Determination of Attainment by the Attainment Date for the 2008 Ozone Standard; Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE Nonattainment Area, 50814-50820 [2017-23226]
Download as PDF
50814
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 211 / Thursday, November 2, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: October 17, 2017.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
2. In § 52.720, the table in paragraph
(c) is amended under ‘‘Part 211:
Definitions and General Provisions’’,
‘‘Subpart B: Definitions’’ by revising the
entry for 211.7150 ‘‘Volatile Organic
Material (VOM) or Volatile Organic
Compound (VOC)’’ to read as follows:
■
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52—APPROVAL AND
PROMULGATION OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
§ 52.720
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
*
■
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED ILLINOIS REGULATIONS AND STATUTES
Illinois citation
State
effective
date
Title/subject
*
*
*
EPA approval date
*
*
Comments
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Part 211: Definitions and General Provisions
*
*
*
*
Subpart B: Definitions
*
*
*
211.7150 ......................................
*
*
*
Volatile Organic Material (VOM)
Or Volatile Organic Compound
(VOC).
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2017–23468 Filed 11–1–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2016–0638; FRL–9969–93–
Region 3]
Determination of Attainment by the
Attainment Date for the 2008 Ozone
Standard; Philadelphia-WilmingtonAtlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE
Nonattainment Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is making a final
determination that the PhiladelphiaWilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MDDE marginal ozone nonattainment area
(the Philadelphia Area) has attained the
2008 ozone national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS) by the July 20, 2016
attainment date. This final
determination is based on complete,
nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:56 Nov 01, 2017
*
Jkt 244001
1/23/2017
*
11/2/2017, [insert Federal Register citation].
*
certified, and quality assured ambient
air quality monitoring data for the
Philadelphia Area for the 2013–2015
monitoring period. The effect of this
determination of attainment (DOA) is
that the Philadelphia Area will not be
bumped up or reclassified as a moderate
nonattainment area. The determination
of attainment is not equivalent to a
redesignation, and the States in the
Philadelphia Area must still meet the
statutory requirements for redesignation
in order to be redesignated to
attainment. This determination is also
not a clean data determination. This
action is being taken under the Clean
Air Act (CAA).
DATES: This final rule is effective on
December 4, 2017.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
EPA–R03–OAR–2016–0638. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the https://www.regulations.gov Web
site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
e.g., confidential business information
(CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
*
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available through https://
www.regulations.gov, or please contact
the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section for
additional availability information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gregory Becoat, (215) 814–2036, or by
email at becoat.gregory@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On April 18, 2017 (82 FR 18268), EPA
published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPR) for the Philadelphia
Area. The Philadelphia Area consists of
Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery
and Philadelphia Counties in
Pennsylvania; Atlantic, Burlington,
Camden, Cape May, Cumberland,
Gloucester, Mercer, Ocean and Salem
Counties in New Jersey; Cecil County,
Maryland; and New Castle County in
Delaware. See 40 CFR 81.331, 81.339,
81.321, and 81.308. In the NPR, EPA
proposed to determine, in accordance
with its statutory obligations under
section 181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA and the
relevant regulatory provisions (40 CFR
E:\FR\FM\02NOR1.SGM
02NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 211 / Thursday, November 2, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
51.1103), that the Philadelphia Area
attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the
applicable extended attainment date of
July 20, 2016.1
II. EPA’s Evaluation
Section 181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA
requires that EPA determine whether an
area has attained the NAAQS by its
attainment date based on complete and
certified air quality data from the three
full calendar years preceding an area’s
attainment date. The 2008 ozone
NAAQS is 0.075 parts per million
(ppm). Consistent with the requirements
contained in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix
P, which set forth how to compute
whether monitoring sites and
nonattainment areas are attaining the
ozone NAAQS, EPA reviewed the ozone
ambient air quality monitoring data for
the monitoring period from 2013
through 2015 for the Philadelphia Area,
as recorded in the air quality system
(AQS) database. State and local agencies
responsible for ozone air monitoring
networks supplied and quality assured
the data. EPA determined that the
monitoring sites with valid data had
design values equal to or less than 0.075
ppm based on the 2013–2015
monitoring period. Therefore, based on
2013–2015 certified air quality data,
EPA concludes that the Philadelphia
Area has attained the 2008 ozone
NAAQS.
Other specific requirements of this
determination of attainment by the
attainment date and the rationale for
EPA’s final action are explained in the
NPR and will not be restated here. EPA
received comments that are addressed
in Section III of this rulemaking action.
nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
III. Public Comments and EPA’s
Responses
EPA received adverse comments from
the Center for Biological Diversity
(Center), Sierra Club, and Delaware
Department of Natural Resources and
Environmental Control (Delaware). The
comments are excerpted and/or
summarized and addressed in this
section:
1 In a final rulemaking action published on May
4, 2016, EPA determined that the Philadelphia Area
did not attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS by its July
20, 2015 attainment date, based on ambient air
quality monitoring data for the 2012–2014
monitoring period. EPA determined that the
Philadelphia Area qualified for a 1-year extension
of its attainment date, as provided in section
181(a)(5) of the CAA and interpreted by regulation
at 40 CFR 51.1107, and granted that extension. EPA
established a new attainment date of July 20, 2016,
with attainment to be based on ambient air quality
monitoring data for the 2013–2015 monitoring
period. See 81 FR 26697. (May 4, 2016). EPA’s
decision to extend the attainment date has been
challenged by the State of Delaware in Delaware v.
EPA, No. 16–1230 (D.C. Cir.). That case is currently
pending before the Court and has not been decided.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:56 Nov 01, 2017
Jkt 244001
Comment 1: EPA’s regression
approach is inconsistent with EPA’s
Appendix P regulations, and EPA’s
reliance on the regression analysis is
unlawful and arbitrary. For one of the
two monitors (Brandywine), EPA relies
on a regression analysis to predict the
missing ozone concentration
measurements and, as a result,
purportedly achieves the requisite data
completeness at that monitor. See U.S.
EPA Region 3, Delaware Brandywine/
Martin Luther King Monitors Data
Substitution Analysis TSD 2013–2015
Ozone (Dec. 2016) (TSD), at p. 7.
Appendix P is quite clear, however, that
‘‘[w]hen computing whether the
minimum data completeness
requirements have been met,
meteorological or ambient data may be
sufficient to demonstrate that
meteorological conditions on missing
days were not conducive to
concentrations above the level of the
standard.’’ 40 CFR part 50, Appendix P
section 2.3(b) (emphasis added). EPA’s
regression analysis does not purport to
make any demonstrations regarding
meteorological conditions, nor can it, as
the analysis is based purely on ozone
monitor readings.
Response 1: Commenters read 40 CFR
part 50, Appendix P, section 2.3(b) too
narrowly, and ignore the last sentence of
that section, which states that ‘‘Missing
days assumed less then [sic] the level of
the standard are counted for the purpose
of meeting the data completeness
requirement.’’ EPA interprets this
regulation to allow for reasonable,
rational assumptions using available
data, whether meteorological or
ambient, to determine whether, on days
where an ozone monitor is missing data,
it is unlikely that the actual ozone levels
would exceed the NAAQS. For this
determination, EPA used three different
methods to determine whether data
from days that the relevant ozone
monitors were missing data were
rationally assumed to be less than the
level of the NAAQS, and therefore could
be counted toward the data
completeness requirement. These
methods are: (1) Analysis of
temperature; (2) regression analysis; and
(3) data substitution. First, EPA
conducted an analysis that compared
temperature (a meteorological
condition) at the Wilmington Delaware
National Airport (ILG) to measured
ozone readings from 2010 through 2015
at the 18 ozone monitors in the
Philadelphia Area (See Table 4 of the
technical support document (TSD) at
page 4). The highest daily 8-hour ozone
readings from those 18 Philadelphia
Area ozone monitors on all days (not
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
50815
just missing days) was compared to the
maximum daily temperatures at the
Wilmington Airport on the
corresponding days. The results of this
analysis, presented in Figure 1 on page
6 of the TSD, shows that from 2010
through 2015, none of the 18 monitors
recorded an 8-hour ozone level above
0.075 ppm when the temperature at
Wilmington Airport was at or below 77
degrees Fahrenheit (°F). This analysis
identified 18 days in 2013, 30 days in
2014, and 27 days in 2015 with missing
ozone readings that could reasonably be
assumed to be below the 0.075 ppm
threshold at the Martin Luther King
(MLK) monitor (AQS ID 10–003–2004)
in Delaware. The temperature-based
analysis alone added enough complete
days to the MLK monitor to meet the
data completeness threshold. For the
Brandywine monitor (AQS ID 10–003–
1010), the temperature-based analysis
identified 22 days during 2013, 9 days
during 2014, and 8 days during 2015
that could reasonably be assumed to be
below a 0.075 ppm ozone reading.
