Redesignation of Certain Unclassifiable Areas for the 2010 1-Hour Sulfur Dioxide (SO2, 54517-54523 [2020-17548]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
54517
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 171 / Wednesday, September 2, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone: (816) 329–4059; fax: (816)
329–4090; email: doug.rudolph@faa.gov.
Before using any approved AMOC on any
airplane to which the AMOC applies, notify
your appropriate principal inspector (PI) in
the FAA Flight Standards District Office
(FSDO), or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
(h) Related Information
Refer to MCAI European Union Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) AD No. 2019–0166,
dated July 15, 2019. You may examine the
MCAI on the internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for and
locating Docket No. FAA–2020–0753. For
service information related to this AD,
contact Pilatus Aircraft Ltd., Customer
Technical Support (MCC), P.O. Box 992, CH–
6371 Stans, Switzerland; telephone: +41
(0)41 619 67 74; fax: +41 (0)41 619 67 73;
email: Techsupport@pilatus-aircraft.com;
internet: https://www.pilatus-aircraft.com/en.
You may review this referenced service
information at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety Branch,
901 Locust, Kansas City, Missouri 64106. For
information on the availability of this
material at the FAA, call (816) 329–4148.
Issued on August 26, 2020.
Gaetano A. Sciortino,
Deputy Director for Strategic Initiatives,
Compliance & Airworthiness Division,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2020–19264 Filed 9–1–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 81
[EPA–HQ–OAR–2020–0292; FRL–10013–35–
OAR]
Redesignation of Certain
Unclassifiable Areas for the 2010 1Hour Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Primary
National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS)
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to
SUMMARY:
redesignate certain unclassifiable areas
designated during the EPA’s Round 2 air
quality designations for the 2010 1-Hour
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Primary National
Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS). Specifically, the EPA believes
that it now has sufficient information to
determine that certain unclassifiable
areas in Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, and
Texas are attaining the 2010 1-hour SO2
primary NAAQS, and, therefore, is
proposing to redesignate these areas to
attainment/unclassifiable for the 2010 1hour SO2 primary NAAQS.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before October 2, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2020–00292, at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from regulations.gov.
The EPA may publish any comment
received to our 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://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
The EPA is temporarily suspending
its Docket Center and Reading Room for
public visitors, with limited exceptions,
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/ as there may be a
delay in processing mail and faxes.
Hand deliveries or couriers will be
received by scheduled appointment
only. For further information and
updates on the EPA Docket Center
services, please visit us online at
https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
Send information identified as CBI
only to the following address: Tiffany
Purifoy, OAQPS Document Control
Officer, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, 109 T.W.
Alexander Drive, Mail Code C404–02,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27711,
Attention Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OAR–2020–0292. There will be a delay
in confirming receipt of CBI packages,
because the EPA–RTP office is closed to
reduce the risk of transmitting COVID–
19. Due to the office closure, the EPA is
also requesting that parties notify the
OAQPS Document Control Officer via
telephone at (919) 541–0878 or email at
purifoy.tiffany@epa.gov when mailing
information identified as CBI.
The EPA continues to carefully and
continuously monitor information from
the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC), local area health
departments, and our Federal partners
so that we can respond rapidly as
conditions change regarding COVID–19.
For
general questions concerning this
action, please contact Ashley Keas, U.S.
EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and
Standards, Air Quality Policy Division,
C539–04, Research Triangle Park, NC
27709, by email at keas.ashley@epa.gov,
or Gobeail McKinley, U.S. EPA, Office
of Air Quality Planning and Standards,
Air Quality Policy Division, C539–04,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, by
email at mckinley.gobeail@epa.gov. The
following EPA contacts can answer
questions regarding areas in a particular
EPA Regional office:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
U.S. EPA REGIONAL OFFICE CONTACTS
Regional office
Affected state
Contact
Region V ................................
Region VI ...............................
Region VII ..............................
Ohio ......................................
Texas ...................................
Missouri, Nebraska ..............
Mary Portanova ....................
Robert Imhoff .......................
Will Stone .............................
The information can also be reviewed
online at https://www.epa.gov/sulfurdioxide-designations and also in the
public docket for these SO2
redesignations at https://
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:02 Sep 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
Telephone
www.regulations.gov under Docket ID
No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2020–0292.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
or ‘‘our’’ means the EPA.
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(312) 353–5954
(214) 665–7262
(913) 551–7714
Email
portanova.mary@epa.gov.
imhoff.robert@epa.gov.
stone.william@epa.gov.
I. Background
The Clean Air Act (CAA or Act)
establishes a process for air quality
management through the establishment
and implementation of the NAAQS.
E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM
02SEP1
54518
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 171 / Wednesday, September 2, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
After the promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS, the EPA is required to
designate all areas of the country,
pursuant to section 107(d)(1)–(2) of the
CAA. For the 2010 SO2 primary
NAAQS, designations are based on the
EPA’s application of the nationwide
analytical approach to, and technical
assessment of, the weight of evidence
for each area, including but not limited
to available air quality monitoring data
and air quality modeling results. In
advance of designating the areas that are
the subject of this proposed
redesignation, the EPA issued updated
designations guidance through a March
20, 2015, memorandum from Stephen D.
Page, Director, U.S. EPA, Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, to Air
Division Directors, U.S. EPA Regions 1–
10 titled, ‘‘Updated Guidance for Area
Designations for the 2010 Primary
Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air
Quality Standard,’’ which contains the
factors the EPA evaluated in
determining the appropriate
designations and associated boundaries,
including: (1) Air quality
characterization via ambient monitoring
or dispersion modeling results; (2)
emissions-related data; (3) meteorology;
(4) geography and topography; and (5)
jurisdictional boundaries. The guidance
also references the EPA’s non-binding
Monitoring Technical Assistance
Document (Monitoring TAD) that
existed at that time.1
The EPA completed the first set of
initial area designations for the 2010 1hour SO2 NAAQS in 2013 (Round 1).
Pursuant to a March 2, 2015, consent
decree and court-ordered schedule, the
EPA finalized a second set of initial area
designations for the 2010 1-hour SO2
NAAQS in 2016 (Round 2). The March
2, 2015, consent decree identified the
following emissions criteria such that
the EPA must designate, in Round 2, an
area surrounding any stationary source
which had (a) annual emissions in 2012
exceeding 16,000 tons of SO2, or (b) both
an annual average emissions rate of at
least 0.45 pounds of SO2 per one million
British thermal units (lbs SO2/mmBTU),
according to the EPA’s Clean Air
Markets Division Database, and annual
emissions of at least 2,600 tons of SO2
in 2012. Areas in Missouri, Nebraska,
Ohio, and Texas, each contained one
source that met these Round 2 criteria.
The EPA evaluated each area, using the
1 The version of the EPA’s ‘‘SO NAAQS
2
Designations Source-Oriented Monitoring Technical
Assistance Document’’ (Monitoring TAD) available
at the time of the Round 2 designations action was
released in December 2013. The current version of
the Monitoring TAD was released in February 2016
and superseded the version released in December
2013.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:02 Sep 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
five factors identified previously, during
the Round 2 designations. Specifically,
as discussed further in Section III of this
document, the Franklin County area in
Missouri contains the Labadie Energy
Center; the Lancaster County area in
Nebraska contains Sheldon Station; the
Gallia County area in Ohio contains the
Gavin Plant; and the Milam County area
in Texas contains the Sandow Plant.
The March 20, 2015, guidance also
specified the designation category
definitions to be used in the Round 2
designations. Specifically, the EPA
defined: A ‘‘nonattainment’’ area as an
area that the EPA has determined
violates the 2010 SO2 NAAQS based on
the most recent 3 years of ambient air
quality monitoring data or an
appropriate modeling analysis, or that
the EPA has determined contributes to
a violation in a nearby area; an
‘‘attainment’’ area as an area that the
EPA has determined meets the 2010 SO2
NAAQS and does not contribute to a
violation of the NAAQS in a nearby area
based on either: (a) the most recent 3
years of ambient air quality monitoring
data from a monitoring network in an
area that is sufficient to be compared to
the NAAQS per the EPA interpretations
in the Monitoring TAD, or (b) an
appropriate modeling analysis. As
discussed further in Section III of this
document, the EPA was unable to
determine whether the areas in
Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, and Texas
that are the subject of this action, met
the definition of a nonattainment area or
the definition of an attainment area
based on the available information at
the time of the Round 2 designations. As
a result, the EPA designated each of
these four areas as unclassifiable in the
Round 2 designations published on July
12, 2016, and December 13, 2016.2
Detailed rationale, analyses, and other
information supporting our initial
designation for these four areas can be
found in the intended and final Round
2 designations’ technical support
documents for Missouri, Nebraska,
Ohio, and Texas, respectively. These
Round 2 documents, along with all
other supporting materials for the initial
2010 1-hour SO2 primary NAAQS
designations for these areas, can be
found on the EPA’s SO2 designations
website.3 Specific technical support
documents (TSDs) for the covered states
are referenced and linked in later
sections of this notice.
