Air Plan Approval and Air Quality Designation; TN; Reasonably Available Control Measures and Redesignation for the TN Portion of the Chattanooga 1997 Annual PM2.5, 68253-68257 [2015-28009]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 213 / Wednesday, November 4, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
Executive Order 12630
Title VIII of ANILCA requires the
Secretaries to administer a subsistence
priority on public lands. The scope of
this Program is limited by definition to
certain public lands. Likewise, these
regulations have no potential takings of
private property implications as defined
by Executive Order 12630.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
The Secretaries have determined and
certify pursuant to the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act, 2 U.S.C. 1502 et
seq., that this rulemaking will not
impose a cost of $100 million or more
in any given year on local or State
governments or private entities. The
implementation of this rule is by
Federal agencies, and there is no cost
imposed on any State or local entities or
tribal governments.
Executive Order 12988
The Secretaries have determined that
these regulations meet the applicable
standards provided in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988,
regarding civil justice reform.
rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Executive Order 13132
In accordance with Executive Order
13132, the rule does not have sufficient
Federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism summary
impact statement. Title VIII of ANILCA
precludes the State from exercising
subsistence management authority over
fish and wildlife resources on Federal
lands unless it meets certain
requirements.
Executive Order 13175
Title VIII of ANILCA does not provide
specific rights to tribes for the
subsistence taking of wildlife, fish, and
shellfish. However, the Secretaries,
through the Board, provided Federally
recognized Tribes and Alaska Native
corporations opportunities to consult on
this rule. Consultation with Alaska
Native corporations are based on Public
Law 108–199, div. H, Sec. 161, Jan. 23,
2004, 118 Stat. 452, as amended by
Public Law 108–447, div. H, title V, Sec.
518, Dec. 8, 2004, 118 Stat. 3267, which
provides that: ‘‘The Director of the
Office of Management and Budget and
all Federal agencies shall hereafter
consult with Alaska Native corporations
on the same basis as Indian tribes under
Executive Order No. 13175.’’
The Secretaries, through the Board,
provided a variety of opportunities for
consultation: Commenting on proposed
changes to the existing rule; engaging in
dialogue at the Council meetings;
engaging in dialogue at the Board’s
meetings; and providing input in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:40 Nov 03, 2015
Jkt 238001
person, by mail, email, or phone at any
time during the rulemaking process.
On March 23 and 24, 2015, the Board
provided Federally recognized Tribes
and Alaska Native Corporations a
specific opportunity to consult on this
rule. Federally recognized Tribes and
Alaska Native Corporations were
notified by mail and telephone and were
given the opportunity to attend in
person or via teleconference.
68253
PART ll—SUBSISTENCE
MANAGEMENT REGULATIONS FOR
PUBLIC LANDS IN ALASKA
1. The authority citation for both 36
CFR part 242 and 50 CFR part 100
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 3, 472, 551, 668dd,
3101–3126; 18 U.S.C. 3551–3586; 43 U.S.C.
1733.
Subpart B—Program Structure
Executive Order 13211
This Executive Order requires
agencies to prepare Statements of
Energy Effects when undertaking certain
actions. However, this rule is not a
significant regulatory action under E.O.
13211, affecting energy supply,
distribution, or use, and no Statement of
Energy Effects is required.
Drafting Information
Theo Matuskowitz drafted these
regulations under the guidance of
Eugene R. Peltola, Jr. of the Office of
Subsistence Management, Alaska
Regional Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Anchorage, Alaska. Additional
assistance was provided by
• Daniel Sharp, Alaska State Office,
Bureau of Land Management;
• Mary McBurney, Alaska Regional
Office, National Park Service;
• Dr. Glenn Chen, Alaska Regional
Office, Bureau of Indian Affairs;
• Trevor T. Fox, Alaska Regional
Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;
and
• Thomas Whitford, Alaska Regional
Office, U.S. Forest Service.
Authority
This rule is issued under the authority
of Title VIII of the Alaska National
Interest Lands Conservation Act
(ANILCA) (16 U.S.C. 3111–3126).
List of Subjects
36 CFR Part 242
Administrative practice and
procedure, Alaska, Fish, National
forests, Public lands, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Wildlife.
50 CFR Part 100
Administrative practice and
procedure, Alaska, Fish, National
forests, Public lands, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Wildlife.
Regulation Promulgation
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, the Secretaries amend 36 CFR
part 242 and 50 CFR part 100 as set
forth below.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
2. In subpart B of 36 CFR part 242 and
50 CFR part 100, § ll.15 is revised to
read as follows:
■
§ ll.15
Rural determination process.
(a) The Board determines which areas
or communities in Alaska are nonrural.
Current determinations are listed at
§ ll.23.