However, the temperature analysis did
not add enough complete days to the
Brandywine monitor to meet the
Appendix P data completeness level
because there was an insufficient
number of days below 77 °F at the
Wilmington Airport in which the
Brandywine monitor was missing data.
Therefore, EPA performed a regression
analysis in order to fill in the remaining
data gap as well as to validate the data
results (for both monitors) obtained
from the analysis of temperature
method.
This regression analysis relied on
ambient data—measured ozone levels at
a nearby certified ozone monitor—to
predict ozone levels at monitors with
missing data. This type of analysis is
only appropriate where readings from a
nearby certified ozone monitor closely
correlate with readings from the
monitors with missing data. In this case,
EPA examined the two other air quality
monitors located in the same county as
the Brandywine and MLK monitors,
compared recorded ozone readings of all
four monitors on days and found that
the Bellefonte2 monitor (AQS ID 10–
003–1013), which is located five miles
from both Brandywine and MLK,
correlated most closely with those
monitors. As explained in more detail in
the TSD, the Bellefonte2 monitor is
strongly correlated with both the
Brandywine and MLK monitors (TSD at
pp. 8–10). Using this information, EPA
determined a separate linear regression
equation for each of the Brandywine
and MLK monitors. These two equations
allowed calculation of predicted ozone
E:\FR\FM\02NOR1.SGM
02NOR1
nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
50816
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 211 / Thursday, November 2, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
readings for the Brandywine or MLK
monitor on days when those monitors
were missing data by using actual ozone
readings from the Bellefonte2 monitor
(TSD at p.11) in the equation. The
values calculated using the linear
regression equations for the MLK and
Brandywine monitors are shaded green
in Table 6 of the TSD on pages 11–16.
EPA took a conservative approach and
added, as complete days, only those
days at the Brandywine monitor where
the predicted ozone value was less than
0.060 ppm. That is, EPA only employed
the regression analysis method to add
days toward the data completeness
requirement for the Brandywine
monitor where EPA’s predicted ozone
value was well below the level of the
NAAQS. The days added as ‘‘complete’’
days to the Brandywine monitor via this
method (linear regression equation
showing less than 0.060 ppm ozone) are
represented by the numeral ‘‘2’’ in Table
9 of the TSD. The regression analysis
added 8 complete days in 2013 and 16
complete days in 2014 to the
Brandywine monitor (TSD, p.16) and
also validated and confirmed EPA’s
conclusions from its temperature
method analysis at this monitor. Since
the analysis of temperature method
provided sufficient complete data for
the MLK monitor, EPA performed a
similar regression analysis for the MLK
monitor only for the purpose of
confirming and validating its
conclusions drawn from the
temperature analysis. Both the
temperature analysis and regression
methods produced the same results at
the MLK monitor.
EPA also used a third method—a data
substitution analysis—as a further check
on the validity of the first two methods
on the Brandywine and MLK monitors.
When any of the four monitors in New
Castle County, Delaware, was missing a
valid day of data during the 2013–2015
ozone seasons, EPA looked at ambient
data in the form of actual recorded
ozone values at the other New Castle
County monitors and substituted the
highest recorded ozone value for the
missing value(s) at the other monitor(s).
After adding these substituted data
values, a 2013–2015 ‘‘test design value’’
was calculated for all four monitors.
None of the four monitors’ calculated
test design values, including
Brandywine and MLK, exceeded the
ozone standard of 75 ppb. See Table 8,
TSD at p. 17.
Comment 2: The monitor data relied
upon by EPA do not actually
demonstrate that exceedances of the
NAAQS will not occur at temperatures
below 78 degrees. (Sierra Club, p. 2). For
both of the monitors (Brandywine and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:56 Nov 01, 2017
Jkt 244001
MLK), EPA relies heavily on a simplistic
comparison of monitored ozone values
at monitors within the Philadelphia
Nonattainment Area and daily high
temperature data from the Wilmington
Delaware National Airport to
purportedly show that meteorological
conditions on days with high
temperatures of 77 °F or below are not
conducive to ozone formation. TSD at p.
3. But EPA’s conclusion regarding the
77 °F temperature threshold is not
supported by data upon which EPA
relies and is inconsistent with prior
statements by the agency regarding the
parameters that influence ozone
formation. With regard to the data,
EPA’s sample of monitor-days is far too
small a data set from which to conclude
that 77 °F represents a magical limit
below which ozone concentrations are
assured to be below the NAAQS.
Indeed, Figure 1 of the TSD shows that
at 78 °F—just one degree above the level
at which EPA expresses confidence that
no NAAQS violations will occur—the
maximum monitored ozone level in the
Philadelphia Nonattainment Area was
close to 85 parts per billion, well above
the 75 part per billion (ppb) NAAQS.
Moreover, Figure 1 also shows that at
68 °F—nine degrees below the
temperature threshold identified by
EPA—maximum monitored ozone levels
in the Philadelphia Nonattainment Area
were within one part per billion of the
NAAQS.
Response 2: It is not necessary to
demonstrate that exceedances of the
NAAQS would never occur at
temperatures below 78 °F, nor was the
purpose of the analysis of temperature
method to do so. The methods used to
determine data completeness are
consistent with 40 CFR part 50,
Appendix P, Section 2.3(b) and are
grounded in science. As an example,
EPA approved a similar demonstration
from Delaware in 2010 for the same
Brandywine ozone monitoring site
which relied on a similar ozone and
temperature comparison. This
demonstration was referenced in a clean
data determination, which is a different
type of rulemaking action that also
relies on air quality data, for the
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City,
PA-NJ-DE-MD nonattainment area for
the 1997 ozone NAAQS which was
finalized in 2012 (77 FR 17341–17343).
The Delaware demonstration relied on
ambient ozone and temperature data for
years 1997–2009, and reached a similar
conclusion that ozone levels did not
exceed 0.075 ppm in the Philadelphia
area on any days where the daily
maximum temperature was less than
77 °F. While not necessary for the data
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
completeness determination for this
Philadelphia determination of
attainment, this example is provided to
demonstrate that data completeness
procedures conducted by Delaware in
the past have arrived at the same
conclusion with regard to the use of
temperature data thresholds. Thus, EPA
does not agree that the 77 °F
temperature threshold below which no
ozone exceedances have occurred in the
Philadelphia Area is not supported by
the evidence. The fact that sometimes
very high levels of ozone occur at 78
degrees or that sometimes high levels of
ozone (yet still below 0.075 ppm) occur
at much lower temperatures does not
invalidate the 77 °F threshold in this
instance. Also, one measured ozone
value above 0.075 ppm does not equal
a NAAQS exceedance because of the
definition of design value, which is a
statistically-based measure of the 4th
high over a 3-year period. Regarding the
sample size, EPA notes that Delaware’s
analysis of temperature versus ozone
concentrations for the period of 1997 to
2009, when combined with EPA’s
analysis of temperature versus ozone
concentrations for the period of 2010
through 2015, provides nineteen years
of data supporting the temperature
analysis conclusion. The following
sources further discuss the importance
of the relationship between temperature
and ozone formation as established by
both EPA and the scientific literature for
decades:
(1) Camalier, L., Cox, W., and
Dolwick, P. (2007). The effects of
meteorology in urban areas and their
use in assessing ozone trends.
Atmospheric Environment, Volume 41,
Issue 33, pages 7127–7137; (2) Cox, W.
and Chu, S (1996). Assessment of
interannual ozone variation in urban
areas from a climatological perspective.
Atmospheric Environment, Volume 30,
Issue 14, pages 2615–2615; (3) U.S. EPA
(2016). Trends in Ozone Concentrations
Adjusted for Weather Conditions.
https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/trendsozone-adjusted-weather-conditions;
and; (4) Walcek, C. and Yuan, H. (1995).
Calculated influence of temperaturerelated factors on ozone formation rates
in the Lower Troposphere. Journal of
Applied Meteorology, Volume 34, pages
1056–1069.
Comment 3: EPA’s proposed
attainment determination is not
protective of public health because
monitoring data from the 2016 ozone
season no longer supports a finding that
the Philadelphia Area is meeting the
2008 ozone NAAQS.
Response 3: To determine whether an
area attained by the 2008 ozone NAAQS
attainment date of July 20, 2016, EPA is
E:\FR\FM\02NOR1.SGM
02NOR1
nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 211 / Thursday, November 2, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
required to rely on the three previous
full years of data, which is 2013–2015.
