Air Quality Plans; Tennessee; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard, 12627-12636 [2016-05160]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 47 / Thursday, March 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules Comments must be received on or before April 11, 2016. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– OAR–2014–0658 at http:// www.regulations.gov or via email to Aburano.Douglas@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edward Doty, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6057, Doty.Edward@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Rules and Regulations section of this Federal Register, EPA is approving Ohio’s SIP revision submittal as a direct final rule without prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no adverse comments are received in response to this rule, no further activity is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on this proposed rule.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. Please note that, if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS DATES: VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Mar 09, 2016 Jkt 238001 severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. For additional information see the direct final rule, which is located in the Rules section of this Federal Register. Dated: February 26, 2016. Robert A. Kaplan, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. [FR Doc. 2016–05272 Filed 3–9–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R04–OAR–2015–0154; FRL–9943–44– Region 4] Air Quality Plans; Tennessee; Infrastructure Requirements for the 2010 Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission, submitted by the State of Tennessee, through the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), on March 13, 2014, for inclusion into the Tennessee SIP. This proposal pertains to the infrastructure requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the 2010 1hour sulfur dioxide (SO2) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for the implementation, maintenance and enforcement of each NAAQS promulgated by EPA, which is commonly referred to as an ‘‘infrastructure SIP submission.’’ TDEC certified that the Tennessee SIP contains provisions that ensure the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS is implemented, enforced, and maintained in Tennessee. EPA is proposing to determine that portions of Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP submission, provided to EPA on March 13, 2014, satisfy certain required infrastructure elements for the 2010 1hour SO2 NAAQS. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before April 11, 2016. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– OAR–2015–0154 at http:// www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be SUMMARY: PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 12627 edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ commenting-epa-dockets. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michele Notarianni, 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. Ms. Notarianni can be reached via electronic mail at notarianni.michele@epa.gov or via telephone at (404) 562–9031. Table of Contents I. Background and Overview II. What elements are required under sections 110(a)(1) and (2)? III. What is EPA’s approach to the review of infrastructure SIP submissions? IV. What is EPA’s analysis of how Tennessee addressed the elements of the sections 110(a)(1) and (2) ‘‘Infrastructure’’ provisions? V. Proposed Action VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background and Overview On June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35520), EPA promulgated a revised primary SO2 NAAQS to an hourly standard of 75 parts per billion (ppb) based on a 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations. Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the CAA, states are required to submit SIPs meeting the applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2) within three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section 110(a)(2) requires states to address basic SIP elements such as requirements for monitoring, basic program requirements and legal authority that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. States were required to E:\FR\FM\10MRP1.SGM 10MRP1 12628 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 47 / Thursday, March 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules submit such SIPs for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS to EPA no later than June 22, 2013.1 Today’s action is proposing to approve Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP submission for certain applicable requirements of the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. With respect to the interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1, 2, and 4), EPA is not proposing any action today regarding these requirements. For the aspects of Tennessee’s submittal proposed for approval today, EPA notes that the Agency is not approving any specific rule, but rather proposing that Tennessee’s already approved SIP meets certain CAA requirements. mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS II. What elements are required under sections 110(a)(1) and (2)? Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit SIPs to provide for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of a new or revised NAAQS within three years following the promulgation of such NAAQS, or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section 110(a) imposes the obligation upon states to make a SIP submission to EPA for a new or revised NAAQS, but the contents of that submission may vary depending upon the facts and circumstances. In particular, the data and analytical tools available at the time the state develops and submits the SIP for a new or revised NAAQS affects the content of the submission. The contents of such SIP submissions may also vary depending upon what provisions the state’s existing SIP already contains. More specifically, section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and timing requirements for SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements that states must meet for ‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP requirements related to a newly established or revised NAAQS. As mentioned above, these requirements include basic SIP elements such as requirements for monitoring, basic program requirements and legal 1 In these infrastructure SIP submissions states generally certify evidence of compliance with sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the CAA through a combination of state regulations and statutes, some of which have been incorporated into the federallyapproved SIP. In addition, certain federallyapproved, non-SIP regulations may also be appropriate for demonstrating compliance with sections 110(a)(1) and (2). Throughout this rulemaking, unless otherwise indicated, the term ‘‘Tennessee Air Pollution Control Regulations’’ or ‘‘TAPCR XXXX–XX–XX’’ indicates that the cited regulation has been approved into Tennessee’s federally-approved SIP. The term ‘‘Tennessee Air Quality Act’’ or ‘‘Tennessee Code Annotated’’ or ‘‘TCA XX–XX–XXXXX’’ indicates cited Tennessee State statutes, which are not a part of the SIP unless otherwise indicated. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Mar 09, 2016 Jkt 238001 authority that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. The requirements are summarized below and in EPA’s September 13, 2013, memorandum entitled ‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2).’’ 2 • 110(a)(2)(A): Emission Limits and Other Control Measures • 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System • 110(a)(2)(C): Programs for Enforcement of Control Measures and for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources 3 • 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II): Interstate Pollution Transport • 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate Pollution Abatement and International Air Pollution • 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate Resources and Authority, Conflict of Interest, and Oversight of Local Governments and Regional Agencies • 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary Source Monitoring and Reporting • 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency Powers • 110(a)(2)(H): SIP Revisions • 110(a)(2)(I): Plan Revisions for Nonattainment Areas 4 • 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with Government Officials, Public Notification, and Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Visibility Protection • 110(a)(2)(K): Air Quality Modeling and Submission of Modeling Data • 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees • 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation and Participation by Affected Local Entities III. What is EPA’s approach to the review of infrastructure SIP submissions? EPA is acting upon the SIP submission from Tennessee that addresses the infrastructure 2 Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not governed by the three year submission deadline of section 110(a)(1) because SIPs incorporating necessary local nonattainment area controls are not due within three years after promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, but rather are due at the time the nonattainment area plan requirements are due pursuant to section 172. These requirements are: (1) Submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(C) to the extent that subsection refers to a permit program as required in part D, title I of the CAA; and (2) submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(I) which pertain to the nonattainment planning requirements of part D, title I of the CAA. Today’s proposed rulemaking does not address infrastructure elements related to section 110(a)(2)(I) or the nonattainment planning requirements of 110(a)(2)(C). 3 This rulemaking only addresses requirements for this element as they relate to attainment areas. 4 As mentioned above, this element is not relevant to today’s proposed rulemaking. PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. The requirement for states to make a SIP submission of this type arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1). Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states must make SIP submissions ‘‘within 3 years (or such shorter period as the Administrator may prescribe) after the promulgation of a national primary ambient air quality standard (or any revision thereof),’’ and these SIP submissions are to provide for the ‘‘implementation, maintenance, and enforcement’’ of such NAAQS. The statute directly imposes on states the duty to make these SIP submissions, and the requirement to make the submissions is not conditioned upon EPA’s taking any action other than promulgating a new or revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific elements that ‘‘[e]ach such plan’’ submission must address. EPA has historically referred to these SIP submissions made for the purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) as ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ submissions. Although the term ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses the term to distinguish this particular type of SIP submission from submissions that are intended to satisfy other SIP requirements under the CAA, such as ‘‘nonattainment SIP’’ or ‘‘attainment plan SIP’’ submissions to address the nonattainment planning requirements of part D of title I of the CAA, ‘‘regional haze SIP’’ submissions required by EPA rule to address the visibility protection requirements of CAA section 169A, and nonattainment new source review (NNSR) permit program submissions to address the permit requirements of CAA, title I, part D. Section 110(a)(1) addresses the timing and general requirements for infrastructure SIP submissions, and section 110(a)(2) provides more details concerning the required contents of these submissions. The list of required elements provided in section 110(a)(2) contains a wide variety of disparate provisions, some of which pertain to required legal authority, some of which pertain to required substantive program provisions, and some of which pertain to requirements for both authority and substantive program provisions.5 EPA 5 For example: Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) provides that states must provide assurances that they have adequate legal authority under state and local law to carry out the SIP; section 110(a)(2)(C) provides that states must have a SIP-approved program to address certain sources as required by part C of title I of the CAA; and section 110(a)(2)(G) provides that states must have legal authority to address E:\FR\FM\10MRP1.SGM 10MRP1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 47 / Thursday, March 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS therefore believes that while the timing requirement in section 110(a)(1) is unambiguous, some of the other statutory provisions are ambiguous. In particular, EPA believes that the list of required elements for infrastructure SIP submissions provided in section 110(a)(2) contains ambiguities concerning what is required for inclusion in an infrastructure SIP submission. The following examples of ambiguities illustrate the need for EPA to interpret some section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2) requirements with respect to infrastructure SIP submissions for a given new or revised NAAQS. One example of ambiguity is that section 110(a)(2) requires that ‘‘each’’ SIP submission must meet the list of requirements therein, while EPA has long noted that this literal reading of the statute is internally inconsistent and would create a conflict with the nonattainment provisions in part D of title I of the Act, which specifically address nonattainment SIP requirements.6 Section 110(a)(2)(I) pertains to nonattainment SIP requirements and part D addresses when attainment plan SIP submissions to address nonattainment area requirements are due. For example, section 172(b) requires EPA to establish a schedule for submission of such plans for certain pollutants when the Administrator promulgates the designation of an area as nonattainment, and section 107(d)(1)(B) allows up to two years, or in some cases three years, for such designations to be promulgated.7 This ambiguity illustrates that rather than apply all the stated requirements of section 110(a)(2) in a strict literal sense, EPA must determine which provisions of section 110(a)(2) are applicable for a particular infrastructure SIP submission. Another example of ambiguity within sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) with respect to infrastructure SIPs pertains to whether states must meet all of the emergencies as well as contingency plans that are triggered in the event of such emergencies. 6 See, e.g., ‘‘Rule To Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone (Clean Air Interstate Rule); Revisions to Acid Rain Program; Revisions to the NOX SIP Call; Final Rule,’’ 70 FR 25162, at 25163–65 (May 12, 2005) (explaining relationship between timing requirement of section 110(a)(2)(D) versus section 110(a)(2)(I)). 7 EPA notes that this ambiguity within section 110(a)(2) is heightened by the fact that various subparts of part D set specific dates for submission of certain types of SIP submissions in designated nonattainment areas for various pollutants. Note, e.g., that section 182(a)(1) provides specific dates for submission of emissions inventories for the ozone NAAQS. Some of these specific dates are necessarily later than three years after promulgation of the new or revised NAAQS. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Mar 09, 2016 Jkt 238001 infrastructure SIP requirements in a single SIP submission, and whether EPA must act upon such SIP submission in a single action. Although section 110(a)(1) directs states to submit ‘‘a plan’’ to meet these requirements, EPA interprets the CAA to allow states to make multiple SIP submissions separately addressing infrastructure SIP elements for the same NAAQS. If states elect to make such multiple SIP submissions to meet the infrastructure SIP requirements, EPA can elect to act on such submissions either individually or in a larger combined action.8 Similarly, EPA interprets the CAA to allow it to take action on the individual parts of one larger, comprehensive infrastructure SIP submission for a given NAAQS without concurrent action on the entire submission. For example, EPA has sometimes elected to act at different times on various elements and sub-elements of the same infrastructure SIP submission.9 Ambiguities within sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) may also arise with respect to infrastructure SIP submission requirements for different NAAQS. Thus, EPA notes that not every element of section 110(a)(2) would be relevant, or as relevant, or relevant in the same way, for each new or revised NAAQS. The states’ attendant infrastructure SIP submissions for each NAAQS therefore could be different. For example, the monitoring requirements that a state might need to meet in its infrastructure SIP submission for purposes of section 110(a)(2)(B) could be very different for different pollutants because the content and scope of a state’s infrastructure SIP submission to meet this element might be very different for an entirely new 8 See, e.g., ‘‘Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Mexico; Revisions to the New Source Review (NSR) State Implementation Plan (SIP); Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) Permitting,’’ 78 FR 4339 (January 22, 2013) (EPA’s final action approving the structural PSD elements of the New Mexico SIP submitted by the State separately to meet the requirements of EPA’s 2008 PM2.5 NSR rule), and ‘‘Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; New Mexico; Infrastructure and Interstate Transport Requirements for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,’’ (78 FR 4337) (January 22, 2013) (EPA’s final action on the infrastructure SIP for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS). 9 On December 14, 2007, the State of Tennessee, through the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, made a SIP revision to EPA demonstrating that the State meets the requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and (2). EPA proposed action for infrastructure SIP elements (C) and (J) on January 23, 2012 (77 FR 3213) and took final action on March 14, 2012 (77 FR 14976). On April 16, 2012 (77 FR 22533) and July 23, 2012 (77 FR 42997), EPA took separate proposed and final actions on all other section 110(a)(2) infrastructure SIP elements of Tennessee’s December 14, 2007, submittal. PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 12629 NAAQS than for a minor revision to an existing NAAQS.10 EPA notes that interpretation of section 110(a)(2) is also necessary when EPA reviews other types of SIP submissions required under the CAA. Therefore, as with infrastructure SIP submissions, EPA also has to identify and interpret the relevant elements of section 110(a)(2) that logically apply to these other types of SIP submissions. For example, section 172(c)(7) requires that attainment plan SIP submissions required by part D have to meet the ‘‘applicable requirements’’ of section 110(a)(2). Thus, for example, attainment plan SIP submissions must meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) regarding enforceable emission limits and control measures and section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) regarding air agency resources and authority. By contrast, it is clear that attainment plan SIP submissions required by part D would not need to meet the portion of section 110(a)(2)(C) that pertains to the PSD program required in part C of title I of the CAA, because PSD does not apply to a pollutant for which an area is designated nonattainment and thus subject to part D planning requirements. As this example illustrates, each type of SIP submission may implicate some elements of section 110(a)(2) but not others. Given the potential for ambiguity in some of the statutory language of section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2), EPA believes that it is appropriate to interpret the ambiguous portions of section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2) in the context of acting on a particular SIP submission. In other words, EPA assumes that Congress could not have intended that each and every SIP submission, regardless of the NAAQS in question or the history of SIP development for the relevant pollutant, would meet each of the requirements, or meet each of them in the same way. Therefore, EPA has adopted an approach under which it reviews infrastructure SIP submissions against the list of elements in section 110(a)(2), but only to the extent each element applies for that particular NAAQS. Historically, EPA has elected to use guidance documents to make recommendations to states for infrastructure SIPs, in some cases conveying needed interpretations on newly arising issues and in some cases conveying interpretations that have already been developed and applied to 10 For example, implementation of the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS required the deployment of a system of new monitors to measure ambient levels of that new indicator species for the new NAAQS. E:\FR\FM\10MRP1.SGM 10MRP1 12630 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 47 / Thursday, March 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS individual SIP submissions for particular elements.11 EPA most recently issued guidance for infrastructure SIPs on September 13, 2013 (2013 Guidance). 12 EPA developed this document to provide states with up-to-date guidance for infrastructure SIPs for any new or revised NAAQS. Within this guidance, EPA describes the duty of states to make infrastructure SIP submissions to meet basic structural SIP requirements within three years of promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. EPA also made recommendations about many specific subsections of section 110(a)(2) that are relevant in the context of infrastructure SIP submissions.13 The guidance also discusses the substantively important issues that are germane to certain subsections of section 110(a)(2). Significantly, EPA interprets sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) such that infrastructure SIP submissions need to address certain issues and need not address others. Accordingly, EPA reviews each infrastructure SIP submission for compliance with the applicable statutory provisions of section 110(a)(2), as appropriate. As an example, section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) is a required element of section 110(a)(2) for infrastructure SIP submissions. Under this element, a state must meet the substantive requirements of section 128, which pertain to state boards that approve permits or enforcement orders and heads of executive agencies with similar powers. Thus, EPA reviews infrastructure SIP submissions to ensure that the state’s implementation plan appropriately addresses the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) and section 128. The 11 EPA notes, however, that nothing in the CAA requires EPA to provide guidance or to promulgate regulations for infrastructure SIP submissions. The CAA directly applies to states and requires the submission of infrastructure SIP submissions, regardless of whether or not EPA provides guidance or regulations pertaining to such submissions. EPA elects to issue such guidance in order to assist states, as appropriate. 12 ‘‘Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2),’’ Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, September 13, 2013. 13 EPA’s September 13, 2013, guidance did not make recommendations with respect to infrastructure SIP submissions to address section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). EPA issued the guidance shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review the D.C. Circuit decision in EME Homer City, 696 F.3d7 (D.C. Cir. 2012) which had interpreted the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). In light of the uncertainty created by ongoing litigation, EPA elected not to provide additional guidance on the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) at that time. As the guidance is neither binding nor required by statute, whether EPA elects to provide guidance on a particular section has no impact on a state’s CAA obligations. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Mar 09, 2016 Jkt 238001 2013 Guidance explains EPA’s interpretation that there may be a variety of ways by which states can appropriately address these substantive statutory requirements, depending on the structure of an individual state’s permitting or enforcement program (e.g., whether permits and enforcement orders are approved by a multi-member board or by a head of an executive agency). However they are addressed by the state, the substantive requirements of section 128 are necessarily included in EPA’s evaluation of infrastructure SIP submissions because section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) explicitly requires that the state satisfy the provisions of section 128. As another example, EPA’s review of infrastructure SIP submissions with respect to the PSD program requirements in sections 110(a)(2)(C), (D)(i)(II), and (J) focuses upon the structural PSD program requirements contained in part C and EPA’s PSD regulations. Structural PSD program requirements include provisions necessary for the PSD program to address all regulated sources and new source review (NSR) pollutants, including greenhouse gases (GHG). By contrast, structural PSD program requirements do not include provisions that are not required under EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR 51.166 but are merely available as an option for the state, such as the option to provide grandfathering of complete permit applications with respect to the 2012 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) NAAQS. Accordingly, the latter optional provisions are types of provisions EPA considers irrelevant in the context of an infrastructure SIP action. For other section 110(a)(2) elements, however, EPA’s review of a state’s infrastructure SIP submission focuses on assuring that the state’s SIP meets basic structural requirements. For example, section 110(a)(2)(C) includes, inter alia, the requirement that states have a program to regulate minor new sources. Thus, EPA evaluates whether the state has an EPA-approved minor NSR program and whether the program addresses the pollutants relevant to that NAAQS. In the context of acting on an infrastructure SIP submission, however, EPA does not think it is necessary to conduct a review of each and every provision of a state’s existing minor source program (i.e., already in the existing SIP) for compliance with the requirements of the CAA and EPA’s regulations that pertain to such programs. With respect to certain other issues, EPA does not believe that an action on a state’s infrastructure SIP submission is PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 necessarily the appropriate type of action in which to address possible deficiencies in a state’s existing SIP. These issues include: (i) Existing provisions related to excess emissions from sources during periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction that may be contrary to the CAA and EPA’s policies addressing such excess emissions (‘‘SSM’’); (ii) existing provisions related to ‘‘director’s variance’’ or ‘‘director’s discretion’’ that may be contrary to the CAA because they purport to allow revisions to SIP-approved emissions limits while limiting public process or not requiring further approval by EPA; and (iii) existing provisions for PSD programs that may be inconsistent with current requirements of EPA’s ‘‘Final NSR Improvement Rule,’’ 67 FR 80186 (December 31, 2002), as amended by 72 FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (‘‘NSR Reform’’). Thus, EPA believes it may approve an infrastructure SIP submission without scrutinizing the totality of the existing SIP for such potentially deficient provisions and may approve the submission even if it is aware of such existing provisions.14 It is important to note that EPA’s approval of a state’s infrastructure SIP submission should not be construed as explicit or implicit re-approval of any existing potentially deficient provisions that relate to the three specific issues just described. EPA’s approach to review of infrastructure SIP submissions is to identify the CAA requirements that are logically applicable to that submission. EPA believes that this approach to the review of a particular infrastructure SIP submission is appropriate, because it would not be reasonable to read the general requirements of section 110(a)(1) and the list of elements in 110(a)(2) as requiring review of each and every provision of a state’s existing SIP against all requirements in the CAA and EPA regulations merely for purposes of assuring that the state in question has the basic structural elements for a functioning SIP for a new or revised NAAQS. Because SIPs have grown by accretion over the decades as statutory and regulatory requirements under the CAA have evolved, they may include some outmoded provisions and historical artifacts. These provisions, while not fully up to date, nevertheless may not pose a significant problem for 14 By contrast, EPA notes that if a state were to include a new provision in an infrastructure SIP submission that contained a legal deficiency, such as a new exemption for excess emissions during SSM events, then EPA would need to evaluate that provision for compliance against the rubric of applicable CAA requirements in the context of the action on the infrastructure SIP. E:\FR\FM\10MRP1.SGM 10MRP1 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 47 / Thursday, March 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS the purposes of ‘‘implementation, maintenance, and enforcement’’ of a new or revised NAAQS when EPA evaluates adequacy of the infrastructure SIP submission. EPA believes that a better approach is for states and EPA to focus attention on those elements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA most likely to warrant a specific SIP revision due to the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS or other factors. For example, EPA’s 2013 Guidance gives simpler recommendations with respect to carbon monoxide than other NAAQS pollutants to meet the visibility requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), because carbon monoxide does not affect visibility. As a result, an infrastructure SIP submission for any future new or revised NAAQS for carbon monoxide need only state this fact in order to address the visibility prong of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Finally, EPA believes that its approach with respect to infrastructure SIP requirements is based on a reasonable reading of sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) because the CAA provides other avenues and mechanisms to address specific substantive deficiencies in existing SIPs. These other statutory tools allow EPA to take appropriately tailored action, depending upon the nature and severity of the alleged SIP deficiency. Section 110(k)(5) authorizes EPA to issue a ‘‘SIP call’’ whenever the Agency determines that a state’s SIP is substantially inadequate to attain or maintain the NAAQS, to mitigate interstate transport, or to otherwise comply with the CAA.15 Section 110(k)(6) authorizes EPA to correct errors in past actions, such as past approvals of SIP submissions.16 Significantly, EPA’s determination that an action on a state’s infrastructure SIP submission is not the appropriate time and place to address all potential 15 For example, EPA issued a SIP call to Utah to address specific existing SIP deficiencies related to the treatment of excess emissions during SSM events. See ‘‘Finding of Substantial Inadequacy of Implementation Plan; Call for Utah State Implementation Plan Revisions,’’ 74 FR 21639 (April 18, 2011). 16 EPA has used this authority to correct errors in past actions on SIP submissions related to PSD programs. See ‘‘Limitation of Approval of Prevention of Significant Deterioration Provisions Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in State Implementation Plans; Final Rule,’’ 75 FR 82536 (December 30, 2010). EPA has previously used its authority under CAA section 110(k)(6) to remove numerous other SIP provisions that the Agency determined it had approved in error. See, e.g., 61 FR 38664 (July 25, 1996) and 62 FR 34641 (June 27, 1997) (corrections to American Samoa, Arizona, California, Hawaii, and Nevada SIPs); 69 FR 67062 (November 16, 2004) (corrections to California SIP); and 74 FR 57051 (November 3, 2009) (corrections to Arizona and Nevada SIPs). VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Mar 09, 2016 Jkt 238001 12631 IV. What is EPA’s analysis of how Tennessee addressed the elements of the sections 110(a)(1) and (2) ‘‘Infrastructure’’ provisions? The Tennessee infrastructure submission addresses the provisions of sections 110(a)(1) and (2) as described below. 1. 110(a)(2)(A) Emission Limits and Other Control Measures: Section 110(a)(2)(A) requires that each implementation plan include enforceable emission limitations and other control measures, means, or techniques (including economic incentives such as fees, marketable permits, and auctions of emissions rights), as well as schedules and timetables for compliance, as may be necessary or appropriate to meet the applicable requirements. Several regulations within Tennessee’s SIP are relevant to air quality control regulations. The regulations described below include enforceable emission limitations and other control measures. SIP-approved Tennessee Air Pollution Control Regulations (TAPCR) 1200–03– 03, Ambient Air Quality Standards, 1200–03–04, Open Burning, 1200–03– 06, Non-process Emission Standards, 1200–03–07, Process Emission Standards, 1200–03–09, Construction and Operating Permits, 1200–03–14, Control of Sulfur Dioxide Emission, 1200–03–19, Emission Standards and Monitoring Requirements for Additional Control Areas, 1200–03–21, General Alternate Emission Standards, and 1200–03–24, Good Engineering Practice Stack Height Regulations, collectively establish enforceable emissions limitations and other control measures, means or techniques, for activities that contribute to SO2 concentrations in the ambient air, and provide authority for TDEC to establish such limits and measures as well as schedules for compliance to meet the applicable requirements of the CAA. Additionally, State statutes established in the Tennessee Air Quality Act and adopted in the Tennessee Code Annotated (TCA) section 68–201–105(a), Powers and duties of board—Notification of vacancy —Termination due to vacancy, provide the Tennessee Air Pollution Control Board and TDEC’s Division of Air Pollution Control the authority to take actions in support of this infrastructure element such as issue permits, promulgate regulations, and issue orders to implement the Tennessee Air Quality Act and the CAA, as relevant. EPA has made the preliminary determination that the provisions contained in these State regulations and State statute satisfy Section 110(a)(2)(A) for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS in the State. In this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove any existing state provisions with regard to excess emissions during start up, shut down, and malfunction (SSM) operations at a facility. EPA believes that a number of states have SSM provisions which are contrary to the CAA and existing EPA guidance, ‘‘State Implementation Plans: Policy Regarding Excess Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup, and Shutdown’’ (September 20, 1999), and the Agency is addressing such state regulations in a separate action.18 Additionally, in this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove any existing state rules with regard to director’s discretion or variance provisions. EPA believes that a number of states have such provisions which are contrary to the CAA and existing EPA guidance (52 FR 45109 (November 24, 1987)), and the Agency plans to take action in the future to address such state regulations. In the meantime, EPA encourages any state having a director’s discretion or variance provision which is contrary to the CAA and EPA guidance to take steps to correct the deficiency as soon as possible. 2. 110(a)(2)(B) Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System: Section 110(a)(2)(B) requires SIPs to provide for establishment and operation of appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to (i) monitor, compile, and analyze data on ambient 17 See, e.g., EPA’s disapproval of a SIP submission from Colorado on the grounds that it would have included a director’s discretion provision inconsistent with CAA requirements, including section 110(a)(2)(A). See, e.g., 75 FR 42342 at 42344 (July 21, 2010) (proposed disapproval of director’s discretion provisions); 76 FR 4540 (Jan. 26, 2011) (final disapproval of such provisions). 18 On June 12, 2015, EPA published a final action entitled, ‘‘State Implementation Plans: Response to Petition for Rulemaking; Restatement and Update of EPA’s SSM Policy Applicable to SIPs; Findings of Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls to Amend Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During Periods of Startup, Shutdown, and Malfunction.’’ See 80 FR 33840. existing SIP deficiencies does not preclude EPA’s subsequent reliance on provisions in section 110(a)(2) as part of the basis for action to correct those deficiencies at a later time. For example, although it may not be appropriate to require a state to eliminate all existing inappropriate director’s discretion provisions in the course of acting on an infrastructure SIP submission, EPA believes that section 110(a)(2)(A) may be among the statutory bases that EPA relies upon in the course of addressing such deficiency in a subsequent action.17 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\10MRP1.SGM 10MRP1 12632 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 47 / Thursday, March 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS air quality, and (ii) upon request, make such data available to the Administrator. TCA 68–201–105(b)(4) gives TDEC the authority to provide technical, scientific and other services as may be required to implement the provisions of the Tennessee Air Quality Act. Annually, states develop and submit to EPA for approval statewide ambient monitoring network plans consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR parts 50, 53, and 58. The annual network plan involves an evaluation of any proposed changes to the monitoring network, includes the annual ambient monitoring network design plan, and includes a certified evaluation of the agency’s ambient monitors and auxiliary support equipment.19 On June 30, 2015, Tennessee submitted its most recent plan to EPA, which was approved by EPA on October 26, 2015, with the exception of two aspects—one related to a monitor for the SO2 nonattainment area in Sullivan County, and the other related to a monitor for ozone and fine particulate in Loudon County.20 Tennessee’s monitoring network plan can be accessed at www.regulations.gov using Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR– 2015–0154. EPA has made the preliminary determination that Tennessee’s SIP and practices are adequate for the ambient air quality monitoring and data system related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. 3. 110(a)(2)(C) Programs for Enforcement of Control Measures and for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources: This element consists of three sub-elements: enforcement, state-wide regulation of new and modified minor sources and minor modifications of major sources, and preconstruction permitting of major sources and major modifications in areas designated attainment or unclassifiable for the subject NAAQS as required by CAA title I part C (i.e., the major source PSD program). TDEC’s 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS infrastructure SIP submission cites a number of SIP provisions to address these requirements. EPA’s rationale for its proposed action regarding each subelement is described below. 19 The annual network plans are approved by EPA in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and, on occasion, proposed changes to the monitoring network are evaluated outside of the network plan approval process in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. 20 Once EPA is in agreement with the proposed locations for the monitoring sites in Sullivan and Loudon Counties, the State is required to make the network plan updates available for public inspection and submit an addendum to its network plan for EPA approval in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Mar 09, 2016 Jkt 238001 Enforcement: The following SIPapproved regulation provides TDEC with authority for enforcement of SO2 emission limits and control measures. TAPCR 1200–3–13–01, Violation Statement, states that, ‘‘Failure to comply with any of the provisions of these regulations shall constitute a violation thereof and shall subject the person or persons responsible therefore to any and all the penalties provided by law.’’ Also note, under TCA 68–201– 116, Orders and assessments of damages and civil penalty—Appeal, the State’s Technical Secretary is authorized to issue orders requiring correction of violations of any part of the Tennessee Air Quality Act, or of any regulation promulgated under this State statute. Violators are subject to civil penalties of up to 25,000 dollars per day for each day of violation and for any damages to the State resulting from the violations. Preconstruction PSD Permitting for Major Sources: EPA interprets the PSD sub-element to require that a state’s infrastructure SIP submission for a particular NAAQS demonstrate that the state has a complete PSD permitting program in place covering the structural PSD requirements for all regulated NSR pollutants. A state’s PSD permitting program is complete for this subelement (and prong 3 of D(i) and J related to PSD) if EPA has already approved or is simultaneously approving the state’s implementation plan with respect to all structural PSD requirements that are due under the EPA regulations or the CAA on or before the date of the EPA’s proposed action on the infrastructure SIP submission. For the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, Tennessee’s authority to regulate construction of new and modified stationary sources to assist in the protection of air quality in attainment or unclassifiable areas is established in TAPCR 1200–03–09–01(4), Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality. Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP submission demonstrates that new major sources and major modifications in areas of the State designated attainment or unclassifiable for the specified NAAQS are subject to a federally-approved PSD permitting program meeting all the current structural requirements of part C of title I of the CAA to satisfy the infrastructure SIP PSD elements.21 Regulation of minor sources and modifications: Section 110(a)(2)(C) also 21 More information concerning how the Tennessee infrastructure SIP submission currently meets applicable requirements for the PSD elements (110(a)(2)(C); (D)(i)(I), prong 3; and (J)) can be found in the technical support document in the docket for today’s rulemaking. PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 requires the SIP to include provisions that govern the minor source program that regulates emissions of the 2010 1hour SO2 NAAQS. TAPCR 1200–03–09– 01, Construction Permits, and TAPCR 1200–03–09–03, General Provisions, collectively govern the preconstruction permitting of modifications and construction of minor stationary sources, and minor modifications of major stationary sources. EPA has made the preliminary determination that Tennessee’s SIP and practices are adequate for program enforcement of control measures, regulation of minor sources and modifications, and preconstruction permitting of major sources and major modifications related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. 4. 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) Interstate Pollution Transport: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) has two components: 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Each of these components has two subparts resulting in four distinct components, commonly referred to as ‘‘prongs,’’ that must be addressed in infrastructure SIP submissions. The first two prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), are provisions that prohibit any source or other type of emissions activity in one state from contributing significantly to nonattainment of the NAAQS in another state (‘‘prong 1’’), and interfering with maintenance of the NAAQS in another state (‘‘prong 2’’). The third and fourth prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are provisions that prohibit emissions activity in one state from interfering with measures required to prevent significant deterioration of air quality in another state (‘‘prong 3’’), or to protect visibility in another state (‘‘prong 4’’). 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)—prongs 1, and 2: EPA is not proposing any action in this rulemaking related to the interstate transport provisions pertaining to the contribution to nonattainment or interference with maintenance in other states of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) (prongs 1 and 2) because Tennessee’s 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS infrastructure submission did not address prongs 1 and 2. 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)—prong 3: With regard to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), the PSD element, referred to as prong 3, may be met by a state’s confirmation in an infrastructure SIP submission that new major sources and major modifications in the state are subject to a PSD program meeting all the current structural requirements of part C of title I of the CAA, or (if the state contains a nonattainment area that has the potential to impact PSD in another E:\FR\FM\10MRP1.SGM 10MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 47 / Thursday, March 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules state), a NNSR program. As discussed in more detail above under section 110(a)(2)(C), Tennessee’s SIP contains provisions for the State’s PSD program that reflects the required structural PSD requirements to satisfy prong 3 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Tennessee addresses prong 3 through TAPCR 1200–03–09–01(4), Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality, and TAPCR 1200–03–09–01(5), Growth Policy, for the PSD and NNSR programs, respectively. EPA has made the preliminary determination that Tennessee’s SIP is adequate for interstate transport for PSD permitting of major sources and major modifications related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS for section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3). 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)—prong 4: EPA is not proposing any action in this rulemaking related to the interstate transport provisions pertaining to visibility in other states of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 4) and will consider these requirements in relation to Tennessee’s 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS infrastructure submission in a separate rulemaking. 5. 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate Pollution Abatement and International Air Pollution: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires SIPs to include provisions ensuring compliance with sections 115 and 126 of the Act, relating to interstate and international pollution abatement. Regulation 1200–03–09–03, General Provisions, requires the permitting authority to notify air agencies whose areas may be affected by emissions from a source. Additionally, Tennessee does not have any pending obligation under sections 115 and 126 of the CAA relating to international or interstate pollution abatement. EPA has made the preliminary determination that Tennessee’s SIP and practices are adequate for ensuring compliance with the applicable requirements relating to interstate and international pollution abatement for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. 6. 110(a)(2)(E) Adequate Resources and Authority, Conflict of Interest, and Oversight of Local Governments and Regional Agencies: Section 110(a)(2)(E) requires that each implementation plan provide: (i) Necessary assurances that the state will have adequate personnel, funding, and authority under state law to carry out its implementation plan, (ii) that the state comply with the requirements respecting state boards pursuant to section 128 of the Act, and (iii) necessary assurances that, where the state has relied on a local or regional government, agency, or instrumentality for the implementation of any plan provision, the state has responsibility VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Mar 09, 2016 Jkt 238001 for ensuring adequate implementation of such plan provisions. EPA is proposing to approve Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP submission as meeting the requirements of subelements 110(a)(2)(E)(i), (ii), and (iii). EPA’s rationale for today’s proposal respecting each section of 110(a)(2)(E) is described in turn below. In support of EPA’s proposal to approve sub-elements 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii), TCA 68–201–105, Powers and duties of board—Notification of vacancy—Termination due to vacancy, gives the Tennessee Air Pollution Control Board the power and duty to promulgate rules and regulations to implement the Tennessee Air Quality Act. The Board may define ambient air quality standards, set emission standards, set forth general policies or plans, establish a system of permits, and identify a schedule of fees for review of plans and specifications, issuance or renewal of permits or inspection of air contaminant sources. TAPCR 1200–03–26, Administrative Fees Schedule, establishes construction fees, annual emission fees, and permit review fees sufficient to supplement existing State and Federal funding and to cover reasonable costs associated with the administration of Tennessee’s air pollution control program. These costs include costs associated with the review of permit applications and reports, issuance of permits, source inspections and emission unit observations, review and evaluation of stack and/or ambient monitoring results, modeling, and costs associated with enforcement actions. TCA 68–201–115, Local pollution control programs—Exemption from state supervision—Applicability of part to air contaminant sources burning wood waste—Open burning of wood waste, states that ‘‘Any municipality or county in this state may enact, by ordinance or resolution respectively, air pollution control regulations not less stringent than the standards adopted for the state pursuant to this part, or any such municipality or county may also adopt or repeal an ordinance or resolution which incorporates by reference any or all of the regulations of the board, or any federal regulations including any changes in such regulations, when such regulations are properly identified as to date and source.’’ Before such ordinances or resolutions become effective, the municipality or county must receive a certificate of exemption from the Board to enact local regulations in the State. In granting any certificate of exemption, the State of Tennessee reserves the right to enforce any applicable resolution, PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 12633 ordinance, or regulation of the local program. TCA 68–201–115 also directs TDEC to ‘‘frequently determine whether or not any exempted municipality or county meets the terms of the exemption granted and continues to comply with this section.’’ If TDEC determines that the local program does not meet the terms of the exemption or does not otherwise comply with the law, the Board may suspend the exemption in whole or in part until the local program complies with the State standards. As evidence of the adequacy of TDEC’s resources with respect to subelements (i) and (iii), EPA submitted a letter to Tennessee on March 9, 2015, outlining section 105 grant commitments and the current status of these commitments for fiscal year 2014. The letter EPA submitted to Tennessee can be accessed at www.regulations.gov using Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR– 2015–0154. Annually, states update these grant commitments based on current SIP requirements, air quality planning, and applicable requirements related to the NAAQS. Tennessee satisfactorily met all commitments agreed to in the Air Planning Agreement for fiscal year 2014, therefore Tennessee’s grants were finalized and closed out. EPA has made the preliminary determination that Tennessee has adequate resources and authority for implementation of the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires that the state comply with section 128 of the CAA. Section 128 requires that the SIP provide: (a)(1) the majority of members of the state board or body which approves permits or enforcement orders represent the public interest and do not derive any significant portion of their income from persons subject to permitting or enforcement orders under the CAA; and (a)(2) any potential conflicts of interest by such board or body, or the head of an executive agency with similar powers be adequately disclosed. Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) obligations for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS and the requirements of CAA section 128 are met in Regulation 0400– 30–17, Conflict of Interest.22 EPA has made the preliminary determination that the State has adequately addressed the requirements of section 128, and accordingly has met the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) with respect to infrastructure SIP requirements. Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP submission as meeting the requirements 22 See E:\FR\FM\10MRP1.SGM 79 FR 18453 (April 2, 2014). 10MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 12634 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 47 / Thursday, March 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules of sub-elements 110(a)(2)(E)(i), (ii) and (iii). 7. 110(a)(2)(F) Stationary Source Monitoring and Reporting: Section 110(a)(2)(F) requires SIPs to meet applicable requirements addressing (i) the installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment, and the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or operators of stationary sources to monitor emissions from such sources, (ii) periodic reports on the nature and amounts of emissions and emissions related data from such sources, and (iii) correlation of such reports by the state agency with any emission limitations or standards established pursuant to this section, which reports shall be available at reasonable times for public inspection. TDEC’s infrastructure SIP submission identifies requirements for compliance testing by emissions sampling and analysis, and for emissions and operation monitoring to ensure the quality of data in the State, and also the collection of source emission data throughout the State and the assurance of the quality of such data. These data are used to compare against current emission limits and to meet requirements of EPA’s Air Emissions Reporting Rule (AERR). Specifically, TAPCR 1200–03–10, Required Sampling, Recording, and Reporting, gives the State’s Technical Secretary the authority to monitor emissions at stationary sources, and to require these sources to conduct emissions monitoring and to submit periodic emissions reports. This rule requires owners or operators of stationary sources to compute emissions, submit periodic reports of such emissions and maintain records as specified by various regulations and permits, and to evaluate reports and records for consistency with the applicable emission limitation or standard on a continuing basis over time. The monitoring data collected and records of operations serve as the basis for a source to certify compliance, and can be used by Tennessee as direct evidence of an enforceable violation of the underlying emission limitation or standard. Additionally, Tennessee is required to submit emissions data to EPA for purposes of the National Emissions Inventory (NEI). The NEI is EPA’s central repository for air emissions data. EPA published the AERR on December 5, 2008, which modified the requirements for collecting and reporting air emissions data (73 FR 76539). The AERR shortened the time states had to report emissions data from 17 to 12 months, giving states one calendar year to submit emissions data. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Mar 09, 2016 Jkt 238001 All states are required to submit a comprehensive emissions inventory every three years and report emissions for certain larger sources annually through EPA’s online Emissions Inventory System. States report emissions data for the six criteria pollutants and the precursors that form them—NOX, SO2, ammonia, lead, carbon monoxide, particulate matter, and volatile organic compounds. Many states also voluntarily report emissions of hazardous air pollutants. Tennessee made its latest update to the 2011 NEI on April 9, 2014. EPA compiles the emissions data, supplementing it where necessary, and releases it to the general public through the Web site http://www. epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiinformation.html. EPA has made the preliminary determination that Tennessee’s SIP and practices are adequate for the stationary source monitoring systems related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Regarding credible evidence, TAPCR 1200–3–10–04, Sampling, Recording, and Reporting Required for Major Stationary Sources, states that: ‘‘the Technical Secretary is authorized to require by permit condition any periodic or enhanced monitoring, recording and reporting that he deems necessary for the verification of the source’s compliance with the applicable requirements as defined in paragraph 1200–03–09–02(11).’’ EPA is unaware of any provision preventing the use of credible evidence in the Tennessee SIP. EPA has made the preliminary determination that Tennessee’s SIP and practices are adequate for the stationary source monitoring systems related to the 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(F). 8. 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency Powers: Section 110(a)(2)(G) of the Act requires that states demonstrate authority comparable with section 303 of the CAA and adequate contingency plans to implement such authority. Tennessee’s emergency powers are outlined in TAPCR 1200–03–15, Emergency Episode Plan, which establishes the criteria for declaring an air pollution episode (air pollution alert, air pollution warning, or air pollution emergency), specific emissions reductions for each episode level, and emergency episode plan requirements for major sources located in or significantly impacting a nonattainment area. Additional emergency powers are codified in TCA 68–201–109, Emergency Stop Orders for Air Contaminant Sources. Under TCA 68–201–109, if the Commissioner of TDEC finds that emissions from the operation of one or more sources are PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 causing imminent danger to human health and safety, the Commissioner may, with the approval of the Governor, order the source(s) responsible to reduce or discontinue immediately its (their) air emissions. Additionally, this State law requires a hearing to be held before the Commissioner within 24 hours of any such order. Regarding the public welfare and environment, TCA 68–201–106, Matters to be considered in exercising powers, states that ‘‘In exercising powers to prevent, abate and control air pollution, the board or department shall give due consideration to all pertinent facts, including, but not necessarily limited to: (1) The character and degree of injury to, or interference with, the protection of the health, general welfare and physical property of the people . . .’’ Also, TCA 68–201–116, Orders and assessments of damages and civil penalty Appeal, provides in subsection (a) that if the Tennessee technical secretary discovers that any State air quality regulation has been violated, the Tennessee technical secretary may issue an order to correct the violation, and this order shall be complied with within the time limit specified in the order. EPA has made the preliminary determination that Tennessee’s SIP and practices are adequate for emergency powers related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(G). 9. 110(a)(2)(H) SIP Revisions: Section 110(a)(2)(H), in summary, requires each SIP to provide for revisions of such plan (i) as may be necessary to take account of revisions of such national primary or secondary ambient air quality standard or the availability of improved or more expeditious methods of attaining such standard, and (ii) whenever the Administrator finds that the plan is substantially inadequate to attain the NAAQS or to otherwise comply with any additional applicable requirements. As previously discussed, TDEC is responsible for adopting air quality rules and revising SIPs as needed to attain or maintain the NAAQS in Tennessee. Section 68–201–105(a) of the Tennessee Air Quality Act authorizes the Tennessee Air Pollution Control Board to promulgate rules and regulations to implement this State statute, including setting and implementing ambient air quality standards, emission standards, general policies or plans, a permits system, and a schedule of fees for review of plans and specifications, issuance or renewal of permits, and inspection of sources. E:\FR\FM\10MRP1.SGM 10MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 47 / Thursday, March 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules EPA has made the preliminary determination that Tennessee’s SIP and practices adequately demonstrate a commitment to provide future SIP revisions related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS when necessary. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(H). 10. 110(a)(2)(J) Consultation with Government Officials, Public Notification, and PSD and Visibility Protection: EPA is proposing to approve Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP submission for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS with respect to the general requirement in section 110(a)(2)(J) to include a program in the SIP that complies with the applicable consultation requirements of section 121, the public notification requirements of section 127, PSD and visibility protection. EPA’s rationale for each sub-element is described below. Consultation with government officials (121 consultation): Section 110(a)(2)(J) of the CAA requires states to provide a process for consultation with local governments, designated organizations and Federal Land Managers carrying out NAAQS implementation requirements pursuant to section 121 relative to consultation. The following State rule, as well as the State’s Regional Haze Implementation Plan (which allows for consultation between appropriate state, local, and tribal air pollution control agencies as well as the corresponding Federal Land Managers), provide for consultation with government officials whose jurisdictions might be affected by SIP development activities: TAPCR 1200– 03–34, Conformity, provides for interagency consultation on transportation and general conformity issues. Tennessee adopted state-wide consultation procedures for the implementation of transportation conformity which includes the development of mobile inventories for SIP development. These consultation procedures were developed in coordination with the transportation partners in the State and are consistent with the approaches used for development of mobile inventories for SIPs. Required partners covered by Tennessee’s consultation procedures include Federal, state and local transportation and air quality agency officials. EPA has made the preliminary determination that Tennessee’s SIP and practices adequately demonstrate consultation with government officials related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS when necessary. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve Tennessee’s VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Mar 09, 2016 Jkt 238001 infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(J) consultation with government officials. Public notification: These requirements are met through the State’s existing Air Quality Index and Air Quality Forecasting programs, which provide a method to alert the public if any NAAQS is exceeded in an area. Additionally, the State’s annual monitoring plan update is sent out each year for public review and comment. EPA has made the preliminary determination that Tennessee’s SIP and practices adequately demonstrate the State’s ability to provide public notification related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS when necessary. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(J) public notification. PSD: With regard to the PSD element of section 110(a)(2)(J), this requirement may be met by a state’s confirmation in an infrastructure SIP submission that new major sources and major modifications in the state are subject to a PSD program meeting all the current structural requirements of part C of title I of the CAA. As discussed in more detail above under section 110(a)(2)(C), Tennessee’s SIP contains provisions for the State’s PSD program that reflect the relevant SIP revisions pertaining to the required structural PSD requirements to satisfy the requirement of the PSD element of section 110(a)(2)(J). EPA has made the preliminary determination that Tennessee’s SIP and practices are adequate for PSD permitting of major sources and major modifications related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS for the PSD element of section 110(a)(2)(J). Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP submission with respect to the PSD element of section 110(a)(2)(J). Visibility protection: EPA’s 2013 Guidance notes that it does not treat the visibility protection aspects of section 110(a)(2)(J) as applicable for purposes of the infrastructure SIP approval process. EPA recognizes that states are subject to visibility protection and regional haze program requirements under part C of the Act (which includes sections 169A and 169B). However, there are no newly applicable visibility protection obligations after the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS. Thus, EPA has determined that states do not need to address the visibility component of 110(a)(2)(J) in infrastructure SIP submittals. As such, EPA has made the preliminary determination that it does not need to address the visibility protection element of section 110(a)(2)(J) in Tennessee’s infrastructure PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 12635 SIP submission related to the 2010 1hour SO2 NAAQS. 11. 110(a)(2)(K) Air Quality Modeling and Submission of Modeling Data: Section 110(a)(2)(K) of the CAA requires that SIPs provide for performing air quality modeling so that effects on air quality of emissions from NAAQS pollutants can be predicted and submission of such data to the EPA can be made. TAPCR 1200–03–09–01(4), Prevention of Significant Air Quality Deterioration, specifies when modeling and when monitoring (pre- or postconstruction) must be performed and that the resulting data be made available for review to EPA. Tennessee has personnel with training and experience to conduct source-oriented dispersion modeling with models approved by EPA. Additionally, Tennessee participates in a regional effort to coordinate the development of emissions inventories and conduct regional modeling for several NAAQS, including the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, for the Southeastern states. Taken as a whole, Tennessee’s air quality regulations and practices demonstrate that TDEC has the authority to provide relevant data for the purpose of predicting the effect on ambient air quality of the 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. EPA has made the preliminary determination that Tennessee’s SIP and practices adequately demonstrate the State’s ability to provide for air quality modeling, along with analysis of the associated data, related to the 2010 1hour SO2 NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(K). 12. 110(a)(2)(L) Permitting fees: Section 110(a)(2)(L) requires the owner or operator of each major stationary source to pay to the permitting authority, as a condition of any permit required under the CAA, a fee sufficient to cover (i) the reasonable costs of reviewing and acting upon any application for such a permit, and (ii) if the owner or operator receives a permit for such source, the reasonable costs of implementing and enforcing the terms and conditions of any such permit (not including any court costs or other costs associated with any enforcement action), until such fee requirement is superseded with respect to such sources by the Administrator’s approval of a fee program under title V. In Tennessee, funding for review of PSD and NNSR permits comes from permit-specific fees that are charged to new applicants and from annual emission fees charged to existing title V emission sources that are applying for major modifications under PSD or E:\FR\FM\10MRP1.SGM 10MRP1 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS 12636 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 47 / Thursday, March 10, 2016 / Proposed Rules NNSR. The cost of reviewing, approving, implementing, and enforcing PSD and major NNSR permits are covered under the following State regulations: (1) TAPCR 1200–03–26– 02(5) requires each new major stationary source to pay a construction permit application filing/processing fee and (2) TAPCR 1200–03–26–02(9), Annual Emission Fees for Major Sources,23 mandates that existing major stationary sources pay annual title V emission fees, which are used to cover the permitting costs for any new construction or modifications at these facilities as well as implementation and enforcement of PSD and NNSR permits after they have been issued. EPA has made the preliminary determination that Tennessee adequately provides for permitting fees related to the 2010 1hour SO2 NAAQS when necessary. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(L). 13. 110(a)(2)(M) Consultation/ participation by affected local entities: Section 110(a)(2)(M) of the Act requires states to provide for consultation and participation in SIP development by local political subdivisions affected by the SIP. TCA 68–201–105, Powers and duties of board Notification of vacancy Termination due to vacancy, authorizes and requires the Tennessee Air Pollution Control Board to promulgate rules and regulations related to consultation under the provisions of the State’s Uniform Administrative Procedures Act. TCA 4–5–202, When hearings required, requires agencies to precede all rulemaking with a notice and public hearing, except for exemptions. TCA 4–5–203, Notice of hearing, states that whenever an agency is required by law to hold a public hearing as part of its rulemaking process, the agency shall: ‘‘(1) Transmit written notice of the hearings to the secretary of state for publication in the notice section of the administrative register Web site . . . and (2) Take such other steps as it deems necessary to convey effective notice to persons who are likely to have an interest in the proposed rulemaking.’’ TCA 68–201– 105(b)(7) authorizes and requires TDEC to ‘‘encourage voluntary cooperation of affected persons or groups in preserving and restoring a reasonable degree of air purity; advise, consult and cooperate with other agencies, persons or groups in matters pertaining to air pollution; and encourage authorized air pollution 23 Title V program regulations are federallyapproved but not incorporated into the federallyapproved SIP. VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:18 Mar 09, 2016 Jkt 238001 agencies of political subdivisions to handle air pollution problems within their respective jurisdictions to the greatest extent possible and to provide technical assistance to political subdivisions . . .’’. TAPCR 1200–03–34, Conformity, requires interagency consultation on transportation and general conformity issues. Additionally, TDEC has, in practice, consulted with local entities for the development of its transportation conformity SIP and has worked with the Federal Land Managers as a requirement of EPA’s regional haze rule. EPA has made the preliminary determination that Tennessee’s SIP and practices adequately demonstrate consultation with affected local entities related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(M). V. Proposed Action With the exception of interstate transport provisions pertaining to the contribution to nonattainment or interference with maintenance in other states and visibility protection requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1, 2, and 4), EPA is proposing to approve Tennessee’s infrastructure submission submitted on March 13, 2014, for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS for the above described infrastructure SIP requirements. EPA is proposing to approve Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP submission for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS because the submission is consistent with section 110 of the CAA. VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Under the CAA, 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, this proposed action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action: • Is not a significant regulatory action 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); • Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 9990 • Is 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.); • Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); • Does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); • Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); • Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); • Is 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 • Does 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, 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 in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Dated: February 23, 2016. Heather McTeer Toney, Regional Administrator, Region 4. [FR Doc. 2016–05160 Filed 3–9–16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P E:\FR\FM\10MRP1.SGM 10MRP1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 47 (Thursday, March 10, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12627-12636]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05160]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0154; FRL-9943-44-Region 4]


