Implementation of the 2015 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: Nonattainment Area Classifications Approach, 10376-10383 [2018-04810]
Download as PDF
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with RULES
10376
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 47 / Friday, March 9, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Global Plus 1D
Global Plus 1E
Global Plus 2C
Global Plus 3
Global Reseller Expedited Package
Contracts
Global Reseller Expedited Package Services
1
Global Reseller Expedited Package Services
2
Global Reseller Expedited Package Services
3
Global Reseller Expedited Package Services
4
Global Expedited Package Services
(GEPS)—Non-Published Rates
Global Expedited Package Services
(GEPS)—Non-Published Rates 2
Global Expedited Package Services
(GEPS)—Non-Published Rates 3
Global Expedited Package Services
(GEPS)—Non-Published Rates 4
Global Expedited Package Services
(GEPS)—Non-Published Rates 5
Global Expedited Package Services
(GEPS)—Non-Published Rates 6
Global Expedited Package Services
(GEPS)—Non-Published Rates 7
Global Expedited Package Services
(GEPS)—Non-Published Rates 8
Global Expedited Package Services
(GEPS)—Non-Published Rates 9
Global Expedited Package Services
(GEPS)—Non-Published Rates 10
Global Expedited Package Services
(GEPS)—Non-Published Rates 11
Global Expedited Package Services
(GEPS)—Non-Published Rates 12
Priority Mail International Regional Rate
Boxes—Non-Published Rates
Outbound Competitive International
Merchandise Return Service Agreement
with Royal Mail Group, Ltd.
Priority Mail International Regional Rate
Boxes Contracts
Priority Mail International Regional Rate
Boxes Contracts 1
Competitive International Merchandise
Return Service Agreements with Foreign
Postal Operators 1
Competitive International Merchandise
Return Service Agreements with Foreign
Postal Operators 1
Competitive International Merchandise
Return Service Agreements with Foreign
Postal Operators 2
Alternative Delivery Provider (ADP)
Contracts ADP 1
Alternative Delivery Provider Reseller
(ADPR) Contracts ADPR 1
Inbound International*
International Business Reply Service
(IBRS) Competitive Contracts
International Business Reply Service
Competitive Contract 1
International Business Reply Service
Competitive Contract 3
Inbound Direct Entry Contracts with
Customers
Inbound Direct Entry Contracts with
Foreign Postal Administrations
Inbound Direct Entry Contracts with
Foreign Postal Administrations
Inbound Direct Entry Contracts with
Foreign Postal Administrations 1
Inbound EMS
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:43 Mar 08, 2018
Jkt 244001
Inbound EMS 2
Inbound Air Parcel Post (at non-UPU rates)
Royal Mail Group Inbound Air Parcel Post
Agreement
Inbound Competitive Multi-Service
Agreements with Foreign Postal
Operators
Inbound Competitive Multi-Service
Agreements with Foreign Postal
Operators 1
Special Services*
Address Enhancement Services
Greeting Cards, Gift Cards, and Stationery
International Ancillary Services
International Money Transfer Service—
Outbound
International Money Transfer Service—
Inbound
Premium Forwarding Service
Shipping and Mailing Supplies
Post Office Box Service
Competitive Ancillary Services
Nonpostal Services*
Advertising
Licensing of Intellectual Property other
than Officially Licensed Retail Products
(OLRP)
Mail Service Promotion
Officially Licensed Retail Products (OLRP)
Passport Photo Service
Photocopying Service
Rental, Leasing, Licensing or other NonSale Disposition of Tangible Property
Training Facilities and Related Services
USPS Electronic Postmark (EPM) Program
Market Tests*
Customized Delivery
Global eCommerce Marketplace (GeM)
Stacy L. Ruble,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018–04785 Filed 3–8–18; 8:45 am]
This final rule is effective on
May 8, 2018.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
docket for this action, identified by
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2016–
0202. All documents in the docket are
listed in the https://www.regulations.gov
website. Although listed in the index,
some information may not be publicly
available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov.
DATES:
For
further general information on this rule,
contact Mr. Robert Lingard, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards
(OAQPS), Air Quality Policy Division,
U.S. EPA, Mailcode 539–01, 109 T.W.
Alexander Drive, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27711; by telephone at (919)
541–5272; or by email at lingard.robert@
epa.gov; or Mr. Butch Stackhouse,
OAQPS, Air Quality Policy Division,
U.S. EPA, Mailcode 539–01, 109 T.W.
Alexander Drive, Research Triangle
Park, NC 27711; by telephone at (919)
541–5208; or by email at
stackhouse.butch@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
I. General Information
BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P
A. Does this action apply to me?
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 51
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2016–0202; FRL–9975–23–
OAR]
RIN 2060–AT41
Implementation of the 2015 National
Ambient Air Quality Standards for
Ozone: Nonattainment Area
Classifications Approach
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
In this final rule, the EPA is
establishing the air quality thresholds
that define the classifications assigned
to all nonattainment areas for the 2015
ozone national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) (the ‘‘2015 ozone
NAAQS’’) promulgated on October 1,
2015. This final rule also establishes the
timing of attainment dates for each
nonattainment area classification.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Entities potentially affected directly
by this final rule include state, local and
tribal governments and air pollution
control agencies (air agencies)
responsible for attainment and
maintenance of the ozone NAAQS.
Entities potentially affected indirectly
by this proposed rule as regulated
sources include owners and operators of
sources of emissions of volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides
(NOX) that contribute to ground-level
ozone formation.
B. Where can I get a copy of this
document and other related
information?
In addition to being available in the
docket, an electronic copy of this
Federal Register document will be
posted at https://www.epa.gov/ozonepollution.
C. How is this document organized?
The information presented in this
document is organized as follows:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 47 / Friday, March 9, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
B. Where can I get a copy of this document
and other related information?
C. How is this document organized?
II. Background
III. Application of Classification Provisions
in CAA Section 181 to Nonattainment
Areas Subject to Subpart 2 of Part D of
Title I of the CAA
A. Background and Summary of the
Proposal
B. Brief Summary of Comments on the
Proposed Rule and the EPA’s Responses
C. Final Action
IV. Environmental Justice Considerations
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing
Regulations and Controlling Regulatory
Costs
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
J. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTA)
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions
To Address Environmental Justice in
Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
M. Judicial Review
VI. Statutory Authority
II. Background
On October 1, 2015,1 the EPA
promulgated a rule that revised the
primary and secondary 8-hour NAAQS
for ozone to a level of 0.070 parts per
million (ppm).2 3 Revisions to the ozone
NAAQS trigger a process set forth in
section 107 of the Clean Air Act (CAA
or Act), in which states recommend area
designations (i.e., as nonattainment,
attainment, or unclassifiable with
respect to the revised standards) to the
EPA, and the EPA then evaluates air
quality data and other factors prior to
making final area designations. In
accordance with CAA section 181(a)(1),
1 See
80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015).
with the NAAQS is computed
based on the annual fourth highest daily maximum
8-hour average concentration, averaged over 3
years. For a detailed explanation of the calculation
of the 3-year 8-hour average, see 40 CFR part 50,
appendix P.
3 Since the 2015 primary and secondary NAAQS
for ozone are identical, for convenience, we refer to
both as ‘‘the 2015 ozone NAAQS’’ or ‘‘the 2015
ozone standards.’’
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with RULES
2 Compliance
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:43 Mar 08, 2018
Jkt 244001
an area designated as nonattainment for
a revised ozone NAAQS must be
classified, at the time of designation, as
Marginal, Moderate, Serious, Severe or
Extreme, depending on the severity of
the ozone air quality problem in that
nonattainment area.
On November 17, 2016, the EPA
proposed a set of nonattainment area
classification thresholds and associated
attainment dates, as well as other
NAAQS implementation-related
provisions including submittal
deadlines and specific CAA
requirements for the content of
nonattainment area and Ozone
Transport Region state implementation
plans (SIPs), for the 2015 ozone NAAQS
(81 FR 81276). With this action, we are
finalizing the set of nonattainment area
classification thresholds and associated
attainment dates, which will apply
when the EPA promulgates final
nonattainment area designations for the
2015 ozone NAAQS.4 The public
comment period on the November 17,
2016, notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM) (November 2016 proposal) ran
from November 17, 2016, to February
13, 2017. The EPA received
approximately 80 comment submissions
on the NPRM, approximately 20 of
which addressed the EPA’s proposed
nonattainment area classifications
approach. The preamble to this final
classifications rule for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS discusses the comments
received and how they were considered
by the EPA in general terms. The
Response to Comments document
provides more detailed responses to the
comments received. The public
comments received on the NPRM and
the EPA’s Response to Comment
document are posted in the docket at
https://www.regulations.gov (Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2016–0202).
We are taking two actions in this final
rule: (1) Establishing the air quality
thresholds that define each of the five
CAA classifications for areas designated
nonattainment for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS; and (2) establishing the
attainment deadline associated with
each classification. The EPA also
proposed in the November 2016
proposal to apply previous voluntary
reclassifications for six areas in
California to the revised 2015 ozone
NAAQS. Consistent with California’s
most recent request, EPA intends to
finalize these voluntary reclassifications
for five areas separately with its final
nonattainment area designations for the
2015 ozone NAAQS.
