Air Plan Approval; TN; Removal of Vehicle I/M Program; Middle Tennessee Area and Hamilton County, 21248-21254 [2021-08320]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
21248
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 76 / Thursday, April 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Public Hearing
If you wish to request or speak at a
public hearing, contact the person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT by 4:00 p.m., CDT on May 7,
2021. If you are disabled and need
reasonable accommodations to attend a
public hearing, contact the person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT. We will arrange the location
and time of the hearing with those
persons requesting the hearing. If no one
requests an opportunity to speak, we
will not hold a hearing.
To assist the transcriber and ensure an
accurate record, we request, if possible,
that each person who speaks at the
public hearing provide us with a written
copy of his or her comments. The public
hearing will continue on the specified
date until everyone scheduled to speak
has been given an opportunity to be
heard. If you are in the audience and
have not been scheduled to speak and
wish to do so, you will be allowed to
speak after those who have been
scheduled. We will end the hearing after
everyone scheduled to speak and others
present in the audience who wish to
speak, have been heard.
Public Meeting
IV. Procedural Determinations
Executive Order 12866—Regulatory
Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563—Improving Regulation
and Regulatory Review
Executive Order 12866 provides that
the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs in the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) will review all significant
rules. Pursuant to OMB guidance, dated
October 12, 1993, the approval of state
program amendments is exempted from
OMB review under Executive Order
12866. Executive Order 13563, which
reaffirms and supplements Executive
Order 12866, retains this exemption.
17:20 Apr 21, 2021
List of Subjects in 30 CFR Part 943
Intergovernmental relations, Surface
mining, Underground mining.
Alfred L. Clayborne,
Regional Director, Interior Regions 3, 4 and
6.
[FR Doc. 2021–08331 Filed 4–21–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–05–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
If only one person requests an
opportunity to speak, we may hold a
public meeting rather than a public
hearing. If you wish to meet with us to
discuss the amendment, please request
a meeting by contacting the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT. All such meetings are open to
the public and, if possible, we will post
notices of meetings at the locations
listed under ADDRESSES. We will make
a written summary of each meeting a
part of the administrative record.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Other Laws and Executive Orders
Affecting Rulemaking
When a State submits a program
amendment to OSMRE for review, our
regulations at 30 CFR 732.17(h) require
us to publish a notice in the Federal
Register indicating receipt of the
proposed amendment, its text or a
summary of its terms, and an
opportunity for public comment. We
conclude our review of the proposed
amendment after the close of the public
comment period and determine whether
the amendment should be approved,
approved in part, or not approved. At
that time, we will also make the
determinations and certifications
required by the various laws and
executive orders governing the
rulemaking process and include them in
the final rule.
Jkt 253001
[EPA–R04–OAR–2019–0618 and EPA–R04–
OAR–2019–0619; FRL–10022–87–Region 4]
Air Plan Approval; TN; Removal of
Vehicle I/M Program; Middle
Tennessee Area and Hamilton County
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Supplemental notice of
proposed rulemaking.
AGENCY:
Through this supplemental
notice of proposed rulemaking
(‘‘supplemental proposal’’ or
‘‘SNPRM’’), the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) is seeking
public comment on the Agency’s
additional and clarified technical
rationale related to the proposed
approval of Tennessee’s February 26,
2020, state implementation plan (SIP)
revisions requesting the removal of
Tennessee’s motor vehicle inspection
and maintenance (I/M) program
requirements for Davidson, Sumner,
Rutherford, Williamson, and Wilson
Counties in Tennessee (also known as
the Middle Tennessee Area) and
Hamilton County (also known as the
Chattanooga Area), from the federallyapproved SIP. Specifically, EPA
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
proposes to affirm that the Hamilton
County and Middle Tennessee areas
would continue to attain and maintain
the national ambient air quality
standards (NAAQS or standards) after
removal of the I/M program, and to rely
on an emissions inventory comparison
to inform its determination that both
areas would continue to attain and
maintain the ozone and carbon
monoxide (CO) NAAQS. EPA is further
proposing to conclude that the removal
of the I/M program will not interfere
with other states’ ability to attain and
maintain the 2008 ozone NAAQS under
the good neighbor provision of the
Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and
providing additional information related
to that conclusion. EPA is now taking
comment on the use of this comparison
and additional information in this
supplemental proposal.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before May 24, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04–
OAR–2019–0618 (Middle Tennessee
Area) or EPA–R04–OAR–2019–0619
(Hamilton County), at
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
EPA may publish any comment received
to its public dockets. Do not submit
electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video,
etc.) must be accompanied by a written
comment. The written comment is
considered the official comment and
should include discussion of all points
you wish to make. EPA will generally
not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
www2.epa.gov/dockets/commentingepa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Air Planning
and Implementation Branch, Air and
Radiation Division, Region 4, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 61
Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia
30303–8960. The telephone number is
(404) 562–9040. Ms. Benjamin can also
be reached via electronic mail at
benjamin.lynorae@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\22APP1.SGM
22APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 76 / Thursday, April 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules
I. Background for This Supplemental
Proposal
EPA published notices of proposed
rulemaking (NPRMs) on June 8, 2020,
and June 11, 2020, responding to
Tennessee’s February 26, 2020, SIP
revision requests 1 that EPA approve
removal of the I/M program 2 from the
Tennessee SIP for Hamilton County and
the Middle Tennessee Area,
respectively. Notably, Tennessee
requested that the Tennessee Air
Pollution Control Regulations (TAPCR)
1200–03–29 and Davidson County’s
Regulation 8 be removed from the
Tennessee SIP.3 See 85 FR 35037 and 85
FR 35607 for additional background.
The June 8, 2020, and June 11, 2020,
NPRMs (hereinafter referred to as the
June 2020 NPRMs) were based on EPA’s
proposed findings that the removal of
the I/M program from the Tennessee SIP
for the Middle Tennessee Area and for
Hamilton County satisfies section 110(l)
of the Clean Air Act (CAA) (i.e., will not
interfere with any applicable
requirement concerning attainment of
any NAAQS and reasonable further
progress, or any applicable requirements
of the CAA). Comments closed on the
NPRMs on July 8, 2020, and July 13,
2020, respectively.4
II. CAA Section 110(l) Analysis
EPA is clarifying that although
Tennessee included photochemical
modeling sensitivity analyses to provide
additional weight of evidence in its
February 26, 2020, SIP revisions, and
EPA described those analyses in the
June 2020 NPRMs, the photochemical
1 EPA officially received Tennessee’s I/M SIP
revisions on February 27, 2020.
2 Tennessee requested that EPA remove the
requirements for the Middle Tennessee Area and
Hamilton County to implement an I/M program as
part of the Early Action Compact (EAC) that was
approved by EPA into the non-regulatory portion of
the Tennessee SIP on August 26, 2005. See 70 FR
50199. With respect to the Middle Tennessee Area,
the I/M program was identified in the EAC as an
existing control strategy in the SIP.
3 Tenn. Code Ann. § 68–201–119(c) allows
Tennessee counties to retain local I/M programs
under certain conditions. As Tennessee is
requesting removal of the I/M program from the SIP,
EPA’s analysis in this supplemental proposal
assumes that no I/M program will be implemented
in the Middle Tennessee Area and Hamilton
County. However, this proposed action does not
preclude local I/M programs from being retained at
a local level outside of the SIP.
4 On January 19, 2021, former EPA Region 4
Administrator Mary Walker signed a document,
which EPA posted to its website at https://
www.epa.gov/sips-tn/epa-approval-tennesseesrequests-remove-inspection-and-maintenance-improgram-tennessee. EPA noted in that posting
‘‘Notwithstanding the fact that the EPA is posting
a pre-publication version, the final rule will not be
promulgated until published in the Federal
Register.’’ EPA will not publish that document in
the Federal Register; therefore, it will not result in
a final rule.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 Apr 21, 2021
Jkt 253001
modeling sensitivity analyses were not
required and were not intended as the
basis for EPA’s proposed determinations
that removal of the I/M program from
Hamilton County and the Middle
Tennessee Area would not interfere
with attainment or maintenance of the
NAAQS or any other applicable CAA
requirements. EPA’s proposed finding
that these removals satisfy CAA section
110(l) is based on the technical analyses
presented below, which are consistent
with and provide additional support for
the proposed conclusions set forth in
the June 2020 NPRMs.
EPA’s CAA section 110(l) noninterference demonstration supporting
its proposed approval of Tennessee’s
SIP revisions seeking removal of the I/
M program in Hamilton County and the
Middle Tennessee Area focuses on
ozone (through its precursors nitrogen
oxides (NOX) and volatile organic
compounds (VOC)) and CO, the criteria
pollutants addressed by I/M programs.5
I/M programs are not designed to
address lead and sulfur dioxide (SO2)
emissions, and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) is
captured generally through
consideration of NOX impacts. While
EPA considers NOX, VOCs, ammonia,
and SO2 as precursors for particulate
matter (PM), PM formation in Tennessee
is dominated by emissions of SO2,
reacting in the atmosphere to form
sulfates, and not by emissions of NOX,
VOCs, or ammonia. However, NOX and
VOC increases are considered through
the analysis for ozone. Although
Tennessee is NOX-limited 6 for ozone
formation, EPA also evaluated VOC
emissions to be environmentally
conservative.
