35652 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

confidentiality agreement which has 

been duly executed between a statutory 

licensee and any other interested party, 

or between one or more interested 

parties; provided that all such 

information shall be made available for 

the audit procedure provided for in this 

section. 

(2) Access to confidential information 

under this section shall be limited to: 

(i) The auditor; and 

(ii) Subject to an appropriate 

confidentiality agreement, those 

employees, agents, consultants and 

independent contractors of the auditor 

who are not employees, officers, or 

agents of a copyright owner for any 

purpose other than the audit, who are 

engaged in the audit of a Statement of 

Account or activities directly related 

hereto, and who require access to the 

confidential information for the purpose 

of performing such duties during the 

ordinary course of their employment. 

(3) The auditor and any person 

identified in paragraph (m)(2)(ii) of this 

section shall implement procedures to 

safeguard all confidential information 

received from any third party in 

connection with an audit, using a 

reasonable standard of care, but no less 

than the same degree of security used to 

protect confidential financial and 

business information or similarly 

sensitive information belonging to the 

auditor or such person. 

Dated: June 8, 2012. 

David O. Carson, 

General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 2012–14454 Filed 6–13–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1410–30–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0323; FRL–9686–7] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans and 

Designations of Areas for Air Quality 

Planning Purposes; Tennessee: 

Bristol; Determination of Attainment 

for the 2008 Lead Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: On April 4, 2012, the State of 

Tennessee, through the Tennessee 

Department of Environment and 

Conservation (TDEC), submitted a 

request to EPA to make a determination 

that the Bristol nonattainment area for 

the 2008 lead national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS or standard) 

has attained the 2008 lead NAAQS. In 

this action, EPA is proposing to 

determine that the Bristol 

nonattainment area (hereafter also 

referred to as the ‘‘Bristol Area’’ or 

‘‘Area’’) has attained the 2008 lead 

NAAQS. This proposed determination 

of attainment is based upon complete, 

quality-assured and certified ambient air 

monitoring data for the 2009—2011 

period showing that the Area has 

monitored attainment of the 2008 lead 

NAAQS. EPA is further proposing that, 

if EPA finalizes this proposed 

determination of attainment, the 

requirements for the Area to submit an 

attainment demonstration, together with 

reasonably available control measures 

(RACM), a reasonable further progress 

(RFP) plan, and contingency measures 

for failure to meet RFP and attainment 

deadlines shall be suspended for so long 

as the Area continues to attain the 2008 

lead NAAQS. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before July 16, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2012–0323, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: R4–RDS@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9040. 

4. Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2012–023, 

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: 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 normal hours of 

operation, and special arrangements 

should be made for deliveries of boxed 

information. The Regional Office 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–2012– 

0323. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

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 

www.regulations.gov or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The 

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 email comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

www.regulations.gov, your email 

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 

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 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: 

Steve Scofield or Richard Wong, 

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. 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 35653 

1EPA completed a second and final round of 

designations for the 2008 Lead NAAQS on 

November 22, 2011. See 76 FR 72097. No additional 

areas in Sullivan County, Tennessee were 

designated as nonattainment for the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS. 

2This Area has ambient air monitoring data for 

forty-seven (47) months for the period of February 

2008 through December 31, 2011, which show 

attainment of the 2008 lead NAAQS. Preliminary 

2012 data indicates that this Area is continuing to 

attain the 2008 lead NAAQS. 

Mr. Scofield may be reached by phone 

at (404) 562–9034 or via electronic mail 

at scofield.steve@epa.gov. Mr. Wong 

may be reached by phone at (404) 562– 

8726 or via electronic mail at wong.

richard@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. What actions is EPA taking? 

II. What is the background for these actions? 

III. Application of EPA’s Clean Data Policy to 

the 2008 Lead NAAQS 

IV. Does the Bristol area meet the 2008 lead 

NAAQS? 

A. Criteria 

B. Bristol Area Air Quality 

V. What is the effect of these actions? 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What actions is EPA taking? 

EPA is proposing to determine that 

the Bristol Area (comprising the portion 

of Sullivan County bounded by a 1.25 

kilometer radius surrounding the 

Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) 

coordinates 4042923 meters E, 386267 

meters N, Zone 17, which surrounds the 

Exide Technologies Facility) has 

attained the 2008 lead NAAQS. This 

proposal is based upon complete, 

quality-assured and certified ambient air 

monitoring data for the 2009–2011 

monitoring period that show that the 

Area has monitored attainment of the 

2008 lead NAAQS. 