(b) All other communities and areas
are, therefore, rural.
Dated: Oct. 28, 2015.
Sally Jewell,
Secretary of the Interior.
Dated: Sept. 30, 2015.
Beth G. Pendleton,
Regional Forester, USDA—Forest Service.
[FR Doc. 2015–27994 Filed 10–30–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–11–4333–15–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R04–OAR–2014–0904; FRL–9936–55–
Region 4]
Air Plan Approval and Air Quality
Designation; TN; Reasonably Available
Control Measures and Redesignation
for the TN Portion of the Chattanooga
1997 Annual PM2.5 Nonattainment Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving the portion
of a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of
Tennessee, through the Tennessee
Department of Environment and
Conservation (TDEC), on October 15,
2009, that addresses reasonably
available control measures (RACM),
including reasonably available control
technology (RACT), for the Tennessee
portion of the Chattanooga, TN-GA-AL
nonattainment area for the 1997 fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS)
(hereinafter referred to as the
‘‘Chattanooga TN-GA-AL Area’’ or
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\04NOR1.SGM
04NOR1
68254
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 213 / Wednesday, November 4, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
‘‘Area’’). Additionally, EPA is taking
three separate final actions related to
Tennessee’s November 13, 2014 request
to redesignate the Tennessee portion of
the Area to attainment for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS and associated SIP
revision containing a plan for
maintaining attainment of the standard
in the Chattanooga TN-GA-AL Area. In
these three actions, EPA is determining
that the Area is continuing to attain the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS; approving and
incorporating the State’s plan for
maintaining attainment of the standard
in the Area, including the 2025 motor
vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) for
nitrogen oxides (NOX) and PM2.5 for the
Tennessee portion of this Area, into the
SIP; and redesignating the Tennessee
portion of the Area to attainment for the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. In addition to the
four final actions described above, EPA
is also finding the 2025 MVEBs for the
Tennessee portion of the Area adequate
for the purposes of transportation
conformity.
This rule will be effective
November 4, 2015.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA–R04–OAR–
2014–0904. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov
Web site. Although listed in the index,
some information may not be publicly
available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information 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 through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Regulatory Management Section,
Air Planning and Implementation
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joel
Huey, Air Planning and Implementation
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Mr. Huey
may be reached by phone at (404) 562–
rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES
DATES:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:40 Nov 03, 2015
Jkt 238001
9104 or via electronic mail at huey.joel@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
State’s plan for maintaining attainment
of the 1997 PM2.5 standard in the Area,
including the 2025 MVEBs for NOX and
PM2.5 for the Tennessee portion of the
I. Background for Final Actions
Area; and to redesignate the Tennessee
portion of the Area to attainment for the
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 80 FR 16331.
the first air quality standards for PM2.5.
EPA promulgated an annual standard at EPA proposed to approve the
a level of 15 micrograms per cubic meter redesignation request and the related
SIP revision based, in part, on the
(mg/m3) (based on a 3-year average of
Agency’s longstanding interpretation
annual mean PM2.5 concentrations) and
that the nonattainment planning
a 24-hour standard of 65 mg/m3 (based
requirements in subpart 1 of title I, part
on a 3-year average of the 98th
D, of the Act (hereinafter ‘‘Subpart 1’’),
percentile of 24-hour concentrations).
including RACM, are not ‘‘applicable’’
See 62 FR 36852. On January 5, 2005,
for purposes of CAA section
and supplemented on April 14, 2005,
107(d)(3)(E)(ii) once an area is attaining
EPA designated Hamilton County in
Tennessee, in association with counties the NAAQS and, therefore, need not be
approved into the SIP before EPA can
in Alabama and Georgia in the
redesignate the area. See 80 FR 16331
Chattanooga TN-GA-AL Area, as
(March 27, 2015). In the NPR, EPA also
nonattainment for the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS.1 See 70 FR 944 and 70 FR notified the public of the status of the
Agency’s adequacy determination for
19844, respectively. The Chattanooga
the NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the
TN-GA-AL Area consists of Hamilton
County, Tennessee; a portion of Jackson Tennessee portion of the Area.
On March 18, 2015, the United States
County, Alabama; and Catoosa and
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Walker Counties in Georgia.