EPA is using an emissions inventory
comparison to inform its determination
of whether Hamilton County and the
Middle Tennessee Area would continue
to attain and maintain the ozone and CO
NAAQS after removal of the I/M
program. Tennessee chose 2022 as the
future year for the State’s non5 The total suite of CAA criteria pollutants are
ozone (through the precursors NOX and VOCs), CO,
PM (and its precursors—NOX, VOCs, ammonia, and
SO2), lead, SO2, and NO2.
6 The term ‘‘NO limited’’ means that changes in
X
anthropogenic VOC emissions have little effect on
ozone formation. Control of NOX and VOC are
generally considered the most important
components of an ozone control strategy, and NOX
and VOC make up the largest controllable
contribution to ambient ozone formation. However,
Tennessee has shown a greater sensitivity of
ground-level ozone to NOX controls rather than
VOC controls. This is due to high biogenic VOC
emissions compared to anthropogenic VOC
emissions in Tennessee. Therefore, implemented
control measures have focused on the control of
NOX emissions.
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
21249
interference demonstrations.7
Tennessee’s non-interference
demonstration utilized EPA’s Motor
Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES)
modeling system, specifically
MOVES2014b, to estimate ozone
precursor emissions for mobile
sources—both on-road and non-road.8
In general, an emissions comparison
approach is a reasonable and valid
approach to determining whether an
area removing an I/M program can
maintain the NAAQS and is very similar
to the maintenance demonstrations that
support the redesignations of areas from
nonattainment to attainment and 10year maintenance plans that are
required for redesignated areas. EPA is
comparing future year emissions
(following the removal of the I/M
program) to emissions in a base year
with an attaining design value.9 If the
total future year emissions for the
relevant pollutant(s)/precursor(s) are
less than the total base year emissions,
EPA considers that to be a sufficient and
reasonable demonstration that the area
will maintain the NAAQS where the
base year emissions are at a level
sufficient to achieve the NAAQS. EPA is
proposing to conclude that these
analyses, as described below, provide
further support for the conclusions set
forth in the June 2020 NPRMs. CAA
section 110(l) demonstrations are casespecific and, in the case of the
Tennessee I/M SIP revisions, modeling
7 EPA notes that Tennessee did an analysis of
emissions between 2022 and 2030 without I/M to
determine the potential impact of on mobile
emissions. Tennessee’s analysis shows that in the
Middle Tennessee Area emissions decrease by 35
percent for NOX, 24 percent for VOC, and 30
percent for CO; and that in Hamilton County
emissions decrease by 45 percent for NOX, 33
percent for VOC, and 40 percent for CO. This
analysis is provided in the dockets for this
proposed rulemaking as weight of evidence.
8 EPA reviewed the MOVES2014b modeling that
was submitted by Tennessee to support the noninterference demonstration and concluded that the
State used appropriate assumptions for the model
and performed the modeling in accordance with
EPA’s MOVES Technical Guidance. See EPA’s July
2014 ‘‘Policy Guidance on the Use of MOVES2014
for State Implementation Plan Development,
Transportation Conformity, and Other Purposes,’’
available at https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?
Dockey=P100K4EB.pdf. MOVES2014b was the
latest version available at the time of Tennessee’s
SIP revision. See EPA’s November 2020 ‘‘Policy
Guidance on the Use of MOVES3 for State
Implementation Plan Development, Transportation
Conformity, General Conformity, and Other
Purposes (EPA–420–B–20–044),’’ available at
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/202011/documents/420b20044_0.pdf (noting that
‘‘[s]tates should use the latest version of MOVES
that is available at the time that a SIP is
developed.’’).
9 Design values are how EPA measures
compliance with the NAAQS.
E:\FR\FM\22APP1.SGM
22APP1
21250
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 76 / Thursday, April 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules
is not required to demonstrate noninterference.
NAAQS.10 As presented in Table 1, past
design values (i.e., prior to October 1,
2015) have demonstrated attainment of
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (i.e., the
applicable NAAQS at that time), and
A. Middle Tennessee Area
The Middle Tennessee Area is
currently in attainment with all
recent design values have demonstrated
attainment of the 2015 8-hour ozone
NAAQS in the Middle Tennessee Area.
TABLE 1—MIDDLE TENNESSEE AREA OZONE MONITOR DESIGN VALUES ***
Ozone design value, parts per billion (ppb)
Site name
2012–2014
Trinity Lane, Davidson County ........................................
Percy Priest, Davidson County ........................................
Rockland Recreation Area, Sumner County ...................
Fairview Middle School, Williamson County ....................
Cedars of Lebanon State Park, Wilson County ..............
2013–2015
(*)
70
72
66
67
2014–2016
(*)
65
67
62
62
2015–2017
66
67
67
61
64
2016–2018
** 65
64
66
60
63
66
67
66
60
(*)
2017–2019
65
65
66
60
(*)
* No valid design value due to incomplete data. The Cedars of Lebanon site had incomplete data in 2018 because there was an issue following the installation of a new monitoring shelter, and TDEC invalidated data collected before the issue was corrected. The East Health/Trinity
Lane site had incomplete data in 2013.
** In the June 11, 2020, NPRM (85 FR 35607), EPA inadvertently stated that the 2015–2017 design value was 66 ppb. The correct value is 65
ppb.
*** The Middle Tennessee Area was in attainment with the most stringent ozone NAAQS effective during the time period of the design value.
2012–2014 and 2013–2015 design values were attaining the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.075 parts per million (ppm). EPA notes that the
2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.070 ppm was not in effect until October 1, 2015, and all design values after this date attained the 2015 8-hour
ozone standard.
Also, design values for Tennessee for
the 1-hour (see Table 2) and 8-hour (see
Table 3) CO NAAQS in 2019 were 1.8
ppm and 1.6 ppm, respectively, which
are less than 20 percent of the CO
NAAQS for both the 1-hour and 8-hour
standards.
TABLE 2—MIDDLE TENNESSEE AREA CO MONITOR 1-HOUR DESIGN VALUES
CO 1-hr design value, ppm **
Site name
2012–2013
Alabama Ave. Station, Shelby County ....
Great Smoky Mountains NP—Look
Rock, Blount County ............................
Memphis NCORE site, Shelby County ....
Broadway, Davidson County ...................
Near Road, Davidson County ..................
Near Road Site at Southwest Tennessee
Community College, Shelby County ....
2013–2014
2014–2015
2015–2016
2016–2017
2017–2018
2018–2019
2.4
2.4
1.9
1.9
1.4
(*)
(*)
(*)
1.3
1.9
(*)
(*)
1.3
1.6
(*)
0.3
1.6
(*)
1.7
2.2
1.6
(*)
1.7
2.2
1.0
(*)
1.9
0.3
1.0
(*)
1.9
1.2
1.0
(*)
1.8
(*)
(*)
4.5
4.5
1.2
1.6
1.6
* Data are not available for all monitors and years due to CO monitor startups and shutdowns during this time period.
** The level of the 1971 1-hour NAAQS for CO is 35 ppm not to be exceeded more than once per year. The design value is evaluated over a
2-year period. Specifically, the design value is the higher of each year’s annual second maximum, non-overlapping 1-hour average. Only valid
design values are shown.
TABLE 3—MIDDLE TENNESSEE AREA CO MONITOR 8-HOUR DESIGN VALUES
CO 8-hr design value, ppm **
Site name
2012–2013
Alabama Ave. Station, Shelby County ....
Great Smoky Mountains NP—Look
Rock, Blount County ............................
Memphis NCORE site, Shelby County ....
Broadway, Davidson County ...................
Near Road, Davidson County ..................
Near Road Site at Southwest Tennessee
Community College, Shelby County ....
2013–2014
2014–2015
2015–2016
2016–2017
2017–2018
2018–2019
1.9
1.9
1.5
1.5
1.2
(*)
(*)
(*)
0.8
1.5
(*)
0.2
0.8
1.2
1.2
0.3
0.9
(*)
1.4
1.2
0.9
(*)
1.5
1.2
0.7
(*)
1.5
0.3
0.9
(*)
1.6
0.6
0.9
(*)
1.6
(*)
0.6
2.0
2.0
0.7
0.9
0.9
* Data are not available for all monitors and years due to CO monitor startups and shutdowns during this time period.
10 As mentioned in the June 8, 2020, NPRM, the
current design values in the Middle Tennessee Area
for PM, NO2, lead and SO2 are attaining the
NAAQS. In fact, the Middle Tennessee Area has
never been designated nonattainment for PM, NO2,
lead, or SO2. The increases in NOX and VOC
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 Apr 21, 2021
Jkt 253001
emissions without the I/M program in 2022 in
comparison to with the I/M program in 2022 are not
expected to cause a concern for PM, NO2, lead and
SO2 compliance in the Middle Tennessee Area. As
discussed more in this notice, no reductions or
emissions benefits are attributable to the I/M
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
program for PM, lead, and SO2 in the Middle
Tennessee Area, and the total emissions increases
in NOX (of which NO2 is a component) in 2022
without the program is less than the total emissions
in 2014.