CAA section 181(b)(2)(A); 40 CFR part
50, Appendix P, section 2.3(b). Any data
occurring in calendar year 2016 cannot
be used in this determination because
July 20, 2016 is in the middle of the
2016 ozone season and would produce
only incomplete non-quality assured,
and uncertified data, as of the July 2016
attainment date. The statutory provision
governing the type of determination of
attainment EPA is finalizing today is
very clear: ‘‘the Administrator shall
determine, based on the area’s design
value (as of the attainment date),
whether the area attained the standard
by that date.’’ CAA section 181(b)(2)(A)
(emphasis added). When making
determinations of attainment by the
attainment deadline, EPA has
consistently applied this unambiguous
language as restricting its analysis to the
years of data that constitute the basis for
an area’s design value as of the specific
attainment deadline. EPA’s regulations
at 40 CFR part 50, Appendix P further
clarify that the design value be derived
from ‘‘three consecutive, complete
calendar years of air quality monitoring
data.’’ 40 CFR part 50, Appendix P,
section 2.3(b) (emphasis added). The
commenter’s request that EPA use nonquality assured, uncertified, incomplete
calendar year 2016 data for this section
181(b)(2) determination is not permitted
under the statute and regulations.
Comment 4: EPA illegally extended
the attainment date deadline.
Response 4: As noted in the proposed
rule (82 FR 18269, fn 2), the issue of
whether EPA ‘‘illegally’’ extended the
attainment date deadline from July 20,
2015 to July 20, 2016 is the subject of
a petition for review filed by the State
of Delaware on July 5, 2016 in the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit. The petition has been
fully briefed, and oral argument was
held on October 5, 2017. State of
Delaware Department of Natural
Resources & Environmental Control v.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
No. 16–1230. The final rule extending
the Philadelphia Area’s attainment date
is therefore legally effective at this time
and outside the scope of this
rulemaking.
Comment 5: The CAA requires that a
finding of attainment be made only
when all measures needed for
attainment have been implemented, and
the current air quality meets the
standard.
Response 5: Commenters are incorrect
regarding the CAA’s requirements for a
section 181(b)(2) determination of
attainment by the attainment date.
Nowhere in that provision does the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:56 Nov 01, 2017
Jkt 244001
CAA require that such a finding can
only be made ‘‘when all measures
needed for attainment have been
implemented’’ and ‘‘current air quality
meets the standard.’’ Demonstrations of
attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS
by the attainment date require using the
three calendar years of certified air
quality data preceding the attainment
date, which is 2013–2015.
Comment 6: Section 181(b)(2) does
not restrict EPA to considering only
fully certified, quality assured and
complete data from 2013–2015, and the
resulting 3-year design values calculated
from those data. EPA should consider
the preliminary 2016 data, and has
considered data other than the three
years of data prior to the attainment date
in past rulemakings, including:
(1) The January 25, 2012 proposed
determination of attainment and clean
data determination for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS for the New York-New JerseyConnecticut Nonattainment Area (NYNJ-CT NAA) at 77 FR 3720; and
(2) The July 18, 2012 final
determination of attainment and clean
data determination for the NY-NJ-CT
NAA at 77 FR 36163; and
(3) The May 15, 2014 proposal to
rescind the clean data determination for
the NY-NJ-CT NAA at 79 FR 27830.
The commenter asserts that these
actions ‘‘. . . prove[ ] that EPA has
considered uncertified data in proposals
involving findings of attainment/clean
data determinations.’’
Response 6: All of the EPA actions
cited by the Commenter support EPA’s
use of only the three years of complete,
quality-assured and certified ozone
monitoring data preceding the
attainment date when making this
section 181(b)(2) determination of
attainment by the attainment date. EPA
often makes 181(b)(2) determinations of
attainment by the attainment date in the
same actions as clean data
determinations, but these are two
distinct actions with different statutory
and regulatory requirements and
consequences. Therefore, it is
reasonable for EPA to consider air
quality monitoring data differently for
these two types of actions. EPA’s
regulations governing clean data
determinations for the various
pollutants, including ozone, interpret
the CAA as suspending attainment
planning requirements for only as long
as the area continues to attain the
standard. See, e.g., 40 CFR 51.1118.
Thus, for a CDD, EPA requires an
attaining design value based on three
full years of data, and also may consider
any additional preliminary data as well.
Because the regulatory consequences of
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
50817
a clean data determination depend on
continued attaining air quality, review
of data until the final rulemaking as
well as post-rulemaking review of data
is appropriate. By contrast, section
181(b)(2) has the specific statutory
consequence of deciding whether or not
an area is reclassified to a higher
classification. Under the CAA, if an area
attains the NAAQS by its statutory
attainment date, it cannot be ‘‘bumped
up’’ or reclassified, even if it later
violates the standard after that date. The
Act therefore instructs the EPA to make
a determination of an area’s air quality
attainment status as of a date certain—
the area’s attainment deadline.
The January 25, 2012 proposal cited
by Commenter contains both a
determination of attainment by the
attainment date and a clean data
determination. The 2012 proposal
specifically states that ‘‘EPA proposes to
determine, in accordance with section
181(b)(2), that the NY-NJ-CT area
attained the 1997 eight-hour ozone
standard by the applicable deadline for
that standard, June 15, 2010. This
proposed determination is based on
complete, quality-assured and certified
data for 2007–2009.’’ 77 FR 3720, 3722.
In the next paragraph, the proposal
states ‘‘[i]n addition, EPA is separately
and independently proposing to
determine that the NY-NJ-CT area is
currently attaining the 1997 eight-hour
ozone standard, based on complete,
quality-assured and certified data for
2008–2010 and preliminary data for
2011 that indicate continued
attainment.’’ Id. This second paragraph
describes EPA’s clean data
determination (CDD), and therefore may
consider all data up to the point of the
rulemaking, including preliminary data.
In this action, EPA is only making a
section 181(b)(2) determination of
attainment by the attainment date for
the Philadelphia Area. If EPA were
making a clean data determination for
the Philadelphia Area, the preliminary
2016 data could be considered as a
supplement.
Similarly, the June 18, 2012 2 final
action for the NY-NJ-CT NAA uses only
complete, quality-assured and certified
2007–2009 data for the determination of
attainment by the June 15, 2010
attainment date, while using complete,
quality-assured and certified 2008–2010
data and preliminary 2011 ozone data in
making its clean data determination. See
77 FR 36163 (June 18, 2012). EPA’s 2014
action proposing to rescind the 2012
2 The comment incorrectly cites July 18, 2012 as
the Federal Register date for this final
determination. The correct date is June 18, 2012.
See 77 FR 36163.
E:\FR\FM\02NOR1.SGM
02NOR1
nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
50818
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 211 / Thursday, November 2, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
clean data determination for the NY-NJCT NAA followed the same practice of
considering all recent data. See 79 FR
27830, 27832 (May 15, 2014). Thus,
these previous actions cited by the
comment do not show that EPA uses or
considers incomplete, uncertified and
preliminary data when making a section
181(b)(2) determinations of attainment
by the attainment date. Today’s action is
therefore consistent with the other
actions cited by the Commenter.
Comment 7: DNREC objects to EPA
performing the data substitution
analysis for the two Delaware monitors
without notifying Delaware and giving
Delaware an opportunity to review prior
to publication.
Response 7: EPA is required to make
this determination of attainment by the
attainment date. This determination of
attainment cannot be made without
complete air quality data for 2013–2015.
Because DNREC did not submit a data
substitution analysis for the two
Delaware monitors with incomplete
data, EPA was required to perform this
analysis.
Comment 8: Early 2017 ozone season
data show that the Philadelphia Area
has already experienced two episodes of
nonattaining air quality based on
preliminary maximum ozone
concentrations of 79 ppb in Delaware
and 86 ppb in Philadelphia.
Response 8: EPA’s determination of
attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
for the Philadelphia Area is based on
complete, quality assured, and certified
data for the 2013–2015 ozone seasons in
accordance with section 181(b)(2) of the
Act and 40 CFR parts 50, 51 and 58.
Comment 9: EPA’s notice did not
explain the implications of a finding of
attainment in its proposal, and Delaware
believes that a finalization of this
finding will suspend CAA obligations
for the area. Therefore, if EPA makes a
final determination of attainment based
on the 2013–2015 data, it must
immediately make a finding of
nonattainment using 2014–2016 data.
