submit plans providing for
timely attainment and meeting a variety
of other requirements.
EPA’s longstanding interpretation of
the nonattainment planning
requirements of section 172 is that once
an area is attaining the NAAQS, those
requirements are not ‘‘applicable’’ for
purposes of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)
and therefore need not be approved into
the SIP before EPA can redesignate the
area. In the 1992 General Preamble for
Implementation of Title I, EPA set forth
its interpretation of applicable
requirements for purposes of evaluating
redesignation requests when an area is
attaining a standard. See 57 FR 13498,
13564 (April 16, 1992). EPA noted that
the requirements for reasonable further
progress and other measures designed to
provide for attainment do not apply in
evaluating redesignation requests
because those nonattainment planning
requirements ‘‘have no meaning’’ for an
area that has already attained the
standard. Id. This interpretation was
also set forth in the Calcagni
Memorandum. EPA’s understanding of
section 172 also forms the basis of its
Clean Data Policy, which was
articulated with regard to PM2.5 in 40
CFR 51.1004(c), and suspends a state’s
obligation to submit most of the
attainment planning requirements that
would otherwise apply, including an
attainment demonstration and planning
SIPs to provide for reasonable further
progress (RFP), RACM, and contingency
measures under section 172(c)(9).3
Courts have upheld EPA’s interpretation
3 This
regulation was promulgated as part of the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS implementation rule that was
subsequently challenged and remanded in NRDC v.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Nov 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
of section 172(c)(1)’s ‘‘reasonably
available’’ control measures and control
technology as meaning only those
controls that advance attainment, which
precludes the need to require additional
measures where an area is already
attaining. NRDC v. EPA, 571 F.3d 1245,
1252 (D.C. Cir. 2009); Sierra Club v.
EPA, 294 F.3d 155, 162 (D.C. Cir. 2002);
Sierra Club v. EPA, 314 F.3d 735, 744
(5th Cir. 2002).
Therefore, because attainment has
been reached in the Chattanooga TN-GA
Area, no additional measures are
needed to provide for attainment, and
section 172(c)(1) requirements for an
attainment demonstration and RACM
are no longer considered to be
applicable for purposes of redesignation
as long as the Area continues to attain
the standard until redesignation.
Section 172(c)(2) requirement that
nonattainment plans contain provisions
promoting reasonable further progress
toward attainment is also not relevant
for purposes of redesignation because
EPA has determined that the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area has monitored
attainment of the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS. In addition, because the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area has attained
the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and is
no longer subject to a RFP requirement,
the requirement to submit the section
172(c)(9) contingency measures is not
applicable for purposes of
redesignation. Section 172(c)(6) requires
the SIP to contain control measures
necessary to provide for attainment of
the NAAQS. Because attainment has
been reached, no additional measures
are needed to provide for attainment.
Section 172(c)(3) requires submission
approval of a comprehensive, accurate,
and current inventory of actual
emissions. On February 8, 2012, EPA
approved Alabama’s 2002 base-year
emissions inventory for the Alabama
Portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
as part of the SIP revision submitted by
ADEM to provide for attainment of the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in the Area. See 77
FR 6467.
Section 172(c)(4) requires the
identification and quantification of
allowable emissions for major new and
modified stationary sources to be
allowed in an area, and section 172(c)(5)
requires source permits for the
construction and operation of new and
modified major stationary sources
anywhere in the nonattainment area.
EPA has determined that, since PSD
requirements will apply after
EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013), as discussed in
Section VI of this notice. However, the Clean Data
Policy portion of the implementation rule was not
at issue in that case.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
redesignation, areas being redesignated
need not comply with the requirement
that a NSR program be approved prior
to redesignation, provided that the area
demonstrates maintenance of the
NAAQS without part D NSR. A more
detailed rationale for this view is
described in a memorandum from Mary
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air
and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994,
entitled ‘‘Part D New Source Review
Requirements for Areas Requesting
Redesignation to Attainment.’’ Alabama
has demonstrated that the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
will be able to maintain the NAAQS
without part D NSR in effect, and
therefore, Alabama need not have fully
approved part D NSR programs prior to
approval of the redesignation request.
Alabama’s PSD program will become
effective in the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area upon
redesignation to attainment.
Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to
meet the applicable provisions of
section 110(a)(2). As noted above, EPA
believes the Alabama SIP meets the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)
applicable for purposes of
redesignation.
176 Conformity Requirements.
Section 176(c) of the CAA requires
states to establish criteria and
procedures to ensure that federallysupported or funded projects conform to
the air quality planning goals in the
applicable SIP. The requirement to
determine conformity applies to
transportation plans, programs, and
projects that are developed, funded, or
approved under title 23 of the United
States Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal
Transit Act (transportation conformity)
as well as to all other federallysupported or funded projects (general
conformity). State transportation
conformity SIP revisions must be
consistent with federal conformity
regulations relating to consultation,
enforcement, and enforceability that
EPA promulgated pursuant to its
authority under the CAA.
EPA believes that it is reasonable to
interpret the conformity SIP
requirements 4 as not applying for
purposes of evaluating the redesignation
request under section 107(d) because
state conformity rules are still required
after redesignation and federal
conformity rules apply where state rules
have not been approved. See Wall v.
4 CAA Section 176(c)(4)(E) requires states to
submit revisions to their SIPs to reflect certain
federal criteria and procedures for determining
transportation conformity. Transportation
conformity SIPs are different from the motor vehicle
emission budgets that are established in control
strategy SIPs and maintenance plans.
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules
EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (upholding this
interpretation) (6th Cir. 2001); See 60 FR
62748 (December 7, 1995).
Thus, for the reasons discussed above,
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area has satisfied all applicable
requirements for purposes of
redesignation under section 110 and
part D of the CAA.
b. The Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area has a fully
approved applicable SIP under section
110(k) of the CAA.
EPA has fully approved the applicable
Alabama SIP for the Alabama portion of
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area for the
1997 Annual PM2.5 nonattainment area
under section 110(k) of the CAA for all
requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation. EPA may rely on prior
SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request (see Calcagni
Memorandum at p. 3; Southwestern
Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v.
Browner, 144 F.3d 984 (6th Cir. 1998);
Wall, 265 F.3d 426) plus any additional
measures it may approve in conjunction
with a redesignation action. See 68 FR
25426 (May 12, 2003) and citations
therein. Following passage of the CAA
of 1970, Alabama has adopted and
submitted, and EPA has fully approved
at various times, provisions addressing
the various SIP elements applicable for
the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area (e.g., 77 FR 59755 (October 1,
2012)). As indicated above, EPA
believes that the section 110 elements
not connected with nonattainment plan
submissions and not linked to the area’s
nonattainment status are not applicable
requirements for purposes of
redesignation.
Criteria (3)—The air quality
improvement in the Chattanooga TN-GA
Area is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions
resulting from implementation of the
SIP and applicable federal air pollution
control regulations and other permanent
and enforceable reductions.
For redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment, the CAA requires
EPA to determine that the air quality
improvement in the area is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions
in emissions resulting from
implementation of the SIP and
applicable Federal air pollution control
regulations and other permanent and
enforceable reductions (CAA section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii)). EPA believes that
Alabama has demonstrated that the
observed air quality improvement in the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions
in emissions resulting from
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Nov 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
implementation of the SIP and Federal
measures.
Fine particulate matter, or PM2.5,
refers to airborne particles less than or
equal to 2.5 micrometers in diameter.
Although treated as a single pollutant,
fine particles come from many different
sources and are composed of many
different compounds. In the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area, one of the
largest components of PM2.5 is sulfate,
which is formed through various
chemical reactions from the precursor
SO2. The other major component of
PM2.5 is organic carbon, which
originates predominantly from biogenic
emission sources. Nitrate, which is
formed from the precursor NOX, is also
a component of PM2.5. Crustal materials
from windblown dust and elemental
carbon from combustion sources are less
significant contributors to total PM2.5.
VOCs, also precursors for PM, are
emitted from a variety of sources,
including motor vehicles, chemical
plants, refineries, factories, consumer
and commercial products, and other
industrial sources. VOCs also are
emitted by natural sources such as
vegetation.
Federal measures enacted in recent
years have resulted in permanent
emission reductions in particulate
matter and its precursors. Most of these
emission reductions are enforceable
through regulations. The Federal
measures that have been implemented
include:
Tier 2 vehicle standards and lowsulfur gasoline. In addition to requiring
NOX controls, the Tier 2 rule reduced
the allowable sulfur content of gasoline
to 30 parts per million (ppm) starting in
January of 2006. Most gasoline sold
prior to this had a sulfur content of
approximately 300 ppm.
Heavy-duty gasoline and diesel
highway vehicle standards & Ultra LowSulfur Diesel Rule. On October 6, 2000,
the U.S. EPA promulgated a rule to
reduce NOX and VOC emissions from
heavy-duty gasoline and diesel highway
vehicles that began to take effect in
2004. See 65 FR 59896. A second phase
of standards and testing procedures
began in 2007 to reduce particulate
matter from heavy-duty highway
engines, and reduce highway diesel fuel
sulfur content to 15 ppm since the
sulfur in fuel damages high efficiency
catalytic exhaust emission control
devices. The total program should
achieve a 90 percent reduction PM
emissions and a 95 percent reduction in
NOX emission for new engines using
low-sulfur diesel, compared to existing
engines using higher-content sulfur
diesel.
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
67143
Non-road, large spark-ignition
engines and recreational engines
standards. The non-road spark-ignition
and recreational engine standards,
effective in July 2003, regulate NOX,
hydrocarbons, and carbon monoxide
from groups of previously unregulated
non-road engines. These engine
standards apply to large spark-ignition
engines (e.g., forklifts and airport
ground service equipment), recreational
vehicles (e.g., off-highway motorcycles
and all-terrain-vehicles), and
recreational marine diesel engines sold
in the United States and imported after
the effective date of these standards.
When all of the non-road sparkignition and recreational engine
standards are fully implemented, an
overall 72 percent reduction in
hydrocarbons, 80 percent reduction in
NOX, and 56 percent reduction in
carbon monoxide emissions are
expected by 2020. These controls will
help reduce ambient concentrations of
ozone, carbon monoxide, and fine
particulate matter.
Large non-road diesel engine
standards. Promulgated in 2004, this
rule is being phased in between 2008
and 2014. This rule will reduce sulfur
content in non-road diesel fuel and,
when fully implemented, will reduce
NOX and direct PM2.5 emissions by over
90 percent from these engines.
Reciprocating Internal Combustion
Engine standard. Initially promulgated
in 2010, this rule regulates emissions of
air toxics from existing diesel powered
stationary reciprocating internal
combustion engines that meet specific
site rating, age, and size criteria. With
all of the reciprocating internal
combustion engine standards fully
implemented in 2013, EPA estimates
that PM2.5 emissions from these engines
have been reduced by approximately
2,800 tons per year (tpy).
Category 3 Marine Diesel Engine
standard. Promulgated in 2010, this rule
establishes more stringent exhaust
emission standards for new large marine
diesel engines with per cylinder
displacement at or above 30 liters
(commonly referred to as Category 3
compression-ignition marine engines) as
part of a coordinated strategy to address
emissions from all ships that affect U.S.
air quality. Near-term standards for
newly built engines applied beginning
in 2011, and long-term standards
requiring an 80 percent reduction in
NOX emissions will begin in 2016.
NOX SIP Call. On October 27, 1998
(63 FR 57356), EPA issued a NOX SIP
Call requiring the District of Columbia
and 22 states to reduce emissions of
NOX. Affected states were required to
comply with Phase I of the SIP Call
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
67144
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules
beginning in 2004 and Phase II
beginning in 2007. Emission reductions
resulting from regulations developed in
response to the NOX SIP Call are
permanent and enforceable.
CAIR and CSAPR. The Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR) was promulgated
in 2005 and required 28 eastern states
and the District of Columbia to
significantly reduce emissions of SO2
and NOX from electric generating units
(EGUs) in order to limit the interstate
transport of these pollutants and the
ozone and fine particulate matter they
form in the atmosphere. 70 FR 25162
(May 12, 2005). In 2008, the D.C. Circuit
initially vacated CAIR, North Carolina
v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008),
but ultimately remanded the rule to EPA
without vacatur to preserve the
environmental benefits provided by
CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d
1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008). On August
8, 2011, acting on the Court’s remand,
EPA promulgated CSAPR, to address
interstate transport of emissions and
resulting secondary air pollutants and to
replace CAIR (76 FR 48208).5 CSAPR
requires substantial reductions of SO2
and NOX emissions from EGUs in 28
states in the Eastern United States.
Implementation of the rule was
scheduled to begin on January 1, 2012,
when CSAPR’s cap-and-trade programs
would have superseded the CAIR capand-trade programs. Numerous parties
filed petitions for review of CSAPR, and
on December 30, 2011, the D.C. Circuit
issued an order staying CSAPR pending
resolution of the petitions and directing
EPA to continue to administer CAIR.
EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v.
EPA, No. 11–1302 (D.C. Cir. Dec. 30,
2011), Order at 2.
On August 21, 2012, the D.C. Circuit
issued its ruling, vacating and
remanding CSAPR to the Agency and
once again ordering continued
implementation of CAIR. EME Homer
City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 F.3d
7, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2012). The D.C. Circuit
subsequently denied EPA’s petition for
rehearing en banc. EME Homer City
Generation, L.P. v. EPA, No. 11–1302,
2013 WL 656247 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 24,
2013), at *1. EPA and other parties then
petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ
of certiorari, and the Supreme Court
granted the petitions on June 24, 2013.
EPA v. EME Homer City Generation,
L.P., 133 S. Ct. 2857 (2013).
On April 29, 2014, the Supreme Court
vacated and reversed the D.C. Circuit’s
5 CAIR addressed the 1997 PM
2.5 Annual standard
and the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. CSAPR
addresses contributions from upwind states to
downwind nonattainment and maintenance of the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard as well as the ozone
and PM2.5 NAAQS addressed by CAIR.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Nov 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
decision regarding CSAPR and
remanded that decision to the D.C.
Circuit to resolve remaining issues in
accordance with its ruling. EPA v. EME
Homer City Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct.
1584 (2014). EPA filed a motion to lift
the stay in light of the Supreme Court
decision, and on October 23, 2014, the
D.C. Circuit granted EPA’s motion. EME
Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA,
Case No. 11–1302, Document No.
1518738.
EPA approved a modification to
Alabama’s SIP on October 1, 2007, that
addressed the requirements of CAIR for
the purpose of reducing SO2 and NOX
emissions (see 72 FR 55659), and
Alabama’s SIP redesignation request
lists CAIR/CSAPR as a control measure.
CAIR was in place and getting emission
reductions when the Chattanooga TNGA Area began monitoring attainment of
the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The
quality-assured, certified monitoring
data used to demonstrate the area’s
attainment of the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS by the April 5, 2010, attainment
deadline was also impacted by CAIR.
However, EPA conducted an air quality
modeling analysis as part of the CSAPR
rulemaking which demonstrates that the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area would be able
to maintain the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS even in the absence of either
CAIR or CSAPR. See ‘‘Air Quality
Modeling Final Rule Technical Support
Document,’’ App. B, B–39.6 This
modeling is available in the docket for
this proposed redesignation action. In
addition, as noted above, the D.C.
Circuit has lifted the stay of CSAPR.
Therefore, to the extent that these
transport rules impact attainment of the
1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area, any emission
reductions associated with CAIR that
helped the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
achieve attainment of the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS are permanent and
enforceable for purposes of
redesignation under section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA because
CSAPR requires similar or greater
emission reductions from relevant
upwind areas starting in 2015 and
beyond.
Criteria (4) —The Alabama portion of
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area has a fully
approved maintenance plan pursuant to
section 175A of the CAA.
For redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment, the CAA requires
EPA to determine that the area has a
fully approved maintenance plan
6 The air quality modeling analysis for the CSAPR
rulemaking did not identify any of the four
monitors in the Chattanooga TN-GA Area as
receptors.
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
pursuant to section 175A of the CAA
(CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv)). In
conjunction with its request to
redesignate the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area to attainment
for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS,
ADEM submitted a SIP revision to
provide for the maintenance of the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS for at least 10
years after the effective date of
redesignation to attainment. EPA
believes that this maintenance plan
meets the requirements for approval
under section 175A of the CAA.
a. What is required in a maintenance
plan?
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth
the elements of a maintenance plan for
areas seeking redesignation from
nonattainment to attainment. Under
section 175A, the plan must
demonstrate continued attainment of
the applicable NAAQS for at least 10
years after the Administrator approves a
redesignation to attainment. Eight years
after the redesignation, ADEM must
submit a revised maintenance plan
which demonstrates that attainment will
continue to be maintained for the 10
years following the initial 10-year
period. To address the possibility of
future NAAQS violations, the
maintenance plan must contain such
contingency measures, as EPA deems
necessary, to assure prompt correction
of any future 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS violations. The Calcagni
Memorandum provides further guidance
on the content of a maintenance plan,
explaining that a maintenance plan
should address five requirements: the
attainment emissions inventory,
maintenance demonstration,
monitoring, verification of continued
attainment, and a contingency plan. As
is discussed below, EPA finds that
ADEM’s maintenance plan includes all
the necessary components and is thus
proposing to approve it as a revision to
the Alabama SIP.
b. CAA 175 Maintenance Plan
Requirements
1. Attainment Emissions Inventory
The Chattanooga TN-GA Area
attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
based on monitoring data for the 3-year
period from 2007–2009. ADEM has
selected 2007 as the attainment
emission inventory year. The attainment
inventory identifies a level of emissions
in the Area that is sufficient to attain the
1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. ADEM
began development of the attainment
inventory by first generating a baseline
emissions inventory for the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area.
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
67145
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules
As noted above, the year 2007 was
chosen as the base year for developing
a comprehensive emissions inventory
for direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors
SO2 and NOX. Emissions projections to
support maintenance through 2025 have
been prepared for the years 2017 and
2025. The projected inventory included
with the maintenance plan estimates
emissions forward to 2025, which
satisfies the 10-year interval required in
section 175(A) of the CAA.
The emissions inventories are
composed of four major types of
sources: point, area, on-road mobile,
and non-road mobile. The 2007
inventory, with the exception of on-road
mobile emissions, was prepared for
Alabama by the contractor for the
Southeastern Modeling, Analysis, and
Planning (SEMAP) project. Under the
SEMAP project, emissions estimates are
reported by county and source
classification code. The SEMAP
emissions inventories were developed
using data from a number of sources,
including state and local agencies and
EPA’s National Emissions Inventory
(NEI). ADEM developed the 2007
inventory of on-road mobile emissions.
The 2007 SO2, NOX, and PM2.5
emissions for the Alabama portion of
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area, as well as
the emissions for other years, were
developed consistent with EPA
guidance and are summarized in Tables
2 through 6 of the following subsection
discussing the maintenance
demonstration.
2. Maintenance Demonstration
The April 23, 2013, final submittal
includes a maintenance plan for the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area. This demonstration:
(i) Shows compliance with and
maintenance of the Annual PM2.5
standard by providing information to
support the demonstration that current
and future emissions of SO2 and NOX
will remain below 2007 emission levels.
(ii) Uses 2007 as the attainment year
and includes future emission inventory
projections for 2017 and 2025.
(iii) Identifies an ‘‘out year’’ at least 10
years after EPA review and potential
approval of the maintenance plan.