2 See actions published on July 12, 2016 (81 FR
45039) and December 13, 2016 (81 FR 89870).
3 https://www.epa.gov/sulfur-dioxidedesignations.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
II. What are the criteria for
redesignating an area from
unclassifiable to attainment/
unclassifiable?
CAA 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.’’ 4 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. In keeping
with CAA section 107(d)(3)(A), areas
that are redesignated to attainment/
unclassifiable 5 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. See the
definitions for nonattainment area,
attainment area, and unclassifiable area
in CAA section 107(d)(1)(A)(i)–(iii).
In its designations under the 2010 SO2
NAAQS, the EPA has generally defined
an attainment/unclassifiable area as an
area that meets the NAAQS and does
not contribute to ambient air quality in
a nearby area that does not meet the
NAAQS. We are proposing to find that
these specific areas now meet this
definition of attainment/unclassifiable
based on the available valid monitoring
data in each area that demonstrates
attainment, i.e., no violations of and not
contributing to a nearby area that is not
meeting the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
The EPA finds this information
sufficient for the purposes of
redesignating an area from
unclassifiable to attainment/
unclassifiable, similar to initial
4 While CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) also lists
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 attainment/
unclassifiable.
5 Historically, the EPA has designated most areas
that do not meet the definition of nonattainment as
‘‘unclassifiable/attainment.’’ The EPA has reversed
the order of the label to be ‘‘attainment/
unclassifiable’’ to better convey the definition of the
designation category and so that the category is
more easily distinguished from the separate
unclassifiable category. See 83 FR 1098 (January 9,
2018) and 83 FR 25776 (June 4, 2018). The EPA
reserves the ‘‘attainment’’ category for when the
EPA redesignates a nonattainment area that has
attained the relevant NAAQS and has an approved
maintenance plan.
E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM
02SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 171 / Wednesday, September 2, 2020 / Proposed Rules
designations, where the inquiry is also
whether the area is factually attaining
the NAAQS, based on actual and
current air quality data. Such
redesignations are functionally similar
to initial designations and are not
subject to CAA section 107(d)(3)(E),
which, amongst other things, requires
attainment to be due to permanent and
enforceable measures and which
requires a demonstration that the area
will maintain the NAAQS for 10 years.
For the areas in Nebraska, Ohio, and
Texas, those states have submitted
formal requests 6 to the EPA to
redesignate those areas from
unclassifiable to attainment/
unclassifiable.7 Therefore, the EPA is
proposing in this action to approve
those requests and redesignate the areas
based on the available monitoring data
in those areas. For the area in Missouri,
for which the EPA has not received a
formal request to redesignate the area,
the EPA is concurrently notifying the
Governor of its recommendation that the
area be redesignated to attainment/
unclassifiable per CAA section
107(d)(3)(A), based on the currently
available information that demonstrates
attainment of the 2010 1-hour SO2
NAAQS.8 The EPA is issuing this
proposal concurrently with notification
to the state in anticipation of the
statutory timeframe provided under
CAA section 107(d)(3)(B) and (C).
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
III. What is the EPA’s rationale for
proposing to redesignate these areas?
As previously mentioned, the EPA
designated each of these areas as
unclassifiable in the Round 2
designations published on July 12, 2016
(intended designations) and December
13, 2016 (final designations). As
discussed in this section, information
available for each of these areas at the
time of the Round 2 designations was
6 These redesignation requests are included in the
docket for this action.
7 Ohio’s April 27, 2020, letter requested that the
Gallia County area be designated attainment/
unclassifiable as part of the EPA’s Round 4
designation process. As the Gallia County area was
already designated unclassifiable in Round 2, the
EPA is treating Ohio’s April 27, 2020, letter as a
redesignation request pursuant to CAA section
107(d)(3)(D).
8 On June 26, 2020, the Missouri Department of
Natural Resources posted a redesignation request
for the Franklin County area on its website for
public comment as part of the state’s public
process. Missouri expects to submit the request to
the EPA in the coming months.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:02 Sep 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
inconclusive and therefore the EPA was
unable to make a determination of the
area’s attainment status. For each of
these areas, the states selected the
monitoring pathway for purposes of air
quality characterization pursuant to the
EPA’s SO2 Data Requirements Rule
(DRR) (80 FR 51052, August 21, 2015).
For each of these areas, the state either
identified existing SO2 monitors and/or
installed and began operating new
monitors in accordance with the DRR.9
These monitors now have complete 3year design values for the 2017–2019
period. Specifically, each area now has
at least one monitor with a complete,
valid 3-year design value that is
attaining the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
A. Franklin and St. Charles Counties,
Missouri
The Franklin County area contains a
stationary source, the Ameren Labadie
Energy Center (Labadie), that met the
Round 2 criteria, discussed in Section I
of this document, requiring the EPA to
designate this area in 2016, under the
March 2, 2015, court-ordered schedule.
In its September 25, 2015, submission,
regarding the second round of
designations, Missouri recommended
that the area surrounding Labadie be
designated as unclassifiable. After
review of all available information at
that time, including modeling provided
by the state, Ameren, and Sierra Club
with differing results and uncertainties,
the EPA was unable to determine the
area’s attainment status. Therefore, the
EPA designated portions of Franklin
and St. Charles Counties as
unclassifiable in Round 2 of
designations for the 2010 1-hour SO2
primary NAAQS.10 11
9 Analyses used to support the siting of these
monitors are discussed in each state’s 2016 or 2017
annual monitoring network plans.
10 For more information on the EPA’s Round 2
designations, see: https://www.epa.gov/sulfurdioxide-designations/epa-completes-second-roundsulfur-dioxide-designations For the intended and
final TSDs specific to Missouri, see: https://
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-03/
documents/mo-epa-tsd-r2.pdf and https://
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-07/
documents/r7_mo_final_designation_tsd_
07012016.pdf.
11 On September 8, 2016, Sierra Club submitted
a petition for reconsideration of the final
unclassifiable designation of the Franklin County
area. In a January 18, 2017, letter, the EPA
responded to Sierra Club’s petition for
reconsideration, stating that the EPA intended to
initiate a new rulemaking process to be concluded
by December 31, 2020, in which the Agency would
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
54519
Pursuant to requirements under the
DRR to characterize the air quality in
the area around Labadie, Missouri
identified existing monitors and
installed additional monitors around
Labadie and began collecting data at
these monitors by January 1, 2017.12
As part of this proposed action, the
EPA considered design values for air
quality monitors in Franklin and St.
Charles Counties, in the Labadie area,
by assessing the most recent 3
consecutive years (i.e., 2017–2019) of
quality-assured, certified ambient air
quality data in the EPA Air Quality
System (AQS) using data from Federal
Reference Method (FRM) and Federal
Equivalent Method (FEM) monitors that
are sited and operated in accordance
with 40 CFR parts 50 and 58.13
Procedures for using monitored air
quality data to determine whether a
violation has occurred are given in 40
CFR part 50 Appendix T, as revised in
the 2010 SO2 NAAQS rulemaking. The
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS is met when
the design value is 75 parts per billion
(ppb) or less. Whenever several
monitors are located in an area, the
design value for the area is determined
by the monitor with the highest valid
design value. Table 1 contains the 2017–
2019 design values for the monitors in
this area. The monitor with the highest
design value is the North site (Site ID:
29–183–9004). Although one of the
monitors in this area, the Valley site
(Site ID: 29–071–9001), does not have a
valid design value for this period, the
remaining three monitors all have valid
design values and are all attaining the
NAAQS. Therefore, data collected at
these monitors indicate that this area is
in attainment of the 2010 1-hour SO2
NAAQS.
evaluate the monitoring data for the area
anticipated to be newly available at that time. Sierra
Club also filed a petition for judicial review of the
Round 2 designations that included this area; that
litigation is currently in abeyance in the D.C.
Circuit. Finalizing this proposed action would
constitute the evaluation contemplated by the
EPA’s January 18, 2017, letter. This letter is
available on our website here: https://www.epa.gov/
sulfur-dioxide-designations/reconsiderationrequests-areas-illinois-missouri-and-ohio.
12 More details on the analyses used to support
the monitor placement are contained in the state’s
2016 annual monitoring network plan.
13 SO air quality data are available from the
2
EPA’s website at https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-airquality-data. SO2 air quality design values are
available at https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/airquality-design-values.
E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM
02SEP1
54520
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 171 / Wednesday, September 2, 2020 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—2010 SO2 NAAQS DESIGN VALUES FOR THE FRANKLIN COUNTY AREA
2017 99th
percentile
(ppb)
AQS site ID
Monitor location
(latitude, longitude)
29–071–9001 *
29–071–9002
29–183–9002
29–183–9004
Valley (38.572522, –90.796911) .........................................
Southwest (38.52814, –90.86326) ......................................
Northwest (38.581799, –90.865528) ...................................
North (38.595607, –90.830618) ..........................................