Response 9: EPA’s notice did not
explain in detail all the implications of
the section 181(b)(2) determination of
attainment by the attainment date. One
consequence of the determination of
attainment by the extended attainment
date is that the Philadelphia Area will
not be reclassified as a Moderate
nonattainment area. See CAA section
181(b)(2)(A). However, although the
Philadelphia Area will remain a
Marginal nonattainment area, since it is
part of the ozone transport region (OTR)
it will need to continue to comply with
the additional requirements applicable
to OTR states, including moderate area
requirements. Furthermore, EPA clearly
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:56 Nov 01, 2017
Jkt 244001
stated in the Summary section of the
NPR that this action was not a
redesignation of the Philadelphia Area
to attainment. EPA also reiterates that
this action is also not a clean data
determination under 40 CFR 51.1118. A
clean data determination, if it were to
occur at some future time, would have
the effect of suspending any attainment
planning requirements. Regarding the
commenter’s statement that EPA must
immediately make a finding of
nonattainment (or a nonattainment
designation) using the 2014–2016 ozone
data, such a finding would be
meaningless in this context. The
Philadelphia Area continues to be
designated nonattainment for the 2008
ozone NAAQS, and EPA is not, in this
notice, issuing a clean data
determination such that the Agency
would need to rescind such
determination based on more recent air
quality data. Given that today’s action is
not changing the Philadelphia Area’s
marginal nonattainment designation, the
suggestion that the Agency issue a
nonattainment designation is
inappropriate. If certified air quality
data indicates issues with continuing
attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS,
the EPA will work with the relevant
states in the Philadelphia Area and, to
the extent necessary, use appropriate
CAA authorities to address those air
quality issues.
Comment 10: EPA should not make a
determination of attainment for the 2008
ozone NAAQS when data shows that
the 2015 ozone NAAQS of 70 ppm is
not currently being met.
Response 10: EPA’s determination of
attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
by the attainment date of July 20, 2016,
is statutorily required by section
181(b)(2), and requires that EPA use
2013–2015 ozone air quality data in
determining whether the 2008 NAAQS
has been met, as of the July 20, 2016
attainment date for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS. The 2015 ozone NAAQS is not
germane to the specific question of
whether the area attained the 2008
ozone NAAQS by the attainment date.
Comment 11: Delaying the
determination of nonattainment for the
Philadelphia Area will only delay
adoption of needed SIP measures to
bring the area into attainment.
Response 11: The determination of
attainment by the attainment date under
181(b)(2) does not suspend any state
planning requirements that are in place
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The effect
of this action will result in the
Philadelphia Area remaining as a
marginal nonattainment area for the
2008 ozone NAAQS, and keeping all
currently applicable planning
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
requirements in place, including OTR
requirements.
Comment 12: The commenter objects
to efforts by Pennsylvania Department
of Environmental Protection (PADEP) to
remove 2016 ozone data based on
‘‘exceptional events,’’ especially if the
exceptional event is an increasing
number of heat waves caused by global
warning.
Response 12: This comment is not
germane to this determination of
attainment because EPA did not rely on
any Pennsylvania ozone monitoring
data from 2016 in making its
determination of attainment. As
required by the CAA and EPA
regulations regarding determinations of
attainment by the attainment date, EPA
used only complete, quality-assured and
certified ozone data from calendar years
2013–2015.
Comment 13: The Center has further
concerns about EPA’s approach for
meeting data completeness
requirements, especially given the
exceedances of the 2008 and 2015
NAAQS as noted above. The proposed
rule notes that EPA was able to ‘‘add’’
missing data from the Brandywine and
MLK monitors by conducting ‘‘an
analysis of the meteorological data and
a regression analysis’’ and performed a
‘‘substitution analysis as a check on the
validity’’ of that analysis. See, 82 FR
18270 (April 18, 2017). It would be
more appropriate to require redundancy
at monitoring stations prone to
malfunctioning as opposed to relying on
data substitutions in areas suffering
from ozone levels at or above the
NAAQS to assure that the most accurate
data is collected.
Response 13: Please see the responses
to comments 1 and 2 above with regard
to the adequacy of the methods used to
meet the minimum data completeness
requirements at the MLK and
Brandywine monitors. As to requiring
redundant monitors, the Philadelphia
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) is
currently meeting monitoring
requirements specified in 40 CFR part
58 Appendix D. Appendix D does not
require redundant monitoring for ozone.
EPA has made recommendations to
Delaware Department of Natural
Resources and Environmental Control
(DNREC) to try to reduce the data loss
at the Brandywine air monitoring site.
EPA is required to perform technical
systems audits on each primary quality
assurance organization at a frequency of
once every three years. DNREC was
audited by EPA Region 3 on May 10–12,
2016. One of the major findings of this
audit was the incompleteness issues at
the Brandywine site. EPA recommended
as corrective action to mitigate potential
E:\FR\FM\02NOR1.SGM
02NOR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 211 / Thursday, November 2, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
data loss due to down power lines that
DNREC do preemptive tree trimming
each year. In addition, EPA
recommended having a backup power
source at the site. DNREC’s response to
EPA’s recommendation was that a backup power source is not feasible. DNREC
will consider purchasing a batteryoperated FEM monitor as a back-up in
case of sustained power loss at the site,
if resources are available.
Comment 14: EPA also received
comments that were not germane to this
final ruling but referred generally to the
support of continuing implementation
of air quality standards and regulations.
The comments included support of
keeping EPA regulations in place to
protect human health and the
environment.
Response 14: EPA appreciates the
supportive comments, and notes that
ozone air quality monitoring will
continue and existing air quality
standards and regulations will remain in
place. This determination of attainment
by the attainment date does not reduce
or revoke any existing ozone monitoring
or control requirements.
IV. Final Action
EPA is making a final determination,
in accordance with its obligations under
section 181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA and 40
CFR 51.1103, that the Philadelphia Area
attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the
applicable attainment date of July 20,
2016. This determination of attainment
does not constitute a redesignation to
attainment, and is also not a clean data
determination.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
A. General Requirements
This rulemaking action finalizes a
determination of attainment for the 2008
ozone NAAQS based on air quality and
does not impose additional
requirements. For that reason, this
determination of attainment:
• 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);
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
action because SIP approvals are
exempted under Executive Order 12866.
• 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:56 Nov 01, 2017
Jkt 244001
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, this rule does not have
tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the state, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
B. Submission to Congress and the
Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
50819
circuit by January 2, 2018. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this action for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action
determining that the Philadelphia Area
attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by its
July 20, 2016 attainment date may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 11, 2017.
Cecil Rodrigues,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 6, 2017.
Catherine R. McCabe,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 2.
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:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart I—Delaware
2. In § 52.425, paragraph (d) is added
to read as follows:
■
§ 52.425
Determinations of attainment.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Based upon EPA’s review of the
air quality data for the 3-year period
2013 to 2015, Philadelphia-WilmingtonAtlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal
ozone nonattainment area has attained
the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient
air quality standard (NAAQS) by the
applicable attainment date of July 20,
2016. Therefore, EPA has met the
requirement pursuant to CAA section
181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on the
area’s air quality as of the attainment
date, whether the area attained the
standard. EPA also determined that the
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City,
PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal ozone
nonattainment area will not be
reclassified for failure to attain by its
E:\FR\FM\02NOR1.SGM
02NOR1
50820
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 211 / Thursday, November 2, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
applicable attainment date pursuant to
section 181(b)(2)(A).
Subpart V—Maryland
3. In § 52.1082, paragraph (j) is added
to read as follows:
■
§ 52.1082
Determinations of attainment.
*
*
*
*
*
(j) Based upon EPA’s review of the air
quality data for the 3-year period 2013
to 2015, Philadelphia-WilmingtonAtlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal
ozone nonattainment area has attained
the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient
air quality standard (NAAQS) by the
applicable attainment date of July 20,
2016. Therefore, EPA has met the
requirement pursuant to CAA section
181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on the
area’s air quality as of the attainment
date, whether the area attained the
standard. EPA also determined that the
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City,
PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal ozone
nonattainment area will not be
reclassified for failure to attain by its
applicable attainment date pursuant to
section 181(b)(2)(A).
4. In § 52.1576, paragraph (d) is added
to read as follows:
■
Determinations of attainment.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) Based upon EPA’s review of the
air quality data for the 3-year period
2013 to 2015, Philadelphia-WilmingtonAtlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal
ozone nonattainment area has attained
the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient
air quality standard (NAAQS) by the
applicable attainment date of July 20,
2016. Therefore, EPA has met the
requirement pursuant to CAA section
181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on the
area’s air quality as of the attainment
date, whether the area attained the
standard. EPA also determined that the
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City,
PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal ozone
nonattainment area will not be
reclassified for failure to attain by its
applicable attainment date pursuant to
section 181(b)(2)(A).
Subpart NN—Pennsylvania
5. In § 52.2056, paragraph (o) is added
to read as follows:
nlaroche on DSK9F9SC42PROD with RULES
■
§ 52.2056
Determinations of attainment.
*
*
*
*
*
(o) Based upon EPA’s review of the air
quality data for the 3-year period 2013
to 2015, Philadelphia-WilmingtonAtlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:56 Nov 01, 2017
Jkt 244001
2991, or send an email to
Nicole.Ongele@fcc.gov.
47 CFR Parts 2, 15, 18, 73, 74, 78, 80,
87, 90, and 101
This is a
summary of the Commission’s First
Report and Order (R&O), ET Docket No.