Air Quality Plans; Tennessee; Infrastructure Requirements for the 
2010 Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 
approve the State Implementation Plan (SIP) submission, submitted by 
the State of Tennessee, through the Tennessee Department of Environment 
and Conservation (TDEC), on March 13, 2014, for inclusion into the 
Tennessee SIP. This proposal pertains to the infrastructure 
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) for the 2010 1-hour 
sulfur dioxide (SO2) national ambient air quality standard 
(NAAQS). The CAA requires that each state adopt and submit a SIP for 
the implementation, maintenance and enforcement of each NAAQS 
promulgated by EPA, which is commonly referred to as an 
``infrastructure SIP submission.'' TDEC certified that the Tennessee 
SIP contains provisions that ensure the 2010 1-hour SO2 
NAAQS is implemented, enforced, and maintained in Tennessee. EPA is 
proposing to determine that portions of Tennessee's infrastructure SIP 
submission, provided to EPA on March 13, 2014, satisfy certain required 
infrastructure elements for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before April 11, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2015-0154 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot 
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any 
comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any 
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) 
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment 
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. The EPA 
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located 
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other 
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA 
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, 
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michele Notarianni, 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. Ms. Notarianni can be reached via electronic mail at 
notarianni.michele@epa.gov or via telephone at (404) 562-9031.