2018 99th
percentile
(ppb)
25
22
21
30
2019 99th
percentile
(ppb)
38
20
17
22
2017–2019
design value
(ppb)
21
30
19
36
28
24
19
29
* This monitor does not have a valid design value, but all remaining monitors in the area do have valid design values that are below the level
of the NAAQS.
Under the EPA’s authority to
undertake a redesignation action 14
under CAA section 107(d)(3)(A), and
reviewing all available information, we
are proposing to find that the 3 years of
monitored ambient SO2 data from the
existing and new monitors adequately
characterize the SO2 air quality in
Franklin and St. Charles Counties and
demonstrate attainment of the 2010 1hour SO2 NAAQS in the same area.
Specifically, the data from these
monitors indicate there are no violations
in this area. Additionally, there is no
evidence of monitored or modeled
violations in the surrounding counties 15
such that the source is not contributing
to any nearby area that does not meet
the NAAQS. The EPA is, therefore,
proposing to redesignate the portions of
Franklin and St. Charles Counties in
Missouri that were designated as
unclassifiable in July 2016, to
attainment/unclassifiable based on the
currently available information that
demonstrates attainment of the 2010 1hour SO2 NAAQS.
B. Lancaster County, Nebraska
The Lancaster County area contains a
stationary source, the Nebraska Public
Power District’s (NPPD) Sheldon Station
(Sheldon), that met the Round 2 criteria,
discussed in Section I of this document,
requiring the EPA to designate this area
in 2016, under the March 2, 2015, courtordered schedule. In its September 18,
2015, submission regarding the second
round of designations, Nebraska
recommended that the area surrounding
Sheldon be designated as unclassifiable.
After review of all available information
at that time, including modeling results
from the state and Sierra Club with
differing results and uncertainties, the
EPA was unable to determine the area’s
attainment status and designated
Lancaster County as unclassifiable in
Round 2 of designations for the 2010 1hour SO2 primary NAAQS.16
Pursuant to requirements under the
DRR to characterize the air quality in
the area around Sheldon, Nebraska
installed a new monitor near the source
to begin collecting data at this monitor
by January 1, 2017.17
On May 6, 2020, Nebraska submitted
a letter 18 to the EPA requesting that the
entirety of Lancaster County, containing
Sheldon Station, be redesignated to
attainment/unclassifiable based on the
newly available monitoring information,
which demonstrates attainment of the
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. To evaluate
Nebraska’s redesignation request, the
EPA considered the design value for the
air quality monitor in Lancaster County,
in the Sheldon area, by assessing the
most recent 3 consecutive years (i.e.,
2017–2019) of quality-assured, certified
ambient air quality data in the EPA AQS
using data from FRM and FEM monitors
that are sited and operated in
accordance with 40 CFR parts 50 and
58.19 Procedures for using monitored air
quality data to determine whether a
violation has occurred are given in 40
CFR part 50 Appendix T, as revised in
the 2010 SO2 NAAQS rulemaking. As
noted previously, the 2010 1-hour SO2
NAAQS is met when the design value
is 75 ppb or less. Table 2 contains the
2017–2019 design value for this area.
Data collected at this monitor indicate
that this area is in attainment of the
NAAQS.
TABLE 2—2010 SO2 NAAQS DESIGN VALUE FOR THE LANCASTER COUNTY AREA
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
31–109–0025
2017 99th
percentile
(ppb)
Monitor location
(latitude, longitude)
AQS site ID
SW 42nd Street (40.554760, ¥96.780350) .......................
2018 99th
percentile
(ppb)
44
2019 99th
percentile
(ppb)
10
2017–2019
design value
(ppb)
33
29
After reviewing Nebraska’s request
under CAA section 107(d)(3)(D) and all
available information, we are proposing
to find that the 3 years of monitored
ambient SO2 data from the new monitor
adequately characterize the SO2 air
quality in Lancaster County and
demonstrate attainment of the 2010 1hour SO2 NAAQS in the same area.
Specifically, the data from this monitor
indicate there are no violations in this
area. Additionally, there is no evidence
of monitored or modeled violations in
the surrounding counties such that the
source is not contributing to any nearby
14 On June 26, 2020, the Missouri Department of
Natural Resources posted a redesignation request
for the Franklin County area on its website for
public comment as part of the state’s public
process. Missouri expects to submit the request to
the EPA in the coming months.
15 While a portion of neighboring Jefferson
County is currently designated as nonattainment for
the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, the EPA determined in a
final action published on September 13, 2017, that
this area is now attaining the NAAQS per the EPA’s
clean data policy. See 82 FR 42945.
16 For more information on the EPA’s Round 2
designations, see https://www.epa.gov/sulfurdioxide-designations/epa-completes-second-roundsulfur-dioxide-designations. For the intended and
final TSDs specific to Nebraska, see https://
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-03/
documents/ne-epa-tsd-r2.pdf and https://
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-07/
documents/r7_ne_final_designation_tsd_
06302016.pdf.
17 More details on the analyses used to support
the monitor placement are contained in the state’s
2016 annual monitoring network plan.
18 This letter is included in the docket for this
action.
19 SO air quality data are available from the
2
EPA’s website at https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-airquality-data. SO2 air quality design values are
available at https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/airquality-design-values.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:02 Sep 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM
02SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 171 / Wednesday, September 2, 2020 / Proposed Rules
area that does not meet the NAAQS. The
EPA is therefore proposing to approve
Nebraska’s redesignation request and
proposing to redesignate the entirety of
Lancaster County that was designated as
unclassifiable in July 2016, to
attainment/unclassifiable based on the
currently available information that
demonstrates attainment of the 2010 1hour SO2 NAAQS.
C. Gallia and Meigs Counties, Ohio
The Gallia County area contains a
stationary source, the General James M.
Gavin power plant (Gavin plant), that
met the Round 2 criteria, discussed in
Section I of this document, requiring the
EPA to designate this area in 2016,
under the March 2, 2015, court-ordered
schedule. In its September 16, 2015,
submission, regarding the second round
of designations, Ohio recommended that
the area surrounding the Gavin plant be
designated as attainment based on a
modeling demonstration. After review
of all available information at that time,
including modeling provided by both
the state and Sierra Club with differing
results and uncertainties, the EPA was
unable to determine the area’s
attainment status. Therefore, the EPA
designated the entirety of Gallia County
and a portion of Meigs County as
unclassifiable in Round 2 of the
designations for the 2010 1-hour SO2
primary NAAQS.20 21
Pursuant to requirements under the
DRR to characterize the air quality in
the area around the Gavin plant and
another nearby power plant,22 Ohio
installed four monitors in Gallia County,
Ohio and Mason County, West Virginia,
to begin collecting data at these
monitors by January 1, 2017.23
On April 27, 2020, Ohio submitted a
letter 24 to the EPA requesting that the
entirety of Gallia County and the
unclassifiable portion of Meigs County
be redesignated to attainment/
unclassifiable based on monitoring
information demonstrating attainment.
To evaluate Ohio’s redesignation
54521
request, the EPA considered the design
values for the air quality monitors in
Gallia County, Ohio and Mason County,
West Virginia, in the Gallia County area,
by assessing the most recent 3
consecutive years (i.e., 2017–2019) of
quality-assured, certified ambient air
quality data in the EPA AQS using data
from FRM and FEM monitors that are
sited and operated in accordance with
40 CFR parts 50 and 58.25 Procedures
for using monitored air quality data to
determine whether a violation has
occurred are given in 40 CFR part 50
Appendix T, as revised in the 2010 SO2
NAAQS rulemaking. Whenever multiple
monitors are located in an area, the
design value for the area is determined
by the monitor with the highest valid
design value. Table 3 contains the 2017–
2019 design values for the Gallia County
area. Data collected at these monitors
indicate that this area attains the 2010
1-hour SO2 NAAQS set at 75 ppb.
TABLE 3—2010 SO2 NAAQS DESIGN VALUES FOR THE GALLIA COUNTY AREA
39–053–0005
39–053–0004
39–053–0006
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
54–053–0001
2017 99th
percentile
(ppb)
Monitor location
(latitude, longitude)
AQS site ID
Ridge monitor 583 Honeysuckle Dr. (38.89495,
¥82.14893).
Cheshire school monitor Watson Grove Rd. (38.95018,
¥82.12211).
Guiding Hand monitor 323 SR 7 North (38.949450,
¥82.110400).
Lakin monitor Mason County, WV (38.95649, ¥82.08866)
2018 99th
percentile
(ppb)
38
54
42
27
41
54
41
38
28
54
40
35
57
61
51
contributing to any nearby area that
does not meet the NAAQS. The EPA is
therefore proposing to approve Ohio’s
redesignation request and proposing to
redesignate the entirety of Gallia County
and the portion of Meigs County, that
were designated as unclassifiable in July
2016, to attainment/unclassifiable based
on the currently available information
that demonstrates attainment of the
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
20 For more information on EPA’s Round 2
designations, see https://www.epa.gov/sulfurdioxide-designations/epa-completes-second-roundsulfur-dioxide-designations For the intended and
final TSDs specific to Ohio, see https://
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-03/
documents/oh-epa-tsd-r2.pdf and https://
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-07/
documents/r5_oh_final_designation_tsd_
06302016.pdf.