ADEM submitted an insignificance
determination for transportation
conformity purposes for PM2.5 and NOX
for the mobile source contribution for
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area, per 40 CFR part 93.
(iv) Provides, as shown in Tables 2, 3,
4, 5, and 6 below, the actual and
projected emissions inventories, in tpy,
for the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area.
TABLE 2—ACTUAL (2007) AND PROJECTED POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS FOR THE ALABAMA PORTION OF THE
CHATTANOOGA TN-GA AREA
[Tons]
Pollutant
2007
2017
2025
SO2 ................................................................................................................................................................
NOX ................................................................................................................................................................
PM2.5 ..............................................................................................................................................................
32,803.98
18,591.83
755.49
10,515.63
3,468.44
534.89
10,517.47
3,607.05
534.89
TABLE 3—ACTUAL (2007) AND PROJECTED NON-POINT SOURCE EMISSIONS FOR THE ALABAMA PORTION OF THE
CHATTANOOGA TN-GA AREA
[Tons]
Pollutant
2007
SO2 ................................................................................................................................................................
NOX ................................................................................................................................................................
PM2.5 ..............................................................................................................................................................
0.25
1.58
27.11
2017
0.25
1.55
28.08
2025
0.24
1.57
29.17
TABLE 4—ACTUAL (2007) AND PROJECTED ON-ROAD MOBILE SOURCES EMISSIONS FOR THE ALABAMA PORTION OF THE
CHATTANOOGA TN-GA AREA
[Tons]
Pollutant
2007
SO2 ................................................................................................................................................................
NOX ................................................................................................................................................................
PM2.5 ..............................................................................................................................................................
0.19
23.00
0.73
2017
0.07
9.00
0.31
2025
0.07
6.00
0.24
TABLE 5—ACTUAL (2007) AND PROJECTED NON-ROAD MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS FOR THE ALABAMA PORTION OF THE
CHATTANOOGA TN-GA AREA
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
[Tons]
Pollutant
2007
SO2 ................................................................................................................................................................
NOX ................................................................................................................................................................
PM2.5 ..............................................................................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Nov 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
0.91
37.32
2.05
12NOP1
2017
0.15
25.86
1.01
2025
0.15
18.95
0.63
67146
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 6—ACTUAL (2007) AND PROJECTED EMISSIONS FOR ALL SECTORS FOR THE ALABAMA PORTION OF THE
CHATTANOOGA TN-GA AREA
[Tons]
Pollutant
2007
2017
2025
SO2 ................................................................................................................................................................
NOX ................................................................................................................................................................
PM2.5 ..............................................................................................................................................................
32,805.33
18,653.73
785.38
10,516.10
3,504.83
564.29
10,517.93
3,633.57
564.93
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
As reflected in Table 6, future
emissions of direct PM2.5 and the
relevant precursors are expected to be
below the ‘‘attainment level’’ emissions
in 2007. In situations where local
emissions are the primary contributor to
nonattainment, such as the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area, if the future projected
emissions in the nonattainment area
remain at or below the baseline
emissions in the nonattainment area,
then the ambient air quality standard
should not be exceeded in the future. As
explained below, EPA finds that the
overall emission projections illustrate
that the Chattanooga TN-GA Area is
expected to continue to attain the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS through 2025.7
Emissions of SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 are
projected to decline by 68 percent, 81
percent, and 28 percent, respectively,
from 2007 to 2025. This is a reflection
of the implementation of the majority of
Federal controls during the first half of
the maintenance period. The projected
declines in emissions demonstrate that
the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS will be
maintained.
A maintenance plan requires the state
to show that projected future year
emissions will not exceed the level of
emissions which led the Area to attain
the NAAQS. EPA agrees that Alabama’s
projected emissions demonstrate that
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area will
continue to attain for the duration of the
maintenance plan.
3. Monitoring Network
There is no monitor measuring
ambient PM2.5 in the Alabama portion of
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. However,
there are four monitors located in the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area. Three
monitors are located in Hamilton
County, Tennessee, and one monitor is
located in Walker County, Georgia. As
noted in Alabama’s maintenance plan,
all four monitors will continue to
operate in the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
in compliance with 40 CFR part 58
7 Based on a limited review of data and emissions
projections available to EPA from the Georgia and
Tennessee portions of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area,
EPA does not at this time believe that projected
emissions from those portions of the Area present
a maintenance problem for air quality in the Area
as a whole.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Nov 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
unless a change is approved by EPA,
and no plans are underway to
discontinue operation, relocate, or
otherwise affect the integrity of these
monitors. EPA proposes to find that
Alabama has thus addressed the
requirement for monitoring.
4. Verification of Continued Attainment
ADEM has the legal authority to
enforce and implement the
requirements of the Alabama portion of
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area through
the 1997 Annual PM2.5 maintenance
plan. This includes the authority to
adopt, implement, and enforce any
subsequent emissions control
contingency measures determined to be
necessary to correct future PM2.5
attainment problems.
ADEM will track the progress of the
maintenance plan by performing future
reviews of triennial emission
inventories for the Alabama portion of
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area as
required in the Air Emissions Reporting
Rule (AERR) and Consolidated
Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR). For
these periodic inventories, ADEM will
review the assumptions made for the
purpose of the maintenance
demonstration concerning projected
growth of activity levels. If any of these
assumptions appear to have changed
substantially, then ADEM will re-project
emissions for the Alabama portion of
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area.
5. Contingency Measures in the
Maintenance Plan.
Section 175A of the CAA requires that
a maintenance plan include such
contingency measures as EPA deems
necessary to assure that the state will
promptly correct a violation of the
NAAQS that occurs after redesignation.
The maintenance plan should identify
the contingency measures to be adopted,
a schedule and procedure for adoption
and implementation, and a time limit
for action by ADEM. A state should also
identify specific indicators to be used to
determine when the contingency
measures need to be implemented. The
maintenance plan must include a
requirement that a state will implement
all measures with respect to control of
the pollutant that were contained in the
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
SIP before redesignation of the area to
attainment in accordance with section
175A(d).
The contingency plan included in the
submittal includes a triggering
mechanism to determine when
contingency measures are needed and a
process of developing and
implementing appropriate control
measures. ADEM will use actual
ambient monitoring data to determine
whether a trigger event has occurred
and when contingency measures should
be implemented. ADEM commits to
adopt, within 18 months of certification
of a violation of the Annual PM2.5
standard, one or more control measures
as needed to re-attain the standard.
In accordance with 40 CFR part 58,
ambient fine particulate matter
monitoring data that indicates a future
violation of the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS will begin the process to
implement these contingency measures.
Also, in the event that the annual
average PM2.5 concentrations in a year at
any individual monitor in the Area
records a reading of 15.0 mg/m3 or
higher, the State will evaluate existing
control measures to determine whether
any further emissions reduction
measures should be implemented at that
time.
Several factors will be considered in
determining the need for additional
control measures in the event of a future
year violation of the 1997 Annual PM2.5
standard. Depending on when such
future year violation occurs, additional
local and regional emissions reductions
may still be expected from various
regulatory programs not accounted for
in the redesignation request. If a future
year violation occurs, ADEM will
consider the air quality impact of these
various regulatory programs in
determining the need for additional
local reductions in emissions of direct
PM2.5 and/or SO2.
If deemed necessary, contingency
measures will be selected from the
following types of measures or from any
other measures deemed appropriate and
effective at the time the selection is
made:
• Reasonably Available Control
Measures (RACM) for sources of SO2
and PM2.5;
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules
• Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT) for point sources of
SO2 and PM2.5;
• Expansion of RACM/RACT to area
of transport within the State; and
• Additional SO2 and/or PM2.5
reduction measures yet to be identified.
Any resulting contingency measures
will be based upon cost effectiveness,
emission reduction potential, economic
and social consideration, ease and
timing of implementation, and other
appropriate factors.
67147
A timeline of the development of
PM2.5, and/or SO2 regulations or permit
conditions follows. This schedule
initiates with certification of ambient air
quality monitoring data indicating a
violation of the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS:
TABLE 7—SCHEDULE FOR PERMIT REVISIONS OR RULE REVISIONS FOR CONTINGENCY MEASURES
1 ..............
2 ..............
3 ..............
4 ..............
Identify and quantify the emissions reductions expected to result in the future from existing and future state and federal regulatory programs.
Use the best available air quality modeling to evaluate the air quality improvement expected to result in Jackson
County from the programs and emissions reductions identified in Step 1 above.
Draft any needed permit conditions or SIP regulations ...................................................................................................
Complete rulemaking or permit revision process and submit to EPA .............................................................................
Completion no later than ..................................................................................................................................................
EPA has concluded that the
maintenance plan adequately addresses
the five basic components required: the
attainment emissions inventory,
maintenance demonstration,
monitoring, verification of continued
attainment, and a contingency plan.
Therefore, the maintenance plan SIP
revision submitted by ADEM for the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area meets the requirements of
section 175A of the CAA and EPA is
proposing that Alabama’s submission is
approvable.
VI. What is the effect of the January 4,
2013, D.C. Circuit decision regarding
PM2.5 implementation under subpart 4?
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
a. Background
As discussed in Section I of this
action, the D.C. Circuit remanded the
1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule to EPA
on January 4, 2013, in Natural
Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 706
F.3d 428. The court found that EPA
erred in implementing the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS pursuant to the general
implementation provisions of subpart 1
of part D of Title I of the CAA rather
than the particulate matter-specific
provisions of subpart 4 of part D of Title
I.
b. Proposal on This Issue
In this portion of the proposed
redesignation, EPA addresses the effect
of the Court’s January 4, 2013, ruling on
the proposed redesignation. As
explained below, EPA is proposing to
determine that the Court’s January 4,
2013, decision does not prevent EPA
from redesignating the Alabama portion
of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area to
attainment. Even in light of the Court’s
decision, redesignation for this area is
appropriate under the CAA and EPA’s
longstanding interpretations of the
CAA’s provisions regarding
redesignation. EPA first explains its
longstanding interpretation that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Nov 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
requirements that are imposed, or that
become due, after a complete
redesignation request is submitted for
an area that is attaining the standard, are
not applicable for purposes of
evaluating a redesignation request.
Second, EPA then shows that, even if
EPA applies the subpart 4 requirements
to the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area redesignation
request and disregards the provisions of
its 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule
recently remanded by the Court, the
State’s request for redesignation of the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area still qualifies for approval.
EPA’s discussion takes into account the
effect of the Court’s ruling on the
maintenance plan for the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area,
which EPA views as approvable when
subpart 4 requirements are considered.
c. Applicable Requirements for the
Purpose of Evaluating the Redesignation
Request
With respect to the 1997 PM2.5
Implementation Rule, the Court’s
January 4, 2013, ruling rejected EPA’s
reasons for implementing the PM2.5
NAAQS solely in accordance with the
provisions of subpart 1 and remanded
that matter to EPA to address
implementation of the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS under subpart 4 of part D of the
CAA, in addition to subpart 1. For the
purposes of evaluating Alabama’s
redesignation request for the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area,
to the extent that implementation under
subpart 4 would impose additional
requirements for areas designated
nonattainment, EPA believes that those
requirements are not ‘‘applicable’’ for
the purposes of CAA section
107(d)(3)(E), and thus EPA is not
required to consider subpart 4
requirements with respect to the
redesignation of the Alabama portion of
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. Under its
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
3 months.
6 months.
3 months.
6 months.
18 months.
longstanding interpretation of the CAA,
EPA has interpreted section 107(d)(3)(E)
to mean, as a threshold matter, that the
part D provisions which are
‘‘applicable’’ and which must be
approved in order for EPA to
redesignate an area include only those
which came due prior to a state’s
submittal of a complete redesignation
request. See ‘‘Procedures for Processing
Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,’’ Memorandum from John
Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4,
1992 (Calcagni memorandum). See also
‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Requirements for Areas Submitting
Requests for the plan and Redesignation
to Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) on or after
November 15, 1992,’’ Memorandum
from Michael Shapiro, Acting Assistant
Administrator, Air and Radiation,
September 17, 1993 (Shapiro
memorandum); Final Redesignation of
Detroit-Ann Arbor, (60 FR 12459,
12465–66, March 7, 1995); Final
Redesignation of St. Louis, Missouri, (68
FR 25418, 25424–27, May 12, 2003);
Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537, 541
(7th Cir. 2004) (upholding EPA’s
redesignation rulemaking applying this
interpretation and expressly rejecting
Sierra Club’s view that the meaning of
‘‘applicable’’ under the statute is
‘‘whatever should have been in the plan
at the time of attainment rather than
whatever actually was in already
implemented or due at the time of
attainment’’).8 In this case, at the time
that Alabama submitted its
redesignation request on April 23, 2013,
8 Applicable requirements of the CAA that come
due subsequent to the area’s submittal of a complete
redesignation request remain applicable until a
redesignation is approved, but are not required as
a prerequisite to redesignation. Section 175A(c) of
the CAA.
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
67148
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules
requirements under subpart 4 were not
due.
EPA’s view that, for purposes of
evaluating the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area redesignation,
the subpart 4 requirements were not due
at the time the State submitted the
redesignation request is in keeping with
the EPA’s interpretation of subpart 2
requirements for subpart 1 ozone areas
redesignated subsequent to the D.C.
Circuit’s decision in South Coast Air
Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d
882 (D.C. Cir. 2006). In South Coast, the
Court found that EPA was not permitted
to implement the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard solely under subpart 1 and
held that EPA was required under the
statute to implement the standard under
the ozone-specific requirements of
subpart 2 as well. Subsequent to the
South Coast decision, in evaluating and
acting upon redesignation requests for
the 1997 8-hour ozone standard that
were submitted to EPA for areas under
subpart 1, EPA applied its longstanding
interpretation of the CAA that
‘‘applicable requirements,’’ for purposes
of evaluating a redesignation, are those
that had been due at the time the
redesignation request was submitted.
See, e.g., Proposed Redesignation of
Manitowoc County and Door County
Nonattainment Areas (75 FR 22047,
22050, April 27, 2010). In those actions,
EPA therefore did not consider subpart
2 requirements to be ‘‘applicable’’ for
the purposes of evaluating whether the
area should be redesignated under
section 107(d)(3)(E).
EPA’s interpretation derives from the
provisions of CAA Section 107(d)(3)(E).
Section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) states that, for an
area to be redesignated, a state must
meet ‘‘all requirements ‘applicable’ to
the area under section 110 and part D.’’
Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) provides that the
EPA must have fully approved the
‘‘applicable’’ SIP for the area seeking
redesignation. These two sections read
together support EPA’s interpretation of
‘‘applicable’’ as only those requirements
that came due prior to submission of a
complete redesignation request. First,
holding states to an ongoing obligation
to adopt new CAA requirements that
arose after the state submitted its
redesignation request, in order to be
redesignated, would make it
problematic or impossible for EPA to act
on redesignation requests in accordance
with the 18-month deadline Congress
set for EPA action in section
107(d)(3)(D). If ‘‘applicable
requirements’’ were interpreted to be a
continuing flow of requirements with no
reasonable limitation, states, after
submitting a redesignation request,
would be forced continuously to make
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Nov 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
additional SIP submissions that in turn
would require EPA to undertake further
notice-and-comment rulemaking actions
to act on those submissions. This would
create a regime of unceasing rulemaking
that would delay action on the
redesignation request beyond the 18month timeframe provided by the Act
for this purpose.
Second, a fundamental premise for
redesignating a nonattainment area to
attainment is that the area has attained
the relevant NAAQS due to emission
reductions from existing controls. Thus,
an area for which a redesignation
request has been submitted would have
already attained the NAAQS as a result
of satisfying statutory requirements that
came due prior to the submission of the
request. Absent a showing that
unadopted and unimplemented
requirements are necessary for future
maintenance, it is reasonable to view
the requirements applicable for
purposes of evaluating the redesignation
request as including only those SIP
requirements that have already come
due. These are the requirements that led
to attainment of the NAAQS. To require,
for redesignation approval, that a state
also satisfy additional SIP requirements
coming due after the state submits its
complete redesignation request, and
while EPA is reviewing it, would
compel the state to do more than is
necessary to attain the NAAQS, without
a showing that the additional
requirements are necessary for
maintenance.
d. Subpart 4 Requirements and the
Alabama Portion of the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area Redesignation Request
Even if EPA were to take the view that
the Court’s January 4, 2013, decision
requires that, in the context of pending
redesignations, subpart 4 requirements
were due and in effect at the time the
State submitted its redesignation
request, EPA proposes to determine that
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area still qualifies for
redesignation to attainment. As
explained below, EPA believes that the
redesignation request for the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area,
though not expressed in terms of
subpart 4 requirements, substantively
meets the requirements of that subpart
for purposes of redesignating the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area to attainment.
With respect to evaluating the
relevant substantive requirements of
subpart 4 for purposes of redesignating
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area, EPA notes that subpart 4
incorporates components of subpart 1 of
part D, which contains general air
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
quality planning requirements for areas
designated as nonattainment. See
section 172(c). Subpart 4 itself contains
specific planning and scheduling
requirements for PM109 nonattainment
areas, and under the Court’s January 4,
2013, decision in NRDC v. EPA, these
same statutory requirements also apply
for PM2.5 nonattainment areas. EPA has
longstanding general guidance that
interprets the 1990 amendments to the
CAA, making recommendations to states
for meeting the statutory requirements
for SIPs for nonattainment areas.10 In
the General Preamble, EPA discussed
the relationship of subpart 1 and
subpart 4 SIP requirements and pointed
out that subpart 1 requirements were to
an extent ‘‘subsumed by, or integrally
related to, the more specific PM–10
requirements.’’ See 57 FR 13538 (April
16, 1992). The subpart 1 requirements
include, among other things, provisions
for attainment demonstrations, RACM
RFP, emissions inventories, and
contingency measures.
For the purposes of this redesignation,
in order to identify any additional
requirements which would apply under
subpart 4, we are considering the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area to be a ‘‘moderate’’ PM2.5
nonattainment area. Under section 188
of the CAA, all areas designated
nonattainment areas under subpart 4
would initially be classified by
operation of law as ‘‘moderate’’
nonattainment areas and would remain
moderate nonattainment areas unless
and until EPA reclassifies the area as a
‘‘serious’’ nonattainment area.
Accordingly, EPA believes that it is
appropriate to limit the evaluation of
the potential impact of subpart 4
requirements to those that would be
applicable to moderate nonattainment
areas. Sections 189(a) and (c) of subpart
4 apply to moderate nonattainment
areas and include the following: (1) An
approved permit program for
construction of new and modified major
stationary sources (section 189(a)(1)(A));
(2) an attainment demonstration (section
189(a)(1)(B)); (3) provisions for RACM
(section 189(a)(1)(C)); and (4)
quantitative milestones demonstrating
RFP toward attainment by the
applicable attainment date (section
189(c)).
The permit requirements of subpart 4,
as contained in section 189(a)(1)(A),
refer to and apply the subpart 1 permit
provisions requirements of sections 172
9 PM
10 refers to particles nominally 10
micrometers in diameter or smaller.
10 See, ‘‘State Implementation Plans; General
Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 57 FR 13498
(April 16, 1992) (the ‘‘General Preamble’’).
