Air Plan Approval and Air Quality Designation; SC; Redesignation of the Greenville-Spartanburg Unclassifiable Area, 10814-10816 [2018-05060]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
10814
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with PROPOSALS
revision also adds paragraph 4 which
states: ‘‘For purposes of enforcement for
a specific source, the test methods
specified in these regulations, in the
approved SIP, or in a permit issued
pursuant to these regulations shall be
used to be consistent with state
regulations.’’ EPA is proposing to
approve these revisions because they are
consistent with the definition of VOC at
40 CFR 51.100(s) and with other similar
SIP-approved regulations.
Finally, the SIP revision adds
paragraph 5 which states: ‘‘The
following compound(s) are VOC for
purposes of all recordkeeping,
emissions reporting, photochemical
dispersion modeling and inventory
requirements which apply to VOC and
shall be uniquely identified in emission
reports, but are not VOC for purposes of
VOC emissions limitations or VOC
content requirements: t-butyl acetate.’’
Through this revision, Hamilton County
is also adding t-butyl acetate to the list
of negligibly reactive compounds, but
maintaining the requirements of
recordkeeping, emissions reporting, and
inventory. EPA is proposing to approve
this revision because it is consistent
with the definition of VOC at 40 CFR
51.100(s).3 4
Pursuant to CAA section 110(l), the
Administrator shall not approve a
revision of a plan if the revision would
interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment and
reasonable further progress (as defined
in CAA section 171), or any other
applicable requirement of the Act. The
State’s addition of the County’s
exemptions from the definition of VOC,
addition of recordkeeping, emissions
reporting, photochemical dispersion
modeling, and inventory requirements
for t-butyl acetate, and other changes in
paragraphs 3 and 4 to Chapter 4 of Part
II, Section 4–2, of the Chattanooga Code
‘‘Definitions’’ are approvable under
section 110(l) because they reflect
changes to federal regulations based on
findings that the aforementioned
compounds are negligibly reactive and
3 In EPA’s November 29, 2004, final rulemaking,
the Agency added tertiary butyl acetate to the list
of excluded compounds from the definition of
VOCs. See 69 FR 69298.
4 While EPA added t-butyl acetate to the list of
negligibly reactive compounds in the November 29,
2004, final rulemaking, t-butyl acetate continued to
be a VOC for purposes of all recordkeeping,
emissions reporting, and inventory requirements
which applied to VOC. See 69 FR 69298.
Subsequently, on February 25, 2016 (81 FR 9339),
EPA issued a final rule removing recordkeeping,
emissions reporting, and inventory requirements for
t-Butyl acetate. Although EPA no longer requires
recordkeeping, emissions reporting, and inventory
requirements for t-butyl acetate, this SIP revision
includes this requirement.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:40 Mar 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
make a negligible contribution to
troposphere ozone formation.
III. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is proposing to
include in a final EPA rule regulatory
text that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is
proposing to incorporate by reference
Chapter 4 of Part II, Section 4–2,
‘‘Definitions’’ effective August 16, 1995,
which revised the definition of VOC.
EPA has made, and will continue to
make, these materials generally
available through www.regulations.gov
and at the EPA Region 4 Office (please
contact the person identified in the ‘‘For
Further Information Contact’’ section of
this preamble for more information).
IV. Proposed Action
Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA,
EPA is proposing to approve the
aforementioned changes to Tennessee’s
SIP for Chapter 4 of Part II, Section 4–
2. EPA has evaluated the relevant
portions of Tennessee’s June 25, 2008,
SIP revision and has determined that it
meets the applicable requirements of the
CAA and EPA regulations and is
consistent with EPA policy.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable Federal regulations.
See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. This action merely proposes to
approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
this proposed action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
action because SIP approvals are
exempted under Executive Order 12866.
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Public Law 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The SIP is not approved to apply on
any Indian reservation land or in any
other area where EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal
implications as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), nor will it impose substantial
direct costs on tribal governments or
preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: February 20, 2018.
Onis ‘‘Trey’’ Glenn, III,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2018–04932 Filed 3–12–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 81
[EPA–R04–OAR–2018–0017; FRL–9975–52Region 4]
Air Plan Approval and Air Quality
Designation; SC; Redesignation of the
Greenville-Spartanburg Unclassifiable
Area
AGENCY:
Environmental Protection
Agency.
E:\FR\FM\13MRP1.SGM
13MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
ACTION:
Proposed rule.