15–170, FCC 17–93, adopted July 13,
2017, and released July 14, 2017. The
full text of this document is available for
inspection and copying during normal
business hours in the FCC Reference
Center (Room CY–A257), 445 12th
Street SW., Washington, DC 20554, or
by downloading the text from the
Commission’s Web site at [https://
transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_
Business/2017/db1003/FCC-1793A1.pdf]. Alternative formats are
available for people with disabilities
(Braille, large print, electronic files,
audio format) by sending an email to
fcc504@fcc.gov or calling the
Commission’s Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202)
418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432
(TTY).
[ET Docket No. 15–170; FCC 17–93]
Synopsis
[FR Doc. 2017–23226 Filed 11–1–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
Authorization of Radiofrequency
Equipment
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
Subpart FF—New Jersey
§ 52.1576
ozone nonattainment area has attained
the 2008 8-hour ozone national ambient
air quality standard (NAAQS) by the
applicable attainment date of July 20,
2016. Therefore, EPA has met the
requirement pursuant to CAA section
181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on the
area’s air quality as of the attainment
date, whether the area attained the
standard. EPA also determined that the
Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City,
PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal ozone
nonattainment area will not be
reclassified for failure to attain by its
applicable attainment date pursuant to
section 181(b)(2)(A).
The Federal Communications
Commission (Commission) amends its
equipment authorization regulations,
increasing the Commission’s agility to
respond to changes in technology and
industry standards. This rule
consolidates, simplifies, and streamlines
certain procedures, and removes the
requirement to file the import
declaration FCC Form 740 under certain
circumstances.
DATES: Effective November 2, 2017.
The incorporation by reference listed
in the rule was approved by the Director
of the Federal Register as of November
2, 2017.
ADDRESSES: FCC Reference Information
Center, Portals II, 445 12th Street SW.,
Room CY–A257, Washington, DC 20554
for full text of ‘‘First Report and Order,
FCC 17–93’’ (also at https://
apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/
FCC-17-93A1.docx) and inspection of
material incorporated by reference. See
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for details.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brian Butler, Office of Engineering and
Technology, (202) 418–2702, email:
Brian.Butler@fcc.gov, TTY (202) 418–
2989. For additional information
concerning the Paperwork Reduction
Act information collection requirements
contained in this document, contact
Nicole Ongele, OMD/PERM, (202) 418–
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. First Report and Order
1. On July 17, 2015, the Commission
adopted a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) in this proceeding.
80 FR 46900, August 6, 2015. In the
First Report and Order, the Commission
amended parts 0, 1, 2, 15, and 18 of its
rules to update and improve its
equipment authorization program.
Section 302 of the Communications Act
of 1934, as amended (the Act),
authorizes the Commission to make
reasonable regulations governing the
interference potential of devices that
emit RF energy and such devices must
demonstrate compliance with the
Commission’s technical and equipment
authorization requirements before they
can be imported to or marketed in the
United States. The Office of Engineering
and Technology (OET) administers the
day-to-day operation of the equipment
authorization program, providing
supplemental guidance that is available
via public notices and in its online
Knowledge Database (KDB). The
Commission’s actions are described in
greater detail below.
2. Supplier’s Declaration of
Conformity. The Commission adopted
its proposal to replace two of the
existing equipment authorization
procedures (Declaration of Conformity
(DoC) and verification) with a single
process—‘‘Supplier’s Declaration of
Conformity’’ (SDoC). Verification and
DoC are both self-approval processes
under which the party responsible for
the compliance of the RF device has
been required to take the necessary
steps (testing or analysis) to ensure that
E:\FR\FM\02NOR1.SGM
02NOR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 211 (Thursday, November 2, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 50814-50820]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-23226]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2016-0638; FRL-9969-93-Region 3]
Determination of Attainment by the Attainment Date for the 2008
Ozone Standard; Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE
Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is making a final
determination that the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-
DE marginal ozone nonattainment area (the Philadelphia Area) has
attained the 2008 ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS)
by the July 20, 2016 attainment date. This final determination is based
on complete, certified, and quality assured ambient air quality
monitoring data for the Philadelphia Area for the 2013-2015 monitoring
period. The effect of this determination of attainment (DOA) is that
the Philadelphia Area will not be bumped up or reclassified as a
moderate nonattainment area. The determination of attainment is not
equivalent to a redesignation, and the States in the Philadelphia Area
must still meet the statutory requirements for redesignation in order
to be redesignated to attainment. This determination is also not a
clean data determination. This action is being taken under the Clean
Air Act (CAA).
DATES: This final rule is effective on December 4, 2017.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
EPA-R03-OAR-2016-0638. All documents in the docket are listed on the
https://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., confidential business
information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is
not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard
copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available through
https://www.regulations.gov, or please contact the person identified in
the For Further Information Contact section for additional availability
information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory Becoat, (215) 814-2036, or by
email at becoat.gregory@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On April 18, 2017 (82 FR 18268), EPA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPR) for the Philadelphia Area. The Philadelphia Area
consists of Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery and Philadelphia
Counties in Pennsylvania; Atlantic, Burlington, Camden, Cape May,
Cumberland, Gloucester, Mercer, Ocean and Salem Counties in New Jersey;
Cecil County, Maryland; and New Castle County in Delaware. See 40 CFR
81.331, 81.339, 81.321, and 81.308. In the NPR, EPA proposed to
determine, in accordance with its statutory obligations under section
181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA and the relevant regulatory provisions (40 CFR
[[Page 50815]]
51.1103), that the Philadelphia Area attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by
the applicable extended attainment date of July 20, 2016.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In a final rulemaking action published on May 4, 2016, EPA
determined that the Philadelphia Area did not attain the 2008 ozone
NAAQS by its July 20, 2015 attainment date, based on ambient air
quality monitoring data for the 2012-2014 monitoring period. EPA
determined that the Philadelphia Area qualified for a 1-year
extension of its attainment date, as provided in section 181(a)(5)
of the CAA and interpreted by regulation at 40 CFR 51.1107, and
granted that extension. EPA established a new attainment date of
July 20, 2016, with attainment to be based on ambient air quality
monitoring data for the 2013-2015 monitoring period. See 81 FR
26697. (May 4, 2016). EPA's decision to extend the attainment date
has been challenged by the State of Delaware in Delaware v. EPA, No.
16-1230 (D.C. Cir.). That case is currently pending before the Court
and has not been decided.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. EPA's Evaluation
Section 181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA requires that EPA determine whether
an area has attained the NAAQS by its attainment date based on complete
and certified air quality data from the three full calendar years
preceding an area's attainment date. The 2008 ozone NAAQS is 0.075
parts per million (ppm). Consistent with the requirements contained in
40 CFR part 50, Appendix P, which set forth how to compute whether
monitoring sites and nonattainment areas are attaining the ozone NAAQS,
EPA reviewed the ozone ambient air quality monitoring data for the
monitoring period from 2013 through 2015 for the Philadelphia Area, as
recorded in the air quality system (AQS) database. State and local
agencies responsible for ozone air monitoring networks supplied and
quality assured the data. EPA determined that the monitoring sites with
valid data had design values equal to or less than 0.075 ppm based on
the 2013-2015 monitoring period. Therefore, based on 2013-2015
certified air quality data, EPA concludes that the Philadelphia Area
has attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
Other specific requirements of this determination of attainment by
the attainment date and the rationale for EPA's final action are
explained in the NPR and will not be restated here. EPA received
comments that are addressed in Section III of this rulemaking action.
III. Public Comments and EPA's Responses
EPA received adverse comments from the Center for Biological
Diversity (Center), Sierra Club, and Delaware Department of Natural
Resources and Environmental Control (Delaware). The comments are
excerpted and/or summarized and addressed in this section:
Comment 1: EPA's regression approach is inconsistent with EPA's
Appendix P regulations, and EPA's reliance on the regression analysis
is unlawful and arbitrary. For one of the two monitors (Brandywine),
EPA relies on a regression analysis to predict the missing ozone
concentration measurements and, as a result, purportedly achieves the
requisite data completeness at that monitor. See U.S. EPA Region 3,
Delaware Brandywine/Martin Luther King Monitors Data Substitution
Analysis TSD 2013-2015 Ozone (Dec. 2016) (TSD), at p. 7. Appendix P is
quite clear, however, that ``[w]hen computing whether the minimum data
completeness requirements have been met, meteorological or ambient data
may be sufficient to demonstrate that meteorological conditions on
missing days were not conducive to concentrations above the level of
the standard.'' 40 CFR part 50, Appendix P section 2.3(b) (emphasis
added). EPA's regression analysis does not purport to make any
demonstrations regarding meteorological conditions, nor can it, as the
analysis is based purely on ozone monitor readings.