Table of Contents

I. Background and Overview
II. What elements are required under sections 110(a)(1) and (2)?
III. What is EPA's approach to the review of infrastructure SIP 
submissions?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of how Tennessee addressed the elements 
of the sections 110(a)(1) and (2) ``Infrastructure'' provisions?
V. Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background and Overview

    On June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35520), EPA promulgated a revised primary 
SO2 NAAQS to an hourly standard of 75 parts per billion 
(ppb) based on a 3-year average of the annual 99th percentile of 1-hour 
daily maximum concentrations. Pursuant to section 110(a)(1) of the CAA, 
states are required to submit SIPs meeting the applicable requirements 
of section 110(a)(2) within three years after promulgation of a new or 
revised NAAQS or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. 
Section 110(a)(2) requires states to address basic SIP elements such as 
requirements for monitoring, basic program requirements and legal 
authority that are designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the 
NAAQS. States were required to

[[Page 12628]]

submit such SIPs for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS to EPA no 
later than June 22, 2013.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In these infrastructure SIP submissions states generally 
certify evidence of compliance with sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of 
the CAA through a combination of state regulations and statutes, 
some of which have been incorporated into the federally-approved 
SIP. In addition, certain federally-approved, non-SIP regulations 
may also be appropriate for demonstrating compliance with sections 
110(a)(1) and (2). Throughout this rulemaking, unless otherwise 
indicated, the term ``Tennessee Air Pollution Control Regulations'' 
or ``TAPCR XXXX-XX-XX'' indicates that the cited regulation has been 
approved into Tennessee's federally-approved SIP. The term 
``Tennessee Air Quality Act'' or ``Tennessee Code Annotated'' or 
``TCA XX-XX-XXXXX'' indicates cited Tennessee State statutes, which 
are not a part of the SIP unless otherwise indicated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Today's action is proposing to approve Tennessee's infrastructure 
SIP submission for certain applicable requirements of the 2010 1-hour 
SO2 NAAQS. With respect to the interstate transport 
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1, 2, and 
4), EPA is not proposing any action today regarding these requirements. 
For the aspects of Tennessee's submittal proposed for approval today, 
EPA notes that the Agency is not approving any specific rule, but 
rather proposing that Tennessee's already approved SIP meets certain 
CAA requirements.

