62026 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

1These changes included amendments to major 

source thresholds for sources in certain classes of 

nonattainment areas, changes to offset ratios for 

marginal, moderate, serious, severe, and extreme 

ozone nonattainment areas, provisions addressing 

offset requirements for facilities that shut down or 

curtail operation, and a requirement stating that 

NOX emissions are ozone precursors. 

designated nonattainment for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS which include 

NSR requirements. Specific to this 

rulemaking, the Phase II Rule made 

changes to Federal regulations found at 

40 CFR 51.165, 51.166 and 52.21, which 

govern the nonattainment NSR and PSD 

permitting programs.1 Specifically, the 

Phase II Rule requirements include 

among other changes, a provision 

stating that NOX is an ozone precursor. 

70 FR 71612, (page 71679) (November 

29, 2005). In the Phase II Rule, EPA 

stated as follows: 

‘‘The EPA has recognized NOX as an ozone 

precursor in several national rules because of 

its contribution to ozone transport and the 

ozone nonattainment problem. The EPA’s 

recognition of NOX as an ozone precursor is 

supported by scientific studies, which have 

long recognized the role of NOX in ozone 

formation and transport. Such formation and 

transport is not limited to nonattainment 

areas. Therefore, we believe NOX should be 

treated consistently as an ozone precursor in 

both our PSD and nonattainment NSR 

regulations. For these reasons, we have 

promulgated final regulations providing that 

NOX is an ozone precursor in attainment 

areas.’’ 

In the Phase II Rule, EPA established 

that states must submit SIPs 

incorporating required changes 

(including the addition of NOX as a 

precursor for ozone) no later than June 

15, 2007. See 70 FR 71612 (page 71683). 

III. What is EPA’s analysis of 

Mississippi’s SIP revision? 

On November 28, 2007, the State of 

Mississippi, through MDEQ, submitted 

a revision to EPA for approval, which 

revised the PSD program. This revision 

incorporates by reference, EPA’s federal 

regulations specified in the Ozone 

Implementation NSR Update relating to 

NOX as an ozone precursor. Specifically, 

the revision is found in Mississippi’s 

Air Quality Regulations, APC–S–5 

‘‘Regulations for the Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration.’’ The submittal 

revised Mississippi’s PSD program to 

include NOX as a precursor to ozone for 

PSD permitting, consistent with changes 

to the Federal regulations set forth in 

the Ozone Implementation NSR Update. 

Mississippi’s November 28, 2007 SIP 

revision incorporates by reference the 

federal PSD regulations (at 40 CFR 

52.21) to include the Ozone 

Implementation NSR Update rules and 

additional subsequent revisions to the 

federal program made through July 15, 

2007. Currently, the State of Mississippi 

is in attainment for all the NAAQS and 

all major sources are subject to the PSD 

permitting program in the Mississippi 

SIP which incorporates by reference 40 

CFR 52.21. Today’s action only relates 

to the portion of Mississippi’s SIP 

revision which incorporates by 

reference the federal provisions related 

to NOX as an ozone precursor. 

The Mississippi NOX as an ozone 

precursor PSD language was 

incorporated by reference and is 

identical to the Federal PSD 

requirements. The SIP revision is 

consistent with the CAA because it adds 

NOX as a precursor to ozone and is 

consistent with federal requirements. 

Therefore, EPA has preliminarily 

determined that the Mississippi PSD 

provisions to include NOX as an ozone 

precursor are approvable. 

IV. Proposed Action 

Pursuant to section 110 of the CAA, 

EPA is proposing to approve the portion 

of Mississippi’s SIP revision submitted 

November 28, 2007, which incorporates 

by reference NOX as an ozone precursor 

for PSD purposes into the Mississippi 

SIP. EPA is proposing to approve these 

revisions because they are consistent 

with the CAA and its implementing 

regulations. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

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, this proposed 

action merely approves state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• 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, this proposed rule does 

not have tribal implications as specified 

by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, and Ozone. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: September 22, 2010. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2010–25309 Filed 10–6–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2010–0666–201031; FRL– 

9211–3] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans and Designation 

of Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; Tennessee; Redesignation 

of the Knoxville 8-Hour Ozone 

Nonattainment Area to Attainment for 

Ozone 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: On July 14, 2010, the State of 

Tennessee, through the Tennessee 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 62027 

Department of Environment and 

Conservation (TDEC), Air Pollution 

Control Division, submitted a request to 

redesignate the Knoxville 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area to attainment for the 

1997 8-hour National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS); and to 

approve a State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) revision containing a maintenance 

plan for the Knoxville, Tennessee Area. 

The Knoxville 1997 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area is comprised of 

Anderson, Blount, Jefferson, Knox, 

Loudon, and Sevier Counties in their 

entireties, and the portion of Cocke 

County that falls within the boundary of 

the Great Smoky Mountains National 

Park (hereafter referred to as the 

‘‘Knoxville Area’’). In this action, EPA is 

proposing to approve the July 14, 2010, 

8-hour ozone redesignation request for 

the Knoxville Area. Additionally, EPA 

is proposing to approve the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS maintenance plan for the 

Knoxville Area, including the 2007 

baseline emission inventory, and the 

motor vehicle emission budgets 

(MVEBs) for nitrogen oxides (NOX) and 

volatile organic compounds (VOC) for 

2024 for the Knoxville Area. This 

proposed approval of Tennessee’s 

redesignation request is based on EPA’s 

determination that the Knoxville Area 

has met the criteria for redesignation to 

attainment specified in the Clean Air 

Act (CAA), including the determination 

that the Knoxville 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area has attained the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. In this 

action, EPA is also describing the status 

of its transportation conformity 

adequacy determination for the new 

2024 MVEBs that are contained in the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

maintenance plan for the Knoxville 

Area. This action is being taken 

pursuant to the CAA and its 

implementing regulations. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before November 8, 2010. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2010–0666, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. E-mail: benjamin.lynorae@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2010–0666, 

Regulatory Development Section, Air 

Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. 

Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2010– 

0666. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The http:// 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

http://www.regulations.gov index. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jane 

Spann or Royce Dansby-Sparks of the 

Regulatory Development Section, in the 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Ms. 

Spann may be reached by phone at (404) 

562–9029, or via electronic mail at 

spann.jane@epa.gov. Mr. Dansby-Sparks 

may be reached by phone at (404) 562– 

9187, or via electronic mail at 

dansby-sparks.royce@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What proposed actions is EPA taking? 

II. What is the background for EPA’s 

proposed actions? 

III. What are the criteria for redesignation? 

IV. Why is EPA proposing these actions? 

V. What is the effect of EPA’s proposed 

actions? 

VI. What is EPA’s analysis of the request? 

VII. What is EPA’s analysis of Tennessee’s 

proposed NOX and VOC MVEBs for the 

Knoxville area? 

VIII. What is the status of EPA’s adequacy 

determination for the proposed NOX and 

VOC MVEBs for 2024 for the Knoxville 

area? 

IX. What is EPA’s analysis of the proposed 

2007 base year emissions inventory for 

the Knoxville Area? 

X. Proposed Action on the Redesignation 

Request and Maintenance Plan SIP 

Revision Including Proposed Approval 

of the 2024 NOX and VOC MVEBs for the 

Knoxville Area 

XI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What proposed actions is EPA taking? 

EPA is proposing several related 

actions, which are summarized below 

and described in greater detail 

throughout this notice of rulemaking: 

(1) To redesignate the Knoxville Area to 

attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS; (2) to approve under section 

172(c)(3) the emissions inventory 

submitted with the maintenance plan; 

and (3) to approve, under section 175A 

of the CAA, Knoxville’s 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS maintenance plan into 

the Tennessee SIP, including the 

associated MVEBs. In addition, and 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
62028 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

1 Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by 

sources. Rather, emissions of NOX and VOC react 

in the presence of sunlight to form ground-level 

ozone. As a result, NOX and VOC are referred to as 

precursors of ozone. 

related to today’s actions, EPA is also 

notifying the public of the status of 

EPA’s adequacy determination for the 

Knoxville Area MVEBs. 

First, EPA is proposing to determine 

that the Knoxville Area has attained the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA further 

proposes to determine that, if EPA’s 

proposed approval of the 2007 baseline 

emissions inventory for the Knoxville 

Area is finalized, the Area has met the 

requirements for redesignation under 

section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. The 

Knoxville Area 1997 8-hour ozone area 

is composed of Anderson, Blount, 

Jefferson, Knox, Loudon, and Sevier 

Counties in their entireties, and the 

portion of Cocke County that falls 

within the boundary of the Great Smoky 

Mountains National Park. In this action, 

EPA is now proposing to approve a 

request to change the legal designation 

of Anderson, Blount, Jefferson, Knox, 

Loudon, and Sevier Counties in their 

entireties, and the portion of Cocke 

County that falls within the boundary of 

the Great Smoky Mountains National 

Park in the Knoxville Area from 

nonattainment to attainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

Second, EPA is proposing to approve 

under the CAA, Tennessee’s 2007 

inventory for the Knoxville Area (under 

section 172(c)(3)). Tennessee selected 

2007 as the attainment emissions 

inventory year for the Knoxville Area. 

This attainment inventory identifies the 

level of emissions in the Area, which is 

sufficient to attain the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. 

Third, EPA is proposing to approve 

Tennessee’s 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

maintenance plan for the Knoxville 

Area (such approval being one of the 

CAA criteria for redesignation to 

attainment status). The maintenance 

plan is designed to help keep the 

Knoxville Area in attainment of the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS through 

2024. Consistent with the CAA, the 

maintenance plan that EPA is proposing 

to approve today also includes 2024 

NOX and VOC MVEBs. EPA is 

proposing to approve (into the 

Tennessee SIP) the 2024 MVEBs that are 

included as part of Tennessee’s 

maintenance plan for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. 

EPA is also notifying the public of the 

status of EPA’s adequacy process for the 

newly-established 2024 NOX and VOC 

MVEBs for the Knoxville Area. The 

Adequacy comment period for the 

Knoxville Area 2024 MVEBs began on 

June 15, 2010, with EPA’s posting of the 

availability of this submittal on EPA’s 

Adequacy Web site. (http:// 

www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/ 

transconf/currsips.htm). The Adequacy 

comment period for these MVEBs closed 

on July 15, 2010. No adverse comments 

were received during the Adequacy 

public comment period. On September 

15, 2010, EPA published its adequacy 

notice for the 2024 MVEB’s for the 

Knoxville Area (75 FR 55977). Please 

see section VIII of this proposed 

rulemaking for further explanation of 

this process, and for more details on the 

MVEBs determination. 

