Air Plan Approval; TN; Removal of the Vehicle I/M Program, Middle Tennessee Area, 35607-35612 [2020-12536]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Correction of Publication
Accordingly, the notice of proposed
rulemaking (REG–104591–18) that was
the subject of FR Doc.2020–08649,
published at 85 FR 28524 (May 13,
2020), is corrected to read as follows:
1. On page 28529, first column, the
fourth line, the language ‘‘amounts or
incurred paid’’ is corrected to read
‘‘amounts paid or incurred’’.
2. On page 28531, second column, the
sixth line from the top of the second full
paragraph, the language ‘‘and by the
Office’’ is corrected to read ‘‘and the
Office’’.
§ 1.162–21
[Corrected]
3. On page 28536, the third column,
paragraph (f)(4), the language ‘‘A suit,
agreement, or otherwise includes, but is
not limited to, settlement agreements,
non-prosecution agreements, deferred
prosecution agreements, judicial
proceedings, administrative
adjudications, decisions issued by
officials, committees, commissions,
boards of a government or governmental
entity, and any legal actions or hearings
which impose a liability on the taxpayer
or pursuant to which the taxpayer
assumes liability’’. is corrected to read
‘‘A suit, agreement agreements; nonprosecution agreements; deferred
prosecution agreements; judicial
proceedings; administrative
adjudications; decisions issued by
officials, committees, commissions,
boards of a government or governmental
entity; and any legal actions or hearings
which impose a liability on the taxpayer
or pursuant to which the taxpayer
assumes liability’’.
■ 4. On page 28537, second column, the
last sentence of paragraph (g)(3)(i), the
language ‘‘Corp. B presents evidence, as
described in paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this
section, to substantiate that the
expenses Corp. B will incur to upgrade
the engines will be amounts paid to
come into compliance with State X’s
law’’. is corrected to read ‘‘Corp. B
presents invoices to substantiate that the
expenses Corp. B will incur to upgrade
the engines will be amounts paid to
come into compliance with State X’s
law.’’.
■ 5. On page 28537, second column, the
first sentence of paragraph (g)(3)(ii), the
language ‘‘Because the agreement
describes the specific action Corp. B
must take to come into compliance with
State X’s law, and Corp. B presents
invoices to establish that the agreement
obligates it to incur costs to come into
compliance with a law, paragraph (a) of
this section would not preclude a
deduction for the amounts Corp. B
incurs to come into compliance.’’ is
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
corrected to read ‘‘Because the
agreement describes the specific action
Corp. B must take to come into
compliance with State X’s law, and
Corp. B provides evidence, as described
in paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section to
establish that the agreement obligates it
to incur costs to come into compliance
with a law, paragraph (a) of this section
would not preclude a deduction for the
amounts Corp. B incurs to come into
compliance.’’.
■ 6. On page 28537, second column, the
third sentence of paragraph (g)(4)(ii), the
language, ‘‘Provided Corp. D establishes,
under paragraph (b)(3) of this section,
that the $60,000 constitutes restitution,
paragraph (a) does not apply.’’ is
corrected to read ‘‘Provided Corp. D
establishes, under paragraph (b)(3) of
this section, that the $60,000 constitutes
restitution, paragraph (a) of this section
does not apply.
Martin V. Franks,
Branch Chief, Publications and Regulations
Branch, Legal Processing Division, Associate
Chief Counsel (Procedure and
Administration).
[FR Doc. 2020–12628 Filed 6–10–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R04–OAR–2019–0618; FRL–10010–
05–Region 4]
Air Plan Approval; TN; Removal of the
Vehicle I/M Program, Middle
Tennessee Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a
State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of
Tennessee, through the Tennessee
Department of Environment and
Conservation (TDEC), through a letter
dated February 26, 2020. Specifically,
EPA is proposing to approve the
removal of Tennessee’s inspection and
maintenance (I/M) program
requirements for Davidson, Sumner,
Rutherford, Williamson and Wilson
Counties in Tennessee (also known as
the Middle Tennessee Area) from the
federally-approved SIP because
removing the requirements is consistent
with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and
applicable regulations.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before July 13, 2020.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35607
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OAR–2019–0618 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://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kelly Sheckler, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and
Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth
Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960.
The telephone number is (404) 562–
9222. Ms. Sheckler can also be reached
via electronic mail at sheckler.kelly@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ADDRESSES:
I. Background
Davidson County began implementing
an I/M program in 1985. See Davidson
County Resolution No. R83–1471. The
program required all light-duty motor
vehicles registered in Davidson County
to be inspected annually for compliance
with emissions performance and antitampering test criteria.
With the passage of the 1990 CAA
amendments, the Middle Tennessee
Area was designated as a moderate
ozone nonattainment area for the 1979
1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 56 FR 56694
(November 6, 1991). Under section 182
of the CAA, I/M programs are required
for areas that are designated as moderate
or above nonattainment for ozone, and
the existing I/M program in Davidson
County was expanded to the Middle
Tennessee Area. In 1994, Tennessee
submitted a SIP revision containing an
I/M program for the Middle Tennessee
Area, which EPA approved. See 60 FR
38694 (July 28, 1995). As part of that
E:\FR\FM\11JNP1.SGM
11JNP1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
35608
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
action, EPA incorporated the State’s I/M
rules at Tennessee Air Pollution Control
Regulations (TAPCR) 1200–03–29 and
Davidson County’s I/M rules at
Regulation 8 into the SIP. See id. On
October 30, 1996, EPA redesignated the
Middle Tennessee Area to attainment
for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS and
approved a maintenance plan with the
I/M program as a control strategy. See
61 FR 55903. The 1979 1-hour ozone
NAAQS was revoked, effective June 15,
2005. See 69 FR 23951 (April 30, 2004).
On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38856), EPA
promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone
standard of 0.08 parts per million
(ppm). In December 2002, the Middle
Tennessee Area entered into EPA’s
Early Action Compact (EAC) program.
As part of the EAC for the Middle
Tennessee Area, the I/M program was
identified as an existing control strategy
in the SIP. The Middle Tennessee Area
met the EAC requirements by December
31, 2007, demonstrating attainment of
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. As a
result of meeting the EAC agreement, on
April 2, 2008, EPA designated the
Middle Tennessee Area as attainment
for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See
73 FR 17897. The 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS was revoked, effective April 6,
2015. See 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015).
The ozone NAAQS was revised in
2008 to a value of 0.075 ppm and again
in 2015 to 0.070 ppm. See 73 FR 16483
(March 27, 2008) and 80 FR 65292
(October 26, 2015). The Middle
Tennessee Area was designated as
unclassifiable/attainment and
attainment/unclassifiable for the 2008
and 2015 ozone NAAQS, respectively.
See 40 CFR 81.343. The Middle
Tennessee Area is currently in
attainment with all ozone NAAQS. See
id.