E:\FR\FM\22APP1.SGM
22APP1
21251
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 76 / Thursday, April 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules
** The level of the 1971 8-hour NAAQS for CO is 9 ppm not to be exceeded more than once per year. The design value is evaluated over a
two-year period. Specifically, the design value is the higher of each year’s annual second maximum, non-overlapping 8-hour average. Only valid
design values are shown.
Monitoring data for 2020 are not yet
certified, but preliminary data remain
consistent with attainment of the ozone
and CO NAAQS.
To support a demonstration of noninterference for the Middle Tennessee
Area, EPA is using 2014 as an
attainment base year 11 and comparing
the total emissions of NOX, VOC, and
CO to the total emissions of these
pollutants in 2022, the first full year in
which the I/M program in the Middle
Tennessee Area is expected to no longer
exist. EPA chose 2014 because the 2014
point, non-road, and non-point data
provided in Tennessee’s February 26,
2020, submissions were the most
current data available to the State at the
time of the development of these SIP
revisions. The mobile emissions were
generated utilizing MOVES2014b, the
applicable mobile emissions model at
the time of the development of the SIP
revision. For consistent comparisons,
EPA obtained the 2014 mobile
emissions submitted by Tennessee from
EPA’s Emissions Inventory System
(EIS). Table 4 provides a summary for
the Middle Tennessee Area of the total
emissions for NOX, VOC, and CO in
2014; total emissions for NOX, VOC, and
CO in 2022 with the I/M program; and
total emissions for NOX, VOC, and CO
in 2022 without the I/M program.
TABLE 4—MIDDLE TENNESSEE AREA EMISSIONS (TONS PER YEAR (tpy))
2014 Emissions
2022 Projected emissions with I/M
2022 Projected emissions
without I/M
Sector
NOX
VOC
CO
NOX
VOC
CO
NOX
VOC
CO
Onroad .......................
Point ...........................
Nonroad ......................
Non-Point ...................
27,499
8,040
8,339
3,702
12,497
3,803
5,638
19,716
135,844
2,568
56,497
41,375
11,309
4,455
5,413
3,504
4,780
3,867
3,451
22,690
71,816
2,696
49,105
45,833
11,788
4,455
5,413
3,504
5,373
3,867
3,451
22,690
82,184
2,696
49,105
45,833
Total ....................
47,580
41,654
236,284
24,681
34,788
169,450
25,160
35,382
179,818
47.1%
15.1%
23.9%
Percent reduction from 2014 emissions:
As stated in EPA’s June 11, 2020,
NPRM, for 2022, the removal of the I/
M program accounts for a small increase
in NOX and VOC on-road emissions.
The difference in NOX emissions in
2022, with and without the I/M
program, is 479 tpy for NOX and 594 tpy
for VOC. However, the total NOX
emissions in 2022 without the I/M
program are 22,420 tpy less than the
total NOX emissions in 2014, and total
VOC emissions in 2022 without the I/M
program are 6,272 tpy less than the total
VOC emissions in 2014. For CO, the
difference in emissions in 2022, with
and without the I/M program, is 10,368
tpy. However, the total CO emissions
without the I/M program are 56,466 tpy
less than the total CO emissions in 2014.
Even without the I/M program in 2022,
emissions of NOX, VOC, and CO are
projected to decrease by 47.1 percent,
15.1 percent, and 23.9 percent,
respectively, from 2014 levels.
Because 2022 total emissions without
the I/M program are projected to be less
than the total 2014 emissions, EPA
proposes to conclude that removal of
the I/M program in the Middle
Tennessee Area will not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of the
NAAQS or any other applicable CAA
requirements. Additionally, as shown in
Table 1, the highest ozone design value
associated with 2014 is 6 ppb above the
most recently available ozone design
value for 2017–2019, thereby providing
an additional buffer, and the 2017–2019
ozone design value is at least 4 ppb
below the level of the 2015 8-hour
ozone NAAQS of 70 ppb. EPA is
proposing to conclude that it is
reasonable to expect emissions that are
22,420 tpy less than 2014 NOX
emissions and 6,272 tpy less than 2014
VOC emissions would not cause ozone
levels to exceed the current 2015 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. Also, EPA is proposing
to conclude that it is reasonable to
expect that emissions that are 56,466
tpy less than 2014 CO emissions would
not cause CO levels to exceed either the
1-hour or 8-hour CO NAAQS.
11 As shown in Table 1 above, 2014 is included
as one of the years associated with attaining design
values for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (the
applicable NAAQS in 2014). Although the 2014 4th
highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone concentration
is 71 ppb (i.e., higher than the level of the 2015 8hour ozone NAAQS) at the Percy Priest Dam
monitor, EPA believes that 2014 is an acceptable
base year given the magnitude of the NOX and VOC
emissions reductions from 2014 to 2022 and the fact
that the 2014 4th max was only one ppb higher than
the level of the 2015 8-hour ozone standard. https://
www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data. EPA also
notes that the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS was not
in effect until October 1, 2015.
12 As mentioned in the June 8, 2020, NPRM, the
current design values in Hamilton County for PM,
NO2, lead, and SO2 are attaining the NAAQS. In
fact, Hamilton County has never been designated
nonattainment for NO2, lead, or SO2. Hamilton
County was previously designated nonattainment
for the 1997 p.m. NAAQS but has since attained
that NAAQS and is still in compliance. The
increases in NOX and VOC emissions without the
I/M program in 2022 in comparison to with the I/
M program in 2022 are not expected to cause a
concern for PM, NO2, lead and SO2 compliance in
Hamilton County. As discussed more in this notice,
no reductions or emissions benefits are attributable
to the I/M program for PM, lead, and SO2 in
Hamilton County, and the total emissions increases
in NOX (of which NO2 is a component) in 2022
without the program is less than the total emissions
in 2014.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 Apr 21, 2021
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
B. Hamilton County
Hamilton County is currently in
attainment with all NAAQS.12 As
presented in Table 5, past design values
(i.e., prior to October 1, 2015) have
demonstrated attainment of the 2008 8hour ozone NAAQS (i.e., the applicable
NAAQS at that time), and recent design
values have demonstrated attainment of
the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS in
Hamilton County.
E:\FR\FM\22APP1.SGM
22APP1
21252
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 76 / Thursday, April 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 5—HAMILTON COUNTY OZONE MONITOR DESIGN VALUES
Ozone design value, ppb *
Site name
2012–2014
Eastside Utility .................................................................
Soddy Daisy .....................................................................
2013–2015
69
67
2014–2016
66
64
2015–2017
68
65
67
65
2016–2018
2017–2019
66
64
64
64
* Hamilton County was in attainment with the most stringent ozone NAAQS effective during the time period of the design value. 2012–2014
and 2013–2015 design values were attaining the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.075 ppm. EPA notes that the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS of
0.070 ppm was not in effect until October 1, 2015, and all design values after this date attained the 2015 standard.
The Chattanooga Metropolitan
Statistical Area (of which Hamilton
County is a part) is not required to
operate a CO monitor, and there is no
historical CO monitoring data in
Hamilton County. The highest CO
design values in Tennessee during
2018–2019 for the 1-hour and 8-hour CO
NAAQS were both measured at the
Nashville Near Road site, and were 1.6
ppm (see Table 2 above) and 1.8 ppm
(see Table 3 above), respectively, which
are less than 20 percent of the CO
NAAQS for both the 1-hour and 8-hour
standards.
To support a demonstration of noninterference for Hamilton County, EPA
is using 2014 as an attainment base
year 13 and comparing the total
emissions of NOX, VOC, and CO to the
total emissions of these pollutants in
2022, the first full year in which the I/
M program in Hamilton County is
expected to no longer exist. EPA chose
2014 because the 2014 point, non-road,
and non-point data provided in
Tennessee’s February 26, 2020,
submissions, were the most current data
available to the State at the time of the
development of these SIP revisions. The
mobile emissions were generated
utilizing MOVES2014b, the applicable
mobile emissions model at the time of
the development of the SIP revision. For
consistent comparisons, EPA obtained
the 2014 mobile emissions submitted by
Tennessee from EPA’s EIS. Table 6
provides a summary for Hamilton
County of the total emissions for NOX,
VOC, and CO in 2014; total emissions
for NOX, VOC, and CO in 2022 with the
I/M program; and total emissions for
NOX, VOC, and CO in 2022 without the
I/M program.
TABLE 6—HAMILTON COUNTY AREA EMISSIONS
2014 Emissions
2022 Projected emissions with I/M
2022 Projected emissions
without I/M
Sector
NOX
VOC
CO
NOX
VOC
CO
NOX
VOC
CO
Onroad .......................