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
and 173 to PM10, without adding to
them. Consequently, EPA believes that
section 189(a)(1)(A) does not itself
impose for redesignation purposes any
additional requirements for moderate
areas beyond those contained in subpart
1.11 In any event, in the context of
redesignation, EPA has long relied on
the interpretation that a fully approved
nonattainment new source review
program is not considered an applicable
requirement for redesignation, provided
the area can maintain the standard with
a PSD program after redesignation. A
detailed rationale for this view is
described in a memorandum from Mary
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air
and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994,
entitled ‘‘Part D New Source Review
Requirements for Areas Requesting
Redesignation to Attainment.’’ See also
rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60
FR 12467–12468, March 7, 1995);
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio (61 FR
20458, 20469–20470, May 7, 1996);
Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665,
October 23, 2001); and Grand Rapids,
Michigan (61 FR 31834–31837, June 21,
1996).
With respect to the specific
attainment planning requirements under
subpart 4,12 when EPA evaluates a
redesignation request under either
subpart 1 or 4, any area that is attaining
the PM2.5 standard is viewed as having
satisfied the attainment planning
requirements for these subparts. As
discussed above, for redesignations,
EPA has for many years interpreted
attainment-linked requirements as not
applicable for areas attaining the
standard.
Therefore, even if we were to consider
the Court’s January 4, 2013, decision in
NRDC v. EPA to mean that attainmentrelated requirements specific to subpart
4 should be imposed retroactively 13 and
thus are now past due, those
requirements do not apply to an area
that is attaining the 1997 PM2.5 standard
for the purpose of evaluating a pending
request to redesignate the area to
attainment. Elsewhere in this notice,
EPA proposes to determine that the
Area has attained the 1997 PM2.5
standard. Under its longstanding
interpretation, EPA is proposing to
determine here that the Area meets the
11 The potential effect of section 189(e) on section
189(a)(1)(A) for purposes of evaluating this
redesignation is discussed below.
12 i.e., attainment demonstration, RFP milestone
requirements, and RACM.
13 As explained above, EPA does not believe that
the Court’s January 4, 2013, decision should be
interpreted so as to impose these requirements on
the states retroactively. Sierra Club v. Whitman,
supra.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Nov 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
attainment-related plan requirements of
subparts 1 and 4.
Thus, EPA is proposing to conclude
that the requirements to submit an
attainment demonstration under
189(a)(1)(B), a RACM determination
under section 189(a)(1)(C), and a RFP
demonstration under 189(c)(1) are
satisfied for purposes of evaluating the
redesignation request.
e. Subpart 4 and Control of PM2.5
Precursors
The D.C. Circuit in NRDC v. EPA
remanded to EPA the two rules at issue
in the case with instructions to EPA to
re-promulgate them consistent with the
requirements of subpart 4. EPA in this
section addresses the Court’s opinion
with respect to PM2.5 precursors. While
past implementation of subpart 4 for
PM10 has allowed for control of PM10
precursors such as NOX from major
stationary, mobile, and area sources in
order to attain the standard as
expeditiously as practicable, CAA
section 189(e) specifically provides that
control requirements for major
stationary sources of direct PM10 shall
also apply to PM10 precursors from
those sources, except where EPA
determines that major stationary sources
of such precursors ‘‘do not contribute
significantly to PM10 levels which
exceed the standard in the area.’’
EPA’s 1997 PM2.5 implementation
rule, remanded by the D.C. Circuit,
contained rebuttable presumptions
concerning certain PM2.5 precursors
applicable to attainment plans and
control measures related to those plans.
Specifically, in 40 CFR 51.1002, EPA
provided, among other things, that a
state was ‘‘not required to address VOC
[and ammonia] as . . . PM2.5 attainment
plan precursor[s] and to evaluate
sources of VOC [and ammonia]
emissions in the State for control
measures.’’ EPA intended these to be
rebuttable presumptions. EPA
established these presumptions at the
time because of uncertainties regarding
the emission inventories for these
pollutants and the effectiveness of
specific control measures in various
regions of the country in reducing PM2.5
concentrations. EPA also left open the
possibility for such regulation of VOC
and ammonia in specific areas where
that was necessary.
The Court in its January 4, 2013,
decision made reference to both section
189(e) and 40 CFR 51.1002, and stated
that, ‘‘In light of our disposition, we
need not address the petitioners’
challenge to the presumptions in [40
CFR 51.1002] that volatile organic
compounds and ammonia are not PM2.5
precursors, as subpart 4 expressly
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
67149
governs precursor presumptions.’’
NRDC v. EPA, at 27, n.10.
Elsewhere in the Court’s opinion,
however, the Court observed:
Ammonia is a precursor to fine particulate
matter, making it a precursor to both PM2.5
and PM10. For a PM10 nonattainment area
governed by subpart 4, a precursor is
presumptively regulated. See 42 U.S.C.
§ 7513a(e) [section 189(e)].
Id. at 21, n.7.
For a number of reasons, EPA believes
that its proposed redesignation of the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area is consistent with the Court’s
decision on this aspect of subpart 4.
First, while the Court, citing section
189(e), stated that ‘‘for a PM10 area
governed by subpart 4, a precursor is
‘presumptively regulated,’’’ the Court
expressly declined to decide the specific
challenge to EPA’s 1997 PM2.5
implementation rule provisions
regarding ammonia and VOC as
precursors. The Court had no occasion
to determine whether and how it was
substantively necessary to regulate any
specific precursor in a particular PM2.5
nonattainment area, and did not address
what might be necessary for purposes of
acting upon a redesignation request.
However, even if EPA takes the view
that the requirements of subpart 4 were
deemed applicable at the time that the
state submitted the redesignation
request, and disregards the
implementation rule’s rebuttable
presumptions regarding ammonia and
VOC as PM2.5 precursors, the regulatory
consequence would be to consider the
need for regulation of all precursors
from any sources in the area to
demonstrate attainment and to apply the
section 189(e) provisions to major
stationary sources of precursors. In the
case of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area,
EPA believes that doing so is consistent
with proposing redesignation of the area
for the PM2.5 standard. The Chattanooga
TN-GA Area has attained the standard
without any specific additional controls
of VOC and ammonia emissions from
any sources in the Area.
Precursors in subpart 4 are
specifically regulated under the
provisions of section 189(e), which
requires, with important exceptions,
control requirements for major
stationary sources of PM10 precursors.14
Under subpart 1 and EPA’s prior
implementation rule, all major
stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors
14 Under either subpart 1 or subpart 4, for
purposes of demonstrating attainment as
expeditiously as practicable, a state is required to
evaluate all economically and technologically
feasible control measures for direct PM emissions
and precursor emissions, and adopt those measures
that are deemed reasonably available.
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
67150
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules
were subject to regulation, with the
exception of ammonia and VOC. Thus,
we must address here whether
additional controls of ammonia and
VOC from major stationary sources are
required under section 189(e) of subpart
4 in order to redesignate the area for the
1997 PM2.5 standard. As explained
below, we do not believe that any
additional controls of ammonia and
VOC are required in the context of this
redesignation.
In the General Preamble, EPA
discusses its approach to implementing
section 189(e). See 57 FR 13538 (April
16, 1992). With regard to precursor
regulation under section 189(e), the
General Preamble explicitly stated that
control of VOCs under other Act
requirements may suffice to relieve a
state from the need to adopt precursor
controls under section 189(e). See 57 FR
13542. EPA in this rulemaking proposes
to determine that even if not explicitly
addressed by the State in its submission,
the State does not need to take further
action with respect to ammonia and
VOCs as precursors to satisfy the
requirements of section 189(e). This
proposed determination is based on our
findings that: (1) The Alabama portion
of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
contains no major stationary sources of
ammonia, and (2) existing major
stationary sources of VOC are
adequately controlled under other
provisions of the CAA regulating the
ozone NAAQS.15 In the alternative, EPA
proposes to determine that, under the
express exception provisions of section
189(e), and in the context of the
redesignation of the Area, which is
attaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5
standard, at present ammonia and VOC
precursors from major stationary
sources do not contribute significantly
to levels exceeding the 1997 PM2.5
standard in the Chattanooga TN-GA
Area. See 57 FR 13539.
EPA notes that its 1997 PM2.5
implementation rule provisions in 40
CFR 51.1002 were not directed at
evaluation of PM2.5 precursors in the
context of redesignation, but rather the
rule assesses SIP plans and control
measures required to bring a
nonattainment area into attainment of
the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. By contrast,
redesignation to attainment primarily
requires the area to have already
attained due to permanent and
enforceable emission reductions, and to
demonstrate that controls in place can
continue to maintain the standard.
15 The Chattanooga TN-GA Area has reduced
VOC emissions through the implementation of
various control programs including various on-road
and non-road motor vehicle control programs.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Nov 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
Thus, even if we regard the Court’s
January 4, 2013, decision as calling for
‘‘presumptive regulation’’ of ammonia
and VOC for PM2.5 under the attainment
planning provisions of subpart 4, those
provisions in and of themselves do not
require additional controls of these
precursors for an area that already
qualifies for redesignation. Nor does
EPA believe that requiring the State to
address precursors differently than they
have already would result in a
substantively different outcome.
Although, as EPA has emphasized, its
consideration here of precursor
requirements under subpart 4 is in the
context of a redesignation to attainment,
EPA’s existing interpretation of subpart
4 requirements with respect to
precursors in attainment plans for PM10
contemplates that states may develop
attainment plans that regulate only
those precursors that are necessary for
purposes of attainment in the area in
question, i.e., states may determine that
only certain precursors need be
regulated for attainment and control
purposes.16 Courts have upheld this
approach to the requirements of subpart
4 for PM10.17 EPA believes that
application of this approach to PM2.5
precursors under subpart 4 is
reasonable. Because the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area has already attained the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS with its current
approach to regulation of PM2.5
precursors, EPA believes that it is
reasonable to conclude in the context of
this redesignation that there is no need
to revisit the attainment control strategy
with respect to the treatment of
precursors. Even if the court’s decision
is construed to impose an obligation, in
evaluating this redesignation request, to
consider additional precursors under
subpart 4, it would not affect EPA’s
approval here of Alabama’s request for
redesignation of the Alabama portion of
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. In the
context of a redesignation, Alabama has
shown that the Chattanooga TN-GA
Area (of which Jackson County is a part)
has attained the standard. Moreover, the
State has shown, and EPA has proposed
to determine, that attainment in this
Area is due to permanent and
enforceable emissions reductions on all
precursors necessary to provide for
continued attainment. It follows
16 See ‘‘Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans for California—San Joaquin
Valley PM–10 Nonattainment Area; Serious Area
Plan for Nonattainment of the 24-Hour and Annual
PM–10 Standards,’’ 69 FR 30006 (May 26, 2004)
(approving a PM10 attainment plan that impose
controls on direct PM10 and NOX emissions and did
not impose controls on SO2, VOC, or ammonia
emissions).
17 See Association of Irritated Residents v. EPA et
al., 423 F.3d 989 (9th Cir. 2005).
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
logically that no further control of
additional precursors is necessary.
Accordingly, EPA does not view the
January 4, 2013, decision of the court as
precluding redesignation of the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area to attainment for the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS at this time. In
sum, even if Alabama were required to
address precursors for Chattanooga TNGA Area under subpart 4 rather than
under subpart 1, EPA would still
conclude that the Alabama portion of
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area had met
all applicable requirements for purposes
of redesignation in accordance with
section 107(d)(3(E)(ii) and (v).
f. Maintenance Plan and Evaluation of
Precursors
With regard to the redesignation of
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area, in evaluating the effect of
the court’s remand of EPA’s
implementation rule, which included
presumptions against consideration of
VOC and ammonia as PM2.5 precursors,
EPA in this proposal is also considering
the impact of the decision on the
maintenance plan required under
sections 175A and 107(d)(3)(E)(iv). To
begin with, EPA notes that the Area has
attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
and that the State has shown that
attainment of that standard is due to
permanent and enforceable emission
reductions.
EPA proposes to determine that the
State’s maintenance plan shows
continued maintenance of the standard
by tracking the levels of the precursors
whose control brought about attainment
of the 1997 PM2.5 standard in the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area. EPA therefore
believes that the only additional
consideration related to the
maintenance plan requirements that
results from the Court’s January 4, 2013,
decision is that of assessing the
potential role of VOC and ammonia in
demonstrating continued maintenance
in this area. As explained below, based
upon documentation provided by
Alabama and supporting information,
EPA believes that the maintenance plan
for the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area need not
include any additional emission
reductions of VOC or ammonia in order
to provide for continued maintenance of
the standard.
First, as noted above in EPA’s
discussion of section 189(e), VOC
emission levels in this area have
historically been well-controlled under
SIP requirements related to ozone and
other pollutants. Second, total ammonia
emissions throughout the portion of
Jackson County in the Chattanooga TN-
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules
GA Area are estimated to be
approximately 1,820.86 tons per year in
2020, a slight increase over 2007 levels.
See Table 7 below. As described below,
available information shows that no
precursor, including VOC and ammonia,
is expected to increase significantly over
the maintenance period so as to
67151
interfere with or undermine the State’s
maintenance demonstration.
TABLE 7—COMPARISON OF 2007 AND 2020 VOC AND AMMONIA EMISSION TOTALS BY SOURCE SECTOR (tpy) FOR THE
ALABAMA PORTION OF THE CHATTANOOGA TN-GA AREA 18
VOC
Source sector
2007
2020
Ammonia
Net
change
2007
2020
Net
change
712.30
1,318.58
1,005.61
142.71
685.66
563.98
327.77
161.74
¥26.6
¥754.6
¥677.84
19.03
1,552.38
0.94
40.43
74.24
1,745.57
1.01
21.54
52.74
193.19
0.07
¥18.89
¥21.5
Total ......................................................................................
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Nonpoint .......................................................................................
Nonroad .......................................................................................
Onroad .........................................................................................
Point .............................................................................................
3,179.20
1,739.15
¥1,440.05
1,668.00
1,820.86
152.86
Alabama’smaintenance plan shows
that emissions of SO2, NOX, and PM2.5
are projected to decrease over the
maintenance period in the Alabama
Portion of the Chattanooga, TN-GA Area
by 22,287.4 tpy, 15,020.16, and 220.45
tpy, respectively. See Table 6, above. In
addition, emissions inventories used in
the regulatory impact analysis (RIA) for
the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 19 show that
VOC emissions are projected to decrease
by 1,440.05 tpy, and the ammonia
emissions are projected to increase by
152.86 tpy between 2007 and 2020.
Although ammonia emissions are
projected to increase slightly between
2007 and 2020, the decrease in
emissions of other precursors in
comparison will keep the Area well
below the standard. See Table 6 and 7,
above. While the RIA emissions
inventories are only projected out to
2020, there is no reason to believe that
this overall downward trend would not
continue through 2025. Given that the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area is already
attaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS even with the current level of
emissions from sources in the Area, the
overall trend of emissions inventories
would be consistent with continued
attainment. Indeed, projected emissions
reductions for the precursors that the
State is addressing for purposes of the
1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS indicate
that the Area should continue to attain
the NAAQS following the precursor
control strategy that the State has
already elected to pursue. Even if VOC
and ammonia emissions were to
increase unexpectedly between 2020
and 2025, the overall emission
reductions projected in SO2, NOX, and
18 These emissions estimates were taken from the
emissions inventories developed for the regulatory
impact analysis for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
19 The RIA for the 2012 PM
2.5 NAAQS standard
can be found on EPA’s Web site at https://
www.epa.gov/ttn/ecas/regdata/RIAs/finalria.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Nov 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
PM2.5 would be sufficient to offset any
increases. For these reasons, EPA
believes that local emissions of all the
potential PM2.5 precursors will not
increase to the extent that they will
cause monitored PM2.5 levels to violate
the 1997 Annual PM2.5 standard during
the maintenance period.
In addition, available air quality data
and modeling analyses show continued
maintenance of the standard during the
maintenance period. As noted in section
V, above, the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
recorded a PM2.5 design value of 10.5
mg/m3 during 2011–2013, the most
recent three years available with
complete, quality-assured and certified
ambient air monitoring data. This is
well below the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS of 15.0 mg/m3. Moreover, the
modeling analysis conducted for the
RIA for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
indicates that the design value for this
area is expected to continue to decline
through 2020. Given the decrease in
overall precursor emissions projected
through 2025, it is reasonable to
conclude that monitored PM2.5 levels in
this area will also continue to decrease
through 2025.
Thus, EPA believes that there is
ample justification to conclude that the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area should be redesignated, even
taking into consideration the emissions
of VOC and ammonia potentially
relevant to PM2.5. After consideration of
the D.C. Circuit’s January 4, 2013,
decision, and for the reasons set forth in
this notice, EPA continues to propose
approval of the State’s maintenance
plan and its request to redesignate the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area to attainment for the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
VII. What is EPA’s analysis of
Alabama’s proposed regional on-road
motor vehicle insignificance
determination for the Alabama portion
of the Chattanooga TN-GA area?
Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new
transportation plans, programs, and
projects, such as the construction of
new highways, must ‘‘conform’’ to (i.e.,
be consistent with) the part of the state’s
air quality plan that addresses pollution
from cars and trucks. Conformity to the
SIP means that transportation activities
will not cause new air quality
violations, worsen existing violations, or
delay timely attainment of the NAAQS
or any interim milestones. If a
transportation plan does not conform,
most new projects that would expand
the capacity of roadways cannot go
forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93
set forth EPA policy, criteria, and
procedures for demonstrating and
assuring conformity of such
transportation activities to a SIP. The
regional emissions analysis is one, but
not the only, requirement for
implementing transportation
conformity. Transportation conformity
is a requirement for nonattainment and
maintenance areas. Maintenance areas
are areas that were previously
nonattainment for a particular NAAQS
but have since been redesignated to
attainment with an approved
maintenance plan for that NAAQS.
Under the CAA, states are required to
submit, at various times, control strategy
SIPs and maintenance plans in
nonattainment areas. These control
strategy SIPs (including RFP and
attainment demonstration) and
maintenance plans create MVEBs for
criteria pollutants and/or their
precursors to address pollution from
cars and trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, a
MVEB must be established for the last
year of the maintenance plan. A state
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
67152
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules
may adopt MVEBs for other years as
well. The MVEB is the portion of the
total allowable emissions in the
maintenance demonstration that is
allocated to highway and transit vehicle
use and emissions. See 40 CFR 93.101.
The MVEB serves as a ceiling on
emissions from an area’s planned
transportation system. The MVEB
concept is further explained in the
preamble to the November 24, 1993,
Transportation Conformity Rule (58 FR
62188). The preamble also describes
how to establish the MVEB in the SIP
and how to revise the MVEB.
Today’s action addresses the element
regarding on-road motor vehicle
emissions and the requirement to
establish MVEB. EPA is proposing to
find that the direct PM2.5 and NOX
emission contribution from motor
vehicles in the Alabama portion of the
Area are insignificant to the air
pollution in the Chattanooga TN-GA
Area. The result of this determination,
if finalized, is that Alabama will not
need to develop MVEB for direct PM2.5
and NOX for the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area and the
Metropolitan Planning Organization or
Department of Transportation
(whichever is applicable) will not need
to perform a regional emissions analysis
for either pollutant when it
demonstrates conformity. See below for
further information on the
insignificance determination.
Regional on-road motor vehicle
insignificance. For motor vehicle
emissions budgets to be approvable,
they must meet, at a minimum, EPA’s
adequacy criteria (40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)).