Today’s notice of proposed 

rulemaking is in response to 

Tennessee’s July 14, 2010, SIP submittal 

requesting the redesignation of the 

Knoxville 1997 8-hour ozone area, and 

includes a SIP revision addressing the 

specific issues summarized above and 

the necessary elements for redesignation 

described in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the 

CAA. 

II. What is the background for EPA’s 

proposed actions? 

The CAA establishes a process for air 

quality management through the 

NAAQS. Ozone is a criteria pollutant for 

which NAAQS are established. On July 

18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS of 0.08 parts per 

million (ppm).1 These NAAQS are more 

stringent than the previous 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS. Under EPA regulations 

found at 40 CFR part 50, the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS are attained when 

the 3-year average of the annual fourthhighest daily maximum 8-hour average 

ambient air quality ozone 

concentrations is less than or equal to 

0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when 

rounding is considered). (See 69 FR 

23857 (April 30, 2004) for further 

information.) Ambient air quality 

monitoring data for the 3-year period 

must meet a data completeness 

requirement. The ambient air quality 

monitoring data completeness 

requirement is met when the percent of 

days with valid ambient monitoring 

data is greater than 90 percent, on 

average, and no single year has less than 

75 percent data completeness as 

determined in Appendix I of part 50. 

Specifically, section 2.3 of 40 CFR part 

50, Appendix I, ‘‘Comparisons with the 

Primary and Secondary Ozone 

Standards’’ states: 

The primary and secondary ozone ambient 

air quality standards are met at an ambient 

air quality monitoring site when the 3-year 

average of the annual fourth-highest daily 

maximum 8-hour average ozone 

concentration is less than or equal to 0.08 

ppm. The number of significant figures in the 

level of the standard dictates the rounding 

convention for comparing the computed 3- 

year average annual fourth-highest daily 

maximum 8-hour average ozone 

concentration with the level of the standard. 

The third decimal place of the computed 

value is rounded, with values equal to or 

greater than 5 rounding up. Thus, a 

computed 3-year average ozone 

concentration of 0.085 ppm is the smallest 

value that is greater than 0.08 ppm. 

The CAA required EPA to designate 

as nonattainment any area that was 

violating the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

based on the three most recent years of 

ambient air quality data. The Knoxville 

Area was initially designated 

nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS using 2001–2003 

ambient air quality data. The Federal 

Register document making these 

designations was published on April 30, 

2004 (69 FR 23857). 

The CAA contains two sets of 

provisions—subpart 1 and subpart 2— 

that address planning and control 

requirements for ozone nonattainment 

areas. (Both are found in title I, part D.) 

Subpart 1 (which EPA refers to as 

‘‘basic’’ nonattainment) contains general, 

less prescriptive, requirements for 

nonattainment areas for any pollutant— 

including ozone—governed by a 

NAAQS. Subpart 2 (which EPA refers to 

as ‘‘classified’’ nonattainment) provides 

more specific requirements for certain 

ozone nonattainment areas. Under 

EPA’s Phase I 1997 8-Hour Ozone 

Implementation Rule (69 FR 23857) 

(Phase I Rule), published April 30, 2004, 

an area was classified under subpart 2 

based on its 1997 8-hour ozone design 

value (i.e., the 3-year average of the 

annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8- 

hour average ozone concentrations), if it 

had a 1-hour design value at or above 

0.121 ppm (the lowest 1-hour design 

value in Table 1 of subpart 2). All other 

areas were covered under subpart 1, 

based upon their 8-hour ambient air 

quality design values. 

Knox County (which is a part of the 

Knoxville Area) was originally 

designated as marginal nonattainment 

for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS on 

November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56694). Knox 

County was redesignated as attainment 

for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS on 

September 27, 1993 (58 FR 50271). At 

that same time, Anderson, Blount, 

Cocke, Jefferson, Loudon and Sevier 

Counties in their entireties were 

designated attainment/unclassifiable for 

the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. On April 30, 

2004, EPA designated the Knoxville 

Area (of which Knox County is a part) 

as a ‘‘basic’’ (subpart 1) 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area (69 FR 23857, April 

30, 2004). When Tennessee submitted 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 62029 

its final redesignation request on July 

14, 2010, the Knoxville Area was 

classified under subpart 1 of the CAA, 

and was obligated to meet only the 

subpart 1 requirements. 

EPA promulgated implementation 

rules for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

These rules were published in 2 phases. 

The Phase I Implementation Rule (69 FR 

23951, April 30, 2004) was published at 

the same time as the ozone designations 

and addresses such topics as 

classifications, revocation of the 1-hour 

NAAQS, anti-backsliding principles, 

and timing for emission reductions. The 

Phase II Rule was published November 

29, 2005, (72 FR 31727) and addressed 

remaining implementation issues not 

covered by the Phase 1 Rule. Various 

aspects of EPA’s Phase 1 Rule were 

challenged in court. On December 22, 

2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 

District of Columbia Circuit (DC Circuit 

Court) vacated EPA’s Phase 1 Rule (69 

FR 23951, April 30, 2004). South Coast 

Air Quality Management Dist. 

(SCAQMD) v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (DC 

Cir. 2006). On June 8, 2007, in response 

to several petitions for rehearing, the DC 

Circuit Court clarified that the Phase I 

Rule was vacated only with regard to 

those parts of the Rule that had been 

successfully challenged. Therefore, the 

Phase I Rule provisions related to 

classifications for areas currently 

classified under subpart 2 of title I, part 

D of the CAA as 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS nonattainment areas, the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS attainment dates 

and the timing for emissions reductions 

needed for attainment of the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS remain effective. 

The June 8th decision left intact the 

court’s rejection of EPA’s reasons for 

implementing the 1997 8-hour NAAQS 

in certain nonattainment areas under 

subpart 1 in lieu of subpart 2, i.e., the 

court’s rejection of the subpart 1 

classification. By limiting the vacatur, 

the court let stand EPA’s revocation of 

the 1-hour NAAQS and those antibacksliding provisions of the Phase I 

Rule that had not been successfully 

challenged. The June 8th decision 

reaffirmed the December 22, 2006, 

decision that EPA had improperly failed 

to retain measures required for 1-hour 

nonattainment areas under the antibacksliding provisions of the 

regulations: (1) Nonattainment area New 

Source Review (NSR) requirements 

based on an area’s 1-hour nonattainment 

classification; (2) Section 185 penalty 

fees for 1-hour severe or extreme 

nonattainment areas; and (3) measures 

to be implemented pursuant to section 

172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the CAA, on the 

contingency of an area not making 

reasonable further progress (RFP) 

toward attainment of the 1-hour 

NAAQS, or for failure to attain that 

NAAQS. The June 8th decision clarified 

that the court’s reference to conformity 

requirements for anti-backsliding 

purposes was limited to requiring the 

continued use of 1-hour MVEBs until 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS budgets 

were available for 8-hour ozone 

conformity determinations, which is 

already required under EPA’s 

conformity regulations. The court thus 

clarified that 1-hour ozone conformity 

determinations are not required for antibacksliding purposes. 

This section sets forth EPA’s views on 

the potential effect of the court’s rulings 

on this proposed redesignation action. 

For the reasons set forth below, EPA 

does not believe that the court’s rulings 

alter any requirements relevant to this 

redesignation action so as to preclude 

redesignation, nor does EPA believe the 

court’s ruling prevents EPA from 

proposing or ultimately finalizing this 

redesignation. EPA believes that the 

court’s December 22, 2006, and June 8, 

2007, decisions impose no impediment 

to moving forward with redesignation of 

the Knoxville Area to attainment. 

With respect to the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, the court’s ruling rejected 

EPA’s reasons for classifying areas 

under subpart 1 for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS, and remanded that 

matter back to the Agency. In its January 

16, 2009, proposed rulemaking in 

response to the SCAQMD decision, EPA 

has proposed to classify the Knoxville 

Area under subpart 2 as a moderate area 

(74 FR 2936). If EPA finalizes the 

reclassification of the Knoxville Area 

before the July 14, 2010, redesignation 

request is approved, the requirements 

under subpart 2 will become applicable 

when they are due. EPA proposed a 

deadline for submission of these 

requirements of one year after the 

effective date of the final rulemaking 

classifying this and other areas (74 FR 

2940–2941). However, EPA believes that 

this does not preclude this 

redesignation from being approved. This 

belief is based upon: (1) EPA’s 

longstanding policy of evaluating 

requirements in accordance with the 

requirements due at the time 

redesignation request is submitted; and 

(2) consideration of the inequity of 

applying retroactively any requirements 

that might in the future be applied. 

First, at the time the redesignation 

request was submitted, the Knoxville 

Area was not classified under subpart 2, 

nor were subpart 2 requirements yet due 

for this Area. Under EPA’s longstanding 

interpretation of section 107(d)(3)(E) of 

the CAA, to qualify for redesignation, 

states requesting redesignation to 

attainment must meet only the relevant 

SIP requirements that came due prior to 

the submittal of a complete 

redesignation request. September 4, 

1992, Calcagni Memorandum 

(‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to 

Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’ 

Memorandum from John Calcagni, 

Director, Air Quality Management 

Division). See also the September 17, 

1993, Michael Shapiro Memorandum 

(’’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,’’ Memorandum 

from Michael Shapiro, Acting Assistant 

Administrator for Air and Radiation), 

and 60 FR 12459, 12465–66 (March 7, 

1995) (Redesignation of Detroit-Ann 

Arbor, Michigan); Sierra Club v. EPA, 

375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004) (upholding 

this interpretation); 68 FR 25418, 25424, 

25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of 

St. Louis, Missouri). 

Moreover, it would be inequitable to 

retroactively apply any new SIP 

requirements that were not applicable at 

the time the request was submitted. The 

DC Circuit Court has recognized the 

inequity in such retroactive rulemaking 

(see Sierra Club v. Whitman 285 F. 3d 

63 (DC Cir. 2002)), in which the court 

upheld a district court’s ruling refusing 

to make retroactive an EPA 

determination of nonattainment that 

was past the statutory due date. Such a 

determination would have resulted in 

the imposition of additional 

requirements on the area. The court 

stated, ‘‘[a]lthough EPA failed to make 

the nonattainment determination within 

the statutory frame, Sierra Club’s 

proposed solution only makes the 

situation worse. Retroactive relief would 

likely impose large costs on the states, 

which would face fines and suits for not 

implementing air pollution prevention 

plans in 1997, even though they were 

not on notice at the time.’’ Id. at 68. 