Point ...........................
Nonroad ......................
Non-Point ...................
6,659
1,024
3,252
2,037
3,173
664
1,587
5,212
35,539
458
13,594
7,038
4,613
1,314
2,220
1,220
2,127
825
935
5,744
23,875
566
11,600
7,007
4,712
1,314
2,220
1,220
2,273
825
935
5,777
26,854
566
11,600
7,007
Total ....................
12,972
10,636
56,629
9,367
9,632
43,049
9,467
9,778
46,028
27.0%
8.1%
18.7%
Percent reduction from 2014 emissions:
As stated in the June 8, 2020, NPRM,
for 2022, the removal of the I/M
program accounts for a small increase in
NOX and VOC on-road emissions. The
difference in emissions in 2022, with
and without the I/M program, is 100 tpy
for NOX and 146 tpy for VOC. However,
the total NOX emissions in 2022 without
the I/M program are 3,505 tpy less than
the total NOX emissions in 2014, and
the total VOC emissions in 2022 without
the I/M program are 858 tpy less than
the total VOC emissions in 2014. For
CO, the difference in emissions in 2022
with and without the I/M program is
2,979 tpy. However, the total CO
emissions without the I/M program are
10,061 tpy less than the total CO
emissions in 2014. Even without the I/
M program in 2022, emissions of NOX,
VOC, and CO are expected to decrease
by 27.0 percent, 8.1 percent and 18.7
percent, respectively from 2014 levels.
Because 2022 total emissions without
the I/M program are less than total 2014
base year emissions, EPA proposes to
conclude that removal of the I/M
program in Hamilton County will not
interfere with attainment or
maintenance of the NAAQS or any other
applicable requirement of the CAA.
Additionally, as shown in Table 5, the
highest ozone design value associated
with 2014 is 5 ppb above the most
recently available ozone design value
for 2017–2019, thereby providing an
additional buffer, and the 2017–2019
ozone design value is 6 ppb below the
level of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS
of 70 ppb. EPA is proposing to conclude
that it is reasonable to expect emissions
that are 3,505 tpy less than 2014 NOX
emissions and 858 tpy less than 2014
VOC emissions would not cause ozone
levels to exceed the current 2015 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. Also, EPA is proposing
to conclude that it is reasonable to
expect that emissions that are 10,061
tpy less than 2014 CO emissions would
not cause CO levels to exceed either the
1-hour or 8-hour CO NAAQS.
13 As shown in Table 5 above, 2014 is one of the
years associated with attaining design values for the
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.075 ppm. The 2008
8-hour ozone NAAQS was the applicable NAAQS
for the 2015 ozone season. EPA notes that the 2015
8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.070 ppm was not in
effect until October 1, 2015.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 Apr 21, 2021
Jkt 253001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
C. Interstate Ozone Transport
EPA proposes to conclude that the
changes that would be approved by EPA
in this action do not interfere with other
states’ ability to attain and maintain the
2008 ozone NAAQS under the good
neighbor provision, CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). EPA has previously
found that the 2016 Cross-State Air
Pollution Rule (CSAPR) Update fully
resolved Tennessee’s good neighbor (or
E:\FR\FM\22APP1.SGM
22APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 76 / Thursday, April 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules
‘‘transport’’) obligations for the 2008
ozone NAAQS. The CSAPR Update
addresses NOX pollution transported to
other states that significantly
contributes to nonattainment or
interferes with maintenance of the 2008
ozone NAAQS.14 Among other things,
the CSAPR Update requires reductions
of NOX from power plants during the
annual ozone season from May 1 to
September 30 in 22 states, including
Tennessee. Although for most covered
states, EPA found the CSAPR Update
may only partially address the covered
states’ good neighbor obligations, EPA
found the rule fully addresses
Tennessee’s good neighbor obligation
for this NAAQS. See 81 FR 74504,
74540. That conclusion was based on an
assessment of air quality in the eastern
U.S. with implementation of the CSAPR
Update, and it accounted for emissions
from all source sectors, including
mobile sources.
The CSAPR Update was reviewed and
generally upheld in Wisconsin v. EPA,
983 F.3d 303 (D.C. Cir. 2019). The D.C.
Circuit remanded the rule without
vacatur because, for states other than
Tennessee, the rule did not provide a
full remedy by the next relevant
attainment date under CAA section 181.
Thus, the CSAPR Update remains in
effect. EPA notes that the aspects of the
CSAPR Update affecting Tennessee
were not challenged in the litigation
over the rule and are not affected by the
remand of the rule in Wisconsin.
EPA believes the projected increase in
mobile source emissions from removal
of Tennessee’s I/M program does not
affect EPA’s prior finding in the CSAPR
Update that the state of Tennessee has
no further interstate transport
obligations for the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. As discussed in the sections
above, in this supplemental notice, EPA
has analyzed the impacts of removing
the I/M program in the Middle
Tennessee Area and Hamilton County
and proposes to find that the largest
projected increase in mobile source
emissions in these areas would result in
a combined projected increase of 579
tons in 2022, or a 2 percent increase in
14 The
CSAPR Update is a rule that followed the
original CSAPR rulemaking in 2011. CSAPR
requires certain states in the eastern half of the U.S.
to improve air quality by reducing power plant
emissions of NOX and SO2 that cross state lines and
contribute to smog and soot pollution in downwind
states. On September 7, 2016, EPA revised the
CSAPR ozone season NOX program by finalizing an
update to CSAPR for the 2008 ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standards, known as the
CSAPR Update. The CSAPR Update ozone season
NOX program was designed to largely replace the
original CSAPR ozone season NOX program starting
on May 1, 2017, and further reduce summertime
NOX emissions from power plants in the eastern
U.S.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 Apr 21, 2021
Jkt 253001
total anthropogenic NOX emissions in
these areas.15 Therefore, the net change
in total anthropogenic emissions across
the entire state of Tennessee would be
much less than the projected 2 percent
increase in NOX emissions for these
areas.
On October 30, 2020, in the notice of
proposed rulemaking for the Revised
CSAPR Update, which addresses the
Wisconsin remand, EPA released and
accepted public comment on updated
2023 modeling that used a 2016
emissions platform developed under the
EPA/Multi-Jurisdictional Organization
(MJO)/state collaborative project.16 In
this modeling, EPA found that the
highest contribution in 2023 from the
entire state of Tennessee to any
downwind receptor identified as having
a nonattainment or maintenance
problem for the 2008 ozone standard is
projected to be 0.32 ppb. This amount
of contribution is well below the 1
percent of the NAAQS threshold used in
EPA’s good neighbor framework for
determining whether an upwind state
contributes to a nonattainment or
maintenance receptor under the 2008
ozone NAAQS (i.e., 0.75 ppb).17
The small amount of projected
increase in NOX emissions in Tennessee
as a result of this action, combined with
the fact that the highest modeled
contributions from this state are well
below the 1 percent threshold, support
the conclusion that the projected
increase in mobile source emissions
does not affect EPA’s prior decision that
Tennessee has no remaining interstate
transport obligations under the 2008
ozone NAAQS.
This supplemental proposed action
does not make any finding regarding
Tennessee’s interstate transport
obligations for the 2015 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. EPA has not yet taken final
action on Tennessee’s good neighbor
SIP submission for the 2015 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.
III. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, EPA is proposing to
include in a final EPA rule amended
15 In 2022, emissions of VOC are projected to
increase by 740 tons, or a 1.7 percent increase in
total anthropogenic VOC emissions. In the context
of interstate ozone transport, EPA focuses on NOX
as the key ozone precursor pollutant.
16 See 85 FR 68964, 68981. The results of this
modeling are included in a spreadsheet in the
docket for this action. The underlying modeling
files are available for public review in the docket
for the Revised CSAPR Update (EPA–HQ–OAR–
2020–0272).
17 On March 15, 2022, Administrator Michael S.
Regan signed the final Revised CSAPR Update. The
final action relies on the same modeling conducted
for the proposed rulemaking and described here.
See https://www.epa.gov/csapr/revised-cross-stateair-pollution-rule-update.
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
21253
regulatory text that includes
incorporation by reference. EPA is
proposing to remove Chapter 1200–3–
29—‘‘Light Duty Vehicle Inspection and
Maintenance’’ located in Table 1—EPA
Approved Tennessee Regulations, and
Regulation No. 8—‘‘Regulation of
Emissions from Light-Duty Motor
Vehicles through Mandatory Vehicle
Inspection and Maintenance Program,’’
located in Table 5—EPA Approved
Nashville-Davidson County, Regulations
from the Tennessee SIP, which is
incorporated by reference in accordance
with the requirements of 1 CFR 51.5.
EPA has made and will continue to
make the SIP generally available
through www.regulations.gov and at the
EPA Region 4 Office (please contact the
person identified in the ‘‘For Further
Information Contact’’ section of this
preamble for more information).