In certain instances, the Transportation
Conformity Rule allows areas to forgo
establishment of a MVEB where it is
demonstrated that the regional motor
vehicle emissions for a particular
pollutant or precursor are an
insignificant contributor to the air
quality problem in an area. The general
criteria for insignificance
determinations can be found in 40 CFR
93.109(f). Insignificance determinations
are based on a number of factors,
including (1) the percentage of motor
vehicle emissions in context of the total
SIP inventory; (2) the current state of air
quality as determined by monitoring
data for that NAAQS; (3) the absence of
SIP motor vehicle control measures; and
(4) historical trends and future
projections of the growth of motor
vehicle emissions. EPA’s rationale for
providing for insignificance
determinations is described in the July
1, 2004, revision to the Transportation
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Nov 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
Conformity Rule at 69 FR 40004.20
Specifically, the rationale is explained
on page 40061 under the subsection
entitled ‘‘XXIII.B. Areas With
Insignificant Motor Vehicle Emissions.’’
Any insignificance determination under
review by EPA is subject to the
adequacy and approval process for
EPA’s action on the SIP.
Through the adequacy and SIP
approval process, EPA may find that a
SIP demonstrates that regional motor
vehicle emissions are an insignificant
contributor to the air quality problem
for the pollutant or precursor at issue.
Upon the effective date of EPA’s
adequacy determination, federal
regulations no longer require a regional
emissions analysis (for the purpose of
transportation conformity
implementation) for the relevant
insignificant pollutant or precursor.
Areas with insignificant regional motor
vehicle emissions for a pollutant or
precursor are still required to make a
conformity determination that satisfies
other relevant conformity requirements.
Additionally, such areas are required to
satisfy the regional emissions analysis
requirements for pollutants or
precursors for which EPA has not made
a determination of insignificance.
The maintenance plan for the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area, included as part of the SIP
revision, contains a regional on-road
motor vehicle insignificance
determination for the direct PM2.5 and
NOX contribution of motor vehicles in
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area to the air quality problem
in the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. As part
of the preparation for its redesignation
request, Alabama used the on-road
emissions of PM2.5 and NOX from motor
vehicles in that portion of Jackson
County, from the document titled
‘‘Chattanooga Non-Attainment Area
Year 2030 Conformity Determination
Report.’’ In order to estimate on-road
mobile source emissions for the
nonattainment portion of Jackson
County, a ratio of the size of the
nonattainment portion of Jackson
County in square miles to the size of the
entire county in square miles was
calculated. The nonattainment portion
of Jackson County was determined to be
only about one percent of the total area
of Jackson County. The same rational
was applied to obtain area and non-road
mobile source emissions for the
nonattainment portion for the county.
20 In the March 24, 2010, final rule (75 FR 14260),
provisions for insignificance determinations were
outlined in 40 CFR 93.109(m). EPA revised 40 CFR
93.109 in its March 14, 2012, final rule (77 FR
14979), and the provisions for insignificance
determinations are now located at 40 CFR 93.109(f).
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Alabama determined that direct PM2.5
and NOX emissions from on-road mobile
sources in the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area are 0.2
percent, and 0.18 percent, respectively,
of the total emissions from on-road
mobile source in the entire Chattanooga
TN-GA Area for 2007, 2017, and 2025.
The information provided by Alabama
supports EPA’s proposal to determine
that the direct PM2.5 and NOX
contribution from on-road vehicles in
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area are insignificant to the
PM2.5 air pollution the Chattanooga TNGA Area. As shown in Tables 2 through
6 above, Alabama’s maintenance plan
demonstrates that on-road direct PM2.5
emissions and NOX emissions will
continue to decrease through 2025, the
end of the initial maintenance plan for
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area. In addition, since 2007,
the PM2.5 design value concentration
has decreased by approximately 15
percent such that the Area is now
attaining the Annual PM2.5 NAAQS with
a 2011–2013 design value of 10.5 mg/m3,
well below the standard of 15.0 mg/m3.
According to information provided by
Alabama, point sources contributed over
99 percent of the emissions in future
years in the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area. The
maintenance plan does not contain any
control measures that apply to on-road
motor vehicles.
After evaluating the information
provided by Alabama and weighing the
factors for the insignificance
determination outlined in 40 CFR
93.109(f), EPA is now proposing to
approve Alabama’s determination that
the direct PM2.5 and NOX contribution
from motor vehicle emissions in the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga
Area are insignificant to the pollution
problem in the Chattanooga TN-GA
Area. EPA’s insignificance
determination should be considered and
specifically noted in the transportation
conformity documentation that is
prepared for the Area. EPA is proposing
that the submitted insignificance
finding is consistent with maintenance
of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
through 2025.
VIII. What is the status of EPA’s
adequacy determination for the on-road
motor vehicle insignificance
determination for the Alabama portion
of the Chattanooga TN-GA area?
When reviewing submitted ‘‘control
strategy’’ SIPs or maintenance plans
containing MVEB and/or insignificance
determinations, EPA may affirmatively
find the MVEB and/or insignificance
determination contained therein
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules
adequate for use in determining
transportation conformity. Once EPA
affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB
is adequate for transportation
conformity purposes, that MVEB must
be used by state and federal agencies in
determining whether proposed
transportation projects conform to the
SIP as required by section 176(c) of the
CAA. Further, once EPA affirmatively
finds the submitted insignificance
determination is adequate for
transportation conformity purposes, the
transportation partners are relieved of
performing a regional emissions
analysis of that pollutant or precursor
but must document the insignificance
determination in its conformity
determination.
EPA’s substantive criteria for
determining adequacy of an MVEB and/
or insignificance determination are set
out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). The process
for determining adequacy consists of
three basic steps: Public notification of
a SIP submission, a public comment
period, and EPA’s adequacy
determination. This process for
determining the adequacy of submitted
MVEB for transportation conformity
purposes was initially outlined in EPA’s
May 14, 1999, guidance, ‘‘Conformity
Guidance on Implementation of March
2, 1999, Conformity Court Decision.’’
EPA adopted regulations to codify the
adequacy process in the Transportation
Conformity Rule Amendments for the
‘‘New 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards and
Miscellaneous Revisions for Existing
Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule
Amendments—Response to Court
Decision and Additional Rule Change,’’
on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004).
Additional information on the adequacy
process for transportation conformity
purposes is available in the proposed
rule entitled, ‘‘Transportation
Conformity Rule Amendments:
Response to Court Decision and
Additional Rule Changes,’’ 68 FR 38974,
38984 (June 30, 2003).
As discussed earlier, Alabama’s
maintenance plan submission includes
an insignificance determination that
direct PM2.5 and NOX emissions from
on-road motor vehicles are an
insignificant contributor to the air
quality problem in the Chattanooga TNGA Area. The Alabama maintenance SIP
submission, including the on-road
motor vehicle insignificance finding,
was open for public comment on EPA’s
adequacy Web site found at: https://
www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/
transconf/currsips.htm. The EPA public
comment period closed on October 22,
2014. EPA did not receive any
comments on the adequacy of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Nov 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
insignificance determination, nor did
EPA receive any requests for the SIP
revision.
EPA intends to make its
determination on the adequacy of the
insignificance finding for the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
for transportation conformity purposes
in the near future. Section 93.109(f)
states that a regional emissions analysis
is no longer necessary if EPA finds
through the adequacy or approval
process that a SIP demonstrates that
regional motor vehicle emissions are an
insignificant contributor to the air
quality problem for that pollutant/
precursor. A finding of insignificance
does not change the requirement for a
regional analysis for other pollutants
and precursors and does not change the
requirement for hot-spot analysis. After
EPA finds the insignificance
determination adequate or approves it,
this on-road motor vehicle
insignificance finding for direct PM2.5
and NOX applies to future
transportation conformity
determinations.21
IX. Proposed Actions on the
Redesignation Request and
Maintenance Plan SIP Revision for the
Alabama Portion of the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area
On May 31, 2011, EPA determined
that the Chattanooga TN-GA Area was
attaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS. See 76 FR 31239. EPA is now
taking two separate but related actions
regarding the Area’s redesignation and
maintenance of the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS.
First, EPA is proposing to determine
that, based upon review of complete,
quality-assured and certified ambient
monitoring data for the 2007–2009
period, and review of data in AQS for
2010 through 2013 that the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area continues to attain the
1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also
proposing to determine that the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area has met the criteria under CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E) for redesignation
from nonattainment to attainment for
the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. On this
basis, EPA is proposing to approve
Alabama’s redesignation request for the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area.
Second, EPA is proposing to approve
the maintenance plan for the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
as meeting the requirements of section
21 The Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area already has an adequate insignificance
finding for its previously-submitted attainment
demonstration.
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
67153
175A of the CAA. The maintenance plan
demonstrates that the Area will
continue to maintain the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS.
If finalized, approval of the
redesignation request would change the
official designation of the portion of
Jackson County in the Chattanooga TNGA Area for the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS, found at 40 CFR part 81 from
nonattainment to attainment. EPA is
also proposing to approve, into the
Alabama SIP, the maintenance plan for
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area.
X. What is the effect of EPA’s proposed
actions?
EPA’s proposed actions establish the
basis upon which EPA may take final
action on the issues being proposed for
approval today. Approval of Alabama’s
redesignation request would change the
legal designation of a portion of Jackson
County in Alabama for the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS, found at 40 CFR part 81,
from nonattainment to attainment.
Approval of the ADEM’s request would
also incorporate a plan for maintaining
the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TNGA Area through 2025 into the Alabama
SIP. This maintenance plan includes
contingency measures to remedy any
future violations of the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS and procedures for
evaluation of potential violations.
Additionally, EPA is notifying the
public of the status of its adequacy
determination for the NOX and PM2.5
insignificance pursuant to 40 CFR
93.118(f)(1).
XI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, redesignation of an
area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of a
maintenance plan under section
107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the
status of a geographical area and do not
impose any additional regulatory
requirements on sources beyond those
imposed by state law. A redesignation to
attainment does not in and of itself
create any new requirements, but rather
results in the applicability of
requirements contained in the CAA for
areas that have been redesignated to
attainment. Moreover, the Administrator
is required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, these proposed
actions merely approve state law as
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
67154
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 218 / Wednesday, November 12, 2014 / Proposed Rules
meeting federal requirements and does
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
that reason, these proposed actions:
• Are not ‘‘significant regulatory
action[s]’’ subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• do not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• are certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• do 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);
• do not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• are not economically significant
regulatory actions based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• are not significant regulatory
actions subject to Executive Order
13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• are not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• do not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The SIP is not approved to apply on
any Indian reservation land or in any
other area where EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal
implications as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), nor will it impose substantial
direct costs on tribal governments or
preempt tribal law.
TKELLEY on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, and Particulate matter.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:13 Nov 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: November 3, 2014.
V. Anne Heard,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2014–26736 Filed 11–10–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[EPA–R06–OAR–2012–0765; FRL–9918–62–
Region 6]
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants; Delegation
of Authority to Arkansas
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The EPA is proposing to
approve, through a ‘‘direct final’’
procedure, a request for delegation of
the Federal air toxics program contained
within 40 CFR Parts 63 pursuant to
Section 112(l) of the Clean Air Act (Act).
The State’s mechanism of delegation
involves the straight delegation of
certain existing and future Section 112
standards unchanged from the Federal
standards. The actual delegation of
authority of individual standards,
except standards addressed specifically
in this action, will occur through a
mechanism set forth in a memorandum
of agreement (MOA) between the
Arkansas Department of Environmental
Quality (ADEQ) and EPA. ADEQ is
requesting delegation and approval to
implement and enforce the existing Part
63 standards as they apply to Part 70
sources, including major and area
sources subject to the Title V (Part 70)
permitting requirements. The delegation
of authority under this action does not
include CAA Section 112(r).
DATES: Written comments on this
proposed rule must be received on or
before December 12, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to
Mr. Rick Barrett, Air Permits Section
(6PD–R), Environmental Protection
Agency, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200,
Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. Comments
may also be submitted electronically or
through hand delivery/courier by
following the detailed instructions in
the Addresses section of the direct final
rule located in the rules section of this
Federal Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Rick Barrett, (214) 665–7227,
barrett.richard@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the
final rules section of this Federal
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Register, EPA is approving ADEQ’s
request for delegation of authority to
implement and enforce certain
NESHAPs for all sources which are
subject to part 70 as a direct rule
without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as noncontroversial
action and anticipates no adverse
comments. A detailed rationale for this
proposed approval is set forth in the
direct final rule. If no relevant, adverse
comments are received in response to
this action no further activity is
contemplated. If EPA receives relevant,
adverse comments, the direct final rule
will be withdrawn and all public
comments received will be addressed in
a subsequent final rule based on this
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a
second comment period. Any parties
interested in commenting on this action
should do so at this time.
For additional information, see the
direct final rule which is located in the
rules section of this Federal Register.
Dated: October 14, 2014.
Ron Curry,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2014–25947 Filed 11–10–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2013–0011;
4500030114]
RIN 1018–AZ44
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Designation of Critical
Habitat for the Western Distinct
Population Segment of the YellowBilled Cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus)
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of
comment period.
AGENCY:
On August 15, 2014, we, the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service),
announced a proposal to designate
critical habitat for the western distinct
population segment of the yellow-billed
cuckoo under the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We now
announce a reopening of the comment
period for our August 15, 2014,
proposed rule to allow for us to accept
and consider additional public
comments on the proposed rule.
DATES: The comment period for the
proposed rule published on August 15,
2014 (79 FR 48548), is reopened. We
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 218 (Wednesday, November 12, 2014)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 67137-67154]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-26736]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0674; FRL-9919-17-Region 4]
Approval of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas:
Alabama; Redesignation of the Alabama Portion of the Chattanooga, 1997
PM2.5 Nonattainment Area to Attainment
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On April 23, 2013, the Alabama Department of Environmental
Management (ADEM), submitted a request to redesignate the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga, TN-GA fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) nonattainment area (hereafter referred to as the
``Chattanooga TN-GA Area'' or ``Area'') to attainment for the 1997
Annual PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
and to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision containing a
maintenance plan for the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area.
The Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area is comprised of a
portion of Jackson County in Alabama. The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve the redesignation request and the
related SIP revision, including the plan for maintaining attainment of
the PM2.5 standard, for the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area. EPA is also proposing to approve the on-road
motor vehicle insignificance determination for direct PM2.5
and nitrogen oxides (NOX) for the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area. On September 14, 2012, Georgia submitted a
request to redesignate the Georgia portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA
Area, and EPA is expecting Tennessee to submit a request to redesignate
the Tennessee portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. EPA will be taking
separate action on the requests from Georgia and Tennessee.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 3, 2014.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2014-0674 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) 562-9019.
4. Mail: EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0674, Regulatory Development Section, Air
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
[[Page 67138]]
Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. 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's normal hours
of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2014-0674. 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 to 4:30, excluding
Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joydeb Majumder of the Regulatory
Development Section, in the Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and
Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Joydeb
Majumder may be reached by phone at (404) 562-9121, or via electronic
mail at majumder.joydeb@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What are the actions EPA is proposing to take?
II. What is the background for EPA's proposed actions?
III. What are the criteria for redesignation?
IV. Why is EPA proposing these actions?
V. What is EPA's analysis of the request?
VI. What is the effect of January 4, 2013, D.C. Circuit decision
regarding PM2.5 implementation under subpart 4?
VII. What is EPA's analysis of Alabama's proposed regional on-road
motor vehicle insignificance determination for the Alabama portion
of the Chattanooga TN-GA area?
VIII. What is the status of EPA's adequacy determination for the on-
road motor vehicle insignificance determination for the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA area?
IX. Proposed Actions on the Redesignation Request and Maintenance
Plan SIP Revision for the Alabama Portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA
Area
X. What is the effect of EPA's proposed actions?
XI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What are the actions EPA is proposing to take?
In this action, EPA is proposing to make a determination that
Chattanooga TN-GA Area is continuing to attain the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS \1\ and to take additional actions related to
Alabama's request to redesignate the Alabama portion of the Area, which
are summarized as follows and described in greater detail throughout
this notice of proposed rulemaking. EPA proposes: (1) To redesignate
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area to attainment for the
1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS; and (2) to approve, under section
175A of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), Alabama's 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan for the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area into the Alabama SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On September 8, 2011, at 76 FR 55774, EPA determined that
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area attained the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS
by its applicable attainment date of April 5, 2010, and that the
Area was continuing to attain the PM2.5 standard with
monitoring data that was currently available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, EPA proposes to determine that the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area has met the requirements for redesignation under
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. In this action, EPA is proposing to
approve a request to change the legal designation of the portion of
Jackson County, Alabama, that is located within the Chattanooga TN-GA
Area from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS.
Second, EPA is proposing to approve Alabama's 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan for the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area (such approval being one of the CAA criteria for
redesignation to attainment status). The maintenance plan is designed
to help keep the Chattanooga TN-GA Area in attainment of the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS through 2025. The maintenance plan that
EPA is proposing to approve includes an insignificance determination
for the on-road motor vehicle contribution of direct PM2.5
and NOX to ambient PM2.5 levels in the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area for transportation conformity
purposes. EPA is proposing to approve the on-road motor vehicle
insignificance determination into the Alabama SIP that is included as
part of Alabama's maintenance plan for the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS.
Further, EPA proposes to make the determination that the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area is continuing to attain the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS and that all other redesignation criteria have
been met for the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. The
bases for EPA's determination for the Area are discussed in greater
detail below.
EPA is also providing the public with an update on the status of
EPA's adequacy process for the on-road motor vehicle insignificance
determination for the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga
[[Page 67139]]
TN-GA Area. Please see section VIII of this proposed rulemaking for
further explanation of this process and for details.
Today's notice of proposed rulemaking is in response to Alabama's
April 23, 2013, SIP revision, which requests redesignation of the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area to attainment for the
1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and addresses the specific issues
summarized above and the necessary elements for redesignation described
in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.
II. What is the background for EPA's proposed actions?
Fine particle pollution can be emitted directly or formed
secondarily in the atmosphere. The main precursors of secondary
PM2.5 are sulfur dioxide (SO2), NOX,
ammonia, and volatile organic compounds (VOC). See 72 FR 20586, 20589
(April 25, 2007). Sulfates are a type of secondary particle formed from
SO2 emissions of power plants and industrial facilities.
Nitrates, another common type of secondary particle, are formed from
NOX emissions of power plants, automobiles, and other
combustion sources.
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated the first air quality standards
for PM2.5. EPA promulgated an annual standard at a level of
15 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\), based on a 3-year average
of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations. In the same rulemaking,
EPA promulgated a 24-hour standard of 65 [mu]g/m\3\, based on a 3-year
average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations. On October
17, 2006, EPA retained the annual average NAAQS at 15 [mu]g/m\3\ but
revised the 24-hour NAAQS to 35 [mu]g/m\3\, based again on the 3-year
average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations.\2\ See 71 FR
61144. Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the primary and
secondary 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS are attained when the
annual arithmetic mean concentration, as determined in accordance with
40 CFR part 50, Appendix N, is less than or equal to 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ at
all relevant monitoring sites in the subject area over a 3-year period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ In response to legal challenges of the annual standard
promulgated in 2006, the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Cir.) remanded this NAAQS to EPA
for further consideration. See American Farm Bureau Federation and
National Pork Producers Council, et al. v. EPA, 559 F.3d 512 (D.C.