(Sixth Circuit) issued an opinion in
On November 13, 2014, TDEC
Sierra Club v. EPA, 781 F.3d 299 (6th
requested that EPA redesignate the
Cir. 2015), that is inconsistent with
Tennessee portion of the Area to
EPA’s longstanding interpretation
attainment for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS
and submitted a SIP revision containing regarding section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) of the
Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). In its
the State’s plan for maintaining
attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 standard in decision, the Court vacated EPA’s
the Area, including the 2025 MVEBs for redesignation of the Indiana and Ohio
portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton
NOX and PM2.5 for the Tennessee
nonattainment area to attainment for the
portion of the Area. In a notice of
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS because EPA had
proposed rulemaking (NPR) published
not yet approved RACM under Subpart
on March 27, 2015, EPA proposed to
determine that the Chattanooga TN-GA- 1 for the Cincinnati Area into the
AL Area is continuing to attain the 1997 Indiana and Ohio SIPs.3 The Court
concluded that ‘‘a State seeking
PM2.5 NAAQS; 2 to approve and
redesignation ‘shall provide for the
incorporate into the Tennessee SIP the
implementation’ of RACM/RACT, even
1 On April 23, 2013, and September 14, 2012,
if those measures are not strictly
Alabama and Georgia (respectively) submitted
necessary to demonstrate attainment
requests and related SIP revisions for EPA to
with the PM2.5 NAAQS . . . . If a State
redesignate the Alabama and Georgia portions of
has not done so, EPA cannot ‘fully
the Chattanooga TN-GA-AL Area to attainment for
the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA has since redesignated approve[]’ the area’s SIP, and
the Alabama and Georgia portions of the Area. See
redesignation to attainment status is
79 FR 76235 (December 22, 2014) and 79 FR 75748
improper.’’ Sierra Club, 781 F.3d at 313.
(December 19, 2014), respectively.
EPA is bound by the Sixth Circuit’s
2 On May 31, 2011 (76 FR 31239), EPA published
decision in Sierra Club v. EPA within
a final determination that the Chattanooga TN-GAthe Court’s jurisdiction unless it is
AL Area had attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS based upon quality-assured and certified
overturned.4 Although EPA continues to
ambient air monitoring data for the 2007–2009 time
believe that Subpart 1 RACM is not an
period. EPA has reviewed the most recent ambient
monitoring data for the Area, which indicate that
the Chattanooga TN-GA-AL Area continues to attain
the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS beyond the
submitted 3-year attainment period of 2007–2009.
As stated in EPA’s March 27, 2015, proposal notice,
the 3-year design value of 12.9 mg/m3 for the Area
for 2007–2009 meets the NAAQS of 15.0 mg/m3.
Quality assured and certified data in EPA’s Air
Quality System (AQS) database provide a 3-year
design value of 10.3 mg/m3 for the Area for 2012–
2014. Furthermore, preliminary monitoring data in
the AQS database for 2015 indicate that the Area
is continuing to attain the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS. The AQS database is available at: https://
www3.epa.gov/airdata/.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3 The Court issued an amended decision on July
14, 2015, revising some of the legal aspects of the
Court’s analysis of the relevant statutory provisions
(section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and section 172(c)(1)) but
maintaining its prior holding that section 172(c)(1)
‘‘unambiguously requires implementation of
RACM/RACT prior to redesignation . . . even if
those measures are not strictly necessary to
demonstrate attainment with the PM2.5 NAAQS.’’
See Sierra Club v. EPA, Nos. 12–3169, 12–3182, 12–
3420 (6th Cir. July 14, 2015).
4 The states of Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and
Tennessee are located within the Sixth Circuit’s
jurisdiction.
E:\FR\FM\04NOR1.SGM
04NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 213 / Wednesday, November 4, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
applicable requirement under section
107(d)(3)(E) for an area that has already
attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS, on September 18, 2015, EPA
proposed two separate but related
actions regarding the Tennessee portion
of the Chattanooga TN-GA-AL Area in
response to the Court’s decision.5 6 First,
EPA proposed to approve the portion of
the State’s October 15, 2009, attainment
plan SIP revision that addresses RACM
under Subpart 1 for the Tennessee
portion of the Area. Second, EPA
proposed to supplement the Agency’s
proposed approval of Tennessee’s
November 13, 2014, redesignation
request for the Area by proposing that
approval of the RACM portion of the
aforementioned SIP revision satisfies
the Subpart 1 RACM requirement in
accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E) of
the CAA. See 80 FR 56418.
The detailed rationale for EPA’s
findings and actions is set forth in the
March 27, 2015, proposed rulemaking
and in the September 18, 2015,
supplemental proposed rulemaking. See
80 FR 16331 and 80 FR 56418,
respectively. The comment periods
associated with these two proposed
rulemakings have closed and no adverse
comments were received.
rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES
II. What are the effects of these actions?
Approval of the RACM portion of
Tennessee’s October 15, 2009,
attainment plan SIP revision satisfies
the Subpart 1 RACM requirement in
accordance with the Sixth Circuit’s
decision in Sierra Club v. EPA.