IV. Supplemental Proposed Actions
In its June 2020 NPRMs, EPA
originally proposed to approve
Tennessee’s February 26, 2020, SIP
revisions to remove the I/M programs
for Hamilton County and the Middle
Tennessee Area from Tennessee’s SIP.
EPA continues to propose to find that
the removal of the I/M program
requirements for Hamilton County and
Middle Tennessee are consistent with
CAA section 110(l). Additionally, EPA
continues to propose to approve the
removal of the I/M requirements for
Hamilton County and the Middle
Tennessee Area from the Tennessee SIP.
However, through this SNPRM, EPA is
proposing to rely on an additional and
clarified technical rationale related to
the proposed approval of Tennessee’s
February 26, 2020 SIP revisions.
Specifically, EPA proposes to rely on an
emissions inventory comparison to
inform its determination of whether
Hamilton County and the Middle
Tennessee Area would continue to
attain and maintain the ozone and CO
NAAQS and further affirms that both
areas would continue to attain and
maintain the other NAAQS after
removal of the I/M program. EPA is
further proposing to conclude that the
proposed removal of the I/M program
will not interfere with other states’
ability to attain and maintain the 2008
ozone NAAQS under the good neighbor
provision and providing information
related to that conclusion. EPA is
requesting comment on the use of
additional and clarified technical
analysis in this supplemental proposal.
V. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve SIP submissions
E:\FR\FM\22APP1.SGM
22APP1
21254
Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 76 / Thursday, April 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules
that comply with the provisions of the
Act and applicable Federal regulations.
See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. These actions merely propose
to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and do not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
these proposed actions:
• Are not significant regulatory
actions subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Do not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Are certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Do 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);
• Do not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Are not economically significant
regulatory actions based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Are not significant regulatory
actions subject to Executive Order
13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• Are not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Do not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The SIP is not approved to apply on
any Indian reservation land or in any
other area where EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal
implications as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), nor will it impose substantial
direct costs on tribal governments or
preempt tribal law.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:20 Apr 21, 2021
Jkt 253001
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
posted without change to https://
www.regulations.gov/, including any
personal information provided. For
detailed instructions on sending
comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the
‘‘Written Comments’’ heading of the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephen Krabbe, Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 7 Office, Air
Quality and Planning Branch, 11201
Renner Boulevard, Lenexa, Kansas
66219; telephone number: (913) 551–
7991 or by email at krabbe.stephen@
epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to EPA.
40 CFR Parts 52 and 70
Table of Contents
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: April 13, 2021.
John Blevins,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2021–08320 Filed 4–21–21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
[EPA–R07–OAR–2021–0266; FRL–10022–
68–Region 7]
Air Plan Approval; Iowa; State
Implementation Plan and State Plans
for Designated Facilities and
Pollutants
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
revisions to the Iowa State
Implementation Plan (SIP) and is also
proposing to approve revisions to the
Iowa Operating Permit Program. The
revisions include updating definitions,
regulatory references, requiring facilities
to submit electronic emissions
inventory information under the state’s
Title V permitting program, and
updating references for the most recent
federally approved minimum
specifications and quality assurance
procedures for performance evaluations
of continuous monitoring systems. EPA
is also proposing to approve previous
revisions to the Operating Permit
Program that allow for electronic
document submission that meet EPA’s
requirements. These revisions will not
impact air quality and will ensure
consistency between the state and
Federally approved rules.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before May 24, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07–
OAR–2021–0266 to https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the Docket ID No. for this
rulemaking. Comments received will be
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
I. Written Comments
II. What is being addressed in this document?
III. What SIP revisions are being proposed by
EPA?
IV. What operating permit plan revisions are
being proposed by EPA?
V. Have the requirements for approval of a
SIP and the operating permits program
revisions been met?
VI. What actions are proposed?
VII. Incorporation by Reference
VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Written Comments
Submit your comments, identified by
Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2021–
0266, at https://www.regulations.gov.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from Regulations.gov.
The EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not
submit electronically any information
you consider to be Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
II. What is being addressed in this
document?
EPA is proposing to approve a
submission from the State of Iowa to
E:\FR\FM\22APP1.SGM
22APP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 76 (Thursday, April 22, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 21248-21254]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08320]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2019-0618 and EPA-R04-OAR-2019-0619; FRL-10022-87-Region
4]
Air Plan Approval; TN; Removal of Vehicle I/M Program; Middle
Tennessee Area and Hamilton County
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Through this supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking
(``supplemental proposal'' or ``SNPRM''), the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is seeking public comment on the Agency's additional and
clarified technical rationale related to the proposed approval of
Tennessee's February 26, 2020, state implementation plan (SIP)
revisions requesting the removal of Tennessee's motor vehicle
inspection and maintenance (I/M) program requirements for Davidson,
Sumner, Rutherford, Williamson, and Wilson Counties in Tennessee (also
known as the Middle Tennessee Area) and Hamilton County (also known as
the Chattanooga Area), from the federally-approved SIP. Specifically,
EPA proposes to affirm that the Hamilton County and Middle Tennessee
areas would continue to attain and maintain the national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS or standards) after removal of the I/M
program, and to rely on an emissions inventory comparison to inform its
determination that both areas would continue to attain and maintain the
ozone and carbon monoxide (CO) NAAQS. EPA is further proposing to
conclude that the removal of the I/M program will not interfere with
other states' ability to attain and maintain the 2008 ozone NAAQS under
the good neighbor provision of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and
providing additional information related to that conclusion. EPA is now
taking comment on the use of this comparison and additional information
in this supplemental proposal.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before May 24, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2019-0618 (Middle Tennessee Area) or EPA-R04-OAR-2019-0619
(Hamilton County), at www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment
received to its public dockets. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Air Planning
and Implementation Branch, Air and Radiation Division, Region 4, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. The telephone number is (404) 562-9040. Ms. Benjamin can
also be reached via electronic mail at [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 21249]]
I. Background for This Supplemental Proposal
EPA published notices of proposed rulemaking (NPRMs) on June 8,
2020, and June 11, 2020, responding to Tennessee's February 26, 2020,
SIP revision requests \1\ that EPA approve removal of the I/M program
\2\ from the Tennessee SIP for Hamilton County and the Middle Tennessee
Area, respectively. Notably, Tennessee requested that the Tennessee Air
Pollution Control Regulations (TAPCR) 1200-03-29 and Davidson County's
Regulation 8 be removed from the Tennessee SIP.\3\ See 85 FR 35037 and
85 FR 35607 for additional background. The June 8, 2020, and June 11,
2020, NPRMs (hereinafter referred to as the June 2020 NPRMs) were based
on EPA's proposed findings that the removal of the I/M program from the
Tennessee SIP for the Middle Tennessee Area and for Hamilton County
satisfies section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) (i.e., will not
interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment of any
NAAQS and reasonable further progress, or any applicable requirements
of the CAA). Comments closed on the NPRMs on July 8, 2020, and July 13,
2020, respectively.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ EPA officially received Tennessee's I/M SIP revisions on
February 27, 2020.
\2\ Tennessee requested that EPA remove the requirements for the
Middle Tennessee Area and Hamilton County to implement an I/M
program as part of the Early Action Compact (EAC) that was approved
by EPA into the non-regulatory portion of the Tennessee SIP on
August 26, 2005. See 70 FR 50199. With respect to the Middle
Tennessee Area, the I/M program was identified in the EAC as an
existing control strategy in the SIP.
\3\ Tenn. Code Ann. Sec. 68-201-119(c) allows Tennessee
counties to retain local I/M programs under certain conditions. As
Tennessee is requesting removal of the I/M program from the SIP,
EPA's analysis in this supplemental proposal assumes that no I/M
program will be implemented in the Middle Tennessee Area and
Hamilton County. However, this proposed action does not preclude
local I/M programs from being retained at a local level outside of
the SIP.
\4\ On January 19, 2021, former EPA Region 4 Administrator Mary
Walker signed a document, which EPA posted to its website at https://www.epa.gov/sips-tn/epa-approval-tennessees-requests-remove-inspection-and-maintenance-im-program-tennessee. EPA noted in that
posting ``Notwithstanding the fact that the EPA is posting a pre-
publication version, the final rule will not be promulgated until
published in the Federal Register.'' EPA will not publish that
document in the Federal Register; therefore, it will not result in a
final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. CAA Section 110(l) Analysis
EPA is clarifying that although Tennessee included photochemical
modeling sensitivity analyses to provide additional weight of evidence
in its February 26, 2020, SIP revisions, and EPA described those
analyses in the June 2020 NPRMs, the photochemical modeling sensitivity
analyses were not required and were not intended as the basis for EPA's
proposed determinations that removal of the I/M program from Hamilton
County and the Middle Tennessee Area would not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS or any other applicable CAA
requirements. EPA's proposed finding that these removals satisfy CAA
section 110(l) is based on the technical analyses presented below,
which are consistent with and provide additional support for the
proposed conclusions set forth in the June 2020 NPRMs.