4 The EPA intends to finalize, where appropriate,
the other portions of the November 17, 2016,
proposed rule in a separate action.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
10377
III. Application of Classification
Provisions in CAA Section 181 to
Nonattainment Areas Subject to
Subpart 2 of Part D of Title I of the CAA
A. Background and Summary of the
Proposal
1. Background
On November 17, 2016, the EPA
proposed numerical ozone air quality
thresholds for classifying nonattainment
areas for the 2015 ozone NAAQS (81 FR
81283). In accordance with CAA section
181(a)(1), each area designated as
nonattainment for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS must be classified at the time
of designation. Accordingly, the EPA is
finalizing classification thresholds on or
before the date that it issues final
nonattainment area designations.
Under Subpart 2 of part D of title I of
the CAA, state planning and emissions
control requirements for ozone are
determined, in part, by a nonattainment
area’s classification. Under subpart 2,
ozone nonattainment areas are initially
classified based on the severity of their
ozone levels, as determined by the
area’s design value (DV),5 relative to the
lower and upper DV thresholds for each
classification. Nonattainment areas with
a ‘‘lower’’ classification have ozone
levels at the time of designation that are
closer to the standard than areas with a
‘‘higher’’ classification. Ozone
nonattainment areas in the lower
classification levels have fewer initial
mandatory air quality planning and
control requirements than those in
higher classifications. Clean Air Act
section 181 provides an increasing
amount of maximum time from the date
of designation to attain the standards for
the progressively higher classifications:
Marginal—3 years, Moderate—6 years,
Serious—9 years, Severe—15 or 17
years, and Extreme—20 years.
The CAA provides mechanisms for
addressing nonattainment areas that
may not be able to attain by the
attainment date for their classification,
or that fail to attain by that date. CAA
section 181(a)(4) provides that within 90
days of designation and classification,
the Administrator may exercise
discretion to reclassify an area to a
higher (or lower) classification if its DV
is within 5 percent of the DV range of
the higher (or lower) classification. An
air agency may also voluntarily request,
pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(3), that
the EPA reclassify the area to a higher
classification. The EPA may not deny
5 Annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour
average ozone concentration, averaged over 3 years.
For a detailed explanation of the calculation of the
3-year 8-hour average, see 40 CFR part 50,
appendix P.
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
10378
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 47 / Friday, March 9, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
and must approve any such voluntary
reclassification requests. Once an area is
reclassified to a higher classification, it
becomes subject to the associated
additional planning and control
requirements for that higher
classification, and must attain the
standard no later than the maximum
attainment date for that classification.
Six nonattainment areas in California
were granted voluntary reclassifications
for both the 1997 and 2008 ozone
NAAQS (77 FR 30165; May 21, 2012),
which we proposed in the November
2016 proposal to apply for the 2015
ozone NAAQS. Finally, if the EPA
determines that an area has failed to
attain the standard by the applicable
attainment date, CAA section 181(b)(2)
requires EPA to reclassify that area to a
higher classification (i.e., ‘‘bump-up’’).
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with RULES
2. Summary of the Proposal
For purposes of the 2015 ozone
NAAQS, the EPA proposed to retain the
‘‘percent-above-the-standard’’ (PATS)
methodology used to establish area
classification thresholds for the 1997
and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (81 FR
81283; November 17, 2016). As the EPA
explained in our proposal, the PATS
approach is rooted in the classification
thresholds established for the ozone
standard in effect at the time of the 1990
CAA amendments, which was a 1-hour
exceedance-based standard of 0.12
ppm.6 The classification provisions in
Table 1 in section 181 of subpart 2 of
the CAA (also referred to herein as the
‘‘CAA Table 1’’) are specific to that
1-hour standard. The EPA subsequently
translated the CAA Table 1 thresholds
for purposes of the revised 1997 ozone
NAAQS, which were expressed in the
form of a 3-year average of annual fourth
highest daily maximum 8-hour
averages.7 Specifically, in the
classifications rule for the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS, we translated the
classification thresholds in CAA Table 1
from 1-hour DVs to 8-hour DVs based on
the percentage by which each
classification threshold in the table
exceeds the 1-hour ozone NAAQS (i.e.,
percent-above-the-standard, or PATS).8
Application of the PATS classification
6 For additional discussion on the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS and its associated area designations and
classifications, see 56 FR 56695 (November 6,
1991).
7 See 69 FR 23954 (April 30, 2004) and 40 CFR
Appendix I.
8 The upper thresholds of the Marginal, Moderate,
Serious and Severe classifications are precise
percentages or fractions above the level of the
standard, namely 15 percent (3/20ths more than the
standard), 33.33 percent (one-third more than the
standard), 50 percent (one-half more than the
standard), and 133.3 percent (one and one-third
more than the standard).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:43 Mar 08, 2018
Jkt 244001
approach for 8-hour ozone NAAQS was
challenged in litigation and upheld by
the Court. See South Coast Air Quality
Management District v. Environmental
Protection Agency, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C.
Cir. 2006) at 896–898. The EPA
subsequently retained the PATS
approach in its final classifications rule
for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.9
The EPA also proposed to retain its
current approach in establishing
attainment dates for each nonattainment
area classification, consistent with CAA
Table 1 and the regulatory approach for
both the 1997 and 2008 ozone NAAQS
(81 FR 81285; November 17, 2016). We
proposed that the maximum attainment
dates for nonattainment areas in each
classification under the 2015 NAAQS
are as follows: Marginal—3 years from
effective date of designation;
Moderate—6 years from effective date of
designation; Serious—9 years from
effective date of designation; Severe—15
years (or 17 years) from effective date of
designation; and Extreme—20 years
from effective date of designation.
Finally, the EPA proposed to again
apply previous voluntary
reclassifications for potential
nonattainment areas in California to the
revised 2015 ozone NAAQS unless the
state of California explicitly requested
otherwise in their comments to the
November 2016 proposal (81 FR
81285).10 These areas included Los
Angeles-South Coast Air Basin, San
Joaquin Valley, Riverside County
(Coachella Valley), Sacramento Metro,
Ventura County and Western Mojave
areas. We believe this is an appropriate
mechanism to address the situation for
these California areas that were
voluntarily reclassified for the 1997
ozone NAAQS and previously used this
mechanism for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
to ensure the areas would have an
attainment date for the revised 2015
ozone NAAQS that is no earlier than the
area’s attainment date for the prior 2008
NAAQS. The EPA proposed this
approach in order to minimize burden
on the state of California and obviate the
need to go through the voluntary
reclassification process again.
B. Brief Summary of Comments on the
Proposed Rule and the EPA’s Responses
The EPA received approximately 20
comment submissions on its proposed
approach for establishing nonattainment
area classification thresholds for the
2015 ozone NAAQS. A majority
(approximately two-thirds) of the
9 See
77 FR 30162 (May 21, 2012).
for which California declines voluntary
reclassification would be classified at the time of
designation for the 2015 ozone NAAQS based on
their DV.
10 Areas
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
commenters supported adoption of the
proposed PATS approach, stating that it
was consistent with the CAA as well as
the method used for classifying
nonattainment areas under the 1997 and
2008 ozone NAAQS, and has been
upheld in litigation. The other one-third
of comments suggested that EPA adopt
a different classification approach, as
addressed more fully below and in the
separate Response to Comments
document that is available in the docket
for this rulemaking. The EPA received
no significant comments regarding its
proposed approach in establishing
attainment dates for each nonattainment
area classification under the 2015 ozone
NAAQS.
Comment: Some commenters were
concerned that the proposed PATS
approach classifies too many areas as
Marginal nonattainment areas, and that
some of those Marginal areas are
unlikely to attain the standard within
the 3 years provided by the Act.
Commenters pointed out that the EPA’s
application of the PATS approach to
classifications for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS resulted in more than half of all
Marginal areas failing to achieve timely
attainment of that NAAQS by the end of
the 2014 ozone season. Because the
CAA does not require states with areas
classified as Marginal to develop
attainment plans or adopt additional
controls, commenters argue that states
will not impose emission reductions
necessary to timely achieve attainment
and moreover that some of these
Marginal areas contribute pollution to
downwind areas that have historically
struggled with attaining the NAAQS due
to transported pollution. These
commenters advocated alternative
classification approaches, such as those
considered by the EPA for the prior
2008 ozone NAAQS, that would adjust
thresholds to classify more areas as
Moderate than the proposed PATS
approach. They argue that modifying
the EPA’s proposed classification
approach with the result of increasing
the number of Moderate areas would
impose needed emissions control
requirements, provide a longer, more
realistic timeframe to attain the ozone
NAAQS, and would equitably require
upwind areas that contribute to
downwind transport to implement new
control measures sooner.
Response: The EPA recognizes that
the nonattainment area classification
thresholds established in this action
would likely result in the vast majority
of nonattainment areas being initially
classified Marginal for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS, subjecting states associated
with these areas to fewer mandatory air
quality planning and control
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 47 / Friday, March 9, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
requirements than would apply in
higher classifications. However, as the
commenters acknowledge, the PATS
approach has ‘‘a degree of consistency
with Congressional intent’’ and has
withstood judicial review. The EPA
previously considered a number of
alternative approaches in establishing
nonattainment area classification
thresholds for the 2008 ozone NAAQS,
and commenters suggested that we
reexamine those approaches and
consider adopting one here, or adopt an
entirely new alternative approach.11 We
rejected the alternative approaches
discussed in the Background
Information Document that
accompanied the classifications rule for
the 2008 ozone NAAQS because we
determined that the alternative
approaches would introduce more
judgment and uncertainty in the
threshold determination process than
contemplated by the CAA, and, thus,
posed heightened legal risk. We believe
the same considerations apply to
classifications for areas designated
nonattainment for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS. As discussed in the November
2016 proposal, the EPA utilized the
PATS approach for classifying areas
under the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, in large part, for its
straightforward translation of the
classification thresholds established by
Congress in CAA Table 1 (81 FR 81283).