21 On January 6, 2017, Sierra Club submitted a
petition for reconsideration of the final
unclassifiable designation of the Gallia County area.
In a January 18, 2017, letter, the EPA responded to
Sierra Club’s petition for reconsideration, stating
that the EPA intended to initiate a new rulemaking
process to be concluded by December 31, 2020, in
which the Agency would evaluate the monitoring
data for the area anticipated to be newly available
at that time. Finalizing this proposed action would
constitute the evaluation contemplated by the
EPA’s January 18, 2017, letter. This letter is
available on our website https://www.epa.gov/
sulfur-dioxide-designations/reconsiderationrequests-areas-illinois-missouri-and-ohio.
22 Kyger Creek Station is approximately 2.5
kilometers southwest of the Gavin plant and was
also a source required to be characterized under the
EPA’s SO2 Data Requirements Rule.
17:02 Sep 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
D. Milam County, Texas
The Milam County area contains a
stationary source, the Luminant
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2017–2019
design value
(ppb)
34
After reviewing Ohio’s request under
CAA section 107(d)(3)(D) and all
available information, we are proposing
to find that the 3 years of monitored
ambient SO2 data from the four new
monitors adequately characterize the
SO2 air quality in Gallia and Meigs
Counties and demonstrate attainment of
the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS in the
same area. Specifically, the data from
these monitors indicate there are no
violations in this area. Additionally,
there is no evidence of monitored or
modeled violations in the surrounding
counties such that the source is not
VerDate Sep<11>2014
2019 99th
percentile
(ppb)
Generation Company’s Sandow 5
Generating Plant (Sandow plant), that
met the Round 2 criteria, discussed in
Section I of this document, requiring the
EPA to designate this area in 2016,
under the March 2, 2015, court-ordered
schedule. In its September 18, 2015,
submission, regarding Round 2 of
designations, Texas noted that it was
not able to model all the sources
impacted in that round of designations
and therefore did not provide a
technical analysis for the Milam County
area nor did the state provide an
updated recommendation for this area
23 More details on the analyses used to support
the monitor placement are contained in the state’s
2016 and 2017 annual monitoring network plans.
24 This letter is included in the docket for this
action. As discussed in Section II of this document,
the EPA is treating Ohio’s April 27, 2020, letter as
a request for redesignation under CAA section
107(d)(3)(D).
25 SO air quality data are available from EPA’s
2
website at https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-qualitydata. SO2 air quality design values are available at
https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-designvalues.
E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM
02SEP1
54522
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 171 / Wednesday, September 2, 2020 / Proposed Rules
but rather reiterated its previous
recommendation for areas without
existing monitors to be designated as
unclassifiable/attainment. After review
of all available information at that time,
the EPA was unable to determine the
area’s attainment status based on the
lack of information and designated the
entirety of Milam County, Texas, as
unclassifiable in Round 2 of
designations for the 2010 1-hour SO2
primary NAAQS.26
Pursuant to requirements under the
DRR to characterize the air quality in
the area around Sandow, Texas installed
a new monitor near Sandow to begin
collecting data at this monitor by
January 1, 2017.27
On June 26, 2020, Texas submitted a
letter 28 to the EPA requesting that the
entirety of Milam County be
redesignated to attainment/
unclassifiable based on the newly
available monitoring information which
demonstrates attainment. To evaluate
Texas’ redesignation request, the EPA
considered the design value for the air
quality monitor in Milam County, in the
Sandow area, by assessing the most
recent 3 consecutive years (i.e., 2017–
2019) of quality-assured, certified
ambient air quality data in the EPA AQS
using data from FRM and FEM monitors
that are sited and operated in
accordance with 40 CFR parts 50 and
58.29 Procedures for using monitored air
quality data to determine whether a
violation has occurred are given in 40
CFR part 50 Appendix T, as revised in
the 2010 SO2 NAAQS rulemaking. The
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS is met when
the design value is 75 ppb or less. Table
4 contains the 2017–2019 design value
for this area. Data collected at this
monitor indicate that this area is in
attainment of the NAAQS.
TABLE 4—2010 SO2 NAAQS DESIGN VALUES FOR THE MILAM COUNTY AREA
48–331–1075
3990 John D Harper Road (30.569534, ¥97.076294) ......
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Texas’ redesignation request to the
EPA also indicated that the Sandow
plant permanently ceased operations in
January 2018. The EPA independently
confirmed the plant is no longer
permitted to operate.30
After reviewing Texas’ request under
CAA section 107(d)(3)(D) and all
available information, we are proposing
to find that the 3 years of monitored
ambient SO2 data from the new monitor
adequately characterize the SO2 air
quality in Milam County and
demonstrate attainment of the 2010 1hour SO2 NAAQS in the same area.
Specifically, the data from this monitor
indicate there are no violations in this
area. Additionally, there is no evidence
of monitored or modeled violations in
the surrounding counties such that the
source is not contributing to any nearby
area that does not meet the NAAQS. The
EPA is therefore proposing to approve
Texas’ redesignation request and
proposing to redesignate the entirety of
Milam County, that was designated as
unclassifiable in December 2016, to
attainment/unclassifiable based on the
currently available information that
demonstrates attainment of the 2010 1hour SO2 NAAQS.
26 For more information on EPA’s Round 2
designations, see https://www.epa.gov/sulfurdioxide-designations/epa-completes-second-roundsulfur-dioxide-designations. For the intended and
final TSDs specific to Texas, see https://
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-03/
documents/tx-epa-tsd-r2.pdf and https://
www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-11/
documents/texas_4_deferred_luminant_tsd_final_
docket.pdf
VerDate Sep<11>2014
2017 99th
percentile
(ppb)
Monitor location
(latitude, longitude)
AQS site ID
17:02 Sep 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
2018 99th
percentile
(ppb)
37
IV. Proposed Action
The EPA is proposing to redesignate
to attainment/unclassifiable the
unclassifiable portions of Franklin and
St. Charles Counties in Missouri; the
entirety of Lancaster County in
Nebraska; the entirety of Gallia County
and the unclassifiable portion of Meigs
County in Ohio; and the entirety of
Milam County in Texas. Additionally,
the EPA is proposing to approve
requests for redesignation from the
states of Nebraska, Ohio, and Texas. For
the area in Missouri, the EPA is
initiating this redesignation action
under the authority of CAA section
107(d)(3)(A). As discussed in prior
sections, this proposed action is based
on the currently available monitoring
data for these areas that demonstrate
attainment of the 2010 1-hour SO2
primary NAAQS. If finalized, this
redesignation action and approval of the
redesignation requests would change
the legal designation for these listed
areas, found at 40 CFR part 81, from
unclassifiable to attainment/
unclassifiable for the 2010 1-hour SO2
primary NAAQS.
27 More details on the analyses used to support
the monitor placement are contained in the state’s
2016 annual monitoring network plan.
28 This letter is included in the docket for this
action.
29 SO air quality data are available from EPA’s
2
website at https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-qualitydata. SO2 air quality design values are available at
https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-designvalues.
30 In a letter dated February 14, 2018, from
Luminant to the Texas Commission on
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2019 99th
percentile
(ppb)
4
2017–2019
design value
(ppb)
2
14
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under CAA section 107(d)(3),
redesignation of an area to attainment/
unclassifiable 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 attainment/
unclassifiable does not in and of itself
create any new requirements.
Accordingly, this proposed action
merely proposes to redesignate an area
to attainment/unclassifiable and does
not impose additional requirements. For
that reason, this proposed action:
• Is exempt from 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 it is exempt 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 not subject to the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Environmental Quality (TCEQ), Luminant requested
to void Sandow permits 4980, PSDTX28,
PSDTX28M1, 16684, 39718, 45425, 72521, 97146,
and 125855. The remaining permits (NSR Permit
5473, PBR 87631, PBR 94625 and Standard Permit
108271) are material handling permits maintained
while closure activities are completed, such as coal
piles, silos, and conveyors. In a letter dated July 19,
2018, from the TCEQ to Luminant, TCEQ verified
the air quality federal operating permit O54 for the
Sandow plant was voided. These letters are
included in the docket for this action.
E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM
02SEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 171 / Wednesday, September 2, 2020 / Proposed Rules
• 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);
• Is not subject because it does not
have Federalism implications as
specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
• Is not subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997)
because it does not establish an
environmental standard intended to
mitigate health or safety risks;
• 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
this action does not involve technical
standards;
• Will not have disproportionate
human health or environmental effects
under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR
7629, February 16, 1994); and
• Does not have Tribal implications
as specified by Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000)
because no tribal lands are located
within the areas covered in this action
and the redesignation does not create
new requirements. The EPA notes this
proposed action will not impose
substantial direct costs on Tribal
governments or preempt Tribal law.
Comments due on or before
October 2, 2020; reply comments due on
or before November 2, 2020.
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr.