II. What elements are required under sections 110(a)(1) and (2)?

    Section 110(a) of the CAA requires states to submit SIPs to provide 
for the implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of a new or 
revised NAAQS within three years following the promulgation of such 
NAAQS, or within such shorter period as EPA may prescribe. Section 
110(a) imposes the obligation upon states to make a SIP submission to 
EPA for a new or revised NAAQS, but the contents of that submission may 
vary depending upon the facts and circumstances. In particular, the 
data and analytical tools available at the time the state develops and 
submits the SIP for a new or revised NAAQS affects the content of the 
submission. The contents of such SIP submissions may also vary 
depending upon what provisions the state's existing SIP already 
contains.
    More specifically, section 110(a)(1) provides the procedural and 
timing requirements for SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific elements 
that states must meet for ``infrastructure'' SIP requirements related 
to a newly established or revised NAAQS. As mentioned above, these 
requirements include basic SIP elements such as requirements for 
monitoring, basic program requirements and legal authority that are 
designed to assure attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. The 
requirements are summarized below and in EPA's September 13, 2013, 
memorandum entitled ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation 
Plan (SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) and 
110(a)(2).'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are not 
governed by the three year submission deadline of section 110(a)(1) 
because SIPs incorporating necessary local nonattainment area 
controls are not due within three years after promulgation of a new 
or revised NAAQS, but rather are due at the time the nonattainment 
area plan requirements are due pursuant to section 172. These 
requirements are: (1) Submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(C) 
to the extent that subsection refers to a permit program as required 
in part D, title I of the CAA; and (2) submissions required by 
section 110(a)(2)(I) which pertain to the nonattainment planning 
requirements of part D, title I of the CAA. Today's proposed 
rulemaking does not address infrastructure elements related to 
section 110(a)(2)(I) or the nonattainment planning requirements of 
110(a)(2)(C).

 110(a)(2)(A): Emission Limits and Other Control Measures
 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System
 110(a)(2)(C): Programs for Enforcement of Control Measures and 
for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ This rulemaking only addresses requirements for this element 
as they relate to attainment areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II): Interstate Pollution Transport
 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate Pollution Abatement and 
International Air Pollution
 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate Resources and Authority, Conflict of 
Interest, and Oversight of Local Governments and Regional Agencies
 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary Source Monitoring and Reporting
 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency Powers
 110(a)(2)(H): SIP Revisions
 110(a)(2)(I): Plan Revisions for Nonattainment Areas \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ As mentioned above, this element is not relevant to today's 
proposed rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with Government Officials, Public 
Notification, and Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and 
Visibility Protection
 110(a)(2)(K): Air Quality Modeling and Submission of Modeling 
Data
 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees
 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation and Participation by Affected Local 
Entities

III. What is EPA's approach to the review of infrastructure SIP 
submissions?

    EPA is acting upon the SIP submission from Tennessee that addresses 
the infrastructure requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) 
for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. The requirement for states to 
make a SIP submission of this type arises out of CAA section 110(a)(1). 
Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states must make SIP submissions 
``within 3 years (or such shorter period as the Administrator may 
prescribe) after the promulgation of a national primary ambient air 
quality standard (or any revision thereof),'' and these SIP submissions 
are to provide for the ``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement'' 
of such NAAQS. The statute directly imposes on states the duty to make 
these SIP submissions, and the requirement to make the submissions is 
not conditioned upon EPA's taking any action other than promulgating a 
new or revised NAAQS. Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of specific 
elements that ``[e]ach such plan'' submission must address.
    EPA has historically referred to these SIP submissions made for the 
purpose of satisfying the requirements of CAA sections 110(a)(1) and 
110(a)(2) as ``infrastructure SIP'' submissions. Although the term 
``infrastructure SIP'' does not appear in the CAA, EPA uses the term to 
distinguish this particular type of SIP submission from submissions 
that are intended to satisfy other SIP requirements under the CAA, such 
as ``nonattainment SIP'' or ``attainment plan SIP'' submissions to 
address the nonattainment planning requirements of part D of title I of 
the CAA, ``regional haze SIP'' submissions required by EPA rule to 
address the visibility protection requirements of CAA section 169A, and 
nonattainment new source review (NNSR) permit program submissions to 
address the permit requirements of CAA, title I, part D.
    Section 110(a)(1) addresses the timing and general requirements for 
infrastructure SIP submissions, and section 110(a)(2) provides more 
details concerning the required contents of these submissions. The list 
of required elements provided in section 110(a)(2) contains a wide 
variety of disparate provisions, some of which pertain to required 
legal authority, some of which pertain to required substantive program 
provisions, and some of which pertain to requirements for both 
authority and substantive program provisions.\5\ EPA

[[Page 12629]]

therefore believes that while the timing requirement in section 
110(a)(1) is unambiguous, some of the other statutory provisions are 
ambiguous. In particular, EPA believes that the list of required 
elements for infrastructure SIP submissions provided in section 
110(a)(2) contains ambiguities concerning what is required for 
inclusion in an infrastructure SIP submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ For example: Section 110(a)(2)(E)(i) provides that states 
must provide assurances that they have adequate legal authority 
under state and local law to carry out the SIP; section 110(a)(2)(C) 
provides that states must have a SIP-approved program to address 
certain sources as required by part C of title I of the CAA; and 
section 110(a)(2)(G) provides that states must have legal authority 
to address emergencies as well as contingency plans that are 
triggered in the event of such emergencies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following examples of ambiguities illustrate the need for EPA 
to interpret some section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2) requirements 
with respect to infrastructure SIP submissions for a given new or 
revised NAAQS. One example of ambiguity is that section 110(a)(2) 
requires that ``each'' SIP submission must meet the list of 
requirements therein, while EPA has long noted that this literal 
reading of the statute is internally inconsistent and would create a 
conflict with the nonattainment provisions in part D of title I of the 
Act, which specifically address nonattainment SIP requirements.\6\ 
Section 110(a)(2)(I) pertains to nonattainment SIP requirements and 
part D addresses when attainment plan SIP submissions to address 
nonattainment area requirements are due. For example, section 172(b) 
requires EPA to establish a schedule for submission of such plans for 
certain pollutants when the Administrator promulgates the designation 
of an area as nonattainment, and section 107(d)(1)(B) allows up to two 
years, or in some cases three years, for such designations to be 
promulgated.\7\ This ambiguity illustrates that rather than apply all 
the stated requirements of section 110(a)(2) in a strict literal sense, 
EPA must determine which provisions of section 110(a)(2) are applicable 
for a particular infrastructure SIP submission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See, e.g., ``Rule To Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine 
Particulate Matter and Ozone (Clean Air Interstate Rule); Revisions 
to Acid Rain Program; Revisions to the NOX SIP Call; 
Final Rule,'' 70 FR 25162, at 25163-65 (May 12, 2005) (explaining 
relationship between timing requirement of section 110(a)(2)(D) 
versus section 110(a)(2)(I)).
    \7\ EPA notes that this ambiguity within section 110(a)(2) is 
heightened by the fact that various subparts of part D set specific 
dates for submission of certain types of SIP submissions in 
designated nonattainment areas for various pollutants. Note, e.g., 
that section 182(a)(1) provides specific dates for submission of 
emissions inventories for the ozone NAAQS. Some of these specific 
dates are necessarily later than three years after promulgation of 
the new or revised NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Another example of ambiguity within sections 110(a)(1) and 
110(a)(2) with respect to infrastructure SIPs pertains to whether 
states must meet all of the infrastructure SIP requirements in a single 
SIP submission, and whether EPA must act upon such SIP submission in a 
single action. Although section 110(a)(1) directs states to submit ``a 
plan'' to meet these requirements, EPA interprets the CAA to allow 
states to make multiple SIP submissions separately addressing 
infrastructure SIP elements for the same NAAQS. If states elect to make 
such multiple SIP submissions to meet the infrastructure SIP 
requirements, EPA can elect to act on such submissions either 
individually or in a larger combined action.\8\ Similarly, EPA 
interprets the CAA to allow it to take action on the individual parts 
of one larger, comprehensive infrastructure SIP submission for a given 
NAAQS without concurrent action on the entire submission. For example, 
EPA has sometimes elected to act at different times on various elements 
and sub-elements of the same infrastructure SIP submission.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ See, e.g., ``Approval and Promulgation of Implementation 
Plans; New Mexico; Revisions to the New Source Review (NSR) State 
Implementation Plan (SIP); Prevention of Significant Deterioration 
(PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) Permitting,'' 78 FR 
4339 (January 22, 2013) (EPA's final action approving the structural 
PSD elements of the New Mexico SIP submitted by the State separately 
to meet the requirements of EPA's 2008 PM2.5 NSR rule), 
and ``Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
New Mexico; Infrastructure and Interstate Transport Requirements for 
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS,'' (78 FR 4337) (January 22, 2013) 
(EPA's final action on the infrastructure SIP for the 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS).
    \9\ On December 14, 2007, the State of Tennessee, through the 
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, made a SIP 
revision to EPA demonstrating that the State meets the requirements 
of sections 110(a)(1) and (2). EPA proposed action for 
infrastructure SIP elements (C) and (J) on January 23, 2012 (77 FR 
3213) and took final action on March 14, 2012 (77 FR 14976). On 
April 16, 2012 (77 FR 22533) and July 23, 2012 (77 FR 42997), EPA 
took separate proposed and final actions on all other section 
110(a)(2) infrastructure SIP elements of Tennessee's December 14, 
2007, submittal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ambiguities within sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) may also arise 
with respect to infrastructure SIP submission requirements for 
different NAAQS. Thus, EPA notes that not every element of section 
110(a)(2) would be relevant, or as relevant, or relevant in the same 
way, for each new or revised NAAQS. The states' attendant 
infrastructure SIP submissions for each NAAQS therefore could be 
different. For example, the monitoring requirements that a state might 
need to meet in its infrastructure SIP submission for purposes of 
section 110(a)(2)(B) could be very different for different pollutants 
because the content and scope of a state's infrastructure SIP 
submission to meet this element might be very different for an entirely 
new NAAQS than for a minor revision to an existing NAAQS.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ For example, implementation of the 1997 PM2.5 
NAAQS required the deployment of a system of new monitors to measure 
ambient levels of that new indicator species for the new NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA notes that interpretation of section 110(a)(2) is also 
necessary when EPA reviews other types of SIP submissions required 
under the CAA. Therefore, as with infrastructure SIP submissions, EPA 
also has to identify and interpret the relevant elements of section 
110(a)(2) that logically apply to these other types of SIP submissions. 
For example, section 172(c)(7) requires that attainment plan SIP 
submissions required by part D have to meet the ``applicable 
requirements'' of section 110(a)(2). Thus, for example, attainment plan 
SIP submissions must meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(A) 
regarding enforceable emission limits and control measures and section 
110(a)(2)(E)(i) regarding air agency resources and authority. By 
contrast, it is clear that attainment plan SIP submissions required by 
part D would not need to meet the portion of section 110(a)(2)(C) that 
pertains to the PSD program required in part C of title I of the CAA, 
because PSD does not apply to a pollutant for which an area is 
designated nonattainment and thus subject to part D planning 
requirements. As this example illustrates, each type of SIP submission 
may implicate some elements of section 110(a)(2) but not others.
    Given the potential for ambiguity in some of the statutory language 
of section 110(a)(1) and section 110(a)(2), EPA believes that it is 
appropriate to interpret the ambiguous portions of section 110(a)(1) 
and section 110(a)(2) in the context of acting on a particular SIP 
submission. In other words, EPA assumes that Congress could not have 
intended that each and every SIP submission, regardless of the NAAQS in 
question or the history of SIP development for the relevant pollutant, 
would meet each of the requirements, or meet each of them in the same 
way. Therefore, EPA has adopted an approach under which it reviews 
infrastructure SIP submissions against the list of elements in section 
110(a)(2), but only to the extent each element applies for that 
particular NAAQS.
    Historically, EPA has elected to use guidance documents to make 
recommendations to states for infrastructure SIPs, in some cases 
conveying needed interpretations on newly arising issues and in some 
cases conveying interpretations that have already been developed and 
applied to