As noted by commenters, the EPA’s
original PATS classification approach
for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS was
challenged in litigation and upheld by
the Court. See South Coast Air Quality
Management District v. Environmental
Protection Agency, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C.
Cir. 2006) at 896–898. For these reasons,
and despite concerns raised by
commenters, the EPA is finalizing the
PATS approach for classifications of the
2015 ozone NAAQS.
Furthermore, the EPA disagrees that
implementation of the 2008 ozone
NAAQS was not in keeping with
Congress’ design simply because many
Marginal areas did not attain by their
initial attainment deadline. Commenters
point out that more than half of all areas
originally classified as Marginal did not
timely attain, but in fact more than half
of all Marginal areas did attain by their
attainment date, when attainment date
extensions are included in the analysis.
Of the 36 areas originally classified as
Marginal for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, 17
attained by their original attainment
11 Docket No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0885
includes a Background Information Document,
titled Additional Options Considered for
Classification of Nonattainment Areas under the
2008 Ozone NAAQS (January 2012).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:43 Mar 08, 2018
Jkt 244001
date, and 6 additional areas attained by
the extended attainment dates
authorized under CAA section
181(a)(5).12 The EPA also does not agree
with commenters’ suggestion that the
EPA should adopt a different
classification scheme in order to address
what they perceive as inequities in the
interstate transport of ozone pollution.
The statute clearly provides other
mechanisms for states and the EPA to
address interstate transport, and the
EPA has worked in partnership with
states to use those mechanisms. See,
e.g., EME Homer City v. EPA, 696 F.3d
7 (D.C. Cir. 2012), reversed by EPA v.
EME Homer City, 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014),
remand addressed in EME Homer City
v. EPA, 795 F.3d 118 (D.C. Cir. 2015)
(largely upholding the EPA’s framework
for addressing CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)
interstate transport obligations).
The adopted PATS approach has
withstood legal challenge and, in
classifying areas as Marginal, maximizes
initial planning flexibility for air
agencies, which the EPA does not
believe thwarts Congress’ intent. To the
extent that states are concerned about
their inability to timely meet the
Marginal attainment deadlines, the CAA
provides authority for them to
voluntarily request a higher
classification for individual areas, if
needed. The docket for this final action
includes a more detailed response to
comments suggesting that EPA adopt an
alternative approach that would have
the effect of classifying more areas as
Moderate.
Comment: Some commenters
suggested that the EPA allow areas the
option to implement the 2015 ozone
NAAQS under CAA section 172 (Part D,
subpart 1), which specifies the general
nonattainment planning requirements
for all NAAQS pollutants.13
Implementing the 2015 ozone NAAQS
under CAA subpart 1 could eliminate
mandatory classifications and provide a
potentially more flexible attainment
12 Eight areas received 1-year extensions of the
attainment date under CAA section 181(a)(5), which
Congress provided for areas that were making good
progress towards achieving the NAAQS and thus
had air quality that was just missing the standard.
Of those eight areas, two eventually failed to attain
by their extended attainment date. The other six
areas attained in the year following the original
attainment date. Thus, a total of 13 original
Marginal areas failed to attain by their applicable
attainment date.
13 Prior to the 1990 CAA Amendments, all
NAAQS nonattainment area requirements were
specified in Part D, subpart 1. In the 1990
Amendments, Congress added pollutant-specific
subparts containing additional nonattainment area
requirements, including subpart 2 which applies to
ozone nonattainment areas.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
10379
timeline with fewer prescribed control
requirements.
Response: The EPA attempted to
implement a subpart 1 approach for
some ozone nonattainment areas as part
of a ‘‘hybrid’’ implementation strategy
in transitioning from the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS (0.12 ppm) to the 1997 8-hour
NAAQS (0.08 ppm), explaining that an
area must be covered under CAA
subpart 2 if the area’s current (i.e., at the
time of designation) 1-hour ozone DV
was equal to or greater than 0.121 ppm,
which was the lowest 1-hour DV in
CAA Table 1 (69 FR 23954; April 30,
2004—the ‘‘Phase 1’’ Rule). In South
Coast, the Court rejected the EPA’s
approach to placing areas solely under
the nonattainment area implementation
provisions of CAA subpart 1, including
the EPA’s use of the CAA Table 1
threshold for deciding which areas must
be covered under implementation of the
provisions of CAA subpart 2. 472 F.3d
at 892–894. The Court concluded that
such a determination must be based on
the 8-hour ‘‘equivalent’’ to the 1-hour
level specified in CAA Table 1, and
ruled that the level that must be used is
an 8-hour level of 0.09 ppm. Id. We
concur with commenters to the
November 2016 proposal that the South
Coast Court left open the possibility that
EPA could develop a reasonable basis to
place under CAA subpart 1 all or certain
areas with an 8-hour DV below 0.09
ppm. The EPA notes, however, that the
South Coast Court also stated in that
same decision that the CAA does not
allow the requirements of CAA subpart
2 ‘‘to be stripped away’’ on the basis
that other provisions would allow
attainment to be achieved more
efficiently. Id. at 894.14 We believe that
the adopted PATS classification
thresholds approach will continue to
provide states a pathway for consistent
and flexible attainment planning across
successive ozone standards and, absent
a more robust legal basis, we are not
adopting a CAA subpart 1 option for
implementing the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
Comment: The California Air
Resources Board (CARB) affirmed our
proposal to apply previous voluntary
reclassifications for selected
nonattainment areas, with the exception
of the Sacramento Metro area. As part of
their comment, CARB forwarded a
request from the Sacramento Air Quality
Management District declining the
voluntary reclassification for the
Sacramento Metro area, which the
District anticipated would be classified
14 Cf. NRDC v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (DC Cir. 2013)
(rejecting EPA’s implementation of PM2.5 under
subpart 1, instead requiring that PM2.5 be
implemented under the ‘‘specific, more stringent,
and far less discretionary’’ provisions of subpart 4).
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
10380
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 47 / Friday, March 9, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
Moderate for the 2015 ozone NAAQS
(see comment no. 100 in the rulemaking
docket).
Response: Based on comments to the
November 2016 proposal received from
the state of California, the EPA also
intends to apply previous voluntary
reclassifications for five of the six
California areas originally proposed.
Table 1 presents the voluntary
reclassification history for these areas
across the 1997 and 2008 ozone
NAAQS, and the anticipated initial
classification and anticipated voluntary
reclassification for each area under the
2015 ozone NAAQS. We intend to
formally apply the previous voluntary
reclassifications for these California
areas in a separate action, along with the
final nonattainment area designations
for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
TABLE 1—AREAS FOR WHICH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA REQUESTED A VOLUNTARY RECLASSIFICATION UNDER THE 1997
OZONE NAAQS AND APPLICATION UNDER SUBSEQUENT OZONE STANDARDS
Nonattainment area
Original 1997 ozone
NAAQS classification
(attainment date)
Voluntary
reclassification
for 1997 ozone NAAQS
(attainment date)
Voluntary
reclassification
for 2008 ozone NAAQS
(attainment date)
Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin ......
San Joaquin Valley ...............................
Riverside County (Coachella Valley) ....
Severe—17 (2021) ......
Serious (2013) .............
Serious (2013) .............
Extreme (2024) ............
Extreme (2024) ............
Severe—15 (2019) ......
Extreme (2032) ............
Extreme (2032) ............
Severe—15 (2027) ......
Severe—15 (2033) ......
Serious (2027) .............
Moderate (2024) ..........
Ventura County .....................................
Western Mojave ....................................
Moderate (2010) ..........
Moderate (2010) ..........
Serious (2013) .............
Severe—15 (2019) ......
Serious (2021) .............
Severe—15 (2027) ......
Marginal (2021) ...........
Moderate (2024) ..........
Anticipated
voluntary
reclassification
under 2015 ozone
NAAQS a
(attainment date)
Hypothetical initial
classification
under 2015 ozone
NAAQS a
(attainment date)
a Based
Extreme (2038).
Extreme (2038).
Severe—15
(2033).
Serious (2027).
Severe—15
(2033).
on adopted PATS classification thresholds and final 2014–2016 design values.
It is important to note that an air
agency may request a voluntary
reclassification for an area under CAA
section 181(b)(3) at any time. In the
November 2016 proposal, the EPA
encouraged any air agency that wanted
a specific higher classification to apply
to an area at the time of initial
designation to make such a request prior
to or contemporaneous with the
designation process. However, an air
agency that determines it would like a
voluntary reclassification after an area’s
initial designation may request, and the
Administrator must approve, a higher
classification for an area for any reason
in accordance with CAA section
181(b)(3).
C. Final Action
The EPA is establishing
nonattainment area classification
thresholds for the 2015 ozone NAAQS
using the PATS methodology applied
previously to translate the CAA Table 1
thresholds for purposes of the 1997 and
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. We are also
establishing maximum attainment dates
for each nonattainment area
classification, consistent with CAA
Table 1 and the regulatory approach for
both the 1997 and 2008 ozone NAAQS.
Table 2 depicts the translation for each
of the CAA Table 1 thresholds and
corresponding maximum attainment
dates for each area classification as they
would apply for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS.
TABLE 2—CAA TABLE 1 OZONE DESIGN VALUE TRANSLATION TO 8-HOUR DESIGN VALUES FOR THE 2015 OZONE
NAAQS OF 0.070 ppm USING PATS METHODOLOGY AND CORRESPONDING MAXIMUM ATTAINMENT DATES FOR
EACH AREA CLASSIFICATION
1-hour
ozone DV
(ppm)
Area class
Marginal ............................................
