Air Plan Approval; Michigan; Redesignation of the Belding Area in Ionia County to Attainment of the 2008 Lead Standard, 24864-24871 [2017-10928]
Download as PDF
24864
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 103 / Wednesday, May 31, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
Dated: April 27, 2017.
Samuel Coleman,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
§ 52.970
*
Subpart T—Louisiana
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Identification of plan
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
2. In § 52.970(c), the table titled ‘‘EPA
Approved Louisiana Regulations in the
Louisiana SIP’’ is amended by adding
entries in numerical order for Sections
525, 527, 529, and 531 to read as
follows:
■
EPA APPROVED LOUISIANA REGULATIONS IN THE LOUISIANA SIP
State
approval
date
State citation
Title/subject
*
Section 525 ....................
*
*
Minor Modifications .......
11/20/1993
Section 527 ....................
Significant Modifications
11/20/1994
Section 529 ....................
Reopenings for Cause ..
11/20/1993
Section 531 ....................
Public Notice and Affected State Notice.
10/20/2006
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2017–10955 Filed 5–30–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R05–OAR–2016–0044; FRL–9962–72–
Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Michigan;
Redesignation of the Belding Area in
Ionia County to Attainment of the 2008
Lead Standard
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is approving the State of
Michigan’s request to revise the
designation of (redesignate) the Belding
nonattainment area (Belding) to
attainment of the 2008 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS or standard) for lead. EPA is
also approving the maintenance plan
and related elements of the
redesignation. EPA is approving
reasonably available control measure
(RACM)/reasonably available control
technology (RACT) measures and a
comprehensive emissions inventory as
meeting the Clean Air Act (CAA)
requirements. EPA is taking these
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 May 30, 2017
Jkt 241001
EPA approval date
Comments
*
*
5/31/2017, [Insert Federal Register citation].
5/31/2017, [Insert Federal Register citation].
5/31/2017, [Insert Federal Register citation].
5/31/2017, [Insert Federal Register citation].
*
*
The SIP does not include LAC 33:III.525.A.2.,
B.2.c, B.3., B.4, B.5.a.–d., B.6., B.7., and B.8.
The SIP does not include LAC 33:III. 527.B.5.
*
*
actions in accordance with the CAA and
EPA’s implementation regulations
regarding the 2008 lead NAAQS.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective
July 31, 2017, unless EPA receives
adverse comments by June 30, 2017. If
adverse comments are received, EPA
will publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register
informing the public that the rule will
not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2016–0044 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
blakley.pamela@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
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
The SIP does not include LAC 33:III.529.B.,
B.1., B.2., B.3., and B.4.
The SIP does not include LAC 33:III.531.A.1.,
A.2., A.3., A.4., B.1.a., B.1.b., and B.1.c.
Sfmt 4700
*
*
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
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt
Rau, Environmental Engineer, Control
Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch
(AR–18J), Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,
(312) 886–6524, rau.matthew@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. Why is EPA concerned about lead?
II. What is the background for these actions?
III. What are the criteria for redesignation to
attainment?
IV. What is EPA’s analysis of Michigan’s
request?
V. What action is EPA taking?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Why is EPA concerned about lead?
Lead (Pb) is a metal found naturally
in the environment and present in some
manufactured products. However, Pb
has serious public health effects and
depending on the level of exposure can
adversely affect the nervous system,
E:\FR\FM\31MYR1.SGM
31MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 103 / Wednesday, May 31, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
kidney function, immune system,
reproductive and developmental
systems and the cardiovascular system.
Infants and young children are
especially sensitive to even low levels of
Pb, which may contribute to behavioral
problems, learning deficits and lowered
intelligence quotient. The major sources
of Pb for air emissions have historically
been from fuels used in on-road motor
vehicles (such as cars and trucks) and
industrial sources. As a result of EPA’s
regulatory efforts to remove Pb from onroad motor vehicle gasoline, emissions
of Pb from the transportation sector
dramatically declined by 95 percent
between 1980 and 1999, and levels of Pb
in the air decreased by 94 percent
between 1980 and 1999.
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
II. What is the background for these
actions?
On November 12, 2008 (73 FR 66964),
EPA established the 2008 primary and
secondary Pb NAAQS at 0.15
micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3)
based on a maximum arithmetic 3month mean concentration for a 3-year
period. 40 CFR 50.16.
On November 22, 2010 (75 FR 71033),
EPA completed its initial air quality
designations and classifications for the
2008 Pb NAAQS based upon air quality
monitoring data for calendar years
2007–2009. The designations became
effective on December 31, 2010. In
Michigan, EPA designated a portion of
Ionia County, specifically a portion of
the city of Belding, as nonattainment for
the 2008 Pb NAAQS. 40 CFR 81.336.
On January 12, 2016, Michigan
requested EPA to designate the Belding
portion of Ionia County as attainment of
the Pb NAAQS. Michigan documented
its request meets the redesignation
criteria of CAA section 107.
Michigan found that the Mueller
Industries, Inc. (Mueller) facility in
Belding, Michigan, is the sole source of
Pb emissions in the area. Mueller’s
Belding facility produces brass rods
used to produce plumbing fittings and
fixtures and other products.
III. What are the criteria for
redesignation to attainment?
The requirements for redesignating an
area from nonattainment to attainment
are found in CAA section 107 (d)(3)(E).
There are five criteria for redesignating
an area. First, the Administrator must
determine that the entire area has
attained the applicable NAAQS based
on current air quality data. Second, the
Administrator has fully approved the
applicable SIP for the area under CAA
section 110(k). The third criterion is for
the Administrator to determine that the
air quality improvement is the result of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 May 30, 2017
Jkt 241001
permanent and enforceable emission
reductions. Fourth, the Administrator
has fully approved a maintenance plan
meeting the CAA section 175A
requirements. The fifth criterion is that
the state has met all the redesignation
requirements of CAA section 110 and
part D.
IV. What is EPA’s analysis of
Michigan’s request?
A. Attainment Determination and
Redesignation
1. The Area Has Attained the 2008 Pb
NAAQS (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(i))
On July 24, 2015, EPA determined
that the Belding, Michigan
nonattainment area has attained the
2008 Pb NAAQS. 80 FR 43956. EPA
made its clean data determination based
upon complete, quality-assured and
certified ambient air monitoring data for
the 2012–2014 period. The Belding area
attained the 2008 Pb NAAQS, with a
design value of 0.06 mg/m3 for 2012–
2014.
EPA has reviewed the current
monitoring data for Ionia County,
Michigan. The 2013–2015 design values
are 0.06 mg/m3 for monitor 26–067–
0002, 545 Reed Street in Belding, and
0.05 mg/m3 for monitor 26–067–0003,
509 Merrick Street in Belding. The
highest monitored value was 0.06 mg/m3
for monitor 26–067–0002 in 2013.
Current monitoring data indicate that
the Belding area continues to attain the
2008 Pb NAAQS.
2. The Area Has Met All Applicable
Requirements Under Section 110 and
Part D and Has a Fully Approved SIP
Under Section 110(k) (Section
107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v))
EPA determines that Michigan has
met all currently applicable SIP
requirements for purposes of
redesignation for the Belding area under
section 110 of the CAA (general SIP
requirements). In addition, with the
exceptions of the RACM/RACT
requirements under section 172(c)(1)
and the emissions inventory under
section 172(c)(3), all applicable
requirements of the Michigan SIP for
purposes of redesignation have either
been approved or have been suspended,
by either a clean data determination or
determination of attainment. EPA is also
approving Michigan’s 2013 emissions
inventory as meeting the section
172(c)(3) comprehensive emissions
inventory requirement as well as
approving the RACM provisions as
meeting the section 172(c)(1)
requirement. Thus, we are determining
that the Michigan submission meets all
SIP requirements currently applicable
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
24865
for purposes of redesignation under part
D of title I of the CAA, in accordance
with sections 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and
107(d)(3)(E)(v).
In making these determinations, EPA
has ascertained which SIP requirements
are applicable for purposes of
redesignation, and concluded that the
Michigan SIP includes measures
meeting those requirements and that
they are fully approved under section
110(k) of the CAA.
a. Michigan Has Met All Applicable
Requirements for Purposes of
Redesignation of the Belding Area
Under Section 110 and Part D of the
CAA
i. Section 110 General SIP
Requirements
Section 110(a) of title I of the CAA
contains the general requirements for a
SIP. Section 110(a)(2) provides that the
implementation plan submitted by a
state must have been adopted by the
state after reasonable public notice and
hearing, and, among other things, must:
(1) Include enforceable emission
limitations and other control measures,
means or techniques necessary to meet
the requirements of the CAA; (2)
provide for establishment and operation
of appropriate devices, methods,
systems, and procedures necessary to
monitor ambient air quality; (3) provide
for implementation of a source permit
program to regulate the modification
and construction of any stationary
source within the areas covered by the
plan; (4) include provisions for the
implementation of part C, Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) and part
D, New Source Review (NSR) permit
programs; (5) include criteria for
stationary source emission control
measures, monitoring, and reporting; (6)
include provisions for air quality
modeling; and (7) provide for public
and local agency participation in
planning and emission control rule
development. Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the
CAA requires that SIPs contain
measures to prevent sources in a state
from significantly contributing to air
quality problems in another state.