On May 15, 2018, a Tennessee law
was signed that states that ‘‘no
inspection and maintenance program
shall be employed in this state on or
after the effective date of this act.’’ See
Tenn. Code Ann. § 68–201–119. The
Tennessee law states that it ‘‘shall take
effect [120] calendar days following the
date on which the [EPA] approves a
revised state implementation plan. . .’’
See Motor Vehicles—Inspection and
Inspectors—Air Pollution, 2018
Tennessee Laws Pub. Ch. 953 (H.B.
1782). Accordingly, Tennessee
submitted the February 26, 2020, SIP
revision requesting that EPA remove the
requirements to implement an I/M
program for the Middle Tennessee
Area.1 A description of the SIP revision
1 Tenn. Code Ann. § 68–201–119(c) allows
Tennessee counties to retain local I/M programs
under certain conditions. However, as Tennessee is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:21 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
and EPA’s analysis is provided in
Section II below.
II. What is EPA’s analysis of
Tennessee’s submittal?
Through a letter dated February 26,
2020,2 Tennessee requested that TAPCR
1200–03–29 and Davidson County’s
Regulation 8 be removed from the
Tennessee SIP. In addition, Tennessee
requested that EPA remove the
requirement for the Middle Tennessee
Area to implement an I/M program as
part of the EAC that was approved by
EPA into the non-regulatory portion of
the Tennessee SIP on August 26, 2005.
See 70 FR 50199. Tennessee also
provided a non-interference
demonstration to support the removal of
the vehicle I/M program for the Middle
Tennessee Area.
As discussed in Section I above, the
Middle Tennessee Area implemented
the I/M program requirements as a
control strategy to meet the 1979 1-hour
ozone NAAQS and expanded it as part
of the EAC addressing the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. Currently, Davidson,
Sumner, Rutherford, Williams and
Wilson Counties in Tennessee are
designated attainment, unclassifiable/
attainment, or attainment/unclassifiable
for all ozone NAAQS. See 40 CFR
81.343.
EPA is proposing to approve the
removal of the I/M requirements for the
Middle Tennessee from the Tennessee
SIP, including TAPCR 1200–03–29 and
Davidson County’s Regulation 8.3 EPA
is also proposing to find that the
removal of the I/M program
requirements for the Middle Tennessee
Area is consistent with CAA section
110(l). Section 110(l) of the CAA
requires that a revision to the SIP not
interfere with any applicable
requirements concerning attainment,
reasonable further progress (as defined
in section 171), or any other applicable
requirements of the CAA. EPA evaluates
section 110(l) non-interference
requesting removal of the I/M program from the SIP,
EPA’s analysis in this proposal assumes that no I/
M program will be implemented in the Middle
Tennessee Area. This proposed action does not
preclude local I/M programs from being retained at
a local level.
2 EPA received Tennessee’s SIP revision on
February 27, 2020.
3 TAPCR 1200–03–29 is applicable only to
Davidson, Hamilton, Rutherford, Sumner,
Williamson, and Wilson Counties. In a separate
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), EPA
proposed to remove Hamilton County from that
chapter of the SIP-approved Tennessee rules. EPA
is proposing in this NPRM to remove Davidson,
Rutherford, Sumner, Williamson, and Wilson
Counties from TAPCR 1200–03–29. Additionally,
EPA is proposing that if it removes all applicable
counties from TAPCR 1200–03–29, to also remove
the remainder of TAPCR 1200–03–29 from the SIP.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
demonstrations on a case-by-case basis
considering the circumstances of each
SIP revision. EPA interprets section
110(l) as applying to all NAAQS that are
in effect. For I/M SIP revisions, the most
relevant pollutants to consider are
ozone precursors (i.e., nitrogen oxides
(NOx) and volatile organic compounds
(VOCs)).
As mentioned above, Tennessee’s
February 26, 2020, SIP revision
included a non-interference
demonstration to support the State’s
request to remove the SIP-approved I/M
program requirements for the Middle
Tennessee counties of Davidson,
Sumner, Rutherford, Williams, and
Wilson. Tennessee’s non-interference
demonstration evaluates the impact that
the removal of the I/M program for the
Middle Tennessee Area would have on
Tennessee’s ability to attain and
maintain any of the NAAQS. Based on
the analysis below, EPA is proposing to
find that removal of the I/M program
requirements for the Middle Tennessee
Area meets the requirements of the CAA
section 110(l) because it would not
interfere with attainment or
maintenance of any NAAQS or any
other requirement of the CAA.4 5 6
4 The initial designations for the course
particulate matter (PM10) NAAQS were completed
on March 15, 1991. See 56 FR 11101. The entire
state of Tennessee was designated as attainment for
PM10 and has been attainment for every PM10
standard thereafter. The pollution control systems
for light-duty gasoline vehicles subject to the I/M
program are not designed to reduce emissions of
PM10´ therefore, removing the I/M program
requirements will not have any impact on ambient
concentrations of PM10. EPA proposes to find that
removal of the SIP-approved I/M program
requirements for the Middle Tennessee Area would
not interfere with continued attainment or
maintenance of the PM10 NAAQS.
5 On June 22, 2010, EPA revised the 1-hour sulfur
dioxide (SO2) NAAQS to 75 parts per billion (ppb)
which became effective on August 23, 2010. See 75
FR 35520. On January 9, 2018, EPA designated most
of the state of Tennessee, including the counties in
the Middle Tennessee Area, as attainment/
unclassifiable for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. See 83 FR
1098. EPA has designated Sullivan County,
Tennessee, as nonattainment and Sumner County as
unclassifiable for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. See
78 FR 47191 (August 5, 2013), and 81 FR 45039
(July 12, 2016). The pollution control systems for
light-duty gasoline vehicles subject to the I/M
program are not designed to reduce emissions for
SO2´ therefore, removing the I/M program
requirements will not have any impact on ambient
concentrations of SO2. EPA proposes to find that
removal of the SIP-approved I/M program
requirements for the Middle Tennessee Area would
not interfere with continued attainment or
maintenance of the SO2 NAAQS.
6 On November 12, 2008, EPA promulgated a
revised lead NAAQS of 0.15 mg/m3. See 73 FR
66964. On November 22, 2011, EPA designated a
majority of the State of Tennessee, including the
counties in the Middle Tennesse Area as
unclassifiable/attainment for the 2008 lead NAAQS.
The Bristol Area in Sullivan County was designated
nonattainment; and the Knox County Area was later
designated unclassifiable. See 76 FR 72907; see also
E:\FR\FM\11JNP1.SGM
11JNP1
35609
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Non-Interference Analysis for the Ozone
NAAQS
On February 8, 1979 (44 FR 8202),
EPA promulgated the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS of 0.12 parts per million
(ppm).7 On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38856),
EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour
ozone standard of 0.08 ppm.8
Subsequently, on March 12, 2008, EPA
revised both the primary and secondary
NAAQS for ozone to a level of 0.075
ppm to provide increased protection of
public health and the environment. See
73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008). The 2008
ozone NAAQS retain the same general
form and averaging time as the 0.08
ppm NAAQS set in 1997 but are set at
a more protective level. Under EPA’s
regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS are attained when
the 3-year average of the annual fourth
highest daily maximum 8-hour average
ambient air quality ozone
concentrations is less than or equal to
0.075 ppm. See 40 CFR 50.15. On
October 26, 2015 (80 FR 65292), EPA
published a final rule lowering the level
of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS to 0.070
ppm or 70 ppb and retaining the same
form.
