Air Plan Approval; Michigan; Redesignation of the Detroit, MI Area to Attainment of the 2015 Ozone Standards, 14210-14224 [2022-05253]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
14210
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules
that in determining whether to apply for
CSP funds, an eligible entity would
evaluate the requirements of preparing
an application and any associated costs
and weigh them against the benefits
likely to be achieved by receiving CSP
grant. An eligible entity will probably
apply only if it determines that the
likely benefits exceed the costs of
preparing an application.
The proposed priorities,
requirements, definitions, and selection
criteria would impose some additional
burden on a small entity applying for a
grant relative to the burden the entity
would face in the absence of the
proposed action.
This proposed regulatory action
would not have a significant economic
impact on a small entity once it receives
a grant because it would be able to meet
the costs of compliance using the funds
provided under this program. We invite
comments from small entities as to
whether they believe this proposed
regulatory action would have a
significant economic impact on them
and, if so, request evidence to support
that belief.
Intergovernmental Review: This
program is subject to Executive Order
12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR
part 79. One of the objectives of the
Executive order is to foster an
intergovernmental partnership and a
strengthened federalism. The Executive
order relies on processes developed by
State and local governments for
coordination and review of proposed
Federal financial assistance.
This document provides early
notification of our specific plans and
actions for this program.
Accessible Format: On request to the
program contact person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT,
individuals with disabilities can obtain
this document in an accessible format.
The Department will provide the
requestor with an accessible format that
may include Rich Text Format (RTF) or
text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3
file, braille, large print, audiotape, or
compact disc, or another accessible
format.
Electronic Access to This Document:
The official version of this document is
the document published in the Federal
Register. You may access the official
edition of the Federal Register and the
Code of Federal Regulations at
www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can
view this document, as well as all other
documents of this Department
published in the Federal Register, in
text or Portable Document Format
(PDF). To use PDF you must have
Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is
available free at the site.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Mar 11, 2022
Jkt 256001
You may also access documents of the
Department published in the Federal
Register by using the article search
feature at www.federalregister.gov.
Specifically, through the advanced
search feature at this site, you can limit
your search to documents published by
the Department.
Ruth E. Ryder,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and
Programs, Office of Elementary and
Secondary Education.
[FR Doc. 2022–05463 Filed 3–11–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R05–OAR–2020–0730; EPA–R05–
OAR–2020–0731; EPA–R05–OAR–2022–
0004; FRL–9629–01–R5]
Air Plan Approval; Michigan;
Redesignation of the Detroit, MI Area
to Attainment of the 2015 Ozone
Standards
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to find that
the Detroit, Michigan area is attaining
the 2015 primary and secondary ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS), and to act in accordance with
a request from the Michigan Department
of Environment, Great Lakes, and
Energy (EGLE) to redesignate the area to
attainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS
because the request meets the statutory
requirements for redesignation under
the Clean Air Act (CAA). The Detroit
area includes Livingston, Macomb,
Monroe, Oakland, St. Clair, Washtenaw,
and Wayne Counties. EGLE submitted
this request on January 3, 2022. EPA is
proposing to approve, as a revision to
the Michigan State Implementation Plan
(SIP), the State’s plan for maintaining
the 2015 ozone NAAQS through 2035 in
the Detroit area. EPA is also proposing
to approve Michigan’s 2025 and 2035
volatile organic compound (VOC) and
oxides of nitrogen (NOX) motor vehicle
emissions budgets (budgets) for the
Detroit area and initiating the adequacy
review process for these budgets.
Finally, EPA is proposing to approve
portions of separate December 18, 2020,
submittals as meeting the applicable
requirements for a base year emissions
inventory and emissions statement
program.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Comments must be received on
or before April 13, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2020–0730, EPA–R05–OAR–
2020–0731, or EPA–R05–OAR–2022–
0004 at https://www.regulations.gov, or
via email to arra.sarah@epa.gov. For
comments submitted at Regulations.gov,
follow the online instructions for
submitting comments. Once submitted,
comments cannot be edited or removed
from Regulations.gov. For either manner
of submission, EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. EPA will generally not consider
comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e.,
on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission
methods, please contact the person
identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the
full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric
Svingen, Environmental Engineer,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–4489,
svingen.eric@epa.gov. The EPA Region 5
office is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding
Federal holidays and facility closures
due to COVID–19.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA.
DATES:
I. What is EPA proposing?
EPA is proposing to take several
related actions. EPA is proposing to
determine that the Detroit
nonattainment area is attaining the 2015
ozone NAAQS, based on quality-assured
and certified monitoring data for 2019–
2021, and that the Detroit area has met
the requirements for redesignation
under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.
EPA is thus proposing to change the
legal designation of the Detroit area
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules
from nonattainment to attainment for
the 2015 ozone NAAQS. EPA is also
proposing to approve, as a revision to
the Michigan SIP, the State’s
maintenance plan for the area. The
maintenance plan is designed to keep
the Detroit area in attainment of the
2015 ozone NAAQS through 2035. EPA
is proposing to approve the newly
established 2025 and 2035 motor
vehicle emissions budgets for the
Detroit area and is initiating the
adequacy process for these budgets.
Finally, EPA is proposing to approve
portions of Michigan’s separate
December 18, 2020, submittals, because
they satisfy the applicable CAA
requirements for a base year emissions
inventory and emissions statement
program for the Detroit area.
II. What is the background for these
actions?
EPA has determined that ground-level
ozone is detrimental to human health.
On October 1, 2015, EPA promulgated a
revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.070
parts per million (ppm). See 80 FR
65292 (October 26, 2015). Under EPA’s
regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 2015
ozone NAAQS is attained in an area
when the 3-year average of the annual
fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour
average concentration is equal to or less
than 0.070 ppm, when truncated after
the thousandth decimal place, at all of
the ozone monitoring sites in the area.
See 40 CFR 50.19 and appendix U to 40
CFR part 50.
Upon promulgation of a new or
revised NAAQS, section 107(d)(1)(B) of
the CAA requires EPA to designate as
nonattainment any areas that are
violating the NAAQS, based on the most
recent three years of quality assured
ozone monitoring data. The Detroit area
was designated as a Marginal
nonattainment area for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS on June 4, 2018 (83 FR 25776)
(effective August 3, 2018).
III. What are the criteria for
redesignation?
Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA
allows redesignation of an area to
attainment of the NAAQS provided that:
(1) The Administrator (EPA) determines
that the area has attained the NAAQS;
(2) the Administrator has fully approved
the applicable implementation plan for
the area under section 110(k) of the
CAA; (3) the Administrator determines
that the improvement in air quality is
due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP,
applicable Federal air pollutant control
regulations, and other permanent and
enforceable emission reductions; (4) the
Administrator has fully approved a
maintenance plan for the area as
meeting the requirements of section
175A of the CAA; and (5) the state
containing the area has met all
requirements applicable to the area for
the purposes of redesignation under
section 110 and part D of the CAA.
On April 16, 1992, EPA provided
guidance on redesignations in the
General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the CAA
Amendments of 1990 (57 FR 13498) and
supplemented this guidance on April
28, 1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has
provided further guidance on processing
redesignation requests in policy
memoranda.
IV. What is EPA’s analysis of
Michigan’s redesignation request?
A. Has the Detroit area attained the
2015 ozone NAAQS?
For redesignation of a nonattainment
area to attainment, the CAA requires
14211
EPA to determine that the area has
attained the applicable NAAQS (CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). An area is
attaining the 2015 ozone NAAQS if it
meets the 2015 ozone NAAQS, as
determined in accordance with 40 CFR
50.19 and appendix U of part 50, based
on three complete, consecutive calendar
years of quality-assured air quality data
for all monitoring sites in the area. To
attain the 2015 ozone NAAQS, the 3year average of the annual fourthhighest daily maximum 8-hour average
ozone concentrations (ozone design
values) at each monitor must not exceed
0.070 ppm. The air quality data must be
collected and quality-assured in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and
recorded in EPA’s Air Quality System
(AQS). Ambient air quality monitoring
data for the 3-year period must also
meet data completeness requirements.
An ozone design value is valid if daily
maximum 8-hour average
concentrations are available for at least
90% of the days within the ozone
monitoring seasons,1 on average, for the
3-year period, with a minimum data
completeness of 75% during the ozone
monitoring season of any year during
the 3-year period. See section 4 of
appendix U to 40 CFR part 50.
EPA has reviewed the available ozone
monitoring data from EGLE’s
monitoring sites in the Detroit area for
the 2019–2021 period. These data have
been quality assured, are recorded in the
AQS, and were certified in advance of
EPA’s publication of this proposal.
These data demonstrate that the Detroit
area is attaining the 2015 ozone
NAAQS. The annual fourth-highest 8hour ozone concentrations and the 3year average of these concentrations
(monitoring site ozone design values)
for all monitoring sites are summarized
in Table 1.
TABLE 1—ANNUAL FOURTH-HIGHEST DAILY MAXIMUM 8-HOUR OZONE CONCENTRATIONS AND 3-YEAR AVERAGE OF THE
FOURTH-HIGHEST DAILY MAXIMUM 8-HOUR OZONE CONCENTRATIONS FOR THE DETROIT AREA
County
Macomb ...............................................................................
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Oakland ................................................................................
St. Clair ................................................................................
Washtenaw ..........................................................................
Wayne ..................................................................................
1 The ozone season is defined by state in 40 CFR
58, appendix D. The ozone season for Michigan is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Mar 11, 2022
2019
4th high
(ppm)
Monitor
Jkt 256001
26–099–0009
26–099–1003
26–125–0001
26–147–0005
26–161–0008
26–161–9991
26–163–0001
26–163–0019
2020
4th high
(ppm)
0.063
0.062
0.066
0.070
0.060
0.058
0.062
0.068
0.074
0.070
0.074
0.069
0.072
0.067
0.070
0.073
March-October. See 80 FR 65292, 65466–67
(October 26, 2015).
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
2021
4th high
(ppm)
0.068
0.067
0.068
0.072
0.066
0.063
0.069
0.069
2019–2021
average
(ppm)
0.068
0.066
0.069
0.070
0.066
0.062
0.067
0.070
14212
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
The Detroit area’s 3-year ozone design
value for 2019–2021 is 0.070 ppm,2
which meets the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
Therefore, in today’s action, EPA
proposes to determine that the Detroit
area is attaining the 2015 ozone
NAAQS.
EPA will not take final action to
determine that the Detroit area is
attaining the NAAQS nor to approve the
redesignation of this area if the design
value of a monitoring site in the area
violates the NAAQS prior to final
approval of the redesignation. As
discussed in section IV.D.3. below,
EGLE has committed to continue
monitoring ozone in this area to verify
maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
B. Has Michigan met all applicable
requirements of section 110 and part D
of the CAA for the Detroit area, and
does Michigan have a fully approved
SIP for the area under section 110(k) of
the CAA?
For redesignation of an area from
nonattainment to attainment of a
NAAQS, the CAA requires EPA to
determine that the state has met all
applicable requirements under section
110 and part D of title I of the CAA (see
section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) of the CAA) and
that the state has a fully approved SIP
under section 110(k) of the CAA (see
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) of the CAA). EPA
proposes to find that Michigan has met
all applicable SIP requirements for
purposes of redesignation under section
119 and part D of title I of the CAA
(requirements specific to nonattainment
areas for the 2015 ozone NAAQA).
Additionally, with the exception of the
base year emissions inventory
requirement of section 182(a)(1) of the
CAA and the emissions statement
requirement of section 182(a)(3)(B) of
the CAA, EPA proposes to find that
Michigan has a fully approved SIP
under section 110(k) of the CAA. As
discussed in sections VI. and VII. below,
EPA is proposing to approve Michigan’s
base year emissions inventory and
emissions statement program as meeting
the requirements of sections 182(a)(1)
and 182(a)(3), respectively, for the 2015
ozone NAAQS. Upon final approval of
these SIP elements, all applicable
requirements of the Michigan SIP for the
area will have been fully approved
under section 110(k) of the CAA. In
making these proposed determinations,
EPA ascertained which requirements are
applicable for purposes of
redesignation, and whether the required
Michigan SIP elements are fully
approved under section 110(k) and part
2 The monitor ozone design value for the monitor
with the highest 3-year averaged concentration.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:55 Mar 11, 2022
Jkt 256001
D of the CAA. As discussed more fully
below, SIPs must be fully approved only
with respect to these applicable
requirements of the CAA.
The September 4, 1992, memorandum
from John Calcagni, Director, Air
Quality Management Division, entitled
‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to
Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’
describes EPA’s interpretation of which
requirements are ‘‘applicable’’ for
purposes of redesignation under section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. Under this
interpretation, a requirement is not
‘‘applicable’’ unless it was due prior to
the state’s submittal of a complete
redesignation request for the area. See
also the September 17, 1993,
memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro,
entitled ‘‘State Implementation Plan
(SIP) Requirements for Areas Submitting
Requests for Redesignation to
Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) On or After
November 15, 1992,’’ and 60 FR 12459,
12465–66 (March 7, 1995)
(redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor,
Michigan to attainment of the 1hour
ozone NAAQS). Applicable
requirements of the CAA that come due
subsequent to the state’s submittal of a
complete request remain applicable
until a redesignation to attainment is
approved but are not required as a
prerequisite to redesignation.3 See
section 175A(c) of the CAA. Sierra Club
v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See
also 68 FR 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003)
(redesignation of the St. Louis/East St.
Louis area to attainment of the 1hour
ozone NAAQS).
1. Michigan has met all applicable
requirements of section 110 and part D
of the CAA applicable to the Detroit area
for purposes of redesignation.
3 EPA is, in a separate action, proposing to find
that the Detroit area failed to attain the 2015 ozone
NAAQS by its attainment date. If that determination
were finalized, the area would be reclassified to
Moderate by operation of law. However, because of
EPA’s interpretation and the date by which
Michigan submitted its request, those Moderate area
requirements are not considered applicable
requirements for purposes of redesignating the
Detroit area. Specifically, at the time Michigan
submitted its request, EPA had not yet determined
that the area failed to attain and had not yet
reclassified the area. Per CAA section 182(i) and
consistent with CAA section 179(d), EPA typically
adjusts the deadlines for SIP submissions that are
required for newly reclassified areas. Therefore,
even if EPA were to finalize today the
determination that the area failed to attain and
reclassify the area, the deadline for the
requirements associated with the reclassification
would be set at some point in the future. Michigan
submitted its request to redesignate well in advance
of any hypothetical due date associated with
Moderate area requirements.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
a. Section 110 General Requirements for
Implementation Plans
Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA
delineates the general requirements for
a SIP. Section 110(a)(2) provides that
the SIP must have been adopted by the
state after reasonable public notice and
hearing, and that, among other things, it
must: (1) Include enforceable emission
limitations and other control measures,
means or techniques necessary to meet
the requirements of the CAA; (2)
provide for establishment and operation
of appropriate devices, methods,
systems and procedures necessary to
monitor ambient air quality; (3) provide
for implementation of a source permit
program to regulate the modification
and construction of stationary sources
within the areas covered by the plan; (4)
include provisions for the
implementation of part C prevention of
significant deterioration (PSD) and part
D new source review (NSR) permit
programs; (5) include provisions for
stationary source emission control
measures, monitoring, and reporting; (6)
include provisions for air quality
modeling; and, (7) provide for public
and local agency participation in
planning and emission control rule
development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA
requires SIPs to contain measures to
prevent sources in a state from
significantly contributing to air quality
problems in another state. To
implement this provision, EPA has
required certain states to establish
programs to address transport of certain
air pollutants, e.g., NOX SIP call, the
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), and
the Cross State Air Pollution Rule
(CSAPR). However, like many of the
110(a)(2) requirements, the section
110(a)(2)(D) SIP requirements are not
linked with a particular area’s ozone
designation and classification. EPA
concludes that the SIP requirements
linked with the area’s ozone designation
and classification are the relevant
measures to evaluate when reviewing a
redesignation request for the area. The
section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements,
where applicable, continue to apply to
a state regardless of the designation of
any one particular area within the state.
Thus, we believe these requirements are
not applicable requirements for
purposes of redesignation. See 65 FR
37890 (June 15, 2000), 66 FR 50399
(October 19, 2001), 68 FR 25418, 25426–
27 (May 13, 2003).
In addition, EPA believes that other
section 110 elements that are neither
connected with nonattainment plan
submissions nor linked with an area’s
ozone attainment status are not
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation. The area will still be
subject to these requirements after the
area is redesignated to attainment of the
2015 ozone NAAQS. The section 110
and part D requirements which are
linked with a particular area’s
designation and classification are the
relevant measures to evaluate in
reviewing a redesignation request. This
approach is consistent with EPA’s
existing policy on applicability (i.e., for
redesignations) of conformity
requirements, as well as with section
184 ozone transport requirements. See
Reading, Pennsylvania proposed and
final rulemakings, 61 FR 53174–53176
(October 10, 1996) and 62 FR 24826
(May 7, 1997); Cleveland-AkronLoraine, Ohio final rulemaking, 61 FR
20458 (May 7, 1996); and Tampa,
Florida final rulemaking, 60 FR 62748
(December 7, 1995). See also the
discussion of this issue in the
Cincinnati, Ohio ozone redesignation
(65 FR 37890, June 19, 2000), and the
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania ozone
redesignation (66 FR 50399, October 19,
2001).
We have reviewed Michigan’s SIP and
propose to find that it meets the general
SIP requirements under section 110 of
the CAA, to the extent those
requirements are applicable for
purposes of redesignation. In any case,
on September 28, 2021 (86 FR 53550),
EPA approved elements of the SIP
submitted by Michigan to meet the
requirements of section 110 for the 2015
ozone standard.
b. Part D Requirements
Section 172(c) of the CAA sets forth
the basic requirements of air quality
plans for states with nonattainment
areas that are required to submit them
pursuant to section 172(b). Subpart 2 of
part D, which includes section 182 of
the CAA, establishes specific
requirements for ozone nonattainment
areas depending on the areas’
nonattainment classifications.
The Detroit area was classified as
Marginal under subpart 2 for the 2015
ozone NAAQS. As such, the area is
subject to the subpart 1 requirements
contained in section 172(c) and section
176. Similarly, the area is subject to the
subpart 2 requirements contained in
section 182(a) (Marginal nonattainment
area requirements). A thorough
discussion of the requirements
contained in section 172(c) and 182 can
be found in the General Preamble for
Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498).
i. Subpart 1 Section 172 Requirements
As provided in subpart 2, for Marginal
ozone nonattainment areas such as the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Mar 11, 2022
Jkt 256001
Detroit area, the specific requirements of
section 182(a) apply in lieu of the
attainment planning requirements that
would otherwise apply under section
172(c), including the attainment
demonstration and reasonably available
control measures (RACM) under section
172(c)(1), reasonable further progress
(RFP) under section 172(c)(2), and
contingency measures under section
172(c)(9). 42 U.S.C. 7511a(a).
Section 172(c)(3) requires submission
and approval of a comprehensive,
accurate and current inventory of actual
emissions. This requirement is
superseded by the inventory
requirement in section 182(a)(1)
discussed below.
Section 172(c)(4) requires the
identification and quantification of
allowable emissions for major new and
modified stationary sources in an area,
and section 172(c)(5) requires source
permits for the construction and
operation of new and modified major
stationary sources anywhere in the
nonattainment area. EPA approved
Michigan’s NSR program on December
16, 2013 (78 FR 76064), and most
recently approved revisions to
Michigan’s NSR program on May 12,
2021 (86 FR 25954). Nonetheless, EPA
has determined that, since PSD
requirements will apply after
redesignation, areas being redesignated
need not comply with the requirement
that a NSR program be approved prior
to redesignation, provided that the area
demonstrates maintenance of the
NAAQS without part D NSR. A more
detailed rationale for this view is
described in the October 14, 1994,
memorandum from Mary Nichols,
Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, entitled, ‘‘Part D New Source
Review Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to
Attainment.’’ See rulemakings for
Detroit, Michigan (60 FR 12467–12468,
March 7, 1995); Cleveland-AkronLorain, Ohio (61 FR 20458, 20469–
20470, May 7, 1996); Louisville,
Kentucky (66 FR 53665, October 23,
2001); and Grand Rapids, Michigan (61
FR 31834–31837, June 21, 1996).