EPA interprets the ‘‘applicable’’
requirements for an area’s redesignation
to be those requirements linked with a
particular area’s nonattainment
designation. Therefore, EPA believes
that the section 110 elements described
above that are not connected with
nonattainment plan submissions and
not linked with an area’s attainment
status, such as the ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’
elements of section 110(a)(2), are not
applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation. A state remains subject to
E:\FR\FM\31MYR1.SGM
31MYR1
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
24866
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 103 / Wednesday, May 31, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
these requirements after an area is
redesignated to attainment, and thus
EPA does not interpret such
requirements to be relevant applicable
requirements to evaluate in a
redesignation. For example, the
requirement to submit state plans
addressing interstate transport
obligations under section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) continue to apply to a
state regardless of the designation of any
one particular area in the state, and thus
are not applicable requirements to be
evaluated in the redesignation context.
EPA has applied this interpretation
consistently in many redesignations for
decades. See e.g., 81 FR 44210 (July 7,
2016) (final redesignation for the
Sullivan County, Tennessee area); 79 FR
43655 (July 28, 2014) (final
redesignation for Bellefontaine, Ohio Pb
nonattainment area); 61 FR 53174–
53176 (October 10, 1996) and 62 FR
24826 (May 7, 1997) (proposed and final
redesignation for Reading, Pennsylvania
ozone nonattainment area); 61 FR 20458
(May 7, 1996) (final redesignation for
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio ozone
nonattainment area); and 60 FR 62748
(December 7, 1995) (final redesignation
of Tampa, Florida ozone nonattainment
area). See also 65 FR 37879, 37890 (June
19, 2000) (discussing this issue in final
redesignation of Cincinnati, Ohio 1-hour
ozone nonattainment area); 66 FR 50399
(October 19, 2001) (final redesignation
of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 1-hour
ozone nonattainment area).
EPA has reviewed the Michigan SIP
and has determined that it meets the
general SIP requirements under section
110 of the CAA to the extent the
requirements are applicable for
purposes of redesignation. EPA has
previously approved provisions of
Michigan’s SIP addressing section 110
requirements, including provisions
addressing Pb, at 40 CFR 52.1170.
On April 3, 2012, and supplemented
on August 9, 2013, and September 19,
2013, Michigan submitted its
infrastructure SIP elements for the 2008
Pb NAAQS as required by CAA section
110(a)(2). EPA approved Michigan’s
infrastructure SIP requirements for the
2008 Pb NAAQS on July 16, 2014. 79 FR
41439. The requirements of section
110(a)(2) are statewide requirements
that are not linked to the Pb
nonattainment status of the Belding area
or Michigan’s redesignation request.
ii. Part D Requirements
EPA determined that upon approval
of the base year emissions inventories
and RACM provisions discussed in this
rulemaking, the Michigan SIP will meet
the applicable SIP requirements for the
Belding area applicable for purposes of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 May 30, 2017
Jkt 241001
redesignation under part D of the CAA.
Subpart 1 of part D sets forth the basic
nonattainment requirements applicable
to all nonattainment areas.
(1) Section 172
Requirements
Section 172(c) sets out general
nonattainment plan requirements. A
thorough discussion of these
requirements can be found in the
General Preamble for Implementation of
Title I (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992)
(‘‘General Preamble’’). EPA’s
longstanding interpretation of the
nonattainment planning requirements of
section 172 is that once an area is
attaining the NAAQS, those
requirements are not ‘‘applicable’’ for
purposes of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)
and therefore need not be approved into
the SIP before EPA can redesignate the
area. In the General Preamble, EPA set
forth its interpretation of applicable
requirements for purposes of evaluating
redesignation requests when an area is
attaining a standard. 57 FR 13564. EPA
noted that the requirements for
reasonable further progress (RFP) and
other measures designed to provide for
an area’s attainment do not apply in
evaluating redesignation requests
because those nonattainment planning
requirements ‘‘have no meaning’’ for an
area that has already attained the
standard. Id. This interpretation was
also set forth in the Calcagni
Memorandum.
EPA’s understanding of section 172
also forms the basis of its Clean Data
Policy. Under the Clean Data Policy,
EPA promulgates a determination of
attainment, published in the Federal
Register and subject to notice-andcomment rulemaking, and this
determination formally suspends a
state’s obligation to submit most of the
attainment planning requirements that
would otherwise apply, including an
attainment demonstration and planning
SIPs to provide for RFP, RACM, and
contingency measures under section
172(c)(9). The Clean Data Policy has
been codified in regulations regarding
the implementation of the ozone and
PM2.5 NAAQS. 70 FR 71612 (November
29, 2005) and 72 FR 20586 (April 25,
2007). The Clean Data Policy has also
been specifically applied in a number of
Pb nonattainment areas where EPA has
determined that the area is attaining the
Pb NAAQS. 79 FR 46212 (August 7,
2014) (proposed determination of
attainment of Lyons, Pennsylvania Pb
nonattainment area); 80 FR 51127
(determination of attainment of Eagan,
Minnesota Pb nonattainment area). EPA
finalized a Clean Data Determination
under this policy for the Belding Pb
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
nonattainment area on July 24, 2015. 80
FR 43956.
EPA’s long-standing interpretation
regarding the applicability of section
172(c)’s attainment planning
requirements for an area that is attaining
a NAAQS applies in this redesignation
of the Belding Pb nonattainment area as
well, except for the applicability of the
requirement to implement all
reasonably available control measures
under section 172(c)(1). On July 14,
2015, the United States Court of
Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (6th
Circuit) ruled that to meet the
requirement of section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii),
states are required to submit plans
addressing RACM/RACT under section
172(c)(1) and EPA is required to
approve those plans prior to
redesignating the area, regardless of
whether the area is attaining the
standard. Sierra Club v. EPA, 793 F.3d
656 (6th Cir. 2015). As Michigan is
within the jurisdiction of the 6th
Circuit, EPA is acting in accordance
with the Sierra Club decision by
approving RACM provisions in parallel
with this redesignation action.1
Section 172(c)(1) requires the plans
for all nonattainment areas to provide
for the implementation of all RACM as
expeditiously as practicable and to
provide for attainment of the primary
NAAQS. Under this requirement, a state
must consider all available control
measures, including reductions that area
available from adopting RACT on
existing sources, for a nonattainment
area and adopt and implement such
measures as are reasonably available in
the area as components of the area’s
attainment demonstration. EPA is today
approving Michigan’s RACM
submission. Therefore, Michigan has
met its requirements under CAA
sections 172(c)(1) and 107(d)(3)(E)(v).
The remaining section 172(c)
‘‘attainment planning’’ requirements are
not applicable for purposes of
evaluating Michigan’s redesignation
request. Specifically, the RFP
requirement under section 172(c)(2),
which is defined as progress that must
be made toward attainment, the
requirement to submit section 172(c)(9)
contingency measures, which are
measures to be taken if the area fails to
make reasonable further progress to
attainment, and section 172(c)(6)’s
requirement that the SIP contain control
1 Although the approach being implemented here
is inconsistent with the Agency’s longstanding
national policy, such deviation is required in order
to act in accordance with a Circuit Court decision.
Consistent with 40 CFR 56.5(b), the Region does not
need to seek concurrence from EPA Headquarters
for such deviation in these circumstances. 81 FR
51102 (August 3, 2016).
E:\FR\FM\31MYR1.SGM
31MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 103 / Wednesday, May 31, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
measures necessary to provide for
attainment of the standard, are not
applicable requirements that Michigan
must meet here because the Belding area
has monitored attainment of the 2008 Pb
NAAQS. As noted, EPA issued a
determination of attainment (or clean
data determination) for the Belding area
in July 2015, which formally suspended
the obligation to submit any of the
attainment planning SIPs. 80 FR 43956
(July 24, 2015).
Section 172(c)(3) requires submission
and approval of a comprehensive,
accurate, and current inventory of actual
emissions. Michigan submitted 2009,
2011, and 2013 emission inventories
along with its redesignation request.
The 2013 inventory can be used as the
most accurate and current inventory. As
discussed in section III.B., EPA is
approving the 2013 base year inventory
as meeting the section 172(c)(3)
emissions inventory requirement for the
Belding area.
Section 172(c)(4) requires the
identification and quantification of
allowable emissions for major new and
modified stationary sources in an area,
and section 172(c)(5) requires source
permits for the construction and
operation of new and modified major
stationary sources anywhere in the
nonattainment area. EPA approved
Michigan’s current NSR program on
December 16, 2013. 78 FR 76064. In
addition, the state’s maintenance plan
does not rely nonattainment NSR,
therefore having a fully approved NSR
program is not an applicable
requirement, but that, nonetheless, EPA
has approved the state’s program.2
Section 172(c)(6) requires the SIP to
contain control measures necessary to
provide for attainment of the standard.