Similarly here, it would be unfair to 

penalize the Knoxville Area by applying 

to it, for purposes of redesignation, 

additional SIP requirements under 

subpart 2 that were not in effect or yet 

due at the time it submitted its 

redesignation request, or the time that 

the Knoxville Area attained the NAAQS. 

With respect to the requirements 

under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, only 

the Knox County portion of the 

Knoxville Area was originally 

designated as a marginal nonattainment 

for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in 

November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56694); the 

remainder of the Knoxville Area was 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
62030 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

2CAA 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 the motor vehicle 

emission budgets that are established in control 

strategy SIPs and maintenance plans. 

designated as attainment. Knox County 

was redesignated as attainment for the 

1-hour ozone NAAQS on September 27, 

1993 (58 FR 50271). Therefore, Knox 

County was redesignated to attainment 

of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS prior to its 

nonattainment designation for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. As a result, Knox 

County (as part of the Knoxville Area) 

is considered to be a 1-hour attainment 

area subject to a CAA section 175A 

maintenance plan for the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS. The DC Circuit Court’s 

decisions do not impact redesignation 

requests for these types of areas, except 

to the extent that the court, in its June 

8th decision, clarified that for those 

areas with 1-hour MVEBs in their 

maintenance plans, anti-backsliding 

requires that those 1-hour budgets must 

be used for 8-hour conformity 

determinations until they are replaced 

by 1997 8-hour budgets. To meet this 

requirement, conformity determinations 

in such areas must comply with the 

applicable requirements of EPA’s 

conformity regulations at 40 CFR part 

93. 

First, there are no conformity 

requirements relevant for evaluating the 

Knoxville Area redesignation request, 

such as a transportation conformity 

SIP.2 It is EPA’s longstanding policy 

that it is reasonable to interpret the 

conformity SIP requirements 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 rules have not been approved. See 

40 CFR 51.390; see also Wall v. EPA, 

265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001) (upholding 

EPA’s interpretation); 60 FR 62748 (Dec. 

7, 1995) (redesignation of Tampa, 

Florida). Tennessee currently has a fully 

approved 1-hour ozone transportation 

conformity SIP, which was approved on 

May 16, 2003 (68 FR 26492). 

Second, with regard to the three other 

anti-backsliding provisions for the 1- 

hour standard that the DC Circuit Court 

found were not properly retained, Knox 

County, Tennessee is an attainment area 

subject to a maintenance plan for the 1- 

hour standard, and the NSR requirement 

no longer applies to this area because it 

was redesignated to attainment of the 1- 

hour standard. Because Knox County 

was redesignated as a 1-hour attainment 

area, the contingency measure (pursuant 

to section 172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9)) and fee 

provision requirements no longer apply 

to the Knoxville Area. As a result, the 

decisions in SCAQMD should not alter 

any requirements that would preclude 

EPA from finalizing the redesignation of 

the Knoxville Area to attainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

As was noted earlier, in 2009, the 

ambient ozone data for the Knoxville 

Area indicated no further violations of 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, using 

data from the 3-year period of 2007– 

2009 to demonstrate attainment. As a 

result, on July 14, 2010, Tennessee 

requested redesignation of the Knoxville 

Area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. The redesignation 

request included three years of 

complete, quality-assured ambient air 

quality data for the ozone seasons 

(March 1st through October 31st) of 

2007–2009, indicating that the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS has been achieved 

for the entire Knoxville Area. Under the 

CAA, nonattainment areas may be 

redesignated to attainment if sufficient, 

complete, quality-assured data is 

available for the Administrator to 

determine that the area has attained the 

standard and the area meets the other 

CAA redesignation requirements in 

section 107(d)(3)(E). The 1997 8-hour 

ozone design values for the Knoxville 

Area indicate that between 1999 and 

2009, ozone concentrations declined 

noticeably at both high and low 

evaluations. While ozone concentrations 

are dependent on a variety of 

conditions, the likely reason for the 

overall downtrend in ozone 

concentrations in the Knoxville Area is 

most likely due to the reduction of NOx 

emissions that have occurred since 

2004. 

III. What are the criteria for 

redesignation? 

The CAA provides the requirements 

for redesignating a nonattainment area 

to attainment. Specifically, section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA allows for 

redesignation providing that: (1) The 

Administrator determines that the area 

has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) 

the Administrator has fully approved 

the applicable implementation plan for 

the area under section 110(k); (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 

and applicable Federal air pollutant 

control regulations and other permanent 

and enforceable reductions; (4) the 

Administrator has fully approved a 

maintenance plan for the area as 

meeting the requirements of section 

175A; and, (5) the state containing such 

area has met all requirements applicable 

to the area for purposes of redesignation 

under section 110 and part D of the 

CAA. 

On April 16, 1992, EPA provided 

guidance on redesignation 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 the following 

documents: 

1. ‘‘Ozone and Carbon Monoxide 

Design Value Calculations,’’ 

Memorandum from Bill Laxton, 

Director, Technical Support Division, 

June 18, 1990; 

2. ‘‘Maintenance Plans for 

Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon 

Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,’’ 

Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief, 

Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs 

Branch, April 30, 1992; 

3. ‘‘Contingency Measures for Ozone 

and Carbon Monoxide (CO) 

Redesignations,’’ Memorandum from G. 

T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon 

Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 

1992; 

4. ‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests 

to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’ 

Memorandum from John Calcagni, 

Director, Air Quality Management 

Division, September 4, 1992 (hereafter 

referred to as the ‘‘Calcagni 

Memorandum’’); 

5. ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Actions Submitted in Response to Clean 

Air Act (CAA) Deadlines,’’ 

Memorandum from John Calcagni, 

Director, Air Quality Management 

Division, October 28, 1992; 

6. ‘‘Technical Support Documents 

(TSDs) for Redesignation of Ozone and 

Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment 

Areas,’’ Memorandum from G. T. Helms, 

Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide 

Programs Branch, August 17, 1993; 

7. ‘‘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,’’ Memorandum 

from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting 

Assistant Administrator for Air and 

Radiation, September 17, 1993; 

8. ‘‘Use of Actual Emissions in 

Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone 

and CO Nonattainment Areas,’’ 

Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, 

Acting Director, Air Quality 

Management Division, November 30, 

1993; 

9. ‘‘Part D New Source Review (Part D 

NSR) Requirements for Areas 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 62031 

Requesting Redesignation to 

Attainment,’’ Memorandum from Mary 

D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for 

Air and Radiation, October 14, 1994; 

and 

10. ‘‘Reasonable Further Progress, 

Attainment Demonstration, and Related 

Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment 

Areas Meeting the Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard,’’ 

Memorandum from John S. Seitz, 

Director, Office of Air Quality Planning 

and Standards, May 10, 1995. 

IV. Why is EPA proposing these 

actions? 

On July 14, 2010, Tennessee, through 

TDEC, requested redesignation of the 

Knoxville Area to attainment for the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA’s 

evaluation indicates that the Knoxville 

Area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS and has met the requirements 

for redesignation set forth in section 

107(d)(3)(E), including the maintenance 

plan requirements under section 175A 

of the CAA. EPA is also proposing to 

approve the 2007 baseline emission 

inventory under section 172(c)(3) 

because Tennessee has used 

methodology consistent with EPA 

guidance and implementing regulations 

to develop this inventory. EPA is also 

announcing the status of its adequacy 

determination of the 2024 NOX and 

VOC MVEBs which are relevant to the 

requested redesignation. 

V. What is the effect of EPA’s proposed 

actions? 

EPA’s proposed actions establish the 

basis upon which EPA may take final 

action on the issues being proposed for 

approval today. Approval of 

Tennessee’s redesignation request 

would change the legal designation of 

the Anderson, Blount, Jefferson, Knox, 

Loudon, and Sevier Counties in their 

entireties, and the portion of Cocke 

County that falls within the boundary of 

the Great Smoky Mountains National 

Park for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

found at 40 CFR part 81 from 

nonattainment to attainment. Approval 

of Tennessee’s request would also 

incorporate into the Tennessee SIP, a 

plan for maintaining the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS in the Knoxville Area 

through 2024. This maintenance plan 

includes contingency measures to 

remedy future violations of the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. The maintenance 

plan also establishes NOX and VOC 

MVEBs for the Knoxville Area. The NOX

and VOC MVEBs for 2024 for the 

Knoxville Area are 36.32 tons per day 

(tpd) and 25.19 tpd, respectively. Final 

action would also approve the Area’s 

emissions inventory under section 

172(c)(3). Approval of Tennessee’s 

maintenance plan would also result in 

approval of the NOX and VOC MVEBs. 

Additionally, EPA is notifying the 

public of the status of its adequacy 

determination for the 2024 NOX and 

VOC MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR 

93.118(f)(1). 

VI. What is EPA’s analysis of the 

request? 

EPA is proposing to make the 

determination that the Knoxville 1997 

8-hour ozone nonattainment area has 

attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, 

and that all other redesignation criteria 

have been met for the Knoxville Area. 

The basis for EPA’s determination for 

the Area is discussed in greater detail 

below. 

Criteria (1)—The Knoxville Area Has 

Attained the 1997 8-Hour Ozone 

NAAQS 

EPA is proposing to determine that 

the Knoxville Area has attained the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. For ozone, 

an area may be considered to be 

attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

if it meets the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard, as determined in accordance 

with 40 CFR 50.10 and Appendix I of 

part 50, based on three complete, 

consecutive calendar years of qualityassured air quality monitoring data. To 

attain these NAAQS, the 3-year average 

of the fourth-highest daily maximum 8- 

hour average ozone concentrations 

measured at each monitor within an 

area over each year must not exceed 

0.08 ppm. Based on the data handling 

and reporting convention described in 

40 CFR part 50, appendix I, the NAAQS 

are attained if the design value is 0.084 

ppm or below. The data must be 

collected and quality-assured in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and 

recorded in the EPA Air Quality System 

(AQS). The monitors generally should 

have remained at the same location for 

the duration of the monitoring period 

required for demonstrating attainment. 