EPA's CAA section 110(l) non-interference demonstration supporting
its proposed approval of Tennessee's SIP revisions seeking removal of
the I/M program in Hamilton County and the Middle Tennessee Area
focuses on ozone (through its precursors nitrogen oxides
(NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOC)) and CO, the
criteria pollutants addressed by I/M programs.\5\ I/M programs are not
designed to address lead and sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions,
and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) is captured generally through
consideration of NOX impacts. While EPA considers
NOX, VOCs, ammonia, and SO2 as precursors for
particulate matter (PM), PM formation in Tennessee is dominated by
emissions of SO2, reacting in the atmosphere to form
sulfates, and not by emissions of NOX, VOCs, or ammonia.
However, NOX and VOC increases are considered through the
analysis for ozone. Although Tennessee is NOX-limited \6\
for ozone formation, EPA also evaluated VOC emissions to be
environmentally conservative.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The total suite of CAA criteria pollutants are ozone
(through the precursors NOX and VOCs), CO, PM (and its
precursors--NOX, VOCs, ammonia, and SO2),
lead, SO2, and NO2.
\6\ The term ``NOX limited'' means that changes in
anthropogenic VOC emissions have little effect on ozone formation.
Control of NOX and VOC are generally considered the most
important components of an ozone control strategy, and
NOX and VOC make up the largest controllable contribution
to ambient ozone formation. However, Tennessee has shown a greater
sensitivity of ground-level ozone to NOX controls rather
than VOC controls. This is due to high biogenic VOC emissions
compared to anthropogenic VOC emissions in Tennessee. Therefore,
implemented control measures have focused on the control of
NOX emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA is using an emissions inventory comparison to inform its
determination of whether Hamilton County and the Middle Tennessee Area
would continue to attain and maintain the ozone and CO NAAQS after
removal of the I/M program. Tennessee chose 2022 as the future year for
the State's non-interference demonstrations.\7\ Tennessee's non-
interference demonstration utilized EPA's Motor Vehicle Emission
Simulator (MOVES) modeling system, specifically MOVES2014b, to estimate
ozone precursor emissions for mobile sources--both on-road and non-
road.\8\ In general, an emissions comparison approach is a reasonable
and valid approach to determining whether an area removing an I/M
program can maintain the NAAQS and is very similar to the maintenance
demonstrations that support the redesignations of areas from
nonattainment to attainment and 10-year maintenance plans that are
required for redesignated areas. EPA is comparing future year emissions
(following the removal of the I/M program) to emissions in a base year
with an attaining design value.\9\ If the total future year emissions
for the relevant pollutant(s)/precursor(s) are less than the total base
year emissions, EPA considers that to be a sufficient and reasonable
demonstration that the area will maintain the NAAQS where the base year
emissions are at a level sufficient to achieve the NAAQS. EPA is
proposing to conclude that these analyses, as described below, provide
further support for the conclusions set forth in the June 2020 NPRMs.
CAA section 110(l) demonstrations are case-specific and, in the case of
the Tennessee I/M SIP revisions, modeling
[[Page 21250]]
is not required to demonstrate non-interference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ EPA notes that Tennessee did an analysis of emissions
between 2022 and 2030 without I/M to determine the potential impact
of on mobile emissions. Tennessee's analysis shows that in the
Middle Tennessee Area emissions decrease by 35 percent for
NOX, 24 percent for VOC, and 30 percent for CO; and that
in Hamilton County emissions decrease by 45 percent for
NOX, 33 percent for VOC, and 40 percent for CO. This
analysis is provided in the dockets for this proposed rulemaking as
weight of evidence.
\8\ EPA reviewed the MOVES2014b modeling that was submitted by
Tennessee to support the non-interference demonstration and
concluded that the State used appropriate assumptions for the model
and performed the modeling in accordance with EPA's MOVES Technical
Guidance. See EPA's July 2014 ``Policy Guidance on the Use of
MOVES2014 for State Implementation Plan Development, Transportation
Conformity, and Other Purposes,'' available at https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P100K4EB.pdf. MOVES2014b was the
latest version available at the time of Tennessee's SIP revision.
See EPA's November 2020 ``Policy Guidance on the Use of MOVES3 for
State Implementation Plan Development, Transportation Conformity,
General Conformity, and Other Purposes (EPA-420-B-20-044),''
available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2020-11/documents/420b20044_0.pdf (noting that ``[s]tates should use the
latest version of MOVES that is available at the time that a SIP is
developed.'').
\9\ Design values are how EPA measures compliance with the
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Middle Tennessee Area
The Middle Tennessee Area is currently in attainment with all
NAAQS.\10\ As presented in Table 1, past design values (i.e., prior to
October 1, 2015) have demonstrated attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS (i.e., the applicable NAAQS at that time), and recent design
values have demonstrated attainment of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS in
the Middle Tennessee Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ As mentioned in the June 8, 2020, NPRM, the current design
values in the Middle Tennessee Area for PM, NO2, lead and
SO2 are attaining the NAAQS. In fact, the Middle
Tennessee Area has never been designated nonattainment for PM,
NO2, lead, or SO2. The increases in
NOX and VOC emissions without the I/M program in 2022 in
comparison to with the I/M program in 2022 are not expected to cause
a concern for PM, NO2, lead and SO2 compliance
in the Middle Tennessee Area. As discussed more in this notice, no
reductions or emissions benefits are attributable to the I/M program
for PM, lead, and SO2 in the Middle Tennessee Area, and
the total emissions increases in NOX (of which
NO2 is a component) in 2022 without the program is less
than the total emissions in 2014.
Table 1--Middle Tennessee Area Ozone Monitor Design Values ***
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ozone design value, parts per billion (ppb)
Site name -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012-2014 2013-2015 2014-2016 2015-2017 2016-2018 2017-2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trinity Lane, Davidson County..... (*) (*) 66 ** 65 66 65
Percy Priest, Davidson County..... 70 65 67 64 67 65
Rockland Recreation Area, Sumner 72 67 67 66 66 66
County...........................
Fairview Middle School, Williamson 66 62 61 60 60 60
County...........................
Cedars of Lebanon State Park, 67 62 64 63 (*) (*)
Wilson County....................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* No valid design value due to incomplete data. The Cedars of Lebanon site had incomplete data in 2018 because
there was an issue following the installation of a new monitoring shelter, and TDEC invalidated data collected
before the issue was corrected. The East Health/Trinity Lane site had incomplete data in 2013.
** In the June 11, 2020, NPRM (85 FR 35607), EPA inadvertently stated that the 2015-2017 design value was 66
ppb. The correct value is 65 ppb.
*** The Middle Tennessee Area was in attainment with the most stringent ozone NAAQS effective during the time
period of the design value. 2012-2014 and 2013-2015 design values were attaining the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS
of 0.075 parts per million (ppm). EPA notes that the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.070 ppm was not in effect
until October 1, 2015, and all design values after this date attained the 2015 8-hour ozone standard.
Also, design values for Tennessee for the 1-hour (see Table 2) and
8-hour (see Table 3) CO NAAQS in 2019 were 1.8 ppm and 1.6 ppm,
respectively, which are less than 20 percent of the CO NAAQS for both
the 1-hour and 8-hour standards.
Table 2--Middle Tennessee Area CO Monitor 1-Hour Design Values
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CO 1-hr design value, ppm **
Site name ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama Ave. Station, Shelby County.......................... 2.4 2.4 1.9 1.9 1.4 (*) (*)
Great Smoky Mountains NP--Look Rock, Blount County........... (*) (*) 0.3 2.2 2.2 0.3 1.2
Memphis NCORE site, Shelby County............................ 1.3 1.3 1.6 1.6 1.0 1.0 1.0
Broadway, Davidson County.................................... 1.9 1.6 (*) (*) (*) (*) (*)
Near Road, Davidson County................................... (*) (*) 1.7 1.7 1.9 1.9 1.8
Near Road Site at Southwest Tennessee Community College, (*) (*) 4.5 4.5 1.2 1.6 1.6
Shelby County...............................................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Data are not available for all monitors and years due to CO monitor startups and shutdowns during this time period.
** The level of the 1971 1-hour NAAQS for CO is 35 ppm not to be exceeded more than once per year. The design value is evaluated over a 2-year period.
Specifically, the design value is the higher of each year's annual second maximum, non-overlapping 1-hour average. Only valid design values are shown.
Table 3--Middle Tennessee Area CO Monitor 8-Hour Design Values
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CO 8-hr design value, ppm **
Site name ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama Ave. Station, Shelby County.......................... 1.9 1.9 1.5 1.5 1.2 (*) (*)
Great Smoky Mountains NP--Look Rock, Blount County........... (*) 0.2 0.3 1.2 1.2 0.3 0.6
Memphis NCORE site, Shelby County............................ 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.9
Broadway, Davidson County.................................... 1.5 1.2 (*) (*) (*) (*) (*)
Near Road, Davidson County................................... (*) 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.6
Near Road Site at Southwest Tennessee Community College, (*) 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.7 0.9 0.9
Shelby County...............................................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Data are not available for all monitors and years due to CO monitor startups and shutdowns during this time period.