Michigan’s PSD program will become
effective in the Detroit area upon
redesignation to attainment. EPA
conditionally approved Michigan’s PSD
program on September 16, 2008 (73 FR
53366), fully approved Michigan’s PSD
program on March 25, 2010 (75 FR
14352), and most recently approved
revisions to Michigan’s PSD program on
May 12, 2021 (86 FR 25954).
Section 172(c)(6) requires the SIP to
contain control measures necessary to
provide for attainment of the NAAQS.
Because attainment has been reached,
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
14213
no additional measures are needed to
provide for attainment.
Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to
meet the applicable provisions of
section 110(a)(2). As noted above, we
believe the Michigan SIP meets the
requirements of section 110(a)(2) for
purposes of redesignation.
ii. Section 176 Conformity
Requirements
Section 176(c) of the CAA requires
that federally supported or funded
projects conform to the applicable SIP.
The requirement to determine
conformity applies to transportation
plans, programs and projects that are
developed, funded or approved under
title 23 of the United States Code
(U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act
(transportation conformity) as well as to
all other federally supported or funded
projects (general conformity). State
transportation conformity SIP revisions
must be consistent with Federal
conformity regulations relating to
consultation, enforcement and
enforceability that EPA promulgated
pursuant to its authority under the CAA.
EPA interprets the conformity SIP
requirements 4 as not applying for
purposes of evaluating a redesignation
request under section 107(d) because
state conformity rules are still required
after redesignation and Federal
conformity rules apply where state
conformity rules have not been
approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d
426 (6th Cir. 2001) (upholding this
interpretation); see also 60 FR 62748
(December 7, 1995) (redesignation of
Tampa, Florida). Nonetheless, Michigan
has an approved conformity SIP for the
Detroit area. See 61 FR 66609 (December
18, 1996) and 82 FR 17134 (April 10,
2017).
iii. Section 182(a) Requirements
Section 182(a)(1) requires states to
submit a comprehensive, accurate, and
current inventory of actual emissions
from sources of NOX and VOC emitted
within the boundaries of the ozone
nonattainment area within two years of
designation. On December 18, 2020,
Michigan submitted emissions
inventories for the Detroit area for the
2017 base year. As described in section
VI. below, EPA is proposing to approve
Michigan’s base year emissions
inventory as meeting the requirements
4 CAA section 176(c)(4)(E) requires states to
submit revisions to their SIPs to reflect certain
Federal criteria and procedures for determining
transportation conformity. Transportation
conformity SIPs are different from SIPs requiring
the development of motor vehicle emissions
budgets, such as control strategy SIPs and
maintenance plans.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
14214
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules
of section 182(a)(1) for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS.
Under section 182(a)(2)(A), states
with ozone nonattainment areas that
were designated prior to the enactment
of the 1990 CAA amendments were
required to submit, within six months of
classification, all rules and corrections
to existing VOC reasonably available
control technology (RACT) rules that
were required under section 172(b)(3)
prior to the 1990 CAA amendments. The
Detroit area is not subject to the section
182(a)(2) RACT ‘‘fix up’’ requirement for
the 2015 ozone NAAQS because it was
designated as nonattainment for this
standard after the enactment of the 1990
CAA amendments and, in any case,
Michigan complied with this
requirement for the Detroit area under
the prior 1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 60
FR 46182 (September 7, 1994).
Section 182(a)(2)(B) requires each
state with a Marginal ozone
nonattainment area that implemented or
was required to implement a vehicle
inspection and maintenance (I/M)
program prior to the 1990 CAA
amendments to submit a SIP revision for
an I/M program no less stringent than
that required prior to the 1990 CAA
amendments or already in the SIP at the
time of the CAA amendments,
whichever is more stringent. For the
purposes of the 2015 ozone NAAQS and
the consideration of Michigan’s
redesignation request for this standard,
the Detroit area is not subject to the
section 182(a)(2)(B) requirement
because the Detroit area was designated
as nonattainment for the 2015 ozone
NAAQS after the enactment of the 1990
CAA amendments and because
Michigan complied with this
requirement for the Detroit area under
the prior 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
Regarding the source permitting and
offset requirements of section
182(a)(2)(C) and section 182(a)(4),
Michigan currently has a fully approved
part D NSR program in place. EPA
approved Michigan’s NSR program on
December 16, 2013 (78 FR 76064), and
most recently approved revisions to
Michigan’s NSR program on May 12,
2021 (86 FR 25954). In addition, EPA
conditionally approved Michigan’s PSD
program on September 16, 2008 (73 FR
53366), fully approved Michigan’s PSD
program on March 25, 2010 (75 FR
14352), and most recently approved
revisions to Michigan’s PSD program on
May 12, 2021 (86 FR 25954). The state’s
PSD program will become effective in
the Detroit area upon redesignation to
attainment.
Section 182(a)(3)(A) requires states to
submit periodic emission inventories
and section 182(a)(3)(B) requires states
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Mar 11, 2022
Jkt 256001
to submit a revision to the SIP to require
the owners or operators of stationary
sources to annually submit emissions
statements documenting actual NOX and
VOC emissions. As discussed below in
section IV.D.4. of this proposed rule,
Michigan will continue to update its
emissions inventory at least once every
three years. With regard to stationary
source emissions statements, EPA
approved Michigan’s emissions
statement program on March 8, 1994 (49
FR 10752). On December 18, 2020,
Michigan submitted a separate request
to strengthen its SIP-approved
emissions statement program by adding,
removing, and updating certain statutes
and reporting forms. As described in
section VII. below, EPA is proposing to
approve most portions of Michigan’s
emissions statement submittal as
meeting the requirements of section
182(a)(3)(B) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
Upon approval of Michigan’s
emissions inventory and emissions
statements rules, the Detroit area will
have satisfied all applicable
requirements for purposes of
redesignation under section 110 and
part D of title I of the CAA.
2. The Detroit area has a fully
approved SIP for purposes of
redesignation under section 110(k) of
the CAA.
At various times, Michigan has
adopted and submitted, and EPA has
approved, provisions addressing the
various SIP elements applicable for the
ozone NAAQS. As discussed above, if
EPA finalizes approval of Michigan’s
section 182(a)(1) base year inventory
requirements and section 182(a)(3)(B)
emission statement requirements, EPA
will have fully approved the Michigan
SIP for the Detroit area under section
110(k) for all requirements applicable
for purposes of redesignation under the
2015 ozone NAAQS. EPA may rely on
prior SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request (see the Calcagni
memorandum at page 3; Southwestern
Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v.
Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989–990 (6th
Cir. 1998); Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426).
Additional measures may also be
approved in conjunction with a
redesignation action (see 68 FR 25426
(May 12, 2003) and citations therein).
C. Are the air quality improvements in
the Detroit area due to permanent and
enforceable emission reductions?
To redesignate an area from
nonattainment to attainment, section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA requires
EPA to determine that the air quality
improvement in the area is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions
in emissions resulting from the
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
implementation of the SIP and
applicable Federal air pollution control
regulations and other permanent and
enforceable emission reductions. EPA
proposes to determine that Michigan
has demonstrated that that the observed
ozone air quality improvement in the
Detroit area is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in VOC and NOX
emissions resulting from state measures
adopted into the SIP and Federal
measures.
In making this demonstration, the
State has calculated the change in
emissions between 2014 and 2019. The
reduction in emissions and the
corresponding improvement in air
quality over this time period can be
attributed to several regulatory control
measures that the Detroit area and
upwind areas have implemented in
recent years. In addition, Michigan
provided an analysis to demonstrate the
improvement in air quality was not due
to unusually favorable meteorology.
Based on the information summarized
below, EPA proposes to find that
Michigan has adequately demonstrated
that the improvement in air quality is
due to permanent and enforceable
emissions reductions.
1. Permanent and Enforceable Emission
Controls Implemented
a. Regional NOX Controls
CAIR/CSAPR. Under the ‘‘good
neighbor provision’’ of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), states are required to
address interstate transport of air
pollution. Specifically, the good
neighbor provision provides that each
state’s SIP must contain provisions
prohibiting emissions from within that
state which will contribute significantly
to nonattainment of the NAAQS, or
interfere with maintenance of the
NAAQS, in any other state.
On May 12, 2005, EPA published
CAIR, which required eastern states,
including Michigan, to prohibit
emissions consistent with annual and
ozone season NOX budgets and annual
sulfur dioxide (SO2) budgets (70 FR
25152). CAIR addressed the good
neighbor provision for the 1997 ozone
NAAQS and 1997 fine particulate
matter (PM2.5) NAAQS and was
designed to mitigate the impact of
transported NOX emissions, a precursor
of both ozone and PM2.5, as well as
transported SO2 emissions, another
precursor of PM2.5. The United States
Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit)
remanded CAIR to EPA for replacement
in 2008. North Carolina v. EPA, 531
F.3d 896, modified, 550 F.3d 1176
(2008). While EPA worked on
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules
On February 10, 2000 (65 FR 6698), EPA
promulgated Tier 2 motor vehicle
emission standards and gasoline sulfur
control requirements. These emission
control requirements result in lower
VOC and NOX emissions from new cars
and light duty trucks, including sport
utility vehicles. With respect to fuels,
this rule required refiners and importers
of gasoline to meet lower standards for
sulfur, which were phased in between
2004 and 2006. By 2006, refiners and
importers were required to meet a 30
ppm average sulfur level, with a
maximum cap of 80 ppm. This
reduction in fuel sulfur content ensures
the effectiveness of low emissioncontrol technologies. The Tier 2 tailpipe
standards established in this rule were
phased in for new vehicles between
2004 and 2009. At the time of
promulgation of Tier 2 standards, EPA
estimated that this rule would cut NOX
and VOC emissions from light-duty
vehicles and light-duty trucks by
approximately 76% and 28%,
respectively. NOX and VOC reductions
from medium-duty passenger vehicles
included as part of the Tier 2 vehicle
program were estimated to be
approximately 37,000 and 9,500 tons
per year, respectively, when fully
implemented. As projected by these
estimates and demonstrated in the onroad emission modeling for the Detroit
area, a portion of these emission
reductions occurred during the period
2014 through 2016, i.e., after the area
was designated nonattainment for the
2015 ozone NAAQS. As discussed
below, the Tier 2 vehicle and gasoline
sulfur standards were replaced by the
Tier 3 emission standards for vehicles
and gasoline sulfur standards beginning
on January 1, 2017.
Tier 3 Emission Standards for
Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur Standards.
On April 28, 2014 (79 FR 23414), EPA
promulgated Tier 3 motor vehicle
emission and fuel standards to reduce
both tailpipe and evaporative emissions
and to further reduce the sulfur content
in fuels. The rule is being phased in
between 2017 and 2025. Tier 3 sets new
b. Federal Emission Control Measures
tailpipe standards for non-methane
Reductions in VOC and NOX
organic gases (NMOG) and NOX,
emissions have occurred statewide and
presented as NMOG+NOX, and for
in upwind areas as a result of Federal
particulate matter. The VOC and NOX
emission control measures, with
tailpipe standards for light-duty
additional emission reductions expected vehicles represent approximately an
to occur in the future. Federal emission
80% reduction in fleet average
control measures include the following: NMOG+NOX and a 70% reduction in
Tier 2 Emission Standards for
per-vehicle particulate matter (PM)
Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur Standards. standards, relative to the fleet average at
the time of phase-in. Heavy-duty
5 In a December 27, 2011 rulemaking, EPA
tailpipe standards represent about a
included Michigan in the ozone season NOX
program, addressing the 1997 ozone NAAQS (76 FR 60% reduction in both fleet average
80760).
NMOG+NOX and per-vehicle PM
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
developing a replacement rule,
implementation of the CAIR program
continued as planned with the NOX
annual and ozone season programs
beginning in 2009 and the SO2 annual
program beginning in 2010.
On August 8, 2011 (76 FR 48208),
acting on the D.C. Circuit’s remand, EPA
published CSAPR to replace CAIR and
to address the good neighbor provision
for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2006 PM2.5
NAAQS.5 Through Federal
Implementation Plans, CSAPR required
electric generating units (EGUs) in
eastern states, including Michigan, to
meet annual and ozone season NOX
budgets and annual SO2 budgets
implemented through new trading
programs. After delays caused by
litigation, EPA started implementing the
CSAPR trading programs in 2015,
simultaneously discontinuing
administration of the CAIR trading
programs. On October 26, 2016, EPA
published the CSAPR Update, which
established, starting in 2017, a new
ozone season NOX trading program for
EGUs in eastern states, including
Michigan, to address the good neighbor
provision for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
(81 FR 74504). The CSAPR Update was
estimated to result in a 20% reduction
in ozone season NOX emissions from
EGUs in the eastern United States, a
reduction of 80,000 tons in 2017
compared to 2015 levels. On April 30,
2021, EPA published the Revised
CSAPR Update, which fully resolved
the obligations of eastern states,
including Michigan, under the good
neighbor provision for the 2008 ozone
NAAQS (82 FR 23054). The Revised
CSAPR Update is estimated to reduce
ozone season NOX emissions from EGUs
by 17,000 tons beginning in 2021,
compared to emissions without the rule.
The reduction in NOX emissions from
the implementation of CAIR and then
CSAPR occurred by the attainment years
and additional emission reductions will
occur throughout the maintenance
period.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Mar 11, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
14215
standards. The evaporative emissions
requirements in the rule will result in
approximately a 50% reduction from
previous standards and apply to all
light-duty and on-road gasolinepowered heavy-duty vehicles. Finally,
the rule lowered the sulfur content of
gasoline to an annual average of 10 ppm
starting in January 2017. As projected by
these estimates and demonstrated in the
on-road emission modeling for the
Detroit area, some of these emission
reductions occurred by the attainment
years and additional emission
reductions will occur throughout the
maintenance period, as older vehicles
are replaced with newer, compliant
model years.
Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Rules. In
July 2000, EPA issued a rule for on-road
heavy-duty diesel engines that includes
standards limiting the sulfur content of
diesel fuel. Emissions standards for
NOX, VOC and PM were phased in
between model years 2007 and 2010. In
addition, the rule reduced the highway
diesel fuel sulfur content to 15 parts per
million by 2007, leading to additional
reductions in combustion NOX and VOC
emissions. EPA has estimated future
year emission reductions due to
implementation of this rule. EPA
estimated that by 2015 NOX and VOC
emissions would decrease nationally by
1,260,000 tons and 54,000 tons,
respectively, and that by 2030 NOX and
VOC emissions will decrease nationally
by 2,570,000 tons and 115,000 tons,
respectively. As projected by these
estimates and demonstrated in the onroad emission modeling for the Detroit
area, some of these emission reductions
occurred by the attainment years and
additional emission reductions will
occur throughout the maintenance
period, as older vehicles are replaced
with newer, compliant model years.
Nonroad Diesel Rule. On June 29,
2004 (69 FR 38958), EPA issued a rule
adopting emissions standards for
nonroad diesel engines and sulfur
reductions in nonroad diesel fuel. This
rule applies to diesel engines used
primarily in construction, agricultural,
and industrial applications. Emission
standards were phased in for the 2008
through 2015 model years based on
engine size. The sulfur limits for
nonroad diesel fuels were phased in
from 2007 through 2012. EPA estimates
that when fully implemented,
compliance with this rule will cut NOX
emissions from these nonroad diesel
engines by approximately 90%. As
projected by these estimates and
demonstrated in the nonroad emission
modeling for the Detroit area, some of
these emission reductions occurred by
the attainment years and additional
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
14216
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules
emission reductions will occur
throughout the maintenance period.
Nonroad Spark-Ignition Engines and
Recreational Engine Standards. On
November 8, 2002 (67 FR 68242), EPA
adopted emission standards for large
spark-ignition engines such as those
used in forklifts and airport groundservice equipment; recreational vehicles
such as off-highway motorcycles, allterrain vehicles, and snowmobiles; and
recreational marine diesel engines.
These emission standards were phased
in from model years 2004 through 2012.
When fully implemented, EPA estimates
an overall 72% reduction in national
VOC emissions from these engines and
an 80% reduction in national NOX
emissions. As projected by these
estimates and demonstrated in the
nonroad emission modeling for the
Detroit area, some of these emission
reductions occurred by the attainment
years and additional emission
reductions will occur throughout the
maintenance period.
Category 3 Marine Diesel Engine
Standards. On April 30, 2010 (75 FR
22896), EPA issued emission standards
for marine compression-ignition engines
at or above 30 liters per cylinder. Tier
2 emission standards apply beginning in
2011 and are expected to result in a 15
to 25% reduction in NOX emissions
from these engines. Final Tier 3
emission standards apply beginning in
2016 and are expected to result in
approximately an 80% reduction in
NOX from these engines. As projected
by these estimates and demonstrated in
the nonroad emission modeling for the
Detroit area, some of these emission
reductions occurred by the attainment
years and additional emission
reductions will occur throughout the
maintenance period.
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
c. Detroit Point Source NOX Reductions.
The DTE Energy River Rouge power
plant ceased operations in May 2021. In
its submittal, EGLE estimated this
shutdown would reduce annual point
source NOX emissions by 2,716 tons.
d. Detroit Low Reid Vapor Pressure
(RVP) Program.
RVP is a measure of a fuel’s volatility
and thereby affects the rate at which
gasoline evaporates and emits VOCs.
The lower a fuel’s RVP, the lower the
rate of evaporation of the fuel. Lowering
RVP in the summer months can offset
the effect of summer temperature upon
the evaporation of gasoline, which in
turn lowers emissions of VOCs.
Michigan’s Low RVP program requires
the sale of 7.0 psi RVP gasoline in the
Detroit area during the summer months,
as compared to the 9.0 psi RVP
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Mar 11, 2022
Jkt 256001
originally required under Federal RVP
controls. EPA approved Michigan’s Low
RVP program for the Detroit area on
January 31, 2007 (72 FR 4432).
2. Emission Reductions
Michigan is using a 2014 emissions
inventory to represent nonattainment
level emissions (nonattainment year
inventory or nonattainment inventory),
which is appropriate because it was one
of the years used to designate the area
as nonattainment due to an exceedance
of the NAAQS. Michigan is using a 2019
emissions inventory to represent
attainment level emissions (attainment
year inventory or attainment inventory),
which is appropriate because it is one
of the years in the 2019–2021 period
used to demonstrate monitored
attainment with the NAAQS.
For both 2014 and 2019, Michigan has
provided inventories for point,
nonpoint, on-road, and nonroad
sources. The point source category
includes facilities that report their
emissions directly to EGLE, as well as
sources such as airports and rail yards.
Nonpoint sources, sometimes called
area sources, include emissions from
sources that are more ubiquitous, such
as consumer products or architectural
coatings. On-road sources are vehicles
that are primarily used on public
roadways, such as cars, trucks, and
motorcycles. Nonroad sources include
engine-based emissions that do not
occur on roads, such as trains or boats.
For its on-road emissions inventory,
Michigan submitted an analysis by the
Southeast Michigan Council of
Governments (SEMCOG). This analysis
used EPA’s MOVES3 model to generate
July weekday on-road emissions for
both 2014 and 2019. SEMCOG’s analysis
relied on local travel inputs including
demographic data, travel demand
forecasting, road types, Vehicle Miles of
Travel (VMT), Vehicle Hours of Travel,
vehicle population, and vehicle age, as
well as meteorological data. In
Attachment B of its submittal, Michigan
has included a detailed narrative of
SEMCOG’s methods.
For its point, nonpoint, and nonroad
emissions inventories, Michigan’s
primary data sources were EPA’s 2014
National Emissions Inventory (NEI)—
Version 2 dataset and EPA’s 2016v2
modeling platform. The 2014 NEI
includes emissions data only for the
year 2014, and the 2016v2 modeling
platform includes emissions data for the
years 2016, 2023, 2026 and 2032. EGLE
used the 2014 NEI as the basis of its
point, nonpoint, and nonroad
inventories for 2014. To derive point,
nonpoint, and nonroad inventories for
2019, EGLE interpolated between 2016
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
and 2023 data from the 2016v2
modeling platform. The 2016v2
modeling platform and 2014 NEI have
been quality-assured, and
documentation regarding these datasets
and their methods is available on EPA’s
website.6 In Attachment B of its
submittal, Michigan has included a
detailed listing of the facilities used to
create the point source inventory for
2014.