Max Staloff of the Office of General
Counsel, at (202) 418–1764, or
Max.Staloff@fcc.gov.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
This is a
summary of the Commission’s Notice of
Proposed Rulemaking, GC Docket No.
20–221, FCC 20–92, adopted on July 8,
2020 and released on July 9, 2020. The
full text of this document is available for
public inspection by downloading the
text from the Commission’s website at
https://www.fcc.gov/document/
updating-commissions-ex-parte-rules.
Alternative formats are available for
people with disabilities (Braille, large
print, electronic files, audio format) by
sending an email to fcc504@fcc.gov or
calling the Commission’s Consumer and
Governmental Affairs Bureau at (202)
418–0530 (voice), (202) 418–0432
(TTY).
47 CFR Part 1
Synopsis
[GC Docket No. 20–221; FCC 20–92; FRS
16967]
1. The Commission seeks comment on
three proposals: (1) Exempting from
Commission ex parte rules certain
government-to-government
consultations between Commission staff
and leaders and official representatives
of federally recognized Tribal Nations;
(2) clarifying the ex parte exemption for
the administrators of certain
Commission programs and expanding
that exemption to include the Toll-Free
Numbering Administrator and the
Reassigned Numbers Database
Administrator; and (3) modifying the
filing deadlines for presentations made
shortly before the beginning of the
Sunshine period and replies to those
presentations as set forth in 47 CFR
1.1206(b)(2).
Anne Austin,
Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator,
Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2020–17548 Filed 9–1–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
Updating the Commission’s Ex Parte
Rules
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
In this document, the
Commission begins a new proceeding to
consider several updates to the
Commission’s ex parte rules. First, the
Commission seeks comment on a
proposal to exempt from its ex parte
rules, in certain proceedings,
government-to-government
consultations between the Commission
and federally recognized Tribal Nations.
SUMMARY:
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Second, the Commission seeks comment
on a proposal to extend the exemption
to its ex parte rules for communications
with certain program administrators,
such as the Universal Service
Administrative Company, to include the
Toll-Free Numbering Administrator and
the Reassigned Numbers Database
Administrator, and to clarify the
conditions under which this exemption
applies. Third, the Commission seeks
comment on a proposal to require that
all written ex parte presentations and
written summaries of oral ex parte
presentations (other than presentations
that are permitted during the Sunshine
period) be submitted before the
Sunshine period begins and to require
that replies to these ex parte
presentations be filed within the first
day of the Sunshine period.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:02 Sep 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
54523
Exemption to Ex Parte Rules for
Government-to-Government Tribal
Consultations
2. The Commission’s existing ex parte
rules have no exemptions or provisions
tailored to presentations to or from
federally recognized Tribal Nations.
Throughout this Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking, ‘‘Tribes’’ or ‘‘Tribal
Nations’’ mean those Nations, including
Alaska Native Villages, that have been
granted federal recognition. Thus, in a
permit-but-disclose proceeding, written
presentations and summaries of oral
presentations between a Tribal
representative and Commission staff
must be filed as prescribed in the rules,
unless an exemption applies. In a
restricted proceeding, ex parte
presentations are forbidden, and those
presentations that are permitted must be
filed or summarized in the record. In
addition, the Sunshine period
prohibitions apply fully to presentations
to or from representatives of Tribal
Nations.
3. Outside the Tribal context, the
Commission has created exemptions
from the ex parte rules for
communications with particular parties
where the circumstances require a
greater degree of confidentiality than the
rules would otherwise permit. Many of
these exemptions are subject to
conditions appropriate to the
circumstances of each exemption. For
example, presentations involving a
military or foreign affairs function of the
United States or classified security
information are exempt from disclosure
requirements and Sunshine restrictions
without limitation. Presentations to or
from an agency or branch of the Federal
Government involving a matter of
shared jurisdiction with the
Commission are similarly exempt, but
this exemption is subject to the
condition that the Commission disclose
any new factual information adduced
from these presentations that it relies on
its decision-making. In the case of
presentations requested by the
Commission or staff to clarify or adduce
evidence or to resolve issues, any new
information elicited must ordinarily be
promptly disclosed, subject to certain
exceptions. In yet another variant, if an
exempt presentation is made that
directly relates to an emergency in
which the safety of life is endangered or
substantial loss of property is
threatened, the presentation or a
summary must be promptly placed in
the record and disclosed to other parties
‘‘as appropriate.’’
4. The relationship between the
United States Government and federally
recognized Tribal Nations is unique.
E:\FR\FM\02SEP1.SGM
02SEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 171 (Wednesday, September 2, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 54517-54523]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-17548]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 81
[EPA-HQ-OAR-2020-0292; FRL-10013-35-OAR]
Redesignation of Certain Unclassifiable Areas for the 2010 1-Hour
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS)
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
redesignate certain unclassifiable areas designated during the EPA's
Round 2 air quality designations for the 2010 1-Hour Sulfur Dioxide
(SO2) Primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS).
Specifically, the EPA believes that it now has sufficient information
to determine that certain unclassifiable areas in Missouri, Nebraska,
Ohio, and Texas are attaining the 2010 1-hour SO2 primary
NAAQS, and, therefore, is proposing to redesignate these areas to
attainment/unclassifiable for the 2010 1-hour SO2 primary
NAAQS.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 2, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2020-00292, at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any
comment received to our 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://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
The EPA is temporarily suspending its Docket Center and Reading
Room for public visitors, with limited exceptions, 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/ as there may be a delay in processing mail and
faxes. Hand deliveries or couriers will be received by scheduled
appointment only. For further information and updates on the EPA Docket
Center services, please visit us online at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
Send information identified as CBI only to the following address:
Tiffany Purifoy, OAQPS Document Control Officer, U.S. EPA, Office of
Air Quality Planning and Standards, 109 T.W. Alexander Drive, Mail Code
C404-02, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OAR-2020-0292. There will be a delay in confirming receipt of CBI
packages, because the EPA-RTP office is closed to reduce the risk of
transmitting COVID-19. Due to the office closure, the EPA is also
requesting that parties notify the OAQPS Document Control Officer via
telephone at (919) 541-0878 or email at [email protected] when
mailing information identified as CBI.
The EPA continues to carefully and continuously monitor information
from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), local area
health departments, and our Federal partners so that we can respond
rapidly as conditions change regarding COVID-19.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general questions concerning this
action, please contact Ashley Keas, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, Air Quality Policy Division, C539-04, Research
Triangle Park, NC 27709, by email at [email protected], or Gobeail
McKinley, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air
Quality Policy Division, C539-04, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, by
email at [email protected]. The following EPA contacts can
answer questions regarding areas in a particular EPA Regional office:
U.S. EPA Regional Office Contacts
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Regional office Affected state Contact Telephone Email
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Region V........................ Ohio............... Mary Portanova.... (312) 353-5954 [email protected].
Region VI....................... Texas.............. Robert Imhoff..... (214) 665-7262 [email protected].
Region VII...................... Missouri, Nebraska. Will Stone........ (913) 551-7714 [email protected].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The information can also be reviewed online at https://www.epa.gov/sulfur-dioxide-designations and also in the public docket for these
SO2 redesignations at https://www.regulations.gov under
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2020-0292.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' or
``our'' means the EPA.
I. Background
The Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) establishes a process for air
quality management through the establishment and implementation of the
NAAQS.
[[Page 54518]]
After the promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, the EPA is required
to designate all areas of the country, pursuant to section 107(d)(1)-
(2) of the CAA. For the 2010 SO2 primary NAAQS, designations
are based on the EPA's application of the nationwide analytical
approach to, and technical assessment of, the weight of evidence for
each area, including but not limited to available air quality
monitoring data and air quality modeling results. In advance of
designating the areas that are the subject of this proposed
redesignation, the EPA issued updated designations guidance through a
March 20, 2015, memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Director, U.S. EPA,
Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, to Air Division
Directors, U.S. EPA Regions 1-10 titled, ``Updated Guidance for Area
Designations for the 2010 Primary Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air
Quality Standard,'' which contains the factors the EPA evaluated in
determining the appropriate designations and associated boundaries,
including: (1) Air quality characterization via ambient monitoring or
dispersion modeling results; (2) emissions-related data; (3)
meteorology; (4) geography and topography; and (5) jurisdictional
boundaries. The guidance also references the EPA's non-binding
Monitoring Technical Assistance Document (Monitoring TAD) that existed
at that time.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The version of the EPA's ``SO2 NAAQS Designations
Source-Oriented Monitoring Technical Assistance Document''
(Monitoring TAD) available at the time of the Round 2 designations
action was released in December 2013. The current version of the
Monitoring TAD was released in February 2016 and superseded the
version released in December 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA completed the first set of initial area designations for
the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS in 2013 (Round 1). Pursuant to a
March 2, 2015, consent decree and court-ordered schedule, the EPA
finalized a second set of initial area designations for the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS in 2016 (Round 2). The March 2, 2015, consent
decree identified the following emissions criteria such that the EPA
must designate, in Round 2, an area surrounding any stationary source
which had (a) annual emissions in 2012 exceeding 16,000 tons of
SO2, or (b) both an annual average emissions rate of at
least 0.45 pounds of SO2 per one million British thermal
units (lbs SO2/mmBTU), according to the EPA's Clean Air
Markets Division Database, and annual emissions of at least 2,600 tons
of SO2 in 2012. Areas in Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, and
Texas, each contained one source that met these Round 2 criteria. The
EPA evaluated each area, using the five factors identified previously,
during the Round 2 designations. Specifically, as discussed further in
Section III of this document, the Franklin County area in Missouri
contains the Labadie Energy Center; the Lancaster County area in
Nebraska contains Sheldon Station; the Gallia County area in Ohio
contains the Gavin Plant; and the Milam County area in Texas contains
the Sandow Plant.