Further, EPA is proposing that, if this 

proposed determination of attainment is 

made final, the requirements for the 

Bristol Area to submit an attainment 

demonstration together with RACM, a 

RFP plan, and contingency measures for 

failure to meet RFP and attainment 

deadlines would be suspended for so 

long as the Area continues to attain the 

2008 lead NAAQS. As discussed below, 

EPA’s proposal is consistent with EPA’s 

regulations and with its longstanding 

interpretation of subpart 1 of part D of 

the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). 

If this proposed rulemaking is 

finalized and EPA subsequently 

determines, after notice-and-comment 

rulemaking in the Federal Register, that 

the Area has violated the 2008 lead 

NAAQS, the basis for the suspension of 

these attainment planning requirements 

would no longer exist for the Bristol 

Area, and the Area would thereafter 

have to address such requirements. 

II. What is the background for these 

actions? 

On November 12, 2008 (73 FR 66964), 

EPA established a 2008 primary and 

secondary lead NAAQS at 0.15 

micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3) 

based on a maximum arithmetic 3- 

month mean concentration for a 3-year 

period. See 40 CFR 50.16. On November 

22, 2010 (75 FR 71033), EPA published 

its initial air quality designations and 

classifications for the 2008 lead NAAQS 

based upon air quality monitoring data 

from those monitors for calendar years 

2007–2009. These designations became 

effective on December 31, 2010.1 The 

Bristol Area was designated 

nonattainment for the 2008 lead 

NAAQS. See 40 CFR 81.343. 

On April 4, 2012, the State of 

Tennessee, through TDEC, submitted a 

request to EPA to make a determination 

that the Bristol Area for the 2008 lead 

NAAQS has attained that standard 

based on complete, quality-assured, 

quality-controlled monitoring data from 

2009 through 2011.2

III. Application of EPA’s Clean Data 

Policy to the 2008 Lead NAAQS 

Following enactment of the CAA 

Amendments of 1990, EPA promulgated 

its interpretation of the requirements for 

implementing the NAAQS in the 

general preamble for the 

Implementation of Title I of the CAA 

Amendments of 1990 (General 

Preamble) 57 FR 13498, 13564 (April 16, 

1992). In 1995, based on the 

interpretation of CAA sections 171 and 

172, and section 182 in the General 

Preamble, EPA set forth what has 

become known as its ‘‘Clean Data 

Policy’’ for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. 

See Memorandum from John S. Seitz, 

Director, Office of Air Quality Planning 

and Standards, ‘‘RFP, Attainment 

Demonstration, and Related 

Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment 

Areas Meeting the Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard’’ (May 

10, 1995). In 2004, EPA indicated its 

intention to extend the Clean Data 

Policy to the PM2.5 NAAQS. See 

Memorandum from Steve Page, Director, 

EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards, ‘‘Clean Data Policy for the 

Fine Particle National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards’’ (December 14, 

2004). 

Since 1995, EPA has applied its 

interpretation under the Clean Data 

Policy in many rulemakings, 

suspending certain attainment-related 

planning requirements for individual 

areas, based on a determination of 

attainment. See 60 FR 36723 (July 18, 

1995) (Salt Lake and Davis Counties, 

Utah, 1-hour ozone); 61 FR 20458 (May 

7, 1996) (Cleveland Akron-Lorain, Ohio, 

1-hour ozone); 61 FR 31832 (June 21, 

1996) (Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1-hour 

ozone); 65 FR 37879 (June 19, 2000) 

(Cincinnati-Hamilton, Ohio-Kentucky, 

1-hour ozone); 66 FR 53094 (October 19, 

2001) (Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, 

Pennsylvania, 1-hour ozone); 68 FR 

25418 (May 12, 2003) (St Louis, 

Missouri, 1-hour ozone); 69 FR 21717 

(April 22, 2004) (San Francisco Bay 

Area, 1-hour ozone), 75 FR 6570 

(February 10, 2010) (Baton Rouge, 

Louisiana, 1-hour ozone), 75 FR 27944 

(May 19, 2010) (Coso Junction, 

California, PM10). 

EPA also incorporated its 

interpretation under the Clean Data 

Policy in implementation rules. See 

Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation 

Rule, 72 FR 20586 (April 25, 2007); 

Final Rule To Implement the 8-Hour 

Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard—Phase 2, 70 FR 71612 

(November 29, 2005). The Court of 

Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit (D.C. Circuit) upheld EPA’s rule 

embodying the Clean Data Policy for the 

1997 8-hour ozone standard. NRDC v. 