No additional measures are needed to
provide for attainment because
attainment has been reached.
Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to
meet the applicable provisions of
section 110(a)(2). EPA finds that the
Michigan SIP meets the section
110(a)(2) applicable requirements for
purposes of redesignation.
(2) Section 176 Conformity
Requirements
CAA section 176(c) requires states to
establish criteria and procedures to
ensure that Federally-supported or
funded activities, including highway
and transit projects, conform to the air
quality planning goals in the applicable
2 A detailed rationale for this view is described
in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October
14, 1994, entitled, ‘‘Part D New Source Review
Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation
to Attainment.’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 May 30, 2017
Jkt 241001
SIPs. The requirement to determine
conformity applies to transportation
plans, programs and projects developed,
funded or approved under title 23 of the
U.S. Code and the Federal Transit Act
(transportation conformity) as well as to
all other Federally-supported or funded
projects (general conformity).
Considering the elimination of Pb
additives in gasoline, transportation
conformity does not apply to the Pb
NAAQS. 73 FR 66964, 67043 n.120.
EPA approved Michigan’s general
conformity SIP on December 18, 1996.
61 FR 66607.
b. Michigan Has a Fully Approved
Applicable SIP Under Section 110(k) of
the CAA
Upon final approval of Michigan’s
comprehensive 2013 emissions
inventories and approval of RACM for
the Belding Pb area, EPA will have fully
approved the Michigan SIP for the
Belding area under section 110(k) of the
CAA for all requirements applicable for
purposes of redesignation, in
accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii).
EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in
approving a redesignation request (See
page 3 of the September 4, 1992,
Processing Requests to Redesignate
Areas to Attainment: Policy
Memorandum (Calcagni
memorandum)); Southwestern
Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v.
Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989–990 (6th
Cir. 1998); Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426
(6th Cir. 2001)). EPA also relies on
measures approved in conjunction with
a redesignation action. See 68 FR 25413
(May 12, 2003) (approving I/M program
for St. Louis) and 68 FR 25413, 25426
(May 12, 2003). Michigan has adopted
and submitted, and EPA has fully
approved, required SIP provisions
addressing the 2008 Pb standards. Of
the CAA requirements applicable to this
redesignation request, only two
remain—the emissions inventory
requirement of section 172(c)(3) and the
RACM requirement of section 172(c)(1).
EPA is approving the submitted
Mueller emission controls as RACM/
RACT and Michigan’s 2013 emissions
inventories for the Belding area as
meeting the requirement of CAA section
172(c)(3). There are no SIP provisions
are currently disapproved, conditionally
approved, or partially approved in the
Belding, Michigan area under section
110(k) in accordance with section
107(d)(3)(E)(ii).
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
24867
3. The Improvement in Air Quality Is
Due to Permanent and Enforceable
Reductions in Emissions Resulting From
Implementation of the SIPs and
Applicable Federal Air Pollution
Control Regulations and Other
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions
(Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii))
To support the revision of an area’s
designation from nonattainment to
attainment, CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii)
requires EPA to determine that the air
quality improvement in the area is due
to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions. The permanent
and enforceable emission reductions
result from the implementation of the
SIP and applicable Federal air pollution
control regulations and other permanent
and enforceable emission reductions.
Michigan identified Mueller as the
lone source of Pb emissions near the
nonattainment area. Mueller produces
brass rods that are used in making
plumbing fixtures and fittings among
other products at its facility in Belding,
Michigan. Mueller implemented various
control measures on its west chip and
east chip dryers that result in decreased
emissions. In 2010, it stopped operating
its uncontrolled east chip dryer and
installed controls on its west chip dryer.
A permanent and enforceable Permit to
Install number 16–11 (PTI 16–11) was
issued on October 20, 2011, and revised
on March 15, 2012, which limits Pb
emissions and requires certain controls
for the east and west chip dryers. PTI
16–11 requires each chip dryer to
operate a cyclone, a thermal oxidizer, a
wet scrubber, and a demister to control
emissions. Operation of the east chip
dryer is allowed once the required
controls are installed. The west chip
dryer stack height was increased to 122
feet in January 2012. The east chip dryer
stack height is also required to be 122
feet. Increasing the stack height creates
more dispersion of the exhaust, which
can reduce the maximum concentration.
The controls and emission limits in PTI
16–11 are permanent and enforceable.
Michigan analyzed the control measures
added in PTI 16–11 and found that
these measures brought the Belding area
into attainment of the 2008 Pb NAAQS.
The monitoring data in the Belding area,
as detailed in III.A.1, show the area has
met and continues to meet the 2008 Pb
NAAQS.
In addition, the Reduction of Lead in
Drinking Water Act (Section 1417 of the
Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C.
300g–6) prohibits the use of Pb in
plumbing fittings or fixtures. Effective
January 4, 2014, plumbing fittings and
fixtures must go from a weighted
average of 8.0 percent Pb to 0.25 percent
E:\FR\FM\31MYR1.SGM
31MYR1
24868
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 103 / Wednesday, May 31, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
Pb. This reduction requires Mueller to
reduce the amount of Pb used in its
brass rod production, which is expected
to continue the decrease in its Pb
emissions.
4. Michigan Has a Fully Approved
Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section
175A of the CAA (Section
107(d)(3)(E)(iv))
In conjunction with its request to
designate the Belding nonattainment
area to attainment, Michigan requested
a SIP revision to provide for
maintenance of the 2008 Pb NAAQS in
the area through 2025.
a. What is required in a maintenance
plan?
The required elements of a
maintenance plan for areas seeking
redesignation from nonattainment to
attainment are contained in section
175A of the CAA. Under section 175A,
the plan must demonstrate continued
attainment of the applicable NAAQS for
at least 10 years after EPA approves a
redesignation to attainment. Eight years
after redesignation, the state must
submit a revised maintenance plan
which demonstrates that attainment will
continue to be maintained for the
subsequent 10 years.
To address the possibility of future
NAAQS violations, the maintenance
plan must contain contingency
measures with a schedule for
implementation as EPA deems
necessary to assure prompt correction of
any future Pb violations.
The September 4, 1992, Calcagni
memorandum provides additional
guidance on the content of a
maintenance plan. The memorandum
states that a maintenance plan should
address the following items: The
attainment emissions inventory, a
maintenance demonstration showing
maintenance for the 10 years of the
maintenance period, a commitment to
maintain the existing monitoring
network, factors and procedures to be
used for verification of continued
attainment of the NAAQS, and a
contingency plan to prevent or correct
future violations of the NAAQS.
Michigan’s maintenance plan shows
that the Belding area’s emissions will
remain below the attainment year levels
through 2025.
b. Attainment Inventory
Michigan provided Pb emissions
inventories for the nonattainment years
(2009 and 2011), attainment year (2013),
and future year (2025). The Pb
emissions for Mueller’s Belding,
Michigan facility are listed in Table 1.
TABLE 1—MUELLER LEAD EMISSIONS
2009
2011
2013
2025
..................................................................................
..................................................................................
..................................................................................
..................................................................................
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
Michigan identified Mueller as the
lone source of Pb emissions in the
vicinity of the Belding nonattainment
area. Thus, the emissions inventories
provided are adequate for the Belding
area.
c. Demonstration of Maintenance
Michigan included a section 175(A)
maintenance plan in its submission.
Section 175A requires a state seeking
redesignation to attainment to submit a
SIP revision to provide for the
maintenance of the NAAQS in the area
‘‘for at least 10 years after the
redesignation’’. EPA has interpreted this
as a showing of maintenance ‘‘for a
period of ten years following
redesignation’’. Calcagni memorandum
at 9. Where the emissions inventory
method of showing maintenance is
used, its purpose is to show that
emissions during the maintenance
period will not increase over the
attainment year inventory. Calcagni
memorandum at 9–10.
A maintenance demonstration need
not be based on modeling. See Wall v.
EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), Sierra
Club v. EPA, 375 F. 3d 537 (7th Cir.
2004). See also 66 FR 53094, 53099–
53100 (October 19, 2001), 68 FR 25413,
25430–25432 (May 12, 2003). Michigan
has provided both an emissions
inventory as well as air dispersion
modeling of the emission limits
established in PTI 16–11 to demonstrate
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 May 30, 2017
Jkt 241001
2,277.73 pounds ..............................................................
1,402.93 pounds ..............................................................
1,153.15 pounds ..............................................................
864 pounds ......................................................................
that the area should maintain the
standard into the future. A summary of
the air dispersion modeling for Mueller
was included in Michigan’s
submissions. The modeling evaluated
the Consent Order 9–2011 and PTI 16–
11 revisions. Michigan used the
American Meteorology Society/
Environmental Protection Agency
Regulatory Model version 11103. That
analysis yielded a maximum impact of
0.13 mg/m3, which is below the 2008 Pb
NAAQS of 0.15 mg/m3. This modeling
analysis is valid for the Belding
redesignation as the Mueller control
revisions are responsible for the
emission reductions that brought the
area into attainment. Michigan also
provided an emissions inventory for an
attainment year, 2013, and for a future
year, 2025. See Table 1. Michigan is
projecting a 25 percent decrease below
attainment year emissions Pb emissions
from the source due to the reduction in
Pb usage in brass manufacturing. Under
the Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water
Act, plumbing fittings and fixtures must
go from a weighted average of 8.0
percent Pb to 0.25 percent Pb, driving
the expected Pb decreases from Mueller.