On January 22, 2018, the State
of South Carolina, through the
Department of Health and
Environmental Control (DHEC),
submitted a request for the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
to redesignate the GreenvilleSpartanburg, South Carolina fine
particulate matter (PM2.5) unclassifiable
area (hereinafter referred to as the
‘‘Greenville Area’’ or ‘‘Area’’) to
unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997
primary and secondary annual PM2.5
national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS). The Greenville Area is
comprised of Anderson, Greenville, and
Spartanburg Counties in South Carolina.
EPA now has sufficient data to
determine that the Greenville Area is in
attainment of the 1997 primary and
secondary annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve
the State’s request and redesignate the
Area to unclassifiable/attainment for the
1997 primary and secondary annual
PM2.5 NAAQS based upon valid,
quality-assured, and certified ambient
air monitoring data showing that the
PM2.5 monitors in the Area are in
compliance with the 1997 primary and
secondary annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before April 12, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OAR–2018–0017 at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
EPA may publish any comment received
to its public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points
you wish to make. EPA will generally
not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Madolyn Sanchez, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:40 Mar 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides
and Toxics Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta,
Georgia 30303–8960. Ms. Sanchez can
be reached by telephone at (404) 562–
9644 or via electronic mail at
sanchez.madolyn@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Clean Air Act (CAA or Act)
establishes a process for air quality
management through the establishment
and implementation of the NAAQS.
After the promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS, EPA is required to
designate areas, pursuant to section
107(d)(1) of the CAA, as attainment,
nonattainment, or unclassifiable. On
July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38652), EPA
revised the NAAQS for particulate
matter to add new standards for PM2.5
(annual and 24-hour). The primary and
secondary annual standards were each
set at a level of 15.0 micrograms per
cubic meter (mg/m3), based on a 3-year
average of annual mean PM2.5
concentrations. The primary and
secondary 24-hour standards were each
set at a level of 65 mg/m3, based on a 3year average of the 98th percentile of 24hour concentrations. EPA established
the standards based on significant
evidence and numerous health studies
demonstrating that serious health effects
are associated with exposures to
particulate matter.
The process for designating areas
following promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS is contained in section
107(d)(1) of the CAA. EPA and state air
quality agencies initiated the monitoring
process for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in
1999, and deployed all air quality
monitors by January 2001. On January 5,
2005 (70 FR 944), EPA designated areas
across the country as nonattainment,
unclassifiable, or unclassifiable/
attainment 1 for the PM2.5 NAAQS based
upon air quality monitoring data from
these monitors for calendar years 2001–
2003.
1 For the initial PM area designations in 2005 (for
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS), EPA used a
designation category of ‘‘unclassifiable/attainment’’
for areas that had monitors showing attainment of
the standard and were not contributing to nearby
violations and for areas that did not have monitors
but for which EPA had reason to believe were likely
attaining the standard and not contributing to
nearby violations. EPA used the category
‘‘unclassifiable’’ for areas in which EPA could not
determine, based upon available information,
whether or not the NAAQS was being met and/or
EPA had not determined the area to be contributing
to nearby violations. EPA reserves the ‘‘attainment’’
category for when EPA redesignates a
nonattainment area that has attained the relevant
NAAQS and has an approved maintenance plan.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
10815
Greenville County, South Carolina,
had a monitor with less than three years
of data since the monitor had not been
in operation for the full 2001–2003
period. Based upon the data that was
obtained during its operation, the
monitor indicated a potential to violate
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Also,
Anderson and Spartanburg Counties
had emissions and population levels
that potentially contributed to the
elevated concentrations of PM2.5 at the
Greenville monitor in question.
Therefore, EPA designated all three
counties—Anderson, Greenville and
Spartanburg—as unclassifiable for the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
II. What are the criteria for
redesignating an area from
unclassifiable to unclassifiable/
attainment?
Section 107(d)(3) of the CAA provides
the framework for changing the area
designations for any NAAQS pollutants.
Section 107(d)(3)(A) provides that the
Administrator may notify the Governor
of any state that the designation of an
area should be revised ‘‘on the basis of
air quality data, planning and control
considerations, or any other air qualityrelated considerations the Administrator
deems appropriate.’’ The Act further
provides in section 107(d)(3)(D) that
even if the Administrator has not
notified a state Governor that a
designation should be revised, the
Governor of any state may, on the
Governor’s own motion, submit a
request to revise the designation of any
area, and the Administrator must
approve or deny the request.