EPA, 571 F.3d 1245 (D.C. Cir. 2009). 

Other courts have reviewed and 

considered rulemakings applying EPA’s 

Clean Data Policy, and have consistently 

upheld them. Sierra Club v. EPA, 99 F. 

3d 1551 (10th Cir. 1996); Sierra Club v. 

EPA, 375 F. 3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004); Our 

Children’s Earth Foundation v. EPA, No. 

04–73032 (9th Cir. June 28, 2005 

(Memorandum Opinion)), Latino Issues 

Forum v. EPA, Nos. 06–75831 and 08– 

71238 (9th Cir. March 2, 2009 

(Memorandum Opinion)). EPA sets forth 

below a brief explanation of the Clean 

Data Policy. EPA also incorporates the 

discussions of its interpretation set forth 

in prior rulemakings, including the 

PM2.5 implementation rulemaking. See 

also 75 FR 31288 (June 3, 2010) (Rhode 

Island, 1997 8-hour ozone), 75 FR 62470 

(October 12, 2010) (Knoxville, 

Tennessee, 1997 8-hour ozone), 75 FR 

53219 (August 31, 2010) (Greater 

Connecticut Area, 1997 8-hour ozone), 

75 FR 54778 (September 9, 2010) (Baton 

Rouge, Louisiana, 1997 8-hour ozone), 

75 FR 64949 (October 21, 2010) 

(Providence, Rhode Island, 1997 8-hour 

ozone), 76 FR 11080 (March 1, 2011) 

(Milwaukee-Racine and Sheboygan 

Areas, 1997 8-hour ozone), 76 FR 31273 

(May 31, 2011) (Pittsburgh-Beaver 

Valley, 1997 8-hour ozone), 76 FR 33647 

(June 9, 2011) (St. Louis, MissouriIllinois, 1997 8-hour ozone), 76 FR 7145 

(November 15, 2011) (Charlotte, North 

Carolina-South Carolina, 1997 8-hour 

ozone), 77 FR 31496 (May 29, 2012) 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
35654 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

3This discussion refers to subpart 1 because 

subparts 1 and 5 contain the requirements relating 

to attainment of the lead NAAQS. 

4This interpretation was adopted in the General 

Preamble, see 57 FR 13498, and has been upheld 

as applied to the Clean Data Policy, as well as to 

nonattainment SIP submissions. See NRDC v. EPA, 

571 F.3d 1245 (D.C. Cir. 2009); Sierra Club v. EPA, 

294 F.3d 155 (D.C. Cir. 2002). 

(Boston-Lawrence-Worchester, 

Massachusetts, 1997 8-hour ozone). See 

also, 75 FR 56 (January 4, 2010) 

(Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High Point, 

1997 PM2.5), 75 FR 230 (January 5, 2010) 

(Hickory-Morganton, Lenoir, 1997 

PM2.5), 75 FR 57186 (September 20, 

2010) (Birmingham, Alabama, 2006 

PM2.5) 76 FR 12860 (March 9, 2011) 

(Louisville, Kentucky-Indiana, 1997 

PM2.5), 76 FR 1850 (April 5, 2011) 

(Rome, Georgia, 1997 PM2.5), 76 FR 

31239 (May 31, 2011) (Chattanooga, 

Tennessee-Georgia-Alabama, 1997 

PM2.5), 76 FR 31858 (June 2, 2011) 

(Macon, Georgia, 1997 PM2.5), 76 FR 

36873 (June 23, 2011) (Atlanta, Georgia 

1997 PM2.5), 76 FR 38023 (June 29, 

2011) (Birmingham, Alabama 1997 

PM2.5), 76 FR 5542 (September 7, 2011) 

(Huntington-Ashland, West VirginiaKentucky-Ohio, 1997 PM2.5), 76 FR 

60373 (September 29, 2011) (Cincinnati, 

Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana, 1997 PM2.5), 

(November 18, 2011) (Charleston, West 

Virginia, 2006 PM2.5), 77 FR 18922 

(March 29, 2012) (Harrisburg-LebononCarlisle-York Allentown, Johnstown and 

Lancaster, 1997 PM2.5) 

The Clean Data Policy represents 

EPA’s interpretation that certain 

requirements of subpart 1 of part D of 

the Act are by their terms not applicable 

to areas that are attaining the NAAQS.3

As explained below, the specific 

requirements that are inapplicable to an 

area attaining the standard are the 

requirements to submit a SIP that 

provides for: Attainment of the NAAQS; 

implementation of all reasonably 

available control measures; reasonable 

further progress; and implementation of 

contingency measures for failure to meet 

deadlines for RFP and attainment. 