Response 1: Commenters read 40 CFR part 50, Appendix P, section
2.3(b) too narrowly, and ignore the last sentence of that section,
which states that ``Missing days assumed less then [sic] the level of
the standard are counted for the purpose of meeting the data
completeness requirement.'' EPA interprets this regulation to allow for
reasonable, rational assumptions using available data, whether
meteorological or ambient, to determine whether, on days where an ozone
monitor is missing data, it is unlikely that the actual ozone levels
would exceed the NAAQS. For this determination, EPA used three
different methods to determine whether data from days that the relevant
ozone monitors were missing data were rationally assumed to be less
than the level of the NAAQS, and therefore could be counted toward the
data completeness requirement. These methods are: (1) Analysis of
temperature; (2) regression analysis; and (3) data substitution. First,
EPA conducted an analysis that compared temperature (a meteorological
condition) at the Wilmington Delaware National Airport (ILG) to
measured ozone readings from 2010 through 2015 at the 18 ozone monitors
in the Philadelphia Area (See Table 4 of the technical support document
(TSD) at page 4). The highest daily 8-hour ozone readings from those 18
Philadelphia Area ozone monitors on all days (not just missing days)
was compared to the maximum daily temperatures at the Wilmington
Airport on the corresponding days. The results of this analysis,
presented in Figure 1 on page 6 of the TSD, shows that from 2010
through 2015, none of the 18 monitors recorded an 8-hour ozone level
above 0.075 ppm when the temperature at Wilmington Airport was at or
below 77 degrees Fahrenheit ([deg]F). This analysis identified 18 days
in 2013, 30 days in 2014, and 27 days in 2015 with missing ozone
readings that could reasonably be assumed to be below the 0.075 ppm
threshold at the Martin Luther King (MLK) monitor (AQS ID 10-003-2004)
in Delaware. The temperature-based analysis alone added enough complete
days to the MLK monitor to meet the data completeness threshold. For
the Brandywine monitor (AQS ID 10-003-1010), the temperature-based
analysis identified 22 days during 2013, 9 days during 2014, and 8 days
during 2015 that could reasonably be assumed to be below a 0.075 ppm
ozone reading. However, the temperature analysis did not add enough
complete days to the Brandywine monitor to meet the Appendix P data
completeness level because there was an insufficient number of days
below 77[emsp14][deg]F at the Wilmington Airport in which the
Brandywine monitor was missing data. Therefore, EPA performed a
regression analysis in order to fill in the remaining data gap as well
as to validate the data results (for both monitors) obtained from the
analysis of temperature method.
This regression analysis relied on ambient data--measured ozone
levels at a nearby certified ozone monitor--to predict ozone levels at
monitors with missing data. This type of analysis is only appropriate
where readings from a nearby certified ozone monitor closely correlate
with readings from the monitors with missing data. In this case, EPA
examined the two other air quality monitors located in the same county
as the Brandywine and MLK monitors, compared recorded ozone readings of
all four monitors on days and found that the Bellefonte2 monitor (AQS
ID 10-003-1013), which is located five miles from both Brandywine and
MLK, correlated most closely with those monitors. As explained in more
detail in the TSD, the Bellefonte2 monitor is strongly correlated with
both the Brandywine and MLK monitors (TSD at pp. 8-10). Using this
information, EPA determined a separate linear regression equation for
each of the Brandywine and MLK monitors. These two equations allowed
calculation of predicted ozone
[[Page 50816]]
readings for the Brandywine or MLK monitor on days when those monitors
were missing data by using actual ozone readings from the Bellefonte2
monitor (TSD at p.11) in the equation. The values calculated using the
linear regression equations for the MLK and Brandywine monitors are
shaded green in Table 6 of the TSD on pages 11-16. EPA took a
conservative approach and added, as complete days, only those days at
the Brandywine monitor where the predicted ozone value was less than
0.060 ppm. That is, EPA only employed the regression analysis method to
add days toward the data completeness requirement for the Brandywine
monitor where EPA's predicted ozone value was well below the level of
the NAAQS. The days added as ``complete'' days to the Brandywine
monitor via this method (linear regression equation showing less than
0.060 ppm ozone) are represented by the numeral ``2'' in Table 9 of the
TSD. The regression analysis added 8 complete days in 2013 and 16
complete days in 2014 to the Brandywine monitor (TSD, p.16) and also
validated and confirmed EPA's conclusions from its temperature method
analysis at this monitor. Since the analysis of temperature method
provided sufficient complete data for the MLK monitor, EPA performed a
similar regression analysis for the MLK monitor only for the purpose of
confirming and validating its conclusions drawn from the temperature
analysis. Both the temperature analysis and regression methods produced
the same results at the MLK monitor.
EPA also used a third method--a data substitution analysis--as a
further check on the validity of the first two methods on the
Brandywine and MLK monitors. When any of the four monitors in New
Castle County, Delaware, was missing a valid day of data during the
2013-2015 ozone seasons, EPA looked at ambient data in the form of
actual recorded ozone values at the other New Castle County monitors
and substituted the highest recorded ozone value for the missing
value(s) at the other monitor(s). After adding these substituted data
values, a 2013-2015 ``test design value'' was calculated for all four
monitors. None of the four monitors' calculated test design values,
including Brandywine and MLK, exceeded the ozone standard of 75 ppb.
See Table 8, TSD at p. 17.
Comment 2: The monitor data relied upon by EPA do not actually
demonstrate that exceedances of the NAAQS will not occur at
temperatures below 78 degrees. (Sierra Club, p. 2). For both of the
monitors (Brandywine and MLK), EPA relies heavily on a simplistic
comparison of monitored ozone values at monitors within the
Philadelphia Nonattainment Area and daily high temperature data from
the Wilmington Delaware National Airport to purportedly show that
meteorological conditions on days with high temperatures of
77[emsp14][deg]F or below are not conducive to ozone formation. TSD at
p. 3. But EPA's conclusion regarding the 77[emsp14][deg]F temperature
threshold is not supported by data upon which EPA relies and is
inconsistent with prior statements by the agency regarding the
parameters that influence ozone formation. With regard to the data,
EPA's sample of monitor-days is far too small a data set from which to
conclude that 77[emsp14][deg]F represents a magical limit below which
ozone concentrations are assured to be below the NAAQS. Indeed, Figure
1 of the TSD shows that at 78[emsp14][deg]F--just one degree above the
level at which EPA expresses confidence that no NAAQS violations will
occur--the maximum monitored ozone level in the Philadelphia
Nonattainment Area was close to 85 parts per billion, well above the 75
part per billion (ppb) NAAQS. Moreover, Figure 1 also shows that at
68[emsp14][deg]F--nine degrees below the temperature threshold
identified by EPA--maximum monitored ozone levels in the Philadelphia
Nonattainment Area were within one part per billion of the NAAQS.
Response 2: It is not necessary to demonstrate that exceedances of
the NAAQS would never occur at temperatures below 78[emsp14][deg]F, nor
was the purpose of the analysis of temperature method to do so. The
methods used to determine data completeness are consistent with 40 CFR
part 50, Appendix P, Section 2.3(b) and are grounded in science. As an
example, EPA approved a similar demonstration from Delaware in 2010 for
the same Brandywine ozone monitoring site which relied on a similar
ozone and temperature comparison. This demonstration was referenced in
a clean data determination, which is a different type of rulemaking
action that also relies on air quality data, for the Philadelphia-
Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-DE-MD nonattainment area for the 1997
ozone NAAQS which was finalized in 2012 (77 FR 17341-17343). The
Delaware demonstration relied on ambient ozone and temperature data for
years 1997-2009, and reached a similar conclusion that ozone levels did
not exceed 0.075 ppm in the Philadelphia area on any days where the
daily maximum temperature was less than 77[emsp14][deg]F. While not
necessary for the data completeness determination for this Philadelphia
determination of attainment, this example is provided to demonstrate
that data completeness procedures conducted by Delaware in the past
have arrived at the same conclusion with regard to the use of
temperature data thresholds. Thus, EPA does not agree that the
77[emsp14][deg]F temperature threshold below which no ozone exceedances
have occurred in the Philadelphia Area is not supported by the
evidence. The fact that sometimes very high levels of ozone occur at 78
degrees or that sometimes high levels of ozone (yet still below 0.075
ppm) occur at much lower temperatures does not invalidate the
77[emsp14][deg]F threshold in this instance. Also, one measured ozone
value above 0.075 ppm does not equal a NAAQS exceedance because of the
definition of design value, which is a statistically-based measure of
the 4th high over a 3-year period. Regarding the sample size, EPA notes
that Delaware's analysis of temperature versus ozone concentrations for
the period of 1997 to 2009, when combined with EPA's analysis of
temperature versus ozone concentrations for the period of 2010 through
2015, provides nineteen years of data supporting the temperature
analysis conclusion. The following sources further discuss the
importance of the relationship between temperature and ozone formation
as established by both EPA and the scientific literature for decades:
(1) Camalier, L., Cox, W., and Dolwick, P. (2007). The effects of
meteorology in urban areas and their use in assessing ozone trends.