When approving or denying a request
to redesignate an area, EPA bases its
decision on the air quality data for the
area as well as the considerations
provided under section 107(d)(3)(A).2 In
keeping with section 107(d)(1)(A), areas
that are redesignated to unclassifiable/
attainment must meet the requirements
for attainment areas and thus must meet
the relevant NAAQS. In addition, the
area must not contribute to ambient air
quality in a nearby area that does not
meet the NAAQS. The relevant
monitoring data must be collected and
quality-assured in accordance with 40
CFR part 58 and recorded in the EPA
Air Quality System (AQS) database. The
designated monitors generally should
have remained at the same location for
the duration of the monitoring period
2 While CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) also list specific
requirements for redesignations, those requirements
only apply to redesignations of nonattainment areas
to attainment and therefore are not applicable in the
context of a redesignation of an area from
unclassifiable to unclassifiable/attainment.
E:\FR\FM\13MRP1.SGM
13MRP1
10816
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 49 / Tuesday, March 13, 2018 / Proposed Rules
upon which the redesignation request is
based.3
III. What is EPA’s rationale for
proposing to redesignate the Area?
In order to redesignate the Area from
unclassifiable to unclassifiable/
attainment for the 1997 primary and
secondary annual PM2.5 NAAQS, the 3year average of annual arithmetic mean
concentrations (i.e., design value) over
the most recent 3-year period must be
less than or equal to 15.0 mg/m3 at all
monitoring sites in the Area over the
full 3-year period, as determined in
accordance with 40 CFR 50.18 and
Appendix N of Part 50. EPA reviewed
PM2.5 monitoring data from monitoring
stations in the Greenville Area for the
1997 primary and secondary annual
PM2.5 NAAQS for the 3-year period from
2014–2016. These data have been
quality-assured, certified, and recorded
in AQS by South Carolina, and the
monitoring locations have not changed
during the monitoring period. As
summarized in Table 1, the design
values for the monitors in the Area for
the 2014–2016 period are well below
the 1997 primary and secondary annual
PM2.5 NAAQS.
TABLE 1—1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 DESIGN VALUES FOR MONITORS IN THE GREENVILLE AREA FOR 2014–2016
Local site name
Monitoring site
Greenville ESC ........................................................................................................................................................
Hillcrest Middle School ............................................................................................................................................
T.K. Gregg ...............................................................................................................................................................
Under the CAA, redesignation of an
area to unclassifiable/attainment is an
action that affects the status of a
geographical area and does not impose
any additional regulatory requirements
on sources beyond those imposed by
state law. A redesignation to
unclassifiable/attainment does not in
and of itself create any new
requirements. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely proposes to
redesignate an area to unclassifiable/
attainment and does not impose
additional requirements. For that
reason, this proposed action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
action because redesignations are
exempted under Executive Order 12866;
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Public Law 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Will not have disproportionate
human health or environmental effects
3 See Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director,
EPA Air Quality Management Division, entitled
‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate
Areas to Attainment’’ (September 4, 1992).
Because the 3-year design values,
based on valid, quality-assured data,
demonstrate that the Area meets the
1997 primary and secondary annual
PM2.5 standards, EPA is proposing to
redesignate the Greenville Area from
unclassifiable to unclassifiable/
attainment for this NAAQS.
IV. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve South
Carolina’s January 22, 2018, request to
redesignate the Greenville Area from
unclassifiable to unclassifiable/
attainment for the 1997 primary and
secondary annual PM2.5 NAAQS. If
finalized, approval of the redesignation
request would change the legal
designation, found at 40 CFR part 81, of
Anderson, Greenville, and Spartanburg
Counties from unclassifiable to
unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997
primary and secondary annual PM2.5
NAAQS.
amozie on DSK30RV082PROD with PROPOSALS
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:40 Mar 12, 2018
Jkt 244001
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2014–2016
Design value
(μg/m3)
45–045–0015
45–045–0016
45–083–0011
9.3
8.6
8.7
under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR
7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed action to
redesignate the Greenville Area from
unclassifiable to unclassifiable/
attainment for the 1997 primary and
secondary annual PM2.5 NAAQS does
not have Tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). The
Catawba Indian Nation Reservation is
located within the State of South
Carolina. Pursuant to the Catawba
Indian Claims Settlement Act, S.C. Code
Ann. 27–16–120, ‘‘all state and local
environmental laws and regulations
apply to the Catawba Indian Nation and
Reservation and are fully enforceable by
all relevant state and local agencies and
authorities.’’ However, because no tribal
lands are located within the Area and
the redesignation does not create new
requirements, EPA has determined that
this proposed rule does not have
substantial direct effects on an Indian
Tribe. EPA notes this proposed action
will not impose substantial direct costs
on Tribal governments or preempt
Tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
Dated: March 5, 2018.