[[Page 12630]]

individual SIP submissions for particular elements.\11\ EPA most 
recently issued guidance for infrastructure SIPs on September 13, 2013 
(2013 Guidance). \12\ EPA developed this document to provide states 
with up-to-date guidance for infrastructure SIPs for any new or revised 
NAAQS. Within this guidance, EPA describes the duty of states to make 
infrastructure SIP submissions to meet basic structural SIP 
requirements within three years of promulgation of a new or revised 
NAAQS. EPA also made recommendations about many specific subsections of 
section 110(a)(2) that are relevant in the context of infrastructure 
SIP submissions.\13\ The guidance also discusses the substantively 
important issues that are germane to certain subsections of section 
110(a)(2). Significantly, EPA interprets sections 110(a)(1) and 
110(a)(2) such that infrastructure SIP submissions need to address 
certain issues and need not address others. Accordingly, EPA reviews 
each infrastructure SIP submission for compliance with the applicable 
statutory provisions of section 110(a)(2), as appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ EPA notes, however, that nothing in the CAA requires EPA to 
provide guidance or to promulgate regulations for infrastructure SIP 
submissions. The CAA directly applies to states and requires the 
submission of infrastructure SIP submissions, regardless of whether 
or not EPA provides guidance or regulations pertaining to such 
submissions. EPA elects to issue such guidance in order to assist 
states, as appropriate.
    \12\ ``Guidance on Infrastructure State Implementation Plan 
(SIP) Elements under Clean Air Act sections 110(a)(1) and 
110(a)(2),'' Memorandum from Stephen D. Page, September 13, 2013.
    \13\ EPA's September 13, 2013, guidance did not make 
recommendations with respect to infrastructure SIP submissions to 
address section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). EPA issued the guidance shortly 
after the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to review the D.C. Circuit 
decision in EME Homer City, 696 F.3d7 (D.C. Cir. 2012) which had 
interpreted the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). In light 
of the uncertainty created by ongoing litigation, EPA elected not to 
provide additional guidance on the requirements of section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) at that time. As the guidance is neither binding 
nor required by statute, whether EPA elects to provide guidance on a 
particular section has no impact on a state's CAA obligations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As an example, section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) is a required element of 
section 110(a)(2) for infrastructure SIP submissions. Under this 
element, a state must meet the substantive requirements of section 128, 
which pertain to state boards that approve permits or enforcement 
orders and heads of executive agencies with similar powers. Thus, EPA 
reviews infrastructure SIP submissions to ensure that the state's 
implementation plan appropriately addresses the requirements of section 
110(a)(2)(E)(ii) and section 128. The 2013 Guidance explains EPA's 
interpretation that there may be a variety of ways by which states can 
appropriately address these substantive statutory requirements, 
depending on the structure of an individual state's permitting or 
enforcement program (e.g., whether permits and enforcement orders are 
approved by a multi-member board or by a head of an executive agency). 
However they are addressed by the state, the substantive requirements 
of section 128 are necessarily included in EPA's evaluation of 
infrastructure SIP submissions because section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) 
explicitly requires that the state satisfy the provisions of section 
128.
    As another example, EPA's review of infrastructure SIP submissions 
with respect to the PSD program requirements in sections 110(a)(2)(C), 
(D)(i)(II), and (J) focuses upon the structural PSD program 
requirements contained in part C and EPA's PSD regulations. Structural 
PSD program requirements include provisions necessary for the PSD 
program to address all regulated sources and new source review (NSR) 
pollutants, including greenhouse gases (GHG). By contrast, structural 
PSD program requirements do not include provisions that are not 
required under EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 51.166 but are merely 
available as an option for the state, such as the option to provide 
grandfathering of complete permit applications with respect to the 2012 
fine particulate matter (PM2.5) NAAQS. Accordingly, the 
latter optional provisions are types of provisions EPA considers 
irrelevant in the context of an infrastructure SIP action.
    For other section 110(a)(2) elements, however, EPA's review of a 
state's infrastructure SIP submission focuses on assuring that the 
state's SIP meets basic structural requirements. For example, section 
110(a)(2)(C) includes, inter alia, the requirement that states have a 
program to regulate minor new sources. Thus, EPA evaluates whether the 
state has an EPA-approved minor NSR program and whether the program 
addresses the pollutants relevant to that NAAQS. In the context of 
acting on an infrastructure SIP submission, however, EPA does not think 
it is necessary to conduct a review of each and every provision of a 
state's existing minor source program (i.e., already in the existing 
SIP) for compliance with the requirements of the CAA and EPA's 
regulations that pertain to such programs.
    With respect to certain other issues, EPA does not believe that an 
action on a state's infrastructure SIP submission is necessarily the 
appropriate type of action in which to address possible deficiencies in 
a state's existing SIP. These issues include: (i) Existing provisions 
related to excess emissions from sources during periods of startup, 
shutdown, or malfunction that may be contrary to the CAA and EPA's 
policies addressing such excess emissions (``SSM''); (ii) existing 
provisions related to ``director's variance'' or ``director's 
discretion'' that may be contrary to the CAA because they purport to 
allow revisions to SIP-approved emissions limits while limiting public 
process or not requiring further approval by EPA; and (iii) existing 
provisions for PSD programs that may be inconsistent with current 
requirements of EPA's ``Final NSR Improvement Rule,'' 67 FR 80186 
(December 31, 2002), as amended by 72 FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (``NSR 
Reform''). Thus, EPA believes it may approve an infrastructure SIP 
submission without scrutinizing the totality of the existing SIP for 
such potentially deficient provisions and may approve the submission 
even if it is aware of such existing provisions.\14\ It is important to 
note that EPA's approval of a state's infrastructure SIP submission 
should not be construed as explicit or implicit re-approval of any 
existing potentially deficient provisions that relate to the three 
specific issues just described.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ By contrast, EPA notes that if a state were to include a 
new provision in an infrastructure SIP submission that contained a 
legal deficiency, such as a new exemption for excess emissions 
during SSM events, then EPA would need to evaluate that provision 
for compliance against the rubric of applicable CAA requirements in 
the context of the action on the infrastructure SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's approach to review of infrastructure SIP submissions is to 
identify the CAA requirements that are logically applicable to that 
submission. EPA believes that this approach to the review of a 
particular infrastructure SIP submission is appropriate, because it 
would not be reasonable to read the general requirements of section 
110(a)(1) and the list of elements in 110(a)(2) as requiring review of 
each and every provision of a state's existing SIP against all 
requirements in the CAA and EPA regulations merely for purposes of 
assuring that the state in question has the basic structural elements 
for a functioning SIP for a new or revised NAAQS. Because SIPs have 
grown by accretion over the decades as statutory and regulatory 
requirements under the CAA have evolved, they may include some outmoded 
provisions and historical artifacts. These provisions, while not fully 
up to date, nevertheless may not pose a significant problem for

[[Page 12631]]

the purposes of ``implementation, maintenance, and enforcement'' of a 
new or revised NAAQS when EPA evaluates adequacy of the infrastructure 
SIP submission. EPA believes that a better approach is for states and 
EPA to focus attention on those elements of section 110(a)(2) of the 
CAA most likely to warrant a specific SIP revision due to the 
promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS or other factors.
    For example, EPA's 2013 Guidance gives simpler recommendations with 
respect to carbon monoxide than other NAAQS pollutants to meet the 
visibility requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), because carbon 
monoxide does not affect visibility. As a result, an infrastructure SIP 
submission for any future new or revised NAAQS for carbon monoxide need 
only state this fact in order to address the visibility prong of 
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II).
    Finally, EPA believes that its approach with respect to 
infrastructure SIP requirements is based on a reasonable reading of 
sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) because the CAA provides other avenues 
and mechanisms to address specific substantive deficiencies in existing 
SIPs. These other statutory tools allow EPA to take appropriately 
tailored action, depending upon the nature and severity of the alleged 
SIP deficiency. Section 110(k)(5) authorizes EPA to issue a ``SIP 
call'' whenever the Agency determines that a state's SIP is 
substantially inadequate to attain or maintain the NAAQS, to mitigate 
interstate transport, or to otherwise comply with the CAA.\15\ Section 
110(k)(6) authorizes EPA to correct errors in past actions, such as 
past approvals of SIP submissions.\16\ Significantly, EPA's 
determination that an action on a state's infrastructure SIP submission 
is not the appropriate time and place to address all potential existing 
SIP deficiencies does not preclude EPA's subsequent reliance on 
provisions in section 110(a)(2) as part of the basis for action to 
correct those deficiencies at a later time. For example, although it 
may not be appropriate to require a state to eliminate all existing 
inappropriate director's discretion provisions in the course of acting 
on an infrastructure SIP submission, EPA believes that section 
110(a)(2)(A) may be among the statutory bases that EPA relies upon in 
the course of addressing such deficiency in a subsequent action.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ For example, EPA issued a SIP call to Utah to address 
specific existing SIP deficiencies related to the treatment of 
excess emissions during SSM events. See ``Finding of Substantial 
Inadequacy of Implementation Plan; Call for Utah State 
Implementation Plan Revisions,'' 74 FR 21639 (April 18, 2011).
    \16\ EPA has used this authority to correct errors in past 
actions on SIP submissions related to PSD programs. See ``Limitation 
of Approval of Prevention of Significant Deterioration Provisions 
Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting-Sources in State Implementation 
Plans; Final Rule,'' 75 FR 82536 (December 30, 2010). EPA has 
previously used its authority under CAA section 110(k)(6) to remove 
numerous other SIP provisions that the Agency determined it had 
approved in error. See, e.g., 61 FR 38664 (July 25, 1996) and 62 FR 
34641 (June 27, 1997) (corrections to American Samoa, Arizona, 
California, Hawaii, and Nevada SIPs); 69 FR 67062 (November 16, 
2004) (corrections to California SIP); and 74 FR 57051 (November 3, 
2009) (corrections to Arizona and Nevada SIPs).
    \17\ See, e.g., EPA's disapproval of a SIP submission from 
Colorado on the grounds that it would have included a director's 
discretion provision inconsistent with CAA requirements, including 
section 110(a)(2)(A). See, e.g., 75 FR 42342 at 42344 (July 21, 
2010) (proposed disapproval of director's discretion provisions); 76 
FR 4540 (Jan. 26, 2011) (final disapproval of such provisions).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. What is EPA's analysis of how Tennessee addressed the elements of 
the sections 110(a)(1) and (2) ``Infrastructure'' provisions?

    The Tennessee infrastructure submission addresses the provisions of 
sections 110(a)(1) and (2) as described below.
    1. 110(a)(2)(A) Emission Limits and Other Control Measures: Section 
110(a)(2)(A) requires that each implementation plan include enforceable 
emission limitations and other control measures, means, or techniques 
(including economic incentives such as fees, marketable permits, and 
auctions of emissions rights), as well as schedules and timetables for 
compliance, as may be necessary or appropriate to meet the applicable 
requirements. Several regulations within Tennessee's SIP are relevant 
to air quality control regulations. The regulations described below 
include enforceable emission limitations and other control measures. 
SIP-approved Tennessee Air Pollution Control Regulations (TAPCR) 1200-
03-03, Ambient Air Quality Standards, 1200-03-04, Open Burning, 1200-
03-06, Non-process Emission Standards, 1200-03-07, Process Emission 
Standards, 1200-03-09, Construction and Operating Permits, 1200-03-14, 
Control of Sulfur Dioxide Emission, 1200-03-19, Emission Standards and 
Monitoring Requirements for Additional Control Areas, 1200-03-21, 
General Alternate Emission Standards, and 1200-03-24, Good Engineering 
Practice Stack Height Regulations, collectively establish enforceable 
emissions limitations and other control measures, means or techniques, 
for activities that contribute to SO2 concentrations in the 
ambient air, and provide authority for TDEC to establish such limits 
and measures as well as schedules for compliance to meet the applicable 
requirements of the CAA. Additionally, State statutes established in 
the Tennessee Air Quality Act and adopted in the Tennessee Code 
Annotated (TCA) section 68-201-105(a), Powers and duties of board--
Notification of vacancy --Termination due to vacancy, provide the 
Tennessee Air Pollution Control Board and TDEC's Division of Air 
Pollution Control the authority to take actions in support of this 
infrastructure element such as issue permits, promulgate regulations, 
and issue orders to implement the Tennessee Air Quality Act and the 
CAA, as relevant. EPA has made the preliminary determination that the 
provisions contained in these State regulations and State statute 
satisfy Section 110(a)(2)(A) for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS 
in the State.
    In this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or disapprove any 
existing state provisions with regard to excess emissions during start 
up, shut down, and malfunction (SSM) operations at a facility. EPA 
believes that a number of states have SSM provisions which are contrary 
to the CAA and existing EPA guidance, ``State Implementation Plans: 
Policy Regarding Excess Emissions During Malfunctions, Startup, and 
Shutdown'' (September 20, 1999), and the Agency is addressing such 
state regulations in a separate action.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ On June 12, 2015, EPA published a final action entitled, 
``State Implementation Plans: Response to Petition for Rulemaking; 
Restatement and Update of EPA's SSM Policy Applicable to SIPs; 
Findings of Substantial Inadequacy; and SIP Calls to Amend 
Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During Periods of Startup, 
Shutdown, and Malfunction.'' See 80 FR 33840.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, in this action, EPA is not proposing to approve or 
disapprove any existing state rules with regard to director's 
discretion or variance provisions. EPA believes that a number of states 
have such provisions which are contrary to the CAA and existing EPA 
guidance (52 FR 45109 (November 24, 1987)), and the Agency plans to 
take action in the future to address such state regulations. In the 
meantime, EPA encourages any state having a director's discretion or 
variance provision which is contrary to the CAA and EPA guidance to 
take steps to correct the deficiency as soon as possible.
    2. 110(a)(2)(B) Ambient Air Quality Monitoring/Data System: Section 
110(a)(2)(B) requires SIPs to provide for establishment and operation 
of appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to 
(i) monitor, compile, and analyze data on ambient