To obtain the inventories for source
categories other than on-road, EGLE
summed the annual totals of NOX and
VOC emissions for each county and
each source category. Then, to convert
the annual totals to a value of tons per
ozone season day, EGLE calculated a
conversion factor for each county and
each source category, using outputs
from the 2016v2 modeling platform.
This conversion factor was generated by
taking the July category emissions and
dividing them by the annual category
emissions, and then dividing by 31 to
represent the number of days in July. It
was not necessary to determine a
conversion factor for on-road emissions
because SEMCOG provided results for a
July weekday. EGLE selected July as the
standard ozone season month, due to an
analysis showing that July had the most
days with high ozone values in recent
years.
Because Michigan’s inventory for
2019 relies on data from the 2016v2
modeling platform, EPA compared
EGLE’s inventory of point source
emissions against records of actual point
source emissions available to EPA
through the Emissions Inventory System
(EIS). To ensure that the two agencies’
calculations for point source emissions
for 2019 would be comparable, EPA
converted annual totals of NOX and
VOC emissions to a value of tons per
ozone season day using the same
conversion factors calculated by EGLE.
Both EGLE’s analysis and EPA’s
analysis show a decrease in point source
emissions from 2014 to 2019.7
Using the inventories described above
for all categories of sources, Michigan’s
submittal documents changes in NOX
and VOC emissions from 2014 to 2019
6 https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/
2014-national-emissions-inventory-nei-technicalsupport-document-tsd and https://www.epa.gov/airemissions-modeling/2016-version-2-technicalsupport-document.
7 For both NO and VOC, EGLE’s 2019 inventory
X
shows emissions levels that are lower than the
levels of actual emissions derived by EPA from EIS.
By relying on the lower level of point source
emissions from the 2016v2 modeling platform in
setting the level of its attainment inventory,
Michigan’s inventories for the maintenance period,
described in section IV.D.2. below, are more
cautious than necessary in setting levels of
emissions that are sufficient to attain the standard.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules
for the Detroit area. Emissions data are
14217
shown in Table 2. Data are expressed in
terms of tons per ozone season day.
TABLE 2—NOX AND VOC EMISSIONS IN THE DETROIT AREA FOR THE 2014 NONATTAINMENT YEAR AND 2019
ATTAINMENT YEAR
[Tons per ozone season day]
NOX
2014
Net change
(2014–2019)
2019
2014
2019
Net change
(2014–2019)
Point .........................................................................................
Nonpoint ...................................................................................
On-road ....................................................................................
Nonroad ...................................................................................
166.86
36.69
192.70
60.26
97.01
27.98
105.80
22.51
¥69.85
¥8.71
¥86.90
¥37.75
32.24
149.93
83.20
69.63
13.74
134.77
51.70
30.46
¥18.50
¥15.16
¥31.50
¥39.17
Total ..................................................................................
456.51
253.30
¥203.21
335.00
230.67
¥104.33
As shown in Table 2, Michigan’s
inventories demonstrate that NOX and
VOC emissions in the Detroit area
declined by 203.21 tons per ozone
season day and 104.33 tons per ozone
season day, respectively, between 2014
and 2019.
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
VOC
3. Meteorology and Temporary Adverse
Economic Conditions
Michigan performed several analyses
to further support its demonstration that
the improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable emission
reductions, and not unusually favorable
meteorology or temporary adverse
economic conditions.
EGLE conducted a meteorological
analysis based on 22 years of data
collected at the three monitors that have
historically monitored the highest ozone
concentrations in the Detroit area.
Michigan analyzed ozone values for
May, June, July, August, and September,
for years 2000 to 2021. First, the
maximum 8-hour ozone concentration
at each monitor was compared to the
number of days where the maximum
temperature was greater than or equal to
80 °F. Second, EGLE examined the
relationship between the average
summer temperature for each year of the
2000–2021 period and the fourthhighest 8-hour ozone concentration.
Third, the number of days with an 8hour average greater than 70 ppb was
compared to the number of days where
the maximum temperature was greater
than or equal to 80 °F. These analyses
show that over the last 22 years, ozone
concentrations at the Detroit monitors
have decreased substantially. In
contrast, temperatures have increased,
with the area showing an overall
warming trend. Because the correlation
between temperature and ozone
formation is well established, these data
suggest that reductions in precursors are
responsible for the reductions in ozone
concentrations in the area, and not
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Mar 11, 2022
Jkt 256001
unusually favorable summer
temperatures.
To further support EGLE’s
demonstration that the improvement in
air quality is not due to unusually
favorable meteorology, an analysis was
performed by the Lake Michigan Air
Directors Consortium (LADCO). A
classification and regression tree
(CART) analysis was conducted with
2005 through 2019 data from Detroit
area ozone sites. The goal of the analysis
was to determine the meteorological and
air quality conditions associated with
ozone episodes, and construct trends for
the days identified as sharing similar
meteorological conditions. Regression
trees were developed for the Detroit area
ozone data to classify each summer day
by its ozone concentration and
associated meteorological conditions.
By grouping days with similar
meteorology, the influence of
meteorological variability on the
underlying trend in ozone
concentrations is partially removed and
the remaining trend is presumed to be
due to trends in precursor emissions or
other non-meteorological influences.
The CART analysis showed the
resulting trends in ozone concentrations
declining over the period examined,
supporting the conclusion that the
improvement in air quality was not due
to unusually favorable meteorology.
Michigan conducted an additional
analysis to assess whether the
improvement in air quality was caused
by temporary adverse economic
conditions, especially the economic
conditions associated with the COVID–
19 pandemic which first impacted
Michigan in 2020. First, EGLE charted
point source VOC emissions in the
Detroit area from 2012 to 2020. Second,
EGLE charted point source NOX
emissions in the Detroit area for the
same period. These two charts show the
overall downward trend in point source
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
emissions from 2012 to 2020. Third, for
2014 to 2021, EGLE compared the
maximum 8-hour ozone concentration
against VMT and employment. This
chart shows that VMT and employment
had a direct correlation to one another,
but these economic indicators had no
correlation to ozone values. The impacts
of the COVID–19 pandemic are apparent
in data showing a decrease in point
source emissions, VMT, and
employment between 2019 and 2020.
But these decreases were not associated
with a corresponding decline in ozone
values from 2019 to 2020. Instead, there
was an increase in the fourth-highest 8hour ozone concentration from 2019 to
2020. Together, these analyses show
that economic conditions associated
with the COVID–19 pandemic were not
correlated with the improved air quality
and strengthen Michigan’s
demonstration that the improved air
quality is due to permanent and
enforceable emissions reductions.
As discussed above, Michigan
identified numerous Federal rules that
resulted in the reduction of VOC and
NOX emissions from 2014 to 2019. In
addition, Michigan’s analyses of
meteorological variables associated with
ozone formation demonstrate that the
improvement in air quality in the area
between the year violations occurred
and the year attainment was achieved is
not due to unusually favorable
meteorology. Michigan also showed that
emissions reductions were not due to
temporary adverse economic conditions,
but rather were consistent with a longerterm trend. Therefore, EPA proposes to
find that Michigan has shown that the
air quality improvements in the Detroit
area are due to permanent and
enforceable emissions reductions.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
14218
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules
D. Does Michigan have a fully
approvable ozone maintenance plan for
the Detroit area?
To redesignate an area from
nonattainment to attainment, section
107(d)(3)(E)(iv) of the CAA requires EPA
to determine that the area has a fully
approved maintenance plan pursuant to
section 175A of the CAA. Section 175A
of the CAA sets forth the elements of a
maintenance plan for areas seeking
redesignation from nonattainment to
attainment. Under section 175A, the
maintenance plan must demonstrate
continued attainment of the NAAQS for
at least 10 years after the Administrator
approves a redesignation to attainment.
Eight years after the redesignation, the
state must submit a revised maintenance
plan which demonstrates that
attainment of the NAAQS will continue
for an additional 10 years beyond the
initial 10-year maintenance period. To
address the possibility of future NAAQS
violations, the maintenance plan must
contain contingency measures, as EPA
deems necessary, to assure prompt
correction of the future NAAQS
violation.
The Calcagni Memorandum provides
further guidance on the content of a
maintenance plan, explaining that a
maintenance plan should address five
elements: (1) An attainment emission
inventory; (2) a maintenance
demonstration; (3) a commitment for
continued air quality monitoring; (4) a
process for verification of continued
attainment; and (5) a contingency plan.
In conjunction with its request to
redesignate the Detroit area to
attainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS,
Michigan submitted a SIP revision to
provide for maintenance of the 2015
ozone NAAQS through 2035, more than
10 years after the expected effective date
of the redesignation to attainment. As
discussed below, EPA proposes to find
that Michigan’s ozone maintenance plan
includes the necessary components and
to approve the maintenance plan as a
revision of the Michigan SIP.
1. Attainment Inventory
EPA is proposing to determine that
the Detroit area has attained the 2015
ozone NAAQS based on monitoring data
for the period of 2019–2021. Michigan
selected 2019 as the attainment
emissions inventory year to establish
attainment emission levels for VOC and
NOX. The attainment emissions
inventory identifies the levels of
emissions in the Detroit area that are
sufficient to attain the 2015 ozone
NAAQS. The derivation of the
attainment year emissions is discussed
above in section IV.C.2. of this proposed
rule. The emissions for the 2019
attainment year, by source category, are
summarized in Table 2 above.
2. Has the state demonstrated
maintenance of the ozone standard in
the Detroit area?
Michigan has demonstrated
maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS
through 2035 by projecting that current
and future emissions of VOC and NOX
for the Detroit area remain at or below
attainment year emission levels. A
maintenance demonstration need not be
based on modeling. See Wall v. EPA,
265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), Sierra Club
v. EPA, 375 F. 3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004).
See also 66 FR 53094, 53099–53100
(October 19, 2001), 68 FR 25413, 25430–
25432 (May 12, 2003).
Michigan is using emissions
inventories for the years 2025 and 2035
to demonstrate maintenance. 2035 was
selected because it is more than 10 years
after the expected effective date of the
redesignation to attainment, and 2025
was selected to demonstrate that
emissions are not expected to spike in
the interim between the 2019 attainment
year and the 2035 final maintenance
year.
To develop emissions inventories for
the years 2025 and 2035, Michigan used
the same data sources discussed above
in section IV.C.2. of this proposed rule.
For its on-road emissions inventory,
Michigan again relied upon the
SEMCOG analysis, which used EPA’s
MOVES3 model to generate July
weekday on-road emissions for 2025
and 2035. SEMCOG’s analysis relied on
local travel inputs including
demographic data, travel demand
forecasting, road types, VMT, Vehicle
Hours of Travel, vehicle population, and
vehicle age, as well as meteorological
data. In Attachment B of its submittal,
Michigan has included a detailed
narrative of SEMCOG’s methods.
For its point, nonpoint, and nonroad
emissions inventories, Michigan again
used EPA’s 2016v2 modeling platform.
To derive inventories for 2025, EGLE
interpolated between 2023 and 2026
data from the 2016v2 modeling
platform. To derive inventories for 2035,
EGLE extrapolated forward from the
2016v2 modeling platform data using
the 2026 and 2032 years. For both the
2025 and 2035 inventories, to convert
annual emissions totals into a value of
tons per ozone season day, EGLE
calculated conversion factors using the
same methodology described in section
IV.C.2. of this proposed rule.
By calculating its inventories through
interpolation and extrapolation, EGLE
projects that changes within a source
category and county are linearly
constant. For point sources, actual
reductions may not align with
inventories derived from linear
interpolation, because shutdowns and
the operation of new control equipment
may be staggered across several years.
However, given the magnitude of the
reductions in other categories of
sources, any uncertainty caused by
linear interpolation would be
outweighed by the emissions reductions
in other sectors. Similarly, inventories
derived from extrapolation may not
align with actual reductions for some
types of sources. However, even if
Michigan as a cautious measure had
projected that emissions from the
2016v2 modeling platform for the year
2032 would remain constant through
2035, this level of emissions would still
have been sufficient to show that the
area would maintain the standard
through 2035. Although the 2016v2
modeling platform does not project
emissions beyond 2032, some amount of
additional reductions into future years
is likely.
Emissions data for the 2014
nonattainment year, 2019 attainment
year, 2025 interim year, and 2035
maintenance year are shown in Tables
3 and 4 below. Data are expressed in
terms of tons per ozone season day.
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
TABLE 3—NOX EMISSIONS IN THE DETROIT AREA FOR THE 2014 NONATTAINMENT YEAR, 2019 ATTAINMENT YEAR, 2025
INTERIM YEAR, AND 2035 MAINTENANCE YEAR
[Tons per ozone season day]
2014
Point .....................................................................................................................
Nonpoint ...............................................................................................................
On-road ................................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Mar 11, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
166.86
36.69
192.70
2019
97.01
27.98
105.80
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
2025
80.83
27.39
61.20
14MRP1
2035
76.44
25.84
40.30
Net change
(2019–2035)
¥20.57
¥2.14
¥65.50
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules
14219
TABLE 3—NOX EMISSIONS IN THE DETROIT AREA FOR THE 2014 NONATTAINMENT YEAR, 2019 ATTAINMENT YEAR, 2025
INTERIM YEAR, AND 2035 MAINTENANCE YEAR—Continued
[Tons per ozone season day]
2014
2019
2025
2035
Net change
(2019–2035)
Nonroad ...............................................................................................................
60.26
22.51
17.49
15.17
¥7.34
Total ..............................................................................................................
456.51
253.30
186.91
157.75
¥95.55
TABLE 4—VOC EMISSIONS IN THE DETROIT AREA FOR THE 2014 NONATTAINMENT YEAR, 2019 ATTAINMENT YEAR, 2025
INTERIM YEAR, AND 2035 MAINTENANCE YEAR
[Tons per ozone season day]
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
2014
2019
2025
2035
Net change
(2019–2035)
Point .....................................................................................................................
Nonpoint ...............................................................................................................
On-road ................................................................................................................
Nonroad ...............................................................................................................
32.24
149.93
83.20
69.63
13.74
134.77
51.70
30.46
14.06
134.12
34.40
27.39
14.12
133.11
22.00
26.56
+0.38
¥1.66
¥29.70
¥3.90
Total ..............................................................................................................
335.00
230.67
209.97
195.79
¥34.88
As shown in Tables 3 and 4, NOX and
VOC emissions in the Detroit area are
projected to decrease by 95.55 tons per
ozone season day and 34.88 tons per
ozone season day, respectively, between
the 2019 attainment year and 2035
maintenance year. Michigan’s
maintenance demonstration for the
Detroit area shows maintenance of the
2015 ozone NAAQS by providing
emissions information to support the
demonstration that future emissions of
NOX and VOC will remain at or below
2019 emission levels when considering
both future source growth and
implementation of future controls.
In addition, EPA’s 2016v2 modeling
platform includes updated air quality
modeling of the contiguous United
States, projecting ozone concentrations
at all air quality monitors in 2023, 2026,
and 2032.8 That modeling incorporates
the most recent updates to emissions
inventories, including on-the-books
emissions reductions, and meteorology.
This modeling indicates that EPA does
not project the Detroit area to be in
nonattainment of the 2015 ozone
NAAQS, nor does EPA expect the area
to struggle with maintenance, in those
modeled future years. We propose to
find that EPA’s ozone transport air
quality modeling further supports
Michigan’s demonstration that the
Detroit area will continue to maintain
the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
3. Continued Air Quality Monitoring
Michigan has committed to continue
to operate its ozone monitors in the
8 https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-modeling/
2016v2-platform.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Mar 11, 2022
Jkt 256001
Detroit area for the duration of the
maintenance period. Michigan remains
obligated to meet monitoring
requirements, to continue to quality
assure monitoring data in accordance
with 40 CFR part 58, and to enter all
data into the AQS in accordance with
Federal guidelines.
4. Verification of Continued Attainment
Michigan has confirmed that it has
the legal authority to enforce and
implement the requirements of its SIP.
Michigan has further committed that it
has the authority to implement the
requested SIP revision, which would
include the maintenance plan for the
Detroit area. This includes the authority
to adopt, implement, and enforce any
subsequent emission control measures
determined to be necessary to correct
future ozone attainment problems.
Verification of continued attainment
is accomplished through operation of
the ambient ozone monitoring network
and the periodic update of the area’s
emissions inventory. Michigan will
continue to operate the ozone monitors
located in the Detroit area. There are no
plans to discontinue operation, relocate,
or otherwise change the existing ozone
monitoring network other than through
revisions in the network approved by
EPA.
In addition, to track future levels of
emissions, Michigan will continue to
develop and submit to EPA updated
emission inventories for all source
categories at least once every three
years, consistent with the requirements
of 40 CFR part 51, subpart A, and in 40
CFR 51.122. The Consolidated
Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) was
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
promulgated by EPA on June 10, 2002
(67 FR 39602). The CERR was replaced
by the Annual Emissions Reporting
Requirements on December 17, 2008 (73
FR 76539). The most recent triennial
inventory for Michigan was compiled
for 2017, and 2020 is in progress. Point
source facilities covered by Michigan’s
emission statement program, described
below in section VII., will continue to
submit VOC and NOX emissions on an
annual basis.
5. What is the contingency plan for the
Detroit area?
Section 175A of the CAA requires that
the state adopt a maintenance plan as a
SIP revision that includes such
contingency measures as EPA deems
necessary to assure that the state will
promptly correct a violation of the
NAAQS that occurs after redesignation
of the area to attainment of the NAAQS.
The maintenance plan must identify:
The contingency measures to be
considered and, if needed for
maintenance, adopted and
implemented; a schedule and procedure
for adoption and implementation; and a
time limit for action by the state. The
state should also identify specific
indicators to be used to determine when
the contingency measures need to be
considered, adopted, and implemented.
The maintenance plan must include a
commitment that the state will
implement all measures with respect to
the control of the pollutant that were
contained in the SIP before
redesignation of the area to attainment
in accordance with section 175A(d) of
the CAA.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
14220
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules
As required by section 175A of the
CAA, Michigan has adopted a
contingency plan for the Detroit area to
address possible future ozone air quality
problems. The contingency plan
adopted by Detroit has two levels of
response, a warning level response and
an action level response.
In Michigan’s plan, a warning level
response will be triggered when an
annual fourth-highest monitored value
of 0.074 ppm or higher is monitored
within the maintenance area. A warning
level response will require Michigan to
conduct a study. The study would
assess whether the ozone value
indicates a trend toward a higher ozone
value and whether emissions appear to
be increasing. The study will evaluate
whether the trend, if any, is likely to
continue and, if so, the control measures
necessary to reverse the trend, taking
into account ease and timing of
implementation. Any implementation of
necessary controls in response to a
warning level response trigger will
occur within 18 months of the
conclusion of the ozone season.
In Michigan’s plan, an action level
response would be triggered when the
fourth-highest monitored value,
averaged over two years, of 0.071 ppm
or higher is monitored within the
maintenance area. The action level
response will also be triggered if a threeyear design value exceeds the level of
the 2015 ozone NAAQS (0.070 ppm).
When an action level response is
triggered and not found to be due to an
exceptional event, malfunction, or
noncompliance with a permit condition
or rule requirement, Michigan will
determine what additional control
measures are needed to assure future
attainment of the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
Control measures selected will be
adopted and implemented within 18
months from the close of the ozone
season that prompted the action level.
Michigan may also consider if
significant new regulations not
currently included as part of the
maintenance provisions will be
implemented in a timely manner and
would thus constitute an adequate
contingency measure response.