Onis ‘‘Trey’’ Glenn, III,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2018–05060 Filed 3–12–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\13MRP1.SGM
13MRP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 13, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10814-10816]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-05060]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 81
[EPA-R04-OAR-2018-0017; FRL-9975-52-Region 4]
Air Plan Approval and Air Quality Designation; SC; Redesignation
of the Greenville-Spartanburg Unclassifiable Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.
[[Page 10815]]
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On January 22, 2018, the State of South Carolina, through the
Department of Health and Environmental Control (DHEC), submitted a
request for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to redesignate
the Greenville-Spartanburg, South Carolina fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) unclassifiable area (hereinafter referred to as the
``Greenville Area'' or ``Area'') to unclassifiable/attainment for the
1997 primary and secondary annual PM2.5 national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS). The Greenville Area is comprised of
Anderson, Greenville, and Spartanburg Counties in South Carolina. EPA
now has sufficient data to determine that the Greenville Area is in
attainment of the 1997 primary and secondary annual PM2.5
NAAQS. Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve the State's request and
redesignate the Area to unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997 primary
and secondary annual PM2.5 NAAQS based upon valid, quality-
assured, and certified ambient air monitoring data showing that the
PM2.5 monitors in the Area are in compliance with the 1997
primary and secondary annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 12, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2018-0017 at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Madolyn Sanchez, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. Ms. Sanchez can be reached by telephone at (404) 562-9644
or via electronic mail at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
The Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) establishes a process for air
quality management through the establishment and implementation of the
NAAQS. After the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, EPA is
required to designate areas, pursuant to section 107(d)(1) of the CAA,
as attainment, nonattainment, or unclassifiable. On July 18, 1997 (62
FR 38652), EPA revised the NAAQS for particulate matter to add new
standards for PM2.5 (annual and 24-hour). The primary and
secondary annual standards were each set at a level of 15.0 micrograms
per cubic meter ([micro]g/m\3\), based on a 3-year average of annual
mean PM2.5 concentrations. The primary and secondary 24-hour
standards were each set at a level of 65 [micro]g/m\3\, based on a 3-
year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations. EPA
established the standards based on significant evidence and numerous
health studies demonstrating that serious health effects are associated
with exposures to particulate matter.
The process for designating areas following promulgation of a new
or revised NAAQS is contained in section 107(d)(1) of the CAA. EPA and
state air quality agencies initiated the monitoring process for the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in 1999, and deployed all air quality
monitors by January 2001. On January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944), EPA
designated areas across the country as nonattainment, unclassifiable,
or unclassifiable/attainment \1\ for the PM2.5 NAAQS based
upon air quality monitoring data from these monitors for calendar years
2001-2003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For the initial PM area designations in 2005 (for the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS), EPA used a designation category of
``unclassifiable/attainment'' for areas that had monitors showing
attainment of the standard and were not contributing to nearby
violations and for areas that did not have monitors but for which
EPA had reason to believe were likely attaining the standard and not
contributing to nearby violations. EPA used the category
``unclassifiable'' for areas in which EPA could not determine, based
upon available information, whether or not the NAAQS was being met
and/or EPA had not determined the area to be contributing to nearby
violations. EPA reserves the ``attainment'' category for when EPA
redesignates a nonattainment area that has attained the relevant
NAAQS and has an approved maintenance plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greenville County, South Carolina, had a monitor with less than
three years of data since the monitor had not been in operation for the
full 2001-2003 period. Based upon the data that was obtained during its
operation, the monitor indicated a potential to violate the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. Also, Anderson and Spartanburg Counties had
emissions and population levels that potentially contributed to the
elevated concentrations of PM2.5 at the Greenville monitor
in question. Therefore, EPA designated all three counties--Anderson,
Greenville and Spartanburg--as unclassifiable for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS.
II. What are the criteria for redesignating an area from unclassifiable
to unclassifiable/attainment?
Section 107(d)(3) of the CAA provides the framework for changing
the area designations for any NAAQS pollutants. Section 107(d)(3)(A)
provides that the Administrator may notify the Governor of any state
that the designation of an area should be revised ``on the basis of air
quality data, planning and control considerations, or any other air
quality-related considerations the Administrator deems appropriate.''