EPA reviewed ozone monitoring data 

from ambient ozone monitoring stations 

in the Knoxville Area for the ozone 

season from 2007–2009. These data 

have been quality-assured and are 

recorded in AQS. The fourth-highest 8- 

hour ozone average for 2007, 2008 and 

2009, and the 3-year average of these 

values (i.e., design values), are 

summarized in the following Table 1 of 

this proposed rulemaking. 

TABLE 1—DESIGN VALUE CONCENTRATIONS FOR THE KNOXVILLE 8-HOUR OZONE AREA (ppm) 

County Site name Monitor ID 

Eight-hour design values (ppm) 

2005–2007 2006–2008 2007–2009 

Anderson .......... Freels Bend Study Area ................................................... 470010101–1 0.080 0.077 0.072 

Blount ................ Look Rock, GSMNP ......................................................... 470090101–1 0.086 0.085 0.079 

Cades Cove, GSMNP ...................................................... 470090102–1 0.070 0.072 0.069 

Jefferson ........... 1188 Lost Creek Road ..................................................... 470890002–1 0.084 0.081 0.076 

Knox .................. 9315 Rutledge Pike .......................................................... 470930021–1 0.081 0.081 0.077

4625 Mildred Drive ........................................................... 470931020–1 0.088 0.088 0.082 

Loudon .............. 1703 Roberts Road .......................................................... 47105109–1 0.085 0.082 0.077 

Sevier ................ Cove Mountain, GSMNP .................................................. 47155101–1 0.082 0.082 0.079 

As discussed above, the design value 

for an area is the highest 3-year average 

of the annual fourth-highest 8-hour 

ozone value recorded at any monitor in 

the area. Therefore, the most recent 3- 

year design value (2007–2009) for the 

Knoxville Area is 0.082 ppm, which 

meets the NAAQS as described above. 

Current air quality data show that the 

Area continues to attain the NAAQS. If 

the Area does not continue to attain 

until EPA finalizes the redesignation, 

EPA will not go forward with the 

redesignation. As discussed in more 

detail below, the State of Tennessee has 

committed to continue monitoring in 

this Area in accordance with 40 CFR 

part 58. EPA proposes to find that the 

Knoxville Area has attained the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
62032 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

3On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA issued 

a NOX SIP Call requiring the District of Columbia 

and 22 states to reduce emissions of NOX in order 

to reduce the transport of ozone and ozone 

precursors. In compliance with EPA’s NOX SIP Call, 

Tennessee developed rules governing the control of 

NOX emissions from Electric Generating Units 

(EGUs), major non-EGU industrial boilers, major 

cement kilns, and internal combustion engines. On 

January 22, 2004, EPA approved Tennessee’s rules 

as fulfilling Phase I (69 FR 3015) and Phase II on 

December 27, 2005 (70 FR 76408). 

4On May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162), EPA 

promulgated CAIR which required 28 upwind 

States and the District of Columbia to revise their 

SIPs to include control measures that would reduce 

emissions of sulfur dioxide and NOX. Various 

aspects of CAIR rule were petitioned in court and 

on December 23, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals 

for the District of Columbia Circuit remanded CAIR 

to EPA (see North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176 

(DC Cir., 2008)) which left CAIR in place to 

‘‘temporarily preserve the environmental values 

covered by CAIR’’ until EPA replaces it with a rule 

consistent with the court’s decision. The court 

directed EPA to remedy various areas of the rule 

that were petitioned consistent with its July 11, 

2008, opinion (see, North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 

836 (DC Cir., 2008)), but declined to impose a 

schedule on EPA for completing that action. Id. 

Therefore, CAIR is currently in effect in Tennessee. 

Criteria (2)—Tennessee Has a Fully 

Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) for 

the Knoxville Area and Criteria (5)— 

Tennessee Has Met All Applicable 

Requirements Under Section 110 and 

Part D of the CAA 

Below is a summary of how these two 

criteria were met. 

EPA proposes to find that Tennessee 

has met all applicable SIP requirements 

for the Knoxville Area under section 

110 of the CAA (general SIP 

requirements) for purposes of 

redesignation. EPA also proposes to find 

that the Tennessee SIP satisfies the 

criterion that it meet applicable SIP 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation under part D of title I of 

the CAA (requirements specific to 

subpart 1 basic 1997 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment areas) in accordance 

with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, 

EPA proposes to determine that the SIP 

is fully approved with respect to all 

requirements applicable for purposes of 

redesignation in accordance with 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these 

determinations, EPA ascertained which 

requirements are applicable to the Area 

and that if applicable, they are fully 

approved under section 110(k). SIPs 

must be fully approved only with 

respect to applicable requirements. 

a. Knoxville Area Has Met All 

Applicable Requirements Under Section 

110 and Part D of the CAA 

The September 4, 1992, Calcagni 

Memorandum describes EPA’s 

interpretation of section 107(d)(3)(E). 

Under this interpretation, to qualify for 

redesignation, states requesting 

redesignation to attainment must meet 

only the relevant CAA requirements that 

come due prior to the submittal of a 

complete redesignation request. See also 

Michael Shapiro Memorandum, (‘‘SIP 

Requirements for Areas Submitting 

Requests for Redesignation to 

Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon 

Monoxide NAAQS On or After 

November 15, 1992,’’ September 17, 

1993); 60 FR 12459, 12465–66 (March 7, 

1995) (redesignation of Detroit-Ann 

Arbor, Michigan). Applicable 

requirements of the CAA that come due 

subsequent to the area’s submittal of a 

complete redesignation request remain 

applicable until a redesignation is 

approved, but are not required as a 

prerequisite to redesignation. See 

section 175A(c) of the CAA; Sierra Club, 

375 F.3d 537; see also 68 FR 25424, 

25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of 

St. Louis, Missouri). 

General SIP requirements. Section 

110(a)(2) of title I of the CAA delineates 

the general requirements for a SIP, 

which include enforceable emissions 

limitations and other control measures, 

means, or techniques, provisions for the 

establishment and operation of 

appropriate devices necessary to collect 

data on ambient air quality, and 

programs to enforce the limitations. 

General SIP elements and requirements 

are delineated in section 110(a)(2) of 

title I, part A of the CAA. These 

requirements include, but are not 

limited to, the following: Submittal of a 

SIP that has been adopted by the state 

after reasonable public notice and 

hearing; provisions for establishment 

and operation of appropriate procedures 

needed to monitor ambient air quality; 

implementation of a source permit 

program; provisions for the 

implementation of part C requirements 

(Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD)) and provisions for the 

implementation of part D requirements 

(NSR permit programs); provisions for 

air pollution modeling; and provisions 

for public and local agency participation 

in planning and emission control rule 

development. 

Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs 

contain certain 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 

the transport of air pollutants (NOX SIP 

Call 3 and Clean Air Interstate Rule 

(CAIR4)). The section 110(a)(2)(D) 

requirements for a state are not linked 

with a particular nonattainment area’s 

designation and classification in that 

state. EPA believes that the 

requirements linked with a particular 

nonattainment area’s designation and 

classifications are the relevant measures 

to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation 

request. The transport SIP submittal 

requirements, where applicable, 

continue to apply to a state regardless of 

the designation of any one particular 

area in the state. Thus, we do not 

believe that the CAA’s interstate 

transport requirements should be 

construed to be applicable requirements 

for purposes of redesignation. 

In addition, EPA believes that the 

other section 110 elements not 

connected with nonattainment plan 

submissions and not linked with an 

area’s attainment status are not 

applicable requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. The area will still be 

subject to these requirements after the 

area is redesignated. 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 and 

oxygenated fuels requirements, as well 

as with section 184 ozone transport 

requirements. See Reading, 

Pennsylvania, proposed and final 

rulemakings (61 FR 53174–53176, 

October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7, 

1997); Cleveland-Akron-Loraine, Ohio, 

final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7, 

1996); and Tampa, Florida, final 

rulemaking at (60 FR 62748, December 

7, 1995). See also the discussion on this 

issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio 

redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 

2000), and in the Pittsburgh, 

Pennsylvania redesignation (66 FR 

50399, October 19, 2001). 

EPA believes that section 110 

elements not linked to the area’s 

nonattainment status are not applicable 

for purposes of redesignation. Therefore, 

as was discussed above, for purposes of 

redesignation, they are not considered 

applicable requirements. Nonetheless, 

EPA notes it has previously approved 

provisions in the Tennessee SIP 

addressing section 110 elements under 

the 1-hour ozone NAAQS (45 FR 53809, 

August 13, 1980). The State believes 

that the section 110 SIP approved for 

the 1-hour ozone NAAQS are sufficient 

to meet the requirements under the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. Tennessee 

submitted a letter dated December 14, 

2007, setting forth its belief that the 

section 110 SIP approved for the 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS is also sufficient to meet 

the requirements under the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. EPA has not yet 

approved this submission, but such 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 62033 

5On August 3, 2010, EPA proposed to approve a 

clean data determination for the Knoxville Area for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS (75 FR 45568). If 

EPA takes final action on this determination, under 

the provisions of EPA’s ozone implementation rule 

(see 40 CFR Section 51.918), the requirements for 

the State of Tennessee to submit an attainment 

demonstration and associated reasonably available 

control measures plan, RFP plan, contingency 

measures, and any other planning SIPs related to 

attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the 

Knoxville Area, shall be suspended for as long as 

the Area continues to meet the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. 

6CAA 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 the motor vehicle 

emission budgets that are established in control 

strategy SIPs and maintenance plans. 

approval is not necessary for purposes 

of redesignation. 

Part D requirements. EPA proposes 

that if EPA approves Tennessee’s base 

year emissions inventory, which is part 

of the maintenance plan submittal, the 

Tennessee SIP will meet applicable SIP 

requirements under part D of the CAA. 

We believe the emissions inventory is 

approvable because the 2007 VOC and 

NOx emissions for Tennessee were 

developed consistent with EPA 

guidance for emission inventories, and 

the choice of the 2007 base year is 

appropriate because it represents the 

2007–2009 period when the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS were not violated. 