[[Page 12632]]

air quality, and (ii) upon request, make such data available to the 
Administrator. TCA 68-201-105(b)(4) gives TDEC the authority to provide 
technical, scientific and other services as may be required to 
implement the provisions of the Tennessee Air Quality Act. Annually, 
states develop and submit to EPA for approval statewide ambient 
monitoring network plans consistent with the requirements of 40 CFR 
parts 50, 53, and 58. The annual network plan involves an evaluation of 
any proposed changes to the monitoring network, includes the annual 
ambient monitoring network design plan, and includes a certified 
evaluation of the agency's ambient monitors and auxiliary support 
equipment.\19\ On June 30, 2015, Tennessee submitted its most recent 
plan to EPA, which was approved by EPA on October 26, 2015, with the 
exception of two aspects--one related to a monitor for the 
SO2 nonattainment area in Sullivan County, and the other 
related to a monitor for ozone and fine particulate in Loudon 
County.\20\ Tennessee's monitoring network plan can be accessed at 
www.regulations.gov using Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0154. EPA has 
made the preliminary determination that Tennessee's SIP and practices 
are adequate for the ambient air quality monitoring and data system 
related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ The annual network plans are approved by EPA in accordance 
with 40 CFR part 58, and, on occasion, proposed changes to the 
monitoring network are evaluated outside of the network plan 
approval process in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.
    \20\ Once EPA is in agreement with the proposed locations for 
the monitoring sites in Sullivan and Loudon Counties, the State is 
required to make the network plan updates available for public 
inspection and submit an addendum to its network plan for EPA 
approval in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. 110(a)(2)(C) Programs for Enforcement of Control Measures and 
for Construction or Modification of Stationary Sources: This element 
consists of three sub-elements: enforcement, state-wide regulation of 
new and modified minor sources and minor modifications of major 
sources, and preconstruction permitting of major sources and major 
modifications in areas designated attainment or unclassifiable for the 
subject NAAQS as required by CAA title I part C (i.e., the major source 
PSD program). TDEC's 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS infrastructure 
SIP submission cites a number of SIP provisions to address these 
requirements. EPA's rationale for its proposed action regarding each 
sub-element is described below.
    Enforcement: The following SIP-approved regulation provides TDEC 
with authority for enforcement of SO2 emission limits and 
control measures. TAPCR 1200-3-13-01, Violation Statement, states that, 
``Failure to comply with any of the provisions of these regulations 
shall constitute a violation thereof and shall subject the person or 
persons responsible therefore to any and all the penalties provided by 
law.'' Also note, under TCA 68-201-116, Orders and assessments of 
damages and civil penalty--Appeal, the State's Technical Secretary is 
authorized to issue orders requiring correction of violations of any 
part of the Tennessee Air Quality Act, or of any regulation promulgated 
under this State statute. Violators are subject to civil penalties of 
up to 25,000 dollars per day for each day of violation and for any 
damages to the State resulting from the violations.
    Preconstruction PSD Permitting for Major Sources: EPA interprets 
the PSD sub-element to require that a state's infrastructure SIP 
submission for a particular NAAQS demonstrate that the state has a 
complete PSD permitting program in place covering the structural PSD 
requirements for all regulated NSR pollutants. A state's PSD permitting 
program is complete for this sub-element (and prong 3 of D(i) and J 
related to PSD) if EPA has already approved or is simultaneously 
approving the state's implementation plan with respect to all 
structural PSD requirements that are due under the EPA regulations or 
the CAA on or before the date of the EPA's proposed action on the 
infrastructure SIP submission. For the 2010 1-hour SO2 
NAAQS, Tennessee's authority to regulate construction of new and 
modified stationary sources to assist in the protection of air quality 
in attainment or unclassifiable areas is established in TAPCR 1200-03-
09-01(4), Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality. 
Tennessee's infrastructure SIP submission demonstrates that new major 
sources and major modifications in areas of the State designated 
attainment or unclassifiable for the specified NAAQS are subject to a 
federally-approved PSD permitting program meeting all the current 
structural requirements of part C of title I of the CAA to satisfy the 
infrastructure SIP PSD elements.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ More information concerning how the Tennessee 
infrastructure SIP submission currently meets applicable 
requirements for the PSD elements (110(a)(2)(C); (D)(i)(I), prong 3; 
and (J)) can be found in the technical support document in the 
docket for today's rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regulation of minor sources and modifications: Section 110(a)(2)(C) 
also requires the SIP to include provisions that govern the minor 
source program that regulates emissions of the 2010 1-hour 
SO2 NAAQS. TAPCR 1200-03-09-01, Construction Permits, and 
TAPCR 1200-03-09-03, General Provisions, collectively govern the 
preconstruction permitting of modifications and construction of minor 
stationary sources, and minor modifications of major stationary 
sources.
    EPA has made the preliminary determination that Tennessee's SIP and 
practices are adequate for program enforcement of control measures, 
regulation of minor sources and modifications, and preconstruction 
permitting of major sources and major modifications related to the 2010 
1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
    4. 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) Interstate Pollution Transport: 
Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) has two components: 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Each of these components has two subparts 
resulting in four distinct components, commonly referred to as 
``prongs,'' that must be addressed in infrastructure SIP submissions. 
The first two prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), 
are provisions that prohibit any source or other type of emissions 
activity in one state from contributing significantly to nonattainment 
of the NAAQS in another state (``prong 1''), and interfering with 
maintenance of the NAAQS in another state (``prong 2''). The third and 
fourth prongs, which are codified in section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are 
provisions that prohibit emissions activity in one state from 
interfering with measures required to prevent significant deterioration 
of air quality in another state (``prong 3''), or to protect visibility 
in another state (``prong 4'').
    110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)--prongs 1, and 2: EPA is not proposing any 
action in this rulemaking related to the interstate transport 
provisions pertaining to the contribution to nonattainment or 
interference with maintenance in other states of section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) (prongs 1 and 2) because Tennessee's 2010 1-hour 
SO2 NAAQS infrastructure submission did not address prongs 1 
and 2.
    110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--prong 3: With regard to section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), the PSD element, referred to as prong 3, may be 
met by a state's confirmation in an infrastructure SIP submission that 
new major sources and major modifications in the state are subject to a 
PSD program meeting all the current structural requirements of part C 
of title I of the CAA, or (if the state contains a nonattainment area 
that has the potential to impact PSD in another

[[Page 12633]]

state), a NNSR program. As discussed in more detail above under section 
110(a)(2)(C), Tennessee's SIP contains provisions for the State's PSD 
program that reflects the required structural PSD requirements to 
satisfy prong 3 of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II). Tennessee addresses 
prong 3 through TAPCR 1200-03-09-01(4), Prevention of Significant 
Deterioration of Air Quality, and TAPCR 1200-03-09-01(5), Growth 
Policy, for the PSD and NNSR programs, respectively. EPA has made the 
preliminary determination that Tennessee's SIP is adequate for 
interstate transport for PSD permitting of major sources and major 
modifications related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS for 
section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) (prong 3).
    110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II)--prong 4: EPA is not proposing any action in 
this rulemaking related to the interstate transport provisions 
pertaining to visibility in other states of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) 
(prong 4) and will consider these requirements in relation to 
Tennessee's 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS infrastructure submission 
in a separate rulemaking.
    5. 110(a)(2)(D)(ii): Interstate Pollution Abatement and 
International Air Pollution: Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires SIPs to 
include provisions ensuring compliance with sections 115 and 126 of the 
Act, relating to interstate and international pollution abatement. 
Regulation 1200-03-09-03, General Provisions, requires the permitting 
authority to notify air agencies whose areas may be affected by 
emissions from a source. Additionally, Tennessee does not have any 
pending obligation under sections 115 and 126 of the CAA relating to 
international or interstate pollution abatement. EPA has made the 
preliminary determination that Tennessee's SIP and practices are 
adequate for ensuring compliance with the applicable requirements 
relating to interstate and international pollution abatement for the 
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
    6. 110(a)(2)(E) Adequate Resources and Authority, Conflict of 
Interest, and Oversight of Local Governments and Regional Agencies: 
Section 110(a)(2)(E) requires that each implementation plan provide: 
(i) Necessary assurances that the state will have adequate personnel, 
funding, and authority under state law to carry out its implementation 
plan, (ii) that the state comply with the requirements respecting state 
boards pursuant to section 128 of the Act, and (iii) necessary 
assurances that, where the state has relied on a local or regional 
government, agency, or instrumentality for the implementation of any 
plan provision, the state has responsibility for ensuring adequate 
implementation of such plan provisions. EPA is proposing to approve 
Tennessee's infrastructure SIP submission as meeting the requirements 
of sub-elements 110(a)(2)(E)(i), (ii), and (iii). EPA's rationale for 
today's proposal respecting each section of 110(a)(2)(E) is described 
in turn below.
    In support of EPA's proposal to approve sub-elements 
110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii), TCA 68-201-105, Powers and duties of board--
Notification of vacancy--Termination due to vacancy, gives the 
Tennessee Air Pollution Control Board the power and duty to promulgate 
rules and regulations to implement the Tennessee Air Quality Act. The 
Board may define ambient air quality standards, set emission standards, 
set forth general policies or plans, establish a system of permits, and 
identify a schedule of fees for review of plans and specifications, 
issuance or renewal of permits or inspection of air contaminant 
sources.
    TAPCR 1200-03-26, Administrative Fees Schedule, establishes 
construction fees, annual emission fees, and permit review fees 
sufficient to supplement existing State and Federal funding and to 
cover reasonable costs associated with the administration of 
Tennessee's air pollution control program. These costs include costs 
associated with the review of permit applications and reports, issuance 
of permits, source inspections and emission unit observations, review 
and evaluation of stack and/or ambient monitoring results, modeling, 
and costs associated with enforcement actions.
    TCA 68-201-115, Local pollution control programs--Exemption from 
state supervision--Applicability of part to air contaminant sources 
burning wood waste--Open burning of wood waste, states that ``Any 
municipality or county in this state may enact, by ordinance or 
resolution respectively, air pollution control regulations not less 
stringent than the standards adopted for the state pursuant to this 
part, or any such municipality or county may also adopt or repeal an 
ordinance or resolution which incorporates by reference any or all of 
the regulations of the board, or any federal regulations including any 
changes in such regulations, when such regulations are properly 
identified as to date and source.'' Before such ordinances or 
resolutions become effective, the municipality or county must receive a 
certificate of exemption from the Board to enact local regulations in 
the State. In granting any certificate of exemption, the State of 
Tennessee reserves the right to enforce any applicable resolution, 
ordinance, or regulation of the local program.
    TCA 68-201-115 also directs TDEC to ``frequently determine whether 
or not any exempted municipality or county meets the terms of the 
exemption granted and continues to comply with this section.'' If TDEC 
determines that the local program does not meet the terms of the 
exemption or does not otherwise comply with the law, the Board may 
suspend the exemption in whole or in part until the local program 
complies with the State standards.
    As evidence of the adequacy of TDEC's resources with respect to 
sub-elements (i) and (iii), EPA submitted a letter to Tennessee on 
March 9, 2015, outlining section 105 grant commitments and the current 
status of these commitments for fiscal year 2014. The letter EPA 
submitted to Tennessee can be accessed at www.regulations.gov using 
Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0154. Annually, states update these 
grant commitments based on current SIP requirements, air quality 
planning, and applicable requirements related to the NAAQS. Tennessee 
satisfactorily met all commitments agreed to in the Air Planning 
Agreement for fiscal year 2014, therefore Tennessee's grants were 
finalized and closed out. EPA has made the preliminary determination 
that Tennessee has adequate resources and authority for implementation 
of the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
    Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) requires that the state comply with 
section 128 of the CAA. Section 128 requires that the SIP provide: 
(a)(1) the majority of members of the state board or body which 
approves permits or enforcement orders represent the public interest 
and do not derive any significant portion of their income from persons 
subject to permitting or enforcement orders under the CAA; and (a)(2) 
any potential conflicts of interest by such board or body, or the head 
of an executive agency with similar powers be adequately disclosed. 
Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) obligations for the 2010 1-hour SO2 
NAAQS and the requirements of CAA section 128 are met in Regulation 
0400-30-17, Conflict of Interest.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\ See 79 FR 18453 (April 2, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has made the preliminary determination that the State has 
adequately addressed the requirements of section 128, and accordingly 
has met the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) with respect to 
infrastructure SIP requirements. Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve 
Tennessee's infrastructure SIP submission as meeting the requirements

[[Page 12634]]