Michigan included the following list
of potential contingency measures in its
maintenance plan. However, Michigan
is not limited to the measures on this
list:
1. VOC or NOX RACT rules for existing
sources covered by Control
Technique Guidelines, Alternative
Control Guidelines, or other
appropriate guidance
2. Application of VOC RACT on existing
smaller sources
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Mar 11, 2022
Jkt 256001
3. Alternative fuel and diesel retrofit
programs for fleet vehicle
operations
4. VOC or NOX control on sources
emitting less than 100 tons per year
5. Increased VOC or NOX emission
offsets for new and modified major
sources
6. Reduced idling programs
7. Trip reduction programs
8. Traffic flow and transit improvements
9. Increased turnover of legacy natural
gas distribution pipelines
10. Stationary engine controls
11. Rules under the American
Innovation and Manufacturing Act
12. Rules for consumer products
13. Additional measures identified by
EGLE
To qualify as a contingency measure,
emissions reductions from that measure
must not be factored into the emissions
projections used in the maintenance
plan.
EPA has concluded that Michigan’s
maintenance plan adequately addresses
the five basic components of a
maintenance plan: Attainment
inventory, maintenance demonstration,
monitoring network, verification of
continued attainment, and a
contingency plan. In addition, as
required by section 175A(b) of the CAA,
Michigan has committed to submit to
EPA an updated ozone maintenance
plan eight years after redesignation of
the Detroit area to cover an additional
ten years beyond the initial 10-year
maintenance period. Thus, EPA finds
that the maintenance plan SIP revision
submitted by Michigan for the Detroit
area meets the requirements of section
175A of the CAA, and EPA proposes to
approve it as a revision to the Michigan
SIP.
V. Has the state adopted approvable
motor vehicle emission budgets?
A. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets
Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new
transportation plans, programs, or
projects that receive Federal funding or
support, such as the construction of new
highways, must ‘‘conform’’ to (i.e., be
consistent with) the SIP. Conformity to
the SIP means that transportation
activities will not cause or contribute to
any new air quality violations, increase
the frequency or severity of any existing
air quality problems, or delay timely
attainment or any required interim
emissions reductions or any other
milestones. Regulations at 40 CFR part
93 set forth EPA policy, criteria, and
procedures for demonstrating and
ensuring conformity of transportation
activities to a SIP.
Transportation conformity is a
requirement for nonattainment and
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
maintenance areas. Maintenance areas
are areas that were previously
nonattainment for a particular NAAQS,
but that have been redesignated to
attainment with an approved CAA
section 175A maintenance plan for the
NAAQS.
Under the CAA, states are required to
submit, at various times, control strategy
SIPs for nonattainment areas and
maintenance plans for areas seeking
redesignations to attainment of the
ozone standard and maintenance areas.
See the SIP requirements for the 2015
ozone standard in EPA’s December 6,
2018, implementation rule (83 FR
62998). These control strategy SIPs
(including reasonable further progress
plans and attainment plans) and
maintenance plans must include motor
vehicle emissions budgets for criteria
pollutants, including ozone, and their
precursor pollutants (VOC and NOX) to
address pollution from on-road
transportation sources. The budgets are
the portion of the total allowable
emissions that are allocated to highway
and transit vehicle use that, together
with emissions from other sources in
the area, will provide for attainment or
maintenance. See 40 CFR 93.101.
Under 40 CFR part 93, a budget for an
area seeking a redesignation to
attainment must be established, at
minimum, for the last year of the
maintenance plan. A state may adopt
budgets for other years as well. The
budget serves as a ceiling on emissions
from an area’s planned transportation
system. The budget concept is further
explained in the preamble to the
November 24, 1993, Transportation
Conformity Rule (58 FR 62188). The
preamble also describes how to
establish the budget(s) in the SIP and
how to revise the budget(s), if needed,
after initially establishing a budget in
the SIP.
As discussed earlier, Michigan’s
maintenance plan includes NOX and
VOC budgets for the Detroit area for
2025, which is an interim year, as well
as 2035, which is the last year of the
maintenance period. EPA has reviewed
Michigan’s NOX and VOC budgets for
the area and, in this action, is proposing
to approve them.9 We are also starting
the adequacy review process for these
budgets to determine if they meet the
adequacy criteria in the transportation
conformity regulations (40 CFR
93.118(e)(4)). Michigan’s January 3,
2022, maintenance plan submission,
including the budgets for this area, is
available for public comment via this
9 See 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2) for requirements
associated with making adequacy findings through
rulemaking on a submitted SIP.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
14221
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules
proposed rulemaking. The submission
was endorsed by the Governor’s
designee and Michigan provided
opportunity for a public hearing. The
budgets were developed as part of an
interagency consultation process which
includes Federal, state, and local
agencies. The budgets were clearly
identified and precisely quantified.
These budgets, when considered
together with all other emissions
sources, are consistent with
maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
TABLE 5—MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS FOR THE DETROIT AREA FOR THE 2025 INTERIM YEAR AND 2035
MAINTENANCE YEAR
[Tons per ozone season day]
2025 Interim year
Projected
on-road
emissions
NOX ..................................................................................
VOCs ................................................................................
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
As shown in Table 5, the 2025 and
2035 budgets exceed the estimated 2025
and 2035 on-road sector emissions. To
accommodate future variations in VMT
in the area, EGLE allocated to the
mobile sector a portion of the safety
margin, as described further below.10
Michigan has demonstrated that the
Detroit area can maintain the 2015
ozone NAAQS in the 2035 maintenance
year with mobile source emissions of
102.41 tons per ozone season day of
NOX and 44.67 tons per ozone season
day of VOCs. Similarly, the Detroit area
can maintain the 2015 ozone NAAQS in
the 2025 interim year with mobile
source emissions of 104.35 tons per
ozone season day of NOX and 47.86 tons
per ozone season day of VOCs. Despite
partial allocation of the safety margin,
emissions will remain under emission
levels in the 2019 attainment year.
EPA is proposing to approve the
budgets for use to determine
transportation conformity in the Detroit
area, because EPA has determined that
the area can maintain attainment of the
2015 ozone NAAQS for the relevant
maintenance period with mobile source
emissions at the levels of the budgets.
B. What is a safety margin?
A ‘‘safety margin’’ is the amount by
which the total projected emissions
from all sources of a given pollutant are
less than the total emissions that would
satisfy the applicable requirement for
maintenance. 40 CFR 93.101. As noted
in Tables 3 and 4, the emissions in the
Detroit area are projected to have safety
margins of 95.55 tons per ozone season
day for NOX and 34.88 tons per ozone
season day for VOC in 2035 (the
difference between emissions in the
2019 attainment year, and projected
10 Allocation
of a safety margin to an area’s motor
vehicle emissions budgets is provided for by the
transportation conformity rule. See 40 CFR
93.124(a).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Mar 11, 2022
Jkt 256001
61.20
34.40
Safety
margin
allocation
43.15
13.46
2035 Maintenance year
104.35
47.86
emissions in the 2035 maintenance year,
for all sources in the Detroit area).
Similarly, there is a safety margin of
66.39 tons per ozone season day for
NOX and 20.69 tons per ozone season
day for VOC in 2025. Even if emissions
exceeded projected levels by the full
amount of the safety margin, the
counties would still demonstrate
maintenance since emission levels
would equal those in the attainment
year.
As shown in Table 5 above, Michigan
is allocating a portion of that safety
margin to the mobile source sector.
Specifically, in 2025, Michigan is
allocating 43.15 tons per ozone season
day and 13.46 tons per ozone season
day of the NOX and VOC safety margins,
respectively. In 2035, Michigan is
allocating 62.11 tons per ozone season
day and 22.67 tons per ozone season
day of the NOX and VOC safety margins,
respectively. Michigan is not requesting
allocation to the budgets of the entire
available safety margins reflected in the
demonstration of maintenance. In fact,
the amount allocated to the budgets
represents only a portion of the 2025
and 2035 safety margins. Therefore,
even though the State is requesting
budgets that exceed the projected onroad mobile source emissions for 2025
and 2035 contained in the
demonstration of maintenance, the
increase in on-road mobile source
emissions that can be considered for
transportation conformity purposes is
within the safety margins of the ozone
maintenance demonstration. Further,
once allocated to mobile sources, these
safety margins will not be available for
use by other sources.
VI. Base Year Emissions Inventory
As discussed above, sections 172(c)(3)
and 182(a)(1) of the CAA require states
to submit a comprehensive, accurate,
and current inventory of actual
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Projected
on-road
emissions
Total
budget
40.30
22.00
Safety
margin
allocation
62.11
22.67
Total
budget
102.41
44.67
emissions from sources of NOX and
VOC emitted within the boundaries of
the ozone nonattainment area. For the
2015 ozone NAAQS, EPA specifies that
states submit ozone season day
emissions estimates for an inventory
calendar year to be consistent with the
base year for RFP plans as required by
40 CFR 51.1310(b). For the RFP base
year for the 2015 ozone NAAQS under
40 CFR 51.1310(b), states may use a
calendar year for the most recently
available complete triennial emissions
inventory (40 CFR 51, subpart A)
preceding the year of the area’s effective
date of designation as a nonattainment
area (83 FR 62998).11 See the SIP
requirements for the 2015 ozone
standard in EPA’s December 6, 2018,
implementation rule (83 FR 62998), and
EPA’s 2017 document ‘‘Emissions
Inventory Guidance for Implementation
of Ozone and Particulate Matter
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) and Regional Haze
Regulations.’’ 12
In its December 18, 2020, submittal,
Michigan requested that EPA approve
into its SIP an inventory addressing the
emissions inventory requirement of
CAA section 182(a)(1). Michigan’s SIP
revision included inventories of NOX
and VOC emissions for several
nonattainment areas, including the
Detroit area, for the year 2017. At the
time of its submittal, data for 2017 was
the most recent comprehensive,
accurate, and quality assured triennial
emissions inventory in the NEI
database. Michigan’s submittal included
estimates of NOX and VOC emissions for
four general classes of anthropogenic
sources, point, nonpoint, on-road
mobile, and nonroad mobile; biogenic
11 The RFP requirements specified in CAA section
182(b)(1) applies to all ozone nonattainment areas
classified Moderate or higher.
12 https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/201612/documents/2016_ei_guidance_for_naaqs.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
14222
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules
emissions; and event emissions, which
are discrete and short-lived sources
such as wildfires.
To develop emissions inventories for
the year 2017, Michigan began with
annual emissions data contained in the
2017 NEI for the point, nonpoint, onroad, nonroad, biogenic, and event
categories. In developing ozone season
day emissions, Michigan again used July
as the representative ozone season
month. EGLE also analyzed the
prevalence of weekend days with ozone
values exceeding the 2015 ozone
NAAQS and determined that including
weekend days in the typical ozone
season day emission derivation is
appropriate. To convert annual
emissions data to ozone season day
values, EGLE extracted data from EPA’s
2016v1 modeling platform and
calculated a conversion factor for the
point, nonpoint, on-road, nonroad, and
biogenic data categories.13 EGLE
determined the event category
emissions were too low and too variable
from year to year to benefit from
applying a conversion factor.
Under CAA section 182(a)(1) and 40
CFR 51.1115, states must submit a base
year emissions inventory within two
years of the effective date of designation
of each nonattainment area for the 2015
ozone NAAQS. For the Detroit area, this
requirement became due on August 3,
2020. At the time that EGLE prepared its
inventory of 2017 emissions to address
the requirements of section 182(a)(1),
several improvements in data sources
were not yet available. Specifically,
EGLE relied upon a version of the 2017
NEI that did not include a revised point
source inventory to correct airport
emissions. Additionally, EGLE relied
upon the 2016v1 modeling platform,
which did not yet include
improvements from the 2016v2
modeling platform including updated
information from the 2017 NEI,
MOVES3, and revised inventory
methodologies. EPA is not evaluating
Michigan’s 2017 emissions inventory
against platforms or data sources that
were not available at the time of
submission.
NOX and VOC emissions data for the
year 2017 are shown in Tables 6 and 7
below. Data are expressed in terms of
tons per ozone season day.
TABLE 6—NOX EMISSIONS FOR COUNTIES IN THE DETROIT AREA FOR THE 2017 BASE YEAR
[Tons per ozone season day]
Point
Nonpoint
On-road
Nonroad
Biogenic
Event
Total
Livingston .............................................................................
Macomb ...............................................................................
Monroe .................................................................................
Oakland ................................................................................
St. Clair ................................................................................
Washtenaw ..........................................................................
Wayne ..................................................................................
1.53
2.55
16.05
2.83
55.62
2.56
41.35
0.72
3.78
1.43
5.22
3.04
1.45
7.77
5.78
16.19
5.22
29.68
3.98
9.35
36.79
1.13
3.83
1.31
7.54
1.42
1.64
2.71
1.32
1.21
2.29
1.37
1.99
1.73
1.00
0.04
0.02
0.01
0.08
0.03
0.05
0.05
10.52
27.58
26.31
46.72
66.08
16.78
89.67
Total ..............................................................................
122.49
23.41
106.99
19.58
10.91
0.28
283.66
TABLE 7—VOC EMISSIONS FOR COUNTIES IN THE DETROIT AREA FOR THE 2017 BASE YEAR
[Tons per ozone season day]
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Point
Nonpoint
On-road
Nonroad
Biogenic
Event
Total
Livingston .............................................................................
Macomb ...............................................................................
Monroe .................................................................................
Oakland ................................................................................
St. Clair ................................................................................
Washtenaw ..........................................................................
Wayne ..................................................................................
0.42
8.22
0.97
2.61
3.16
0.61
15.19
6.10
28.46
5.79
36.72
5.68
15.56
57.45
3.14
11.50
2.66
18.55
2.45
5.12
21.74
1.77
4.77
2.02
10.62
2.41
2.59
8.50
22.11
13.64
13.17
33.00
28.77
22.67
24.51
0.65
0.47
0.18
1.48
0.59
0.77
1.05
34.19
67.06
24.79
102.98
43.06
47.32
128.44
Total ..............................................................................
31.18
155.76
65.16
32.68
157.87
5.19
447.84
As shown in Table 6, total NOX
emissions in the Detroit area for the
2017 base year are 283.66 tons per
summer day. As shown in Table 7, total
VOC emissions in the Detroit area for
the 2017 base year are 447.84 tons per
summer day.
Michigan’s December 18, 2020,
emissions inventory submission
includes a demonstration showing that
approval of this SIP revision is
consistent with CAA section 110(l).
Section 110(l) provides that EPA cannot
approve a SIP revision if the revision
would interfere with attainment and
maintenance of the NAAQS, reasonable
further progress, or any other applicable
requirement of the CAA. EGLE is
making this submission as required by
CAA sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1),
and approval of the 2017 base year
inventories would strengthen the
Michigan SIP and would not interfere
with any applicable CAA requirement.
EPA reviewed Michigan’s December
18, 2020, submittal for consistency with
sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) of the
CAA, and with EPA’s emissions
inventory requirements. In particular,
EPA reviewed the techniques used by
EGLE to derive and quality assure the
emissions estimates. The documentation
of the emissions estimation procedures
is thorough and is adequate for EPA to
determine that Michigan followed
acceptable procedures to estimate the
emissions. Accordingly, we propose to
conclude that Michigan has developed
inventories of NOX and VOC emissions
that are comprehensive and complete.
EPA therefore proposes to approve the
emissions inventory for the Detroit area
in Michigan’s December 18, 2020,
submittal and shown above in Tables 6
and 7 as meeting the emissions
13 https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-modeling/
2016v1-platform.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Mar 11, 2022
Jkt 256001
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
inventory requirements of sections
172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) of the CAA.
In this rulemaking, EPA is only
evaluating the portions of Michigan’s
December 18, 2020, emissions inventory
submittal relating to the Detroit area.
EPA is not evaluating inventories
relating to other nonattainment areas.
Instead, EPA will evaluate these
inventories in a separate rulemaking.
VII. Emissions Statement
Section 182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA
requires states with ozone
nonattainment areas to submit revisions
to their SIP to require the owner or
operator of each stationary source of
NOX or VOC to provide the state with
an annual statement documenting the
actual emissions of NOX and VOC from
their source. Under section
182(a)(3)(B)(ii), a state may waive the
emissions statement requirement for any
class or category of stationary sources
which emits less than 25 tons per year
of VOC or NOX if the state, in its base
year emissions inventory, provides an
inventory of emissions from such class
or category of sources based on the
EPA’s emission factors, or other method
acceptable to the EPA.
On March 8, 1994, EPA approved
Michigan’s emission statement program
as a revision to the SIP (59 FR 10752).
Specifically, EPA approved into the SIP
the following: Section 5 of the 1965 Air
Pollution Act 348 (1965 PA 348),
Section 14a of 1965 PA 348, Air
Pollution Control Rule 336.202 (Rule 2),
and the 1993 Michigan Air Pollution
Reporting Forms, Reference Tables, and
General Instructions.
In a separate SIP submittal also dated
December 18, 2020, Michigan requested
that EPA revise the emissions statement
program in its SIP by adding, removing,
and updating certain statutes and
reporting forms.
First, Michigan requests that EPA
remove from the SIP Section 5 of 1965
PA 348 and approve into the SIP
Michigan Complied Laws (MCL)
324.5503, Section 5503 of 1994 PA 451.
At the time that EPA approved Section
5 of 1965 PA 348 in 1994, this measure
conferred several authorities onto the
Michigan Commission on the
Environment, including the authority to
require sources to report their
emissions. In 1995, 1965 PA 348 was
repealed by the Michigan Legislature
and replaced with 1994 PA 451, and all
Commission powers were transferred to
the department. EGLE’s current
authority to require emissions reports,
which Michigan is now requesting EPA
approve into the SIP, is provided at
MCL 324.5503, Section 5503 of 1994 PA
451.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Mar 11, 2022
Jkt 256001
Second, Michigan requests that EPA
remove from the SIP Section 14a of 1965
PA 348, which relates to surveillance
fees. In its submittal, Michigan states its
belief that Section 14a was incorrectly
submitted to and approved into the SIP
as part of the emissions statement
program, and that this measure is not
required as part of an emissions
statement program. In this rulemaking,
EPA is not evaluating the portion of
Michigan’s submittal requesting the
removal of Section 14a of 1965 PA 348
from its SIP. Instead, EPA will evaluate
this request in a separate rulemaking.
Third, Michigan requests that EPA
retain in its SIP Rule 2 and strengthen
this rule by approving into the SIP
AQD–013, Last Revision Date: July 22,
2020, entitled ‘‘Criteria Pollutant
Threshold Levels for Point Sources’’
(AQD–013), of EGLE’s AQD Policy and
Procedure. Michigan’s remaining
authority to require emissions reports
from certain sources is provided at Rule
2; since EPA approved Rule 2 into its
SIP, Michigan has developed specific
policies and procedures to determine
which stationary sources must comply
with Rule 2. These policies and
procedures, including specific
thresholds of emissions that trigger Rule
2 applicability, are provided at AQD–
013. Additionally, AQD–013 is
applicable to the emissions reporting
requirements of Air Pollution Control
Rule 336.1212 (Rule 212), which EPA
approved into the SIP on August 31,
2018 (83 FR 44485). Michigan first
developed AQD–013 in 1996 and most
recently updated AQD–013 in 2020.
Fourth, Michigan requests that EPA
remove from the SIP its 1993 Michigan
Air Pollution Reporting forms and
reference tables and strengthen its SIP
by replacing them with the 2019 version
of certain Michigan Air Emissions
Reporting System (MAERS) forms.
Specifically, Michigan is requesting that
EPA approve into the SIP the 2019
version of five forms: MAERS form SB–
101 Submit, MAERS form S–101
Source, MAERS form A–101 Activity,
MAERS form EU–101 Emission Unit,
and MAERS form E–101 Emissions.
These forms satisfy requirements under
EPA’s 1992 Guidance on the
Implementation of an Emission
Statement Program relating to
certification of data accuracy, source
identification information, operating
schedule, emissions information,
control equipment information, and
process data.
Fifth, Michigan requests that EPA
remove from its SIP the 1993 general
instructions and strengthen its SIP by
replacing them with the January 2020
MAERS User Guide. EGLE no longer
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
14223
uses the 1993 general instructions that
are currently in the SIP, and instead
provides sources with its 2020 user
guide, which clearly defines terms used
in the MAERS forms and aids the
sources in completing their MAERS
submittal via the electronic format for
all required pollutants.