Part D, subpart 1 applicable SIP 

requirements. EPA has determined that, 

if EPA finalizes the approval of the base 

year emissions inventories discussed in 

section IX of this rulemaking, the 

Tennessee SIP will meet the applicable 

SIP requirements for the Knoxville Area 

applicable for purposes of redesignation 

under part D of the CAA. Subpart 1 of 

part D, found in sections 172–176 of the 

CAA, sets for the basic nonattainment 

requirements applicable to all 

nonattainment areas. Subpart 2 of part 

D, which includes section 182 of the 

CAA, establishes additional specific 

requirements depending on the area’s 

nonattainment classification. Since the 

Knoxville Area was not classified under 

subpart 2 at the time the redesignation 

request was submitted, the subpart 2 

requirements do not apply for purposes 

of evaluating the Tennessee’s 

redesignation request. The applicable 

subpart 1 requirements are contained in 

sections 172(c)(1)–(9) and in section 

176. A thorough discussion of the 

requirements contained in section 172 

can be found in the General Preamble 

for Implementation of title I (57 FR 

13498). 

Subpart 1 Section 172 Requirements.5

For purposes of evaluating this 

redesignation request, the applicable 

section 172 SIP requirements for the 

Knoxville Area are contained in sections 

172(c)(1)–(9). A thorough discussion of 

the requirements contained in section 

172 can be found in the General 

Preamble for Implementation of Title I 

(57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992). 

Section 172(c)(1) requires the plans 

for all nonattainment areas to provide 

for the implementation of all reasonably 

available control measures (RACM) as 

expeditiously as practicable and to 

provide for attainment of the national 

primary ambient air quality standards. 

EPA interprets this requirement to 

impose a duty on all nonattainment 

areas to consider all available control 

measures and to adopt and implement 

such measures as are reasonably 

available for implementation in each 

area as components of the area’s 

attainment demonstration. 

The RFP plan requirement under 

section 172(c)(2) is defined as progress 

that must be made toward attainment. 

This requirement is not relevant for 

purposes of redesignation because the 

Knoxville Area has monitored 

attainment of the ozone NAAQS. 

(General Preamble, 57 FR 13564). See 

also 40 CFR 51.918. In addition, because 

the Knoxville Area has attained the 

ozone NAAQS and is no longer subject 

to an RFP requirement, the requirement 

to submit the section 172(c)(9) 

contingency measures is not applicable 

for purposes of redesignation. Id. 

Section 172(c)(3) requires submission 

and approval of a comprehensive, 

accurate, and current inventory of actual 

emissions. As part of Tennessee’s 

redesignation request for the Knoxville 

Area, Tennessee submitted a 2007 base 

year emissions inventory. As discussed 

below in section IX, EPA is proposing 

to approve the 2007 base year inventory 

that Tennessee submitted with the 

redesignation request as meeting the 

section 172(c)(3) emissions inventory 

requirement. 

Section 172(c)(4) requires the 

identification and quantification of 

allowable emissions for major new and 

modified stationary sources to be 

allowed 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 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 a memorandum from Mary 

Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air 

and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, 

entitled, ‘‘Part D New Source Review 

Requirements for Areas Requesting 

Redesignation to Attainment.’’ 

Tennessee has demonstrated that the 

Knoxville Area will be able to maintain 

the NAAQS without part D NSR in 

effect; therefore, EPA concludes that 

Tennessee need not have fully approved 

part D NSR programs prior to approval 

of the redesignation request. 

Tennessee’s PSD programs will become 

effective in the Knoxville Area upon 

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). 

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 Tennessee SIP meets the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2) 

applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. 

Section 176 Conformity 

Requirements. Section 176(c) of the 

CAA requires states to establish criteria 

and procedures to ensure that federallysupported or funded projects conform to 

the air quality planning goals in the 

applicable SIP. The requirement to 

determine conformity applies to 

transportation plans, programs and 

projects 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 believes it is reasonable to 

interpret the conformity SIP 

requirements 6 as not applying for 

purposes of evaluating the redesignation 

request under section 107(d) because 

state conformity rules are still required 

after redesignation and federal 

conformity rules apply where state rules 

have not been approved. See Wall, 265 

F.3d 426 (upholding this interpretation); 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
62034 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

see also 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995, 

Tampa, Florida). Tennessee submitted 

its transportation conformity SIP for 1- 

hour ozone on March 19, 2002. EPA 

issued a direct final rule approving 

Tennessee’s Transportation Conformity 

SIP on May 16, 2003 (68 FR 26492). 

NSR Requirements. EPA has also 

determined that 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 a 

part D NSR program in effect since PSD 

requirements will apply after 

redesignation. The rationale for this 

view is described in a memorandum 

from Mary Nichols, Assistant 

Administrator for Air and Radiation, 

dated October 14, 1994, entitled ‘‘Part D 

New Source Review (Part D NSR) 

Requirements for Areas Requesting 

Redesignation to Attainment.’’ 

Tennessee has demonstrated that the 

Knoxville Area will be able to maintain 

the NAAQS without a part D NSR 

program in effect, and therefore, 

Tennessee need not have a fullyapproved part D NSR program prior to 

approval of the redesignation request. 

However, Tennessee currently has a 

fully-approved part D NSR program in 

place. Tennessee’s PSD program will 

become effective in the Knoxville Area 

upon redesignation to attainment. See 

rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60 

FR 12467–12468, March 7, 1995); 

Cleveland-Akron-Lorraine, Ohio (61 FR 

20458, 20469–70, May 7, 1996); 

Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665, 

October 23, 2001); and Grand Rapids, 

Michigan (61 FR 31834–31837, June 21, 

1996). Thus, the Knoxville Area has 

satisfied all applicable requirements for 

purposes of redesignation under section 

110 and part D of the CAA. 

b. The Knoxville Area Has a Fully 

Approved Applicable SIP Under Section 

110(k) of the CAA 

If EPA issues a final approval of the 

base year emissions inventories, EPA 

will have fully approved the applicable 

Tennessee SIP for the Knoxville 8-hour 

ozone nonattainment area, under 

section 110(k) of the CAA for all 

requirements applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. EPA may rely on prior 

SIP approvals in approving a 

redesignation request, see Calcagni 

Memorandum at p. 3; Southwestern 

Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. 

Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989–90 (6th Cir. 

1998); Wall, 265 F.3d 426, plus any 

additional measures it may approve in 

conjunction with a redesignation action. 

See 68 FR 25426 (May 12, 2003) and 

citations therein. Following passage of 

the CAA of 1970, Tennessee has 

adopted and submitted, and EPA has 

fully approved at various times, 

provisions addressing the various 

1-hour ozone NAAQS SIP elements 

applicable in Knox County, Tennessee 

(58 FR 50271, September 27, 1993; and 

69 FR 4852, February 2, 2004). 

As indicated above, EPA believes that 

the section 110 elements not connected 

with nonattainment plan submissions 

and not linked to the area’s 

nonattainment status are not applicable 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. EPA also believes that 

since the part D subpart 1 requirements 

did not become due prior to submission 

of the redesignation request, they also 

are therefore not applicable 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 

F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004); 68 FR 25424, 

25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of 

the St. Louis-East St. Louis Area to 

attainment of the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS). With the approval of the 

emissions inventory, EPA will have 

approved all Part D subpart 1 

requirements applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. 

Criteria (3)—The Air Quality 

Improvement in the Knoxville Area 1997 

8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment 

Area Is Due to Permanent and 

Enforceable Reductions in Emissions 

Resulting From Implementation of the 

SIP and Applicable Federal Air 

Pollution Control Regulations and Other 

Permanent and Enforceable Reductions 

EPA believes that Tennessee has 

demonstrated that the observed air 

quality improvement in the Knoxville 

Area is due to permanent and 

enforceable reductions in emissions 

resulting from implementation of the 

SIP, Federal measures, and other state 

adopted measures. Additionally, new 

emissions control programs for fuels 

and motor vehicles will help ensure a 

continued decrease in emissions 

throughout the region. 

Measured reductions in ozone 

concentrations in and around the 

Knoxville Area are largely attributable 

to reductions from emission sources of 

VOC and NOX, which are precursors in 

the formation of ozone. Table 2 

summarizes several of the measures 

adopted that contributed to reductions 

of emissions. The majority of these 

reductions have been realized from 

federal measures related to mobile 

sources and electrical power generation. 

TABLE 2—FEDERAL AND STATE MEASURES CONTRIBUTING TO EMISSIONS

REDUCTIONS

Federal Measures: 

NOX Budget Trading Program. 

NOX SIP call. 

National Low Emission Vehicles. 

Tier 2 Vehicle Standards. 

Tier 1, Tier 2 and Tier 3 (non-road). 

Sources-Spark Ignition Engines (non-road). 

State and Local Measures: 

Stage I Vapor Recovery. 

Motor Vehicle Anti-tampering Rule. 

Air Quality Alert Programs. 

Smart Trips Program. 

One key program, the NOX SIP, 

required states to make significant, 

specific emissions reductions (63 FR 

57356). It also provided a mechanism, 

the NOX Budget Trading Program, 

which states could use to achieve those 

reductions. When EPA promulgated 

CAIR, it discontinued (starting in 2009) 

the NOX Budget Trading Program, 40 

CFR 51.121(r), but created another 

mechanism—the CAIR ozone season 

trading program—which states could 

use to meet their SIP Call obligations, 70 

FR 25289–90. All NOX SIP Call states 

have SIPs that currently satisfy their 

obligations under the SIP Call, the SIP 

Call reduction requirements are being 

met, and EPA will continue to enforce 

the requirements of the NOX SIP Call 

even after any response to the CAIR 

remand. Notably, the anti-backsliding 

provisions of 40 CFR 51.905(f) 

specifically provide that the provisions 

of the NOX SIP Call, including the 

statewide NOX emission budgets, 

continue to apply after revocation of the 

1-hour standard. 

Regarding point source emissions, the 

Tennessee Valley Authority’s (TVA’s) 

Bull Run Steam Plant located in 

Anderson County and Kingston Steam 

Plant located in Roane County include 

a total of 10 coal-fired boilers. As a 

result of EPA’s ‘‘Finding of Significant 

Contribution and Rulemaking for 

Certain States in the Ozone Transport 

Assessment Group Region for Purposes 

of Reducing Region Transport of Ozone’’ 

(NOX SIP Call), TVA began operation of 

selective catalytic reduction (SCR) 

systems in 2004 at Bull Run’s unit and 

on eight of the nine units at Kingston. 