of sub-elements 110(a)(2)(E)(i), (ii) and (iii).
    7. 110(a)(2)(F) Stationary Source Monitoring and Reporting: Section 
110(a)(2)(F) requires SIPs to meet applicable requirements addressing 
(i) the installation, maintenance, and replacement of equipment, and 
the implementation of other necessary steps, by owners or operators of 
stationary sources to monitor emissions from such sources, (ii) 
periodic reports on the nature and amounts of emissions and emissions 
related data from such sources, and (iii) correlation of such reports 
by the state agency with any emission limitations or standards 
established pursuant to this section, which reports shall be available 
at reasonable times for public inspection. TDEC's infrastructure SIP 
submission identifies requirements for compliance testing by emissions 
sampling and analysis, and for emissions and operation monitoring to 
ensure the quality of data in the State, and also the collection of 
source emission data throughout the State and the assurance of the 
quality of such data. These data are used to compare against current 
emission limits and to meet requirements of EPA's Air Emissions 
Reporting Rule (AERR). Specifically, TAPCR 1200-03-10, Required 
Sampling, Recording, and Reporting, gives the State's Technical 
Secretary the authority to monitor emissions at stationary sources, and 
to require these sources to conduct emissions monitoring and to submit 
periodic emissions reports. This rule requires owners or operators of 
stationary sources to compute emissions, submit periodic reports of 
such emissions and maintain records as specified by various regulations 
and permits, and to evaluate reports and records for consistency with 
the applicable emission limitation or standard on a continuing basis 
over time. The monitoring data collected and records of operations 
serve as the basis for a source to certify compliance, and can be used 
by Tennessee as direct evidence of an enforceable violation of the 
underlying emission limitation or standard.
    Additionally, Tennessee is required to submit emissions data to EPA 
for purposes of the National Emissions Inventory (NEI). The NEI is 
EPA's central repository for air emissions data. EPA published the AERR 
on December 5, 2008, which modified the requirements for collecting and 
reporting air emissions data (73 FR 76539). The AERR shortened the time 
states had to report emissions data from 17 to 12 months, giving states 
one calendar year to submit emissions data. All states are required to 
submit a comprehensive emissions inventory every three years and report 
emissions for certain larger sources annually through EPA's online 
Emissions Inventory System. States report emissions data for the six 
criteria pollutants and the precursors that form them--NOX, 
SO2, ammonia, lead, carbon monoxide, particulate matter, and 
volatile organic compounds. Many states also voluntarily report 
emissions of hazardous air pollutants. Tennessee made its latest update 
to the 2011 NEI on April 9, 2014. EPA compiles the emissions data, 
supplementing it where necessary, and releases it to the general public 
through the Web site http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiinformation.html. 
EPA has made the preliminary determination that Tennessee's SIP and 
practices are adequate for the stationary source monitoring systems 
related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
    Regarding credible evidence, TAPCR 1200-3-10-04, Sampling, 
Recording, and Reporting Required for Major Stationary Sources, states 
that: ``the Technical Secretary is authorized to require by permit 
condition any periodic or enhanced monitoring, recording and reporting 
that he deems necessary for the verification of the source's compliance 
with the applicable requirements as defined in paragraph 1200-03-09-
02(11).'' EPA is unaware of any provision preventing the use of 
credible evidence in the Tennessee SIP. EPA has made the preliminary 
determination that Tennessee's SIP and practices are adequate for the 
stationary source monitoring systems related to the 1-hour 
SO2 NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve 
Tennessee's infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 
110(a)(2)(F).
    8. 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency Powers: Section 110(a)(2)(G) of the Act 
requires that states demonstrate authority comparable with section 303 
of the CAA and adequate contingency plans to implement such authority. 
Tennessee's emergency powers are outlined in TAPCR 1200-03-15, 
Emergency Episode Plan, which establishes the criteria for declaring an 
air pollution episode (air pollution alert, air pollution warning, or 
air pollution emergency), specific emissions reductions for each 
episode level, and emergency episode plan requirements for major 
sources located in or significantly impacting a nonattainment area. 
Additional emergency powers are codified in TCA 68-201-109, Emergency 
Stop Orders for Air Contaminant Sources. Under TCA 68-201-109, if the 
Commissioner of TDEC finds that emissions from the operation of one or 
more sources are causing imminent danger to human health and safety, 
the Commissioner may, with the approval of the Governor, order the 
source(s) responsible to reduce or discontinue immediately its (their) 
air emissions. Additionally, this State law requires a hearing to be 
held before the Commissioner within 24 hours of any such order.
    Regarding the public welfare and environment, TCA 68-201-106, 
Matters to be considered in exercising powers, states that ``In 
exercising powers to prevent, abate and control air pollution, the 
board or department shall give due consideration to all pertinent 
facts, including, but not necessarily limited to: (1) The character and 
degree of injury to, or interference with, the protection of the 
health, general welfare and physical property of the people . . .'' 
Also, TCA 68-201-116, Orders and assessments of damages and civil 
penalty Appeal, provides in subsection (a) that if the Tennessee 
technical secretary discovers that any State air quality regulation has 
been violated, the Tennessee technical secretary may issue an order to 
correct the violation, and this order shall be complied with within the 
time limit specified in the order. EPA has made the preliminary 
determination that Tennessee's SIP and practices are adequate for 
emergency powers related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. 
Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve Tennessee's infrastructure SIP 
submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(G).
    9. 110(a)(2)(H) SIP Revisions: Section 110(a)(2)(H), in summary, 
requires each SIP to provide for revisions of such plan (i) as may be 
necessary to take account of revisions of such national primary or 
secondary ambient air quality standard or the availability of improved 
or more expeditious methods of attaining such standard, and (ii) 
whenever the Administrator finds that the plan is substantially 
inadequate to attain the NAAQS or to otherwise comply with any 
additional applicable requirements. As previously discussed, TDEC is 
responsible for adopting air quality rules and revising SIPs as needed 
to attain or maintain the NAAQS in Tennessee.
    Section 68-201-105(a) of the Tennessee Air Quality Act authorizes 
the Tennessee Air Pollution Control Board to promulgate rules and 
regulations to implement this State statute, including setting and 
implementing ambient air quality standards, emission standards, general 
policies or plans, a permits system, and a schedule of fees for review 
of plans and specifications, issuance or renewal of permits, and 
inspection of sources.

[[Page 12635]]

EPA has made the preliminary determination that Tennessee's SIP and 
practices adequately demonstrate a commitment to provide future SIP 
revisions related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS when 
necessary. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve Tennessee's 
infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(H).
    10. 110(a)(2)(J) Consultation with Government Officials, Public 
Notification, and PSD and Visibility Protection: EPA is proposing to 
approve Tennessee's infrastructure SIP submission for the 2010 1-hour 
SO2 NAAQS with respect to the general requirement in section 
110(a)(2)(J) to include a program in the SIP that complies with the 
applicable consultation requirements of section 121, the public 
notification requirements of section 127, PSD and visibility 
protection. EPA's rationale for each sub-element is described below.
    Consultation with government officials (121 consultation): Section 
110(a)(2)(J) of the CAA requires states to provide a process for 
consultation with local governments, designated organizations and 
Federal Land Managers carrying out NAAQS implementation requirements 
pursuant to section 121 relative to consultation. The following State 
rule, as well as the State's Regional Haze Implementation Plan (which 
allows for consultation between appropriate state, local, and tribal 
air pollution control agencies as well as the corresponding Federal 
Land Managers), provide for consultation with government officials 
whose jurisdictions might be affected by SIP development activities: 
TAPCR 1200-03-34, Conformity, provides for interagency consultation on 
transportation and general conformity issues. Tennessee adopted state-
wide consultation procedures for the implementation of transportation 
conformity which includes the development of mobile inventories for SIP 
development. These consultation procedures were developed in 
coordination with the transportation partners in the State and are 
consistent with the approaches used for development of mobile 
inventories for SIPs. Required partners covered by Tennessee's 
consultation procedures include Federal, state and local transportation 
and air quality agency officials. EPA has made the preliminary 
determination that Tennessee's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate 
consultation with government officials related to the 2010 1-hour 
SO2 NAAQS when necessary. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to 
approve Tennessee's infrastructure SIP submission with respect to 
section 110(a)(2)(J) consultation with government officials.
    Public notification: These requirements are met through the State's 
existing Air Quality Index and Air Quality Forecasting programs, which 
provide a method to alert the public if any NAAQS is exceeded in an 
area. Additionally, the State's annual monitoring plan update is sent 
out each year for public review and comment. EPA has made the 
preliminary determination that Tennessee's SIP and practices adequately 
demonstrate the State's ability to provide public notification related 
to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS when necessary. Accordingly, 
EPA is proposing to approve Tennessee's infrastructure SIP submission 
with respect to section 110(a)(2)(J) public notification.
    PSD: With regard to the PSD element of section 110(a)(2)(J), this 
requirement may be met by a state's confirmation in an infrastructure 
SIP submission that new major sources and major modifications in the 
state are subject to a PSD program meeting all the current structural 
requirements of part C of title I of the CAA. As discussed in more 
detail above under section 110(a)(2)(C), Tennessee's SIP contains 
provisions for the State's PSD program that reflect the relevant SIP 
revisions pertaining to the required structural PSD requirements to 
satisfy the requirement of the PSD element of section 110(a)(2)(J). EPA 
has made the preliminary determination that Tennessee's SIP and 
practices are adequate for PSD permitting of major sources and major 
modifications related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS for the 
PSD element of section 110(a)(2)(J). Accordingly, EPA is proposing to 
approve Tennessee's infrastructure SIP submission with respect to the 
PSD element of section 110(a)(2)(J).
    Visibility protection: EPA's 2013 Guidance notes that it does not 
treat the visibility protection aspects of section 110(a)(2)(J) as 
applicable for purposes of the infrastructure SIP approval process. EPA 
recognizes that states are subject to visibility protection and 
regional haze program requirements under part C of the Act (which 
includes sections 169A and 169B). However, there are no newly 
applicable visibility protection obligations after the promulgation of 
a new or revised NAAQS. Thus, EPA has determined that states do not 
need to address the visibility component of 110(a)(2)(J) in 
infrastructure SIP submittals. As such, EPA has made the preliminary 
determination that it does not need to address the visibility 
protection element of section 110(a)(2)(J) in Tennessee's 
infrastructure SIP submission related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 
NAAQS.
    11. 110(a)(2)(K) Air Quality Modeling and Submission of Modeling 
Data: Section 110(a)(2)(K) of the CAA requires that SIPs provide for 
performing air quality modeling so that effects on air quality of 
emissions from NAAQS pollutants can be predicted and submission of such 
data to the EPA can be made. TAPCR 1200-03-09-01(4), Prevention of 
Significant Air Quality Deterioration, specifies when modeling and when 
monitoring (pre- or post-construction) must be performed and that the 
resulting data be made available for review to EPA. Tennessee has 
personnel with training and experience to conduct source-oriented 
dispersion modeling with models approved by EPA. Additionally, 
Tennessee participates in a regional effort to coordinate the 
development of emissions inventories and conduct regional modeling for 
several NAAQS, including the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, for the 
Southeastern states. Taken as a whole, Tennessee's air quality 
regulations and practices demonstrate that TDEC has the authority to 
provide relevant data for the purpose of predicting the effect on 
ambient air quality of the 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. EPA has made 
the preliminary determination that Tennessee's SIP and practices 
adequately demonstrate the State's ability to provide for air quality 
modeling, along with analysis of the associated data, related to the 
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to 
approve Tennessee's infrastructure SIP submission with respect to 
section 110(a)(2)(K).
    12. 110(a)(2)(L) Permitting fees: Section 110(a)(2)(L) requires the 
owner or operator of each major stationary source to pay to the 
permitting authority, as a condition of any permit required under the 
CAA, a fee sufficient to cover (i) the reasonable costs of reviewing 
and acting upon any application for such a permit, and (ii) if the 
owner or operator receives a permit for such source, the reasonable 
costs of implementing and enforcing the terms and conditions of any 
such permit (not including any court costs or other costs associated 
with any enforcement action), until such fee requirement is superseded 
with respect to such sources by the Administrator's approval of a fee 
program under title V.
    In Tennessee, funding for review of PSD and NNSR permits comes from 
permit-specific fees that are charged to new applicants and from annual 
emission fees charged to existing title V emission sources that are 
applying for major modifications under PSD or

[[Page 12636]]

NNSR. The cost of reviewing, approving, implementing, and enforcing PSD 
and major NNSR permits are covered under the following State 
regulations: (1) TAPCR 1200-03-26-02(5) requires each new major 
stationary source to pay a construction permit application filing/
processing fee and (2) TAPCR 1200-03-26-02(9), Annual Emission Fees for 
Major Sources,\23\ mandates that existing major stationary sources pay 
annual title V emission fees, which are used to cover the permitting 
costs for any new construction or modifications at these facilities as 
well as implementation and enforcement of PSD and NNSR permits after 
they have been issued. EPA has made the preliminary determination that 
Tennessee adequately provides for permitting fees related to the 2010 
1-hour SO2 NAAQS when necessary. Accordingly, EPA is 
proposing to approve Tennessee's infrastructure SIP submission with 
respect to section 110(a)(2)(L).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Title V program regulations are federally-approved but not 
incorporated into the federally-approved SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    13. 110(a)(2)(M) Consultation/participation by affected local 
entities: Section 110(a)(2)(M) of the Act requires states to provide 
for consultation and participation in SIP development by local 
political subdivisions affected by the SIP. TCA 68-201-105, Powers and 
duties of board Notification of vacancy Termination due to vacancy, 
authorizes and requires the Tennessee Air Pollution Control Board to 
promulgate rules and regulations related to consultation under the 
provisions of the State's Uniform Administrative Procedures Act. TCA 4-
5-202, When hearings required, requires agencies to precede all 
rulemaking with a notice and public hearing, except for exemptions. TCA 
4-5-203, Notice of hearing, states that whenever an agency is required 
by law to hold a public hearing as part of its rulemaking process, the 
agency shall: ``(1) Transmit written notice of the hearings to the 
secretary of state for publication in the notice section of the 
administrative register Web site . . . and (2) Take such other steps as 
it deems necessary to convey effective notice to persons who are likely 
to have an interest in the proposed rulemaking.'' TCA 68-201-105(b)(7) 
authorizes and requires TDEC to ``encourage voluntary cooperation of 
affected persons or groups in preserving and restoring a reasonable 
degree of air purity; advise, consult and cooperate with other 
agencies, persons or groups in matters pertaining to air pollution; and 
encourage authorized air pollution agencies of political subdivisions 
to handle air pollution problems within their respective jurisdictions 
to the greatest extent possible and to provide technical assistance to 
political subdivisions . . .''. TAPCR 1200-03-34, Conformity, requires 
interagency consultation on transportation and general conformity 
issues. Additionally, TDEC has, in practice, consulted with local 
entities for the development of its transportation conformity SIP and 
has worked with the Federal Land Managers as a requirement of EPA's 
regional haze rule. EPA has made the preliminary determination that 
Tennessee's SIP and practices adequately demonstrate consultation with 
affected local entities related to the 2010 1-hour SO2 
NAAQS. Accordingly, EPA is proposing to approve Tennessee's 
infrastructure SIP submission with respect to section 110(a)(2)(M).

V. Proposed Action

    With the exception of interstate transport provisions pertaining to 
the contribution to nonattainment or interference with maintenance in 
other states and visibility protection requirements of section 
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) and (II) (prongs 1, 2, and 4), EPA is proposing to 
approve Tennessee's infrastructure submission submitted on March 13, 
2014, for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS for the above described 
infrastructure SIP requirements. EPA is proposing to approve 
Tennessee's infrastructure SIP submission for the 2010 1-hour 
SO2 NAAQS because the submission is consistent with section 
110 of the CAA.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, 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, this 
proposed action merely approves state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action 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);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is 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.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is 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
     Does 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, 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 in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

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

    Dated: February 23, 2016.
Heather McTeer Toney,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2016-05160 Filed 3-9-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P