The Middle Tennessee Area is
designated as attainment or
unclassifiable/attainment for all ozone
NAAQS.9 See 40 CFR 81.343. Ambient
air quality monitoring for ozone is being
conducted at five locations in the
Middle Tennessee Area. In the February
26, 2020, SIP revision, the State
provides recent 8-hour ozone design
values in ppb (see Table 1). The values
in Table 1 below indicate attainment of
the 2015 8-hour NAAQS of 70 ppb.
TABLE 1—MIDDLE TENNESSE AREA MONITOR DESIGN VALUES
Ozone design value, ppb
Site name
2013–2015
Trinity Lane, Davidson County ............................................
Percy Priest, Davidson County ............................................
Rockland Recreation Area, Sumner County .......................
Fairview Middle School, Williamson County ........................
Cedars of Lebanon State Park, Wilson County ..................
2014–2016
62
65
67
62
62
2015–2017
66
67
67
61
64
2016–2018
66
64
66
60
63
2017–2019
66
67
66
60
* 64
65
65
66
60
* 61
* Not a valid design value because the monitor did not meet data completeness requirements in 2018. There was an issue following the installation of the new monitoring shelter and TDEC invalidated data leading up to the correction of the issue.
Tennessee’s non-interference analysis
includes modeling to calculate ozone
precursor emissions, as well as a
sensitivity analysis to demonstrate the
impact of emissions increases on
monitored ozone values. Tennessee’s
non-interference demonstration utilized
EPA’s MOVES2014 emission modeling
system to estimate ozone precursor
emissions for mobile sources—both onroad and non-road. Tennessee chose
2022 as the future year for the State’s
non-interference demonstration because
it is the year that it anticipates that the
Middle Tennessee Area will cease
implementation of the I/M program due
to the CAA’s SIP processing timeframe
and the language of Tenn. Code Ann.
§ 68–201–119. The point source
emissions for the Middle Tennessee
Area were obtained from the 2014
version 2 National Emissions Inventory
(NEI) and grown to the year 2022 using
the appropriate EPA growth factors or
using engineering judgment, as detailed
in Appendices H and I of the February
26, 2020, SIP revision. For non-point
sources, the inventory was developed
using EPA established methodologies
published by EPA,10 as detailed in
Appendix J of the February 26, 2020,
SIP revision. Tennessee calculated
projected emissions in the year 2022 by
adding all four sectors (on-road, point,
non-road, and non-point) together.
Table 2 shows the total projected
emissions in 2022 with the I/M program
in the Middle Tennessee Area. Table 3
shows the total projected emissions in
2022 without the I/M program in the
Middle Tennessee Area.11 By 2022,
emission benefits resulting from
Tennessee’s I/M program for the Middle
Tennessee Area are predicted to be a
478.52 ton per year (tpy) reduction of
NOX, and a 593.10 tpy reduction of
VOCs. On a percentage basis, removal of
the I/M program will result in a 4.2
percent increase in NOX emissions and
a 12.4 percent increase in VOCs. The
differences in the two scenarios for all
four sectors combined is a 1.9 percent
increase in NOX and a 1.7 percent
increase in VOC emissions.
TABLE 2—MIDDLE TENNESSEE AREA TOTAL 2022 PROJECTED EMISSIONS OF NOX AND VOC (in tpy) WITH THE I/M
PROGRAM
Sector
NOX
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
On road ....................................................................................................................................................................
Point .........................................................................................................................................................................
Nonroad ...................................................................................................................................................................
Non-Point .................................................................................................................................................................
75 FR 71033 (November 22, 2011). Subsequently,
the Bristol Area was redesignated to attainment. See
81 FR 44210 (July 7, 2016). Effective January 1,
1996, EPA banned the sale of leaded fuel for use
in on-road vehicles. The pollution control systems
for light-duty gasoline vehicles subject to the I/M
program are not designed to reduce emissions for
lead; therefore, removal of the I/M program
requirements would not cause an increase in
emissions of lead. EPA proposes to find that
removal of the SIP-approved I/M program
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
requirements for the Middle Tennesse Area would
not interfere with continued attainment or
maintenance of the lead NAAQS.
7 The 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS was revoked,
effective June 15, 2005. See 69 FR 23951 (April 30,
2004).
8 The 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS was revoked,
effective April 6, 2015. See 80 FR 12264 (March 6,
2015).
9 Visit https://gispub.epa.gov/air/trendsreport/
2019/#home or https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
11,309
4,455
5,413
3,504
VOC
4,780
3,867
3,451
22,690
quality-data for air quality data including current
status and trends for all NAAQS.
10 See 2017 NEI Final Plan: Revised July 2018,
available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/
files/2018-07/documents/2017_nei_plan_final_
revised_jul2018.pdf.
11 Since the I/M program only impacts emissions
in the on-road sector, the projected emissions in
other sectors (point, non-road and non-point) are
the same between the ‘‘with the I/M program’’ and
the ‘‘without the I/M program’’ scenarios.
E:\FR\FM\11JNP1.SGM
11JNP1
35610
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 2—MIDDLE TENNESSEE AREA TOTAL 2022 PROJECTED EMISSIONS OF NOX AND VOC (in tpy) WITH THE I/M
PROGRAM—Continued
Sector
NOX
Total ..................................................................................................................................................................
VOC
24,681
34,788
TABLE 3—MIDDLE TENNESSEE AREA TOTAL 2022 PROJECTED EMISSIONS OF NOX AND VOC (in tpy) WITHOUT THE I/M
PROGRAM
Sector
NOX tpy
VOC tpy
On road ....................................................................................................................................................................
Point .........................................................................................................................................................................
Nonroad ...................................................................................................................................................................
Non-Point .................................................................................................................................................................
11,788
4,455
5,413
3,504
5,373
3,867
3,451
22,690
Total ..................................................................................................................................................................
25,160
35,382
TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF NOX AND VOC EMISSIONS INCREASES ASSOCIATED WITH REMOVING THE MIDDLE TENNESSEE
AREA FROM THE I/M PROGRAM
NOX
emissions
in 2022
Total On-Road Emissions for Middle TN Counties in Current I/M Program (tpy) ..................................................
Total On-Road Emissions after Removing Middle TN Counties from I/M Program (tpy) .......................................
Total Emissions for Middle TN Counties in Current I/M Program (all sectors) (tpy) ..............................................
Total Emissions after Removing Middle TN Counties from I/M Program (all sectors) (tpy) ..................................
Emissions Increases (tpy) .......................................................................................................................................
Emissions Increases (% of Total On-Road Emissions for Middle TN Counties) ....................................................
Emissions Increases (% of Total Emissions for Middle TN Counties, all sectors) .................................................