From up to a .....................................
Moderate ...........................................
From up to a .....................................
Serious ..............................................
From up to a .....................................
Severe—15 .......................................
From up to a .....................................
Severe—17 .......................................
From up to a .....................................
Extreme .............................................
Equal to or above .............................
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with RULES
a But
0.121
0.138
0.138
0.160
0.160
0.180
0.180
0.190
.0190
0.280
0.280
Percent
above 1-hour
ozone NAAQS
0.833
15
15
33.333
33.333
50
50
58.333
58.333
133.333
133.333
8-hour
ozone DV
(ppm)
0.071
0.081
0.081
0.093
0.093
0.105
0.105
0.111
0.111
0.163
0.163
Maximum
attainment
date
(years from
effective date
of designation)
3
6
9
15
17
20
not including.
The EPA intends to apply voluntary
reclassifications for five California areas
in a separate action with the final
nonattainment area designations for the
2015 ozone NAAQS, in accordance with
comments received from relevant air
agencies in California. The EPA is also
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:43 Mar 08, 2018
Jkt 244001
finalizing a number of regulatory
definitions needed to support the
implementation of this final
classifications rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
IV. Environmental Justice
Considerations
The EPA believes the human health or
environmental risk addressed by this
action will not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 47 / Friday, March 9, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
environmental effects on minority, lowincome, or indigenous populations
because it would not negatively affect
the level of protection provided to
human health or the environment under
the 2015 ozone NAAQS. When
promulgated, these regulations will
establish classification thresholds for
the 2015 ozone NAAQS. These
requirements are designed to protect all
segments of the general population and,
as such, will not adversely affect the
health or safety of minority, low-income
or indigenous populations.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant
regulatory action and was therefore not
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) for review.
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing
Regulations and Controlling Regulatory
Costs
This action is not an Executive Order
13771 regulatory action because this
action is not significant under Executive
Order 12866.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an
information collection burden under the
PRA. The EPA is establishing
nonattainment area classification
thresholds for the 2015 ozone NAAQS
so that areas may be classified at the
time of designation as provided in
section 181(a) of the CAA. No new
information needs to be collected from
the states as a result of this final
classifications rule.
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with RULES
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the RFA. This action will not
impose any requirements on small
entities. Entities potentially affected
directly by this rule include state, local
and tribal governments and none of
these governments are small
governments.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
(UMRA)
This action does not contain any
unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does
not significantly or uniquely affect small
governments. The action implements
mandates specifically and explicitly set
forth in the CAA without the exercise of
any policy discretion by the EPA.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:43 Mar 08, 2018
Jkt 244001
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism
implications. It will not have substantial
direct effects on the states, on the
relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
This action does not have tribal
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13175. It would not have a
substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, since no tribe has to
develop a tribal implementation plan
under these regulatory revisions.
Furthermore, these regulation revisions
do not affect the relationship or
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the federal
government and Indian tribes. The CAA
and the Tribal Air Rule establish the
relationship of the federal government
and tribes in developing plans to attain
the NAAQS, and these revisions to the
regulations do nothing to modify that
relationship. Thus, Executive Order
13175 does not apply to this action.
Consistent with the EPA’s OAR
Handbook for Interacting with Tribal
Governments, the EPA invited tribal
officials to consult on the November
2016 proposal; however, we received no
subsequent requests for consultation.
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of
Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order
13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern
environmental health or safety risks that
the EPA has reason to believe may
disproportionately affect children, per
the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory
action’’ in section 2–202 of the
Executive Order. This action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045
because it does not concern an
environmental health risk or safety risk.
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This action is not a ‘‘significant
energy action’’ because it is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution or use of energy.
J. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTA)
This rulemaking does not involve
technical standards.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
10381
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal
Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes that this action does
not have disproportionately high and
adverse human health or environmental
effects on minority populations, lowincome populations and/or indigenous
populations as specified in Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16,
1994). The adopted regulations establish
classification thresholds for the 2015
ozone NAAQS, which are designed to
protect all segments of the general
populations. The results of our
evaluation are contained in Section IV
of this preamble.
L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, and
the EPA will submit a rule report to
each House of the Congress and to the
Comptroller General of the United
States. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’
as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
M. Judicial Review
Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA indicates
which Federal Courts of Appeal have
venue for petitions of review of final
agency actions by the EPA under the
CAA. This section provides, in part, that
petitions for review must be filed in the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit (i) when the agency
action consists of ‘‘nationally applicable
regulations promulgated, or final actions
taken, by the Administrator’’ or (ii)
when such action is locally or regionally
applicable, if ‘‘such action is based on
a determination of nationwide scope or
effect and if in taking such action the
Administrator finds and publishes that
such action is based on such a
determination.’’
This rule implementing the 2015
ozone NAAQS nonattainment area
classifications is ‘‘nationally applicable’’
within the meaning of CAA section
307(b)(1). First, the rulemaking
addresses the NAAQS that applies to all
states and territories in the U.S. Second,
the rulemaking addresses the
classification of potential nonattainment
areas in states across the U.S. that are
located in each of the ten EPA regions,
numerous federal circuits and multiple
time zones. Third, the rulemaking
addresses a common core of knowledge
and analysis involved in formulating the
decision and a common interpretation
of the requirements of the CAA being
applied to potential nonattainment areas
in states across the country. Fourth, the
rulemaking, by addressing issues
relevant to potential nonattainment area
classifications in one state, may have
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
10382
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 47 / Friday, March 9, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
precedential impacts upon potential
nonattainment area classifications in
other states nationwide. Courts have
found similar implementation
rulemaking actions to be of nationwide
scope and effect.15
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit by May 8, 2018. Any
such judicial review is limited to only
those objections that are raised with
reasonable specificity in timely
comments. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of
this final rule does not affect the finality
of this rule 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. Under section 307(b)(2) of the
Act, the requirements of this final action
may not be challenged later in civil or
criminal proceedings brought by us to
enforce these requirements.
VI. Statutory Authority
The statutory authority for this action
is provided by sections 109; 110; 172;
181; and 301(a)(1) of the CAA, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 7409; 42 U.S.C.
7410; 42 U.S.C. 7502; 42 U.S.C. 7511; 42
U.S.C. 7601(a)(1)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Transportation, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: March 1, 2018.
E. Scott Pruitt,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, 40 CFR part 51 is amended as
follows:
PART 51—REQUIREMENTS FOR
PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND
SUBMITTAL OF IMPLEMENTATION
PLANS
1. The authority citation for part 51
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101; 42 U.S.C. 7401–
7671q.
2. Add subpart CC, consisting of
§§ 51.1300 through 51.1303, to read as
follows:
■
Subpart CC—Provisions for Implementation
of the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standards
Sec.
51.1300 Definitions.
51.1301 Applicability of this part.
51.1302 Classification and nonattainment
area planning provisions.
51.1303 Application of classification and
attainment date provisions in CAA
section 181 to areas subject to § 51.1302.
Subpart CC—Provisions for
Implementation of the 2015 Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality
Standards
§ 51.1300
Definitions.
The following definitions apply for
purposes of this subpart. Any term not
defined herein shall have the meaning
as defined in § 51.100.
(a) 2015 NAAQS. The 2015 8-hour
primary and secondary ozone NAAQS
codified at 40 CFR 50.19.
(b) 8-hour ozone design value. The 8hour ozone concentration calculated
according to 40 CFR part 50, appendix
P, for the 2008 NAAQS, and 40 CFR part
50, appendix U, for the 2015 NAAQS.
(c) CAA. The Clean Air Act as
codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q
(2010).
(d) Designation for a NAAQS. The
effective date of the designation for an
area for that NAAQS.
(e) Higher classification/lower
classification. For purposes of
determining whether a classification is
higher or lower, classifications under
subpart 2 of part D of title I of the CAA
are ranked from lowest to highest as
follows: Marginal; Moderate; Serious;
Severe-15; Severe-17; and Extreme.
§ 51.1301
Applicability of this part.
The provisions in subparts A through
Y and AA of this part apply to areas for
purposes of the 2015 ozone NAAQS to
the extent they are not inconsistent with
the provisions of this subpart.
§ 51.1302 Classification and
nonattainment area planning provisions.
An area designated nonattainment for
the 2015 ozone NAAQS will be
classified in accordance with CAA
section 181, as interpreted in
§ 51.1303(a), and will be subject to the
requirements of subpart 2 of part D of
title I of the CAA that apply for that
classification.
§ 51.1303 Application of classification and
attainment date provisions in CAA section
181 to areas subject to § 51.1302.
(a) In accordance with CAA section
181(a)(1), each area designated
nonattainment for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS shall be classified by operation
of law at the time of designation. The
classification shall be based on the 8hour design value for the area at the
time of designation, in accordance with
Table 1 of this paragraph (a). A state
may request a higher or lower
classification as provided in paragraphs
(b) and (c) of this section. For each area
classified under this section, the
attainment date for the 2015 NAAQS
shall be as expeditious as practicable,
but not later than the date provided in
Table 1 as follows:
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)—CLASSIFICATIONS AND ATTAINMENT DATES FOR 2015 8-HOUR OZONE NAAQS (0.070
ppm) FOR AREAS SUBJECT TO § 51.1302
8-hour ozone
design value
(ppm)
Area class
from up to * ........................................................
Moderate ............................................................
from up to * ........................................................
Serious ...............................................................