Cir. 2009). However, given that the 1997 and 2006 Annual NAAQS are
essentially identical, attainment of the 1997 Annual NAAQS would
also indicate attainment of the remanded 2006 Annual NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 5, 2005, and supplemented on April 14, 2005, EPA
designated a portion of Jackson County, Alabama, in association with
counties in Georgia and Tennessee in the Chattanooga TN-GA Area, as
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 70 FR 944 and 70
FR 19844, respectively. On November 13, 2009, EPA promulgated
designations for the 24-hour standard established in 2006, designating
counties in the Chattanooga TN-GA Area as unclassifiable/attainment for
the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. See 74 FR 58688. That action
also clarified that the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
was classified unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS promulgated. EPA did not promulgate designations
for the annual PM2.5 NAAQS promulgated in 2006 since that
NAAQS was essentially identical to the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS. Therefore, the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area is
designated nonattainment for the annual PM2.5 NAAQS
promulgated in 1997, and today's action only addresses this
designation.
All 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS areas were designated under subpart
1 of title I, part D, of the CAA. Subpart 1 contains the general
requirements for nonattainment areas for any pollutant governed by a
NAAQS and is less prescriptive than the other subparts of title I, part
D. On April 25, 2007, EPA promulgated its PM2.5
Implementation Rule, codified at 40 CFR part 51, subpart Z, in which
the Agency provided guidance for state and tribal plans to implement
the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 72 FR 20664. That rule, at 40 CFR
51.1004(c), specifies some of the regulatory results of attaining the
NAAQS, as discussed below. The United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) remanded the Clean Air Fine
Particle Implementation Rule and the final rule entitled
``Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate
Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)'' final rule (73 FR
28321, May 16, 2008) (collectively, ``1997 PM2.5
Implementation Rule'') to EPA on January 4, 2013, in Natural Resources
Defense Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013). The court found
that EPA erred in implementing the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS pursuant
to the general implementation provisions of subpart 1 of Part D of
Title I of the CAA, rather than the particulate matter-specific
provisions of subpart 4 of part D of title I. The effect of the court's
ruling on this proposed redesignation action is discussed in detail in
Section VI of this notice.
The 3-year ambient air quality data for 2007-2009 indicated no
violations of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area. As a result, on April 23, 2013, Alabama
requested redesignation of the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA
Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The
redesignation request includes three years of complete, quality-assured
ambient air quality data for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS for
2007-2009, indicating that this NAAQS had been achieved for the entire
Chattanooga TN-GA Area. Under the CAA, nonattainment areas may be
redesignated to attainment if sufficient, complete, quality-assured
data is available for the Administrator to determine that the area has
attained the standard and the area meets the other CAA redesignation
requirements in section 107(d)(3)(E). The Chattanooga TN-GA Area's
design value, based on data from 2007 through 2009, is below 15.0
[mu]g/m\3\, which demonstrates attainment of the standards. While
annual PM2.5 concentrations are dependent on a variety of
conditions, the overall improvement in annual PM2.5
concentrations in the Chattanooga TN-GA Area can be attributed to the
reduction of pollutant emissions, as will be discussed in more detail
in section V of this proposed rulemaking.
The D.C. Circuit and the United States Supreme Court have issued a
number of decisions and orders regarding the status of EPA's regional
trading programs for transported air pollution, CAIR and CSAPR, that
impact this proposed redesignation action. The effect of those court
actions on this rulemaking is discussed in detail in Section V of this
notice.
III. What are the criteria for redesignation?
The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA
allows for redesignation provided the following criteria are met: (1)
The Administrator determines that the area has attained the applicable
NAAQS; (2) the Administrator has fully approved the applicable
implementation plan for the area under section 110(k); (3) the
Administrator determines that the improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP and applicable federal air
pollutant control regulations and other permanent and enforceable
reductions; (4) the Administrator has fully approved a maintenance plan
for the area as
[[Page 67140]]
meeting the requirements of section 175A; and (5) the state containing
such area has met all requirements applicable to the area under section
110 and part D of title I of the CAA.
EPA has provided guidance on redesignation in the General Preamble
for the Implementation of title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990 (April
16, 1992 (57 FR 13498) and supplemented on April 28, 1992 (57 FR
18070)) and has provided further guidance on processing redesignation
requests in the following documents:
1. ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4, 1992 (hereafter referred to as the
``Calcagni Memorandum'');
2. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response
to Clean Air Act (CAA) Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni,
Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992; and
3. ``Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Memorandum from Mary D.
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14,
1994.
IV. Why is EPA proposing these actions?
On April 23, 2013, ADEM requested the redesignation of the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. The Chattanooga TN-GA Area has attained the
1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, and EPA's preliminary evaluation
indicates that the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area has
met the requirements for redesignation set forth in section
107(d)(3)(E), including the maintenance plan requirements under section
175A of the CAA. EPA is also announcing the status of its adequacy
determination for the insignificance determinations for both
NOX and direct PM2.5 for the Alabama portion of
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. Additionally, EPA is also approving the
insignificance determinations for both NOX and direct
PM2.5 that were included in Alabama's maintenance plan.
V. What is EPA's analysis of the request?
As stated above, in accordance with the CAA, EPA proposes in
today's action to: (1) Redesignate the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS; and (2) approve, into the Alabama SIP, the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS maintenance plan, including the mobile
source emissions insignificance determination under transportation
conformity, for the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area.
Further, EPA proposes to make the determination that the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area continues to attain the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
and that all other redesignation criteria have been met for the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. The five redesignation criteria
provided under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) are discussed in greater detail
for the Area in the following paragraphs of this section.
Criteria (1)--The Chattanooga TN-GA Area has attained the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the area has attained the applicable
NAAQS (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). EPA is proposing to determine that
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area continues to attain the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS since the May 31, 2011, attainment
determination. See 76 FR 31239. For PM2.5, an area may be
considered to be attaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS if it
meets the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, as determined in
accordance with 40 CFR 50.13 and Appendix N of part 50, based on three
complete, consecutive calendar years of quality-assured air quality
monitoring data. To attain these NAAQS, the 3-year average of the
annual arithmetic mean concentration, as determined in accordance with
40 CFR part 50, Appendix N, must be less than or equal to 15.0 [mu]g/
m\3\ at all relevant monitoring sites in the subject area over a 3-year
period. The relevant data must be collected and quality-assured in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and recorded in the EPA Air Quality
System (AQS) database. The monitors generally should have remained at
the same location for the duration of the monitoring period required
for demonstrating attainment.
On May 31, 2011, EPA determined that the Chattanooga TN-GA Area was
attaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. See 76 FR 31239. For
that action, EPA reviewed PM2.5 monitoring data from
monitoring stations in the Chattanooga TN-GA Area for the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS for 2007-2009. These data had been quality-
assured by the respective state agencies and are recorded in AQS. In
addition, on September 8, 2011, at 76 FR 55774, EPA finalized a
determination that the Chattanooga TN-GA Area attained the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date of April 5,
2010. As summarized in Table 1, below, the 3-year averages of annual
arithmetic mean concentrations (i.e., design values) for the years 2009
through 2013 for the Chattanooga TN-GA Area are below the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS.
Table 1--Design Value Concentrations for the Chattanooga TN-GA Area for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS ([mu]g/m\3\)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3-year design values
Location County Site ID -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2007-2009 2008-2010 2009-2011 2010-2012 2011-2013
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rossville--Maple St., Georgia..... Walker County, 132950002 * 12.3 10.6 10.1 10.0 10.5
Georgia.
Siskin Drive/UTC, Tennessee....... Hamilton County, 470654002 12.9 11.6 11.1 10.9 10.0
Tennessee.
Maxwell Road/East Ridge, Tennessee Hamilton County, 470650031 12.7 11.7 11.2 11.1 10.1
Tennessee.
Soddy-Daisy High School, Tennessee Hamilton County, 470651011 11.8 11.4 11.0 11.2 9.8
Tennessee.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Values subject to data substitution (76 FR 15895)
[[Page 67141]]
As discussed above, the design value for an area is the highest 3-
year average of annual mean concentrations recorded at any monitor in
the Area. Therefore, the 3-year design value for the period on which
Alabama based its redesignation request (2007-2009) for the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area is 12.9 [mu]g/m\3\, which is below the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. Additional details can be found in EPA's final
clean data determination for the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. See 76 FR
31239 (May 31, 2011). EPA has reviewed more recent data which indicate
that the Chattanooga TN-GA Area continues to attain the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS beyond the submitted 3-year attainment period of
2007-2009. If the Area does not continue to attain before EPA finalizes
the redesignation, EPA will not go forward with the redesignation. As
discussed in more detail below, the four PM2.5 monitors in
the Area will continue to operate in accordance with 40 CFR part 58
unless a change is approved by EPA.
Criteria (5)--Alabama has met all Applicable Requirements under
Section 110 and part D of the CAA; and Criteria (2)--Alabama has a
fully approved SIP under section 110(k) for the Alabama Portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area.
For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the state has met all applicable
requirements under section 110 and part D of title I of the CAA (CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E)(v)) and that the state has a fully approved SIP
under section 110(k) for the area (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)). EPA
proposes to find that Alabama has met all applicable SIP requirements
for the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area under section 110
of the CAA (general SIP requirements) for purposes of redesignation.
Additionally, EPA proposes to find that the Alabama SIP satisfies the
criterion that it meets applicable SIP requirements for purposes of
redesignation under part D of title I of the CAA (requirements specific
to 1997 Annual PM2.5 nonattainment areas) in accordance with
section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). Further, EPA proposes to determine that the
SIP is fully approved with respect to all requirements applicable for
purposes of redesignation in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii).
In making these determinations, EPA ascertained which requirements are
applicable to the Area and, if applicable, that they are fully approved
under section 110(k). SIPs must be fully approved only with respect to
requirements that were applicable prior to submittal of the complete
redesignation request.
a. The Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area has met all
applicable requirements under section 110 and part D of the CAA.
General SIP requirements. Section 110(a)(2) of title I of the CAA
delineates the general requirements for a SIP, which include
enforceable emissions limitations and other control measures, means, or
techniques; provisions for the establishment and operation of
appropriate devices necessary to collect data on ambient air quality;
and programs to enforce the limitations. General SIP elements and
requirements are delineated in section 110(a)(2) of title I, part A of
the CAA. These requirements include, but are not limited to, the
following: submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the state after
reasonable public notice and hearing; provisions for establishment and
operation of appropriate procedures needed to monitor ambient air
quality; implementation of a source permit program; provisions for the
implementation of part C requirements (Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD)) and provisions for the implementation of part D
requirements (New Source Review (NSR) permit programs); provisions for
air pollution modeling; and provisions for public and local agency
participation in planning and emission control rule development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to
prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air
quality problems in another state. To implement this provision, EPA has
required certain states to establish programs to address the interstate
transport of air pollutants. The section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for
a state are not linked with a particular nonattainment area's
designation and classification in that state. EPA believes that the
requirements linked with a particular nonattainment area's designation
and classifications are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing
a redesignation request. The transport SIP submittal requirements,
where applicable, continue to apply to a state regardless of the
designation of any one particular area in the state. Thus, EPA does not
believe that the CAA's interstate transport requirements should be
construed to be applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation.
In addition, EPA believes other section 110 elements that are
neither connected with nonattainment plan submissions nor linked with
an area's attainment status are not applicable requirements for
purposes of redesignation. The area will still be subject to these
requirements after the area is redesignated. The section 110 and part D
requirements which are linked with a particular area's designation and
classification are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a
redesignation request. This approach is consistent with EPA's existing
policy on applicability (i.e., for redesignations) of conformity and
oxygenated fuels requirements, as well as with section 184 ozone
transport requirements. See Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final
rulemakings (61 FR 53174-53176, October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7,
1997); Cleveland-Akron-Loraine, Ohio, final rulemaking (61 FR 20458,
May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida, final rulemaking at (60 FR 62748,
December 7, 1995). See also the discussion on this issue in the
Cincinnati, Ohio, redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 2000), and in
the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, redesignation (66 FR 50399, October 19,
2001).
On October 1, 2012, April 12, 2013, and May 7, 2014, EPA approved
all infrastructure SIP elements required under section 110(a)(2) for
the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS with the exception of the
section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) element that requires the State to comply with
section 128 of the CAA. See 77 FR 59755 (October 1, 2012), 77 FR 62452
(October 15, 2012), 78 FR 21841 (April 12, 2013), and 79 FR 26143 (May
7, 2014). These requirements are, however, statewide requirements that
are not linked to the PM2.5 nonattainment status of the
Area. As stated above, EPA believes that section 110 elements not
linked to an area's nonattainment status are not applicable for
purposes of redesignation. Therefore, EPA believes it has approved all
SIP elements under section 110 that must be approved as a prerequisite
for the redesignation to attainment of the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area.
Title I, Part D, subpart 1 applicable SIP requirements. EPA
proposes to determine that the Alabama SIP meets the applicable SIP
requirements for the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area for
purposes of redesignation under part D of the CAA. Subpart 1 of part D,
found in sections 172-176 of the CAA, sets forth the basic
nonattainment requirements applicable to all nonattainment areas. All
areas that were designated nonattainment for the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS were designated under subpart 1 of the CAA. For
purposes of evaluating this redesignation request, the applicable part
D, subpart 1 SIP requirements for all nonattainment areas are contained
in sections 172(c)(1)-(9) and in section
[[Page 67142]]
176. A thorough discussion of the requirements contained in section 172
can be found in the General Preamble for Implementation of title I. See
57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992). Section VI of this proposed rulemaking
notice discusses the relationship between this proposed redesignation
action and subpart 4 of Part D.
Subpart 1 Section 172 Requirements. Section 172(c)(1) requires the
plans for all nonattainment areas to provide for the implementation of
all reasonably available control measures (RACM) as expeditiously as
practicable and to provide for attainment of the NAAQS. EPA interprets
this requirement to impose a duty on all nonattainment areas to
consider all available control measures and to adopt and implement such
measures as are reasonably available for implementation in each area as
components of the area's attainment demonstration. Under section 172,
states with nonattainment areas must submit plans providing for timely
attainment and meeting a variety of other requirements.
EPA's longstanding interpretation of the nonattainment planning
requirements of section 172 is that once an area is attaining the
NAAQS, those requirements are not ``applicable'' for purposes of CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and therefore need not be approved into the
SIP before EPA can redesignate the area. In the 1992 General Preamble
for Implementation of Title I, EPA set forth its interpretation of
applicable requirements for purposes of evaluating redesignation
requests when an area is attaining a standard. See 57 FR 13498, 13564
(April 16, 1992). EPA noted that the requirements for reasonable
further progress and other measures designed to provide for attainment
do not apply in evaluating redesignation requests because those
nonattainment planning requirements ``have no meaning'' for an area
that has already attained the standard. Id. This interpretation was
also set forth in the Calcagni Memorandum. EPA's understanding of
section 172 also forms the basis of its Clean Data Policy, which was
articulated with regard to PM2.5 in 40 CFR 51.1004(c), and
suspends a state's obligation to submit most of the attainment planning
requirements that would otherwise apply, including an attainment
demonstration and planning SIPs to provide for reasonable further
progress (RFP), RACM, and contingency measures under section
172(c)(9).\3\ Courts have upheld EPA's interpretation of section
172(c)(1)'s ``reasonably available'' control measures and control
technology as meaning only those controls that advance attainment,
which precludes the need to require additional measures where an area
is already attaining. NRDC v. EPA, 571 F.3d 1245, 1252 (D.C. Cir.
2009); Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d 155, 162 (D.C. Cir. 2002); Sierra
Club v. EPA, 314 F.3d 735, 744 (5th Cir. 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ This regulation was promulgated as part of the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS implementation rule that was subsequently
challenged and remanded in NRDC v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir.
2013), as discussed in Section VI of this notice. However, the Clean
Data Policy portion of the implementation rule was not at issue in
that case.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, because attainment has been reached in the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area, no additional measures are needed to provide for
attainment, and section 172(c)(1) requirements for an attainment
demonstration and RACM are no longer considered to be applicable for
purposes of redesignation as long as the Area continues to attain the
standard until redesignation. Section 172(c)(2) requirement that
nonattainment plans contain provisions promoting reasonable further
progress toward attainment is also not relevant for purposes of
redesignation because EPA has determined that the Chattanooga TN-GA
Area has monitored attainment of the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS. In addition, because the Chattanooga TN-GA Area has attained the
1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS and is no longer subject to a RFP
requirement, the requirement to submit the section 172(c)(9)
contingency measures is not applicable for purposes of redesignation.
Section 172(c)(6) requires the SIP to contain control measures
necessary to provide for attainment of the NAAQS. Because attainment
has been reached, no additional measures are needed to provide for
attainment.
Section 172(c)(3) requires submission approval of a comprehensive,
accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions. On February 8,
2012, EPA approved Alabama's 2002 base-year emissions inventory for the
Alabama Portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area as part of the SIP
revision submitted by ADEM to provide for attainment of the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS in the Area. See 77 FR 6467.
Section 172(c)(4) requires the identification and quantification of
allowable emissions for major new and modified stationary sources to be
allowed in an area, and section 172(c)(5) requires source permits for
the construction and operation of new and modified major stationary
sources anywhere in the nonattainment area. EPA has determined that,
since PSD requirements will apply after redesignation, areas being
redesignated need not comply with the requirement that a NSR program be
approved prior to redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates
maintenance of the NAAQS without part D NSR. A more detailed rationale
for this view is described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled
``Part D New Source Review Requirements for Areas Requesting
Redesignation to Attainment.'' Alabama has demonstrated that the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area will be able to maintain
the NAAQS without part D NSR in effect, and therefore, Alabama need not
have fully approved part D NSR programs prior to approval of the
redesignation request. Alabama's PSD program will become effective in
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area upon redesignation to
attainment.
Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to meet the applicable
provisions of section 110(a)(2). As noted above, EPA believes the
Alabama SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2) applicable for
purposes of redesignation.
176 Conformity Requirements. Section 176(c) of the CAA requires
states to establish criteria and procedures to ensure that federally-
supported or funded projects conform to the air quality planning goals
in the applicable SIP. The requirement to determine conformity applies
to transportation plans, programs, and projects that are developed,
funded, or approved under title 23 of the United States Code (U.S.C.)
and the Federal Transit Act (transportation conformity) as well as to
all other federally-supported or funded projects (general conformity).
State transportation conformity SIP revisions must be consistent with
federal conformity regulations relating to consultation, enforcement,
and enforceability that EPA promulgated pursuant to its authority under
the CAA.
EPA believes that it is reasonable to interpret the conformity SIP
requirements \4\ as not applying for purposes of evaluating the
redesignation request under section 107(d) because state conformity
rules are still required after redesignation and federal conformity
rules apply where state rules have not been approved. See Wall v.
[[Page 67143]]
EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (upholding this interpretation) (6th Cir. 2001); See
60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ CAA Section 176(c)(4)(E) requires states to submit revisions
to their SIPs to reflect certain federal criteria and procedures for
determining transportation conformity. Transportation conformity
SIPs are different from the motor vehicle emission budgets that are
established in control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus, for the reasons discussed above, the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area has satisfied all applicable requirements for
purposes of redesignation under section 110 and part D of the CAA.
b. The Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area has a fully
approved applicable SIP under section 110(k) of the CAA.