CAA section 172(c)(1), the 

requirement for an attainment 

demonstration, provides in relevant part 

that SIPs ‘‘shall provide for attainment 

of the [NAAQS].’’ EPA has interpreted 

this requirement as not applying to 

areas that have attained the standard. If 

an area has attained the standard, there 

is no need to submit a plan 

demonstrating how the area will reach 

attainment. In the General Preamble (57 

FR 13564), EPA stated that no other 

measures to provide for attainment 

would be needed by areas seeking 

redesignation to attainment since 

‘‘attainment will have been reached.’’ 

See also Memorandum from John 

Calcagni, ‘‘Procedures for Processing 

Requests to Redesignate Areas to 

Attainment,’’ (September 4, 1992), at 

page 6. 

A component of the attainment plan 

specified under section 172(c)(1) is the 

requirement to provide for ‘‘the 

implementation of all reasonably 

available control measures as 

expeditiously as practicable’’ (RACM). 

Since RACM is an element of the 

attainment demonstration, see General 

Preamble (57 FR 13560), for the same 

reason the attainment demonstration no 

longer applies by its own terms, RACM 

also no longer applies. Furthermore, 

EPA has consistently interpreted this 

provision to require only 

implementation of potential RACM 

measures that could advance 

attainment.4 Thus, where an area is 

already attaining the standard, no 

additional RACM measures are 

required. EPA’ s interpretation that the 

statute requires only implementation of 

RACM measures that would advance 

attainment was upheld by the United 

States Court of Appeals for the Fifth 

Circuit (Sierra Club v. EPA, 314 F. 3d 

735, 743–745, 5th Cir. 2002) and by the 

United States Court of Appeals for the 

D.C. Circuit (Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F. 

3d 155, 162–163, D.C. Cir. 2002). See 

also the final rulemakings for 

Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, Pennsylvania, 

66 FR 53096 (October 19, 2001) and St. 

Louis, 68 FR 25418 (May 12, 2003). 

CAA section 172(c)(2) provides that 

state implementation plan (SIP) 

provisions in nonattainment areas must 

require ‘‘reasonable further progress.’’ 

The term ‘‘reasonable further progress’’ 

is defined in section 171(1) as ‘‘such 

annual incremental reductions in 

emissions of the relevant air pollutant as 

are required by this part or may 

reasonably be required by the 

Administrator for the purpose of 

ensuring attainment of the applicable 

NAAQS by the applicable date.’’ Thus, 

by definition, the ‘‘reasonable further 

progress’’ provision requires only such 

reductions in emissions as are necessary 

to attain the NAAQS. If an area has 

attained the NAAQS, the purpose of the 

RFP requirement has been fulfilled, and 

since the area has already attained, 

showing that the State will make RFP 

towards attainment ‘‘[has] no meaning 

at that point.’’ General Preamble, 57 FR 

13498, 13564 (April 16, 1992). 

CAA section 172(c)(9) provides that 

SIPs in nonattainment areas ‘‘shall 

provide for the implementation of 

specific measures to be undertaken if 

the area fails to make reasonable further 

progress, or to attain the [NAAQS] by 

the attainment date applicable under 

this part. Such measures shall be 

included in the plan revision as 

contingency measures to take effect in 

any such case without further action by 

the State or [EPA].’’ This contingency 

measure requirement is inextricably tied 

to the reasonable further progress and 

attainment demonstration requirements. 

Contingency measures are implemented 

if reasonable further progress targets are 

not achieved, or if attainment is not 

realized by the attainment date. Where 

an area has already achieved attainment 

by the attainment date, it has no need 

to rely on contingency measures to 

come into attainment or to make further 

progress to attainment. As EPA stated in 

the General Preamble: ‘‘The section 

172(c)(9) requirements for contingency 

measures are directed at ensuring RFP 

and attainment by the applicable date.’’ 

See 57 FR 13564. Thus these 

requirements no longer apply when an 

area has attained the standard. 

It is important to note that should an 

area attain the lead standards based on 

3 years of data, its obligation to submit 

an attainment demonstration and 

related planning submissions is 

suspended only for so long as the area 

continues to attain the standard. If EPA 

subsequently determines, after noticeand-comment rulemaking, that the Area 

has violated the 2008 lead NAAQS, the 

requirements for the State to submit a 

SIP to meet the previously suspended 

requirements would be reinstated. It is 

likewise important to note that the area 

remains designated nonattainment 

pending a further redesignation action. 