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with RULES
Marginal .............................................................
from up to * ........................................................
Severe-15 ..........................................................
from up to * ........................................................
15 See, e.g., State of Texas, et al. v. EPA, 2011 U.S.
App. LEXIS 5654 (5th Cir. 2011) (finding SIP call
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:43 Mar 08, 2018
Jkt 244001
to 13 states to be of nationwide scope and effect and
thus transferring the case to the U.S. Court of
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Primary standard
attainment date
(years after the effective
date of designation for
2015 primary NAAQS)
0.071
0.081
0.081
0.093
0.093
0.105
0.105
0.111
Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in accordance with
CAA section 307(b)(1)).
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
3
6
9
15
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 47 / Friday, March 9, 2018 / Rules and Regulations
10383
TABLE 1 TO PARAGRAPH (a)—CLASSIFICATIONS AND ATTAINMENT DATES FOR 2015 8-HOUR OZONE NAAQS (0.070
ppm) FOR AREAS SUBJECT TO § 51.1302—Continued
8-hour ozone
design value
(ppm)
Area class
Severe-17 ..........................................................
from up to * ........................................................
Extreme ..............................................................
equal to or above ..............................................
Primary standard
attainment date
(years after the effective
date of designation for
2015 primary NAAQS)
0.111
0.163
0.163
17
20
* But not including.
(b) A state may request, and the
Administrator must approve, a higher
classification for an area for any reason
in accordance with CAA section
181(b)(3).
(c) A state may request, and the
Administrator may in the
Administrator’s discretion approve, a
higher or lower classification for an area
in accordance with CAA section
181(a)(4).
[FR Doc. 2018–04810 Filed 3–8–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 271
[EPA–R10–RCRA–2017–0285; FRL–9974–
35–Region 10]
Washington: Authorization of State
Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revisions
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final authorization.
AGENCY:
Washington applied to the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
for final authorization of certain changes
to its hazardous waste program under
the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act, as amended, (RCRA). The
EPA reviewed Washington’s
application, and has determined that
these changes satisfy all requirements
needed to qualify for final authorization.
The EPA sought public comment under
Docket number EPA–R10–RCRA–2017–
0285 from July 13, 2017 to August 14,
2017 and from September 25, 2017 to
October 25, 2017, prior to taking this
final action to authorize these changes.
The EPA received one comment which
was responded to but was not
applicable to this authorization action.
DATES: This final authorization is
effective April 9, 2018.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Barbara McCullough, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:43 Mar 08, 2018
Jkt 244001
Region 10, Office of Air and Waste
(OAW–150), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite
900, Seattle, Washington 98101, phone
number: (206) 553–2416, email:
mccullough.barbara@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Why are revisions to State programs
necessary?
States that have received final
authorization from the EPA pursuant to
Section 3006(b) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C.
6926(b), must maintain a hazardous
waste program that is equivalent to,
consistent with, and no less stringent
than the Federal program. As the
Federal program changes, states must
change their programs and ask the EPA
to authorize the changes. Changes to
state programs may be necessary when
federal or state statutory or regulatory
authority is modified or when certain
other changes occur. Most commonly,
states must change their programs
because of changes to the EPA’s
regulations in title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 124,
260 through 266, 268, 270, 273, and 279.
Washington State’s hazardous waste
management program was initially
approved on January 30, 1986 and
became effective on January 31, 1986.
As explained in Section E below, it has
been revised and reauthorized
numerous times since then. On January
26, 2017, the EPA received the State’s
most recent authorization revision
application. This authorization revision
application requested federal
authorization for Washington’s Rules
and Standards for Hazardous Waste,
effective as of December 31, 2014, and
sought to revise its federally-authorized
hazardous waste management program
to include Federal hazardous waste
regulations promulgated through July 1,
2013.
B. What decisions has the EPA made in
this authorization?
The EPA has reviewed Washington’s
application to revise its authorized
program and has determined that it
meets all the statutory and regulatory
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
requirements established by RCRA.
Therefore, the EPA is granting
Washington final authorization to
operate its hazardous waste program
with the changes described in the
authorization revision application.
Washington will continue to have
responsibility for permitting Treatment,
Storage, and Disposal Facilities (TSDFs)
within its borders (except in Indian
country (18 U.S.C. 1151)) with the
exception of the non-trust lands within
the exterior boundaries of the Puyallup
Indian Reservation (also referred to as
the ‘‘1873 Survey Area’’ or ‘‘Survey
Area’’) located in Tacoma, Washington
(see Section J below for full description)
and for carrying out the aspects of the
RCRA program described in its revised
program application, subject to the
limitations of the Hazardous and Solid
Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA).
New Federal requirements and
prohibitions imposed by Federal
regulations that the EPA promulgates
under the authority of HSWA, and
which are not less stringent than
existing requirements, take effect in
authorized states before the states are
authorized for the requirements. Thus,
the EPA will implement those
requirements and prohibitions in
Washington, including issuing permits,
until the State is granted authorization
to do so.
C. What is the effect of this
authorization decision?
A person in Washington subject to
RCRA must comply with the authorized
State requirements in lieu of the
corresponding Federal requirements.
Additionally, such persons will have to
comply with any applicable Federal
requirements, such as HSWA
regulations issued by the EPA for which
the State has not received authorization
and RCRA requirements that are not
supplanted by authorized State-issued
requirements. Washington continues to
have enforcement responsibilities under
its State hazardous waste management
program for violations of this program,
but the EPA retains its authority under
E:\FR\FM\09MRR1.SGM
09MRR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 47 (Friday, March 9, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 10376-10383]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-04810]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 51
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0202; FRL-9975-23-OAR]
RIN 2060-AT41
Implementation of the 2015 National Ambient Air Quality Standards
for Ozone: Nonattainment Area Classifications Approach
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In this final rule, the EPA is establishing the air quality
thresholds that define the classifications assigned to all
nonattainment areas for the 2015 ozone national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS) (the ``2015 ozone NAAQS'') promulgated on October 1,
2015. This final rule also establishes the timing of attainment dates
for each nonattainment area classification.
DATES: This final rule is effective on May 8, 2018.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action, identified
by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2016-0202. All documents in the docket are
listed in the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in
the index, some information may not be publicly available, e.g.,
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available
electronically in https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further general information on
this rule, contact Mr. Robert Lingard, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards (OAQPS), Air Quality Policy Division, U.S. EPA, Mailcode
539-01, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711; by
telephone at (919) 541-5272; or by email at [email protected]; or
Mr. Butch Stackhouse, OAQPS, Air Quality Policy Division, U.S. EPA,
Mailcode 539-01, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC
27711; by telephone at (919) 541-5208; or by email at
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
Entities potentially affected directly by this final rule include
state, local and tribal governments and air pollution control agencies
(air agencies) responsible for attainment and maintenance of the ozone
NAAQS. Entities potentially affected indirectly by this proposed rule
as regulated sources include owners and operators of sources of
emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides
(NOX) that contribute to ground-level ozone formation.
B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related
information?
In addition to being available in the docket, an electronic copy of
this Federal Register document will be posted at https://www.epa.gov/ozone-pollution.
C. How is this document organized?
The information presented in this document is organized as follows:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
[[Page 10377]]
B. Where can I get a copy of this document and other related
information?
C. How is this document organized?
II. Background
III. Application of Classification Provisions in CAA Section 181 to
Nonattainment Areas Subject to Subpart 2 of Part D of Title I of the
CAA
A. Background and Summary of the Proposal
B. Brief Summary of Comments on the Proposed Rule and the EPA's
Responses
C. Final Action
IV. Environmental Justice Considerations
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTA)
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income
Populations
L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
M. Judicial Review
VI. Statutory Authority
II. Background
On October 1, 2015,\1\ the EPA promulgated a rule that revised the
primary and secondary 8-hour NAAQS for ozone to a level of 0.070 parts
per million (ppm).\2\ \3\ Revisions to the ozone NAAQS trigger a
process set forth in section 107 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act), in
which states recommend area designations (i.e., as nonattainment,
attainment, or unclassifiable with respect to the revised standards) to
the EPA, and the EPA then evaluates air quality data and other factors
prior to making final area designations. In accordance with CAA section
181(a)(1), an area designated as nonattainment for a revised ozone
NAAQS must be classified, at the time of designation, as Marginal,
Moderate, Serious, Severe or Extreme, depending on the severity of the
ozone air quality problem in that nonattainment area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015).
\2\ Compliance with the NAAQS is computed based on the annual
fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average concentration, averaged
over 3 years. For a detailed explanation of the calculation of the
3-year 8-hour average, see 40 CFR part 50, appendix P.