Atmospheric Environment, Volume 41, Issue 33, pages 7127-7137; (2) Cox,
W. and Chu, S (1996). Assessment of interannual ozone variation in
urban areas from a climatological perspective. Atmospheric Environment,
Volume 30, Issue 14, pages 2615-2615; (3) U.S. EPA (2016). Trends in
Ozone Concentrations Adjusted for Weather Conditions. https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/trends-ozone-adjusted-weather-conditions; and;
(4) Walcek, C. and Yuan, H. (1995). Calculated influence of
temperature-related factors on ozone formation rates in the Lower
Troposphere. Journal of Applied Meteorology, Volume 34, pages 1056-
1069.
Comment 3: EPA's proposed attainment determination is not
protective of public health because monitoring data from the 2016 ozone
season no longer supports a finding that the Philadelphia Area is
meeting the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
Response 3: To determine whether an area attained by the 2008 ozone
NAAQS attainment date of July 20, 2016, EPA is
[[Page 50817]]
required to rely on the three previous full years of data, which is
2013-2015. CAA section 181(b)(2)(A); 40 CFR part 50, Appendix P,
section 2.3(b). Any data occurring in calendar year 2016 cannot be used
in this determination because July 20, 2016 is in the middle of the
2016 ozone season and would produce only incomplete non-quality
assured, and uncertified data, as of the July 2016 attainment date. The
statutory provision governing the type of determination of attainment
EPA is finalizing today is very clear: ``the Administrator shall
determine, based on the area's design value (as of the attainment
date), whether the area attained the standard by that date.'' CAA
section 181(b)(2)(A) (emphasis added). When making determinations of
attainment by the attainment deadline, EPA has consistently applied
this unambiguous language as restricting its analysis to the years of
data that constitute the basis for an area's design value as of the
specific attainment deadline. EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 50,
Appendix P further clarify that the design value be derived from
``three consecutive, complete calendar years of air quality monitoring
data.'' 40 CFR part 50, Appendix P, section 2.3(b) (emphasis added).
The commenter's request that EPA use non-quality assured, uncertified,
incomplete calendar year 2016 data for this section 181(b)(2)
determination is not permitted under the statute and regulations.
Comment 4: EPA illegally extended the attainment date deadline.
Response 4: As noted in the proposed rule (82 FR 18269, fn 2), the
issue of whether EPA ``illegally'' extended the attainment date
deadline from July 20, 2015 to July 20, 2016 is the subject of a
petition for review filed by the State of Delaware on July 5, 2016 in
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The
petition has been fully briefed, and oral argument was held on October
5, 2017. State of Delaware Department of Natural Resources &
Environmental Control v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 16-
1230. The final rule extending the Philadelphia Area's attainment date
is therefore legally effective at this time and outside the scope of
this rulemaking.
Comment 5: The CAA requires that a finding of attainment be made
only when all measures needed for attainment have been implemented, and
the current air quality meets the standard.
Response 5: Commenters are incorrect regarding the CAA's
requirements for a section 181(b)(2) determination of attainment by the
attainment date. Nowhere in that provision does the CAA require that
such a finding can only be made ``when all measures needed for
attainment have been implemented'' and ``current air quality meets the
standard.'' Demonstrations of attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the
attainment date require using the three calendar years of certified air
quality data preceding the attainment date, which is 2013-2015.
Comment 6: Section 181(b)(2) does not restrict EPA to considering
only fully certified, quality assured and complete data from 2013-2015,
and the resulting 3-year design values calculated from those data. EPA
should consider the preliminary 2016 data, and has considered data
other than the three years of data prior to the attainment date in past
rulemakings, including:
(1) The January 25, 2012 proposed determination of attainment and
clean data determination for the 1997 ozone NAAQS for the New York-New
Jersey-Connecticut Nonattainment Area (NY-NJ-CT NAA) at 77 FR 3720; and
(2) The July 18, 2012 final determination of attainment and clean
data determination for the NY-NJ-CT NAA at 77 FR 36163; and
(3) The May 15, 2014 proposal to rescind the clean data
determination for the NY-NJ-CT NAA at 79 FR 27830.
The commenter asserts that these actions ``. . . prove[ ] that EPA has
considered uncertified data in proposals involving findings of
attainment/clean data determinations.''
Response 6: All of the EPA actions cited by the Commenter support
EPA's use of only the three years of complete, quality-assured and
certified ozone monitoring data preceding the attainment date when
making this section 181(b)(2) determination of attainment by the
attainment date. EPA often makes 181(b)(2) determinations of attainment
by the attainment date in the same actions as clean data
determinations, but these are two distinct actions with different
statutory and regulatory requirements and consequences. Therefore, it
is reasonable for EPA to consider air quality monitoring data
differently for these two types of actions. EPA's regulations governing
clean data determinations for the various pollutants, including ozone,
interpret the CAA as suspending attainment planning requirements for
only as long as the area continues to attain the standard. See, e.g.,
40 CFR 51.1118. Thus, for a CDD, EPA requires an attaining design value
based on three full years of data, and also may consider any additional
preliminary data as well. Because the regulatory consequences of a
clean data determination depend on continued attaining air quality,
review of data until the final rulemaking as well as post-rulemaking
review of data is appropriate. By contrast, section 181(b)(2) has the
specific statutory consequence of deciding whether or not an area is
reclassified to a higher classification. Under the CAA, if an area
attains the NAAQS by its statutory attainment date, it cannot be
``bumped up'' or reclassified, even if it later violates the standard
after that date. The Act therefore instructs the EPA to make a
determination of an area's air quality attainment status as of a date
certain--the area's attainment deadline.
The January 25, 2012 proposal cited by Commenter contains both a
determination of attainment by the attainment date and a clean data
determination. The 2012 proposal specifically states that ``EPA
proposes to determine, in accordance with section 181(b)(2), that the
NY-NJ-CT area attained the 1997 eight-hour ozone standard by the
applicable deadline for that standard, June 15, 2010. This proposed
determination is based on complete, quality-assured and certified data
for 2007-2009.'' 77 FR 3720, 3722. In the next paragraph, the proposal
states ``[i]n addition, EPA is separately and independently proposing
to determine that the NY-NJ-CT area is currently attaining the 1997
eight-hour ozone standard, based on complete, quality-assured and
certified data for 2008-2010 and preliminary data for 2011 that
indicate continued attainment.'' Id. This second paragraph describes
EPA's clean data determination (CDD), and therefore may consider all
data up to the point of the rulemaking, including preliminary data. In
this action, EPA is only making a section 181(b)(2) determination of
attainment by the attainment date for the Philadelphia Area. If EPA
were making a clean data determination for the Philadelphia Area, the
preliminary 2016 data could be considered as a supplement.
Similarly, the June 18, 2012 \2\ final action for the NY-NJ-CT NAA
uses only complete, quality-assured and certified 2007-2009 data for
the determination of attainment by the June 15, 2010 attainment date,
while using complete, quality-assured and certified 2008-2010 data and
preliminary 2011 ozone data in making its clean data determination. See
77 FR 36163 (June 18, 2012). EPA's 2014 action proposing to rescind the
2012
[[Page 50818]]
clean data determination for the NY-NJ-CT NAA followed the same
practice of considering all recent data. See 79 FR 27830, 27832 (May
15, 2014). Thus, these previous actions cited by the comment do not
show that EPA uses or considers incomplete, uncertified and preliminary
data when making a section 181(b)(2) determinations of attainment by
the attainment date. Today's action is therefore consistent with the
other actions cited by the Commenter.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The comment incorrectly cites July 18, 2012 as the Federal
Register date for this final determination. The correct date is June
18, 2012. See 77 FR 36163.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment 7: DNREC objects to EPA performing the data substitution
analysis for the two Delaware monitors without notifying Delaware and
giving Delaware an opportunity to review prior to publication.
Response 7: EPA is required to make this determination of
attainment by the attainment date. This determination of attainment
cannot be made without complete air quality data for 2013-2015. Because
DNREC did not submit a data substitution analysis for the two Delaware
monitors with incomplete data, EPA was required to perform this
analysis.
Comment 8: Early 2017 ozone season data show that the Philadelphia
Area has already experienced two episodes of nonattaining air quality
based on preliminary maximum ozone concentrations of 79 ppb in Delaware
and 86 ppb in Philadelphia.
Response 8: EPA's determination of attainment for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS for the Philadelphia Area is based on complete, quality assured,
and certified data for the 2013-2015 ozone seasons in accordance with
section 181(b)(2) of the Act and 40 CFR parts 50, 51 and 58.