To further quantify the potential
impact of removal of the I/M program,
Tennessee completed a photochemical
modeling sensitivity analysis. As shown
in Table 5, the sensitivity analysis
indicates that the largest increase in
11,309
11,788
24,681
25,160
479
4.2%
1.9%
VOC
emissions
in 2022
4,780
5,373
34,788
35,382
593
12.4%
1.7%
ozone concentration would be at the
Percy Priest monitor at 0.262 ppb.
TABLE 5—RESULTS OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS, INCREASES OF OZONE CONCENTRATIONS AT MONITORS IN THE MIDDLE
TENNESSEE AREA
2016–2018 ozone
design value
Site name
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Trinity Lane, Davidson County ........................................................................................................
Percy Priest, Davidson County ........................................................................................................
Rockland Recreation Area, Sumner County ...................................................................................
Fairview Middle School, Williamson County ...................................................................................
Cedars of Lebanon State Park, Wilson County ..............................................................................
EPA has evaluated the State’s analysis
and preliminarily agrees with its
findings and conclusions. EPA therefore
proposes to find that removal of the SIPapproved I/M program requirements for
the Middle Tennessee Area would not
interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment or
maintenance of the ozone NAAQS.
Non-Interference Analysis for the Fine
Particulate Matter (PM2.5) NAAQS
On July 16, 1997, EPA established an
annual PM2.5 NAAQS of 15.0
micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3),
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
based on a 3-year average of annual
mean PM2.5 concentrations, and a 24hour PM2.5 NAAQS of 65 mg/m3, based
on a 3-year average of the 98th
percentile of 24-hour
concentrations.12 See 62 FR 38652 (July
18, 1997). On September 21, 2006, EPA
retained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS
of 15.0 mg/m3 but revised the 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS to 35 mg/m3, based again
on a 3-year average of the 98th
percentile of 24-hour concentrations.
12 The 1997 annual PM
2.5 NAAQS was revoked
for areas designated as attainment, effective October
24, 2016. See 81 FR 58010 (August 24, 2016).
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
66
67
66
60
64
Sensitivity analysis
corresponding ozone
increase due to
combined NOX and
VOC increases
0.249
0.262
0.196
0.186
0.178
See 71 FR 61144 (October 17, 2006). On
December 14, 2012, EPA retained the
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS of 35 mg/m3
but revised the annual primary PM2.5
NAAQS to 12.0 mg/m3, based again on
a 3-year average of annual mean PM2.5
concentrations. See 78 FR 3086 (January
15, 2013).
EPA published designations for the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS on January
5, 2005 (70 FR 944) and April 14, 2005
(70 FR 19844), designating all counties
in the Middle Tennessee Area
attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS. On November 13, 2009 (74 FR
E:\FR\FM\11JNP1.SGM
11JNP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
58688), and on January 15, 2015 (80 FR
2206), EPA published notices
determining that the counties in the
Middle Tennessee Area were designated
unclassifiable/attainment for the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and the 2012
annual PM2.5 NAAQS, respectively.
In Tennessee’s February 26, 2020, SIP
revision, the State concluded that the
removal of the counties in the Middle
Tennessee Area from the Tennessee’s
SIP-approved I/M program would not
interfere with attainment or
maintenance of the PM2.5 NAAQS. The
pollution control systems for light-duty
gasoline vehicles subject to the I/M
program are not designed to reduce
emissions of direct PM2.5 and sulfate
(i.e., the primary precursor for PM2.5
formation in the Southeast); therefore,
removing counties from the program
will not have any impact on ambient
concentrations of PM2.5 NAAQS. In
addition, ambient air monitoring shows
that PM2.5 24-hour design value for
Middle Tennessee in 2019 is 18 mg/m3,
which is below the 24-hour NAAQS of
35 mg/m3. Also, the annual design value
in 2019 is 9.3 mg/m3, which is below the
annual NAAQS of 12.0 mg/m3. The
small increase in NOX emissions of 1.9
percent is expected to only cause a
small increase in PM2.5 design value.
EPA has evaluated the State’s analysis
and preliminarily agrees with its
findings and conclusions. EPA therefore
proposes to find that removal of the SIPapproved I/M program requirements for
the Middle Tennessee Area would not
interfere with continued attainment or
maintenance of the PM2.5 NAAQS.
Non-Interference Analysis for the 2010
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) NAAQS 13
The 2010 NO2 1-hour standard is set
at 100 ppb, based on the 3-year average
of the 98th percentile of the yearly
distribution of 1-hour daily maximum
concentrations. See 75 FR 6474
(February 9, 2010). On February 17,
2012, EPA designated all counties in
Tennessee as unclassifiable/attainment
for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. See 77 FR
9532.
Based on the technical analysis in
Tennessee’s February 26, 2020, SIP
revision, the projected increase in total
NOX emissions (of which NO2 is a
component) in 2022 is 1.9 percent.14
This increase is not expected to interfere
with continued attainment of the NO2
NAAQS in the Middle Tennessee Area.
The 2019 design value for the 1-hour
NO2 NAAQS for the Middle Tennessee
Area is 50 ppb.
13 The annual standard of 53 ppb is based on the
annual mean concentration. See 36 FR 8186 (April
30, 1971).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
EPA has evaluated the State’s analysis
and preliminarily agrees with its
findings and conclusions. For these
reasons, EPA proposes to find that
removal of the SIP-approved I/M
program requirements for the Middle
Tennessee Area would not interfere
with continued attainment or
maintenance of the NO2 NAAQS.
Non-Interference Analysis for the
Carbon Monoxide (CO) NAAQS
EPA promulgated the CO NAAQS in
1971 and has retained the standards
since its last review of the standards in
2011. The primary NAAQS for CO
consist of: (1) An 8-hour standard of 9
ppm, not to be exceeded more than once
in a year (i.e., the second highest, nonoverlapping 8-hour average
concentration cannot exceed the
standard); and (2) a 1-hour average of 35
ppm, not to be exceeded more than once
in a year. The Middle Tennessee Area
has always been designated as
unclassifiable/attainment for the CO
NAAQS.
In Tennessee’s February 26, 2020, SIP
revision, the State concluded that the
removal of counties in the Middle
Tennessee Area from the SIP-approved
I/M program would not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of the CO
NAAQS. MOVES2014 mobile emissions
modeling results show an increase in
CO emissions of 6.1 percent in the
Middle Tennessee Area in 2022 as a
result of removing the I/M program for
the Middle Tennessee Area. This
increase is not expected to interfere
with continued attainment of the CO
NAAQS in the Middle Tennessee Area.
The 2018 design values for Tennessee
for the 1-hour and 8-hour CO NAAQS
are 1.8 ppm and 1.6 ppm, respectively.
Preliminary design values for Tennessee
for the 1-hour and 8-hour CO NAAQS
in 2019 were 1.6 ppm and 1.8 ppm,
respectively, which are less than 20
percent of the CO NAAQS for both the
1-hour and 8-hour standards.