TVA began operation of a SCR for the 

ninth unit at Kingston in 2006. There 

was an 85 percent and 90 percent 

reduction in NOX emissions from the 

Bull Run and Kingston facilities, 

respectively from 2003 to 2008 as a 

result of these controls. Furthermore, 

NOX emissions from all categories are 

projected to decrease in the Knoxville 

Area by 56.1 tpd between 2007 and 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 62035 

2024 (41.5 percent reduction). Total 

point source NOX emissions are 

projected to increase slightly (2.42 tpd), 

while EGU NOX emissions are projected 

to remain unchanged between 2007 and 

2024. For these reasons, EPA believes 

that regardless of the status of the CAIR 

program, the NOX SIP call requirements 

can be relied upon in demonstrating 

maintenance. Here, Tennessee has 

demonstrated maintenance based in part 

on those requirements. 

In addition, EPA undertook an 

analysis of the changes in NOX expected 

across a broader region. In particular, 

EPA reviewed available projections of 

NOX emissions from nearby states from 

2002 to 2018. 

TABLE 3—2002 BASE ANNUAL EMISSION INVENTORY SUMMARY FOR NOX* 

[Tons per year] 

States EGU point Non-EGU 

point Non-road Area Mobile Fires Total 

AR ................................ 24,722 47,698 62,472 21,700 141,894 5,492 303,978 

KY ................................ 201,928 38,434 104,571 39,507 156,417 534 541,391 

LA ................................. 111,703 199,218 114,711 93,069 180,664 6,942 706,307 

MS ................................ 40,433 61,533 88,787 4,200 111,914 308 307,175 

MO ............................... 145,438 36,144 99,306 32,435 189,852 2,442 505,617 

TN ................................ 152,137 64,344 96,827 17,844 238,577 217 569,946 

Total ...................... 676,361 447,371 566,674 208,755 1,019,318 15,935 2,934,414 

* From the Tennessee Regional Haze SIP, Appendix D, page D.3–5 and support table for Technical Support Document for CENRAP Emissions and Air Quality Modeling to Support Regional Haze State Implementation Plans, page 2–40, figure 2–4. 

TABLE 4—2018 BASE ANNUAL EMISSION INVENTORY SUMMARY FOR NOX * 

[Tons per year] 

States EGU point Non-EGU 

point Non-road Area Mobile Fires Total 

AR ................................ 34,938 36,169 34,305 25,672 33,640 5,600 170,324 

KY ................................ 64,378 41,034 79,392 44,346 52,263 714 282,127 

LA ................................. 44,485 225,748 106,685 114,374 44,806 6,969 543,067 

MS ................................ 21,535 61,252 68,252 4,483 30,619 1,073 187,214 

MO ............................... 83,181 51,489 59,625 35,213 50,861 2,442 282,811 

TN ................................ 31,715 62,519 70,226 19,597 69,385 405 253,847 

Total ...................... 280,232 478,211 418,485 243,685 281,574 17,203 1,708,390 

* From the Tennessee Regional Haze SIP, Appendix D, page D.3–5 and support table for Technical Support Document for CENRAP Emissions and Air Quality Modeling to Support Regional Haze State Implementation Plans, page 2–40, figure 2–4. 

From 2002 to 2018 NOX emissions are 

projected to decrease in the region by 

1,215,024 tpy or 41.4 percent in all. 

EGU NOX anticipated decreases due to 

CAIR and the NOX SIP Call are 

projected to be 198,150 tpy. However 

the largest source in this region remains 

the motor vehicle sector, which is 

projected to decrease 737,744 tpy. Even 

without EGU controls on NOX

emissions, total NOX emissions are 

projected to continually decrease 

throughout the maintenance period. 

On July 6, 2010, EPA proposed the 

Transport Rule, which will require 

significant reductions in sulfur dioxide 

and NOX emissions that cross state 

boundaries. This proposed rule will 

potentially form the basis for a final rule 

which replaces EPA’s 2005 CAIR (North 

Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176 (D.C. 

Cir., 2008)). 

These regional projections of 

emissions data have been prepared 

through 2018. However, since motor 

vehicle and non-road emissions 

continue to decrease long after a rule is 

adopted as the engine population is 

gradually replaced by newer engines, it 

is reasonable to expect that this 

projected decrease in regional NOX

emissions from mobile and non-road 

sources should continue through 2024 

and assure that ozone in the Knoxville 

Area will continue to decline 

throughout the 10-year maintenance 

period. Hence, we believe the projected 

regional NOX reductions are adequate to 

assure that the Knoxville Area will 

continue demonstrating maintenance 

throughout the 10-year maintenance 

period. 

Criteria (4)—The Knoxville Area Has a 

Fully Approved Maintenance Plan 

Pursuant to Section 175A of the CAA 

In conjunction with its request to 

redesignate the Knoxville Area to 

attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, TDEC submitted a SIP revision 

to provide for the maintenance of the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 

10 years after the effective date of 

redesignation to attainment. 

a. What is required in a maintenance 

plan? 

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 plan must 

demonstrate continued attainment of 

the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 

years after the Administrator approves a 

redesignation to attainment. Eight years 

after the redesignation, the State of 

Tennessee must submit a revised 

maintenance plan, which demonstrates 

that attainment will continue to be 

maintained for the 10 years following 

the initial 10-year period. To address 

the possibility of future NAAQS 

violations, the maintenance plan must 

contain such contingency measures, 

with a schedule for implementation as 

EPA deems necessary to assure prompt 

correction of any future 1997 8-hour 

ozone violations. Section 175A of the 

CAA sets forth the elements of a 

maintenance plan for areas seeking 

redesignation from nonattainment to 

attainment. The Calcagni Memorandum 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
62036 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

provides additional guidance on the 

content of a maintenance plan. The 

Calcagni Memorandum explains that an 

ozone maintenance plan should address 

five requirements: the attainment 

emissions inventory, maintenance 

demonstration, monitoring, verification 

of continued attainment, and a 

contingency plan. As is discussed more 

fully below, Tennessee’s maintenance 

plan includes all the necessary 

components and is approvable as part of 

the redesignation request. 

b. Attainment Emissions Inventory 

The Knoxville Area attained the 1997 

8-hour NAAQS with monitoring data 

from 2007, 2008, and 2009, therefore 

Tennessee selected 2007 as the 

attainment emission inventory year. The 

attainment inventory identifies the level 

of emissions in the Area, which is 

sufficient to attain the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. Tennessee began 

development of the attainment 

inventory by first developing a baseline 

emissions inventory for the Knoxville 

Area. The year 2007 was chosen as the 

base year for developing a 

comprehensive ozone precursor 

emissions inventory for which projected 

emissions could be developed for 2010, 

2013, 2016, 2020, and 2024. The 

projected inventory estimates emissions 

forward to 2024, which is beyond the 

10-year interval required in section 

175(A) of the CAA. Non-road mobile 

emissions estimates were based on 

EPA’s NONROAD2008 model. On-road 

mobile source emissions were 

calculated using EPA’s MOBILE6.2 

emission factors model. The 2007 VOC 

and NOX emissions, as well as the 

emissions for other years, for the 

Knoxville Area were developed 

consistent with EPA guidance, and are 

summarized in Tables 5 and 6 in the 

following subsection. 

c. Maintenance Demonstration 

The July 14, 2010, final submittal 

includes a maintenance plan for the 

Knoxville Area. This demonstration: 

(i) Shows compliance and 

maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS by providing information to 

support the demonstration that current 

and future emissions of VOC and NOX

remain at or below attainment inventory 

year 2007 emissions levels. The year 

2007 was chosen as the attainment 

inventory year because it is one of the 

most recent three years (i.e., 2007, 2008, 

and 2009) for which the Knoxville Area 

has clean air quality data for the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

(ii) Uses 2007 as the attainment 

inventory year and includes future 

emission inventory projections for 2010, 

2013, 2016, 2020, and 2024. 

(iii) Identifies an ‘‘out year,’’ at least 10 

years (and beyond) after the time 

necessary for EPA to review and 

approve the maintenance plan. Per 40 

CFR part 93, NOx and VOC MVEBs 

were established for the last year (2024) 

of the maintenance plan. 

(iv) Provides the following actual and 

projected emissions inventories, in tpd 

for the Knoxville Area. See Tables 5 

and 6. 

TABLE 5—KNOXVILLE AREA VOC EMISSIONS

[Summer season tpd] 

Summary of VOC emissions (tpd) 

Year Point Area Onroad 

Nonroad 

(excluding 

MLA) 

Nonroad 

(MLA) Total Safety margin 

Change 

from 2007 

(percent) 

2007 ................................. 7.32 33.25 36.77 34.26 0.68 112.28 .................... ....................

2010 ................................. 7.17 34.21 33.53 31.05 0.62 106.58 5.70 ¥5.1 

2013 ................................. 7.37 35.23 30.29 26.47 0.52 99.88 12.40 ¥11.0 

2016 ................................. 7.88 36.64 27.05 22.07 0.44 94.08 18.20 ¥16.2 

2020 ................................. 8.64 38.40 22.72 18.04 0.35 88.15 24.13 ¥21.5 

2024 ................................. 9.53 40.24 18.39 16.62 0.33 85.11 27.17 ¥24.2 

Note: Emissions are for Anderson, Blount, Jefferson, Knox, Loudon, Sevier and onroad emissions for Cocke County. 

MLA = Commercial Marine Vessels, Locomotives and Aircraft. 

TABLE 6—KNOXVILLE AREA NOX EMISSIONS

[Summer season tpd] 

Summary of NOX emissions (tpd) 

Year Point Area Onroad 

Nonroad 

(excluding 

MLA) 

Nonroad 

(MLA) Total Safety margin 

Change 

from 2007 

(percent) 

2007 ................................. 42.69 2.07 71.83 13.16 5.44 135.19 

2010 ................................. 42.65 2.15 63.10 12.17 5.03 125.10 10.09 ¥7.5 

2013 ................................. 42.94 2.29 54.36 10.51 4.34 114.44 20.75 ¥15.3 

2016 ................................. 43.56 2.50 45.62 8.74 3.61 104.03 31.18 ¥23.0 

2020 ................................. 44.30 2.60 33.96 7.21 2.98 91.05 44.14 ¥32.7 

2024 ................................. 45.11 2.68 22.29 6.37 2.63 79.08 56.11 ¥41.5 

Note: Emissions are for Anderson, Blount, Jefferson, Knox, Loudon, Sevier and onroad emissions for Cocke County. 

MLA = Commercial Marine Vessels, Locomotives and Aircraft. 

A safety margin is the difference 

between the attainment level of 

emissions (from all sources) and the 

projected level of emissions (from all 

sources) in the maintenance plan. The 

attainment level of emissions is the 

level of emissions during one of the 

years in which the area met the NAAQS. 