[[Page 21251]]
** The level of the 1971 8-hour NAAQS for CO is 9 ppm not to be exceeded more than once per year. The design value is evaluated over a two-year period.
Specifically, the design value is the higher of each year's annual second maximum, non-overlapping 8-hour average. Only valid design values are shown.
Monitoring data for 2020 are not yet certified, but preliminary
data remain consistent with attainment of the ozone and CO NAAQS.
To support a demonstration of non-interference for the Middle
Tennessee Area, EPA is using 2014 as an attainment base year \11\ and
comparing the total emissions of NOX, VOC, and CO to the
total emissions of these pollutants in 2022, the first full year in
which the I/M program in the Middle Tennessee Area is expected to no
longer exist. EPA chose 2014 because the 2014 point, non-road, and non-
point data provided in Tennessee's February 26, 2020, submissions were
the most current data available to the State at the time of the
development of these SIP revisions. The mobile emissions were generated
utilizing MOVES2014b, the applicable mobile emissions model at the time
of the development of the SIP revision. For consistent comparisons, EPA
obtained the 2014 mobile emissions submitted by Tennessee from EPA's
Emissions Inventory System (EIS). Table 4 provides a summary for the
Middle Tennessee Area of the total emissions for NOX, VOC,
and CO in 2014; total emissions for NOX, VOC, and CO in 2022
with the I/M program; and total emissions for NOX, VOC, and
CO in 2022 without the I/M program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ As shown in Table 1 above, 2014 is included as one of the
years associated with attaining design values for the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS (the applicable NAAQS in 2014). Although the 2014 4th
highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone concentration is 71 ppb (i.e.,
higher than the level of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS) at the Percy
Priest Dam monitor, EPA believes that 2014 is an acceptable base
year given the magnitude of the NOX and VOC emissions
reductions from 2014 to 2022 and the fact that the 2014 4th max was
only one ppb higher than the level of the 2015 8-hour ozone
standard. https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data. EPA also
notes that the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS was not in effect until
October 1, 2015.
Table 4--Middle Tennessee Area Emissions (Tons per Year (tpy))
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014 Emissions 2022 Projected emissions with I/M 2022 Projected emissions without
------------------------------------------------------------------------ I/M
Sector -----------------------------------
NOX VOC CO NOX VOC CO NOX VOC CO
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onroad...................................... 27,499 12,497 135,844 11,309 4,780 71,816 11,788 5,373 82,184
Point....................................... 8,040 3,803 2,568 4,455 3,867 2,696 4,455 3,867 2,696
Nonroad..................................... 8,339 5,638 56,497 5,413 3,451 49,105 5,413 3,451 49,105
Non-Point................................... 3,702 19,716 41,375 3,504 22,690 45,833 3,504 22,690 45,833
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................... 47,580 41,654 236,284 24,681 34,788 169,450 25,160 35,382 179,818
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent reduction from 2014 emissions: 47.1% 15.1% 23.9%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated in EPA's June 11, 2020, NPRM, for 2022, the removal of
the I/M program accounts for a small increase in NOX and VOC
on-road emissions. The difference in NOX emissions in 2022,
with and without the I/M program, is 479 tpy for NOX and 594
tpy for VOC. However, the total NOX emissions in 2022
without the I/M program are 22,420 tpy less than the total
NOX emissions in 2014, and total VOC emissions in 2022
without the I/M program are 6,272 tpy less than the total VOC emissions
in 2014. For CO, the difference in emissions in 2022, with and without
the I/M program, is 10,368 tpy. However, the total CO emissions without
the I/M program are 56,466 tpy less than the total CO emissions in
2014. Even without the I/M program in 2022, emissions of
NOX, VOC, and CO are projected to decrease by 47.1 percent,
15.1 percent, and 23.9 percent, respectively, from 2014 levels.
Because 2022 total emissions without the I/M program are projected
to be less than the total 2014 emissions, EPA proposes to conclude that
removal of the I/M program in the Middle Tennessee Area will not
interfere with attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS or any other
applicable CAA requirements. Additionally, as shown in Table 1, the
highest ozone design value associated with 2014 is 6 ppb above the most
recently available ozone design value for 2017-2019, thereby providing
an additional buffer, and the 2017-2019 ozone design value is at least
4 ppb below the level of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 70 ppb. EPA is
proposing to conclude that it is reasonable to expect emissions that
are 22,420 tpy less than 2014 NOX emissions and 6,272 tpy
less than 2014 VOC emissions would not cause ozone levels to exceed the
current 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Also, EPA is proposing to conclude
that it is reasonable to expect that emissions that are 56,466 tpy less
than 2014 CO emissions would not cause CO levels to exceed either the
1-hour or 8-hour CO NAAQS.
B. Hamilton County
Hamilton County is currently in attainment with all NAAQS.\12\ As
presented in Table 5, past design values (i.e., prior to October 1,
2015) have demonstrated attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS
(i.e., the applicable NAAQS at that time), and recent design values
have demonstrated attainment of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS in Hamilton
County.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ As mentioned in the June 8, 2020, NPRM, the current design
values in Hamilton County for PM, NO2, lead, and
SO2 are attaining the NAAQS. In fact, Hamilton County has
never been designated nonattainment for NO2, lead, or
SO2. Hamilton County was previously designated
nonattainment for the 1997 p.m. NAAQS but has since attained that
NAAQS and is still in compliance. The increases in NOX
and VOC emissions without the I/M program in 2022 in comparison to
with the I/M program in 2022 are not expected to cause a concern for
PM, NO2, lead and SO2 compliance in Hamilton
County. As discussed more in this notice, no reductions or emissions
benefits are attributable to the I/M program for PM, lead, and
SO2 in Hamilton County, and the total emissions increases
in NOX (of which NO2 is a component) in 2022
without the program is less than the total emissions in 2014.
[[Page 21252]]
Table 5--Hamilton County Ozone Monitor Design Values
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ozone design value, ppb *
Site name -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012-2014 2013-2015 2014-2016 2015-2017 2016-2018 2017-2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eastside Utility.................. 69 66 68 67 66 64
Soddy Daisy....................... 67 64 65 65 64 64
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Hamilton County was in attainment with the most stringent ozone NAAQS effective during the time period of the
design value. 2012-2014 and 2013-2015 design values were attaining the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.075 ppm.
EPA notes that the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.070 ppm was not in effect until October 1, 2015, and all
design values after this date attained the 2015 standard.
The Chattanooga Metropolitan Statistical Area (of which Hamilton
County is a part) is not required to operate a CO monitor, and there is
no historical CO monitoring data in Hamilton County. The highest CO
design values in Tennessee during 2018-2019 for the 1-hour and 8-hour
CO NAAQS were both measured at the Nashville Near Road site, and were
1.6 ppm (see Table 2 above) and 1.8 ppm (see Table 3 above),
respectively, which are less than 20 percent of the CO NAAQS for both
the 1-hour and 8-hour standards.
To support a demonstration of non-interference for Hamilton County,
EPA is using 2014 as an attainment base year \13\ and comparing the
total emissions of NOX, VOC, and CO to the total emissions
of these pollutants in 2022, the first full year in which the I/M
program in Hamilton County is expected to no longer exist. EPA chose
2014 because the 2014 point, non-road, and non-point data provided in
Tennessee's February 26, 2020, submissions, were the most current data
available to the State at the time of the development of these SIP
revisions. The mobile emissions were generated utilizing MOVES2014b,
the applicable mobile emissions model at the time of the development of
the SIP revision. For consistent comparisons, EPA obtained the 2014
mobile emissions submitted by Tennessee from EPA's EIS. Table 6
provides a summary for Hamilton County of the total emissions for
NOX, VOC, and CO in 2014; total emissions for
NOX, VOC, and CO in 2022 with the I/M program; and total
emissions for NOX, VOC, and CO in 2022 without the I/M
program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ As shown in Table 5 above, 2014 is one of the years
associated with attaining design values for the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS of 0.075 ppm. The 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS was the applicable
NAAQS for the 2015 ozone season. EPA notes that the 2015 8-hour
ozone NAAQS of 0.070 ppm was not in effect until October 1, 2015.
Table 6--Hamilton County Area Emissions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014 Emissions 2022 Projected emissions with I/M 2022 Projected emissions without
------------------------------------------------------------------------ I/M
Sector -----------------------------------
NOX VOC CO NOX VOC CO NOX VOC CO
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onroad...................................... 6,659 3,173 35,539 4,613 2,127 23,875 4,712 2,273 26,854
Point....................................... 1,024 664 458 1,314 825 566 1,314 825 566
Nonroad..................................... 3,252 1,587 13,594 2,220 935 11,600 2,220 935 11,600
Non-Point................................... 2,037 5,212 7,038 1,220 5,744 7,007 1,220 5,777 7,007
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................... 12,972 10,636 56,629 9,367 9,632 43,049 9,467 9,778 46,028
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent reduction from 2014 emissions: 27.0% 8.1% 18.7%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated in the June 8, 2020, NPRM, for 2022, the removal of the
I/M program accounts for a small increase in NOX and VOC on-
road emissions. The difference in emissions in 2022, with and without
the I/M program, is 100 tpy for NOX and 146 tpy for VOC.