Comment 9: EPA's notice did not explain the implications of a
finding of attainment in its proposal, and Delaware believes that a
finalization of this finding will suspend CAA obligations for the area.
Therefore, if EPA makes a final determination of attainment based on
the 2013-2015 data, it must immediately make a finding of nonattainment
using 2014-2016 data.
Response 9: EPA's notice did not explain in detail all the
implications of the section 181(b)(2) determination of attainment by
the attainment date. One consequence of the determination of attainment
by the extended attainment date is that the Philadelphia Area will not
be reclassified as a Moderate nonattainment area. See CAA section
181(b)(2)(A). However, although the Philadelphia Area will remain a
Marginal nonattainment area, since it is part of the ozone transport
region (OTR) it will need to continue to comply with the additional
requirements applicable to OTR states, including moderate area
requirements. Furthermore, EPA clearly stated in the Summary section of
the NPR that this action was not a redesignation of the Philadelphia
Area to attainment. EPA also reiterates that this action is also not a
clean data determination under 40 CFR 51.1118. A clean data
determination, if it were to occur at some future time, would have the
effect of suspending any attainment planning requirements. Regarding
the commenter's statement that EPA must immediately make a finding of
nonattainment (or a nonattainment designation) using the 2014-2016
ozone data, such a finding would be meaningless in this context. The
Philadelphia Area continues to be designated nonattainment for the 2008
ozone NAAQS, and EPA is not, in this notice, issuing a clean data
determination such that the Agency would need to rescind such
determination based on more recent air quality data. Given that today's
action is not changing the Philadelphia Area's marginal nonattainment
designation, the suggestion that the Agency issue a nonattainment
designation is inappropriate. If certified air quality data indicates
issues with continuing attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the EPA will
work with the relevant states in the Philadelphia Area and, to the
extent necessary, use appropriate CAA authorities to address those air
quality issues.
Comment 10: EPA should not make a determination of attainment for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS when data shows that the 2015 ozone NAAQS of 70
ppm is not currently being met.
Response 10: EPA's determination of attainment for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS by the attainment date of July 20, 2016, is statutorily required
by section 181(b)(2), and requires that EPA use 2013-2015 ozone air
quality data in determining whether the 2008 NAAQS has been met, as of
the July 20, 2016 attainment date for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The 2015
ozone NAAQS is not germane to the specific question of whether the area
attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the attainment date.
Comment 11: Delaying the determination of nonattainment for the
Philadelphia Area will only delay adoption of needed SIP measures to
bring the area into attainment.
Response 11: The determination of attainment by the attainment date
under 181(b)(2) does not suspend any state planning requirements that
are in place for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The effect of this action will
result in the Philadelphia Area remaining as a marginal nonattainment
area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and keeping all currently applicable
planning requirements in place, including OTR requirements.
Comment 12: The commenter objects to efforts by Pennsylvania
Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) to remove 2016 ozone
data based on ``exceptional events,'' especially if the exceptional
event is an increasing number of heat waves caused by global warning.
Response 12: This comment is not germane to this determination of
attainment because EPA did not rely on any Pennsylvania ozone
monitoring data from 2016 in making its determination of attainment. As
required by the CAA and EPA regulations regarding determinations of
attainment by the attainment date, EPA used only complete, quality-
assured and certified ozone data from calendar years 2013-2015.
Comment 13: The Center has further concerns about EPA's approach
for meeting data completeness requirements, especially given the
exceedances of the 2008 and 2015 NAAQS as noted above. The proposed
rule notes that EPA was able to ``add'' missing data from the
Brandywine and MLK monitors by conducting ``an analysis of the
meteorological data and a regression analysis'' and performed a
``substitution analysis as a check on the validity'' of that analysis.
See, 82 FR 18270 (April 18, 2017). It would be more appropriate to
require redundancy at monitoring stations prone to malfunctioning as
opposed to relying on data substitutions in areas suffering from ozone
levels at or above the NAAQS to assure that the most accurate data is
collected.
Response 13: Please see the responses to comments 1 and 2 above
with regard to the adequacy of the methods used to meet the minimum
data completeness requirements at the MLK and Brandywine monitors. As
to requiring redundant monitors, the Philadelphia Metropolitan
Statistical Area (MSA) is currently meeting monitoring requirements
specified in 40 CFR part 58 Appendix D. Appendix D does not require
redundant monitoring for ozone. EPA has made recommendations to
Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control
(DNREC) to try to reduce the data loss at the Brandywine air monitoring
site. EPA is required to perform technical systems audits on each
primary quality assurance organization at a frequency of once every
three years. DNREC was audited by EPA Region 3 on May 10-12, 2016. One
of the major findings of this audit was the incompleteness issues at
the Brandywine site. EPA recommended as corrective action to mitigate
potential
[[Page 50819]]
data loss due to down power lines that DNREC do preemptive tree
trimming each year. In addition, EPA recommended having a backup power
source at the site. DNREC's response to EPA's recommendation was that a
back-up power source is not feasible. DNREC will consider purchasing a
battery-operated FEM monitor as a back-up in case of sustained power
loss at the site, if resources are available.
Comment 14: EPA also received comments that were not germane to
this final ruling but referred generally to the support of continuing
implementation of air quality standards and regulations. The comments
included support of keeping EPA regulations in place to protect human
health and the environment.
Response 14: EPA appreciates the supportive comments, and notes
that ozone air quality monitoring will continue and existing air
quality standards and regulations will remain in place. This
determination of attainment by the attainment date does not reduce or
revoke any existing ozone monitoring or control requirements.
IV. Final Action
EPA is making a final determination, in accordance with its
obligations under section 181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA and 40 CFR 51.1103,
that the Philadelphia Area attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the
applicable attainment date of July 20, 2016. This determination of
attainment does not constitute a redesignation to attainment, and is
also not a clean data determination.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. General Requirements
This rulemaking action finalizes a determination of attainment for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS based on air quality and does not impose
additional requirements. For that reason, this determination of
attainment:
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);
Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866.
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, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the appropriate circuit by January 2, 2018. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or
action. This action determining that the Philadelphia Area attained the
2008 ozone NAAQS by its July 20, 2016 attainment date may not be
challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See
section 307(b)(2)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 11, 2017.
Cecil Rodrigues,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: October 6, 2017.
Catherine R. McCabe,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 2.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart I--Delaware
0
2. In Sec. 52.425, paragraph (d) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 52.425 Determinations of attainment.
* * * * *
(d) Based upon EPA's review of the air quality data for the 3-year
period 2013 to 2015, Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE
marginal ozone nonattainment area has attained the 2008 8-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) by the applicable
attainment date of July 20, 2016. Therefore, EPA has met the
requirement pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on
the area's air quality as of the attainment date, whether the area
attained the standard. EPA also determined that the Philadelphia-
Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal ozone nonattainment area
will not be reclassified for failure to attain by its
[[Page 50820]]
applicable attainment date pursuant to section 181(b)(2)(A).
Subpart V--Maryland
0
3. In Sec. 52.1082, paragraph (j) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1082 Determinations of attainment.
* * * * *
(j) Based upon EPA's review of the air quality data for the 3-year
period 2013 to 2015, Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE
marginal ozone nonattainment area has attained the 2008 8-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) by the applicable
attainment date of July 20, 2016. Therefore, EPA has met the
requirement pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on
the area's air quality as of the attainment date, whether the area
attained the standard. EPA also determined that the Philadelphia-
Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal ozone nonattainment area
will not be reclassified for failure to attain by its applicable
attainment date pursuant to section 181(b)(2)(A).
Subpart FF--New Jersey
0
4. In Sec. 52.1576, paragraph (d) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1576 Determinations of attainment.
* * * * *
(d) Based upon EPA's review of the air quality data for the 3-year
period 2013 to 2015, Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE
marginal ozone nonattainment area has attained the 2008 8-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) by the applicable
attainment date of July 20, 2016. Therefore, EPA has met the
requirement pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on
the area's air quality as of the attainment date, whether the area
attained the standard. EPA also determined that the Philadelphia-
Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal ozone nonattainment area
will not be reclassified for failure to attain by its applicable
attainment date pursuant to section 181(b)(2)(A).
Subpart NN--Pennsylvania
0
5. In Sec. 52.2056, paragraph (o) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 52.2056 Determinations of attainment.
* * * * *
(o) Based upon EPA's review of the air quality data for the 3-year
period 2013 to 2015, Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE
marginal ozone nonattainment area has attained the 2008 8-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) by the applicable
attainment date of July 20, 2016. Therefore, EPA has met the
requirement pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) to determine, based on
the area's air quality as of the attainment date, whether the area
attained the standard. EPA also determined that the Philadelphia-
Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE marginal ozone nonattainment area
will not be reclassified for failure to attain by its applicable
attainment date pursuant to section 181(b)(2)(A).
[FR Doc. 2017-23226 Filed 11-1-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P