Michigan’s December 18, 2020,
emissions statement submission also
includes a demonstration showing that
approval of this SIP revision is
consistent with CAA section 110(l). The
revisions EPA is proposing to approve
would strengthen Michigan’s SIPapproved emissions statement program
by removing from the SIP outdated
reporting forms and a statute that has
been repealed by the state legislature
and replacing those measures with the
statute containing the state’s current
authority to require the reporting of
emissions, as well as updated program
forms, policies and procedures, and user
information. These revisions would not
interfere with any applicable CAA
requirement.
EPA reviewed Michigan’s December
18, 2020, submittal for consistency with
182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA and EPA’s
Guidance on the Implementation of an
Emission Statement Program. Section
182(a)(3)(B) requires annual submission
emissions from stationary sources with
emissions greater than 25 tons per year
(tpy) of NOX and VOC. At AQD–013,
Michigan requires annual reports from
sources with VOC emissions of 10 tpy
or greater statewide, and NOX emissions
of 25 tpy or greater in ozone
nonattainment areas and 40 tpy in all
other areas of the state. As described
above, EPA will address the portion of
Michigan’s submittal requesting the
removal of Section 14a of 1965 PA 348
from its SIP in a separate action. The
remaining portions of Michigan’s
submittal are consistent with
182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA and relevant
guidance and would strengthen
Michigan’s SIP-approved emissions
statement program. EPA therefore
proposes to approve the remaining
portions of Michigan’s December 18,
2020, emissions statement submittal as
meeting the emissions statement
requirements of section 182(a)(3)(B) of
the CAA.
VIII. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to determine that
the Detroit nonattainment area is
attaining the 2015 ozone NAAQS, based
on quality-assured and certified
monitoring data for 2019–2021. EPA is
proposing to approve portions of
Michigan’s December 18, 2020,
submittals as meeting the base year
emissions inventory and emissions
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
14224
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules
statement requirements of sections
182(a)(1) and 182(a)(3), respectively.
EPA is also proposing to approve, as a
revision to the Michigan SIP, the state’s
maintenance plan for the area. The
maintenance plan is designed to keep
the Detroit area in attainment of the
2015 ozone NAAQS through 2035. EPA
is proposing to determine that upon
final approval of Michigan’s 2017 base
year emissions inventory, emission
statement SIP, and maintenance plan
SIP, the area will have met the
requirements for redesignation under
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is
thus proposing to change the legal
designation of the Detroit area from
nonattainment to attainment for the
2015 ozone NAAQS. Finally, EPA is
proposing to approve the newly
established 2025 and 2035 motor
vehicle emissions budgets for the
Detroit area and initiating the adequacy
process for these budgets.
jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
IX. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is proposing to
include in a final EPA rule regulatory
text that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is
proposing to incorporate by reference
Michigan Act 451, Section 5503,
effective March 30, 1995. EPA has
made, and will continue to make, these
documents generally available through
www.regulations.gov and at the EPA
Region 5 Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
preamble for more information).
X. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, redesignation of an
area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of a
maintenance plan under section
107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the
status of a geographical area and do not
impose any additional regulatory
requirements on sources beyond those
imposed by state law. A redesignation to
attainment does not in and of itself
create any new requirements, but rather
results in the applicability of
requirements contained in the CAA for
areas that have been redesignated to
attainment. Moreover, the Administrator
is required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA and applicable Federal regulations.
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. Accordingly, the proposed
actions to approve Michigan’s SIP
submissions merely approve state law as
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Mar 11, 2022
Jkt 256001
meeting Federal requirements and do
not impose additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law. For
these reasons, this action:
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to review by the Office of
Management and Budget under
Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, 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), because
redesignation is an action that affects
the status of a geographical area and
does not impose any new regulatory
requirements on tribes, impact any
existing sources of air pollution on
tribal lands, nor impair the maintenance
of ozone national ambient air quality
standards in tribal lands.
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: March 7, 2022.
Debra Shore,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2022–05253 Filed 3–11–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 312
[EPA–HQ–OLEM–2021–0946; FRL–9334–
01–OLEM]
Standards and Practices for All
Appropriate Inquiries
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
EPA is proposing to amend
the Standards and Practices for All
Appropriate Inquiries to reference a
standard practice recently made
available by ASTM International, a
widely recognized standards
development organization. Specifically,
EPA is proposing to amend the All
Appropriate Inquiries Rule to reference
ASTM International’s E1527–21
‘‘Standard Practice for Environmental
Site Assessments: Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment
Process’’ and allow for its use to satisfy
the requirements for conducting all
appropriate inquiries under the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act. In the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’
section in this issue of Federal Register,
EPA is amending the All Appropriate
Inquiries Rule to reference ASTM
International’s E1527–21 standard
practice as a direct final rule without a
prior proposed rule. If we receive no
adverse comment, we will not take
further action on this proposed rule.
DATES: Written comments must be
received by April 13, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OLEM–2021–0946 at
www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\14MRP1.SGM
14MRP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 49 (Monday, March 14, 2022)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 14210-14224]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05253]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0730; EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0731; EPA-R05-OAR-2022-0004;
FRL-9629-01-R5]
Air Plan Approval; Michigan; Redesignation of the Detroit, MI
Area to Attainment of the 2015 Ozone Standards
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to find
that the Detroit, Michigan area is attaining the 2015 primary and
secondary ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), and to
act in accordance with a request from the Michigan Department of
Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) to redesignate the area to
attainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS because the request meets the
statutory requirements for redesignation under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
The Detroit area includes Livingston, Macomb, Monroe, Oakland, St.
Clair, Washtenaw, and Wayne Counties. EGLE submitted this request on
January 3, 2022. EPA is proposing to approve, as a revision to the
Michigan State Implementation Plan (SIP), the State's plan for
maintaining the 2015 ozone NAAQS through 2035 in the Detroit area. EPA
is also proposing to approve Michigan's 2025 and 2035 volatile organic
compound (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) motor vehicle
emissions budgets (budgets) for the Detroit area and initiating the
adequacy review process for these budgets. Finally, EPA is proposing to
approve portions of separate December 18, 2020, submittals as meeting
the applicable requirements for a base year emissions inventory and
emissions statement program.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 13, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2020-0730, EPA-R05-OAR-2020-0731, or EPA-R05-OAR-2022-0004 at
https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to [email protected]. For
comments submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions
for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be edited or
removed from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, EPA may
publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish
to make. EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents
located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, please
contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section. For the full EPA public comment policy, information about CBI
or multimedia submissions, and general guidance on making effective
comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric Svingen, Environmental Engineer,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-4489,
[email protected]. The EPA Region 5 office is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays and
facility closures due to COVID-19.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
I. What is EPA proposing?
EPA is proposing to take several related actions. EPA is proposing
to determine that the Detroit nonattainment area is attaining the 2015
ozone NAAQS, based on quality-assured and certified monitoring data for
2019-2021, and that the Detroit area has met the requirements for
redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is thus
proposing to change the legal designation of the Detroit area
[[Page 14211]]
from nonattainment to attainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. EPA is also
proposing to approve, as a revision to the Michigan SIP, the State's
maintenance plan for the area. The maintenance plan is designed to keep
the Detroit area in attainment of the 2015 ozone NAAQS through 2035.
EPA is proposing to approve the newly established 2025 and 2035 motor
vehicle emissions budgets for the Detroit area and is initiating the
adequacy process for these budgets. Finally, EPA is proposing to
approve portions of Michigan's separate December 18, 2020, submittals,
because they satisfy the applicable CAA requirements for a base year
emissions inventory and emissions statement program for the Detroit
area.
II. What is the background for these actions?
EPA has determined that ground-level ozone is detrimental to human
health. On October 1, 2015, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone
NAAQS of 0.070 parts per million (ppm). See 80 FR 65292 (October 26,
2015). Under EPA's regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 2015 ozone NAAQS
is attained in an area when the 3-year average of the annual fourth
highest daily maximum 8-hour average concentration is equal to or less
than 0.070 ppm, when truncated after the thousandth decimal place, at
all of the ozone monitoring sites in the area. See 40 CFR 50.19 and
appendix U to 40 CFR part 50.
Upon promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, section 107(d)(1)(B)
of the CAA requires EPA to designate as nonattainment any areas that
are violating the NAAQS, based on the most recent three years of
quality assured ozone monitoring data. The Detroit area was designated
as a Marginal nonattainment area for the 2015 ozone NAAQS on June 4,
2018 (83 FR 25776) (effective August 3, 2018).
III. What are the criteria for redesignation?
Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA allows redesignation of an area to
attainment of the NAAQS provided that: (1) The Administrator (EPA)
determines that the area has attained the NAAQS; (2) the Administrator
has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for the area
under section 110(k) of the CAA; (3) the Administrator determines that
the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the applicable
SIP, applicable Federal air pollutant control regulations, and other
permanent and enforceable emission reductions; (4) the Administrator
has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area as meeting the
requirements of section 175A of the CAA; and (5) the state containing
the area has met all requirements applicable to the area for the
purposes of redesignation under section 110 and part D of the CAA.
On April 16, 1992, EPA provided guidance on redesignations in the
General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the CAA
Amendments of 1990 (57 FR 13498) and supplemented this guidance on
April 28, 1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has provided further guidance on
processing redesignation requests in policy memoranda.
IV. What is EPA's analysis of Michigan's redesignation request?
A. Has the Detroit area attained the 2015 ozone NAAQS?
For redesignation of a nonattainment area to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the area has attained the applicable
NAAQS (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). An area is attaining the 2015
ozone NAAQS if it meets the 2015 ozone NAAQS, as determined in
accordance with 40 CFR 50.19 and appendix U of part 50, based on three
complete, consecutive calendar years of quality-assured air quality
data for all monitoring sites in the area. To attain the 2015 ozone
NAAQS, the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-
hour average ozone concentrations (ozone design values) at each monitor
must not exceed 0.070 ppm. The air quality data must be collected and
quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and recorded in EPA's
Air Quality System (AQS). Ambient air quality monitoring data for the
3-year period must also meet data completeness requirements. An ozone
design value is valid if daily maximum 8-hour average concentrations
are available for at least 90% of the days within the ozone monitoring
seasons,\1\ on average, for the 3-year period, with a minimum data
completeness of 75% during the ozone monitoring season of any year
during the 3-year period. See section 4 of appendix U to 40 CFR part
50.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The ozone season is defined by state in 40 CFR 58, appendix
D. The ozone season for Michigan is March-October. See 80 FR 65292,
65466-67 (October 26, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA has reviewed the available ozone monitoring data from EGLE's
monitoring sites in the Detroit area for the 2019-2021 period. These
data have been quality assured, are recorded in the AQS, and were
certified in advance of EPA's publication of this proposal. These data
demonstrate that the Detroit area is attaining the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
The annual fourth-highest 8-hour ozone concentrations and the 3-year
average of these concentrations (monitoring site ozone design values)
for all monitoring sites are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1--Annual Fourth-Highest Daily Maximum 8-Hour Ozone Concentrations and 3-Year Average of the Fourth-
Highest Daily Maximum 8-Hour Ozone Concentrations for the Detroit Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2019 4th high 2020 4th high 2021 4th high 2019-2021
County Monitor (ppm) (ppm) (ppm) average (ppm)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Macomb.......................... 26-099-0009 0.063 0.074 0.068 0.068
26-099-1003 0.062 0.070 0.067 0.066
Oakland......................... 26-125-0001 0.066 0.074 0.068 0.069
St. Clair....................... 26-147-0005 0.070 0.069 0.072 0.070
Washtenaw....................... 26-161-0008 0.060 0.072 0.066 0.066
26-161-9991 0.058 0.067 0.063 0.062
Wayne........................... 26-163-0001 0.062 0.070 0.069 0.067
26-163-0019 0.068 0.073 0.069 0.070
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 14212]]
The Detroit area's 3-year ozone design value for 2019-2021 is 0.070
ppm,\2\ which meets the 2015 ozone NAAQS. Therefore, in today's action,
EPA proposes to determine that the Detroit area is attaining the 2015
ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The monitor ozone design value for the monitor with the
highest 3-year averaged concentration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA will not take final action to determine that the Detroit area
is attaining the NAAQS nor to approve the redesignation of this area if
the design value of a monitoring site in the area violates the NAAQS
prior to final approval of the redesignation. As discussed in section
IV.D.3. below, EGLE has committed to continue monitoring ozone in this
area to verify maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
B. Has Michigan met all applicable requirements of section 110 and part
D of the CAA for the Detroit area, and does Michigan have a fully
approved SIP for the area under section 110(k) of the CAA?
For redesignation of an area from nonattainment to attainment of a
NAAQS, the CAA requires EPA to determine that the state has met all
applicable requirements under section 110 and part D of title I of the
CAA (see section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) of the CAA) and that the state has a
fully approved SIP under section 110(k) of the CAA (see section
107(d)(3)(E)(ii) of the CAA). EPA proposes to find that Michigan has
met all applicable SIP requirements for purposes of redesignation under
section 119 and part D of title I of the CAA (requirements specific to
nonattainment areas for the 2015 ozone NAAQA). Additionally, with the
exception of the base year emissions inventory requirement of section
182(a)(1) of the CAA and the emissions statement requirement of section
182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA, EPA proposes to find that Michigan has a fully
approved SIP under section 110(k) of the CAA. As discussed in sections
VI. and VII. below, EPA is proposing to approve Michigan's base year
emissions inventory and emissions statement program as meeting the
requirements of sections 182(a)(1) and 182(a)(3), respectively, for the
2015 ozone NAAQS. Upon final approval of these SIP elements, all
applicable requirements of the Michigan SIP for the area will have been
fully approved under section 110(k) of the CAA. In making these
proposed determinations, EPA ascertained which requirements are
applicable for purposes of redesignation, and whether the required
Michigan SIP elements are fully approved under section 110(k) and part
D of the CAA. As discussed more fully below, SIPs must be fully
approved only with respect to these applicable requirements of the CAA.
The September 4, 1992, memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air
Quality Management Division, entitled ``Procedures for Processing
Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' describes EPA's
interpretation of which requirements are ``applicable'' for purposes of
redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. Under this
interpretation, a requirement is not ``applicable'' unless it was due
prior to the state's submittal of a complete redesignation request for
the area. See also the September 17, 1993, memorandum from Michael H.
Shapiro, entitled ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for
Areas Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone
and Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
On or After November 15, 1992,'' and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66 (March 7,
1995) (redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor, Michigan to attainment of
the 1hour ozone NAAQS). Applicable requirements of the CAA that come
due subsequent to the state's submittal of a complete request remain
applicable until a redesignation to attainment is approved but are not
required as a prerequisite to redesignation.\3\ See section 175A(c) of
the CAA. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also 68
FR 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of the St. Louis/East St.
Louis area to attainment of the 1hour ozone NAAQS).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ EPA is, in a separate action, proposing to find that the
Detroit area failed to attain the 2015 ozone NAAQS by its attainment
date. If that determination were finalized, the area would be
reclassified to Moderate by operation of law. However, because of
EPA's interpretation and the date by which Michigan submitted its
request, those Moderate area requirements are not considered
applicable requirements for purposes of redesignating the Detroit
area. Specifically, at the time Michigan submitted its request, EPA
had not yet determined that the area failed to attain and had not
yet reclassified the area. Per CAA section 182(i) and consistent
with CAA section 179(d), EPA typically adjusts the deadlines for SIP
submissions that are required for newly reclassified areas.
Therefore, even if EPA were to finalize today the determination that
the area failed to attain and reclassify the area, the deadline for
the requirements associated with the reclassification would be set
at some point in the future. Michigan submitted its request to
redesignate well in advance of any hypothetical due date associated
with Moderate area requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Michigan has met all applicable requirements of section 110 and
part D of the CAA applicable to the Detroit area for purposes of
redesignation.
a. Section 110 General Requirements for Implementation Plans
Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA delineates the general requirements
for a SIP. Section 110(a)(2) provides that the SIP must have been
adopted by the state after reasonable public notice and hearing, and
that, among other things, it must: (1) Include enforceable emission
limitations and other control measures, means or techniques necessary
to meet the requirements of the CAA; (2) provide for establishment and
operation of appropriate devices, methods, systems and procedures
necessary to monitor ambient air quality; (3) provide for
implementation of a source permit program to regulate the modification
and construction of stationary sources within the areas covered by the
plan; (4) include provisions for the implementation of part C
prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) and part D new source
review (NSR) permit programs; (5) include provisions for stationary
source emission control measures, monitoring, and reporting; (6)
include provisions for air quality modeling; and, (7) provide for
public and local agency participation in planning and emission control
rule development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA requires SIPs to contain measures
to prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air
quality problems in another state. To implement this provision, EPA has
required certain states to establish programs to address transport of
certain air pollutants, e.g., NOX SIP call, the Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR), and the Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR).
However, like many of the 110(a)(2) requirements, the section
110(a)(2)(D) SIP requirements are not linked with a particular area's
ozone designation and classification. EPA concludes that the SIP
requirements linked with the area's ozone designation and
classification are the relevant measures to evaluate when reviewing a
redesignation request for the area. The section 110(a)(2)(D)
requirements, where applicable, continue to apply to a state regardless
of the designation of any one particular area within the state. Thus,
we believe these requirements are not applicable requirements for
purposes of redesignation. See 65 FR 37890 (June 15, 2000), 66 FR 50399
(October 19, 2001), 68 FR 25418, 25426-27 (May 13, 2003).
In addition, EPA believes that other section 110 elements that are
neither connected with nonattainment plan submissions nor linked with
an area's ozone attainment status are not
[[Page 14213]]
applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. The area will
still be subject to these requirements after the area is redesignated
to attainment of the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The section 110 and part D
requirements which are linked with a particular area's designation and
classification are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a
redesignation request. This approach is consistent with EPA's existing
policy on applicability (i.e., for redesignations) of conformity
requirements, as well as with section 184 ozone transport requirements.
See Reading, Pennsylvania proposed and final rulemakings, 61 FR 53174-
53176 (October 10, 1996) and 62 FR 24826 (May 7, 1997); Cleveland-
Akron-Loraine, Ohio final rulemaking, 61 FR 20458 (May 7, 1996); and
Tampa, Florida final rulemaking, 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995). See
also the discussion of this issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio ozone
redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 2000), and the Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania ozone redesignation (66 FR 50399, October 19, 2001).
We have reviewed Michigan's SIP and propose to find that it meets
the general SIP requirements under section 110 of the CAA, to the
extent those requirements are applicable for purposes of redesignation.
In any case, on September 28, 2021 (86 FR 53550), EPA approved elements
of the SIP submitted by Michigan to meet the requirements of section
110 for the 2015 ozone standard.
b. Part D Requirements
Section 172(c) of the CAA sets forth the basic requirements of air
quality plans for states with nonattainment areas that are required to
submit them pursuant to section 172(b). Subpart 2 of part D, which
includes section 182 of the CAA, establishes specific requirements for
ozone nonattainment areas depending on the areas' nonattainment
classifications.
The Detroit area was classified as Marginal under subpart 2 for the
2015 ozone NAAQS. As such, the area is subject to the subpart 1
requirements contained in section 172(c) and section 176. Similarly,
the area is subject to the subpart 2 requirements contained in section
182(a) (Marginal nonattainment area requirements). A thorough
discussion of the requirements contained in section 172(c) and 182 can
be found in the General Preamble for Implementation of Title I (57 FR
13498).
i. Subpart 1 Section 172 Requirements
As provided in subpart 2, for Marginal ozone nonattainment areas
such as the Detroit area, the specific requirements of section 182(a)
apply in lieu of the attainment planning requirements that would
otherwise apply under section 172(c), including the attainment
demonstration and reasonably available control measures (RACM) under
section 172(c)(1), reasonable further progress (RFP) under section
172(c)(2), and contingency measures under section 172(c)(9). 42 U.S.C.
7511a(a).