Approval of Tennessee’s redesignation
request changes the legal designation of
Hamilton County in the Tennessee
portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA-AL
Area, found at 40 CFR 81.343, from
nonattainment to attainment for the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. Approval of
Tennessee’s associated SIP revision also
incorporates a plan for maintaining the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in the Area through
2025, including contingency measures
to remedy any future violations of the
5 Pursuant to 40 CFR 56.5(b), the EPA Region 4
Regional Administrator signed a memorandum on
July 20, 2015, seeking concurrence from the
Director of EPA’s Air Quality Policy Division
(AQPD) in the Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards to act inconsistent with EPA’s
interpretation of CAA sections 107(d)(3)(E) and
172(c)(1) when taking action on pending and future
redesignation requests in Kentucky and Tennessee
because the Region is bound by the Sixth Circuit’s
decision in Sierra Club v. EPA. The AQPD Director
issued her concurrence on July 22, 2015. The July
20, 2015, memorandum with AQPD concurrence is
located in the docket for today’s actions.
6 On September 3, 2015, the Sixth Circuit denied
the petitions for rehearing en banc of this portion
of its opinion that were filed by EPA, the state of
Ohio, and industry groups from Ohio. Sierra Club
v. EPA, Nos. 12–3169, 12–3182, 12–3420, Doc. 136–
1 (6th Cir. Sept. 3, 2015).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:40 Nov 03, 2015
Jkt 238001
NAAQS and procedures for evaluation
of potential violations, into the SIP. The
maintenance plan also establishes NOX
and PM2.5 MVEBs of 3,200 tons per year
(tpy) and 100 tpy, respectively, for the
year 2025 for the Tennessee portion of
the Area. Within 24 months from this
final rule, these budgets must be used
for future conformity determinations.
III. Final Actions
EPA is approving the RACM portion
of a SIP revision submitted by TDEC on
October 15, 2009, for the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS in the Tennessee portion
of the Chattanooga TN–GA–AL Area.
Additionally, EPA is taking three
separate final actions regarding
Tennessee’s November 13, 2014 request
to redesignate the Tennessee portion of
the Area to attainment for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS and related SIP revision.
First, EPA is determining that the
Chattanooga, TN–GA–AL Area is
continuing to attain the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS.
Second, EPA is approving and
incorporating the maintenance plan for
the Tennessee portion of the Area,
including NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the
year 2025, into the Tennessee SIP. The
maintenance plan demonstrates that the
Area will continue to maintain the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS, and the budgets meet all
of the adequacy criteria contained in 40
CFR 93.118(e)(4) and (5).
Third, EPA is determining that
Tennessee has met the criteria under
CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) for the
Tennessee portion of the Area for
redesignation from nonattainment to
attainment for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.
On this basis, EPA is approving
Tennessee’s redesignation request for
the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS for the
Tennessee portion of the Area. As
mentioned above, approval of the
redesignation request changes the
official designation of Hamilton County
in the Tennessee portion of the
Chattanooga, TN-GA-AL Area for the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS from nonattainment
to attainment, as found at 40 CFR part
81.
EPA is also notifying the public that
it finds the newly-established NOX and
PM2.5 MVEBs for the Tennessee portion
of the Area adequate for the purpose of
transportation conformity. Within 24
months from this final rule, the
transportation partners must
demonstrate conformity to the new NOX
and PM2.5 MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR
93.104(e).
EPA has determined that these actions
are effective immediately upon
publication under the authority of 5
U.S.C. 553(d). The purpose of the 30day waiting period prescribed in section
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
68255
553(d) is to give affected parties a
reasonable time to adjust their behavior
and prepare before the final rule takes
effect. Section 553(d)(1) allows an
effective date less than 30 days after
publication if a substantive rule
‘‘relieves a restriction.’’ These actions
qualify for the exception under section
553(d)(1) because they relieve the State
of various requirements for the
Tennessee portion of the Chattanooga
TN-GA-AL Area. Furthermore, section
553(d)(3) allows an effective date less
than 30 days after publication ‘‘as
otherwise provided by the agency for
good cause found and published with
the rule.’’ EPA finds good cause to make
these actions effective immediately
pursuant to section 553(d)(3) because
they do not create any new regulatory
requirements such that affected parties
would need time to prepare before the
actions take effect.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, redesignation of an
area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of the
maintenance plan under CAA section
107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the
status of geographical area and do not
impose any additional regulatory
requirements on sources beyond those
required by state law. A redesignation to
attainment does not in and of itself
impose any new requirements, but
rather results in the application 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.
See 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 actions
merely approve state law as meeting
Federal requirements and do not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state or Federal law. For
these reasons, these actions:
• Are not a significant regulatory
actions subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• 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.);
E:\FR\FM\04NOR1.SGM
04NOR1
68256
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 213 / Wednesday, November 4, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
• 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 a significant regulatory
action 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
• will not have disproportionate
human health or environmental effects
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.