IV. Does the Bristol area meet the 2008 

lead NAAQS? 

A. Criteria 

Today’s proposed rulemaking assesses 

whether Bristol Area has attained the 

2008 Lead NAAQS, based on the most 

recent 3 years of quality-assured data. 

The Bristol Area comprises the portion 

of Sullivan County bounded by a 1.25 

kilometer radius surrounding the UTM 

coordinates 4042923 meters E, 386267 

meters N, Zone 17, which surrounds the 

Exide Technologies Facility. 

Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR 

50.16, the 2008 primary and secondary 

lead standards are met when the 

maximum arithmetic 3-month mean 

concentration for a 3-year period, as 

determined in accordance with 40 CFR 

part 50, Appendix R, is less than or 

equal to 0.15 mg/m3 at all relevant 

monitoring sites in the subject area. 

B. Bristol Area Air Quality 

EPA has reviewed the ambient air 

monitoring data for the Bristol Area in 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 35655 

5According to 40 CFR 58.12(b) ‘‘For Pb manual 

methods, at least one 24-hour sample must be 

collected every 6 days except during periods or 

seasons exempted by the Regional Administrator.’’ 

All three Exide monitors met and exceeded this 

requirement, and collected a sample every three 

days. EPA also publishes an annual recommended 

national sampling calendar, which contains 

suggested days of the week for sampling. While this 

schedule is recommended, it is not a CFR 

requirement. From March 30, 2011–November 23, 

2011, the Exide facility’s monitors inadvertently 

operated on a schedule that deviated from the 

recommended national schedule by one day of the 

week. However, since the monitors still collected a 

sample every six days, the data collection 

requirements were met by all three Exide monitors 

for the Area. EPA has thus counted the samples 

collected using the alternate sampling schedule as 

creditable samples and calculated valid design 

values supporting a clean data determination for the 

Area. 

accordance with the provisions of 40 

CFR part 50, Appendix R. All data 

considered are complete, qualityassured, certified, and recorded in 

EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS) 

database. This review addresses air 

quality data collected in 3-year period of 

2009–2011 which are the most recent 

quality-assured data available. 

40 CFR part 58, Appendix D, Section 

4.5, states that ‘‘At a minimum, there 

must be one source-oriented State and 

Local Air Monitoring Station site 

located to measure the maximum Pb 

[lead] concentration in ambient air 

resulting from each non-airport Pb 

source which emits 0.50 or more tons 

per year * * *.’’ The Exide 

Technologies facility in Bristol is 

responsible for operating the monitors 

that meet this requirement. EPA’s 

review shows that Exide has been 

exceeding the minimum monitoring 

requirement of one monitor, and is 

currently operating three Federal 

reference method (FRM) source-oriented 

monitors at the facility, which meet the 

quality assurance requirements of 40 

CFR part 58, Appendix A. In addition, 

the State of Tennessee is also operating 

one additional source-oriented FRM 

monitor (AQS ID 47–163–3004, 

identified in Table 1) at the Exide 

facility. The State’s monitor originally 

operated from January 1, 2009 through 

December 31, 2009 (AQS ID 47–163– 

4002). Beginning January 1, 2010, 

Tennessee’s monitor was relocated 0.3 

miles to its current location, 

approximately 10 feet from Exide’s 

design value monitor (47–163–3001), 

which is an area of expected maximum 

concentration at the site. 

Table 1 shows the 2009–2011 design 

values at the Bristol Area monitors (the 

metrics calculated in accordance with 

40 CFR part 50, Appendix R, for 

determining compliance with the 

NAAQS) for the 2008 lead NAAQS. It 

also shows the maximum 3-month 

rolling average for each individual year. 

TABLE 1—DESIGN VALUE FOR MONITORS IN THE BRISTOL NONATTAINMENT AREA FOR THE 2008 LEAD NAAQS 

Location AQS site ID 

2009 Max 3- 

month rolling avg 

(μg/m3) 

2010 Max 3- 

month rolling avg 

(μg/m3) 

2011 Max 3- 

month rolling avg 

(μg/m3) 

2009–2011 

design value 

(μg/m3) 

364 Exide Drive ............................................... 5 47–163–3001 0.09 0.08 0.06 0.09 

47–163–3002 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.06 

47–163–3003 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.06 

47–163–3004 ............................ 0.05 0.08 ............................