EPA has fully approved the applicable Alabama SIP for the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area for the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 nonattainment area under section 110(k) of the CAA for
all requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation. EPA may rely
on prior SIP approvals in approving a redesignation request (see
Calcagni Memorandum at p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance
v. Browner, 144 F.3d 984 (6th Cir. 1998); Wall, 265 F.3d 426) plus any
additional measures it may approve in conjunction with a redesignation
action. See 68 FR 25426 (May 12, 2003) and citations therein. Following
passage of the CAA of 1970, Alabama has adopted and submitted, and EPA
has fully approved at various times, provisions addressing the various
SIP elements applicable for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS in
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area (e.g., 77 FR 59755
(October 1, 2012)). As indicated above, EPA believes that the section
110 elements not connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not
linked to the area's nonattainment status are not applicable
requirements for purposes of redesignation.
Criteria (3)--The air quality improvement in the Chattanooga TN-GA
Area is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions
resulting from implementation of the SIP and applicable federal air
pollution control regulations and other permanent and enforceable
reductions.
For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the air quality improvement in the area
is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting
from implementation of the SIP and applicable Federal air pollution
control regulations and other permanent and enforceable reductions (CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii)). EPA believes that Alabama has demonstrated
that the observed air quality improvement in the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting
from implementation of the SIP and Federal measures.
Fine particulate matter, or PM2.5, refers to airborne
particles less than or equal to 2.5 micrometers in diameter. Although
treated as a single pollutant, fine particles come from many different
sources and are composed of many different compounds. In the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area, one of the largest components of
PM2.5 is sulfate, which is formed through various chemical
reactions from the precursor SO2. The other major component
of PM2.5 is organic carbon, which originates predominantly
from biogenic emission sources. Nitrate, which is formed from the
precursor NOX, is also a component of PM2.5.
Crustal materials from windblown dust and elemental carbon from
combustion sources are less significant contributors to total
PM2.5. VOCs, also precursors for PM, are emitted from a
variety of sources, including motor vehicles, chemical plants,
refineries, factories, consumer and commercial products, and other
industrial sources. VOCs also are emitted by natural sources such as
vegetation.
Federal measures enacted in recent years have resulted in permanent
emission reductions in particulate matter and its precursors. Most of
these emission reductions are enforceable through regulations. The
Federal measures that have been implemented include:
Tier 2 vehicle standards and low-sulfur gasoline. In addition to
requiring NOX controls, the Tier 2 rule reduced the
allowable sulfur content of gasoline to 30 parts per million (ppm)
starting in January of 2006. Most gasoline sold prior to this had a
sulfur content of approximately 300 ppm.
Heavy-duty gasoline and diesel highway vehicle standards & Ultra
Low-Sulfur Diesel Rule. On October 6, 2000, the U.S. EPA promulgated a
rule to reduce NOX and VOC emissions from heavy-duty
gasoline and diesel highway vehicles that began to take effect in 2004.
See 65 FR 59896. A second phase of standards and testing procedures
began in 2007 to reduce particulate matter from heavy-duty highway
engines, and reduce highway diesel fuel sulfur content to 15 ppm since
the sulfur in fuel damages high efficiency catalytic exhaust emission
control devices. The total program should achieve a 90 percent
reduction PM emissions and a 95 percent reduction in NOX
emission for new engines using low-sulfur diesel, compared to existing
engines using higher-content sulfur diesel.
Non-road, large spark-ignition engines and recreational engines
standards. The non-road spark-ignition and recreational engine
standards, effective in July 2003, regulate NOX,
hydrocarbons, and carbon monoxide from groups of previously unregulated
non-road engines. These engine standards apply to large spark-ignition
engines (e.g., forklifts and airport ground service equipment),
recreational vehicles (e.g., off-highway motorcycles and all-terrain-
vehicles), and recreational marine diesel engines sold in the United
States and imported after the effective date of these standards.
When all of the non-road spark-ignition and recreational engine
standards are fully implemented, an overall 72 percent reduction in
hydrocarbons, 80 percent reduction in NOX, and 56 percent
reduction in carbon monoxide emissions are expected by 2020. These
controls will help reduce ambient concentrations of ozone, carbon
monoxide, and fine particulate matter.
Large non-road diesel engine standards. Promulgated in 2004, this
rule is being phased in between 2008 and 2014. This rule will reduce
sulfur content in non-road diesel fuel and, when fully implemented,
will reduce NOX and direct PM2.5 emissions by
over 90 percent from these engines.
Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engine standard. Initially
promulgated in 2010, this rule regulates emissions of air toxics from
existing diesel powered stationary reciprocating internal combustion
engines that meet specific site rating, age, and size criteria. With
all of the reciprocating internal combustion engine standards fully
implemented in 2013, EPA estimates that PM2.5 emissions from
these engines have been reduced by approximately 2,800 tons per year
(tpy).
Category 3 Marine Diesel Engine standard. Promulgated in 2010, this
rule establishes more stringent exhaust emission standards for new
large marine diesel engines with per cylinder displacement at or above
30 liters (commonly referred to as Category 3 compression-ignition
marine engines) as part of a coordinated strategy to address emissions
from all ships that affect U.S. air quality. Near-term standards for
newly built engines applied beginning in 2011, and long-term standards
requiring an 80 percent reduction in NOX emissions will
begin in 2016.
NOX SIP Call. On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA issued a
NOX SIP Call requiring the District of Columbia and 22
states to reduce emissions of NOX. Affected states were
required to comply with Phase I of the SIP Call
[[Page 67144]]
beginning in 2004 and Phase II beginning in 2007. Emission reductions
resulting from regulations developed in response to the NOX
SIP Call are permanent and enforceable.
CAIR and CSAPR. The Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) was
promulgated in 2005 and required 28 eastern states and the District of
Columbia to significantly reduce emissions of SO2 and
NOX from electric generating units (EGUs) in order to limit
the interstate transport of these pollutants and the ozone and fine
particulate matter they form in the atmosphere. 70 FR 25162 (May 12,
2005). In 2008, the D.C. Circuit initially vacated CAIR, North Carolina
v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008), but ultimately remanded the rule
to EPA without vacatur to preserve the environmental benefits provided
by CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008).
On August 8, 2011, acting on the Court's remand, EPA promulgated CSAPR,
to address interstate transport of emissions and resulting secondary
air pollutants and to replace CAIR (76 FR 48208).\5\ CSAPR requires
substantial reductions of SO2 and NOX emissions
from EGUs in 28 states in the Eastern United States. Implementation of
the rule was scheduled to begin on January 1, 2012, when CSAPR's cap-
and-trade programs would have superseded the CAIR cap-and-trade
programs. Numerous parties filed petitions for review of CSAPR, and on
December 30, 2011, the D.C. Circuit issued an order staying CSAPR
pending resolution of the petitions and directing EPA to continue to
administer CAIR. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, No. 11-1302
(D.C. Cir. Dec. 30, 2011), Order at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ CAIR addressed the 1997 PM2.5 Annual standard and
the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. CSAPR addresses contributions from
upwind states to downwind nonattainment and maintenance of the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 standard as well as the ozone and
PM2.5 NAAQS addressed by CAIR.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 21, 2012, the D.C. Circuit issued its ruling, vacating
and remanding CSAPR to the Agency and once again ordering continued
implementation of CAIR. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696
F.3d 7, 38 (D.C. Cir. 2012). The D.C. Circuit subsequently denied EPA's
petition for rehearing en banc. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA,
No. 11-1302, 2013 WL 656247 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 24, 2013), at *1. EPA and
other parties then petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of
certiorari, and the Supreme Court granted the petitions on June 24,
2013. EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 133 S. Ct. 2857 (2013).
On April 29, 2014, the Supreme Court vacated and reversed the D.C.
Circuit's decision regarding CSAPR and remanded that decision to the
D.C. Circuit to resolve remaining issues in accordance with its ruling.
EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014). EPA
filed a motion to lift the stay in light of the Supreme Court decision,
and on October 23, 2014, the D.C. Circuit granted EPA's motion. EME
Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, Case No. 11-1302, Document No.
1518738.
EPA approved a modification to Alabama's SIP on October 1, 2007,
that addressed the requirements of CAIR for the purpose of reducing
SO2 and NOX emissions (see 72 FR 55659), and
Alabama's SIP redesignation request lists CAIR/CSAPR as a control
measure. CAIR was in place and getting emission reductions when the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area began monitoring attainment of the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. The quality-assured, certified monitoring data
used to demonstrate the area's attainment of the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS by the April 5, 2010, attainment deadline was
also impacted by CAIR. However, EPA conducted an air quality modeling
analysis as part of the CSAPR rulemaking which demonstrates that the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area would be able to maintain the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS even in the absence of either CAIR or CSAPR. See
``Air Quality Modeling Final Rule Technical Support Document,'' App. B,
B-39.\6\ This modeling is available in the docket for this proposed
redesignation action. In addition, as noted above, the D.C. Circuit has
lifted the stay of CSAPR. Therefore, to the extent that these transport
rules impact attainment of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS in
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area, any emission reductions associated with
CAIR that helped the Chattanooga TN-GA Area achieve attainment of the
1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS are permanent and enforceable for
purposes of redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA
because CSAPR requires similar or greater emission reductions from
relevant upwind areas starting in 2015 and beyond.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The air quality modeling analysis for the CSAPR rulemaking
did not identify any of the four monitors in the Chattanooga TN-GA
Area as receptors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Criteria (4) --The Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
has a fully approved maintenance plan pursuant to section 175A of the
CAA.
For redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the area has a fully approved
maintenance plan pursuant to section 175A of the CAA (CAA section
107(d)(3)(E)(iv)). In conjunction with its request to redesignate the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area to attainment for the
1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, ADEM submitted a SIP revision to
provide for the maintenance of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
for at least 10 years after the effective date of redesignation to
attainment. EPA believes that this maintenance plan meets the
requirements for approval under section 175A of the CAA.
a. What is required in a maintenance plan?
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment.
Under section 175A, the plan must demonstrate continued attainment of
the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after the Administrator
approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after the
redesignation, ADEM must submit a revised maintenance plan which
demonstrates that attainment will continue to be maintained for the 10
years following the initial 10-year period. To address the possibility
of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must contain such
contingency measures, as EPA deems necessary, to assure prompt
correction of any future 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS violations.
The Calcagni Memorandum provides further guidance on the content of a
maintenance plan, explaining that a maintenance plan should address
five requirements: the attainment emissions inventory, maintenance
demonstration, monitoring, verification of continued attainment, and a
contingency plan. As is discussed below, EPA finds that ADEM's
maintenance plan includes all the necessary components and is thus
proposing to approve it as a revision to the Alabama SIP.
b. CAA 175 Maintenance Plan Requirements
1. Attainment Emissions Inventory
The Chattanooga TN-GA Area attained the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS based on monitoring data for the 3-year period
from 2007-2009. ADEM has selected 2007 as the attainment emission
inventory year. The attainment inventory identifies a level of
emissions in the Area that is sufficient to attain the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. ADEM began development of the attainment
inventory by first generating a baseline emissions inventory for the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area.
[[Page 67145]]
As noted above, the year 2007 was chosen as the base year for
developing a comprehensive emissions inventory for direct
PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors SO2 and
NOX. Emissions projections to support maintenance through
2025 have been prepared for the years 2017 and 2025. The projected
inventory included with the maintenance plan estimates emissions
forward to 2025, which satisfies the 10-year interval required in
section 175(A) of the CAA.
The emissions inventories are composed of four major types of
sources: point, area, on-road mobile, and non-road mobile. The 2007
inventory, with the exception of on-road mobile emissions, was prepared
for Alabama by the contractor for the Southeastern Modeling, Analysis,
and Planning (SEMAP) project. Under the SEMAP project, emissions
estimates are reported by county and source classification code. The
SEMAP emissions inventories were developed using data from a number of
sources, including state and local agencies and EPA's National
Emissions Inventory (NEI). ADEM developed the 2007 inventory of on-road
mobile emissions. The 2007 SO2, NOX, and
PM2.5 emissions for the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area, as well as the emissions for other years, were developed
consistent with EPA guidance and are summarized in Tables 2 through 6
of the following subsection discussing the maintenance demonstration.
2. Maintenance Demonstration
The April 23, 2013, final submittal includes a maintenance plan for
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. This demonstration:
(i) Shows compliance with and maintenance of the Annual
PM2.5 standard by providing information to support the
demonstration that current and future emissions of SO2 and
NOX will remain below 2007 emission levels.
(ii) Uses 2007 as the attainment year and includes future emission
inventory projections for 2017 and 2025.
(iii) Identifies an ``out year'' at least 10 years after EPA review
and potential approval of the maintenance plan. ADEM submitted an
insignificance determination for transportation conformity purposes for
PM2.5 and NOX for the mobile source contribution
for the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area, per 40 CFR part
93.
(iv) Provides, as shown in Tables 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 below, the
actual and projected emissions inventories, in tpy, for the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area.
Table 2--Actual (2007) and Projected Point Source Emissions for the
Alabama Portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
[Tons]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollutant 2007 2017 2025
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2................................. 32,803.98 10,515.63 10,517.47
NOX................................. 18,591.83 3,468.44 3,607.05
PM2.5............................... 755.49 534.89 534.89
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3--Actual (2007) and Projected Non-Point Source Emissions for the
Alabama Portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
[Tons]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollutant 2007 2017 2025
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2................................. 0.25 0.25 0.24
NOX................................. 1.58 1.55 1.57
PM2.5............................... 27.11 28.08 29.17
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4--Actual (2007) and Projected On-Road Mobile Sources Emissions
for the Alabama Portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
[Tons]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollutant 2007 2017 2025
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2................................. 0.19 0.07 0.07
NOX................................. 23.00 9.00 6.00
PM2.5............................... 0.73 0.31 0.24
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 5--Actual (2007) and Projected Non-Road Mobile Source Emissions
for the Alabama Portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
[Tons]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollutant 2007 2017 2025
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2................................. 0.91 0.15 0.15
NOX................................. 37.32 25.86 18.95
PM2.5............................... 2.05 1.01 0.63
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 67146]]
Table 6--Actual (2007) and Projected Emissions for All Sectors for the
Alabama Portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
[Tons]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pollutant 2007 2017 2025
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2................................. 32,805.33 10,516.10 10,517.93
NOX................................. 18,653.73 3,504.83 3,633.57
PM2.5............................... 785.38 564.29 564.93
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As reflected in Table 6, future emissions of direct
PM2.5 and the relevant precursors are expected to be below
the ``attainment level'' emissions in 2007. In situations where local
emissions are the primary contributor to nonattainment, such as the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area, if the future projected emissions in the
nonattainment area remain at or below the baseline emissions in the
nonattainment area, then the ambient air quality standard should not be
exceeded in the future. As explained below, EPA finds that the overall
emission projections illustrate that the Chattanooga TN-GA Area is
expected to continue to attain the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS through
2025.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Based on a limited review of data and emissions projections
available to EPA from the Georgia and Tennessee portions of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area, EPA does not at this time believe that
projected emissions from those portions of the Area present a
maintenance problem for air quality in the Area as a whole.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emissions of SO2, NOx, and PM2.5 are
projected to decline by 68 percent, 81 percent, and 28 percent,
respectively, from 2007 to 2025. This is a reflection of the
implementation of the majority of Federal controls during the first
half of the maintenance period. The projected declines in emissions
demonstrate that the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS will be
maintained.
A maintenance plan requires the state to show that projected future
year emissions will not exceed the level of emissions which led the
Area to attain the NAAQS. EPA agrees that Alabama's projected emissions
demonstrate that the Chattanooga TN-GA Area will continue to attain for
the duration of the maintenance plan.
3. Monitoring Network
There is no monitor measuring ambient PM2.5 in the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. However, there are four
monitors located in the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. Three monitors are
located in Hamilton County, Tennessee, and one monitor is located in
Walker County, Georgia. As noted in Alabama's maintenance plan, all
four monitors will continue to operate in the Chattanooga TN-GA Area in
compliance with 40 CFR part 58 unless a change is approved by EPA, and
no plans are underway to discontinue operation, relocate, or otherwise
affect the integrity of these monitors. EPA proposes to find that
Alabama has thus addressed the requirement for monitoring.
4. Verification of Continued Attainment
ADEM has the legal authority to enforce and implement the
requirements of the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
through the 1997 Annual PM2.5 maintenance plan. This
includes the authority to adopt, implement, and enforce any subsequent
emissions control contingency measures determined to be necessary to
correct future PM2.5 attainment problems.
ADEM will track the progress of the maintenance plan by performing
future reviews of triennial emission inventories for the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area as required in the Air Emissions
Reporting Rule (AERR) and Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR).
For these periodic inventories, ADEM will review the assumptions made
for the purpose of the maintenance demonstration concerning projected
growth of activity levels. If any of these assumptions appear to have
changed substantially, then ADEM will re-project emissions for the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area.
5. Contingency Measures in the Maintenance Plan.
Section 175A of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include
such contingency measures as EPA deems necessary to assure that the
state will promptly correct a violation of the NAAQS that occurs after
redesignation. The maintenance plan should identify the contingency
measures to be adopted, a schedule and procedure for adoption and
implementation, and a time limit for action by ADEM. A state should
also identify specific indicators to be used to determine when the
contingency measures need to be implemented. The maintenance plan must
include a requirement that a state will implement all measures with
respect to control of the pollutant that were contained in the SIP
before redesignation of the area to attainment in accordance with
section 175A(d).
The contingency plan included in the submittal includes a
triggering mechanism to determine when contingency measures are needed
and a process of developing and implementing appropriate control
measures. ADEM will use actual ambient monitoring data to determine
whether a trigger event has occurred and when contingency measures
should be implemented. ADEM commits to adopt, within 18 months of
certification of a violation of the Annual PM2.5 standard,
one or more control measures as needed to re-attain the standard.
In accordance with 40 CFR part 58, ambient fine particulate matter
monitoring data that indicates a future violation of the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS will begin the process to implement these
contingency measures. Also, in the event that the annual average
PM2.5 concentrations in a year at any individual monitor in
the Area records a reading of 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ or higher, the State will
evaluate existing control measures to determine whether any further
emissions reduction measures should be implemented at that time.
Several factors will be considered in determining the need for
additional control measures in the event of a future year violation of
the 1997 Annual PM2.5 standard. Depending on when such
future year violation occurs, additional local and regional emissions
reductions may still be expected from various regulatory programs not
accounted for in the redesignation request. If a future year violation
occurs, ADEM will consider the air quality impact of these various
regulatory programs in determining the need for additional local
reductions in emissions of direct PM2.5 and/or
SO2.
If deemed necessary, contingency measures will be selected from the
following types of measures or from any other measures deemed
appropriate and effective at the time the selection is made:
Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) for sources
of SO2 and PM2.5;
[[Page 67147]]
Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) for point
sources of SO2 and PM2.5;
Expansion of RACM/RACT to area of transport within the
State; and
Additional SO2 and/or PM2.5
reduction measures yet to be identified.
Any resulting contingency measures will be based upon cost
effectiveness, emission reduction potential, economic and social
consideration, ease and timing of implementation, and other appropriate
factors.
A timeline of the development of PM2.5, and/or
SO2 regulations or permit conditions follows. This schedule
initiates with certification of ambient air quality monitoring data
indicating a violation of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS:
Table 7--Schedule for Permit Revisions or Rule Revisions for Contingency
Measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1........... Identify and quantify the emissions 3 months.
reductions expected to result in the
future from existing and future state
and federal regulatory programs.