Section 172(c)(3) requires submission and approval of a
comprehensive, accurate and current inventory of actual emissions. This
requirement is superseded by the inventory requirement in section
182(a)(1) discussed below.
Section 172(c)(4) requires the identification and quantification of
allowable emissions for major new and modified stationary sources in an
area, and section 172(c)(5) requires source permits for the
construction and operation of new and modified major stationary sources
anywhere in the nonattainment area. EPA approved Michigan's NSR program
on December 16, 2013 (78 FR 76064), and most recently approved
revisions to Michigan's NSR program on May 12, 2021 (86 FR 25954).
Nonetheless, EPA has determined that, since PSD requirements will apply
after redesignation, areas being redesignated need not comply with the
requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to redesignation,
provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the NAAQS without
part D NSR. A more detailed rationale for this view is described in the
October 14, 1994, memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator
for Air and Radiation, entitled, ``Part D New Source Review
Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.'' See
rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60 FR 12467-12468, March 7, 1995);
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio (61 FR 20458, 20469-20470, May 7, 1996);
Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665, October 23, 2001); and Grand Rapids,
Michigan (61 FR 31834-31837, June 21, 1996). Michigan's PSD program
will become effective in the Detroit area upon redesignation to
attainment. EPA conditionally approved Michigan's PSD program on
September 16, 2008 (73 FR 53366), fully approved Michigan's PSD program
on March 25, 2010 (75 FR 14352), and most recently approved revisions
to Michigan's PSD program on May 12, 2021 (86 FR 25954).
Section 172(c)(6) requires the SIP to contain control measures
necessary to provide for attainment of the NAAQS. Because attainment
has been reached, no additional measures are needed to provide for
attainment.
Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to meet the applicable
provisions of section 110(a)(2). As noted above, we believe the
Michigan SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2) for purposes
of redesignation.
ii. Section 176 Conformity Requirements
Section 176(c) of the CAA requires that federally supported or
funded projects conform to the applicable SIP. The requirement to
determine conformity applies to transportation plans, programs and
projects that are developed, funded or approved under title 23 of the
United States Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act (transportation
conformity) as well as to all other federally supported or funded
projects (general conformity). State transportation conformity SIP
revisions must be consistent with Federal conformity regulations
relating to consultation, enforcement and enforceability that EPA
promulgated pursuant to its authority under the CAA.
EPA interprets the conformity SIP requirements \4\ as not applying
for purposes of evaluating a redesignation request under section 107(d)
because state conformity rules are still required after redesignation
and Federal conformity rules apply where state conformity rules have
not been approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001)
(upholding this interpretation); see also 60 FR 62748 (December 7,
1995) (redesignation of Tampa, Florida). Nonetheless, Michigan has an
approved conformity SIP for the Detroit area. See 61 FR 66609 (December
18, 1996) and 82 FR 17134 (April 10, 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ CAA section 176(c)(4)(E) requires states to submit revisions
to their SIPs to reflect certain Federal criteria and procedures for
determining transportation conformity. Transportation conformity
SIPs are different from SIPs requiring the development of motor
vehicle emissions budgets, such as control strategy SIPs and
maintenance plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
iii. Section 182(a) Requirements
Section 182(a)(1) requires states to submit a comprehensive,
accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions from sources of
NOX and VOC emitted within the boundaries of the ozone
nonattainment area within two years of designation. On December 18,
2020, Michigan submitted emissions inventories for the Detroit area for
the 2017 base year. As described in section VI. below, EPA is proposing
to approve Michigan's base year emissions inventory as meeting the
requirements
[[Page 14214]]
of section 182(a)(1) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
Under section 182(a)(2)(A), states with ozone nonattainment areas
that were designated prior to the enactment of the 1990 CAA amendments
were required to submit, within six months of classification, all rules
and corrections to existing VOC reasonably available control technology
(RACT) rules that were required under section 172(b)(3) prior to the
1990 CAA amendments. The Detroit area is not subject to the section
182(a)(2) RACT ``fix up'' requirement for the 2015 ozone NAAQS because
it was designated as nonattainment for this standard after the
enactment of the 1990 CAA amendments and, in any case, Michigan
complied with this requirement for the Detroit area under the prior 1-
hour ozone NAAQS. See 60 FR 46182 (September 7, 1994).
Section 182(a)(2)(B) requires each state with a Marginal ozone
nonattainment area that implemented or was required to implement a
vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program prior to the 1990 CAA
amendments to submit a SIP revision for an I/M program no less
stringent than that required prior to the 1990 CAA amendments or
already in the SIP at the time of the CAA amendments, whichever is more
stringent. For the purposes of the 2015 ozone NAAQS and the
consideration of Michigan's redesignation request for this standard,
the Detroit area is not subject to the section 182(a)(2)(B) requirement
because the Detroit area was designated as nonattainment for the 2015
ozone NAAQS after the enactment of the 1990 CAA amendments and because
Michigan complied with this requirement for the Detroit area under the
prior 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
Regarding the source permitting and offset requirements of section
182(a)(2)(C) and section 182(a)(4), Michigan currently has a fully
approved part D NSR program in place. EPA approved Michigan's NSR
program on December 16, 2013 (78 FR 76064), and most recently approved
revisions to Michigan's NSR program on May 12, 2021 (86 FR 25954). In
addition, EPA conditionally approved Michigan's PSD program on
September 16, 2008 (73 FR 53366), fully approved Michigan's PSD program
on March 25, 2010 (75 FR 14352), and most recently approved revisions
to Michigan's PSD program on May 12, 2021 (86 FR 25954). The state's
PSD program will become effective in the Detroit area upon
redesignation to attainment.
Section 182(a)(3)(A) requires states to submit periodic emission
inventories and section 182(a)(3)(B) requires states to submit a
revision to the SIP to require the owners or operators of stationary
sources to annually submit emissions statements documenting actual
NOX and VOC emissions. As discussed below in section IV.D.4.
of this proposed rule, Michigan will continue to update its emissions
inventory at least once every three years. With regard to stationary
source emissions statements, EPA approved Michigan's emissions
statement program on March 8, 1994 (49 FR 10752). On December 18, 2020,
Michigan submitted a separate request to strengthen its SIP-approved
emissions statement program by adding, removing, and updating certain
statutes and reporting forms. As described in section VII. below, EPA
is proposing to approve most portions of Michigan's emissions statement
submittal as meeting the requirements of section 182(a)(3)(B) for the
2015 ozone NAAQS.
Upon approval of Michigan's emissions inventory and emissions
statements rules, the Detroit area will have satisfied all applicable
requirements for purposes of redesignation under section 110 and part D
of title I of the CAA.
2. The Detroit area has a fully approved SIP for purposes of
redesignation under section 110(k) of the CAA.
At various times, Michigan has adopted and submitted, and EPA has
approved, provisions addressing the various SIP elements applicable for
the ozone NAAQS. As discussed above, if EPA finalizes approval of
Michigan's section 182(a)(1) base year inventory requirements and
section 182(a)(3)(B) emission statement requirements, EPA will have
fully approved the Michigan SIP for the Detroit area under section
110(k) for all requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation
under the 2015 ozone NAAQS. EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in
approving a redesignation request (see the Calcagni memorandum at page
3; Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F.3d 984,
989-990 (6th Cir. 1998); Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426). Additional
measures may also be approved in conjunction with a redesignation
action (see 68 FR 25426 (May 12, 2003) and citations therein).
C. Are the air quality improvements in the Detroit area due to
permanent and enforceable emission reductions?
To redesignate an area from nonattainment to attainment, section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA requires EPA to determine that the air
quality improvement in the area is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions resulting from the implementation of the SIP
and applicable Federal air pollution control regulations and other
permanent and enforceable emission reductions. EPA proposes to
determine that Michigan has demonstrated that that the observed ozone
air quality improvement in the Detroit area is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in VOC and NOX emissions resulting
from state measures adopted into the SIP and Federal measures.
In making this demonstration, the State has calculated the change
in emissions between 2014 and 2019. The reduction in emissions and the
corresponding improvement in air quality over this time period can be
attributed to several regulatory control measures that the Detroit area
and upwind areas have implemented in recent years. In addition,
Michigan provided an analysis to demonstrate the improvement in air
quality was not due to unusually favorable meteorology. Based on the
information summarized below, EPA proposes to find that Michigan has
adequately demonstrated that the improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable emissions reductions.
1. Permanent and Enforceable Emission Controls Implemented
a. Regional NOX Controls
CAIR/CSAPR. Under the ``good neighbor provision'' of CAA section
110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), states are required to address interstate transport
of air pollution. Specifically, the good neighbor provision provides
that each state's SIP must contain provisions prohibiting emissions
from within that state which will contribute significantly to
nonattainment of the NAAQS, or interfere with maintenance of the NAAQS,
in any other state.
On May 12, 2005, EPA published CAIR, which required eastern states,
including Michigan, to prohibit emissions consistent with annual and
ozone season NOX budgets and annual sulfur dioxide
(SO2) budgets (70 FR 25152). CAIR addressed the good
neighbor provision for the 1997 ozone NAAQS and 1997 fine particulate
matter (PM2.5) NAAQS and was designed to mitigate the impact
of transported NOX emissions, a precursor of both ozone and
PM2.5, as well as transported SO2 emissions,
another precursor of PM2.5. The United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) remanded
CAIR to EPA for replacement in 2008. North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d
896, modified, 550 F.3d 1176 (2008). While EPA worked on
[[Page 14215]]
developing a replacement rule, implementation of the CAIR program
continued as planned with the NOX annual and ozone season
programs beginning in 2009 and the SO2 annual program
beginning in 2010.
On August 8, 2011 (76 FR 48208), acting on the D.C. Circuit's
remand, EPA published CSAPR to replace CAIR and to address the good
neighbor provision for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, the 1997 PM2.5
NAAQS, and the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.\5\ Through Federal
Implementation Plans, CSAPR required electric generating units (EGUs)
in eastern states, including Michigan, to meet annual and ozone season
NOX budgets and annual SO2 budgets implemented
through new trading programs. After delays caused by litigation, EPA
started implementing the CSAPR trading programs in 2015, simultaneously
discontinuing administration of the CAIR trading programs. On October
26, 2016, EPA published the CSAPR Update, which established, starting
in 2017, a new ozone season NOX trading program for EGUs in
eastern states, including Michigan, to address the good neighbor
provision for the 2008 ozone NAAQS (81 FR 74504). The CSAPR Update was
estimated to result in a 20% reduction in ozone season NOX
emissions from EGUs in the eastern United States, a reduction of 80,000
tons in 2017 compared to 2015 levels. On April 30, 2021, EPA published
the Revised CSAPR Update, which fully resolved the obligations of
eastern states, including Michigan, under the good neighbor provision
for the 2008 ozone NAAQS (82 FR 23054). The Revised CSAPR Update is
estimated to reduce ozone season NOX emissions from EGUs by
17,000 tons beginning in 2021, compared to emissions without the rule.
The reduction in NOX emissions from the implementation of
CAIR and then CSAPR occurred by the attainment years and additional
emission reductions will occur throughout the maintenance period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ In a December 27, 2011 rulemaking, EPA included Michigan in
the ozone season NOX program, addressing the 1997 ozone
NAAQS (76 FR 80760).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
b. Federal Emission Control Measures
Reductions in VOC and NOX emissions have occurred
statewide and in upwind areas as a result of Federal emission control
measures, with additional emission reductions expected to occur in the
future. Federal emission control measures include the following:
Tier 2 Emission Standards for Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur
Standards. On February 10, 2000 (65 FR 6698), EPA promulgated Tier 2
motor vehicle emission standards and gasoline sulfur control
requirements. These emission control requirements result in lower VOC
and NOX emissions from new cars and light duty trucks,
including sport utility vehicles. With respect to fuels, this rule
required refiners and importers of gasoline to meet lower standards for
sulfur, which were phased in between 2004 and 2006. By 2006, refiners
and importers were required to meet a 30 ppm average sulfur level, with
a maximum cap of 80 ppm. This reduction in fuel sulfur content ensures
the effectiveness of low emission-control technologies. The Tier 2
tailpipe standards established in this rule were phased in for new
vehicles between 2004 and 2009. At the time of promulgation of Tier 2
standards, EPA estimated that this rule would cut NOX and
VOC emissions from light-duty vehicles and light-duty trucks by
approximately 76% and 28%, respectively. NOX and VOC
reductions from medium-duty passenger vehicles included as part of the
Tier 2 vehicle program were estimated to be approximately 37,000 and
9,500 tons per year, respectively, when fully implemented. As projected
by these estimates and demonstrated in the on-road emission modeling
for the Detroit area, a portion of these emission reductions occurred
during the period 2014 through 2016, i.e., after the area was
designated nonattainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. As discussed below,
the Tier 2 vehicle and gasoline sulfur standards were replaced by the
Tier 3 emission standards for vehicles and gasoline sulfur standards
beginning on January 1, 2017.
Tier 3 Emission Standards for Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur
Standards. On April 28, 2014 (79 FR 23414), EPA promulgated Tier 3
motor vehicle emission and fuel standards to reduce both tailpipe and
evaporative emissions and to further reduce the sulfur content in
fuels. The rule is being phased in between 2017 and 2025. Tier 3 sets
new tailpipe standards for non-methane organic gases (NMOG) and
NOX, presented as NMOG+NOX, and for particulate
matter. The VOC and NOX tailpipe standards for light-duty
vehicles represent approximately an 80% reduction in fleet average
NMOG+NOX and a 70% reduction in per-vehicle particulate
matter (PM) standards, relative to the fleet average at the time of
phase-in. Heavy-duty tailpipe standards represent about a 60% reduction
in both fleet average NMOG+NOX and per-vehicle PM standards.
The evaporative emissions requirements in the rule will result in
approximately a 50% reduction from previous standards and apply to all
light-duty and on-road gasoline-powered heavy-duty vehicles. Finally,
the rule lowered the sulfur content of gasoline to an annual average of
10 ppm starting in January 2017. As projected by these estimates and
demonstrated in the on-road emission modeling for the Detroit area,
some of these emission reductions occurred by the attainment years and
additional emission reductions will occur throughout the maintenance
period, as older vehicles are replaced with newer, compliant model
years.
Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Rules. In July 2000, EPA issued a rule for
on-road heavy-duty diesel engines that includes standards limiting the
sulfur content of diesel fuel. Emissions standards for NOX,
VOC and PM were phased in between model years 2007 and 2010. In
addition, the rule reduced the highway diesel fuel sulfur content to 15
parts per million by 2007, leading to additional reductions in
combustion NOX and VOC emissions. EPA has estimated future
year emission reductions due to implementation of this rule. EPA
estimated that by 2015 NOX and VOC emissions would decrease
nationally by 1,260,000 tons and 54,000 tons, respectively, and that by
2030 NOX and VOC emissions will decrease nationally by
2,570,000 tons and 115,000 tons, respectively. As projected by these
estimates and demonstrated in the on-road emission modeling for the
Detroit area, some of these emission reductions occurred by the
attainment years and additional emission reductions will occur
throughout the maintenance period, as older vehicles are replaced with
newer, compliant model years.
Nonroad Diesel Rule. On June 29, 2004 (69 FR 38958), EPA issued a
rule adopting emissions standards for nonroad diesel engines and sulfur
reductions in nonroad diesel fuel. This rule applies to diesel engines
used primarily in construction, agricultural, and industrial
applications. Emission standards were phased in for the 2008 through
2015 model years based on engine size. The sulfur limits for nonroad
diesel fuels were phased in from 2007 through 2012. EPA estimates that
when fully implemented, compliance with this rule will cut
NOX emissions from these nonroad diesel engines by
approximately 90%. As projected by these estimates and demonstrated in
the nonroad emission modeling for the Detroit area, some of these
emission reductions occurred by the attainment years and additional
[[Page 14216]]
emission reductions will occur throughout the maintenance period.
Nonroad Spark-Ignition Engines and Recreational Engine Standards.
On November 8, 2002 (67 FR 68242), EPA adopted emission standards for
large spark-ignition engines such as those used in forklifts and
airport ground-service equipment; recreational vehicles such as off-
highway motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles, and snowmobiles; and
recreational marine diesel engines. These emission standards were
phased in from model years 2004 through 2012. When fully implemented,
EPA estimates an overall 72% reduction in national VOC emissions from
these engines and an 80% reduction in national NOX
emissions. As projected by these estimates and demonstrated in the
nonroad emission modeling for the Detroit area, some of these emission
reductions occurred by the attainment years and additional emission
reductions will occur throughout the maintenance period.
Category 3 Marine Diesel Engine Standards. On April 30, 2010 (75 FR
22896), EPA issued emission standards for marine compression-ignition
engines at or above 30 liters per cylinder. Tier 2 emission standards
apply beginning in 2011 and are expected to result in a 15 to 25%
reduction in NOX emissions from these engines. Final Tier 3
emission standards apply beginning in 2016 and are expected to result
in approximately an 80% reduction in NOX from these engines.
As projected by these estimates and demonstrated in the nonroad
emission modeling for the Detroit area, some of these emission
reductions occurred by the attainment years and additional emission
reductions will occur throughout the maintenance period.
c. Detroit Point Source NOX Reductions.
The DTE Energy River Rouge power plant ceased operations in May
2021. In its submittal, EGLE estimated this shutdown would reduce
annual point source NOX emissions by 2,716 tons.
d. Detroit Low Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) Program.
RVP is a measure of a fuel's volatility and thereby affects the
rate at which gasoline evaporates and emits VOCs. The lower a fuel's
RVP, the lower the rate of evaporation of the fuel. Lowering RVP in the
summer months can offset the effect of summer temperature upon the
evaporation of gasoline, which in turn lowers emissions of VOCs.
Michigan's Low RVP program requires the sale of 7.0 psi RVP gasoline in
the Detroit area during the summer months, as compared to the 9.0 psi
RVP originally required under Federal RVP controls. EPA approved
Michigan's Low RVP program for the Detroit area on January 31, 2007 (72
FR 4432).
2. Emission Reductions
Michigan is using a 2014 emissions inventory to represent
nonattainment level emissions (nonattainment year inventory or
nonattainment inventory), which is appropriate because it was one of
the years used to designate the area as nonattainment due to an
exceedance of the NAAQS. Michigan is using a 2019 emissions inventory
to represent attainment level emissions (attainment year inventory or
attainment inventory), which is appropriate because it is one of the
years in the 2019-2021 period used to demonstrate monitored attainment
with the NAAQS.
For both 2014 and 2019, Michigan has provided inventories for
point, nonpoint, on-road, and nonroad sources. The point source
category includes facilities that report their emissions directly to
EGLE, as well as sources such as airports and rail yards. Nonpoint
sources, sometimes called area sources, include emissions from sources
that are more ubiquitous, such as consumer products or architectural
coatings. On-road sources are vehicles that are primarily used on
public roadways, such as cars, trucks, and motorcycles. Nonroad sources
include engine-based emissions that do not occur on roads, such as
trains or boats.
For its on-road emissions inventory, Michigan submitted an analysis
by the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG). This
analysis used EPA's MOVES3 model to generate July weekday on-road
emissions for both 2014 and 2019. SEMCOG's analysis relied on local
travel inputs including demographic data, travel demand forecasting,
road types, Vehicle Miles of Travel (VMT), Vehicle Hours of Travel,
vehicle population, and vehicle age, as well as meteorological data. In
Attachment B of its submittal, Michigan has included a detailed
narrative of SEMCOG's methods.
For its point, nonpoint, and nonroad emissions inventories,
Michigan's primary data sources were EPA's 2014 National Emissions
Inventory (NEI)--Version 2 dataset and EPA's 2016v2 modeling platform.