EPA has evaluated the State’s analysis
and preliminarily agrees with its
findings and conclusions. For these
reasons, EPA proposes to find that
removal of the SIP-approved I/M
program requirements for the Middle
Tennessee Area would not interfere
with continued attainment or
maintenance of the CO NAAQS.
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the
removal of the I/M requirements for the
Middle Tennessee Area (i.e., Davidson,
Sumner, Rutherford, Williamson and
Wilson Counties) from the Tennessee
SIP. EPA is proposing to approve the
removal of the I/M program
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
35611
requirements for the Middle Tennessee
Area from the federally-approved SIP
because removing the requirements is
consistent with the CAA and applicable
regulations.
IV. 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 they meet the criteria of the
CAA. This proposed 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.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
E:\FR\FM\11JNP1.SGM
11JNP1
35612
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 113 / Thursday, June 11, 2020 / Proposed Rules
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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 29, 2020.
Mary Walker,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2020–12536 Filed 6–10–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 83
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2020–00044; FRL 10010–
62–OAR]
RIN 2060–AU51
Increasing Consistency and
Transparency in Considering Benefits
and Costs in the Clean Air Act
Rulemaking Process
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing processes
that it would be required to undertake
in promulgating regulations under the
Clean Air Act (CAA) to ensure that
information regarding the benefits and
costs of regulatory decisions is provided
and considered in a consistent and
transparent manner. This proposed
rulemaking addresses, among other
things, issues raised in the June 13, 2018
advance notice of proposed rulemaking,
‘‘Increasing Consistency and
Transparency in Considering Costs and
Benefits in the Rulemaking Process,’’
and proposes how the concepts
described in that advance document
would be implemented in rulemakings
conducted by the EPA using its
authorities under the CAA. The EPA is
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:51 Jun 10, 2020
Jkt 250001
proposing to establish procedural
requirements governing the
development and presentation of
benefit-cost analyses (BCA), including
risk assessments used in the BCA, for
significant rulemakings conducted
under the CAA. Together, these
requirements would help ensure that
the EPA implements its statutory
obligations under the CAA, and
describes its work in implementing
those obligations, in a way that is
consistent and transparent.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before July 27, 2020.
Public Hearing: The EPA will hold
one or more virtual public hearings on
this proposed rulemaking. These will be
announced in a separate Federal
Register publication that provides
details, including specific dates, times,
and contact information for these
hearings.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2020–00044, by any of the
following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov/ (our
preferred method). Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the Docket ID No. EPA–
HQ–OAR–2020–00044 for this
rulemaking. Comments received may be
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov/, including any
personal information provided. For
detailed instructions on sending
comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the
‘‘Public Participation’’ heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document. Out of an abundance of
caution for members of the public and
our staff, the EPA Docket Center and
Reading Room was closed to public
visitors on March 31, 2020, to reduce
the risk of transmitting COVID–19. Our
Docket Center staff will continue to
provide remote customer service via
email, phone, and webform. We
encourage the public to submit
comments via https://
www.regulations.gov or email, as there
is a temporary suspension of mail
delivery to EPA, and no hand deliveries
are currently accepted. For further
information on EPA Docket Center
services and the current status, please
visit us online at https://www.epa.gov/
dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leif
Hockstad, Office of Air Policy and
Program Support, Office of Air and
Radiation, Environmental Protection
Agency, Mail Code 6103A,1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington,
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
DC 20460; (202) 343–9432; email
address: hockstad.leif@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Organization of this document. The
following outline is provided to aid in
locating information in this preamble.
I. Public Participation
II. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
B. What is the Agency’s authority for
taking this action?
C. What action is the Agency taking?
III. Background
IV. Rationale and Summary of the Proposed
Requirements
A. Preparation of Benefit-Cost Analyses for
Significant Regulations
B. Best Practices for the Development of
Benefit-Cost Analysis
C. Requirement for Additional
Presentations of BCA Results in
Rulemakings
V. Additional Considerations and Requests
for Comment
A. Specifying How BCA Results Should
Inform Regulatory Decisions
B. Other Areas of Solicitation for Public
Comment
VI. References
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Public Participation
A. Written Comments
Submit your comments, identified by
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2020–
00044, at https://www.regulations.gov
(our preferred method), or the other
methods identified in the ADDRESSES
section. Once submitted, comments
cannot be edited or removed from the
docket. The EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
The EPA is temporarily suspending
its Docket Center and Reading Room for
public visitors to reduce the risk of
transmitting COVID–19. Written
comments submitted by mail are
temporarily suspended and no hand
E:\FR\FM\11JNP1.SGM
11JNP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 113 (Thursday, June 11, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35607-35612]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-12536]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2019-0618; FRL-10010-05-Region 4]
Air Plan Approval; TN; Removal of the Vehicle I/M Program, Middle
Tennessee Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the
State of Tennessee, through the Tennessee Department of Environment and
Conservation (TDEC), through a letter dated February 26, 2020.
Specifically, EPA is proposing to approve the removal of Tennessee's
inspection and maintenance (I/M) program requirements for Davidson,
Sumner, Rutherford, Williamson and Wilson Counties in Tennessee (also
known as the Middle Tennessee Area) from the federally-approved SIP
because removing the requirements is consistent with the Clean Air Act
(CAA or Act) and applicable regulations.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 13, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2019-0618 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://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelly Sheckler, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is
(404) 562-9222. Ms. Sheckler can also be reached via electronic mail at
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
Davidson County began implementing an I/M program in 1985. See
Davidson County Resolution No. R83-1471. The program required all
light-duty motor vehicles registered in Davidson County to be inspected
annually for compliance with emissions performance and anti-tampering
test criteria.
With the passage of the 1990 CAA amendments, the Middle Tennessee
Area was designated as a moderate ozone nonattainment area for the 1979
1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 56 FR 56694 (November 6, 1991). Under section
182 of the CAA, I/M programs are required for areas that are designated
as moderate or above nonattainment for ozone, and the existing I/M
program in Davidson County was expanded to the Middle Tennessee Area.
In 1994, Tennessee submitted a SIP revision containing an I/M program
for the Middle Tennessee Area, which EPA approved. See 60 FR 38694
(July 28, 1995). As part of that
[[Page 35608]]
action, EPA incorporated the State's I/M rules at Tennessee Air
Pollution Control Regulations (TAPCR) 1200-03-29 and Davidson County's
I/M rules at Regulation 8 into the SIP. See id. On October 30, 1996,
EPA redesignated the Middle Tennessee Area to attainment for the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS and approved a maintenance plan with the I/M program as a
control strategy. See 61 FR 55903. The 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS was
revoked, effective June 15, 2005. See 69 FR 23951 (April 30, 2004).