Michigan’s maintenance plan
submission shows that the Belding
area’s Pb emissions will remain below
the attainment year inventories through
2025. The reductions in Pb emissions in
Belding result from the permeant and
enforceable control measures for
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
nonattainment year.
nonattainment year.
attainment year.
future year.
Mueller, the lone Pb source in the area.
Monitoring data show the Belding area
ambient Pb concentrations declined
following the Mueller emission
reductions. It is reasonable to expect the
emissions to remain at the reduced
levels because of the control measures
implemented. Thus, it is reasonable to
expect the Belding area will continue to
attain the 2008 Pb NAAQS through
2027.
EPA believes that Michigan’s
submission demonstrates that the area
will continue to maintain the 2008 Pb
NAAQS at least through 2027. This is
because the 2027 emissions should
remain at the same level as projected for
2025 due to the permanent and
enforceable limits in PTI 16–11 along
with additional reductions from other
rules. In addition, the air dispersion
modeling indicates that with the PTI
16–11 controls the Belding area ambient
Pb concentration will be below the 2008
Pb NAAQS. Thus, EPA is approving the
redesignation request and maintenance
plans based on a showing, in
accordance with section 175A, that the
Michigan’s maintenance plan provides
for maintenance for at least 10 years
after redesignation.
d. Monitoring Network
Michigan will monitor ambient Pb
levels during the 10 year maintenance
period in the Belding area to confirm
continued maintenance of the 2008 Pb
E:\FR\FM\31MYR1.SGM
31MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 103 / Wednesday, May 31, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
NAAQS. EPA determines that the
Belding, Michigan area Pb monitoring
network is adequate to confirm
maintenance. Michigan commits to
continue to operate an adequate
monitoring network.
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
Michigan will also continue to enter
its air monitoring data into the Air
Quality System in accordance with
Federal guidelines. It will also submit
periodic emissions inventories to EPA
as required by the Federal Consolidated
Emissions Reporting Rule to verify
continued attainment. 67 FR 39602,
June 10, 2002. Both actions will help to
verify continued attainment in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58.
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
f. Contingency Plan
The contingency plan provisions are
designed to promptly correct or prevent
a violation of the NAAQS that might
occur after redesignation of an area to
attainment. CAA section 175A requires
that the maintenance plan include such
contingency measures. The maintenance
plan should identify the contingency
measures to be adopted, a schedule and
procedure for adoption and
implementation of the contingency
measures, and a time limit for action by
the state. The state should also identify
specific indicators to be used to
determine when the contingency
measures need to be adopted and
implemented. The maintenance plan
must include a requirement that the
state will implement all pollution
control measures that were contained in
the SIP before redesignation of the area
to attainment. Section 175A(d) of the
CAA.
Michigan commits to implement one
or more contingency measures should
the 2008 Pb NAAQS be violated during
the maintenance period. The
contingency measures are:
i. Increase inspection frequency of
Mueller to twice per year, beginning
three months after a quality-assured
violation of the NAAQS at a Belding,
Michigan air monitoring site. The
increased inspection frequency will
remain in place until the qualityassured Pb ambient air monitored levels
show NAAQS compliance on a 3-year
rolling average.
ii. Require Mueller to submit an
enhanced preventative maintenance/
malfunction abatement plan within six
months after a quality-assured violation
of the NAAQS at a Belding, Michigan
air monitoring site.
iii. Require Mueller to reassess control
strategies that further limit Pb emissions
within one year of a quality-assured
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 May 30, 2017
Jkt 241001
violation of the NAAQS at a Belding,
Michigan air monitoring site.
Michigan will also consider any other
potential contingency measures at the
time of the selection.
EPA finds that Michigan’s
maintenance plan adequately addresses
the five basic components of a
maintenance plan: attainment
inventory, maintenance demonstration,
monitoring network, verification of
continued attainment, and a
contingency plan.
As required by section 175A(b) of the
CAA, Michigan commits to submit to
the EPA an updated Pb maintenance
plan eight years after redesignation of
the Belding area to cover an additional
10 year period beyond the initial 10 year
maintenance period.
EPA is approving Michigan’s 2008 Pb
maintenance plan for the Belding area
as meeting the requirements of CAA
section 175A.
B. Comprehensive Emissions Inventory
Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires
areas to submit a comprehensive,
accurate, and current emissions
inventory. Michigan provided such an
inventory in its submission.
Michigan identified Mueller as the
lone source of Pb emissions in the
vicinity of the Belding nonattainment
area. Thus, it provided the emissions for
Mueller that represent the emissions of
the Belding area. In 2013, Pb emissions
were 1,153.15 pounds. See Table 1.
EPA approves the Pb emissions
inventories submitted by Michigan in
January 2016 as fully meeting the
comprehensive inventory requirement
of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA for the
Belding area for the 2008 Pb NAAQS.
C. RACM Requirements
Based on the 6th Circuit decision,
CAA Section 172(c)(1) requires areas to
have approved RACM/RACT provisions
to be redesignated. PTI 16–11 added
legally enforceable emission controls on
Mueller considered to be RACT for Pb.
PTI 16–11 requires each Mueller chip
dryer to operate a cyclone, a thermal
oxidizer, a wet scrubber, and a demister
to control emissions. The west chip
dryer stack height was increased to 122
feet in January 2012. The east chip dryer
stack height is also required to be 122
feet. EPA is approving the emission
controls as required by PTI 16–11 as
satisfying the RACT requirement of
Section 172(c)(1).
V. What action is EPA taking?
EPA has determined that the Belding
area is attaining the 2008 Pb NAAQS
and that the area has met the
requirements for redesignation under
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
24869
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is
thus approving the requests from
Michigan to change the legal
designation of the Belding area from
nonattainment to attainment for the
2008 Pb standard. EPA is approving
Michigan’s maintenance plan for the
Belding area as a revision to the
Michigan SIP because the plan meets
the requirements of section 175A of the
CAA. EPA is approving the emission
controls in PTI 16–11 as required by
Consent Order 9–2011 as meeting the
RACM/RACT requirements of CAA
section 172(c)(1). EPA is approving the
2013 emissions inventory as meeting the
comprehensive emissions inventory
requirements of section 172(c)(3) of the
CAA. EPA is taking these actions in
accordance with the CAA and EPA’s
implementation regulations regarding
the 2008 Pb NAAQS.
We are publishing this action without
prior proposal because we view this as
a noncontroversial amendment and
anticipate no adverse comments.
However, in the proposed rules section
of this Federal Register publication, we
are publishing a separate document that
will serve as the proposal to approve the
state plan if relevant adverse written
comments are filed. This rule will be
effective July 31, 2017 without further
notice unless we receive relevant
adverse written comments by June 30,
2017. If we receive such comments, we
will withdraw this action before the
effective date by publishing a
subsequent document that will
withdraw the final action. All public
comments received will then be
addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed action. 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 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. If we do not receive any
comments, this action will be effective
July 31, 2017.
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
CAA and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
merely approves state law as meeting
E:\FR\FM\31MYR1.SGM
31MYR1
24870
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 103 / Wednesday, May 31, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that
reason, this 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 and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Lead.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control.
Dated: May 4, 2017.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended
as follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
2. In § 52.1170 the table in paragraph
(e) is amended:
■ a. Under ‘‘Emissions Inventories’’ by
adding an entry for ‘‘2008 lead (Pb) 2013
base year’’ after the entry for ‘‘1997
annual PM2.5 2005 base year;’’ and
■ b. Under ‘‘Maintenance Plans’’ by
adding an entry for ‘‘2008 lead (Pb)’’
after the entry for ‘‘2006 24-Hour
PM2.5.’’
The additions read as follows:
■
§ 52.1170
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED MICHIGAN NONREGULATORY AND QUASI-REGULATORY PROVISIONS
Name of
nonregulatory SIP
provision
*
Applicable geographic or
nonattainment
area
*
*
2008 lead (Pb) 2013 base
year.
*
*
*
State
submittal
date
*
Emissions Inventories
*
Belding area (Ionia County,
part).
*
*
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
*
*
3. Section 52.1188 is amended by
adding paragraphs (b) and (c) to read as
follows:
■
§ 52.1188
Control strategy: Lead (Pb).
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Michigan’s 2013 lead emissions
inventory for the Belding area as
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 May 30, 2017
Jkt 241001
*
1/12/2016
*
1/12/2016
*
*
submitted on January 12, 2016,
satisfying the emission inventory
requirements of section 172(c)(3) of the
Clean Air Act for the Belding area.
(c) Approval. The 2008 lead
maintenance plan for the Belding,
Michigan nonattainment area has been
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
5/31/2017, [insert Federal
Register citation].
*
*
*
*
Comments
*
*
5/31/2017, [insert Federal
Register citation].