\3\ Since the 2015 primary and secondary NAAQS for ozone are
identical, for convenience, we refer to both as ``the 2015 ozone
NAAQS'' or ``the 2015 ozone standards.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 17, 2016, the EPA proposed a set of nonattainment area
classification thresholds and associated attainment dates, as well as
other NAAQS implementation-related provisions including submittal
deadlines and specific CAA requirements for the content of
nonattainment area and Ozone Transport Region state implementation
plans (SIPs), for the 2015 ozone NAAQS (81 FR 81276). With this action,
we are finalizing the set of nonattainment area classification
thresholds and associated attainment dates, which will apply when the
EPA promulgates final nonattainment area designations for the 2015
ozone NAAQS.\4\ The public comment period on the November 17, 2016,
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) (November 2016 proposal) ran from
November 17, 2016, to February 13, 2017. The EPA received approximately
80 comment submissions on the NPRM, approximately 20 of which addressed
the EPA's proposed nonattainment area classifications approach. The
preamble to this final classifications rule for the 2015 ozone NAAQS
discusses the comments received and how they were considered by the EPA
in general terms. The Response to Comments document provides more
detailed responses to the comments received. The public comments
received on the NPRM and the EPA's Response to Comment document are
posted in the docket at https://www.regulations.gov (Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OAR-2016-0202).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The EPA intends to finalize, where appropriate, the other
portions of the November 17, 2016, proposed rule in a separate
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are taking two actions in this final rule: (1) Establishing the
air quality thresholds that define each of the five CAA classifications
for areas designated nonattainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS; and (2)
establishing the attainment deadline associated with each
classification. The EPA also proposed in the November 2016 proposal to
apply previous voluntary reclassifications for six areas in California
to the revised 2015 ozone NAAQS. Consistent with California's most
recent request, EPA intends to finalize these voluntary
reclassifications for five areas separately with its final
nonattainment area designations for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
III. Application of Classification Provisions in CAA Section 181 to
Nonattainment Areas Subject to Subpart 2 of Part D of Title I of the
CAA
A. Background and Summary of the Proposal
1. Background
On November 17, 2016, the EPA proposed numerical ozone air quality
thresholds for classifying nonattainment areas for the 2015 ozone NAAQS
(81 FR 81283). In accordance with CAA section 181(a)(1), each area
designated as nonattainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS must be classified
at the time of designation. Accordingly, the EPA is finalizing
classification thresholds on or before the date that it issues final
nonattainment area designations.
Under Subpart 2 of part D of title I of the CAA, state planning and
emissions control requirements for ozone are determined, in part, by a
nonattainment area's classification. Under subpart 2, ozone
nonattainment areas are initially classified based on the severity of
their ozone levels, as determined by the area's design value (DV),\5\
relative to the lower and upper DV thresholds for each classification.
Nonattainment areas with a ``lower'' classification have ozone levels
at the time of designation that are closer to the standard than areas
with a ``higher'' classification. Ozone nonattainment areas in the
lower classification levels have fewer initial mandatory air quality
planning and control requirements than those in higher classifications.
Clean Air Act section 181 provides an increasing amount of maximum time
from the date of designation to attain the standards for the
progressively higher classifications: Marginal--3 years, Moderate--6
years, Serious--9 years, Severe--15 or 17 years, and Extreme--20 years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentration, averaged over 3 years. For a detailed explanation of
the calculation of the 3-year 8-hour average, see 40 CFR part 50,
appendix P.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CAA provides mechanisms for addressing nonattainment areas that
may not be able to attain by the attainment date for their
classification, or that fail to attain by that date. CAA section
181(a)(4) provides that within 90 days of designation and
classification, the Administrator may exercise discretion to reclassify
an area to a higher (or lower) classification if its DV is within 5
percent of the DV range of the higher (or lower) classification. An air
agency may also voluntarily request, pursuant to CAA section 181(b)(3),
that the EPA reclassify the area to a higher classification. The EPA
may not deny
[[Page 10378]]
and must approve any such voluntary reclassification requests. Once an
area is reclassified to a higher classification, it becomes subject to
the associated additional planning and control requirements for that
higher classification, and must attain the standard no later than the
maximum attainment date for that classification. Six nonattainment
areas in California were granted voluntary reclassifications for both
the 1997 and 2008 ozone NAAQS (77 FR 30165; May 21, 2012), which we
proposed in the November 2016 proposal to apply for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS. Finally, if the EPA determines that an area has failed to attain
the standard by the applicable attainment date, CAA section 181(b)(2)
requires EPA to reclassify that area to a higher classification (i.e.,
``bump-up'').
2. Summary of the Proposal
For purposes of the 2015 ozone NAAQS, the EPA proposed to retain
the ``percent-above-the-standard'' (PATS) methodology used to establish
area classification thresholds for the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS
(81 FR 81283; November 17, 2016). As the EPA explained in our proposal,
the PATS approach is rooted in the classification thresholds
established for the ozone standard in effect at the time of the 1990
CAA amendments, which was a 1-hour exceedance-based standard of 0.12
ppm.\6\ The classification provisions in Table 1 in section 181 of
subpart 2 of the CAA (also referred to herein as the ``CAA Table 1'')
are specific to that 1-hour standard. The EPA subsequently translated
the CAA Table 1 thresholds for purposes of the revised 1997 ozone
NAAQS, which were expressed in the form of a 3-year average of annual
fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour averages.\7\ Specifically, in the
classifications rule for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, we translated the
classification thresholds in CAA Table 1 from 1-hour DVs to 8-hour DVs
based on the percentage by which each classification threshold in the
table exceeds the 1-hour ozone NAAQS (i.e., percent-above-the-standard,
or PATS).\8\ Application of the PATS classification approach for 8-hour
ozone NAAQS was challenged in litigation and upheld by the Court. See
South Coast Air Quality Management District v. Environmental Protection
Agency, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006) at 896-898. The EPA subsequently
retained the PATS approach in its final classifications rule for the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ For additional discussion on the 1-hour ozone NAAQS and its
associated area designations and classifications, see 56 FR 56695
(November 6, 1991).
\7\ See 69 FR 23954 (April 30, 2004) and 40 CFR Appendix I.
\8\ The upper thresholds of the Marginal, Moderate, Serious and
Severe classifications are precise percentages or fractions above
the level of the standard, namely 15 percent (3/20ths more than the
standard), 33.33 percent (one-third more than the standard), 50
percent (one-half more than the standard), and 133.3 percent (one
and one-third more than the standard).
\9\ See 77 FR 30162 (May 21, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA also proposed to retain its current approach in
establishing attainment dates for each nonattainment area
classification, consistent with CAA Table 1 and the regulatory approach
for both the 1997 and 2008 ozone NAAQS (81 FR 81285; November 17,
2016). We proposed that the maximum attainment dates for nonattainment
areas in each classification under the 2015 NAAQS are as follows:
Marginal--3 years from effective date of designation; Moderate--6 years
from effective date of designation; Serious--9 years from effective
date of designation; Severe--15 years (or 17 years) from effective date
of designation; and Extreme--20 years from effective date of
designation.
Finally, the EPA proposed to again apply previous voluntary
reclassifications for potential nonattainment areas in California to
the revised 2015 ozone NAAQS unless the state of California explicitly
requested otherwise in their comments to the November 2016 proposal (81
FR 81285).\10\ These areas included Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin,
San Joaquin Valley, Riverside County (Coachella Valley), Sacramento
Metro, Ventura County and Western Mojave areas. We believe this is an
appropriate mechanism to address the situation for these California
areas that were voluntarily reclassified for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and
previously used this mechanism for the 2008 ozone NAAQS to ensure the
areas would have an attainment date for the revised 2015 ozone NAAQS
that is no earlier than the area's attainment date for the prior 2008
NAAQS. The EPA proposed this approach in order to minimize burden on
the state of California and obviate the need to go through the
voluntary reclassification process again.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Areas for which California declines voluntary
reclassification would be classified at the time of designation for
the 2015 ozone NAAQS based on their DV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Brief Summary of Comments on the Proposed Rule and the EPA's
Responses
The EPA received approximately 20 comment submissions on its
proposed approach for establishing nonattainment area classification
thresholds for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. A majority (approximately two-
thirds) of the commenters supported adoption of the proposed PATS
approach, stating that it was consistent with the CAA as well as the
method used for classifying nonattainment areas under the 1997 and 2008
ozone NAAQS, and has been upheld in litigation. The other one-third of
comments suggested that EPA adopt a different classification approach,
as addressed more fully below and in the separate Response to Comments
document that is available in the docket for this rulemaking. The EPA
received no significant comments regarding its proposed approach in
establishing attainment dates for each nonattainment area
classification under the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
Comment: Some commenters were concerned that the proposed PATS
approach classifies too many areas as Marginal nonattainment areas, and
that some of those Marginal areas are unlikely to attain the standard
within the 3 years provided by the Act. Commenters pointed out that the
EPA's application of the PATS approach to classifications for the 2008
ozone NAAQS resulted in more than half of all Marginal areas failing to
achieve timely attainment of that NAAQS by the end of the 2014 ozone
season. Because the CAA does not require states with areas classified
as Marginal to develop attainment plans or adopt additional controls,
commenters argue that states will not impose emission reductions
necessary to timely achieve attainment and moreover that some of these
Marginal areas contribute pollution to downwind areas that have
historically struggled with attaining the NAAQS due to transported
pollution. These commenters advocated alternative classification
approaches, such as those considered by the EPA for the prior 2008
ozone NAAQS, that would adjust thresholds to classify more areas as
Moderate than the proposed PATS approach. They argue that modifying the
EPA's proposed classification approach with the result of increasing
the number of Moderate areas would impose needed emissions control
requirements, provide a longer, more realistic timeframe to attain the
ozone NAAQS, and would equitably require upwind areas that contribute
to downwind transport to implement new control measures sooner.