2........... Use the best available air quality 6 months.
modeling to evaluate the air quality
improvement expected to result in
Jackson County from the programs and
emissions reductions identified in Step
1 above.
3........... Draft any needed permit conditions or 3 months.
SIP regulations.
4........... Complete rulemaking or permit revision 6 months.
process and submit to EPA.
Completion no later than................ 18 months.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA has concluded that the maintenance plan adequately addresses
the five basic components required: the attainment emissions inventory,
maintenance demonstration, monitoring, verification of continued
attainment, and a contingency plan. Therefore, the maintenance plan SIP
revision submitted by ADEM for the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area meets the requirements of section 175A of the CAA and EPA is
proposing that Alabama's submission is approvable.
VI. What is the effect of the January 4, 2013, D.C. Circuit decision
regarding PM2.5 implementation under subpart 4?
a. Background
As discussed in Section I of this action, the D.C. Circuit remanded
the 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule to EPA on January 4,
2013, in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428. The
court found that EPA erred in implementing the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS pursuant to the general implementation provisions of subpart 1 of
part D of Title I of the CAA rather than the particulate matter-
specific provisions of subpart 4 of part D of Title I.
b. Proposal on This Issue
In this portion of the proposed redesignation, EPA addresses the
effect of the Court's January 4, 2013, ruling on the proposed
redesignation. As explained below, EPA is proposing to determine that
the Court's January 4, 2013, decision does not prevent EPA from
redesignating the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area to
attainment. Even in light of the Court's decision, redesignation for
this area is appropriate under the CAA and EPA's longstanding
interpretations of the CAA's provisions regarding redesignation. EPA
first explains its longstanding interpretation that requirements that
are imposed, or that become due, after a complete redesignation request
is submitted for an area that is attaining the standard, are not
applicable for purposes of evaluating a redesignation request. Second,
EPA then shows that, even if EPA applies the subpart 4 requirements to
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area redesignation request
and disregards the provisions of its 1997 PM2.5
Implementation Rule recently remanded by the Court, the State's request
for redesignation of the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
still qualifies for approval. EPA's discussion takes into account the
effect of the Court's ruling on the maintenance plan for the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area, which EPA views as approvable
when subpart 4 requirements are considered.
c. Applicable Requirements for the Purpose of Evaluating the
Redesignation Request
With respect to the 1997 PM2.5 Implementation Rule, the
Court's January 4, 2013, ruling rejected EPA's reasons for implementing
the PM2.5 NAAQS solely in accordance with the provisions of
subpart 1 and remanded that matter to EPA to address implementation of
the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS under subpart 4 of part D of the CAA,
in addition to subpart 1. For the purposes of evaluating Alabama's
redesignation request for the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA
Area, to the extent that implementation under subpart 4 would impose
additional requirements for areas designated nonattainment, EPA
believes that those requirements are not ``applicable'' for the
purposes of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E), and thus EPA is not required to
consider subpart 4 requirements with respect to the redesignation of
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. Under its
longstanding interpretation of the CAA, EPA has interpreted section
107(d)(3)(E) to mean, as a threshold matter, that the part D provisions
which are ``applicable'' and which must be approved in order for EPA to
redesignate an area include only those which came due prior to a
state's submittal of a complete redesignation request. See ``Procedures
for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,''
Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management
Division, September 4, 1992 (Calcagni memorandum). See also ``State
Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas Submitting Requests
for the plan and Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) on or
after November 15, 1992,'' Memorandum from Michael Shapiro, Acting
Assistant Administrator, Air and Radiation, September 17, 1993 (Shapiro
memorandum); Final Redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor, (60 FR 12459,
12465-66, March 7, 1995); Final Redesignation of St. Louis, Missouri,
(68 FR 25418, 25424-27, May 12, 2003); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d
537, 541 (7th Cir. 2004) (upholding EPA's redesignation rulemaking
applying this interpretation and expressly rejecting Sierra Club's view
that the meaning of ``applicable'' under the statute is ``whatever
should have been in the plan at the time of attainment rather than
whatever actually was in already implemented or due at the time of
attainment'').\8\ In this case, at the time that Alabama submitted its
redesignation request on April 23, 2013,
[[Page 67148]]
requirements under subpart 4 were not due.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Applicable requirements of the CAA that come due subsequent
to the area's submittal of a complete redesignation request remain
applicable until a redesignation is approved, but are not required
as a prerequisite to redesignation. Section 175A(c) of the CAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA's view that, for purposes of evaluating the Alabama portion of
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area redesignation, the subpart 4 requirements
were not due at the time the State submitted the redesignation request
is in keeping with the EPA's interpretation of subpart 2 requirements
for subpart 1 ozone areas redesignated subsequent to the D.C. Circuit's
decision in South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882
(D.C. Cir. 2006). In South Coast, the Court found that EPA was not
permitted to implement the 1997 8-hour ozone standard solely under
subpart 1 and held that EPA was required under the statute to implement
the standard under the ozone-specific requirements of subpart 2 as
well. Subsequent to the South Coast decision, in evaluating and acting
upon redesignation requests for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard that
were submitted to EPA for areas under subpart 1, EPA applied its
longstanding interpretation of the CAA that ``applicable
requirements,'' for purposes of evaluating a redesignation, are those
that had been due at the time the redesignation request was submitted.
See, e.g., Proposed Redesignation of Manitowoc County and Door County
Nonattainment Areas (75 FR 22047, 22050, April 27, 2010). In those
actions, EPA therefore did not consider subpart 2 requirements to be
``applicable'' for the purposes of evaluating whether the area should
be redesignated under section 107(d)(3)(E).
EPA's interpretation derives from the provisions of CAA Section
107(d)(3)(E). Section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) states that, for an area to be
redesignated, a state must meet ``all requirements `applicable' to the
area under section 110 and part D.'' Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) provides
that the EPA must have fully approved the ``applicable'' SIP for the
area seeking redesignation. These two sections read together support
EPA's interpretation of ``applicable'' as only those requirements that
came due prior to submission of a complete redesignation request.
First, holding states to an ongoing obligation to adopt new CAA
requirements that arose after the state submitted its redesignation
request, in order to be redesignated, would make it problematic or
impossible for EPA to act on redesignation requests in accordance with
the 18-month deadline Congress set for EPA action in section
107(d)(3)(D). If ``applicable requirements'' were interpreted to be a
continuing flow of requirements with no reasonable limitation, states,
after submitting a redesignation request, would be forced continuously
to make additional SIP submissions that in turn would require EPA to
undertake further notice-and-comment rulemaking actions to act on those
submissions. This would create a regime of unceasing rulemaking that
would delay action on the redesignation request beyond the 18-month
timeframe provided by the Act for this purpose.
Second, a fundamental premise for redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment is that the area has attained the relevant NAAQS due
to emission reductions from existing controls. Thus, an area for which
a redesignation request has been submitted would have already attained
the NAAQS as a result of satisfying statutory requirements that came
due prior to the submission of the request. Absent a showing that
unadopted and unimplemented requirements are necessary for future
maintenance, it is reasonable to view the requirements applicable for
purposes of evaluating the redesignation request as including only
those SIP requirements that have already come due. These are the
requirements that led to attainment of the NAAQS. To require, for
redesignation approval, that a state also satisfy additional SIP
requirements coming due after the state submits its complete
redesignation request, and while EPA is reviewing it, would compel the
state to do more than is necessary to attain the NAAQS, without a
showing that the additional requirements are necessary for maintenance.
d. Subpart 4 Requirements and the Alabama Portion of the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area Redesignation Request
Even if EPA were to take the view that the Court's January 4, 2013,
decision requires that, in the context of pending redesignations,
subpart 4 requirements were due and in effect at the time the State
submitted its redesignation request, EPA proposes to determine that the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area still qualifies for
redesignation to attainment. As explained below, EPA believes that the
redesignation request for the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA
Area, though not expressed in terms of subpart 4 requirements,
substantively meets the requirements of that subpart for purposes of
redesignating the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area to
attainment.
With respect to evaluating the relevant substantive requirements of
subpart 4 for purposes of redesignating the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area, EPA notes that subpart 4 incorporates
components of subpart 1 of part D, which contains general air quality
planning requirements for areas designated as nonattainment. See
section 172(c). Subpart 4 itself contains specific planning and
scheduling requirements for PM10\9\ nonattainment areas, and
under the Court's January 4, 2013, decision in NRDC v. EPA, these same
statutory requirements also apply for PM2.5 nonattainment
areas. EPA has longstanding general guidance that interprets the 1990
amendments to the CAA, making recommendations to states for meeting the
statutory requirements for SIPs for nonattainment areas.\10\ In the
General Preamble, EPA discussed the relationship of subpart 1 and
subpart 4 SIP requirements and pointed out that subpart 1 requirements
were to an extent ``subsumed by, or integrally related to, the more
specific PM-10 requirements.'' See 57 FR 13538 (April 16, 1992). The
subpart 1 requirements include, among other things, provisions for
attainment demonstrations, RACM RFP, emissions inventories, and
contingency measures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ PM10 refers to particles nominally 10 micrometers
in diameter or smaller.
\10\ See, ``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,''
57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) (the ``General Preamble'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the purposes of this redesignation, in order to identify any
additional requirements which would apply under subpart 4, we are
considering the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area to be a
``moderate'' PM2.5 nonattainment area. Under section 188 of
the CAA, all areas designated nonattainment areas under subpart 4 would
initially be classified by operation of law as ``moderate''
nonattainment areas and would remain moderate nonattainment areas
unless and until EPA reclassifies the area as a ``serious''
nonattainment area. Accordingly, EPA believes that it is appropriate to
limit the evaluation of the potential impact of subpart 4 requirements
to those that would be applicable to moderate nonattainment areas.
Sections 189(a) and (c) of subpart 4 apply to moderate nonattainment
areas and include the following: (1) An approved permit program for
construction of new and modified major stationary sources (section
189(a)(1)(A)); (2) an attainment demonstration (section 189(a)(1)(B));
(3) provisions for RACM (section 189(a)(1)(C)); and (4) quantitative
milestones demonstrating RFP toward attainment by the applicable
attainment date (section 189(c)).
The permit requirements of subpart 4, as contained in section
189(a)(1)(A), refer to and apply the subpart 1 permit provisions
requirements of sections 172
[[Page 67149]]
and 173 to PM10, without adding to them. Consequently, EPA
believes that section 189(a)(1)(A) does not itself impose for
redesignation purposes any additional requirements for moderate areas
beyond those contained in subpart 1.\11\ In any event, in the context
of redesignation, EPA has long relied on the interpretation that a
fully approved nonattainment new source review program is not
considered an applicable requirement for redesignation, provided the
area can maintain the standard with a PSD program after redesignation.
A detailed rationale for this view is described in a memorandum from
Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated
October 14, 1994, entitled ``Part D New Source Review Requirements for
Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.'' See also rulemakings
for Detroit, Michigan (60 FR 12467-12468, March 7, 1995); Cleveland-
Akron-Lorain, Ohio (61 FR 20458, 20469-20470, May 7, 1996); Louisville,
Kentucky (66 FR 53665, October 23, 2001); and Grand Rapids, Michigan
(61 FR 31834-31837, June 21, 1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ The potential effect of section 189(e) on section
189(a)(1)(A) for purposes of evaluating this redesignation is
discussed below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to the specific attainment planning requirements under
subpart 4,\12\ when EPA evaluates a redesignation request under either
subpart 1 or 4, any area that is attaining the PM2.5
standard is viewed as having satisfied the attainment planning
requirements for these subparts. As discussed above, for
redesignations, EPA has for many years interpreted attainment-linked
requirements as not applicable for areas attaining the standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ i.e., attainment demonstration, RFP milestone requirements,
and RACM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, even if we were to consider the Court's January 4, 2013,
decision in NRDC v. EPA to mean that attainment-related requirements
specific to subpart 4 should be imposed retroactively \13\ and thus are
now past due, those requirements do not apply to an area that is
attaining the 1997 PM2.5 standard for the purpose of
evaluating a pending request to redesignate the area to attainment.
Elsewhere in this notice, EPA proposes to determine that the Area has
attained the 1997 PM2.5 standard. Under its longstanding
interpretation, EPA is proposing to determine here that the Area meets
the attainment-related plan requirements of subparts 1 and 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ As explained above, EPA does not believe that the Court's
January 4, 2013, decision should be interpreted so as to impose
these requirements on the states retroactively. Sierra Club v.
Whitman, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus, EPA is proposing to conclude that the requirements to submit
an attainment demonstration under 189(a)(1)(B), a RACM determination
under section 189(a)(1)(C), and a RFP demonstration under 189(c)(1) are
satisfied for purposes of evaluating the redesignation request.
e. Subpart 4 and Control of PM2.5 Precursors
The D.C. Circuit in NRDC v. EPA remanded to EPA the two rules at
issue in the case with instructions to EPA to re-promulgate them
consistent with the requirements of subpart 4. EPA in this section
addresses the Court's opinion with respect to PM2.5
precursors. While past implementation of subpart 4 for PM10
has allowed for control of PM10 precursors such as
NOX from major stationary, mobile, and area sources in order
to attain the standard as expeditiously as practicable, CAA section
189(e) specifically provides that control requirements for major
stationary sources of direct PM10 shall also apply to
PM10 precursors from those sources, except where EPA
determines that major stationary sources of such precursors ``do not
contribute significantly to PM10 levels which exceed the
standard in the area.''
EPA's 1997 PM2.5 implementation rule, remanded by the
D.C. Circuit, contained rebuttable presumptions concerning certain
PM2.5 precursors applicable to attainment plans and control
measures related to those plans. Specifically, in 40 CFR 51.1002, EPA
provided, among other things, that a state was ``not required to
address VOC [and ammonia] as . . . PM2.5 attainment plan
precursor[s] and to evaluate sources of VOC [and ammonia] emissions in
the State for control measures.'' EPA intended these to be rebuttable
presumptions. EPA established these presumptions at the time because of
uncertainties regarding the emission inventories for these pollutants
and the effectiveness of specific control measures in various regions
of the country in reducing PM2.5 concentrations. EPA also
left open the possibility for such regulation of VOC and ammonia in
specific areas where that was necessary.
The Court in its January 4, 2013, decision made reference to both
section 189(e) and 40 CFR 51.1002, and stated that, ``In light of our
disposition, we need not address the petitioners' challenge to the
presumptions in [40 CFR 51.1002] that volatile organic compounds and
ammonia are not PM2.5 precursors, as subpart 4 expressly
governs precursor presumptions.'' NRDC v. EPA, at 27, n.10.
Elsewhere in the Court's opinion, however, the Court observed:
Ammonia is a precursor to fine particulate matter, making it a
precursor to both PM2.5 and PM10. For a
PM10 nonattainment area governed by subpart 4, a
precursor is presumptively regulated. See 42 U.S.C. Sec. 7513a(e)
[section 189(e)].
Id. at 21, n.7.
For a number of reasons, EPA believes that its proposed
redesignation of the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area is
consistent with the Court's decision on this aspect of subpart 4.
First, while the Court, citing section 189(e), stated that ``for a
PM10 area governed by subpart 4, a precursor is
`presumptively regulated,''' the Court expressly declined to decide the
specific challenge to EPA's 1997 PM2.5 implementation rule
provisions regarding ammonia and VOC as precursors. The Court had no
occasion to determine whether and how it was substantively necessary to
regulate any specific precursor in a particular PM2.5
nonattainment area, and did not address what might be necessary for
purposes of acting upon a redesignation request.
However, even if EPA takes the view that the requirements of
subpart 4 were deemed applicable at the time that the state submitted
the redesignation request, and disregards the implementation rule's
rebuttable presumptions regarding ammonia and VOC as PM2.5
precursors, the regulatory consequence would be to consider the need
for regulation of all precursors from any sources in the area to
demonstrate attainment and to apply the section 189(e) provisions to
major stationary sources of precursors. In the case of the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area, EPA believes that doing so is consistent with proposing
redesignation of the area for the PM2.5 standard. The
Chattanooga TN-GA Area has attained the standard without any specific
additional controls of VOC and ammonia emissions from any sources in
the Area.
Precursors in subpart 4 are specifically regulated under the
provisions of section 189(e), which requires, with important
exceptions, control requirements for major stationary sources of
PM10 precursors.\14\ Under subpart 1 and EPA's prior
implementation rule, all major stationary sources of PM2.5
precursors
[[Page 67150]]
were subject to regulation, with the exception of ammonia and VOC.
Thus, we must address here whether additional controls of ammonia and
VOC from major stationary sources are required under section 189(e) of
subpart 4 in order to redesignate the area for the 1997
PM2.5 standard. As explained below, we do not believe that
any additional controls of ammonia and VOC are required in the context
of this redesignation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Under either subpart 1 or subpart 4, for purposes of
demonstrating attainment as expeditiously as practicable, a state is
required to evaluate all economically and technologically feasible
control measures for direct PM emissions and precursor emissions,
and adopt those measures that are deemed reasonably available.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the General Preamble, EPA discusses its approach to implementing
section 189(e). See 57 FR 13538 (April 16, 1992). With regard to
precursor regulation under section 189(e), the General Preamble
explicitly stated that control of VOCs under other Act requirements may
suffice to relieve a state from the need to adopt precursor controls
under section 189(e). See 57 FR 13542. EPA in this rulemaking proposes
to determine that even if not explicitly addressed by the State in its
submission, the State does not need to take further action with respect
to ammonia and VOCs as precursors to satisfy the requirements of
section 189(e). This proposed determination is based on our findings
that: (1) The Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area contains no
major stationary sources of ammonia, and (2) existing major stationary
sources of VOC are adequately controlled under other provisions of the
CAA regulating the ozone NAAQS.\15\ In the alternative, EPA proposes to
determine that, under the express exception provisions of section
189(e), and in the context of the redesignation of the Area, which is
attaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5 standard, at present ammonia
and VOC precursors from major stationary sources do not contribute
significantly to levels exceeding the 1997 PM2.5 standard in
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. See 57 FR 13539.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ The Chattanooga TN-GA Area has reduced VOC emissions
through the implementation of various control programs including
various on-road and non-road motor vehicle control programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA notes that its 1997 PM2.5 implementation rule
provisions in 40 CFR 51.1002 were not directed at evaluation of
PM2.5 precursors in the context of redesignation, but rather
the rule assesses SIP plans and control measures required to bring a
nonattainment area into attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.
By contrast, redesignation to attainment primarily requires the area to
have already attained due to permanent and enforceable emission
reductions, and to demonstrate that controls in place can continue to
maintain the standard. Thus, even if we regard the Court's January 4,
2013, decision as calling for ``presumptive regulation'' of ammonia and
VOC for PM2.5 under the attainment planning provisions of
subpart 4, those provisions in and of themselves do not require
additional controls of these precursors for an area that already
qualifies for redesignation. Nor does EPA believe that requiring the
State to address precursors differently than they have already would
result in a substantively different outcome.