*
Maintenance Plans
*
*
*
2008 lead (Pb) ........................ Belding area (Ionia County,
part).
*
EPA approval date
*
approved as submitted on January 12,
2016.
E:\FR\FM\31MYR1.SGM
31MYR1
24871
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 103 / Wednesday, May 31, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
PART 81—DESIGNATION OF AREAS
FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING
PURPOSES
§ 81.323
5. Section 81.323 is amended by
revising the entry for Belding, MI in the
table entitled ‘‘Michigan—2008 Lead
NAAQS’’ to read as follows:
■
4. The authority citation for part 81
continues to read as follows:
■
*
*
Michigan.
*
*
*
MICHIGAN—2008 LEAD NAAQS
Designation for the 2008
NAAQS a
Designated area
Date 1
Belding, MI:
Ionia County (part) ..............................................................................................................................................
The area bounded by the following coordinates: Southeast corner by latitude 43.0956705 N and longitude 85.2130771 W; southwest corner (intersection of S. Broas St. and W. Washington St.) by latitude 43.0960358 N and longitude 85.2324027 W; northeast corner by latitude 43.1074942 N and
longitude 85.2132313 W; western boundary 1 (intersection of W. Ellis St. and the vertical extension
of S. Broas St.) by latitude 43.1033277 N and longitude 85.2322553 W; western boundary 2 (intersection of W. Ellis St. and N. Bridge St.) by latitude 43.1033911 N and longitude 85.2278464 W;
western boundary 3 (intersection of N. Bridge St. and Earle St.) by latitude 43.1074479 N and longitude 85.2279722 W.
*
a Includes
*
*
*
*
5/31/2017
Type
Attainment.
*
*
Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
31, 2011 unless otherwise noted.
1 December
is taking these actions in accordance
with the Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA’s
implementation regulations regarding
the 2008 lead NAAQS.
[FR Doc. 2017–10928 Filed 5–30–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
This direct final rule will be
effective July 31, 2017, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by June 30,
2017.
DATES:
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R05–OAR–2016–0395; FRL–9963–01–
Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Ohio;
Redesignation of the Cleveland Area to
Attainment of the 2008 Lead Standard
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
On June 29, 2016, the Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency
(OEPA) submitted a request for the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
to redesignate the partial Cuyahoga
County nonattainment area (known as
and referred to as the Cleveland area) to
attainment for the 2008 national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQS
or standards) for lead. EPA finds that
the Cleveland area meets the
requirements for redesignation and is
also approving several additional
related actions. EPA is approving, as
revisions to the Ohio state
implementation plan (SIP), reasonably
available control measure/reasonably
available control technology (RACM/
RACT) requirements, emissions
inventory requirements, and the state’s
plan for maintaining the 2008 lead
NAAQS through 2030 for the area. EPA
asabaliauskas on DSKBBXCHB2PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:13 May 30, 2017
Jkt 241001
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2016–0395 at https://
www.regulations.gov or via email to
blakley.pamela@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
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Carolyn Persoon, Environmental
Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–8290,
persoon.carolyn@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. What action is EPA taking?
II. Why is EPA concerned about lead?
III. What is the background for these actions?
IV. What are the criteria for redesignation to
attainment?
V. What is EPA’s analysis of the state’s
request?
VI. What are the effects of EPA’s actions?
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is taking several actions related
to the redesignation of the Cleveland
area to attainment for the 2008 lead
NAAQS. EPA is approving Ohio’s lead
maintenance plan for the Cleveland area
as a revision to the Ohio SIP. EPA is
also approving RACM/RACT that
satisfies 172(c)(1) requirements and is
approving the 2013 lead base year
emission inventories, which satisfy the
requirement in section 172(c)(3) for a
current, accurate and comprehensive
emission inventory.
E:\FR\FM\31MYR1.SGM
31MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 103 (Wednesday, May 31, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24864-24871]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-10928]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0044; FRL-9962-72-Region 5]
Air Plan Approval; Michigan; Redesignation of the Belding Area in
Ionia County to Attainment of the 2008 Lead Standard
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving the
State of Michigan's request to revise the designation of (redesignate)
the Belding nonattainment area (Belding) to attainment of the 2008
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS or standard) for lead.
EPA is also approving the maintenance plan and related elements of the
redesignation. EPA is approving reasonably available control measure
(RACM)/reasonably available control technology (RACT) measures and a
comprehensive emissions inventory as meeting the Clean Air Act (CAA)
requirements. EPA is taking these actions in accordance with the CAA
and EPA's implementation regulations regarding the 2008 lead NAAQS.
DATES: This direct final rule is effective July 31, 2017, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by June 30, 2017. If adverse comments are
received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not
take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2016-0044 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
blakley.pamela@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 https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Rau, Environmental Engineer,
Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6524, rau.matthew@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. Why is EPA concerned about lead?
II. What is the background for these actions?
III. What are the criteria for redesignation to attainment?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of Michigan's request?
V. What action is EPA taking?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Why is EPA concerned about lead?
Lead (Pb) is a metal found naturally in the environment and present
in some manufactured products. However, Pb has serious public health
effects and depending on the level of exposure can adversely affect the
nervous system,
[[Page 24865]]
kidney function, immune system, reproductive and developmental systems
and the cardiovascular system. Infants and young children are
especially sensitive to even low levels of Pb, which may contribute to
behavioral problems, learning deficits and lowered intelligence
quotient. The major sources of Pb for air emissions have historically
been from fuels used in on-road motor vehicles (such as cars and
trucks) and industrial sources. As a result of EPA's regulatory efforts
to remove Pb from on-road motor vehicle gasoline, emissions of Pb from
the transportation sector dramatically declined by 95 percent between
1980 and 1999, and levels of Pb in the air decreased by 94 percent
between 1980 and 1999.
II. What is the background for these actions?
On November 12, 2008 (73 FR 66964), EPA established the 2008
primary and secondary Pb NAAQS at 0.15 micrograms per cubic meter
([mu]g/m\3\) based on a maximum arithmetic 3-month mean concentration
for a 3-year period. 40 CFR 50.16.
On November 22, 2010 (75 FR 71033), EPA completed its initial air
quality designations and classifications for the 2008 Pb NAAQS based
upon air quality monitoring data for calendar years 2007-2009. The
designations became effective on December 31, 2010. In Michigan, EPA
designated a portion of Ionia County, specifically a portion of the
city of Belding, as nonattainment for the 2008 Pb NAAQS. 40 CFR 81.336.
On January 12, 2016, Michigan requested EPA to designate the
Belding portion of Ionia County as attainment of the Pb NAAQS. Michigan
documented its request meets the redesignation criteria of CAA section
107.
Michigan found that the Mueller Industries, Inc. (Mueller) facility
in Belding, Michigan, is the sole source of Pb emissions in the area.
Mueller's Belding facility produces brass rods used to produce plumbing
fittings and fixtures and other products.
III. What are the criteria for redesignation to attainment?
The requirements for redesignating an area from nonattainment to
attainment are found in CAA section 107 (d)(3)(E). There are five
criteria for redesignating an area. First, the Administrator must
determine that the entire area has attained the applicable NAAQS based
on current air quality data. Second, the Administrator has fully
approved the applicable SIP for the area under CAA section 110(k). The
third criterion is for the Administrator to determine that the air
quality improvement is the result of permanent and enforceable emission
reductions. Fourth, the Administrator has fully approved a maintenance
plan meeting the CAA section 175A requirements. The fifth criterion is
that the state has met all the redesignation requirements of CAA
section 110 and part D.
IV. What is EPA's analysis of Michigan's request?
A. Attainment Determination and Redesignation
1. The Area Has Attained the 2008 Pb NAAQS (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(i))
On July 24, 2015, EPA determined that the Belding, Michigan
nonattainment area has attained the 2008 Pb NAAQS. 80 FR 43956. EPA
made its clean data determination based upon complete, quality-assured
and certified ambient air monitoring data for the 2012-2014 period. The
Belding area attained the 2008 Pb NAAQS, with a design value of 0.06
[micro]g/m\3\ for 2012-2014.
EPA has reviewed the current monitoring data for Ionia County,
Michigan. The 2013-2015 design values are 0.06 [micro]g/m\3\ for
monitor 26-067-0002, 545 Reed Street in Belding, and 0.05 [micro]g/m\3\
for monitor 26-067-0003, 509 Merrick Street in Belding. The highest
monitored value was 0.06 [micro]g/m\3\ for monitor 26-067-0002 in 2013.
Current monitoring data indicate that the Belding area continues to
attain the 2008 Pb NAAQS.
2. The Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and
Part D and Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) (Section
107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v))
EPA determines that Michigan has met all currently applicable SIP
requirements for purposes of redesignation for the Belding area under
section 110 of the CAA (general SIP requirements). In addition, with
the exceptions of the RACM/RACT requirements under section 172(c)(1)
and the emissions inventory under section 172(c)(3), all applicable
requirements of the Michigan SIP for purposes of redesignation have
either been approved or have been suspended, by either a clean data
determination or determination of attainment. EPA is also approving
Michigan's 2013 emissions inventory as meeting the section 172(c)(3)
comprehensive emissions inventory requirement as well as approving the
RACM provisions as meeting the section 172(c)(1) requirement. Thus, we
are determining that the Michigan submission meets all SIP requirements
currently applicable for purposes of redesignation under part D of
title I of the CAA, in accordance with sections 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and
107(d)(3)(E)(v).