The 2014 NEI includes emissions data only for the year 2014, and the
2016v2 modeling platform includes emissions data for the years 2016,
2023, 2026 and 2032. EGLE used the 2014 NEI as the basis of its point,
nonpoint, and nonroad inventories for 2014. To derive point, nonpoint,
and nonroad inventories for 2019, EGLE interpolated between 2016 and
2023 data from the 2016v2 modeling platform. The 2016v2 modeling
platform and 2014 NEI have been quality-assured, and documentation
regarding these datasets and their methods is available on EPA's
website.\6\ In Attachment B of its submittal, Michigan has included a
detailed listing of the facilities used to create the point source
inventory for 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/2014-national-emissions-inventory-nei-technical-support-document-tsd and https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-modeling/2016-version-2-technical-support-document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To obtain the inventories for source categories other than on-road,
EGLE summed the annual totals of NOX and VOC emissions for
each county and each source category. Then, to convert the annual
totals to a value of tons per ozone season day, EGLE calculated a
conversion factor for each county and each source category, using
outputs from the 2016v2 modeling platform. This conversion factor was
generated by taking the July category emissions and dividing them by
the annual category emissions, and then dividing by 31 to represent the
number of days in July. It was not necessary to determine a conversion
factor for on-road emissions because SEMCOG provided results for a July
weekday. EGLE selected July as the standard ozone season month, due to
an analysis showing that July had the most days with high ozone values
in recent years.
Because Michigan's inventory for 2019 relies on data from the
2016v2 modeling platform, EPA compared EGLE's inventory of point source
emissions against records of actual point source emissions available to
EPA through the Emissions Inventory System (EIS). To ensure that the
two agencies' calculations for point source emissions for 2019 would be
comparable, EPA converted annual totals of NOX and VOC
emissions to a value of tons per ozone season day using the same
conversion factors calculated by EGLE. Both EGLE's analysis and EPA's
analysis show a decrease in point source emissions from 2014 to
2019.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ For both NOX and VOC, EGLE's 2019 inventory shows
emissions levels that are lower than the levels of actual emissions
derived by EPA from EIS. By relying on the lower level of point
source emissions from the 2016v2 modeling platform in setting the
level of its attainment inventory, Michigan's inventories for the
maintenance period, described in section IV.D.2. below, are more
cautious than necessary in setting levels of emissions that are
sufficient to attain the standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using the inventories described above for all categories of
sources, Michigan's submittal documents changes in NOX and
VOC emissions from 2014 to 2019
[[Page 14217]]
for the Detroit area. Emissions data are shown in Table 2. Data are
expressed in terms of tons per ozone season day.
Table 2--NOX and VOC Emissions in the Detroit Area for the 2014 Nonattainment Year and 2019 Attainment Year
[Tons per ozone season day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX VOC
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net change Net change
2014 2019 (2014-2019) 2014 2019 (2014-2019)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point............................... 166.86 97.01 -69.85 32.24 13.74 -18.50
Nonpoint............................ 36.69 27.98 -8.71 149.93 134.77 -15.16
On-road............................. 192.70 105.80 -86.90 83.20 51.70 -31.50
Nonroad............................. 60.26 22.51 -37.75 69.63 30.46 -39.17
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total........................... 456.51 253.30 -203.21 335.00 230.67 -104.33
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As shown in Table 2, Michigan's inventories demonstrate that
NOX and VOC emissions in the Detroit area declined by 203.21
tons per ozone season day and 104.33 tons per ozone season day,
respectively, between 2014 and 2019.
3. Meteorology and Temporary Adverse Economic Conditions
Michigan performed several analyses to further support its
demonstration that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent
and enforceable emission reductions, and not unusually favorable
meteorology or temporary adverse economic conditions.
EGLE conducted a meteorological analysis based on 22 years of data
collected at the three monitors that have historically monitored the
highest ozone concentrations in the Detroit area. Michigan analyzed
ozone values for May, June, July, August, and September, for years 2000
to 2021. First, the maximum 8-hour ozone concentration at each monitor
was compared to the number of days where the maximum temperature was
greater than or equal to 80 [deg]F. Second, EGLE examined the
relationship between the average summer temperature for each year of
the 2000-2021 period and the fourth-highest 8-hour ozone concentration.
Third, the number of days with an 8-hour average greater than 70 ppb
was compared to the number of days where the maximum temperature was
greater than or equal to 80 [deg]F. These analyses show that over the
last 22 years, ozone concentrations at the Detroit monitors have
decreased substantially. In contrast, temperatures have increased, with
the area showing an overall warming trend. Because the correlation
between temperature and ozone formation is well established, these data
suggest that reductions in precursors are responsible for the
reductions in ozone concentrations in the area, and not unusually
favorable summer temperatures.
To further support EGLE's demonstration that the improvement in air
quality is not due to unusually favorable meteorology, an analysis was
performed by the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO). A
classification and regression tree (CART) analysis was conducted with
2005 through 2019 data from Detroit area ozone sites. The goal of the
analysis was to determine the meteorological and air quality conditions
associated with ozone episodes, and construct trends for the days
identified as sharing similar meteorological conditions. Regression
trees were developed for the Detroit area ozone data to classify each
summer day by its ozone concentration and associated meteorological
conditions. By grouping days with similar meteorology, the influence of
meteorological variability on the underlying trend in ozone
concentrations is partially removed and the remaining trend is presumed
to be due to trends in precursor emissions or other non-meteorological
influences. The CART analysis showed the resulting trends in ozone
concentrations declining over the period examined, supporting the
conclusion that the improvement in air quality was not due to unusually
favorable meteorology.
Michigan conducted an additional analysis to assess whether the
improvement in air quality was caused by temporary adverse economic
conditions, especially the economic conditions associated with the
COVID-19 pandemic which first impacted Michigan in 2020. First, EGLE
charted point source VOC emissions in the Detroit area from 2012 to
2020. Second, EGLE charted point source NOX emissions in the
Detroit area for the same period. These two charts show the overall
downward trend in point source emissions from 2012 to 2020. Third, for
2014 to 2021, EGLE compared the maximum 8-hour ozone concentration
against VMT and employment. This chart shows that VMT and employment
had a direct correlation to one another, but these economic indicators
had no correlation to ozone values. The impacts of the COVID-19
pandemic are apparent in data showing a decrease in point source
emissions, VMT, and employment between 2019 and 2020. But these
decreases were not associated with a corresponding decline in ozone
values from 2019 to 2020. Instead, there was an increase in the fourth-
highest 8-hour ozone concentration from 2019 to 2020. Together, these
analyses show that economic conditions associated with the COVID-19
pandemic were not correlated with the improved air quality and
strengthen Michigan's demonstration that the improved air quality is
due to permanent and enforceable emissions reductions.
As discussed above, Michigan identified numerous Federal rules that
resulted in the reduction of VOC and NOX emissions from 2014
to 2019. In addition, Michigan's analyses of meteorological variables
associated with ozone formation demonstrate that the improvement in air
quality in the area between the year violations occurred and the year
attainment was achieved is not due to unusually favorable meteorology.
Michigan also showed that emissions reductions were not due to
temporary adverse economic conditions, but rather were consistent with
a longer-term trend. Therefore, EPA proposes to find that Michigan has
shown that the air quality improvements in the Detroit area are due to
permanent and enforceable emissions reductions.
[[Page 14218]]
D. Does Michigan have a fully approvable ozone maintenance plan for the
Detroit area?
To redesignate an area from nonattainment to attainment, section
107(d)(3)(E)(iv) of the CAA requires EPA to determine that the area has
a fully approved maintenance plan pursuant to section 175A of the CAA.
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance plan
for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. Under
section 175A, the maintenance plan must demonstrate continued
attainment of the NAAQS for at least 10 years after the Administrator
approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after the
redesignation, the state must submit a revised maintenance plan which
demonstrates that attainment of the NAAQS will continue for an
additional 10 years beyond the initial 10-year maintenance period. To
address the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance
plan must contain contingency measures, as EPA deems necessary, to
assure prompt correction of the future NAAQS violation.
The Calcagni Memorandum provides further guidance on the content of
a maintenance plan, explaining that a maintenance plan should address
five elements: (1) An attainment emission inventory; (2) a maintenance
demonstration; (3) a commitment for continued air quality monitoring;
(4) a process for verification of continued attainment; and (5) a
contingency plan. In conjunction with its request to redesignate the
Detroit area to attainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS, Michigan submitted
a SIP revision to provide for maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS
through 2035, more than 10 years after the expected effective date of
the redesignation to attainment. As discussed below, EPA proposes to
find that Michigan's ozone maintenance plan includes the necessary
components and to approve the maintenance plan as a revision of the
Michigan SIP.
1. Attainment Inventory
EPA is proposing to determine that the Detroit area has attained
the 2015 ozone NAAQS based on monitoring data for the period of 2019-
2021. Michigan selected 2019 as the attainment emissions inventory year
to establish attainment emission levels for VOC and NOX. The
attainment emissions inventory identifies the levels of emissions in
the Detroit area that are sufficient to attain the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
The derivation of the attainment year emissions is discussed above in
section IV.C.2. of this proposed rule. The emissions for the 2019
attainment year, by source category, are summarized in Table 2 above.
2. Has the state demonstrated maintenance of the ozone standard in the
Detroit area?
Michigan has demonstrated maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS
through 2035 by projecting that current and future emissions of VOC and
NOX for the Detroit area remain at or below attainment year
emission levels. A maintenance demonstration need not be based on
modeling. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), Sierra Club v.
EPA, 375 F. 3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also 66 FR 53094, 53099-53100
(October 19, 2001), 68 FR 25413, 25430-25432 (May 12, 2003).
Michigan is using emissions inventories for the years 2025 and 2035
to demonstrate maintenance. 2035 was selected because it is more than
10 years after the expected effective date of the redesignation to
attainment, and 2025 was selected to demonstrate that emissions are not
expected to spike in the interim between the 2019 attainment year and
the 2035 final maintenance year.
To develop emissions inventories for the years 2025 and 2035,
Michigan used the same data sources discussed above in section IV.C.2.
of this proposed rule.
For its on-road emissions inventory, Michigan again relied upon the
SEMCOG analysis, which used EPA's MOVES3 model to generate July weekday
on-road emissions for 2025 and 2035. SEMCOG's analysis relied on local
travel inputs including demographic data, travel demand forecasting,
road types, VMT, Vehicle Hours of Travel, vehicle population, and
vehicle age, as well as meteorological data. In Attachment B of its
submittal, Michigan has included a detailed narrative of SEMCOG's
methods.
For its point, nonpoint, and nonroad emissions inventories,
Michigan again used EPA's 2016v2 modeling platform. To derive
inventories for 2025, EGLE interpolated between 2023 and 2026 data from
the 2016v2 modeling platform. To derive inventories for 2035, EGLE
extrapolated forward from the 2016v2 modeling platform data using the
2026 and 2032 years. For both the 2025 and 2035 inventories, to convert
annual emissions totals into a value of tons per ozone season day, EGLE
calculated conversion factors using the same methodology described in
section IV.C.2. of this proposed rule.
By calculating its inventories through interpolation and
extrapolation, EGLE projects that changes within a source category and
county are linearly constant. For point sources, actual reductions may
not align with inventories derived from linear interpolation, because
shutdowns and the operation of new control equipment may be staggered
across several years. However, given the magnitude of the reductions in
other categories of sources, any uncertainty caused by linear
interpolation would be outweighed by the emissions reductions in other
sectors. Similarly, inventories derived from extrapolation may not
align with actual reductions for some types of sources. However, even
if Michigan as a cautious measure had projected that emissions from the
2016v2 modeling platform for the year 2032 would remain constant
through 2035, this level of emissions would still have been sufficient
to show that the area would maintain the standard through 2035.
Although the 2016v2 modeling platform does not project emissions beyond
2032, some amount of additional reductions into future years is likely.
Emissions data for the 2014 nonattainment year, 2019 attainment
year, 2025 interim year, and 2035 maintenance year are shown in Tables
3 and 4 below. Data are expressed in terms of tons per ozone season
day.
Table 3--NOX Emissions in the Detroit Area for the 2014 Nonattainment Year, 2019 Attainment Year, 2025 Interim
Year, and 2035 Maintenance Year
[Tons per ozone season day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net change
2014 2019 2025 2035 (2019-2035)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point............................................... 166.86 97.01 80.83 76.44 -20.57
Nonpoint............................................ 36.69 27.98 27.39 25.84 -2.14
On-road............................................. 192.70 105.80 61.20 40.30 -65.50
[[Page 14219]]
Nonroad............................................. 60.26 22.51 17.49 15.17 -7.34
-----------------------------------------------------------
Total........................................... 456.51 253.30 186.91 157.75 -95.55
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4--VOC Emissions in the Detroit Area for the 2014 Nonattainment Year, 2019 Attainment Year, 2025 Interim
Year, and 2035 Maintenance Year
[Tons per ozone season day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net change
2014 2019 2025 2035 (2019-2035)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point............................................... 32.24 13.74 14.06 14.12 +0.38
Nonpoint............................................ 149.93 134.77 134.12 133.11 -1.66
On-road............................................. 83.20 51.70 34.40 22.00 -29.70
Nonroad............................................. 69.63 30.46 27.39 26.56 -3.90
-----------------------------------------------------------
Total........................................... 335.00 230.67 209.97 195.79 -34.88
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As shown in Tables 3 and 4, NOX and VOC emissions in the
Detroit area are projected to decrease by 95.55 tons per ozone season
day and 34.88 tons per ozone season day, respectively, between the 2019
attainment year and 2035 maintenance year. Michigan's maintenance
demonstration for the Detroit area shows maintenance of the 2015 ozone
NAAQS by providing emissions information to support the demonstration
that future emissions of NOX and VOC will remain at or below
2019 emission levels when considering both future source growth and
implementation of future controls.
In addition, EPA's 2016v2 modeling platform includes updated air
quality modeling of the contiguous United States, projecting ozone
concentrations at all air quality monitors in 2023, 2026, and 2032.\8\
That modeling incorporates the most recent updates to emissions
inventories, including on-the-books emissions reductions, and
meteorology. This modeling indicates that EPA does not project the
Detroit area to be in nonattainment of the 2015 ozone NAAQS, nor does
EPA expect the area to struggle with maintenance, in those modeled
future years. We propose to find that EPA's ozone transport air quality
modeling further supports Michigan's demonstration that the Detroit
area will continue to maintain the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-modeling/2016v2-platform.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Continued Air Quality Monitoring
Michigan has committed to continue to operate its ozone monitors in
the Detroit area for the duration of the maintenance period. Michigan
remains obligated to meet monitoring requirements, to continue to
quality assure monitoring data in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and
to enter all data into the AQS in accordance with Federal guidelines.
4. Verification of Continued Attainment
Michigan has confirmed that it has the legal authority to enforce
and implement the requirements of its SIP. Michigan has further
committed that it has the authority to implement the requested SIP
revision, which would include the maintenance plan for the Detroit
area. This includes the authority to adopt, implement, and enforce any
subsequent emission control measures determined to be necessary to
correct future ozone attainment problems.
Verification of continued attainment is accomplished through
operation of the ambient ozone monitoring network and the periodic
update of the area's emissions inventory. Michigan will continue to
operate the ozone monitors located in the Detroit area. There are no
plans to discontinue operation, relocate, or otherwise change the
existing ozone monitoring network other than through revisions in the
network approved by EPA.
In addition, to track future levels of emissions, Michigan will
continue to develop and submit to EPA updated emission inventories for
all source categories at least once every three years, consistent with
the requirements of 40 CFR part 51, subpart A, and in 40 CFR 51.122.
The Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) was promulgated by EPA
on June 10, 2002 (67 FR 39602). The CERR was replaced by the Annual
Emissions Reporting Requirements on December 17, 2008 (73 FR 76539).
The most recent triennial inventory for Michigan was compiled for 2017,
and 2020 is in progress. Point source facilities covered by Michigan's
emission statement program, described below in section VII., will
continue to submit VOC and NOX emissions on an annual basis.
5. What is the contingency plan for the Detroit area?
Section 175A of the CAA requires that the state adopt a maintenance
plan as a SIP revision that includes such contingency measures as EPA
deems necessary to assure that the state will promptly correct a
violation of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation of the area to
attainment of the NAAQS. The maintenance plan must identify: The
contingency measures to be considered and, if needed for maintenance,
adopted and implemented; a schedule and procedure for adoption and
implementation; and a time limit for action by the state. The state
should also identify specific indicators to be used to determine when
the contingency measures need to be considered, adopted, and
implemented. The maintenance plan must include a commitment that the
state will implement all measures with respect to the control of the
pollutant that were contained in the SIP before redesignation of the
area to attainment in accordance with section 175A(d) of the CAA.
[[Page 14220]]
As required by section 175A of the CAA, Michigan has adopted a
contingency plan for the Detroit area to address possible future ozone
air quality problems. The contingency plan adopted by Detroit has two
levels of response, a warning level response and an action level
response.
In Michigan's plan, a warning level response will be triggered when
an annual fourth-highest monitored value of 0.074 ppm or higher is
monitored within the maintenance area. A warning level response will
require Michigan to conduct a study. The study would assess whether the
ozone value indicates a trend toward a higher ozone value and whether
emissions appear to be increasing. The study will evaluate whether the
trend, if any, is likely to continue and, if so, the control measures
necessary to reverse the trend, taking into account ease and timing of
implementation. Any implementation of necessary controls in response to
a warning level response trigger will occur within 18 months of the
conclusion of the ozone season.
In Michigan's plan, an action level response would be triggered
when the fourth-highest monitored value, averaged over two years, of
0.071 ppm or higher is monitored within the maintenance area. The
action level response will also be triggered if a three-year design
value exceeds the level of the 2015 ozone NAAQS (0.070 ppm). When an
action level response is triggered and not found to be due to an
exceptional event, malfunction, or noncompliance with a permit
condition or rule requirement, Michigan will determine what additional
control measures are needed to assure future attainment of the 2015
ozone NAAQS. Control measures selected will be adopted and implemented
within 18 months from the close of the ozone season that prompted the
action level. Michigan may also consider if significant new regulations
not currently included as part of the maintenance provisions will be
implemented in a timely manner and would thus constitute an adequate
contingency measure response.
Michigan included the following list of potential contingency
measures in its maintenance plan. However, Michigan is not limited to
the measures on this list:
1. VOC or NOX RACT rules for existing sources covered by
Control Technique Guidelines, Alternative Control Guidelines, or other
appropriate guidance
2. Application of VOC RACT on existing smaller sources
3. Alternative fuel and diesel retrofit programs for fleet vehicle
operations
4. VOC or NOX control on sources emitting less than 100 tons
per year
5. Increased VOC or NOX emission offsets for new and
modified major sources
6. Reduced idling programs
7. Trip reduction programs
8. Traffic flow and transit improvements
9. Increased turnover of legacy natural gas distribution pipelines
10. Stationary engine controls
11. Rules under the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act
12. Rules for consumer products
13. Additional measures identified by EGLE
To qualify as a contingency measure, emissions reductions from that
measure must not be factored into the emissions projections used in the
maintenance plan.
EPA has concluded that Michigan's maintenance plan adequately
addresses the five basic components of a maintenance plan: Attainment
inventory, maintenance demonstration, monitoring network, verification
of continued attainment, and a contingency plan. In addition, as
required by section 175A(b) of the CAA, Michigan has committed to
submit to EPA an updated ozone maintenance plan eight years after
redesignation of the Detroit area to cover an additional ten years
beyond the initial 10-year maintenance period. Thus, EPA finds that the
maintenance plan SIP revision submitted by Michigan for the Detroit
area meets the requirements of section 175A of the CAA, and EPA
proposes to approve it as a revision to the Michigan SIP.
V. Has the state adopted approvable motor vehicle emission budgets?
A. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets
Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation plans,
programs, or projects that receive Federal funding or support, such as
the construction of new highways, must ``conform'' to (i.e., be
consistent with) the SIP. Conformity to the SIP means that
transportation activities will not cause or contribute to any new air
quality violations, increase the frequency or severity of any existing
air quality problems, or delay timely attainment or any required
interim emissions reductions or any other milestones. Regulations at 40
CFR part 93 set forth EPA policy, criteria, and procedures for
demonstrating and ensuring conformity of transportation activities to a
SIP.
Transportation conformity is a requirement for nonattainment and
maintenance areas. Maintenance areas are areas that were previously
nonattainment for a particular NAAQS, but that have been redesignated
to attainment with an approved CAA section 175A maintenance plan for
the NAAQS.