The March 20, 2015, guidance also specified the designation
category definitions to be used in the Round 2 designations.
Specifically, the EPA defined: A ``nonattainment'' area as an area that
the EPA has determined violates the 2010 SO2 NAAQS based on
the most recent 3 years of ambient air quality monitoring data or an
appropriate modeling analysis, or that the EPA has determined
contributes to a violation in a nearby area; an ``attainment'' area as
an area that the EPA has determined meets the 2010 SO2 NAAQS
and does not contribute to a violation of the NAAQS in a nearby area
based on either: (a) the most recent 3 years of ambient air quality
monitoring data from a monitoring network in an area that is sufficient
to be compared to the NAAQS per the EPA interpretations in the
Monitoring TAD, or (b) an appropriate modeling analysis. As discussed
further in Section III of this document, the EPA was unable to
determine whether the areas in Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, and Texas that
are the subject of this action, met the definition of a nonattainment
area or the definition of an attainment area based on the available
information at the time of the Round 2 designations. As a result, the
EPA designated each of these four areas as unclassifiable in the Round
2 designations published on July 12, 2016, and December 13, 2016.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See actions published on July 12, 2016 (81 FR 45039) and
December 13, 2016 (81 FR 89870).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Detailed rationale, analyses, and other information supporting our
initial designation for these four areas can be found in the intended
and final Round 2 designations' technical support documents for
Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, and Texas, respectively. These Round 2
documents, along with all other supporting materials for the initial
2010 1-hour SO2 primary NAAQS designations for these areas,
can be found on the EPA's SO2 designations website.\3\
Specific technical support documents (TSDs) for the covered states are
referenced and linked in later sections of this notice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ https://www.epa.gov/sulfur-dioxide-designations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. What are the criteria for redesignating an area from unclassifiable
to attainment/unclassifiable?
CAA 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.'' \4\ 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. In keeping with CAA section 107(d)(3)(A), areas that are
redesignated to attainment/unclassifiable \5\ 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. See the definitions for
nonattainment area, attainment area, and unclassifiable area in CAA
section 107(d)(1)(A)(i)-(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ While CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) also lists 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 attainment/unclassifiable.
\5\ Historically, the EPA has designated most areas that do not
meet the definition of nonattainment as ``unclassifiable/
attainment.'' The EPA has reversed the order of the label to be
``attainment/unclassifiable'' to better convey the definition of the
designation category and so that the category is more easily
distinguished from the separate unclassifiable category. See 83 FR
1098 (January 9, 2018) and 83 FR 25776 (June 4, 2018). The EPA
reserves the ``attainment'' category for when the EPA redesignates a
nonattainment area that has attained the relevant NAAQS and has an
approved maintenance plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its designations under the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, the EPA
has generally defined an attainment/unclassifiable area as an area that
meets the NAAQS and does not contribute to ambient air quality in a
nearby area that does not meet the NAAQS. We are proposing to find that
these specific areas now meet this definition of attainment/
unclassifiable based on the available valid monitoring data in each
area that demonstrates attainment, i.e., no violations of and not
contributing to a nearby area that is not meeting the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS. The EPA finds this information sufficient for the
purposes of redesignating an area from unclassifiable to attainment/
unclassifiable, similar to initial
[[Page 54519]]
designations, where the inquiry is also whether the area is factually
attaining the NAAQS, based on actual and current air quality data. Such
redesignations are functionally similar to initial designations and are
not subject to CAA section 107(d)(3)(E), which, amongst other things,
requires attainment to be due to permanent and enforceable measures and
which requires a demonstration that the area will maintain the NAAQS
for 10 years.
For the areas in Nebraska, Ohio, and Texas, those states have
submitted formal requests \6\ to the EPA to redesignate those areas
from unclassifiable to attainment/unclassifiable.\7\ Therefore, the EPA
is proposing in this action to approve those requests and redesignate
the areas based on the available monitoring data in those areas. For
the area in Missouri, for which the EPA has not received a formal
request to redesignate the area, the EPA is concurrently notifying the
Governor of its recommendation that the area be redesignated to
attainment/unclassifiable per CAA section 107(d)(3)(A), based on the
currently available information that demonstrates attainment of the
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.\8\ The EPA is issuing this proposal
concurrently with notification to the state in anticipation of the
statutory timeframe provided under CAA section 107(d)(3)(B) and (C).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ These redesignation requests are included in the docket for
this action.
\7\ Ohio's April 27, 2020, letter requested that the Gallia
County area be designated attainment/unclassifiable as part of the
EPA's Round 4 designation process. As the Gallia County area was
already designated unclassifiable in Round 2, the EPA is treating
Ohio's April 27, 2020, letter as a redesignation request pursuant to
CAA section 107(d)(3)(D).
\8\ On June 26, 2020, the Missouri Department of Natural
Resources posted a redesignation request for the Franklin County
area on its website for public comment as part of the state's public
process. Missouri expects to submit the request to the EPA in the
coming months.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. What is the EPA's rationale for proposing to redesignate these
areas?
As previously mentioned, the EPA designated each of these areas as
unclassifiable in the Round 2 designations published on July 12, 2016
(intended designations) and December 13, 2016 (final designations). As
discussed in this section, information available for each of these
areas at the time of the Round 2 designations was inconclusive and
therefore the EPA was unable to make a determination of the area's
attainment status. For each of these areas, the states selected the
monitoring pathway for purposes of air quality characterization
pursuant to the EPA's SO2 Data Requirements Rule (DRR) (80
FR 51052, August 21, 2015). For each of these areas, the state either
identified existing SO2 monitors and/or installed and began
operating new monitors in accordance with the DRR.\9\ These monitors
now have complete 3-year design values for the 2017-2019 period.
Specifically, each area now has at least one monitor with a complete,
valid 3-year design value that is attaining the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Analyses used to support the siting of these monitors are
discussed in each state's 2016 or 2017 annual monitoring network
plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Franklin and St. Charles Counties, Missouri
The Franklin County area contains a stationary source, the Ameren
Labadie Energy Center (Labadie), that met the Round 2 criteria,
discussed in Section I of this document, requiring the EPA to designate
this area in 2016, under the March 2, 2015, court-ordered schedule. In
its September 25, 2015, submission, regarding the second round of
designations, Missouri recommended that the area surrounding Labadie be
designated as unclassifiable. After review of all available information
at that time, including modeling provided by the state, Ameren, and
Sierra Club with differing results and uncertainties, the EPA was
unable to determine the area's attainment status. Therefore, the EPA
designated portions of Franklin and St. Charles Counties as
unclassifiable in Round 2 of designations for the 2010 1-hour
SO2 primary NAAQS.10 11
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ For more information on the EPA's Round 2 designations,
see: https://www.epa.gov/sulfur-dioxide-designations/epa-completes-second-round-sulfur-dioxide-designations For the intended and final
TSDs specific to Missouri, see: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-03/documents/mo-epa-tsd-r2.pdf and https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-07/documents/r7_mo_final_designation_tsd_07012016.pdf.
\11\ On September 8, 2016, Sierra Club submitted a petition for
reconsideration of the final unclassifiable designation of the
Franklin County area. In a January 18, 2017, letter, the EPA
responded to Sierra Club's petition for reconsideration, stating
that the EPA intended to initiate a new rulemaking process to be
concluded by December 31, 2020, in which the Agency would evaluate
the monitoring data for the area anticipated to be newly available
at that time. Sierra Club also filed a petition for judicial review
of the Round 2 designations that included this area; that litigation
is currently in abeyance in the D.C. Circuit. Finalizing this
proposed action would constitute the evaluation contemplated by the
EPA's January 18, 2017, letter. This letter is available on our
website here: https://www.epa.gov/sulfur-dioxide-designations/reconsideration-requests-areas-illinois-missouri-and-ohio.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to requirements under the DRR to characterize the air
quality in the area around Labadie, Missouri identified existing
monitors and installed additional monitors around Labadie and began
collecting data at these monitors by January 1, 2017.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ More details on the analyses used to support the monitor
placement are contained in the state's 2016 annual monitoring
network plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As part of this proposed action, the EPA considered design values
for air quality monitors in Franklin and St. Charles Counties, in the
Labadie area, by assessing the most recent 3 consecutive years (i.e.,
2017-2019) of quality-assured, certified ambient air quality data in
the EPA Air Quality System (AQS) using data from Federal Reference
Method (FRM) and Federal Equivalent Method (FEM) monitors that are
sited and operated in accordance with 40 CFR parts 50 and 58.\13\
Procedures for using monitored air quality data to determine whether a
violation has occurred are given in 40 CFR part 50 Appendix T, as
revised in the 2010 SO2 NAAQS rulemaking. The 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS is met when the design value is 75 parts per
billion (ppb) or less. Whenever several monitors are located in an
area, the design value for the area is determined by the monitor with
the highest valid design value. Table 1 contains the 2017-2019 design
values for the monitors in this area. The monitor with the highest
design value is the North site (Site ID: 29-183-9004). Although one of
the monitors in this area, the Valley site (Site ID: 29-071-9001), does
not have a valid design value for this period, the remaining three
monitors all have valid design values and are all attaining the NAAQS.