In making these determinations, EPA has ascertained which SIP
requirements are applicable for purposes of redesignation, and
concluded that the Michigan SIP includes measures meeting those
requirements and that they are fully approved under section 110(k) of
the CAA.
a. Michigan Has Met All Applicable Requirements for Purposes of
Redesignation of the Belding Area Under Section 110 and Part D of the
CAA
i. Section 110 General SIP Requirements
Section 110(a) of title I of the CAA contains the general
requirements for a SIP. Section 110(a)(2) provides that the
implementation plan submitted by a state must have been adopted by the
state after reasonable public notice and hearing, and, among other
things, must: (1) Include enforceable emission limitations and other
control measures, means or techniques necessary to meet the
requirements of the CAA; (2) provide for establishment and operation of
appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to
monitor ambient air quality; (3) provide for implementation of a source
permit program to regulate the modification and construction of any
stationary source within the areas covered by the plan; (4) include
provisions for the implementation of part C, Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) and part D, New Source Review (NSR) permit
programs; (5) include criteria for stationary source emission control
measures, monitoring, and reporting; (6) include provisions for air
quality modeling; and (7) provide for public and local agency
participation in planning and emission control rule development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA requires that SIPs contain measures to
prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air
quality problems in another state.
EPA interprets the ``applicable'' requirements for an area's
redesignation to be those requirements linked with a particular area's
nonattainment designation. Therefore, EPA believes that the section 110
elements described above that are not connected with nonattainment plan
submissions and not linked with an area's attainment status, such as
the ``infrastructure SIP'' elements of section 110(a)(2), are not
applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. A state remains
subject to
[[Page 24866]]
these requirements after an area is redesignated to attainment, and
thus EPA does not interpret such requirements to be relevant applicable
requirements to evaluate in a redesignation. For example, the
requirement to submit state plans addressing interstate transport
obligations under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) continue to apply to a
state regardless of the designation of any one particular area in the
state, and thus are not applicable requirements to be evaluated in the
redesignation context.
EPA has applied this interpretation consistently in many
redesignations for decades. See e.g., 81 FR 44210 (July 7, 2016) (final
redesignation for the Sullivan County, Tennessee area); 79 FR 43655
(July 28, 2014) (final redesignation for Bellefontaine, Ohio Pb
nonattainment area); 61 FR 53174-53176 (October 10, 1996) and 62 FR
24826 (May 7, 1997) (proposed and final redesignation for Reading,
Pennsylvania ozone nonattainment area); 61 FR 20458 (May 7, 1996)
(final redesignation for Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio ozone
nonattainment area); and 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995) (final
redesignation of Tampa, Florida ozone nonattainment area). See also 65
FR 37879, 37890 (June 19, 2000) (discussing this issue in final
redesignation of Cincinnati, Ohio 1-hour ozone nonattainment area); 66
FR 50399 (October 19, 2001) (final redesignation of Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania 1-hour ozone nonattainment area).
EPA has reviewed the Michigan SIP and has determined that it meets
the general SIP requirements under section 110 of the CAA to the extent
the requirements are applicable for purposes of redesignation. EPA has
previously approved provisions of Michigan's SIP addressing section 110
requirements, including provisions addressing Pb, at 40 CFR 52.1170.
On April 3, 2012, and supplemented on August 9, 2013, and September
19, 2013, Michigan submitted its infrastructure SIP elements for the
2008 Pb NAAQS as required by CAA section 110(a)(2). EPA approved
Michigan's infrastructure SIP requirements for the 2008 Pb NAAQS on
July 16, 2014. 79 FR 41439. The requirements of section 110(a)(2) are
statewide requirements that are not linked to the Pb nonattainment
status of the Belding area or Michigan's redesignation request.
ii. Part D Requirements
EPA determined that upon approval of the base year emissions
inventories and RACM provisions discussed in this rulemaking, the
Michigan SIP will meet the applicable SIP requirements for the Belding
area applicable for purposes of redesignation under part D of the CAA.
Subpart 1 of part D sets forth the basic nonattainment requirements
applicable to all nonattainment areas.
(1) Section 172 Requirements
Section 172(c) sets out general nonattainment plan requirements. A
thorough discussion of these requirements can be found in the General
Preamble for Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992)
(``General Preamble''). EPA's longstanding interpretation of the
nonattainment planning requirements of section 172 is that once an area
is attaining the NAAQS, those requirements are not ``applicable'' for
purposes of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and therefore need not be
approved into the SIP before EPA can redesignate the area. In the
General Preamble, EPA set forth its interpretation of applicable
requirements for purposes of evaluating redesignation requests when an
area is attaining a standard. 57 FR 13564. EPA noted that the
requirements for reasonable further progress (RFP) and other measures
designed to provide for an area's attainment do not apply in evaluating
redesignation requests because those nonattainment planning
requirements ``have no meaning'' for an area that has already attained
the standard. Id. This interpretation was also set forth in the
Calcagni Memorandum.
EPA's understanding of section 172 also forms the basis of its
Clean Data Policy. Under the Clean Data Policy, EPA promulgates a
determination of attainment, published in the Federal Register and
subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking, and this determination
formally suspends a state's obligation to submit most of the attainment
planning requirements that would otherwise apply, including an
attainment demonstration and planning SIPs to provide for RFP, RACM,
and contingency measures under section 172(c)(9). The Clean Data Policy
has been codified in regulations regarding the implementation of the
ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS. 70 FR 71612 (November 29, 2005) and
72 FR 20586 (April 25, 2007). The Clean Data Policy has also been
specifically applied in a number of Pb nonattainment areas where EPA
has determined that the area is attaining the Pb NAAQS. 79 FR 46212
(August 7, 2014) (proposed determination of attainment of Lyons,
Pennsylvania Pb nonattainment area); 80 FR 51127 (determination of
attainment of Eagan, Minnesota Pb nonattainment area). EPA finalized a
Clean Data Determination under this policy for the Belding Pb
nonattainment area on July 24, 2015. 80 FR 43956.
EPA's long-standing interpretation regarding the applicability of
section 172(c)'s attainment planning requirements for an area that is
attaining a NAAQS applies in this redesignation of the Belding Pb
nonattainment area as well, except for the applicability of the
requirement to implement all reasonably available control measures
under section 172(c)(1). On July 14, 2015, the United States Court of
Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (6th Circuit) ruled that to meet the
requirement of section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii), states are required to submit
plans addressing RACM/RACT under section 172(c)(1) and EPA is required
to approve those plans prior to redesignating the area, regardless of
whether the area is attaining the standard. Sierra Club v. EPA, 793
F.3d 656 (6th Cir. 2015). As Michigan is within the jurisdiction of the
6th Circuit, EPA is acting in accordance with the Sierra Club decision
by approving RACM provisions in parallel with this redesignation
action.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Although the approach being implemented here is inconsistent
with the Agency's longstanding national policy, such deviation is
required in order to act in accordance with a Circuit Court
decision. Consistent with 40 CFR 56.5(b), the Region does not need
to seek concurrence from EPA Headquarters for such deviation in
these circumstances. 81 FR 51102 (August 3, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 172(c)(1) requires the plans for all nonattainment areas to
provide for the implementation of all RACM as expeditiously as
practicable and to provide for attainment of the primary NAAQS. Under
this requirement, a state must consider all available control measures,
including reductions that area available from adopting RACT on existing
sources, for a nonattainment area and adopt and implement such measures
as are reasonably available in the area as components of the area's
attainment demonstration. EPA is today approving Michigan's RACM
submission. Therefore, Michigan has met its requirements under CAA
sections 172(c)(1) and 107(d)(3)(E)(v).
The remaining section 172(c) ``attainment planning'' requirements
are not applicable for purposes of evaluating Michigan's redesignation
request. Specifically, the RFP requirement under section 172(c)(2),
which is defined as progress that must be made toward attainment, the
requirement to submit section 172(c)(9) contingency measures, which are
measures to be taken if the area fails to make reasonable further
progress to attainment, and section 172(c)(6)'s requirement that the
SIP contain control
[[Page 24867]]
measures necessary to provide for attainment of the standard, are not
applicable requirements that Michigan must meet here because the
Belding area has monitored attainment of the 2008 Pb NAAQS. As noted,
EPA issued a determination of attainment (or clean data determination)
for the Belding area in July 2015, which formally suspended the
obligation to submit any of the attainment planning SIPs. 80 FR 43956
(July 24, 2015).
Section 172(c)(3) requires submission and approval of a
comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions.
Michigan submitted 2009, 2011, and 2013 emission inventories along with
its redesignation request. The 2013 inventory can be used as the most
accurate and current inventory. As discussed in section III.B., EPA is
approving the 2013 base year inventory as meeting the section 172(c)(3)
emissions inventory requirement for the Belding area.