However, the total NOX emissions in 2022 without the I/M
program are 3,505 tpy less than the total NOX emissions in
2014, and the total VOC emissions in 2022 without the I/M program are
858 tpy less than the total VOC emissions in 2014. For CO, the
difference in emissions in 2022 with and without the I/M program is
2,979 tpy. However, the total CO emissions without the I/M program are
10,061 tpy less than the total CO emissions in 2014. Even without the
I/M program in 2022, emissions of NOX, VOC, and CO are
expected to decrease by 27.0 percent, 8.1 percent and 18.7 percent,
respectively from 2014 levels.
Because 2022 total emissions without the I/M program are less than
total 2014 base year emissions, EPA proposes to conclude that removal
of the I/M program in Hamilton County will not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS or any other applicable
requirement of the CAA. Additionally, as shown in Table 5, the highest
ozone design value associated with 2014 is 5 ppb above the most
recently available ozone design value for 2017-2019, thereby providing
an additional buffer, and the 2017-2019 ozone design value is 6 ppb
below the level of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 70 ppb. EPA is
proposing to conclude that it is reasonable to expect emissions that
are 3,505 tpy less than 2014 NOX emissions and 858 tpy less
than 2014 VOC emissions would not cause ozone levels to exceed the
current 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Also, EPA is proposing to conclude
that it is reasonable to expect that emissions that are 10,061 tpy less
than 2014 CO emissions would not cause CO levels to exceed either the
1-hour or 8-hour CO NAAQS.
C. Interstate Ozone Transport
EPA proposes to conclude that the changes that would be approved by
EPA in this action do not interfere with other states' ability to
attain and maintain the 2008 ozone NAAQS under the good neighbor
provision, CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). EPA has previously found
that the 2016 Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) Update fully
resolved Tennessee's good neighbor (or
[[Page 21253]]
``transport'') obligations for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The CSAPR Update
addresses NOX pollution transported to other states that
significantly contributes to nonattainment or interferes with
maintenance of the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\14\ Among other things, the CSAPR
Update requires reductions of NOX from power plants during
the annual ozone season from May 1 to September 30 in 22 states,
including Tennessee. Although for most covered states, EPA found the
CSAPR Update may only partially address the covered states' good
neighbor obligations, EPA found the rule fully addresses Tennessee's
good neighbor obligation for this NAAQS. See 81 FR 74504, 74540. That
conclusion was based on an assessment of air quality in the eastern
U.S. with implementation of the CSAPR Update, and it accounted for
emissions from all source sectors, including mobile sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ The CSAPR Update is a rule that followed the original CSAPR
rulemaking in 2011. CSAPR requires certain states in the eastern
half of the U.S. to improve air quality by reducing power plant
emissions of NOX and SO2 that cross state
lines and contribute to smog and soot pollution in downwind states.
On September 7, 2016, EPA revised the CSAPR ozone season
NOX program by finalizing an update to CSAPR for the 2008
ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards, known as the CSAPR
Update. The CSAPR Update ozone season NOX program was
designed to largely replace the original CSAPR ozone season
NOX program starting on May 1, 2017, and further reduce
summertime NOX emissions from power plants in the eastern
U.S.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CSAPR Update was reviewed and generally upheld in Wisconsin v.
EPA, 983 F.3d 303 (D.C. Cir. 2019). The D.C. Circuit remanded the rule
without vacatur because, for states other than Tennessee, the rule did
not provide a full remedy by the next relevant attainment date under
CAA section 181. Thus, the CSAPR Update remains in effect. EPA notes
that the aspects of the CSAPR Update affecting Tennessee were not
challenged in the litigation over the rule and are not affected by the
remand of the rule in Wisconsin.
EPA believes the projected increase in mobile source emissions from
removal of Tennessee's I/M program does not affect EPA's prior finding
in the CSAPR Update that the state of Tennessee has no further
interstate transport obligations for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. As
discussed in the sections above, in this supplemental notice, EPA has
analyzed the impacts of removing the I/M program in the Middle
Tennessee Area and Hamilton County and proposes to find that the
largest projected increase in mobile source emissions in these areas
would result in a combined projected increase of 579 tons in 2022, or a
2 percent increase in total anthropogenic NOX emissions in
these areas.\15\ Therefore, the net change in total anthropogenic
emissions across the entire state of Tennessee would be much less than
the projected 2 percent increase in NOX emissions for these
areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ In 2022, emissions of VOC are projected to increase by 740
tons, or a 1.7 percent increase in total anthropogenic VOC
emissions. In the context of interstate ozone transport, EPA focuses
on NOX as the key ozone precursor pollutant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 30, 2020, in the notice of proposed rulemaking for the
Revised CSAPR Update, which addresses the Wisconsin remand, EPA
released and accepted public comment on updated 2023 modeling that used
a 2016 emissions platform developed under the EPA/Multi-Jurisdictional
Organization (MJO)/state collaborative project.\16\ In this modeling,
EPA found that the highest contribution in 2023 from the entire state
of Tennessee to any downwind receptor identified as having a
nonattainment or maintenance problem for the 2008 ozone standard is
projected to be 0.32 ppb. This amount of contribution is well below the
1 percent of the NAAQS threshold used in EPA's good neighbor framework
for determining whether an upwind state contributes to a nonattainment
or maintenance receptor under the 2008 ozone NAAQS (i.e., 0.75
ppb).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See 85 FR 68964, 68981. The results of this modeling are
included in a spreadsheet in the docket for this action. The
underlying modeling files are available for public review in the
docket for the Revised CSAPR Update (EPA-HQ-OAR-2020-0272).
\17\ On March 15, 2022, Administrator Michael S. Regan signed
the final Revised CSAPR Update. The final action relies on the same
modeling conducted for the proposed rulemaking and described here.
See https://www.epa.gov/csapr/revised-cross-state-air-pollution-rule-update.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The small amount of projected increase in NOX emissions
in Tennessee as a result of this action, combined with the fact that
the highest modeled contributions from this state are well below the 1
percent threshold, support the conclusion that the projected increase
in mobile source emissions does not affect EPA's prior decision that
Tennessee has no remaining interstate transport obligations under the
2008 ozone NAAQS.
This supplemental proposed action does not make any finding
regarding Tennessee's interstate transport obligations for the 2015 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. EPA has not yet taken final action on Tennessee's
good neighbor SIP submission for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
III. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
amended regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. EPA
is proposing to remove Chapter 1200-3-29--``Light Duty Vehicle
Inspection and Maintenance'' located in Table 1--EPA Approved Tennessee
Regulations, and Regulation No. 8--``Regulation of Emissions from
Light-Duty Motor Vehicles through Mandatory Vehicle Inspection and
Maintenance Program,'' located in Table 5--EPA Approved Nashville-
Davidson County, Regulations from the Tennessee SIP, which is
incorporated by reference in accordance with the requirements of 1 CFR
51.5. EPA has made and will continue to make the SIP generally
available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 4 Office
(please contact the person identified in the ``For Further Information
Contact'' section of this preamble for more information).
IV. Supplemental Proposed Actions
In its June 2020 NPRMs, EPA originally proposed to approve
Tennessee's February 26, 2020, SIP revisions to remove the I/M programs
for Hamilton County and the Middle Tennessee Area from Tennessee's SIP.
EPA continues to propose to find that the removal of the I/M program
requirements for Hamilton County and Middle Tennessee are consistent
with CAA section 110(l). Additionally, EPA continues to propose to
approve the removal of the I/M requirements for Hamilton County and the
Middle Tennessee Area from the Tennessee SIP. However, through this
SNPRM, EPA is proposing to rely on an additional and clarified
technical rationale related to the proposed approval of Tennessee's
February 26, 2020 SIP revisions. Specifically, EPA proposes to rely on
an emissions inventory comparison to inform its determination of
whether Hamilton County and the Middle Tennessee Area would continue to
attain and maintain the ozone and CO NAAQS and further affirms that
both areas would continue to attain and maintain the other NAAQS after
removal of the I/M program. EPA is further proposing to conclude that
the proposed removal of the I/M program will not interfere with other
states' ability to attain and maintain the 2008 ozone NAAQS under the
good neighbor provision and providing information related to that
conclusion. EPA is requesting comment on the use of additional and
clarified technical analysis in this supplemental proposal.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve SIP
submissions
[[Page 21254]]
that comply with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal
regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing
SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that
they meet the criteria of the CAA. These actions merely propose to
approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and do not impose
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that
reason, these proposed actions:
Are not significant regulatory actions subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
Do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Are certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Do 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);
Do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Are not economically significant regulatory actions based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Are not significant regulatory actions subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Are not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Do not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: April 13, 2021.
John Blevins,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2021-08320 Filed 4-21-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