Under the CAA, states are required to submit, at various times,
control strategy SIPs for nonattainment areas and maintenance plans for
areas seeking redesignations to attainment of the ozone standard and
maintenance areas. See the SIP requirements for the 2015 ozone standard
in EPA's December 6, 2018, implementation rule (83 FR 62998). These
control strategy SIPs (including reasonable further progress plans and
attainment plans) and maintenance plans must include motor vehicle
emissions budgets for criteria pollutants, including ozone, and their
precursor pollutants (VOC and NOX) to address pollution from
on-road transportation sources. The budgets are the portion of the
total allowable emissions that are allocated to highway and transit
vehicle use that, together with emissions from other sources in the
area, will provide for attainment or maintenance. See 40 CFR 93.101.
Under 40 CFR part 93, a budget for an area seeking a redesignation
to attainment must be established, at minimum, for the last year of the
maintenance plan. A state may adopt budgets for other years as well.
The budget serves as a ceiling on emissions from an area's planned
transportation system. The budget concept is further explained in the
preamble to the November 24, 1993, Transportation Conformity Rule (58
FR 62188). The preamble also describes how to establish the budget(s)
in the SIP and how to revise the budget(s), if needed, after initially
establishing a budget in the SIP.
As discussed earlier, Michigan's maintenance plan includes
NOX and VOC budgets for the Detroit area for 2025, which is
an interim year, as well as 2035, which is the last year of the
maintenance period. EPA has reviewed Michigan's NOX and VOC
budgets for the area and, in this action, is proposing to approve
them.\9\ We are also starting the adequacy review process for these
budgets to determine if they meet the adequacy criteria in the
transportation conformity regulations (40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)). Michigan's
January 3, 2022, maintenance plan submission, including the budgets for
this area, is available for public comment via this
[[Page 14221]]
proposed rulemaking. The submission was endorsed by the Governor's
designee and Michigan provided opportunity for a public hearing. The
budgets were developed as part of an interagency consultation process
which includes Federal, state, and local agencies. The budgets were
clearly identified and precisely quantified. These budgets, when
considered together with all other emissions sources, are consistent
with maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2) for requirements associated with
making adequacy findings through rulemaking on a submitted SIP.
Table 5--Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for the Detroit Area for the 2025 Interim Year and 2035 Maintenance
Year
[Tons per ozone season day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2025 Interim year 2035 Maintenance year
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Projected Safety Projected Safety
on-road margin Total on-road margin Total
emissions allocation budget emissions allocation budget
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX............................... 61.20 43.15 104.35 40.30 62.11 102.41
VOCs.............................. 34.40 13.46 47.86 22.00 22.67 44.67
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As shown in Table 5, the 2025 and 2035 budgets exceed the estimated
2025 and 2035 on-road sector emissions. To accommodate future
variations in VMT in the area, EGLE allocated to the mobile sector a
portion of the safety margin, as described further below.\10\ Michigan
has demonstrated that the Detroit area can maintain the 2015 ozone
NAAQS in the 2035 maintenance year with mobile source emissions of
102.41 tons per ozone season day of NOX and 44.67 tons per
ozone season day of VOCs. Similarly, the Detroit area can maintain the
2015 ozone NAAQS in the 2025 interim year with mobile source emissions
of 104.35 tons per ozone season day of NOX and 47.86 tons
per ozone season day of VOCs. Despite partial allocation of the safety
margin, emissions will remain under emission levels in the 2019
attainment year.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Allocation of a safety margin to an area's motor vehicle
emissions budgets is provided for by the transportation conformity
rule. See 40 CFR 93.124(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA is proposing to approve the budgets for use to determine
transportation conformity in the Detroit area, because EPA has
determined that the area can maintain attainment of the 2015 ozone
NAAQS for the relevant maintenance period with mobile source emissions
at the levels of the budgets.
B. What is a safety margin?
A ``safety margin'' is the amount by which the total projected
emissions from all sources of a given pollutant are less than the total
emissions that would satisfy the applicable requirement for
maintenance. 40 CFR 93.101. As noted in Tables 3 and 4, the emissions
in the Detroit area are projected to have safety margins of 95.55 tons
per ozone season day for NOX and 34.88 tons per ozone season
day for VOC in 2035 (the difference between emissions in the 2019
attainment year, and projected emissions in the 2035 maintenance year,
for all sources in the Detroit area). Similarly, there is a safety
margin of 66.39 tons per ozone season day for NOX and 20.69
tons per ozone season day for VOC in 2025. Even if emissions exceeded
projected levels by the full amount of the safety margin, the counties
would still demonstrate maintenance since emission levels would equal
those in the attainment year.
As shown in Table 5 above, Michigan is allocating a portion of that
safety margin to the mobile source sector. Specifically, in 2025,
Michigan is allocating 43.15 tons per ozone season day and 13.46 tons
per ozone season day of the NOX and VOC safety margins,
respectively. In 2035, Michigan is allocating 62.11 tons per ozone
season day and 22.67 tons per ozone season day of the NOX
and VOC safety margins, respectively. Michigan is not requesting
allocation to the budgets of the entire available safety margins
reflected in the demonstration of maintenance. In fact, the amount
allocated to the budgets represents only a portion of the 2025 and 2035
safety margins. Therefore, even though the State is requesting budgets
that exceed the projected on-road mobile source emissions for 2025 and
2035 contained in the demonstration of maintenance, the increase in on-
road mobile source emissions that can be considered for transportation
conformity purposes is within the safety margins of the ozone
maintenance demonstration. Further, once allocated to mobile sources,
these safety margins will not be available for use by other sources.
VI. Base Year Emissions Inventory
As discussed above, sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) of the CAA
require states to submit a comprehensive, accurate, and current
inventory of actual emissions from sources of NOX and VOC
emitted within the boundaries of the ozone nonattainment area. For the
2015 ozone NAAQS, EPA specifies that states submit ozone season day
emissions estimates for an inventory calendar year to be consistent
with the base year for RFP plans as required by 40 CFR 51.1310(b). For
the RFP base year for the 2015 ozone NAAQS under 40 CFR 51.1310(b),
states may use a calendar year for the most recently available complete
triennial emissions inventory (40 CFR 51, subpart A) preceding the year
of the area's effective date of designation as a nonattainment area (83
FR 62998).\11\ See the SIP requirements for the 2015 ozone standard in
EPA's December 6, 2018, implementation rule (83 FR 62998), and EPA's
2017 document ``Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of
Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations.'' \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ The RFP requirements specified in CAA section 182(b)(1)
applies to all ozone nonattainment areas classified Moderate or
higher.
\12\ https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-12/documents/2016_ei_guidance_for_naaqs.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In its December 18, 2020, submittal, Michigan requested that EPA
approve into its SIP an inventory addressing the emissions inventory
requirement of CAA section 182(a)(1). Michigan's SIP revision included
inventories of NOX and VOC emissions for several
nonattainment areas, including the Detroit area, for the year 2017. At
the time of its submittal, data for 2017 was the most recent
comprehensive, accurate, and quality assured triennial emissions
inventory in the NEI database. Michigan's submittal included estimates
of NOX and VOC emissions for four general classes of
anthropogenic sources, point, nonpoint, on-road mobile, and nonroad
mobile; biogenic
[[Page 14222]]
emissions; and event emissions, which are discrete and short-lived
sources such as wildfires.
To develop emissions inventories for the year 2017, Michigan began
with annual emissions data contained in the 2017 NEI for the point,
nonpoint, on-road, nonroad, biogenic, and event categories. In
developing ozone season day emissions, Michigan again used July as the
representative ozone season month. EGLE also analyzed the prevalence of
weekend days with ozone values exceeding the 2015 ozone NAAQS and
determined that including weekend days in the typical ozone season day
emission derivation is appropriate. To convert annual emissions data to
ozone season day values, EGLE extracted data from EPA's 2016v1 modeling
platform and calculated a conversion factor for the point, nonpoint,
on-road, nonroad, and biogenic data categories.\13\ EGLE determined the
event category emissions were too low and too variable from year to
year to benefit from applying a conversion factor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-modeling/2016v1-platform.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under CAA section 182(a)(1) and 40 CFR 51.1115, states must submit
a base year emissions inventory within two years of the effective date
of designation of each nonattainment area for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. For
the Detroit area, this requirement became due on August 3, 2020. At the
time that EGLE prepared its inventory of 2017 emissions to address the
requirements of section 182(a)(1), several improvements in data sources
were not yet available. Specifically, EGLE relied upon a version of the
2017 NEI that did not include a revised point source inventory to
correct airport emissions. Additionally, EGLE relied upon the 2016v1
modeling platform, which did not yet include improvements from the
2016v2 modeling platform including updated information from the 2017
NEI, MOVES3, and revised inventory methodologies. EPA is not evaluating
Michigan's 2017 emissions inventory against platforms or data sources
that were not available at the time of submission.
NOX and VOC emissions data for the year 2017 are shown
in Tables 6 and 7 below. Data are expressed in terms of tons per ozone
season day.
Table 6--NOX Emissions for Counties in the Detroit Area for the 2017 Base Year
[Tons per ozone season day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Nonpoint On-road Nonroad Biogenic Event Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Livingston......................... 1.53 0.72 5.78 1.13 1.32 0.04 10.52
Macomb............................. 2.55 3.78 16.19 3.83 1.21 0.02 27.58
Monroe............................. 16.05 1.43 5.22 1.31 2.29 0.01 26.31
Oakland............................ 2.83 5.22 29.68 7.54 1.37 0.08 46.72
St. Clair.......................... 55.62 3.04 3.98 1.42 1.99 0.03 66.08
Washtenaw.......................... 2.56 1.45 9.35 1.64 1.73 0.05 16.78
Wayne.............................. 41.35 7.77 36.79 2.71 1.00 0.05 89.67
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total.......................... 122.49 23.41 106.99 19.58 10.91 0.28 283.66
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 7--VOC Emissions for Counties in the Detroit Area for the 2017 Base Year
[Tons per ozone season day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Nonpoint On-road Nonroad Biogenic Event Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Livingston......................... 0.42 6.10 3.14 1.77 22.11 0.65 34.19
Macomb............................. 8.22 28.46 11.50 4.77 13.64 0.47 67.06
Monroe............................. 0.97 5.79 2.66 2.02 13.17 0.18 24.79
Oakland............................ 2.61 36.72 18.55 10.62 33.00 1.48 102.98
St. Clair.......................... 3.16 5.68 2.45 2.41 28.77 0.59 43.06
Washtenaw.......................... 0.61 15.56 5.12 2.59 22.67 0.77 47.32
Wayne.............................. 15.19 57.45 21.74 8.50 24.51 1.05 128.44
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total.......................... 31.18 155.76 65.16 32.68 157.87 5.19 447.84
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As shown in Table 6, total NOX emissions in the Detroit
area for the 2017 base year are 283.66 tons per summer day. As shown in
Table 7, total VOC emissions in the Detroit area for the 2017 base year
are 447.84 tons per summer day.
Michigan's December 18, 2020, emissions inventory submission
includes a demonstration showing that approval of this SIP revision is
consistent with CAA section 110(l). Section 110(l) provides that EPA
cannot approve a SIP revision if the revision would interfere with
attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS, reasonable further progress,
or any other applicable requirement of the CAA. EGLE is making this
submission as required by CAA sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1), and
approval of the 2017 base year inventories would strengthen the
Michigan SIP and would not interfere with any applicable CAA
requirement.
EPA reviewed Michigan's December 18, 2020, submittal for
consistency with sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) of the CAA, and with
EPA's emissions inventory requirements. In particular, EPA reviewed the
techniques used by EGLE to derive and quality assure the emissions
estimates. The documentation of the emissions estimation procedures is
thorough and is adequate for EPA to determine that Michigan followed
acceptable procedures to estimate the emissions. Accordingly, we
propose to conclude that Michigan has developed inventories of
NOX and VOC emissions that are comprehensive and complete.
EPA therefore proposes to approve the emissions inventory for the
Detroit area in Michigan's December 18, 2020, submittal and shown above
in Tables 6 and 7 as meeting the emissions
[[Page 14223]]
inventory requirements of sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) of the CAA.
In this rulemaking, EPA is only evaluating the portions of
Michigan's December 18, 2020, emissions inventory submittal relating to
the Detroit area. EPA is not evaluating inventories relating to other
nonattainment areas. Instead, EPA will evaluate these inventories in a
separate rulemaking.
VII. Emissions Statement
Section 182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA requires states with ozone
nonattainment areas to submit revisions to their SIP to require the
owner or operator of each stationary source of NOX or VOC to
provide the state with an annual statement documenting the actual
emissions of NOX and VOC from their source. Under section
182(a)(3)(B)(ii), a state may waive the emissions statement requirement
for any class or category of stationary sources which emits less than
25 tons per year of VOC or NOX if the state, in its base
year emissions inventory, provides an inventory of emissions from such
class or category of sources based on the EPA's emission factors, or
other method acceptable to the EPA.
On March 8, 1994, EPA approved Michigan's emission statement
program as a revision to the SIP (59 FR 10752). Specifically, EPA
approved into the SIP the following: Section 5 of the 1965 Air
Pollution Act 348 (1965 PA 348), Section 14a of 1965 PA 348, Air
Pollution Control Rule 336.202 (Rule 2), and the 1993 Michigan Air
Pollution Reporting Forms, Reference Tables, and General Instructions.
In a separate SIP submittal also dated December 18, 2020, Michigan
requested that EPA revise the emissions statement program in its SIP by
adding, removing, and updating certain statutes and reporting forms.
First, Michigan requests that EPA remove from the SIP Section 5 of
1965 PA 348 and approve into the SIP Michigan Complied Laws (MCL)
324.5503, Section 5503 of 1994 PA 451. At the time that EPA approved
Section 5 of 1965 PA 348 in 1994, this measure conferred several
authorities onto the Michigan Commission on the Environment, including
the authority to require sources to report their emissions. In 1995,
1965 PA 348 was repealed by the Michigan Legislature and replaced with
1994 PA 451, and all Commission powers were transferred to the
department. EGLE's current authority to require emissions reports,
which Michigan is now requesting EPA approve into the SIP, is provided
at MCL 324.5503, Section 5503 of 1994 PA 451.
Second, Michigan requests that EPA remove from the SIP Section 14a
of 1965 PA 348, which relates to surveillance fees. In its submittal,
Michigan states its belief that Section 14a was incorrectly submitted
to and approved into the SIP as part of the emissions statement
program, and that this measure is not required as part of an emissions
statement program. In this rulemaking, EPA is not evaluating the
portion of Michigan's submittal requesting the removal of Section 14a
of 1965 PA 348 from its SIP. Instead, EPA will evaluate this request in
a separate rulemaking.
Third, Michigan requests that EPA retain in its SIP Rule 2 and
strengthen this rule by approving into the SIP AQD-013, Last Revision
Date: July 22, 2020, entitled ``Criteria Pollutant Threshold Levels for
Point Sources'' (AQD-013), of EGLE's AQD Policy and Procedure.
Michigan's remaining authority to require emissions reports from
certain sources is provided at Rule 2; since EPA approved Rule 2 into
its SIP, Michigan has developed specific policies and procedures to
determine which stationary sources must comply with Rule 2. These
policies and procedures, including specific thresholds of emissions
that trigger Rule 2 applicability, are provided at AQD-013.
Additionally, AQD-013 is applicable to the emissions reporting
requirements of Air Pollution Control Rule 336.1212 (Rule 212), which
EPA approved into the SIP on August 31, 2018 (83 FR 44485). Michigan
first developed AQD-013 in 1996 and most recently updated AQD-013 in
2020.
Fourth, Michigan requests that EPA remove from the SIP its 1993
Michigan Air Pollution Reporting forms and reference tables and
strengthen its SIP by replacing them with the 2019 version of certain
Michigan Air Emissions Reporting System (MAERS) forms. Specifically,
Michigan is requesting that EPA approve into the SIP the 2019 version
of five forms: MAERS form SB-101 Submit, MAERS form S-101 Source, MAERS
form A-101 Activity, MAERS form EU-101 Emission Unit, and MAERS form E-
101 Emissions. These forms satisfy requirements under EPA's 1992
Guidance on the Implementation of an Emission Statement Program
relating to certification of data accuracy, source identification
information, operating schedule, emissions information, control
equipment information, and process data.
Fifth, Michigan requests that EPA remove from its SIP the 1993
general instructions and strengthen its SIP by replacing them with the
January 2020 MAERS User Guide. EGLE no longer uses the 1993 general
instructions that are currently in the SIP, and instead provides
sources with its 2020 user guide, which clearly defines terms used in
the MAERS forms and aids the sources in completing their MAERS
submittal via the electronic format for all required pollutants.
Michigan's December 18, 2020, emissions statement submission also
includes a demonstration showing that approval of this SIP revision is
consistent with CAA section 110(l). The revisions EPA is proposing to
approve would strengthen Michigan's SIP-approved emissions statement
program by removing from the SIP outdated reporting forms and a statute
that has been repealed by the state legislature and replacing those
measures with the statute containing the state's current authority to
require the reporting of emissions, as well as updated program forms,
policies and procedures, and user information. These revisions would
not interfere with any applicable CAA requirement.
EPA reviewed Michigan's December 18, 2020, submittal for
consistency with 182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA and EPA's Guidance on the
Implementation of an Emission Statement Program. Section 182(a)(3)(B)
requires annual submission emissions from stationary sources with
emissions greater than 25 tons per year (tpy) of NOX and
VOC. At AQD-013, Michigan requires annual reports from sources with VOC
emissions of 10 tpy or greater statewide, and NOX emissions
of 25 tpy or greater in ozone nonattainment areas and 40 tpy in all
other areas of the state. As described above, EPA will address the
portion of Michigan's submittal requesting the removal of Section 14a
of 1965 PA 348 from its SIP in a separate action. The remaining
portions of Michigan's submittal are consistent with 182(a)(3)(B) of
the CAA and relevant guidance and would strengthen Michigan's SIP-
approved emissions statement program. EPA therefore proposes to approve
the remaining portions of Michigan's December 18, 2020, emissions
statement submittal as meeting the emissions statement requirements of
section 182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA.
VIII. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is proposing to determine that the Detroit nonattainment area
is attaining the 2015 ozone NAAQS, based on quality-assured and
certified monitoring data for 2019-2021. EPA is proposing to approve
portions of Michigan's December 18, 2020, submittals as meeting the
base year emissions inventory and emissions
[[Page 14224]]
statement requirements of sections 182(a)(1) and 182(a)(3),
respectively. EPA is also proposing to approve, as a revision to the
Michigan SIP, the state's maintenance plan for the area. The
maintenance plan is designed to keep the Detroit area in attainment of
the 2015 ozone NAAQS through 2035. EPA is proposing to determine that
upon final approval of Michigan's 2017 base year emissions inventory,
emission statement SIP, and maintenance plan SIP, the area will have
met the requirements for redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E) of
the CAA. EPA is thus proposing to change the legal designation of the
Detroit area from nonattainment to attainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.
Finally, EPA is proposing to approve the newly established 2025 and
2035 motor vehicle emissions budgets for the Detroit area and
initiating the adequacy process for these budgets.
IX. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference Michigan Act 451, Section 5503, effective March 30, 1995. EPA
has made, and will continue to make, these documents generally
available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 5 Office
(please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT section of this preamble for more information).
X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of a maintenance plan under section 107(d)(3)(E)
are actions that affect the status of a geographical area and do not
impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources beyond those
imposed by state law. A redesignation to attainment does not in and of
itself create any new requirements, but rather results in the
applicability of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have
been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions
of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 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.
Accordingly, the proposed actions to approve Michigan's SIP submissions
merely approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and do not
impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For
these reasons, this action:
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Does not have federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, 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), because
redesignation is an action that affects the status of a geographical
area and does not impose any new regulatory requirements on tribes,
impact any existing sources of air pollution on tribal lands, nor
impair the maintenance of ozone national ambient air quality standards
in tribal lands.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: March 7, 2022.
Debra Shore,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2022-05253 Filed 3-11-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