Section 172(c)(4) requires the identification and quantification of
allowable emissions for major new and modified stationary sources in an
area, and section 172(c)(5) requires source permits for the
construction and operation of new and modified major stationary sources
anywhere in the nonattainment area. EPA approved Michigan's current NSR
program on December 16, 2013. 78 FR 76064. In addition, the state's
maintenance plan does not rely nonattainment NSR, therefore having a
fully approved NSR program is not an applicable requirement, but that,
nonetheless, EPA has approved the state's program.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ A detailed rationale for this view is described in a
memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled, ``Part D New Source
Review Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to
Attainment.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 172(c)(6) requires the SIP to contain control measures
necessary to provide for attainment of the standard. No additional
measures are needed to provide for attainment because attainment has
been reached.
Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to meet the applicable
provisions of section 110(a)(2). EPA finds that the Michigan SIP meets
the section 110(a)(2) applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation.
(2) Section 176 Conformity Requirements
CAA section 176(c) requires states to establish criteria and
procedures to ensure that Federally-supported or funded activities,
including highway and transit projects, conform to the air quality
planning goals in the applicable SIPs. The requirement to determine
conformity applies to transportation plans, programs and projects
developed, funded or approved under title 23 of the U.S. Code and the
Federal Transit Act (transportation conformity) as well as to all other
Federally-supported or funded projects (general conformity).
Considering the elimination of Pb additives in gasoline, transportation
conformity does not apply to the Pb NAAQS. 73 FR 66964, 67043 n.120.
EPA approved Michigan's general conformity SIP on December 18, 1996. 61
FR 66607.
b. Michigan Has a Fully Approved Applicable SIP Under Section 110(k) of
the CAA
Upon final approval of Michigan's comprehensive 2013 emissions
inventories and approval of RACM for the Belding Pb area, EPA will have
fully approved the Michigan SIP for the Belding area under section
110(k) of the CAA for all requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation, in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). EPA may
rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a redesignation request (See
page 3 of the September 4, 1992, Processing Requests to Redesignate
Areas to Attainment: Policy Memorandum (Calcagni memorandum));
Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F.3d 984,
989-990 (6th Cir. 1998); Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001)).
EPA also relies on measures approved in conjunction with a
redesignation action. See 68 FR 25413 (May 12, 2003) (approving I/M
program for St. Louis) and 68 FR 25413, 25426 (May 12, 2003). Michigan
has adopted and submitted, and EPA has fully approved, required SIP
provisions addressing the 2008 Pb standards. Of the CAA requirements
applicable to this redesignation request, only two remain--the
emissions inventory requirement of section 172(c)(3) and the RACM
requirement of section 172(c)(1).
EPA is approving the submitted Mueller emission controls as RACM/
RACT and Michigan's 2013 emissions inventories for the Belding area as
meeting the requirement of CAA section 172(c)(3). There are no SIP
provisions are currently disapproved, conditionally approved, or
partially approved in the Belding, Michigan area under section 110(k)
in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii).
3. The Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to Permanent and Enforceable
Reductions in Emissions Resulting From Implementation of the SIPs and
Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control Regulations and Other
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii))
To support the revision of an area's designation from nonattainment
to attainment, CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) requires EPA to determine
that the air quality improvement in the area is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions. The permanent and enforceable
emission reductions result from the implementation of the SIP and
applicable Federal air pollution control regulations and other
permanent and enforceable emission reductions.
Michigan identified Mueller as the lone source of Pb emissions near
the nonattainment area. Mueller produces brass rods that are used in
making plumbing fixtures and fittings among other products at its
facility in Belding, Michigan. Mueller implemented various control
measures on its west chip and east chip dryers that result in decreased
emissions. In 2010, it stopped operating its uncontrolled east chip
dryer and installed controls on its west chip dryer. A permanent and
enforceable Permit to Install number 16-11 (PTI 16-11) was issued on
October 20, 2011, and revised on March 15, 2012, which limits Pb
emissions and requires certain controls for the east and west chip
dryers. PTI 16-11 requires each chip dryer to operate a cyclone, a
thermal oxidizer, a wet scrubber, and a demister to control emissions.
Operation of the east chip dryer is allowed once the required controls
are installed. The west chip dryer stack height was increased to 122
feet in January 2012. The east chip dryer stack height is also required
to be 122 feet. Increasing the stack height creates more dispersion of
the exhaust, which can reduce the maximum concentration. The controls
and emission limits in PTI 16-11 are permanent and enforceable.
Michigan analyzed the control measures added in PTI 16-11 and found
that these measures brought the Belding area into attainment of the
2008 Pb NAAQS. The monitoring data in the Belding area, as detailed in
III.A.1, show the area has met and continues to meet the 2008 Pb NAAQS.
In addition, the Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act (Section
1417 of the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300g-6) prohibits the
use of Pb in plumbing fittings or fixtures. Effective January 4, 2014,
plumbing fittings and fixtures must go from a weighted average of 8.0
percent Pb to 0.25 percent
[[Page 24868]]
Pb. This reduction requires Mueller to reduce the amount of Pb used in
its brass rod production, which is expected to continue the decrease in
its Pb emissions.
4. Michigan Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section
175A of the CAA (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv))
In conjunction with its request to designate the Belding
nonattainment area to attainment, Michigan requested a SIP revision to
provide for maintenance of the 2008 Pb NAAQS in the area through 2025.
a. What is required in a maintenance plan?
The required elements of a maintenance plan for areas seeking
redesignation from nonattainment to attainment are contained in section
175A of the CAA. Under section 175A, the plan must demonstrate
continued attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years
after EPA approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after
redesignation, the state must submit a revised maintenance plan which
demonstrates that attainment will continue to be maintained for the
subsequent 10 years.
To address the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the
maintenance plan must contain contingency measures with a schedule for
implementation as EPA deems necessary to assure prompt correction of
any future Pb violations.
The September 4, 1992, Calcagni memorandum provides additional
guidance on the content of a maintenance plan. The memorandum states
that a maintenance plan should address the following items: The
attainment emissions inventory, a maintenance demonstration showing
maintenance for the 10 years of the maintenance period, a commitment to
maintain the existing monitoring network, factors and procedures to be
used for verification of continued attainment of the NAAQS, and a
contingency plan to prevent or correct future violations of the NAAQS.
Michigan's maintenance plan shows that the Belding area's emissions
will remain below the attainment year levels through 2025.
b. Attainment Inventory
Michigan provided Pb emissions inventories for the nonattainment
years (2009 and 2011), attainment year (2013), and future year (2025).
The Pb emissions for Mueller's Belding, Michigan facility are listed in
Table 1.
Table 1--Mueller Lead Emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009................................... 2,277.73 pounds........... nonattainment year.
2011................................... 1,402.93 pounds........... nonattainment year.
2013................................... 1,153.15 pounds........... attainment year.
2025................................... 864 pounds................ future year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michigan identified Mueller as the lone source of Pb emissions in
the vicinity of the Belding nonattainment area. Thus, the emissions
inventories provided are adequate for the Belding area.
c. Demonstration of Maintenance
Michigan included a section 175(A) maintenance plan in its
submission. Section 175A requires a state seeking redesignation to
attainment to submit a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of
the NAAQS in the area ``for at least 10 years after the
redesignation''. EPA has interpreted this as a showing of maintenance
``for a period of ten years following redesignation''. Calcagni
memorandum at 9. Where the emissions inventory method of showing
maintenance is used, its purpose is to show that emissions during the
maintenance period will not increase over the attainment year
inventory. Calcagni memorandum at 9-10.
A maintenance demonstration need not be based on modeling. See Wall
v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F. 3d 537
(7th Cir. 2004). See also 66 FR 53094, 53099-53100 (October 19, 2001),
68 FR 25413, 25430-25432 (May 12, 2003). Michigan has provided both an
emissions inventory as well as air dispersion modeling of the emission
limits established in PTI 16-11 to demonstrate that the area should
maintain the standard into the future. A summary of the air dispersion
modeling for Mueller was included in Michigan's submissions. The
modeling evaluated the Consent Order 9-2011 and PTI 16-11 revisions.
Michigan used the American Meteorology Society/Environmental Protection
Agency Regulatory Model version 11103. That analysis yielded a maximum
impact of 0.13 [micro]g/m\3\, which is below the 2008 Pb NAAQS of 0.15
[micro]g/m\3\. This modeling analysis is valid for the Belding
redesignation as the Mueller control revisions are responsible for the
emission reductions that brought the area into attainment. Michigan
also provided an emissions inventory for an attainment year, 2013, and
for a future year, 2025. See Table 1. Michigan is projecting a 25
percent decrease below attainment year emissions Pb emissions from the
source due to the reduction in Pb usage in brass manufacturing. Under
the Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act, plumbing fittings and
fixtures must go from a weighted average of 8.0 percent Pb to 0.25
percent Pb, driving the expected Pb decreases from Mueller.