Although, as EPA has emphasized, its consideration here of
precursor requirements under subpart 4 is in the context of a
redesignation to attainment, EPA's existing interpretation of subpart 4
requirements with respect to precursors in attainment plans for
PM10 contemplates that states may develop attainment plans
that regulate only those precursors that are necessary for purposes of
attainment in the area in question, i.e., states may determine that
only certain precursors need be regulated for attainment and control
purposes.\16\ Courts have upheld this approach to the requirements of
subpart 4 for PM10.\17\ EPA believes that application of
this approach to PM2.5 precursors under subpart 4 is
reasonable. Because the Chattanooga TN-GA Area has already attained the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS with its current approach to regulation of
PM2.5 precursors, EPA believes that it is reasonable to
conclude in the context of this redesignation that there is no need to
revisit the attainment control strategy with respect to the treatment
of precursors. Even if the court's decision is construed to impose an
obligation, in evaluating this redesignation request, to consider
additional precursors under subpart 4, it would not affect EPA's
approval here of Alabama's request for redesignation of the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. In the context of a
redesignation, Alabama has shown that the Chattanooga TN-GA Area (of
which Jackson County is a part) has attained the standard. Moreover,
the State has shown, and EPA has proposed to determine, that attainment
in this Area is due to permanent and enforceable emissions reductions
on all precursors necessary to provide for continued attainment. It
follows logically that no further control of additional precursors is
necessary. Accordingly, EPA does not view the January 4, 2013, decision
of the court as precluding redesignation of the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS at this time. In sum, even if Alabama were
required to address precursors for Chattanooga TN-GA Area under subpart
4 rather than under subpart 1, EPA would still conclude that the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area had met all applicable
requirements for purposes of redesignation in accordance with section
107(d)(3(E)(ii) and (v).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See ``Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans for
California--San Joaquin Valley PM-10 Nonattainment Area; Serious
Area Plan for Nonattainment of the 24-Hour and Annual PM-10
Standards,'' 69 FR 30006 (May 26, 2004) (approving a PM10
attainment plan that impose controls on direct PM10 and
NOX emissions and did not impose controls on
SO2, VOC, or ammonia emissions).
\17\ See Association of Irritated Residents v. EPA et al., 423
F.3d 989 (9th Cir. 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
f. Maintenance Plan and Evaluation of Precursors
With regard to the redesignation of the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area, in evaluating the effect of the court's remand
of EPA's implementation rule, which included presumptions against
consideration of VOC and ammonia as PM2.5 precursors, EPA in
this proposal is also considering the impact of the decision on the
maintenance plan required under sections 175A and 107(d)(3)(E)(iv). To
begin with, EPA notes that the Area has attained the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS and that the State has shown that attainment of
that standard is due to permanent and enforceable emission reductions.
EPA proposes to determine that the State's maintenance plan shows
continued maintenance of the standard by tracking the levels of the
precursors whose control brought about attainment of the 1997
PM2.5 standard in the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. EPA therefore
believes that the only additional consideration related to the
maintenance plan requirements that results from the Court's January 4,
2013, decision is that of assessing the potential role of VOC and
ammonia in demonstrating continued maintenance in this area. As
explained below, based upon documentation provided by Alabama and
supporting information, EPA believes that the maintenance plan for the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area need not include any
additional emission reductions of VOC or ammonia in order to provide
for continued maintenance of the standard.
First, as noted above in EPA's discussion of section 189(e), VOC
emission levels in this area have historically been well-controlled
under SIP requirements related to ozone and other pollutants. Second,
total ammonia emissions throughout the portion of Jackson County in the
Chattanooga TN-
[[Page 67151]]
GA Area are estimated to be approximately 1,820.86 tons per year in
2020, a slight increase over 2007 levels. See Table 7 below. As
described below, available information shows that no precursor,
including VOC and ammonia, is expected to increase significantly over
the maintenance period so as to interfere with or undermine the State's
maintenance demonstration.
Table 7--Comparison of 2007 and 2020 VOC and Ammonia Emission Totals by
Source Sector (tpy) for the Alabama Portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA
Area \18\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC Ammonia
---------------------------------------
Source sector Net Net
2007 2020 change 2007 2020 change
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nonpoint........................ 712. 685. -26.6 1,55 1,74 193.19
30 66 2.38 5.57
Nonroad......................... 1,31 563. -754.6 0.94 1.01 0.07
8.58 98
Onroad.......................... 1,00 327. -677.8 40.4 21.5 -18.89
5.61 77 4 3 4
Point........................... 142. 161. 19.03 74.2 52.7 -21.5
71 74 4 4
---------------------------------------
Total....................... 3,17 1,73 -1,440 1,66 1,82 152.86
9.20 9.15 .05 8.00 0.86
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama's maintenance plan shows that emissions of SO2,
NOX, and PM2.5 are projected to decrease over the
maintenance period in the Alabama Portion of the Chattanooga, TN-GA
Area by 22,287.4 tpy, 15,020.16, and 220.45 tpy, respectively. See
Table 6, above. In addition, emissions inventories used in the
regulatory impact analysis (RIA) for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS
\19\ show that VOC emissions are projected to decrease by 1,440.05 tpy,
and the ammonia emissions are projected to increase by 152.86 tpy
between 2007 and 2020. Although ammonia emissions are projected to
increase slightly between 2007 and 2020, the decrease in emissions of
other precursors in comparison will keep the Area well below the
standard. See Table 6 and 7, above. While the RIA emissions inventories
are only projected out to 2020, there is no reason to believe that this
overall downward trend would not continue through 2025. Given that the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area is already attaining the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS even with the current level of emissions from
sources in the Area, the overall trend of emissions inventories would
be consistent with continued attainment. Indeed, projected emissions
reductions for the precursors that the State is addressing for purposes
of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS indicate that the Area should
continue to attain the NAAQS following the precursor control strategy
that the State has already elected to pursue. Even if VOC and ammonia
emissions were to increase unexpectedly between 2020 and 2025, the
overall emission reductions projected in SO2,
NOX, and PM2.5 would be sufficient to offset any
increases. For these reasons, EPA believes that local emissions of all
the potential PM2.5 precursors will not increase to the
extent that they will cause monitored PM2.5 levels to
violate the 1997 Annual PM2.5 standard during the
maintenance period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ These emissions estimates were taken from the emissions
inventories developed for the regulatory impact analysis for the
2012 PM2.5 NAAQS.
\19\ The RIA for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS standard can be
found on EPA's Web site at https://www.epa.gov/ttn/ecas/regdata/RIAs/finalria.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, available air quality data and modeling analyses show
continued maintenance of the standard during the maintenance period. As
noted in section V, above, the Chattanooga TN-GA Area recorded a
PM2.5 design value of 10.5 [mu]g/m\3\ during 2011-2013, the
most recent three years available with complete, quality-assured and
certified ambient air monitoring data. This is well below the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS of 15.0 [micro]g/m\3\. Moreover, the
modeling analysis conducted for the RIA for the 2012 PM2.5
NAAQS indicates that the design value for this area is expected to
continue to decline through 2020. Given the decrease in overall
precursor emissions projected through 2025, it is reasonable to
conclude that monitored PM2.5 levels in this area will also
continue to decrease through 2025.
Thus, EPA believes that there is ample justification to conclude
that the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area should be
redesignated, even taking into consideration the emissions of VOC and
ammonia potentially relevant to PM2.5. After consideration
of the D.C. Circuit's January 4, 2013, decision, and for the reasons
set forth in this notice, EPA continues to propose approval of the
State's maintenance plan and its request to redesignate the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area to attainment for the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS.
VII. What is EPA's analysis of Alabama's proposed regional on-road
motor vehicle insignificance determination for the Alabama portion of
the Chattanooga TN-GA area?
Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation plans,
programs, and projects, such as the construction of new highways, must
``conform'' to (i.e., be consistent with) the part of the state's air
quality plan that addresses pollution from cars and trucks. Conformity
to the SIP means that transportation activities will not cause new air
quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely
attainment of the NAAQS or any interim milestones. If a transportation
plan does not conform, most new projects that would expand the capacity
of roadways cannot go forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth
EPA policy, criteria, and procedures for demonstrating and assuring
conformity of such transportation activities to a SIP. The regional
emissions analysis is one, but not the only, requirement for
implementing transportation conformity. Transportation conformity is a
requirement for nonattainment and maintenance areas. Maintenance areas
are areas that were previously nonattainment for a particular NAAQS but
have since been redesignated to attainment with an approved maintenance
plan for that NAAQS.
Under the CAA, states are required to submit, at various times,
control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans in nonattainment areas.
These control strategy SIPs (including RFP and attainment
demonstration) and maintenance plans create MVEBs for criteria
pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution from cars and
trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, a MVEB must be established for the last
year of the maintenance plan. A state
[[Page 67152]]
may adopt MVEBs for other years as well. The MVEB is the portion of the
total allowable emissions in the maintenance demonstration that is
allocated to highway and transit vehicle use and emissions. See 40 CFR
93.101. The MVEB serves as a ceiling on emissions from an area's
planned transportation system. The MVEB concept is further explained in
the preamble to the November 24, 1993, Transportation Conformity Rule
(58 FR 62188). The preamble also describes how to establish the MVEB in
the SIP and how to revise the MVEB.
Today's action addresses the element regarding on-road motor
vehicle emissions and the requirement to establish MVEB. EPA is
proposing to find that the direct PM2.5 and NOX
emission contribution from motor vehicles in the Alabama portion of the
Area are insignificant to the air pollution in the Chattanooga TN-GA
Area. The result of this determination, if finalized, is that Alabama
will not need to develop MVEB for direct PM2.5 and
NOX for the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
and the Metropolitan Planning Organization or Department of
Transportation (whichever is applicable) will not need to perform a
regional emissions analysis for either pollutant when it demonstrates
conformity. See below for further information on the insignificance
determination.
Regional on-road motor vehicle insignificance. For motor vehicle
emissions budgets to be approvable, they must meet, at a minimum, EPA's
adequacy criteria (40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)). In certain instances, the
Transportation Conformity Rule allows areas to forgo establishment of a
MVEB where it is demonstrated that the regional motor vehicle emissions
for a particular pollutant or precursor are an insignificant
contributor to the air quality problem in an area. The general criteria
for insignificance determinations can be found in 40 CFR 93.109(f).
Insignificance determinations are based on a number of factors,
including (1) the percentage of motor vehicle emissions in context of
the total SIP inventory; (2) the current state of air quality as
determined by monitoring data for that NAAQS; (3) the absence of SIP
motor vehicle control measures; and (4) historical trends and future
projections of the growth of motor vehicle emissions. EPA's rationale
for providing for insignificance determinations is described in the
July 1, 2004, revision to the Transportation Conformity Rule at 69 FR
40004.\20\ Specifically, the rationale is explained on page 40061 under
the subsection entitled ``XXIII.B. Areas With Insignificant Motor
Vehicle Emissions.'' Any insignificance determination under review by
EPA is subject to the adequacy and approval process for EPA's action on
the SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ In the March 24, 2010, final rule (75 FR 14260), provisions
for insignificance determinations were outlined in 40 CFR 93.109(m).
EPA revised 40 CFR 93.109 in its March 14, 2012, final rule (77 FR
14979), and the provisions for insignificance determinations are now
located at 40 CFR 93.109(f).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Through the adequacy and SIP approval process, EPA may find that a
SIP demonstrates that regional motor vehicle emissions are an
insignificant contributor to the air quality problem for the pollutant
or precursor at issue. Upon the effective date of EPA's adequacy
determination, federal regulations no longer require a regional
emissions analysis (for the purpose of transportation conformity
implementation) for the relevant insignificant pollutant or precursor.
Areas with insignificant regional motor vehicle emissions for a
pollutant or precursor are still required to make a conformity
determination that satisfies other relevant conformity requirements.
Additionally, such areas are required to satisfy the regional emissions
analysis requirements for pollutants or precursors for which EPA has
not made a determination of insignificance.
The maintenance plan for the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-
GA Area, included as part of the SIP revision, contains a regional on-
road motor vehicle insignificance determination for the direct
PM2.5 and NOX contribution of motor vehicles in
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area to the air quality
problem in the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. As part of the preparation for
its redesignation request, Alabama used the on-road emissions of
PM2.5 and NOX from motor vehicles in that portion
of Jackson County, from the document titled ``Chattanooga Non-
Attainment Area Year 2030 Conformity Determination Report.'' In order
to estimate on-road mobile source emissions for the nonattainment
portion of Jackson County, a ratio of the size of the nonattainment
portion of Jackson County in square miles to the size of the entire
county in square miles was calculated. The nonattainment portion of
Jackson County was determined to be only about one percent of the total
area of Jackson County. The same rational was applied to obtain area
and non-road mobile source emissions for the nonattainment portion for
the county. Alabama determined that direct PM2.5 and
NOX emissions from on-road mobile sources in the Alabama
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area are 0.2 percent, and 0.18
percent, respectively, of the total emissions from on-road mobile
source in the entire Chattanooga TN-GA Area for 2007, 2017, and 2025.
The information provided by Alabama supports EPA's proposal to
determine that the direct PM2.5 and NOX
contribution from on-road vehicles in the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area are insignificant to the PM2.5 air
pollution the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. As shown in Tables 2 through 6
above, Alabama's maintenance plan demonstrates that on-road direct
PM2.5 emissions and NOX emissions will continue
to decrease through 2025, the end of the initial maintenance plan for
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area. In addition, since
2007, the PM2.5 design value concentration has decreased by
approximately 15 percent such that the Area is now attaining the Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS with a 2011-2013 design value of 10.5 [micro]g/
m\3\, well below the standard of 15.0 [micro]g/m\3\. According to
information provided by Alabama, point sources contributed over 99
percent of the emissions in future years in the Alabama portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area. The maintenance plan does not contain any
control measures that apply to on-road motor vehicles.
After evaluating the information provided by Alabama and weighing
the factors for the insignificance determination outlined in 40 CFR
93.109(f), EPA is now proposing to approve Alabama's determination that
the direct PM2.5 and NOX contribution from motor
vehicle emissions in the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga Area are
insignificant to the pollution problem in the Chattanooga TN-GA Area.
EPA's insignificance determination should be considered and
specifically noted in the transportation conformity documentation that
is prepared for the Area. EPA is proposing that the submitted
insignificance finding is consistent with maintenance of the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS through 2025.
VIII. What is the status of EPA's adequacy determination for the on-
road motor vehicle insignificance determination for the Alabama portion
of the Chattanooga TN-GA area?
When reviewing submitted ``control strategy'' SIPs or maintenance
plans containing MVEB and/or insignificance determinations, EPA may
affirmatively find the MVEB and/or insignificance determination
contained therein
[[Page 67153]]
adequate for use in determining transportation conformity. Once EPA
affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB is adequate for transportation
conformity purposes, that MVEB must be used by state and federal
agencies in determining whether proposed transportation projects
conform to the SIP as required by section 176(c) of the CAA. Further,
once EPA affirmatively finds the submitted insignificance determination
is adequate for transportation conformity purposes, the transportation
partners are relieved of performing a regional emissions analysis of
that pollutant or precursor but must document the insignificance
determination in its conformity determination.
EPA's substantive criteria for determining adequacy of an MVEB and/
or insignificance determination are set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). The
process for determining adequacy consists of three basic steps: Public
notification of a SIP submission, a public comment period, and EPA's
adequacy determination. This process for determining the adequacy of
submitted MVEB for transportation conformity purposes was initially
outlined in EPA's May 14, 1999, guidance, ``Conformity Guidance on
Implementation of March 2, 1999, Conformity Court Decision.'' EPA
adopted regulations to codify the adequacy process in the
Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for the ``New 8-Hour Ozone
and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and
Miscellaneous Revisions for Existing Areas; Transportation Conformity
Rule Amendments--Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule
Change,'' on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). Additional information on the
adequacy process for transportation conformity purposes is available in
the proposed rule entitled, ``Transportation Conformity Rule
Amendments: Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Changes,''
68 FR 38974, 38984 (June 30, 2003).
As discussed earlier, Alabama's maintenance plan submission
includes an insignificance determination that direct PM2.5
and NOX emissions from on-road motor vehicles are an
insignificant contributor to the air quality problem in the Chattanooga
TN-GA Area. The Alabama maintenance SIP submission, including the on-
road motor vehicle insignificance finding, was open for public comment
on EPA's adequacy Web site found at: https://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm. The EPA public comment period
closed on October 22, 2014. EPA did not receive any comments on the
adequacy of the insignificance determination, nor did EPA receive any
requests for the SIP revision.
EPA intends to make its determination on the adequacy of the
insignificance finding for the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA
Area for transportation conformity purposes in the near future. Section
93.109(f) states that a regional emissions analysis is no longer
necessary if EPA finds through the adequacy or approval process that a
SIP demonstrates that regional motor vehicle emissions are an
insignificant contributor to the air quality problem for that
pollutant/precursor. A finding of insignificance does not change the
requirement for a regional analysis for other pollutants and precursors
and does not change the requirement for hot-spot analysis. After EPA
finds the insignificance determination adequate or approves it, this
on-road motor vehicle insignificance finding for direct
PM2.5 and NOX applies to future transportation
conformity determinations.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ The Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area already
has an adequate insignificance finding for its previously-submitted
attainment demonstration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IX. Proposed Actions on the Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan
SIP Revision for the Alabama Portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area
On May 31, 2011, EPA determined that the Chattanooga TN-GA Area was
attaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. See 76 FR 31239. EPA
is now taking two separate but related actions regarding the Area's
redesignation and maintenance of the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS.
First, EPA is proposing to determine that, based upon review of
complete, quality-assured and certified ambient monitoring data for the
2007-2009 period, and review of data in AQS for 2010 through 2013 that
the Chattanooga TN-GA Area continues to attain the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to determine that the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area has met the criteria
under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) for redesignation from nonattainment to
attainment for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. On this basis,
EPA is proposing to approve Alabama's redesignation request for the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area.
Second, EPA is proposing to approve the maintenance plan for the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area as meeting the
requirements of section 175A of the CAA. The maintenance plan
demonstrates that the Area will continue to maintain the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS.
If finalized, approval of the redesignation request would change
the official designation of the portion of Jackson County in the
Chattanooga TN-GA Area for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS,
found at 40 CFR part 81 from nonattainment to attainment. EPA is also
proposing to approve, into the Alabama SIP, the maintenance plan for
the Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area.
X. What is the effect of EPA's proposed actions?
EPA's proposed actions establish the basis upon which EPA may take
final action on the issues being proposed for approval today. Approval
of Alabama's redesignation request would change the legal designation
of a portion of Jackson County in Alabama for the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS, found at 40 CFR part 81, from nonattainment to
attainment. Approval of the ADEM's request would also incorporate a
plan for maintaining the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the
Alabama portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA Area through 2025 into the
Alabama SIP. This maintenance plan includes contingency measures to
remedy any future violations of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
and procedures for evaluation of potential violations. Additionally,
EPA is notifying the public of the status of its adequacy determination
for the NOX and PM2.5 insignificance pursuant to
40 CFR 93.118(f)(1).
XI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of a maintenance plan under section 107(d)(3)(E)
are actions that affect the status of a geographical area and do not
impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources beyond those
imposed by state law. A redesignation to attainment does not in and of
itself create any new requirements, but rather results in the
applicability of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have
been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions
of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40
CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to
approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA.
Accordingly, these proposed actions merely approve state law as
[[Page 67154]]
meeting federal requirements and does not impose additional
requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, these
proposed actions:
Are not ``significant regulatory action[s]'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
are certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
do 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);
do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
are not economically significant regulatory actions based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
are not significant regulatory actions subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
are not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
do not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, and Particulate
matter.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: November 3, 2014.
V. Anne Heard,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2014-26736 Filed 11-10-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