On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38856), EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour
ozone standard of 0.08 parts per million (ppm). In December 2002, the
Middle Tennessee Area entered into EPA's Early Action Compact (EAC)
program. As part of the EAC for the Middle Tennessee Area, the I/M
program was identified as an existing control strategy in the SIP. The
Middle Tennessee Area met the EAC requirements by December 31, 2007,
demonstrating attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. As a result of
meeting the EAC agreement, on April 2, 2008, EPA designated the Middle
Tennessee Area as attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. See 73 FR
17897. The 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS was revoked, effective April 6,
2015. See 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015).
The ozone NAAQS was revised in 2008 to a value of 0.075 ppm and
again in 2015 to 0.070 ppm. See 73 FR 16483 (March 27, 2008) and 80 FR
65292 (October 26, 2015). The Middle Tennessee Area was designated as
unclassifiable/attainment and attainment/unclassifiable for the 2008
and 2015 ozone NAAQS, respectively. See 40 CFR 81.343. The Middle
Tennessee Area is currently in attainment with all ozone NAAQS. See id.
On May 15, 2018, a Tennessee law was signed that states that ``no
inspection and maintenance program shall be employed in this state on
or after the effective date of this act.'' See Tenn. Code Ann. Sec.
68-201-119. The Tennessee law states that it ``shall take effect [120]
calendar days following the date on which the [EPA] approves a revised
state implementation plan. . .'' See Motor Vehicles--Inspection and
Inspectors--Air Pollution, 2018 Tennessee Laws Pub. Ch. 953 (H.B.
1782). Accordingly, Tennessee submitted the February 26, 2020, SIP
revision requesting that EPA remove the requirements to implement an I/
M program for the Middle Tennessee Area.\1\ A description of the SIP
revision and EPA's analysis is provided in Section II below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Tenn. Code Ann. Sec. 68-201-119(c) allows Tennessee
counties to retain local I/M programs under certain conditions.
However, as Tennessee is requesting removal of the I/M program from
the SIP, EPA's analysis in this proposal assumes that no I/M program
will be implemented in the Middle Tennessee Area. This proposed
action does not preclude local I/M programs from being retained at a
local level.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. What is EPA's analysis of Tennessee's submittal?
Through a letter dated February 26, 2020,\2\ Tennessee requested
that TAPCR 1200-03-29 and Davidson County's Regulation 8 be removed
from the Tennessee SIP. In addition, Tennessee requested that EPA
remove the requirement for the Middle Tennessee Area to implement an I/
M program as part of the EAC that was approved by EPA into the non-
regulatory portion of the Tennessee SIP on August 26, 2005. See 70 FR
50199. Tennessee also provided a non-interference demonstration to
support the removal of the vehicle I/M program for the Middle Tennessee
Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ EPA received Tennessee's SIP revision on February 27, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in Section I above, the Middle Tennessee Area
implemented the I/M program requirements as a control strategy to meet
the 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS and expanded it as part of the EAC
addressing the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Currently, Davidson, Sumner,
Rutherford, Williams and Wilson Counties in Tennessee are designated
attainment, unclassifiable/attainment, or attainment/unclassifiable for
all ozone NAAQS. See 40 CFR 81.343.
EPA is proposing to approve the removal of the I/M requirements for
the Middle Tennessee from the Tennessee SIP, including TAPCR 1200-03-29
and Davidson County's Regulation 8.\3\ EPA is also proposing to find
that the removal of the I/M program requirements for the Middle
Tennessee Area is consistent with CAA section 110(l). Section 110(l) of
the CAA requires that a revision to the SIP not interfere with any
applicable requirements concerning attainment, reasonable further
progress (as defined in section 171), or any other applicable
requirements of the CAA. EPA evaluates section 110(l) non-interference
demonstrations on a case-by-case basis considering the circumstances of
each SIP revision. EPA interprets section 110(l) as applying to all
NAAQS that are in effect. For I/M SIP revisions, the most relevant
pollutants to consider are ozone precursors (i.e., nitrogen oxides
(NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ TAPCR 1200-03-29 is applicable only to Davidson, Hamilton,
Rutherford, Sumner, Williamson, and Wilson Counties. In a separate
notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), EPA proposed to remove
Hamilton County from that chapter of the SIP-approved Tennessee
rules. EPA is proposing in this NPRM to remove Davidson, Rutherford,
Sumner, Williamson, and Wilson Counties from TAPCR 1200-03-29.
Additionally, EPA is proposing that if it removes all applicable
counties from TAPCR 1200-03-29, to also remove the remainder of
TAPCR 1200-03-29 from the SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As mentioned above, Tennessee's February 26, 2020, SIP revision
included a non-interference demonstration to support the State's
request to remove the SIP-approved I/M program requirements for the
Middle Tennessee counties of Davidson, Sumner, Rutherford, Williams,
and Wilson. Tennessee's non-interference demonstration evaluates the
impact that the removal of the I/M program for the Middle Tennessee
Area would have on Tennessee's ability to attain and maintain any of
the NAAQS. Based on the analysis below, EPA is proposing to find that
removal of the I/M program requirements for the Middle Tennessee Area
meets the requirements of the CAA section 110(l) because it would not
interfere with attainment or maintenance of any NAAQS or any other
requirement of the CAA.4 5 6
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The initial designations for the course particulate matter
(PM10) NAAQS were completed on March 15, 1991. See 56 FR
11101. The entire state of Tennessee was designated as attainment
for PM10 and has been attainment for every
PM10 standard thereafter. The pollution control systems
for light-duty gasoline vehicles subject to the I/M program are not
designed to reduce emissions of PM10; therefore, removing
the I/M program requirements will not have any impact on ambient
concentrations of PM10. EPA proposes to find that removal
of the SIP-approved I/M program requirements for the Middle
Tennessee Area would not interfere with continued attainment or
maintenance of the PM10 NAAQS.
\5\ On June 22, 2010, EPA revised the 1-hour sulfur dioxide
(SO2) NAAQS to 75 parts per billion (ppb) which became
effective on August 23, 2010. See 75 FR 35520. On January 9, 2018,
EPA designated most of the state of Tennessee, including the
counties in the Middle Tennessee Area, as attainment/unclassifiable
for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. See 83 FR 1098. EPA has
designated Sullivan County, Tennessee, as nonattainment and Sumner
County as unclassifiable for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
See 78 FR 47191 (August 5, 2013), and 81 FR 45039 (July 12, 2016).
The pollution control systems for light-duty gasoline vehicles
subject to the I/M program are not designed to reduce emissions for
SO2; therefore, removing the I/M program requirements
will not have any impact on ambient concentrations of
SO2. EPA proposes to find that removal of the SIP-
approved I/M program requirements for the Middle Tennessee Area
would not interfere with continued attainment or maintenance of the
SO2 NAAQS.
\6\ On November 12, 2008, EPA promulgated a revised lead NAAQS
of 0.15 [micro]g/m\3\. See 73 FR 66964. On November 22,
2011, EPA designated a majority of the State of Tennessee, including
the counties in the Middle Tennesse Area as unclassifiable/
attainment for the 2008 lead NAAQS. The Bristol Area in Sullivan
County was designated nonattainment; and the Knox County Area was
later designated unclassifiable. See 76 FR 72907; see also 75 FR
71033 (November 22, 2011). Subsequently, the Bristol Area was
redesignated to attainment. See 81 FR 44210 (July 7, 2016).