Michigan's maintenance plan submission shows that the Belding
area's Pb emissions will remain below the attainment year inventories
through 2025. The reductions in Pb emissions in Belding result from the
permeant and enforceable control measures for Mueller, the lone Pb
source in the area. Monitoring data show the Belding area ambient Pb
concentrations declined following the Mueller emission reductions. It
is reasonable to expect the emissions to remain at the reduced levels
because of the control measures implemented. Thus, it is reasonable to
expect the Belding area will continue to attain the 2008 Pb NAAQS
through 2027.
EPA believes that Michigan's submission demonstrates that the area
will continue to maintain the 2008 Pb NAAQS at least through 2027. This
is because the 2027 emissions should remain at the same level as
projected for 2025 due to the permanent and enforceable limits in PTI
16-11 along with additional reductions from other rules. In addition,
the air dispersion modeling indicates that with the PTI 16-11 controls
the Belding area ambient Pb concentration will be below the 2008 Pb
NAAQS. Thus, EPA is approving the redesignation request and maintenance
plans based on a showing, in accordance with section 175A, that the
Michigan's maintenance plan provides for maintenance for at least 10
years after redesignation.
d. Monitoring Network
Michigan will monitor ambient Pb levels during the 10 year
maintenance period in the Belding area to confirm continued maintenance
of the 2008 Pb
[[Page 24869]]
NAAQS. EPA determines that the Belding, Michigan area Pb monitoring
network is adequate to confirm maintenance. Michigan commits to
continue to operate an adequate monitoring network.
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
Michigan will also continue to enter its air monitoring data into
the Air Quality System in accordance with Federal guidelines. It will
also submit periodic emissions inventories to EPA as required by the
Federal Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule to verify continued
attainment. 67 FR 39602, June 10, 2002. Both actions will help to
verify continued attainment in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.
f. Contingency Plan
The contingency plan provisions are designed to promptly correct or
prevent a violation of the NAAQS that might occur after redesignation
of an area to attainment. CAA section 175A requires that the
maintenance plan include such contingency measures. The maintenance
plan should identify the contingency measures to be adopted, a schedule
and procedure for adoption and implementation of the contingency
measures, and a time limit for action by the state. The state should
also identify specific indicators to be used to determine when the
contingency measures need to be adopted and implemented. The
maintenance plan must include a requirement that the state will
implement all pollution control measures that were contained in the SIP
before redesignation of the area to attainment. Section 175A(d) of the
CAA.
Michigan commits to implement one or more contingency measures
should the 2008 Pb NAAQS be violated during the maintenance period. The
contingency measures are:
i. Increase inspection frequency of Mueller to twice per year,
beginning three months after a quality-assured violation of the NAAQS
at a Belding, Michigan air monitoring site. The increased inspection
frequency will remain in place until the quality-assured Pb ambient air
monitored levels show NAAQS compliance on a 3-year rolling average.
ii. Require Mueller to submit an enhanced preventative maintenance/
malfunction abatement plan within six months after a quality-assured
violation of the NAAQS at a Belding, Michigan air monitoring site.
iii. Require Mueller to reassess control strategies that further
limit Pb emissions within one year of a quality-assured violation of
the NAAQS at a Belding, Michigan air monitoring site.
Michigan will also consider any other potential contingency
measures at the time of the selection.
EPA finds that Michigan's maintenance plan adequately addresses the
five basic components of a maintenance plan: attainment inventory,
maintenance demonstration, monitoring network, verification of
continued attainment, and a contingency plan.
As required by section 175A(b) of the CAA, Michigan commits to
submit to the EPA an updated Pb maintenance plan eight years after
redesignation of the Belding area to cover an additional 10 year period
beyond the initial 10 year maintenance period.
EPA is approving Michigan's 2008 Pb maintenance plan for the
Belding area as meeting the requirements of CAA section 175A.
B. Comprehensive Emissions Inventory
Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires areas to submit a
comprehensive, accurate, and current emissions inventory. Michigan
provided such an inventory in its submission.
Michigan identified Mueller as the lone source of Pb emissions in
the vicinity of the Belding nonattainment area. Thus, it provided the
emissions for Mueller that represent the emissions of the Belding area.
In 2013, Pb emissions were 1,153.15 pounds. See Table 1.
EPA approves the Pb emissions inventories submitted by Michigan in
January 2016 as fully meeting the comprehensive inventory requirement
of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA for the Belding area for the 2008 Pb
NAAQS.
C. RACM Requirements
Based on the 6th Circuit decision, CAA Section 172(c)(1) requires
areas to have approved RACM/RACT provisions to be redesignated. PTI 16-
11 added legally enforceable emission controls on Mueller considered to
be RACT for Pb. PTI 16-11 requires each Mueller chip dryer to operate a
cyclone, a thermal oxidizer, a wet scrubber, and a demister to control
emissions. The west chip dryer stack height was increased to 122 feet
in January 2012. The east chip dryer stack height is also required to
be 122 feet. EPA is approving the emission controls as required by PTI
16-11 as satisfying the RACT requirement of Section 172(c)(1).
V. What action is EPA taking?
EPA has determined that the Belding area is attaining the 2008 Pb
NAAQS and that the area has met the requirements for redesignation
under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is thus approving the
requests from Michigan to change the legal designation of the Belding
area from nonattainment to attainment for the 2008 Pb standard. EPA is
approving Michigan's maintenance plan for the Belding area as a
revision to the Michigan SIP because the plan meets the requirements of
section 175A of the CAA. EPA is approving the emission controls in PTI
16-11 as required by Consent Order 9-2011 as meeting the RACM/RACT
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(1). EPA is approving the 2013
emissions inventory as meeting the comprehensive emissions inventory
requirements of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. EPA is taking these
actions in accordance with the CAA and EPA's implementation regulations
regarding the 2008 Pb NAAQS.
We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse
written comments are filed. This rule will be effective July 31, 2017
without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written
comments by June 30, 2017. If we receive such comments, we will
withdraw this action before the effective date by publishing a
subsequent document that will withdraw the final action. All public
comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on the proposed action. 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 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.
If we do not receive any comments, this action will be effective July
31, 2017.
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 CAA and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
action merely approves state law as meeting
[[Page 24870]]
Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that reason, this 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 and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control.
Dated: May 4, 2017.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 52.1170 the table in paragraph (e) is amended:
0
a. Under ``Emissions Inventories'' by adding an entry for ``2008 lead
(Pb) 2013 base year'' after the entry for ``1997 annual
PM2.5 2005 base year;'' and
0
b. Under ``Maintenance Plans'' by adding an entry for ``2008 lead
(Pb)'' after the entry for ``2006 24-Hour PM2.5.''
The additions read as follows:
Sec. 52.1170 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
EPA-Approved Michigan Nonregulatory And Quasi-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable
Name of nonregulatory SIP geographic or State EPA approval date Comments
provision nonattainment area submittal date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Emissions Inventories
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
2008 lead (Pb) 2013 base year.... Belding area (Ionia 1/12/2016 5/31/2017, [insert ...................
County, part). Federal Register
citation].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Maintenance Plans
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
2008 lead (Pb)................... Belding area (Ionia 1/12/2016 5/31/2017, [insert ...................
County, part). Federal Register
citation].
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3. Section 52.1188 is amended by adding paragraphs (b) and (c) to read
as follows:
Sec. 52.1188 Control strategy: Lead (Pb).
* * * * *
(b) Michigan's 2013 lead emissions inventory for the Belding area
as submitted on January 12, 2016, satisfying the emission inventory
requirements of section 172(c)(3) of the Clean Air Act for the Belding
area.
(c) Approval. The 2008 lead maintenance plan for the Belding,
Michigan nonattainment area has been approved as submitted on January
12, 2016.
[[Page 24871]]
PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES
0
4. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
0
5. Section 81.323 is amended by revising the entry for Belding, MI in
the table entitled ``Michigan--2008 Lead NAAQS'' to read as follows:
Sec. 81.323 Michigan.
* * * * *
Michigan--2008 Lead NAAQS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation for the 2008 NAAQS \a\
Designated area --------------------------------------
Date \1\ Type
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Belding, MI:
Ionia County (part).......... 5/31/2017 Attainment.
The area bounded by the
following coordinates:
Southeast corner by
latitude 43.0956705 N
and longitude 85.2130771
W; southwest corner
(intersection of S.
Broas St. and W.
Washington St.) by
latitude 43.0960358 N
and longitude 85.2324027
W; northeast corner by
latitude 43.1074942 N
and longitude 85.2132313
W; western boundary 1
(intersection of W.
Ellis St. and the
vertical extension of S.
Broas St.) by latitude
43.1033277 N and
longitude 85.2322553 W;
western boundary 2
(intersection of W.
Ellis St. and N. Bridge
St.) by latitude
43.1033911 N and
longitude 85.2278464 W;
western boundary 3
(intersection of N.
Bridge St. and Earle
St.) by latitude
43.1074479 N and
longitude 85.2279722 W.
* * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as
otherwise specified.
\1\ December 31, 2011 unless otherwise noted.
[FR Doc. 2017-10928 Filed 5-30-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P