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by January 4, 2016. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section
307(b)(2).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, and Particulate matter.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, National parks.
Dated: October 20, 2015.
Heather McTeer Toney,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended
as follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart RR—Tennessee
2. Section 52.2220(e) is amended by
adding new entries ‘‘RACM analysis for
the Tennessee portion of the
Chattanooga Area for the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS’’ and ‘‘1997 Annual PM2.5
Maintenance Plan for the Tennessee
portion of Chattanooga TN–GA–AL
Area’’ at the end of the table to read as
follows:
■
§ 52.2220
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
EPA—APPROVED TENNESSEE NON-REGULATORY PROVISIONS
Applicable geographic
or nonattainment area
Name of non-regulatory SIP provision
State effective
date
*
*
*
*
RACM analysis for the Tennessee portion of the Hamilton County ...........
Chattanooga Area for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.
1997 Annual PM2.5 Maintenance Plan for the Hamilton County ...........
Tennessee portion of the Chattanooga TN–
GA–AL Area.
PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS
FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING
PURPOSES
3. The authority citation for part 81
continues to read as follows:
rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:40 Nov 03, 2015
Jkt 238001
4. In § 81.343, the table entitled
‘‘Tennessee—1997 Annual PM2.5
NAAQS (Primary and Secondary)’’ is
amended under ‘‘Chattanooga, TN–GA–
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Explanation
*
*
10/15/2009 11/4/2015 [Insert citation of publication].
11/13/2014 11/4/2015 [Insert citation of publication].
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
■
EPA approval date
*
AL:’’ by revising the entry for ‘‘Hamilton
County’’ to read as follows:
§ 81.343
*
E:\FR\FM\04NOR1.SGM
*
Tennessee.
*
04NOR1
*
*
68257
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 213 / Wednesday, November 4, 2015 / Rules and Regulations
TENNESSEE—1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 NAAQS
[Primary and Secondary]
Designation a
Classification
Designated area
Date 1
Chattanooga, TN-GA-AL:
Hamilton County .......................................................................................
*
*
*
Type
Attainment .....
11/4/2015
*
Date 2
........................
*
*
Type
*
a Includes
1 This
2 This
Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted.
date is July 2, 2014, unless otherwise noted.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
(7505P), Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; main telephone
number: (703) 305–7090; email address:
RDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
40 CFR Part 180
I. General Information
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0695; FRL–9934–05]
A. Does this action apply to me?
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2015–28009 Filed 11–3–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Diethofencarb; Pesticide Tolerance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes a
tolerance for residues of diethofencarb
in or on banana. Sumitomo Chemical
Company requested this tolerance under
the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic
Act (FFDCA).
DATES: This regulation is effective
November 4, 2015. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before January 4, 2016, and must
be filed in accordance with the
instructions provided in 40 CFR part
178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
ADDRESSES: The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2014–0695 is
available at https://www.regulations.gov
or at the Office of Pesticide Programs
Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket)
in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William
Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460–0001. The Public Reading Room
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744,
and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review
the visitor instructions and additional
information about the docket available
at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Susan Lewis, Registration Division
rmajette on DSK7SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
13:40 Nov 03, 2015
Jkt 238001
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. The following
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of EPA’s tolerance
regulations at 40 CFR part 180 through
the Government Printing Office’s e-CFR
site at https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/
40tab_02.tpl. To access the OCSPP test
guidelines referenced in this document
electronically, please go to https://
www.epa.gov/ocspp and select ‘‘Test
Methods and Guidelines.’’
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2014–0695 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
objections and requests for a hearing
must be in writing, and must be
received by the Hearing Clerk on or
before January 4, 2016. Addresses for
mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40
CFR 178.25(b).
In addition to filing an objection or
hearing request with the Hearing Clerk
as described in 40 CFR part 178, please
submit a copy of the filing (excluding
any Confidential Business Information
(CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket.
Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be
disclosed publicly by EPA without prior
notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your
objection or hearing request, identified
by docket ID number EPA–HQ–OPP–
2014–0695, by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be CBI or
other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on
commenting or visiting the docket,
along with more information about
dockets generally, is available at
https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
II. Summary of Petitioned-For
Tolerance
In the Federal Register of December
17, 2014 (79 FR 75107) (FRL–9918–90),
EPA issued a document pursuant to
FFDCA section 408(d)(3), 21 U.S.C.