Tennessee has decided to allocate a 

portion of the available safety margin to 

the Area’s VOC and NOX MVEBs for 

2024 for the Knoxville Area and has 

calculated the safety margin in its 

submittal. Specifically, 14.03 tpd of the 

available NOX safety margin is allocated 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 62037 

7Of the nine air quality ozone monitors in the 

Knoxville Area, the Clingman’s Dome ozone 

monitoring site in Sevier County does not meet 

siting criteria listing in 40 CFR part 58, and thus 

is not appropriate to be used for the determination 

of attainment or nonattainment for the ozone 

NAAQS. 

to the 2024 MVEB, the remaining safety 

margin for NOX for 2024 is 42.08 tpd. 

Also, 6.8 tpd of the available VOC safety 

margin is allocated to the 2024 MVEB, 

the remaining safety margin for VOC for 

2024 is 20.37 tpd. See Tables 5 and 6, 

above. This allocation and the resulting 

available safety margin for the Knoxville 

Area are discussed further in section VII 

of this proposed rulemaking. 

d. Monitoring Network 

There are currently nine monitors 

measuring ozone in the Knoxville Area 

(see Table 1).7 TDEC and the Knox 

County Department of Air Quality 

Management (DAQM) have committed, 

in the maintenance plan, to continue 

operation of monitors in the Knoxville 

Area in compliance with 40 CFR part 

58, and have addressed the requirement 

for monitoring. 

e. Verification of Continued Attainment 

The State of Tennessee, through 

TDEC, and the Knox County DAQM 

have the legal authority to enforce and 

implement the requirements of the 

Knoxville Area 1997 8-Hour Ozone 

Maintenance plan. This includes the 

authority to adopt, implement and 

enforce any subsequent emissions 

control contingency measures 

determined to be necessary to correct 

future ozone attainment problems. 

Both agencies will track the progress 

of the maintenance plan by performing 

future reviews of triennial emission 

inventories for the Knoxville Area using 

the latest emissions factors, models and 

methodologies. For these periodic 

inventories, TDEC and Knox County 

DAQM will review the assumptions 

made for the purpose of the 

maintenance demonstration concerning 

projected growth of activity levels. If 

any of these assumptions appear to have 

changed substantially, the Knoxville 

Area will re-project emissions. 

f. Contingency Plan 

The contingency plan provisions are 

designed to promptly correct a violation 

of the NAAQS that occurs after 

redesignation. Section 175A of the CAA 

requires that a maintenance plan 

include such contingency measures as 

EPA deems necessary to assure that the 

state will promptly correct a violation of 

the NAAQS that occurs after 

redesignation. The maintenance plan 

should identify the contingency 

measures to be adopted, a schedule and 

procedure for adoption and 

implementation, and a time limit for 

action by the state. A state should also 

identify specific indicators to be used to 

determine when the contingency 

measures need to be implemented. The 

maintenance plan must include a 

requirement that a state will implement 

all measures with respect to control of 

the pollutant that were contained in the 

SIP before redesignation of the area to 

attainment in accordance with section 

175A(d). 

In the July 14, 2010, submittal, 

Tennessee affirms that all programs 

instituted by the State and EPA will 

remain enforceable, and that sources are 

prohibited from reducing emissions 

controls following the redesignation of 

the Area. The contingency plan 

included in the submittal includes a 

triggering mechanism to determine 

when contingency measures are needed 

and a process of developing and 

implementing appropriate control 

measures. The primary trigger will be a 

quality assured/quality controlled (QA/ 

QC) violating design value of the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. In addition to the 

primary trigger indicated above, 

Tennessee and the Knox County DAQM 

will monitor regional emissions through 

the Consolidated Emissions Reporting 

Rule (CERR). If the CERR results 

indicate that the projected emissions in 

this maintenance plan are significantly 

less than the CERR reveals (greater than 

ten percent), TDEC and Knox County 

DAQM will investigate the differences 

and develop an appropriate strategy for 

addressing the differences. In addition, 

if ambient monitoring data indicates 

that a violation of the three-year design 

value may be imminent, TDEC and 

Knox County DAQM will evaluate 

existing control measures to determine 

whether further emission reduction 

measures should be implemented. If 

QA/QC data indicates a violating design 

value for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, then the triggering event will 

be the date of the design value violation, 

and not the final QA/QC date. However, 

if initial monitoring data indicates a 

possible violation but later QA/QC data 

indicates that the NAAQS was not 

violated, then a triggering event will not 

have occurred, and contingency 

measures will not be required. 

The contingency plan states that upon 

a measured violation of the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS in the Knoxville Area, 

TDEC and the Knox County DAQM will 

complete sufficient analyses and 

provide those to the EPA. If deemed 

necessary, contingency measures would 

be adopted and implemented as 

expeditiously as possible, but no later 

than eighteen to twenty-four months 

after a triggering event. The proposed 

schedule for these actions would be as 

follows: 

• Six months to identify appropriate 

contingency measures, including 

identification of emission sources and 

appropriate control technologies; 

• Between three and six months to 

initiate a stakeholder process; and 

• Between nine and twelve months to 

implement the contingency measures. 

This step would include the time 

required to draft rules or SIP 

amendments, complete the rulemaking 

process, and submit the final plans to 

EPA. 

Tennessee will consider one or more of 

the following contingency measures to 

re-attain the NAAQS: 

• Implementation of diesel retrofit 

programs, including incentives for 

performing retrofits. 

• Reasonable Available Control 

Technology for NOX sources in 

nonattainment counties. 

• Programs or incentives to decrease 

motor vehicle use, including employerbased programs, additional park and 

ride services, enhanced transit service 

and encouragement of flexible work 

hours/compressed work week/ 

telecommuting. 

• Trip reduction ordinances. 

• Additional emissions reductions on 

stationary sources. 

• Enhanced stationary source 

inspection to ensure that emissions 

control equipment is functioning 

properly. 

• Voluntary fuel programs, including 

incentives for alternative fuels. 

• Construction of high-occupancy 

vehicle (HOV) lanes, or restriction of 

certain roads or lanes for HOV. 

• Programs for new construction and 

major reconstruction of bicycle and 

pedestrian facilities including shared 

use paths, sidewalks, and bicycle lanes. 

• Expand Air Quality Action Day 

activities/Clean Air Partners public 

education outreach. 

• Expansion of E-government services 

at State and local levels. 

• Additional enforcement or outreach 

on driver observance of reduced speed 

limits. 

• Land use/transportation polices. 

• Promote non-motorized 

transportation. 

• Promote tree-planting standards 

that favor trees with low VOC biogenic 

emissions. 

• Promote energy savings plans for 

local government. 

• Gas can and lawnmower 

replacement programs. 

• Seasonal open burning ban in 

nonattainment counties. 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
62038 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

• Evaluate anti-idling rules and/or 

policy. 

• Additional controls in upwind 

areas, if necessary. 

Other control measures, not included in 

the above list, will be considered if new 

control programs are deemed more 

advantageous for this Area. 

EPA has concluded that the 

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. The maintenance 

plan SIP revision submitted by the State 

of Tennessee for the Knoxville Area 

meets the requirements of section 175A 

of the CAA and is approvable. 

VII. What is EPA’s analysis of 

Tennessee’s proposed NOX and VOC 

MVEBs for the Knoxville area? 

Under the CAA, states are required to 

submit, at various times, control strategy 

SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone 

areas. These control strategy SIPs 

(reasonable further progress and 

attainment demonstration) and 

maintenance plans create MVEBs for 

criteria pollutants and/or their 

precursors to address pollution from 

cars and trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, an 

MVEB is established for the last year of 

the maintenance plan. A state may 

adopt MVEBs for other years as well. 

The MVEB is the portion of the total 

allowable emissions in the maintenance 

demonstration that is allocated to 

highway and transit vehicle use and 

emissions. See 40 CFR 93.101. The 

MVEB serves as a ceiling on emissions 

from an area’s planned transportation 

system. The MVEB 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 MVEB in the SIP and how 

to revise the MVEB. 

After interagency consultation with 

the transportation partners for the 

Knoxville Area, Tennessee has elected 

to develop MVEBs for VOC and NOX for 

the entire Area. Tennessee is developing 

these MVEBs, as required, for the last 

year of its maintenance plan, 2024. The 

MVEBs reflect the total on-road 

emissions for 2024, plus an allocation 

from the available VOC and NOX safety 

margin. Under 40 CFR 93.101, the term 

safety margin is the difference between 

the attainment level (from all sources) 

and the projected level of emissions 

(from all sources) in the maintenance 

plan. The safety margin can be allocated 

to the transportation sector; however, 

the total emissions must remain below 

the attainment level. These MVEBs and 

allocation from the safety margin were 

developed in consultation with the 

transportation partners and were added 

to account for uncertainties in 

population growth, changes in model 

vehicle miles traveled and new 

emission factor models. The NOX and 

VOC MVEBs for the Knoxville Area are 

defined in Table 7 below. 

TABLE 7—KNOXVILLE AREA VOC AND

NOX MVEBS

[Summer season tpd] 

2024 

NOX ...................................... 36.32 

VOC ...................................... 25.19 

As mentioned above, the Knoxville 

Area has chosen to allocate a portion of 

the available safety margin to the 2024 

NOX and VOC MVEBs. This allocation 

is 14.03 tpd for NOX and 6.80 tpd for 

VOC. Thus, the remaining safety margin 

in 2024 is 42.08 tpd for NOX and 20.37 

tpd for VOC. 

Through this rulemaking, EPA is 

proposing to approve the 2024 MVEBs 

for VOC and NOX for the Knoxville Area 

because EPA has determined that the 

Area maintains the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS with the emissions at the levels 

of the budgets. Once the MVEBs for the 

Knoxville Area (the subject of this 

rulemaking) are approved or found 

adequate (whichever is done first), they 

must be used for future conformity 

determinations. 

VIII. What is the status of EPA’s 

adequacy determination for the 

proposed NOX and VOC MVEBs for 

2024 for the Knoxville Area? 

Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new 

transportation projects, such as the 

construction of new highways, must 

‘‘conform’’ to (i.e., be consistent with) 

the part of the state’s air quality plan 

that addresses pollution from cars and 

trucks. ‘‘Conformity’’ to the SIP means 

that transportation activities will not 

cause new air quality violations, worsen 

existing violations, or delay timely 

attainment of the NAAQS. If a 

transportation plan does not ‘‘conform,’’ 

most new projects that would expand 

the capacity of roadways cannot go 

forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 

set forth EPA policy, criteria, and 

procedures for demonstrating and 

assuring conformity of such 

transportation activities to a SIP. The 

regional emissions analysis is one, but 

not the only, requirement for 

implementing transportation 

conformity. Transportation conformity 

is a requirement for nonattainment and 

maintenance areas. Maintenance areas 

are areas that were previously 

nonattainment for a particular NAAQS 

but have since been redesignated to 

attainment with a maintenance plan for 

that NAAQS. 

When reviewing submitted ‘‘control 

strategy’’ SIPs or maintenance plans 

containing MVEBs, EPA may 

affirmatively find the MVEB contained 

therein ‘‘adequate’’ for use in 

determining transportation conformity. 

Once EPA affirmatively finds the 

submitted MVEB is adequate for 

transportation conformity purposes, that 

MVEB must be used by state and 

Federal agencies in determining 

whether proposed transportation 

projects ‘‘conform’’ to the SIP as required 

by section 176(c) of the CAA. 

EPA’s substantive criteria for 

determining ‘‘adequacy’’ of an MVEB are 

set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). The 

process for determining ‘‘adequacy’’ 

consists of three basic steps: public 

notification of a SIP submission, a 

public comment period, and EPA’s 

adequacy finding. This process for 

determining the adequacy of submitted 

SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in 

EPA’s May 14, 1999, guidance, 

‘‘Conformity Guidance on 

Implementation of March 2, 1999, 

Conformity Court Decision.’’ This 

guidance was finalized in the 

Transportation Conformity Rule 

Amendments for the ‘‘New 8–Hour 

Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards and Miscellaneous 

Revisions for Existing Areas; 

Transportation Conformity Rule 

Amendments—Response to Court 

Decision and Additional Rule Change,’’ 

on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). 

Additional information on the adequacy 

process for MVEBs is available in the 

proposed rule entitled, ‘‘Transportation 

Conformity Rule Amendments: 

Response to Court Decision and 

Additional Rule Changes,’’ 68 FR 38974, 

38984 (June 30, 2003). 

As discussed earlier, Tennessee’s 

maintenance plan submission includes 

VOC and NOX MVEBs for the Knoxville 

Area for 2024. EPA reviewed both the 

VOCs and NOX MVEBs through the 

adequacy process. The Tennessee SIP 

submission, including the Knoxville 

Area VOC and NOX MVEBs was open 

for public comment on EPA’s adequacy 

Web site on June 15, 2010, found at: 

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ 

stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm. 

The public comment period on 

adequacy of the 2024 VOC and NOX

MVEBs for Knoxville Area closed on 

July 15, 2010. EPA did not receive any 

comments on the adequacy of the 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 62039 

MVEBs, nor did EPA receive any 

requests for the SIP submittal. 

EPA intends to make its 

determination on the adequacy of the 

2024 MVEBs for the Knoxville Area for 

transportation conformity purposes in 

the near future by completing the 

adequacy process that was started on 

June 15, 2010. After EPA finds the 2024 

MVEBs adequate or approves them, the 

new MVEBs for VOC and NOX must be 

used, for future transportation 

conformity determinations. For required 

regional emissions analysis years prior 

to 2024, the conformity test will be the 

applicable interim emissions test 

applicable for the Area per 40 CFR Part 

93 (the transportation conformity rule). 

For required regional emissions analysis 

years that involve 2024 or beyond, the 

applicable budgets will be the new 2024 

MVEBs. The 2024 MVEBs are defined in 

section VII of this proposed rulemaking. 

IX. What is EPA’s analysis of the 

proposed 2007 base year emissions 

inventory for the Knoxville Area? 

As discussed above, section 172(c)(3) 

of the CAA requires areas to submit a 

base year emissions inventory. As part 

of Tennessee’s request to redesignate the 

Knoxville Area, the state submitted 

2007 base year emissions inventory to 

meet this requirement. Emissions 

contained in the submittal cover the 

general source categories of point 

sources, area sources, on-road mobile 

sources, and non-road mobile sources. 

All emission summaries were 

accompanied by source-specific 

descriptions of emission calculation 

procedures and sources of input data. 

On-road mobile emissions were 

prepared using the MOBILE6.2 

emissions model. Tennessee’s submittal 

documents 2007 emissions in the 

Knoxville Area in units of tons per 

summer day. Table 8 below provides a 

summary of the 2007 summer day 

emissions of VOC and NOX for the 

Knoxville Area. 

TABLE 8—KNOXVILLE AREA 2007 SUMMER DAY EMISSIONS FOR VOC AND NOX

[Summer season tpd] 

Source NOX VOC 

Point Source Total ....................................................................................................................................... 42.69 7.32 

Area Source Total ........................................................................................................................................ 2.07 33.25 

On-Road Mobile Source Total ..................................................................................................................... 71.83 36.77 

Non-Road Mobile Source Total ................................................................................................................... 13.16 34.26 

Non-Road Mobile Source Total ................................................................................................................... 5.44 0.68 

Total for all Sources ............................................................................................................................. 135.19 112.28 

EPA is proposing to approve this 2007 

base year inventory as meeting the 

section 172(c)(3) emissions inventory 

requirement. 

X. Proposed Action on the 

Redesignation Request and 

Maintenance Plan SIP Revision 

Including Approval of the 2024 NOX

and VOC MVEBs for the Knoxville Area 

EPA is proposing to make the 

determination that the Knoxville Area 

has met the criteria for redesignation 

from nonattainment to attainment for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Further, 

EPA is proposing to approve 

Tennessee’s July 14, 2010, SIP submittal 

including the redesignation request for 

the Knoxville Area. Additionally, EPA 

is proposing to approve the baseline 

emissions inventory for the Knoxville 

Area for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

EPA believes that the redesignation 

request and monitoring data 

demonstrate that the Knoxville Area has 

attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

EPA is also proposing to approve the 

maintenance plan for the Knoxville 

Area included as part of the July 14, 

2010, SIP revision as meeting the 

requirements of section 175A of the 

CAA. The maintenance plan includes 

NOX and VOC MVEBs for 2024. EPA is 

proposing to approve the 2024 NOX and 

VOC MVEBs for the Knoxville Area 

because the maintenance plan 

demonstrates that, in light of expected 

emissions for all source categories, the 

Area will continue to maintain the 1997 

8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

Further as part of today’s action, EPA 

is describing the status of its adequacy 

determination for the 2024 NOX and 

VOC MVEBs, in accordance with 40 

CFR 93.118(f)(1). Within 24 months 

from the effective date of EPA’s 

adequacy finding for the MVEBs, or the 

effective date for the final rule for this 

action, whichever is earlier, the 

transportation partners will need to 

demonstrate conformity to the new NOX

and VOC MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR 

93.104(e). 

XI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

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, this proposed 

action merely approves state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• 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 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
62040 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 194 / Thursday, October 7, 2010 / Proposed Rules 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed rule does 

not have tribal implications as specified 

by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, and Volatile organic 

compounds. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, National parks, 

Wilderness areas. 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

Dated: September 28, 2010. 

Gwendolyn Keyes Fleming, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2010–25291 Filed 10–6–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 261 

[EPA–R03–RCRA–2010–0132; FRL–9211–7] 

Hazardous Waste Management 

System; Identification and Listing of 

Hazardous Waste; Proposed Exclusion 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA, also the Agency or we in 

this preamble) is proposing to grant a 

petition submitted by Babcock & Wilcox 

Nuclear Operations Group, Inc., the 

current owner, and to BWX 

Technologies, Inc., as predecessor in 

interest to the current owner, identified 

collectively hereafter in this preamble as 

‘‘B&W NOG,’’ to exclude (or delist) on a 

one-time basis from the lists of 

hazardous waste, a certain solid waste 

generated at its Mt. Athos facility near 

Lynchburg, Virginia. 

The Agency has tentatively decided to 

grant the petition based on an 

evaluation of specific information 

provided by the petitioner. This 

tentative decision, if finalized, would 

conditionally exclude the petitioned 

waste from the requirements of the 

hazardous waste regulations under the 

Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act (RCRA). 

The Agency is requesting comments 

on this proposed decision. 

DATES: To make sure we consider your 

comments on this proposed exclusion, 

they must be received by November 22, 

2010. Comments received after the close 

of the comment period will be 

designated as late. These late comments 

may not be considered in formulating a 

final decision. 

Any person may request a hearing on 

this tentative decision to grant the 

petition by filing a request by October 

22, 2010. The request must contain the 

information prescribed in 40 CFR 

260.20(d). 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03– 

RCRA–2010–0132 by one of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• E-mail: friedman.davidm@epa.gov. 

• Mail: David M. Friedman, 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Region III, Land and Chemicals 

Management Division, Office of 

Technical and Administrative Support, 

Mail Code: 3LC10, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver 

your comments to: David M. Friedman, 

Environmental Protection Agency 

Region III, Land and Chemicals 

Management Division, Office of 

Technical and Administrative Support, 

Mail Code: 3LC10, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029. 

Comments delivered in this manner are 

only accepted during normal hours of 

operation. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–RCRA–2010– 

0132. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http://www/ 

regulations.gov, including any personal 

information provided, unless the 

comment includes information claimed 

to be Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. Do 

not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The 

http://www.regulations.gov Web site is 

an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

that is made available on the Internet. If 

you submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket, visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http://www/ 

epa/gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the 

index, some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Land and Chemicals Division, Office of 

Technical and Administrative Support, 

Mail Code: 3LC10, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, PA 19103–2029. The hard 

copy RCRA regulatory docket for this 

proposed rule, EPA–R03–RCRA–2010– 

0132, is available for viewing from 

8 a.m. to 3 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding Federal holidays. You 

may copy material from any regulatory 

docket at a cost of $0.15 per page for 

additional copies. EPA requests that you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. You should 

make an appointment with the office at 

least 24 hours in advance. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further technical information 

concerning this document or for 

appointments to view the docket or the 

B&W NOG facility petition, contact 

David M. Friedman, Environmental 

Protection Agency Region III, Land and 

Chemicals Division, Office of Technical 

and Administrative Support, Mail Code: 

3LC10, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, 

PA 19103–2029, by calling 215–814– 

3395 or by e-mail at 

friedman.davidm@epa.gov. 


jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1