Therefore, data collected at these monitors indicate that this area is
in attainment of the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ SO2 air quality data are available from the
EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data.
SO2 air quality design values are available at https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-design-values.
[[Page 54520]]
Table 1--2010 SO2 NAAQS Design Values for the Franklin County Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 99th 2018 99th 2019 99th 2017-2019
AQS site ID Monitor location percentile percentile percentile design value
(latitude, longitude) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
29-071-9001 *............ Valley (38.572522, - 25 38 21 28
90.796911).
29-071-9002.............. Southwest (38.52814, - 22 20 30 24
90.86326).
29-183-9002.............. Northwest (38.581799, 21 17 19 19
-90.865528).
29-183-9004.............. North (38.595607, - 30 22 36 29
90.830618).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This monitor does not have a valid design value, but all remaining monitors in the area do have valid design
values that are below the level of the NAAQS.
Under the EPA's authority to undertake a redesignation action \14\
under CAA section 107(d)(3)(A), and reviewing all available
information, we are proposing to find that the 3 years of monitored
ambient SO2 data from the existing and new monitors
adequately characterize the SO2 air quality in Franklin and
St. Charles Counties and demonstrate attainment of the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS in the same area. Specifically, the data from
these monitors indicate there are no violations in this area.
Additionally, there is no evidence of monitored or modeled violations
in the surrounding counties \15\ such that the source is not
contributing to any nearby area that does not meet the NAAQS. The EPA
is, therefore, proposing to redesignate the portions of Franklin and
St. Charles Counties in Missouri that were designated as unclassifiable
in July 2016, to attainment/unclassifiable based on the currently
available information that demonstrates attainment of the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ On June 26, 2020, the Missouri Department of Natural
Resources posted a redesignation request for the Franklin County
area on its website for public comment as part of the state's public
process. Missouri expects to submit the request to the EPA in the
coming months.
\15\ While a portion of neighboring Jefferson County is
currently designated as nonattainment for the 2010 SO2
NAAQS, the EPA determined in a final action published on September
13, 2017, that this area is now attaining the NAAQS per the EPA's
clean data policy. See 82 FR 42945.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Lancaster County, Nebraska
The Lancaster County area contains a stationary source, the
Nebraska Public Power District's (NPPD) Sheldon Station (Sheldon), that
met the Round 2 criteria, discussed in Section I of this document,
requiring the EPA to designate this area in 2016, under the March 2,
2015, court-ordered schedule. In its September 18, 2015, submission
regarding the second round of designations, Nebraska recommended that
the area surrounding Sheldon be designated as unclassifiable. After
review of all available information at that time, including modeling
results from the state and Sierra Club with differing results and
uncertainties, the EPA was unable to determine the area's attainment
status and designated Lancaster County as unclassifiable in Round 2 of
designations for the 2010 1-hour SO2 primary NAAQS.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ For more information on the EPA's Round 2 designations, see
https://www.epa.gov/sulfur-dioxide-designations/epa-completes-second-round-sulfur-dioxide-designations. For the intended and final
TSDs specific to Nebraska, see https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-03/documents/ne-epa-tsd-r2.pdf and https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-07/documents/r7_ne_final_designation_tsd_06302016.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to requirements under the DRR to characterize the air
quality in the area around Sheldon, Nebraska installed a new monitor
near the source to begin collecting data at this monitor by January 1,
2017.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ More details on the analyses used to support the monitor
placement are contained in the state's 2016 annual monitoring
network plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On May 6, 2020, Nebraska submitted a letter \18\ to the EPA
requesting that the entirety of Lancaster County, containing Sheldon
Station, be redesignated to attainment/unclassifiable based on the
newly available monitoring information, which demonstrates attainment
of the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. To evaluate Nebraska's
redesignation request, the EPA considered the design value for the air
quality monitor in Lancaster County, in the Sheldon area, by assessing
the most recent 3 consecutive years (i.e., 2017-2019) of quality-
assured, certified ambient air quality data in the EPA AQS using data
from FRM and FEM monitors that are sited and operated in accordance
with 40 CFR parts 50 and 58.\19\ Procedures for using monitored air
quality data to determine whether a violation has occurred are given in
40 CFR part 50 Appendix T, as revised in the 2010 SO2 NAAQS
rulemaking. As noted previously, the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS
is met when the design value is 75 ppb or less. Table 2 contains the
2017-2019 design value for this area. Data collected at this monitor
indicate that this area is in attainment of the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ This letter is included in the docket for this action.
\19\ SO2 air quality data are available from the
EPA's website at https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data.
SO2 air quality design values are available at https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-design-values.
Table 2--2010 SO2 NAAQS Design Value for the Lancaster County Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 99th 2018 99th 2019 99th 2017-2019
AQS site ID Monitor location percentile percentile percentile design value
(latitude, longitude) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
31-109-0025.............. SW 42nd Street 44 10 33 29
(40.554760, -
96.780350).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After reviewing Nebraska's request under CAA section 107(d)(3)(D)
and all available information, we are proposing to find that the 3
years of monitored ambient SO2 data from the new monitor
adequately characterize the SO2 air quality in Lancaster
County and demonstrate attainment of the 2010 1-hour SO2
NAAQS in the same area. Specifically, the data from this monitor
indicate there are no violations in this area. Additionally, there is
no evidence of monitored or modeled violations in the surrounding
counties such that the source is not contributing to any nearby
[[Page 54521]]
area that does not meet the NAAQS. The EPA is therefore proposing to
approve Nebraska's redesignation request and proposing to redesignate
the entirety of Lancaster County that was designated as unclassifiable
in July 2016, to attainment/unclassifiable based on the currently
available information that demonstrates attainment of the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS.
C. Gallia and Meigs Counties, Ohio
The Gallia County area contains a stationary source, the General
James M. Gavin power plant (Gavin plant), that met the Round 2
criteria, discussed in Section I of this document, requiring the EPA to
designate this area in 2016, under the March 2, 2015, court-ordered
schedule. In its September 16, 2015, submission, regarding the second
round of designations, Ohio recommended that the area surrounding the
Gavin plant be designated as attainment based on a modeling
demonstration. After review of all available information at that time,
including modeling provided by both the state and Sierra Club with
differing results and uncertainties, the EPA was unable to determine
the area's attainment status. Therefore, the EPA designated the
entirety of Gallia County and a portion of Meigs County as
unclassifiable in Round 2 of the designations for the 2010 1-hour
SO2 primary NAAQS.20 21
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ For more information on EPA's Round 2 designations, see
https://www.epa.gov/sulfur-dioxide-designations/epa-completes-second-round-sulfur-dioxide-designations For the intended and final
TSDs specific to Ohio, see https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-03/documents/oh-epa-tsd-r2.pdf and https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-07/documents/r5_oh_final_designation_tsd_06302016.pdf.
\21\ On January 6, 2017, Sierra Club submitted a petition for
reconsideration of the final unclassifiable designation of the
Gallia County area. In a January 18, 2017, letter, the EPA responded
to Sierra Club's petition for reconsideration, stating that the EPA
intended to initiate a new rulemaking process to be concluded by
December 31, 2020, in which the Agency would evaluate the monitoring
data for the area anticipated to be newly available at that time.
Finalizing this proposed action would constitute the evaluation
contemplated by the EPA's January 18, 2017, letter. This letter is
available on our website https://www.epa.gov/sulfur-dioxide-designations/reconsideration-requests-areas-illinois-missouri-and-ohio.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to requirements under the DRR to characterize the air
quality in the area around the Gavin plant and another nearby power
plant,\22\ Ohio installed four monitors in Gallia County, Ohio and
Mason County, West Virginia, to begin collecting data at these monitors
by January 1, 2017.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Kyger Creek Station is approximately 2.5 kilometers
southwest of the Gavin plant and was also a source required to be
characterized under the EPA's SO2 Data Requirements Rule.