346a(d)(3), announcing the filing of a
E:\FR\FM\04NOR1.SGM
04NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 213 (Wednesday, November 4, 2015)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 68253-68257]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-28009]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0904; FRL-9936-55-Region 4]
Air Plan Approval and Air Quality Designation; TN; Reasonably
Available Control Measures and Redesignation for the TN Portion of the
Chattanooga 1997 Annual PM2.5 Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving the
portion of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the
State of Tennessee, through the Tennessee Department of Environment and
Conservation (TDEC), on October 15, 2009, that addresses reasonably
available control measures (RACM), including reasonably available
control technology (RACT), for the Tennessee portion of the
Chattanooga, TN-GA-AL nonattainment area for the 1997 fine particulate
matter (PM2.5) national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) (hereinafter referred to as the ``Chattanooga TN-GA-AL Area''
or
[[Page 68254]]
``Area''). Additionally, EPA is taking three separate final actions
related to Tennessee's November 13, 2014 request to redesignate the
Tennessee portion of the Area to attainment for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS and associated SIP revision containing a plan
for maintaining attainment of the standard in the Chattanooga TN-GA-AL
Area. In these three actions, EPA is determining that the Area is
continuing to attain the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS; approving and
incorporating the State's plan for maintaining attainment of
the standard in the Area, including the 2025 motor vehicle
emission budgets (MVEBs) for nitrogen oxides (NOX) and
PM2.5 for the Tennessee portion of this Area, into the SIP;
and redesignating the Tennessee portion of the Area to attainment for
the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. In addition to the four final actions
described above, EPA is also finding the 2025 MVEBs for the Tennessee
portion of the Area adequate for the purposes of transportation
conformity.
DATES: This rule will be effective November 4, 2015.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2014-0904. All documents in the docket
are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the
index, some information may not be publicly available, i.e.,
Confidential Business Information 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 through www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joel Huey, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Mr. Huey may be reached by phone at (404)
562-9104 or via electronic mail at huey.joel@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background for Final Actions
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) and a 24-hour standard
of 65 [mu]g/m\3\ (based on a 3-year average of the 98th percentile of
24-hour concentrations). See 62 FR 36852. On January 5, 2005, and
supplemented on April 14, 2005, EPA designated Hamilton County in
Tennessee, in association with counties in Alabama and Georgia in the
Chattanooga TN-GA-AL Area, as nonattainment for the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS.\1\ See 70 FR 944 and 70 FR 19844, respectively.
The Chattanooga TN-GA-AL Area consists of Hamilton County, Tennessee; a
portion of Jackson County, Alabama; and Catoosa and Walker Counties in
Georgia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On April 23, 2013, and September 14, 2012, Alabama and
Georgia (respectively) submitted requests and related SIP revisions
for EPA to redesignate the Alabama and Georgia portions of the
Chattanooga TN-GA-AL Area to attainment for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA has since redesignated the Alabama and
Georgia portions of the Area. See 79 FR 76235 (December 22, 2014)
and 79 FR 75748 (December 19, 2014), respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 13, 2014, TDEC requested that EPA redesignate the
Tennessee portion of the Area to attainment for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS and submitted a SIP revision containing the
State's plan for maintaining attainment of the 1997 PM2.5
standard in the Area, including the 2025 MVEBs for NOX and
PM2.5 for the Tennessee portion of the Area. In a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPR) published on March 27, 2015, EPA proposed to
determine that the Chattanooga TN-GA-AL Area is continuing to attain
the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS; \2\ to approve and incorporate into
the Tennessee SIP the State's plan for maintaining attainment of the
1997 PM2.5 standard in the Area, including the 2025 MVEBs
for NOX and PM2.5 for the Tennessee portion of
the Area; and to redesignate the Tennessee portion of the Area to
attainment for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. See 80 FR 16331. EPA
proposed to approve the redesignation request and the related SIP
revision based, in part, on the Agency's longstanding interpretation
that the nonattainment planning requirements in subpart 1 of title I,
part D, of the Act (hereinafter ``Subpart 1''), including RACM, are not
``applicable'' for purposes of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) once an
area is attaining the NAAQS and, therefore, need not be approved into
the SIP before EPA can redesignate the area. See 80 FR 16331 (March 27,
2015). In the NPR, EPA also notified the public of the status of the
Agency's adequacy determination for the NOX and
PM2.5 MVEBs for the Tennessee portion of the Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ On May 31, 2011 (76 FR 31239), EPA published a final
determination that the Chattanooga TN-GA-AL Area had attained the
1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS based upon quality-assured and
certified ambient air monitoring data for the 2007-2009 time period.
EPA has reviewed the most recent ambient monitoring data for the
Area, which indicate that the Chattanooga TN-GA-AL Area continues to
attain the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS beyond the submitted
3-year attainment period of 2007-2009. As stated in EPA's March 27,
2015, proposal notice, the 3-year design value of 12.9 [mu]g/m\3\
for the Area for 2007-2009 meets the NAAQS of 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\.