Response: The EPA recognizes that the nonattainment area
classification thresholds established in this action would likely
result in the vast majority of nonattainment areas being initially
classified Marginal for the 2015 ozone NAAQS, subjecting states
associated with these areas to fewer mandatory air quality planning and
control
[[Page 10379]]
requirements than would apply in higher classifications. However, as
the commenters acknowledge, the PATS approach has ``a degree of
consistency with Congressional intent'' and has withstood judicial
review. The EPA previously considered a number of alternative
approaches in establishing nonattainment area classification thresholds
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and commenters suggested that we reexamine
those approaches and consider adopting one here, or adopt an entirely
new alternative approach.\11\ We rejected the alternative approaches
discussed in the Background Information Document that accompanied the
classifications rule for the 2008 ozone NAAQS because we determined
that the alternative approaches would introduce more judgment and
uncertainty in the threshold determination process than contemplated by
the CAA, and, thus, posed heightened legal risk. We believe the same
considerations apply to classifications for areas designated
nonattainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. As discussed in the November
2016 proposal, the EPA utilized the PATS approach for classifying areas
under the 1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, in large part, for its
straightforward translation of the classification thresholds
established by Congress in CAA Table 1 (81 FR 81283). As noted by
commenters, the EPA's original PATS classification approach for the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS was challenged in litigation and upheld by the Court.
See South Coast Air Quality Management District v. Environmental
Protection Agency, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006) at 896-898. For these
reasons, and despite concerns raised by commenters, the EPA is
finalizing the PATS approach for classifications of the 2015 ozone
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0885 includes a Background
Information Document, titled Additional Options Considered for
Classification of Nonattainment Areas under the 2008 Ozone NAAQS
(January 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Furthermore, the EPA disagrees that implementation of the 2008
ozone NAAQS was not in keeping with Congress' design simply because
many Marginal areas did not attain by their initial attainment
deadline. Commenters point out that more than half of all areas
originally classified as Marginal did not timely attain, but in fact
more than half of all Marginal areas did attain by their attainment
date, when attainment date extensions are included in the analysis. Of
the 36 areas originally classified as Marginal for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS, 17 attained by their original attainment date, and 6 additional
areas attained by the extended attainment dates authorized under CAA
section 181(a)(5).\12\ The EPA also does not agree with commenters'
suggestion that the EPA should adopt a different classification scheme
in order to address what they perceive as inequities in the interstate
transport of ozone pollution. The statute clearly provides other
mechanisms for states and the EPA to address interstate transport, and
the EPA has worked in partnership with states to use those mechanisms.
See, e.g., EME Homer City v. EPA, 696 F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012), reversed
by EPA v. EME Homer City, 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014), remand addressed in
EME Homer City v. EPA, 795 F.3d 118 (D.C. Cir. 2015) (largely upholding
the EPA's framework for addressing CAA section 110(a)(2)(D) interstate
transport obligations).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Eight areas received 1-year extensions of the attainment
date under CAA section 181(a)(5), which Congress provided for areas
that were making good progress towards achieving the NAAQS and thus
had air quality that was just missing the standard. Of those eight
areas, two eventually failed to attain by their extended attainment
date. The other six areas attained in the year following the
original attainment date. Thus, a total of 13 original Marginal
areas failed to attain by their applicable attainment date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The adopted PATS approach has withstood legal challenge and, in
classifying areas as Marginal, maximizes initial planning flexibility
for air agencies, which the EPA does not believe thwarts Congress'
intent. To the extent that states are concerned about their inability
to timely meet the Marginal attainment deadlines, the CAA provides
authority for them to voluntarily request a higher classification for
individual areas, if needed. The docket for this final action includes
a more detailed response to comments suggesting that EPA adopt an
alternative approach that would have the effect of classifying more
areas as Moderate.
Comment: Some commenters suggested that the EPA allow areas the
option to implement the 2015 ozone NAAQS under CAA section 172 (Part D,
subpart 1), which specifies the general nonattainment planning
requirements for all NAAQS pollutants.\13\ Implementing the 2015 ozone
NAAQS under CAA subpart 1 could eliminate mandatory classifications and
provide a potentially more flexible attainment timeline with fewer
prescribed control requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Prior to the 1990 CAA Amendments, all NAAQS nonattainment
area requirements were specified in Part D, subpart 1. In the 1990
Amendments, Congress added pollutant-specific subparts containing
additional nonattainment area requirements, including subpart 2
which applies to ozone nonattainment areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Response: The EPA attempted to implement a subpart 1 approach for
some ozone nonattainment areas as part of a ``hybrid'' implementation
strategy in transitioning from the 1-hour ozone NAAQS (0.12 ppm) to the
1997 8-hour NAAQS (0.08 ppm), explaining that an area must be covered
under CAA subpart 2 if the area's current (i.e., at the time of
designation) 1-hour ozone DV was equal to or greater than 0.121 ppm,
which was the lowest 1-hour DV in CAA Table 1 (69 FR 23954; April 30,
2004--the ``Phase 1'' Rule). In South Coast, the Court rejected the
EPA's approach to placing areas solely under the nonattainment area
implementation provisions of CAA subpart 1, including the EPA's use of
the CAA Table 1 threshold for deciding which areas must be covered
under implementation of the provisions of CAA subpart 2. 472 F.3d at
892-894. The Court concluded that such a determination must be based on
the 8-hour ``equivalent'' to the 1-hour level specified in CAA Table 1,
and ruled that the level that must be used is an 8-hour level of 0.09
ppm. Id. We concur with commenters to the November 2016 proposal that
the South Coast Court left open the possibility that EPA could develop
a reasonable basis to place under CAA subpart 1 all or certain areas
with an 8-hour DV below 0.09 ppm. The EPA notes, however, that the
South Coast Court also stated in that same decision that the CAA does
not allow the requirements of CAA subpart 2 ``to be stripped away'' on
the basis that other provisions would allow attainment to be achieved
more efficiently. Id. at 894.\14\ We believe that the adopted PATS
classification thresholds approach will continue to provide states a
pathway for consistent and flexible attainment planning across
successive ozone standards and, absent a more robust legal basis, we
are not adopting a CAA subpart 1 option for implementing the 2015 ozone
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Cf. NRDC v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (DC Cir. 2013) (rejecting
EPA's implementation of PM2.5 under subpart 1, instead
requiring that PM2.5 be implemented under the ``specific,
more stringent, and far less discretionary'' provisions of subpart
4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment: The California Air Resources Board (CARB) affirmed our
proposal to apply previous voluntary reclassifications for selected
nonattainment areas, with the exception of the Sacramento Metro area.
As part of their comment, CARB forwarded a request from the Sacramento
Air Quality Management District declining the voluntary
reclassification for the Sacramento Metro area, which the District
anticipated would be classified
[[Page 10380]]
Moderate for the 2015 ozone NAAQS (see comment no. 100 in the
rulemaking docket).
Response: Based on comments to the November 2016 proposal received
from the state of California, the EPA also intends to apply previous
voluntary reclassifications for five of the six California areas
originally proposed. Table 1 presents the voluntary reclassification
history for these areas across the 1997 and 2008 ozone NAAQS, and the
anticipated initial classification and anticipated voluntary
reclassification for each area under the 2015 ozone NAAQS. We intend to
formally apply the previous voluntary reclassifications for these
California areas in a separate action, along with the final
nonattainment area designations for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
Table 1--Areas for Which the State of California Requested a Voluntary Reclassification Under the 1997 Ozone NAAQS and Application Under Subsequent
Ozone Standards
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Voluntary Voluntary Hypothetical initial Anticipated voluntary
Original 1997 ozone reclassification for reclassification for classification under reclassification under
Nonattainment area NAAQS classification 1997 ozone NAAQS 2008 ozone NAAQS 2015 ozone NAAQS \a\ 2015 ozone NAAQS \a\
(attainment date) (attainment date) (attainment date) (attainment date) (attainment date)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Los Angeles-South Coast Air Basin. Severe--17 (2021).... Extreme (2024)....... Extreme (2032)....... Severe--15 (2033)... Extreme (2038).
San Joaquin Valley................ Serious (2013)....... Extreme (2024)....... Extreme (2032)....... Serious (2027)...... Extreme (2038).
Riverside County (Coachella Serious (2013)....... Severe--15 (2019).... Severe--15 (2027).... Moderate (2024)..... Severe--15 (2033).
Valley).
Ventura County.................... Moderate (2010)...... Serious (2013)....... Serious (2021)....... Marginal (2021)..... Serious (2027).
Western Mojave.................... Moderate (2010)...... Severe--15 (2019).... Severe--15 (2027).... Moderate (2024)..... Severe--15 (2033).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Based on adopted PATS classification thresholds and final 2014-2016 design values.
It is important to note that an air agency may request a voluntary
reclassification for an area under CAA section 181(b)(3) at any time.
In the November 2016 proposal, the EPA encouraged any air agency that
wanted a specific higher classification to apply to an area at the time
of initial designation to make such a request prior to or
contemporaneous with the designation process. However, an air agency
that determines it would like a voluntary reclassification after an
area's initial designation may request, and the Administrator must
approve, a higher classification for an area for any reason in
accordance with CAA section 181(b)(3).
C. Final Action
The EPA is establishing nonattainment area classification
thresholds for the 2015 ozone NAAQS using the PATS methodology applied
previously to translate the CAA Table 1 thresholds for purposes of the
1997 and 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. We are also establishing maximum
attainment dates for each nonattainment area classification, consistent
with CAA Table 1 and the regulatory approach for both the 1997 and 2008
ozone NAAQS. Table 2 depicts the translation for each of the CAA Table
1 thresholds and corresponding maximum attainment dates for each area
classification as they would apply for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
Table 2--CAA Table 1 Ozone Design Value Translation to 8-Hour Design Values for the 2015 Ozone NAAQS of 0.070
ppm Using PATS Methodology and Corresponding Maximum Attainment Dates for Each Area Classification
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum
attainment
1-hour ozone Percent above 8-hour ozone date (years
Area class DV (ppm) 1-hour ozone DV (ppm) from effective
NAAQS date of
designation)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marginal...................... From up to \a\.. 0.121 0.833 0.071 3
0.138 15 0.081
Moderate...................... From up to \a\.. 0.138 15 0.081 6
0.160 33.333 0.093
Serious....................... From up to \a\.. 0.160 33.333 0.093 9
0.180 50 0.105
Severe--15.................... From up to \a\.. 0.180 50 0.105 15
0.190 58.333 0.111
Severe--17.................... From up to \a\.. .0190 58.333 0.111 17
0.280 133.333 0.163
Extreme....................... Equal to or 0.280 133.333 0.163 20
above.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ But not including.