\23\ More details on the analyses used to support the monitor
placement are contained in the state's 2016 and 2017 annual
monitoring network plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On April 27, 2020, Ohio submitted a letter \24\ to the EPA
requesting that the entirety of Gallia County and the unclassifiable
portion of Meigs County be redesignated to attainment/unclassifiable
based on monitoring information demonstrating attainment. To evaluate
Ohio's redesignation request, the EPA considered the design values for
the air quality monitors in Gallia County, Ohio and Mason County, West
Virginia, in the Gallia County area, by assessing the most recent 3
consecutive years (i.e., 2017-2019) of quality-assured, certified
ambient air quality data in the EPA AQS using data from FRM and FEM
monitors that are sited and operated in accordance with 40 CFR parts 50
and 58.\25\ Procedures for using monitored air quality data to
determine whether a violation has occurred are given in 40 CFR part 50
Appendix T, as revised in the 2010 SO2 NAAQS rulemaking.
Whenever multiple monitors are located in an area, the design value for
the area is determined by the monitor with the highest valid design
value. Table 3 contains the 2017-2019 design values for the Gallia
County area. Data collected at these monitors indicate that this area
attains the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS set at 75 ppb.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ This letter is included in the docket for this action. As
discussed in Section II of this document, the EPA is treating Ohio's
April 27, 2020, letter as a request for redesignation under CAA
section 107(d)(3)(D).
\25\ SO2 air quality data are available from EPA's
website at https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data.
SO2 air quality design values are available at https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-design-values.
Table 3--2010 SO2 NAAQS Design Values for the Gallia County Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 99th 2018 99th 2019 99th 2017-2019
AQS site ID Monitor location percentile percentile percentile design value
(latitude, longitude) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
39-053-0005.............. Ridge monitor 583 34 38 54 42
Honeysuckle Dr.
(38.89495, -
82.14893).
39-053-0004.............. Cheshire school 27 41 54 41
monitor Watson Grove
Rd. (38.95018, -
82.12211).
39-053-0006.............. Guiding Hand monitor 38 28 54 40
323 SR 7 North
(38.949450, -
82.110400).
54-053-0001.............. Lakin monitor Mason 35 57 61 51
County, WV
(38.95649, -
82.08866).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After reviewing Ohio's request under CAA section 107(d)(3)(D) and
all available information, we are proposing to find that the 3 years of
monitored ambient SO2 data from the four new monitors
adequately characterize the SO2 air quality in Gallia and
Meigs Counties and demonstrate attainment of the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS in the same area. Specifically, the data from
these monitors indicate there are no violations in this area.
Additionally, there is no evidence of monitored or modeled violations
in the surrounding counties such that the source is not contributing to
any nearby area that does not meet the NAAQS. The EPA is therefore
proposing to approve Ohio's redesignation request and proposing to
redesignate the entirety of Gallia County and the portion of Meigs
County, that were designated as unclassifiable in July 2016, to
attainment/unclassifiable based on the currently available information
that demonstrates attainment of the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS.
D. Milam County, Texas
The Milam County area contains a stationary source, the Luminant
Generation Company's Sandow 5 Generating Plant (Sandow plant), that met
the Round 2 criteria, discussed in Section I of this document,
requiring the EPA to designate this area in 2016, under the March 2,
2015, court-ordered schedule. In its September 18, 2015, submission,
regarding Round 2 of designations, Texas noted that it was not able to
model all the sources impacted in that round of designations and
therefore did not provide a technical analysis for the Milam County
area nor did the state provide an updated recommendation for this area
[[Page 54522]]
but rather reiterated its previous recommendation for areas without
existing monitors to be designated as unclassifiable/attainment. After
review of all available information at that time, the EPA was unable to
determine the area's attainment status based on the lack of information
and designated the entirety of Milam County, Texas, as unclassifiable
in Round 2 of designations for the 2010 1-hour SO2 primary
NAAQS.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ For more information on EPA's Round 2 designations, see
https://www.epa.gov/sulfur-dioxide-designations/epa-completes-second-round-sulfur-dioxide-designations. For the intended and final
TSDs specific to Texas, see https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-03/documents/tx-epa-tsd-r2.pdf and https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-11/documents/texas_4_deferred_luminant_tsd_final_docket.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to requirements under the DRR to characterize the air
quality in the area around Sandow, Texas installed a new monitor near
Sandow to begin collecting data at this monitor by January 1, 2017.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ More details on the analyses used to support the monitor
placement are contained in the state's 2016 annual monitoring
network plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On June 26, 2020, Texas submitted a letter \28\ to the EPA
requesting that the entirety of Milam County be redesignated to
attainment/unclassifiable based on the newly available monitoring
information which demonstrates attainment. To evaluate Texas'
redesignation request, the EPA considered the design value for the air
quality monitor in Milam County, in the Sandow area, by assessing the
most recent 3 consecutive years (i.e., 2017-2019) of quality-assured,
certified ambient air quality data in the EPA AQS using data from FRM
and FEM monitors that are sited and operated in accordance with 40 CFR
parts 50 and 58.\29\ Procedures for using monitored air quality data to
determine whether a violation has occurred are given in 40 CFR part 50
Appendix T, as revised in the 2010 SO2 NAAQS rulemaking. The
2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS is met when the design value is 75 ppb
or less. Table 4 contains the 2017-2019 design value for this area.
Data collected at this monitor indicate that this area is in attainment
of the NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ This letter is included in the docket for this action.
\29\ SO2 air quality data are available from EPA's
website at https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data.
SO2 air quality design values are available at https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-design-values.
Table 4--2010 SO2 NAAQS Design Values for the Milam County Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2017 99th 2018 99th 2019 99th 2017-2019
AQS site ID Monitor location percentile percentile percentile design value
(latitude, longitude) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) (ppb)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
48-331-1075.............. 3990 John D Harper 37 4 2 14
Road (30.569534, -
97.076294).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Texas' redesignation request to the EPA also indicated that the
Sandow plant permanently ceased operations in January 2018. The EPA
independently confirmed the plant is no longer permitted to
operate.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ In a letter dated February 14, 2018, from Luminant to the
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), Luminant requested
to void Sandow permits 4980, PSDTX28, PSDTX28M1, 16684, 39718,
45425, 72521, 97146, and 125855. The remaining permits (NSR Permit
5473, PBR 87631, PBR 94625 and Standard Permit 108271) are material
handling permits maintained while closure activities are completed,
such as coal piles, silos, and conveyors. In a letter dated July 19,
2018, from the TCEQ to Luminant, TCEQ verified the air quality
federal operating permit O54 for the Sandow plant was voided. These
letters are included in the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After reviewing Texas' request under CAA section 107(d)(3)(D) and
all available information, we are proposing to find that the 3 years of
monitored ambient SO2 data from the new monitor adequately
characterize the SO2 air quality in Milam County and
demonstrate attainment of the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS in the
same area. Specifically, the data from this monitor indicate there are
no violations in this area. Additionally, there is no evidence of
monitored or modeled violations in the surrounding counties such that
the source is not contributing to any nearby area that does not meet
the NAAQS. The EPA is therefore proposing to approve Texas'
redesignation request and proposing to redesignate the entirety of
Milam County, that was designated as unclassifiable in December 2016,
to attainment/unclassifiable based on the currently available
information that demonstrates attainment of the 2010 1-hour
SO2 NAAQS.
IV. Proposed Action
The EPA is proposing to redesignate to attainment/unclassifiable
the unclassifiable portions of Franklin and St. Charles Counties in
Missouri; the entirety of Lancaster County in Nebraska; the entirety of
Gallia County and the unclassifiable portion of Meigs County in Ohio;
and the entirety of Milam County in Texas. Additionally, the EPA is
proposing to approve requests for redesignation from the states of
Nebraska, Ohio, and Texas. For the area in Missouri, the EPA is
initiating this redesignation action under the authority of CAA section
107(d)(3)(A). As discussed in prior sections, this proposed action is
based on the currently available monitoring data for these areas that
demonstrate attainment of the 2010 1-hour SO2 primary NAAQS.
If finalized, this redesignation action and approval of the
redesignation requests would change the legal designation for these
listed areas, found at 40 CFR part 81, from unclassifiable to
attainment/unclassifiable for the 2010 1-hour SO2 primary
NAAQS.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under CAA section 107(d)(3), redesignation of an area to
attainment/unclassifiable 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 attainment/unclassifiable does not in and of itself
create any new requirements. Accordingly, this proposed action merely
proposes to redesignate an area to attainment/unclassifiable and does
not impose additional requirements. For that reason, this proposed
action:
Is exempt from 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 it is exempt 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 not subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C.
601 et seq.);
[[Page 54523]]
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);
Is not subject because it does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999);
Is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997) because it does not establish an environmental standard
intended to mitigate health or safety risks;
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 this action does not involve technical standards;
Will not have disproportionate human health or
environmental effects under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February
16, 1994); and
Does not have Tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000) because no tribal
lands are located within the areas covered in this action and the
redesignation does not create new requirements. The EPA notes this
proposed action will not impose substantial direct costs on Tribal
governments or preempt Tribal law.
Anne Austin,
Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2020-17548 Filed 9-1-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