Quality assured and certified data in EPA's Air Quality System (AQS)
database provide a 3-year design value of 10.3 [mu]g/m\3\ for the
Area for 2012-2014. Furthermore, preliminary monitoring data in the
AQS database for 2015 indicate that the Area is continuing to attain
the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The AQS database is
available at: https://www3.epa.gov/airdata/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On March 18, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth
Circuit (Sixth Circuit) issued an opinion in Sierra Club v. EPA, 781
F.3d 299 (6th Cir. 2015), that is inconsistent with EPA's longstanding
interpretation regarding section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA or Act). In its decision, the Court vacated EPA's redesignation of
the Indiana and Ohio portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton nonattainment
area to attainment for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS because EPA had
not yet approved RACM under Subpart 1 for the Cincinnati Area into the
Indiana and Ohio SIPs.\3\ The Court concluded that ``a State seeking
redesignation `shall provide for the implementation' of RACM/RACT, even
if those measures are not strictly necessary to demonstrate attainment
with the PM2.5 NAAQS . . . . If a State has not done so, EPA
cannot `fully approve[]' the area's SIP, and redesignation to
attainment status is improper.'' Sierra Club, 781 F.3d at 313.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The Court issued an amended decision on July 14, 2015,
revising some of the legal aspects of the Court's analysis of the
relevant statutory provisions (section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and section
172(c)(1)) but maintaining its prior holding that section 172(c)(1)
``unambiguously requires implementation of RACM/RACT prior to
redesignation . . . even if those measures are not strictly
necessary to demonstrate attainment with the PM2.5
NAAQS.'' See Sierra Club v. EPA, Nos. 12-3169, 12-3182, 12-3420 (6th
Cir. July 14, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA is bound by the Sixth Circuit's decision in Sierra Club v. EPA
within the Court's jurisdiction unless it is overturned.\4\ Although
EPA continues to believe that Subpart 1 RACM is not an
[[Page 68255]]
applicable requirement under section 107(d)(3)(E) for an area that has
already attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS, on September
18, 2015, EPA proposed two separate but related actions regarding the
Tennessee portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA-AL Area in response to the
Court's decision.5 6 First, EPA proposed to approve the
portion of the State's October 15, 2009, attainment plan SIP revision
that addresses RACM under Subpart 1 for the Tennessee portion of the
Area. Second, EPA proposed to supplement the Agency's proposed approval
of Tennessee's November 13, 2014, redesignation request for the Area by
proposing that approval of the RACM portion of the aforementioned SIP
revision satisfies the Subpart 1 RACM requirement in accordance with
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. See 80 FR 56418.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The states of Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee are
located within the Sixth Circuit's jurisdiction.
\5\ Pursuant to 40 CFR 56.5(b), the EPA Region 4 Regional
Administrator signed a memorandum on July 20, 2015, seeking
concurrence from the Director of EPA's Air Quality Policy Division
(AQPD) in the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards to act
inconsistent with EPA's interpretation of CAA sections 107(d)(3)(E)
and 172(c)(1) when taking action on pending and future redesignation
requests in Kentucky and Tennessee because the Region is bound by
the Sixth Circuit's decision in Sierra Club v. EPA. The AQPD
Director issued her concurrence on July 22, 2015. The July 20, 2015,
memorandum with AQPD concurrence is located in the docket for
today's actions.
\6\ On September 3, 2015, the Sixth Circuit denied the petitions
for rehearing en banc of this portion of its opinion that were filed
by EPA, the state of Ohio, and industry groups from Ohio. Sierra
Club v. EPA, Nos. 12-3169, 12-3182, 12-3420, Doc. 136-1 (6th Cir.
Sept. 3, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The detailed rationale for EPA's findings and actions is set forth
in the March 27, 2015, proposed rulemaking and in the September 18,
2015, supplemental proposed rulemaking. See 80 FR 16331 and 80 FR
56418, respectively. The comment periods associated with these two
proposed rulemakings have closed and no adverse comments were received.
II. What are the effects of these actions?
Approval of the RACM portion of Tennessee's October 15, 2009,
attainment plan SIP revision satisfies the Subpart 1 RACM requirement
in accordance with the Sixth Circuit's decision in Sierra Club v. EPA.
Approval of Tennessee's redesignation request changes the legal
designation of Hamilton County in the Tennessee portion of the
Chattanooga TN-GA-AL Area, found at 40 CFR 81.343, from nonattainment
to attainment for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. Approval of
Tennessee's associated SIP revision also incorporates a plan for
maintaining the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in the Area through 2025,
including contingency measures to remedy any future violations of the
NAAQS and procedures for evaluation of potential violations, into the
SIP. The maintenance plan also establishes NOX and
PM2.5 MVEBs of 3,200 tons per year (tpy) and 100 tpy,
respectively, for the year 2025 for the Tennessee portion of the Area.