47–163–4002 0.04 ............................ ............................ ............................

EPA’s review of these data indicates 

that the Bristol Area has attained and 

continues to attain the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS, with a design value of 0.09 mg/ 

m3 for the period of 2009–2011. EPA is 

soliciting public comments on the 

issues discussed in this document. 

These comments will be considered 

before taking final action. 

V. What is the effect of these actions? 

EPA is proposing to determine that 

the Bristol Area has attained the 2008 

lead NAAQS, based on complete, 

quality-assured and certified data for 

2009–2011. Preliminary data available 

for 2012 indicates that the area 

continues to be in attainment. EPA 

further proposes that, if its proposed 

determination of attainment is made 

final, the requirements for the Bristol 

Area to submit an attainment 

demonstration and associated RACM, a 

RFP plan, contingency measures, and 

any other planning SIPs related to 

attainment of the 2008 lead NAAQS 

would be suspended for so long as the 

Area continues to attain the 2008 lead 

NAAQS. EPA’s proposal is consistent 

and in keeping with its long-held 

interpretation of CAA requirements, as 

well as with EPA’s regulations for 

similar determinations for ozone (see 40 

CFR 51.918) and fine particulate matter 

(see 40 CFR 51.1004(c)). As described 

below, any such determination would 

not be equivalent to the redesignation of 

the Area to attainment for the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS. 

Finalizing this proposed action would 

not constitute a redesignation of the 

Area to attainment of the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS under section 107(d)(3) of the 

CAA. Further, finalizing this proposed 

action does not involve approving a 

maintenance plan for the Area as 

required under section 175A of the 

CAA, nor would it find that the Area 

has met all other requirements for 

redesignation. Even if EPA finalizes the 

proposed action, the Bristol Area would 

remain designated nonattainment for 

the 2008 Lead NAAQS until such time 

as EPA determines that the Area meets 

the CAA requirements for redesignation 

to attainment and takes action to 

redesignate the Area. 

If the Bristol Area continues to 

monitor attainment of the 2008 lead 

NAAQS, EPA proposes that the 

requirements for the Bristol Area to 

submit an attainment demonstration 

and associated RACM, a RFP plan, 

contingency measures, and any other 

planning SIPs related to attainment of 

the annual PM2.5 NAAQS will remain 

suspended. If this proposed rulemaking 

is finalized and EPA subsequently 

determines, after notice-and-comment 

rulemaking in the Federal Register, that 

the Area has violated the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS, the basis for the suspension of 

these attainment planning requirements 

would no longer exist for the Bristol 

Area, and the Area would thereafter 

have to address such requirements. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed 

action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ and therefore is not subject to 

review by the Office of Management and 

Budget. For this reason, this action is 

also not subject to Executive Order 

13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations 

that Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001). This action proposes to make 

a determination based on air quality 

data and to suspend certain Federal 

requirements. Accordingly, the 

Administrator certifies that this rule 

will not have a significant economic 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
35656 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 115 / Thursday, June 14, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.). Because this 

rule proposes to make a determination 

based on air quality data and to suspend 

certain Federal requirements, it 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). This proposed rule also 

does not have tribal implications 

because it will not have a substantial 

direct effect on one or more Indian 

tribes, on the relationship between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities between the Federal 

Government and Indian tribes, as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This 

proposed action also does not have 

Federalism implications because it does 

not have substantial direct effects on the 

states, on the relationship between the 

national government and the states, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999), because it only 

proposes to make a determination based 

on air quality data and suspend certain 

Federal requirements, and does not alter 

the relationship or the distribution of 

power and responsibilities established 

in the CAA. This proposed rule also is 

not subject to Executive Order 13045 

‘‘Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), 

because it proposes to determine that air 

quality in the affected area is meeting 

Federal standards. The requirements of 

section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not 

apply because it would be inconsistent 

with applicable law for EPA, when 

determining the attainment status of an 

area, to use voluntary consensus 

standards in place of promulgated air 

quality standards and monitoring 

procedures that otherwise satisfy the 

provisions of the CAA. This proposed 

rule does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

(44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.). Under 

Executive Order 12898, EPA finds that 

this rule involves a proposed 

determination of attainment based on 

air quality data and will not have 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on any communities in the area, 

including minority and low-income. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Lead, Reporting and 

Recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: June 5, 2012. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2012–14566 Filed 6–13–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1