Effective January 1, 1996, EPA banned the sale of leaded fuel for
use in on-road vehicles. The pollution control systems for light-
duty gasoline vehicles subject to the I/M program are not designed
to reduce emissions for lead; therefore, removal of the I/M program
requirements would not cause an increase in emissions of lead. EPA
proposes to find that removal of the SIP-approved I/M program
requirements for the Middle Tennesse Area would not interfere with
continued attainment or maintenance of the lead NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 35609]]
Non-Interference Analysis for the Ozone NAAQS
On February 8, 1979 (44 FR 8202), EPA promulgated the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS of 0.12 parts per million (ppm).\7\ On July 18, 1997 (62 FR
38856), EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone standard of 0.08 ppm.\8\
Subsequently, on March 12, 2008, EPA revised both the primary and
secondary NAAQS for ozone to a level of 0.075 ppm to provide increased
protection of public health and the environment. See 73 FR 16436 (March
27, 2008). The 2008 ozone NAAQS retain the same general form and
averaging time as the 0.08 ppm NAAQS set in 1997 but are set at a more
protective level. Under EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS are attained when the 3-year average of the annual
fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average ambient air quality ozone
concentrations is less than or equal to 0.075 ppm. See 40 CFR 50.15. On
October 26, 2015 (80 FR 65292), EPA published a final rule lowering the
level of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS to 0.070 ppm or 70 ppb and retaining
the same form.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ The 1979 1-hour ozone NAAQS was revoked, effective June 15,
2005. See 69 FR 23951 (April 30, 2004).
\8\ The 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS was revoked, effective April 6,
2015. See 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Middle Tennessee Area is designated as attainment or
unclassifiable/attainment for all ozone NAAQS.\9\ See 40 CFR 81.343.
Ambient air quality monitoring for ozone is being conducted at five
locations in the Middle Tennessee Area. In the February 26, 2020, SIP
revision, the State provides recent 8-hour ozone design values in ppb
(see Table 1). The values in Table 1 below indicate attainment of the
2015 8-hour NAAQS of 70 ppb.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Visit https://gispub.epa.gov/air/trendsreport/2019/#home or
https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data for air quality data
including current status and trends for all NAAQS.
Table 1--Middle Tennesse Area Monitor Design Values
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ozone design value, ppb
Site name -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2013-2015 2014-2016 2015-2017 2016-2018 2017-2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trinity Lane, Davidson County... 62 66 66 66 65
Percy Priest, Davidson County... 65 67 64 67 65
Rockland Recreation Area, Sumner 67 67 66 66 66
County.........................
Fairview Middle School, 62 61 60 60 60
Williamson County..............
Cedars of Lebanon State Park, 62 64 63 * 64 * 61
Wilson County..................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Not a valid design value because the monitor did not meet data completeness requirements in 2018. There was an
issue following the installation of the new monitoring shelter and TDEC invalidated data leading up to the
correction of the issue.
Tennessee's non-interference analysis includes modeling to
calculate ozone precursor emissions, as well as a sensitivity analysis
to demonstrate the impact of emissions increases on monitored ozone
values. Tennessee's non-interference demonstration utilized EPA's
MOVES2014 emission modeling system to estimate ozone precursor
emissions for mobile sources--both on-road and non-road. Tennessee
chose 2022 as the future year for the State's non-interference
demonstration because it is the year that it anticipates that the
Middle Tennessee Area will cease implementation of the I/M program due
to the CAA's SIP processing timeframe and the language of Tenn. Code
Ann. Sec. 68-201-119. The point source emissions for the Middle
Tennessee Area were obtained from the 2014 version 2 National Emissions
Inventory (NEI) and grown to the year 2022 using the appropriate EPA
growth factors or using engineering judgment, as detailed in Appendices
H and I of the February 26, 2020, SIP revision. For non-point sources,
the inventory was developed using EPA established methodologies
published by EPA,\10\ as detailed in Appendix J of the February 26,
2020, SIP revision. Tennessee calculated projected emissions in the
year 2022 by adding all four sectors (on-road, point, non-road, and
non-point) together.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See 2017 NEI Final Plan: Revised July 2018, available at
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-07/documents/2017_nei_plan_final_revised_jul2018.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2 shows the total projected emissions in 2022 with the I/M
program in the Middle Tennessee Area. Table 3 shows the total projected
emissions in 2022 without the I/M program in the Middle Tennessee
Area.\11\ By 2022, emission benefits resulting from Tennessee's I/M
program for the Middle Tennessee Area are predicted to be a 478.52 ton
per year (tpy) reduction of NOX, and a 593.10 tpy reduction
of VOCs. On a percentage basis, removal of the I/M program will result
in a 4.2 percent increase in NOX emissions and a 12.4
percent increase in VOCs. The differences in the two scenarios for all
four sectors combined is a 1.9 percent increase in NOX and a
1.7 percent increase in VOC emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Since the I/M program only impacts emissions in the on-road
sector, the projected emissions in other sectors (point, non-road
and non-point) are the same between the ``with the I/M program'' and
the ``without the I/M program'' scenarios.
Table 2--Middle Tennessee Area Total 2022 Projected Emissions of NOX and
VOC (in tpy) With the I/M Program
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sector NOX VOC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On road................................. 11,309 4,780
Point................................... 4,455 3,867
Nonroad................................. 5,413 3,451
Non-Point............................... 3,504 22,690
-------------------------------
[[Page 35610]]
Total............................... 24,681 34,788
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3--Middle Tennessee Area Total 2022 Projected Emissions of NOX and
VOC (in tpy) Without the I/M Program
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sector NOX tpy VOC tpy
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On road................................. 11,788 5,373
Point................................... 4,455 3,867
Nonroad................................. 5,413 3,451
Non-Point............................... 3,504 22,690
-------------------------------
Total............................... 25,160 35,382
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4--Summary of NOX and VOC Emissions Increases Associated With
Removing the Middle Tennessee Area From the I/M Program
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX emissions
in 2022 VOC emissions
in 2022
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total On-Road Emissions for Middle TN 11,309 4,780
Counties in Current I/M Program (tpy)..
Total On-Road Emissions after Removing 11,788 5,373
Middle TN Counties from I/M Program
(tpy)..................................
Total Emissions for Middle TN Counties 24,681 34,788
in Current I/M Program (all sectors)
(tpy)..................................
Total Emissions after Removing Middle TN 25,160 35,382
Counties from I/M Program (all sectors)
(tpy)..................................
Emissions Increases (tpy)............... 479 593
Emissions Increases (% of Total On-Road 4.2% 12.4%
Emissions for Middle TN Counties)......
Emissions Increases (% of Total 1.9% 1.7%
Emissions for Middle TN Counties, all
sectors)...............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To further quantify the potential impact of removal of the I/M
program, Tennessee completed a photochemical modeling sensitivity
analysis. As shown in Table 5, the sensitivity analysis indicates that
the largest increase in ozone concentration would be at the Percy
Priest monitor at 0.262 ppb.