Within 24 months from this final rule, these budgets must be used for
future conformity determinations.
III. Final Actions
EPA is approving the RACM portion of a SIP revision submitted by
TDEC on October 15, 2009, for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS in
the Tennessee portion of the Chattanooga TN-GA-AL Area.
Additionally, EPA is taking three separate final actions regarding
Tennessee's November 13, 2014 request to redesignate the Tennessee
portion of the Area to attainment for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS
and related SIP revision. First, EPA is determining that the
Chattanooga, TN-GA-AL Area is continuing to attain the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS.
Second, EPA is approving and incorporating the maintenance plan for
the Tennessee portion of the Area, including NOX and
PM2.5 MVEBs for the year 2025, into the Tennessee SIP. The
maintenance plan demonstrates that the Area will continue to maintain
the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, and the budgets meet all of the
adequacy criteria contained in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and (5).
Third, EPA is determining that Tennessee has met the criteria under
CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) for the Tennessee portion of the Area for
redesignation from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS. On this basis, EPA is approving Tennessee's
redesignation request for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS for the
Tennessee portion of the Area. As mentioned above, approval of the
redesignation request changes the official designation of Hamilton
County in the Tennessee portion of the Chattanooga, TN-GA-AL Area for
the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS from nonattainment to attainment, as
found at 40 CFR part 81.
EPA is also notifying the public that it finds the newly-
established NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the Tennessee
portion of the Area adequate for the purpose of transportation
conformity. Within 24 months from this final rule, the transportation
partners must demonstrate conformity to the new NOX and
PM2.5 MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR 93.104(e).
EPA has determined that these actions are effective immediately
upon publication under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 553(d). The purpose of
the 30-day waiting period prescribed in section 553(d) is to give
affected parties a reasonable time to adjust their behavior and prepare
before the final rule takes effect. Section 553(d)(1) allows an
effective date less than 30 days after publication if a substantive
rule ``relieves a restriction.'' These actions qualify for the
exception under section 553(d)(1) because they relieve the State of
various requirements for the Tennessee portion of the Chattanooga TN-
GA-AL Area. Furthermore, section 553(d)(3) allows an effective date
less than 30 days after publication ``as otherwise provided by the
agency for good cause found and published with the rule.'' EPA finds
good cause to make these actions effective immediately pursuant to
section 553(d)(3) because they do not create any new regulatory
requirements such that affected parties would need time to prepare
before the actions take effect.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of the maintenance plan under CAA section
107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the status of geographical area
and do not impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources
beyond those required by state law. A redesignation to attainment does
not in and of itself impose any new requirements, but rather results in
the application 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. See 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 actions merely approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and do not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state or Federal law. For these reasons, these actions:
Are not a significant regulatory actions subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
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.);
[[Page 68256]]
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 a significant regulatory action 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
will not have disproportionate human health or
environmental effects 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.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by January 4, 2016. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. See section 307(b)(2).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, and Particulate matter.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks.
Dated: October 20, 2015.
Heather McTeer Toney,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart RR--Tennessee
0
2. Section 52.2220(e) is amended by adding new entries ``RACM analysis
for the Tennessee portion of the Chattanooga Area for the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS'' and ``1997 Annual PM2.5 Maintenance
Plan for the Tennessee portion of Chattanooga TN-GA-AL Area'' at the
end of the table to read as follows:
Sec. 52.2220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
EPA--Approved Tennessee Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable
Name of non-regulatory SIP geographic or State EPA approval
provision nonattainment effective date date Explanation
area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
RACM analysis for the Hamilton County.. 10/15/2009 11/4/2015 ...........................
Tennessee portion of the [Insert
Chattanooga Area for the 1997 citation of
PM2.5 NAAQS. publication].
1997 Annual PM2.5 Maintenance Hamilton County.. 11/13/2014 11/4/2015 ...........................
Plan for the Tennessee [Insert
portion of the Chattanooga TN- citation of
GA-AL Area. publication].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES
0
3. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
0
4. In Sec. 81.343, the table entitled ``Tennessee--1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS (Primary and Secondary)'' is amended under
``Chattanooga, TN-GA-AL:'' by revising the entry for ``Hamilton
County'' to read as follows:
Sec. 81.343 Tennessee.
* * * * *
[[Page 68257]]
Tennessee--1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
[Primary and Secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation \a\ Classification
Designated area ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date \1\ Type Date \2\ Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chattanooga, TN-GA-AL:
Hamilton County........... 11/4/2015 Attainment.......... .................... ....................
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
\1\ This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ This date is July 2, 2014, unless otherwise noted.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2015-28009 Filed 11-3-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P