The EPA intends to apply voluntary reclassifications for five
California areas in a separate action with the final nonattainment area
designations for the 2015 ozone NAAQS, in accordance with comments
received from relevant air agencies in California. The EPA is also
finalizing a number of regulatory definitions needed to support the
implementation of this final classifications rule.
IV. Environmental Justice Considerations
The EPA believes the human health or environmental risk addressed
by this action will not have disproportionately high and adverse human
health or
[[Page 10381]]
environmental effects on minority, low-income, or indigenous
populations because it would not negatively affect the level of
protection provided to human health or the environment under the 2015
ozone NAAQS. When promulgated, these regulations will establish
classification thresholds for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. These requirements
are designed to protect all segments of the general population and, as
such, will not adversely affect the health or safety of minority, low-
income or indigenous populations.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
This action is not a significant regulatory action and was
therefore not submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
for review.
B. Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulations and Controlling
Regulatory Costs
This action is not an Executive Order 13771 regulatory action
because this action is not significant under Executive Order 12866.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
This action does not impose an information collection burden under
the PRA. The EPA is establishing nonattainment area classification
thresholds for the 2015 ozone NAAQS so that areas may be classified at
the time of designation as provided in section 181(a) of the CAA. No
new information needs to be collected from the states as a result of
this final classifications rule.
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities. Entities
potentially affected directly by this rule include state, local and
tribal governments and none of these governments are small governments.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
This action does not contain any unfunded mandate as described in
UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. The action implements mandates specifically and
explicitly set forth in the CAA without the exercise of any policy
discretion by the EPA.
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments
This action does not have tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. It would not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, since no tribe has to develop a tribal
implementation plan under these regulatory revisions. Furthermore,
these regulation revisions do not affect the relationship or
distribution of power and responsibilities between the federal
government and Indian tribes. The CAA and the Tribal Air Rule establish
the relationship of the federal government and tribes in developing
plans to attain the NAAQS, and these revisions to the regulations do
nothing to modify that relationship. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does
not apply to this action. Consistent with the EPA's OAR Handbook for
Interacting with Tribal Governments, the EPA invited tribal officials
to consult on the November 2016 proposal; however, we received no
subsequent requests for consultation.
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks
The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the EPA has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. This action is not subject to
Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an environmental
health risk or safety risk.
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
This action is not a ``significant energy action'' because it is
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution or use of energy.
J. National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTA)
This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.
K. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions To Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations
The EPA believes that this action does not have disproportionately
high and adverse human health or environmental effects on minority
populations, low-income populations and/or indigenous populations as
specified in Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). The
adopted regulations establish classification thresholds for the 2015
ozone NAAQS, which are designed to protect all segments of the general
populations. The results of our evaluation are contained in Section IV
of this preamble.
L. Congressional Review Act (CRA)
This action is subject to the CRA, and the EPA will submit a rule
report to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of
the United States. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5
U.S.C. 804(2).
M. Judicial Review
Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA indicates which Federal Courts of
Appeal have venue for petitions of review of final agency actions by
the EPA under the CAA. This section provides, in part, that petitions
for review must be filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District
of Columbia Circuit (i) when the agency action consists of ``nationally
applicable regulations promulgated, or final actions taken, by the
Administrator'' or (ii) when such action is locally or regionally
applicable, if ``such action is based on a determination of nationwide
scope or effect and if in taking such action the Administrator finds
and publishes that such action is based on such a determination.''
This rule implementing the 2015 ozone NAAQS nonattainment area
classifications is ``nationally applicable'' within the meaning of CAA
section 307(b)(1). First, the rulemaking addresses the NAAQS that
applies to all states and territories in the U.S. Second, the
rulemaking addresses the classification of potential nonattainment
areas in states across the U.S. that are located in each of the ten EPA
regions, numerous federal circuits and multiple time zones. Third, the
rulemaking addresses a common core of knowledge and analysis involved
in formulating the decision and a common interpretation of the
requirements of the CAA being applied to potential nonattainment areas
in states across the country. Fourth, the rulemaking, by addressing
issues relevant to potential nonattainment area classifications in one
state, may have
[[Page 10382]]
precedential impacts upon potential nonattainment area classifications
in other states nationwide. Courts have found similar implementation
rulemaking actions to be of nationwide scope and effect.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See, e.g., State of Texas, et al. v. EPA, 2011 U.S. App.
LEXIS 5654 (5th Cir. 2011) (finding SIP call to 13 states to be of
nationwide scope and effect and thus transferring the case to the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in accordance with CAA
section 307(b)(1)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Act, petitions for judicial review
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia Circuit by May 8, 2018. Any such judicial
review is limited to only those objections that are raised with
reasonable specificity in timely comments. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule 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.
Under section 307(b)(2) of the Act, the requirements of this final
action may not be challenged later in civil or criminal proceedings
brought by us to enforce these requirements.
VI. Statutory Authority
The statutory authority for this action is provided by sections
109; 110; 172; 181; and 301(a)(1) of the CAA, as amended (42 U.S.C.
7409; 42 U.S.C. 7410; 42 U.S.C. 7502; 42 U.S.C. 7511; 42 U.S.C.
7601(a)(1)).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Ozone, Particulate matter, Transportation, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: March 1, 2018.
E. Scott Pruitt,
Administrator.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, 40 CFR part 51 is amended
as follows:
PART 51--REQUIREMENTS FOR PREPARATION, ADOPTION, AND SUBMITTAL OF
IMPLEMENTATION PLANS
0
1. The authority citation for part 51 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 23 U.S.C. 101; 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
0
2. Add subpart CC, consisting of Sec. Sec. 51.1300 through 51.1303, to
read as follows:
Subpart CC--Provisions for Implementation of the 2015 Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
Sec.
51.1300 Definitions.
51.1301 Applicability of this part.
51.1302 Classification and nonattainment area planning provisions.
51.1303 Application of classification and attainment date provisions
in CAA section 181 to areas subject to Sec. 51.1302.
Subpart CC--Provisions for Implementation of the 2015 Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
Sec. 51.1300 Definitions.
The following definitions apply for purposes of this subpart. Any
term not defined herein shall have the meaning as defined in Sec.
51.100.
(a) 2015 NAAQS. The 2015 8-hour primary and secondary ozone NAAQS
codified at 40 CFR 50.19.
(b) 8-hour ozone design value. The 8-hour ozone concentration
calculated according to 40 CFR part 50, appendix P, for the 2008 NAAQS,
and 40 CFR part 50, appendix U, for the 2015 NAAQS.
(c) CAA. The Clean Air Act as codified at 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q
(2010).
(d) Designation for a NAAQS. The effective date of the designation
for an area for that NAAQS.
(e) Higher classification/lower classification. For purposes of
determining whether a classification is higher or lower,
classifications under subpart 2 of part D of title I of the CAA are
ranked from lowest to highest as follows: Marginal; Moderate; Serious;
Severe-15; Severe-17; and Extreme.
Sec. 51.1301 Applicability of this part.
The provisions in subparts A through Y and AA of this part apply to
areas for purposes of the 2015 ozone NAAQS to the extent they are not
inconsistent with the provisions of this subpart.
Sec. 51.1302 Classification and nonattainment area planning
provisions.
An area designated nonattainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS will be
classified in accordance with CAA section 181, as interpreted in Sec.
51.1303(a), and will be subject to the requirements of subpart 2 of
part D of title I of the CAA that apply for that classification.
Sec. 51.1303 Application of classification and attainment date
provisions in CAA section 181 to areas subject to Sec. 51.1302.
(a) In accordance with CAA section 181(a)(1), each area designated
nonattainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS shall be classified by operation
of law at the time of designation. The classification shall be based on
the 8-hour design value for the area at the time of designation, in
accordance with Table 1 of this paragraph (a). A state may request a
higher or lower classification as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of
this section. For each area classified under this section, the
attainment date for the 2015 NAAQS shall be as expeditious as
practicable, but not later than the date provided in Table 1 as
follows:
Table 1 to Paragraph (a)--Classifications and Attainment Dates for 2015 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS (0.070 ppm) for Areas
Subject to Sec. 51.1302
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Primary standard
8-hour ozone attainment date (years
Area class design value after the effective
(ppm) date of designation for
2015 primary NAAQS)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marginal................................ from up to *.............. 0.071 3
0.081
Moderate................................ from up to *.............. 0.081 6
0.093
Serious................................. from up to *.............. 0.093 9
0.105
Severe-15............................... from up to *.............. 0.105 15
0.111
[[Page 10383]]
Severe-17............................... from up to *.............. 0.111 17
0.163
Extreme................................. equal to or above......... 0.163 20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* But not including.
(b) A state may request, and the Administrator must approve, a
higher classification for an area for any reason in accordance with CAA
section 181(b)(3).
(c) A state may request, and the Administrator may in the
Administrator's discretion approve, a higher or lower classification
for an area in accordance with CAA section 181(a)(4).
[FR Doc. 2018-04810 Filed 3-8-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P