Table 5--Results of Sensitivity Analysis, Increases of Ozone
Concentrations at Monitors in the Middle Tennessee Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sensitivity analysis
corresponding ozone
Site name 2016-2018 ozone increase due to
design value combined NOX and VOC
increases
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trinity Lane, Davidson 66 0.249
County.....................
Percy Priest, Davidson 67 0.262
County.....................
Rockland Recreation Area, 66 0.196
Sumner County..............
Fairview Middle School, 60 0.186
Williamson County..........
Cedars of Lebanon State 64 0.178
Park, Wilson County........
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA has evaluated the State's analysis and preliminarily agrees
with its findings and conclusions. EPA therefore proposes to find that
removal of the SIP-approved I/M program requirements for the Middle
Tennessee Area would not interfere with any applicable requirement
concerning attainment or maintenance of the ozone NAAQS.
Non-Interference Analysis for the Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) NAAQS
On July 16, 1997, EPA established an annual PM2.5 NAAQS
of 15.0 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\), based on a 3-year
average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations, and a 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS of 65 [mu]g/m\3\, based on a 3-year average of
the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations.\12\ See 62 FR 38652
(July 18, 1997). On September 21, 2006, EPA retained the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS of 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ but revised the 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS to 35 [mu]g/m\3\, based again on a 3-year
average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations. See 71 FR
61144 (October 17, 2006). On December 14, 2012, EPA retained the 2006
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS of 35 [mu]g/m\3\ but revised the annual
primary PM2.5 NAAQS to 12.0 [mu]g/m\3\, based again on a 3-
year average of annual mean PM2.5 concentrations. See 78 FR
3086 (January 15, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ The 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS was revoked for
areas designated as attainment, effective October 24, 2016. See 81
FR 58010 (August 24, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA published designations for the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS on January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944) and April 14, 2005 (70 FR 19844),
designating all counties in the Middle Tennessee Area attainment for
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. On November 13, 2009 (74 FR
[[Page 35611]]
58688), and on January 15, 2015 (80 FR 2206), EPA published notices
determining that the counties in the Middle Tennessee Area were
designated unclassifiable/attainment for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS and the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS,
respectively.
In Tennessee's February 26, 2020, SIP revision, the State concluded
that the removal of the counties in the Middle Tennessee Area from the
Tennessee's SIP-approved I/M program would not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of the PM2.5 NAAQS. The pollution
control systems for light-duty gasoline vehicles subject to the I/M
program are not designed to reduce emissions of direct PM2.5
and sulfate (i.e., the primary precursor for PM2.5 formation
in the Southeast); therefore, removing counties from the program will
not have any impact on ambient concentrations of PM2.5
NAAQS. In addition, ambient air monitoring shows that PM2.5
24-hour design value for Middle Tennessee in 2019 is 18 [mu]g/m\3\,
which is below the 24-hour NAAQS of 35 [mu]g/m\3\. Also, the annual
design value in 2019 is 9.3 [mu]g/m\3\, which is below the annual NAAQS
of 12.0 [mu]g/m\3\. The small increase in NOX emissions of
1.9 percent is expected to only cause a small increase in
PM2.5 design value.
EPA has evaluated the State's analysis and preliminarily agrees
with its findings and conclusions. EPA therefore proposes to find that
removal of the SIP-approved I/M program requirements for the Middle
Tennessee Area would not interfere with continued attainment or
maintenance of the PM2.5 NAAQS.
Non-Interference Analysis for the 2010 Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) NAAQS
13
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ The annual standard of 53 ppb is based on the annual mean
concentration. See 36 FR 8186 (April 30, 1971).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2010 NO2 1-hour standard is set at 100 ppb, based on
the 3-year average of the 98th percentile of the yearly distribution of
1-hour daily maximum concentrations. See 75 FR 6474 (February 9, 2010).
On February 17, 2012, EPA designated all counties in Tennessee as
unclassifiable/attainment for the 2010 NO2 NAAQS. See 77 FR
9532.
Based on the technical analysis in Tennessee's February 26, 2020,
SIP revision, the projected increase in total NOX emissions
(of which NO2 is a component) in 2022 is 1.9 percent.\14\
This increase is not expected to interfere with continued attainment of
the NO2 NAAQS in the Middle Tennessee Area. The 2019 design
value for the 1-hour NO2 NAAQS for the Middle Tennessee Area
is 50 ppb.
EPA has evaluated the State's analysis and preliminarily agrees
with its findings and conclusions. For these reasons, EPA proposes to
find that removal of the SIP-approved I/M program requirements for the
Middle Tennessee Area would not interfere with continued attainment or
maintenance of the NO2 NAAQS.
Non-Interference Analysis for the Carbon Monoxide (CO) NAAQS
EPA promulgated the CO NAAQS in 1971 and has retained the standards
since its last review of the standards in 2011. The primary NAAQS for
CO consist of: (1) An 8-hour standard of 9 ppm, not to be exceeded more
than once in a year (i.e., the second highest, non-overlapping 8-hour
average concentration cannot exceed the standard); and (2) a 1-hour
average of 35 ppm, not to be exceeded more than once in a year. The
Middle Tennessee Area has always been designated as unclassifiable/
attainment for the CO NAAQS.
In Tennessee's February 26, 2020, SIP revision, the State concluded
that the removal of counties in the Middle Tennessee Area from the SIP-
approved I/M program would not interfere with attainment or maintenance
of the CO NAAQS. MOVES2014 mobile emissions modeling results show an
increase in CO emissions of 6.1 percent in the Middle Tennessee Area in
2022 as a result of removing the I/M program for the Middle Tennessee
Area. This increase is not expected to interfere with continued
attainment of the CO NAAQS in the Middle Tennessee Area. The 2018
design values for Tennessee for the 1-hour and 8-hour CO NAAQS are 1.8
ppm and 1.6 ppm, respectively. Preliminary design values for Tennessee
for the 1-hour and 8-hour CO NAAQS in 2019 were 1.6 ppm and 1.8 ppm,
respectively, which are less than 20 percent of the CO NAAQS for both
the 1-hour and 8-hour standards.
EPA has evaluated the State's analysis and preliminarily agrees
with its findings and conclusions. For these reasons, EPA proposes to
find that removal of the SIP-approved I/M program requirements for the
Middle Tennessee Area would not interfere with continued attainment or
maintenance of the CO NAAQS.
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the removal of the I/M requirements for
the Middle Tennessee Area (i.e., Davidson, Sumner, Rutherford,
Williamson and Wilson Counties) from the Tennessee SIP. EPA is
proposing to approve the removal of the I/M program requirements for
the Middle Tennessee Area from the federally-approved SIP because
removing the requirements is consistent with the CAA and applicable
regulations.
IV. 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 they meet the criteria of the CAA. This proposed 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.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible
[[Page 35612]]
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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 29, 2020.
Mary Walker,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2020-12536 Filed 6-10-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