The Act further provides in section 107(d)(3)(D) that even if the
Administrator has not notified a state Governor that a designation
should be revised, the Governor of any state may, on the Governor's own
motion, submit a request to revise the designation of any area, and the
Administrator must approve or deny the request.
When approving or denying a request to redesignate an area, EPA
bases its decision on the air quality data for the area as well as the
considerations provided under section 107(d)(3)(A).\2\ In keeping with
section 107(d)(1)(A), areas that are redesignated to unclassifiable/
attainment must meet the requirements for attainment areas and thus
must meet the relevant NAAQS. In addition, the area must not contribute
to ambient air quality in a nearby area that does not meet the NAAQS.
The relevant monitoring data must be collected and quality-assured in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and recorded in the EPA Air Quality
System (AQS) database. The designated monitors generally should have
remained at the same location for the duration of the monitoring period
[[Page 10816]]
upon which the redesignation request is based.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ While CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) also list specific
requirements for redesignations, those requirements only apply to
redesignations of nonattainment areas to attainment and therefore
are not applicable in the context of a redesignation of an area from
unclassifiable to unclassifiable/attainment.
\3\ See Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, EPA Air Quality
Management Division, entitled ``Procedures for Processing Requests
to Redesignate Areas to Attainment'' (September 4, 1992).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. What is EPA's rationale for proposing to redesignate the Area?
In order to redesignate the Area from unclassifiable to
unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997 primary and secondary annual
PM2.5 NAAQS, the 3-year average of annual arithmetic mean
concentrations (i.e., design value) over the most recent 3-year period
must be less than or equal to 15.0 [micro]g/m\3\ at all monitoring
sites in the Area over the full 3-year period, as determined in
accordance with 40 CFR 50.18 and Appendix N of Part 50. EPA reviewed
PM2.5 monitoring data from monitoring stations in the
Greenville Area for the 1997 primary and secondary annual
PM2.5 NAAQS for the 3-year period from 2014-2016. These data
have been quality-assured, certified, and recorded in AQS by South
Carolina, and the monitoring locations have not changed during the
monitoring period. As summarized in Table 1, the design values for the
monitors in the Area for the 2014-2016 period are well below the 1997
primary and secondary annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
Table 1--1997 Annual PM2.5 Design Values for Monitors in the Greenville
Area for 2014-2016
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014-2016
Local site name Monitoring Design value
site ([mu]g/m\3\)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greenville ESC.......................... 45-045-0015 9.3
Hillcrest Middle School................. 45-045-0016 8.6
T.K. Gregg.............................. 45-083-0011 8.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the 3-year design values, based on valid, quality-assured
data, demonstrate that the Area meets the 1997 primary and secondary
annual PM2.5 standards, EPA is proposing to redesignate the
Greenville Area from unclassifiable to unclassifiable/attainment for
this NAAQS.
IV. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve South Carolina's January 22, 2018,
request to redesignate the Greenville Area from unclassifiable to
unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997 primary and secondary annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. If finalized, approval of the redesignation
request would change the legal designation, found at 40 CFR part 81, of
Anderson, Greenville, and Spartanburg Counties from unclassifiable to
unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997 primary and secondary annual
PM2.5 NAAQS.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to unclassifiable/
attainment is an action that affects the status of a geographical area
and does not impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources
beyond those imposed by state law. A redesignation to unclassifiable/
attainment does not in and of itself create any new requirements.
Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to redesignate an
area to unclassifiable/attainment and does not impose additional
requirements. For that reason, this proposed action:
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because redesignations are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Will not have disproportionate human health or
environmental effects under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February
16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed action to redesignate the Greenville
Area from unclassifiable to unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997
primary and secondary annual PM2.5 NAAQS does not have
Tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000). The Catawba Indian Nation Reservation is located
within the State of South Carolina. Pursuant to the Catawba Indian
Claims Settlement Act, S.C. Code Ann. 27-16-120, ``all state and local
environmental laws and regulations apply to the Catawba Indian Nation
and Reservation and are fully enforceable by all relevant state and
local agencies and authorities.'' However, because no tribal lands are
located within the Area and the redesignation does not create new
requirements, EPA has determined that this proposed rule does not have
substantial direct effects on an Indian Tribe. EPA notes this proposed
action will not impose substantial direct costs on Tribal governments
or preempt Tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
Dated: March 5, 2018.
Onis ``Trey'' Glenn, III,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2018-05060 Filed 3-12-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
