Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules 11727 

submitting comments. Once submitted, 

comments cannot be edited or removed 

from Regulations.gov. For either manner 

of submission, EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. EPA will generally not consider 

comments or comment contents located 

outside of the primary submission (i.e. 

on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 

system). For additional submission 

methods, please contact the person 

identified in the ‘‘For Further 

Information Contact’’ section. For the 

full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Edward Doty, Air Programs Branch 

(AR–18J), Environmental Protection 

Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6057, 

Doty.Edward@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

Final Rules section of this Federal 

Register, EPA is approving IEPA’s SIP 

revision as a direct final rule without 

prior proposal because EPA views this 

as a noncontroversial submittal and 

anticipates no adverse comments. A 

detailed rationale for the approval is set 

forth in the direct final rule. If no 

adverse comments are received in 

response to this rule, no further activity 

is contemplated. If EPA receives adverse 

comments, the direct final rule will be 

withdrawn and all public comments 

received will be addressed in a 

subsequent final rule based on this 

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a 

second comment period. Any parties 

interested in commenting on this action 

should do so at this time. Please note 

that, if EPA receives adverse comment 

on an amendment, paragraph, or section 

of this rule and if that provision may be 

severed from the remainder of the rule, 

EPA may adopt as final those provisions 

of the rule that are not the subject of an 

adverse comment. For additional 

information see the direct final rule, 

which is located in the Rules section of 

this Federal Register. 

Dated: February 22, 2016. 

Robert A. Kaplan, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2016–04877 Filed 3–4–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2015–0205; FRL–9943–27– 

Region 8] 

Designation of Areas for Air Quality 

Planning Purposes; Redesignation 

Request and Associated Maintenance 

Plan for Billings, MT 2010 SO2

Nonattainment Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: On December 14, 2015, the 

State of Montana submitted a request for 

the Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) to redesignate the Billings, 

Montana, 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) 

National Ambient Air Quality Standard 

(NAAQS) nonattainment area to 

attainment and to approve a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

containing a maintenance plan for the 

area. In response to this submittal, the 

EPA is proposing to take the following 

actions: Determine that the Billings SO2

nonattainment area is attaining the 2010 

SO2 primary NAAQS; approve 

Montana’s plan for maintaining 

attainment of the 2010 SO2 primary 

NAAQS in the area; and redesignate the 

Billings SO2 nonattainment area to 

attainment for the 2010 SO2 primary 

NAAQS. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 6, 2016. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08– 

OAR–2015–0205, at http://

www.regulations.gov Web site. Follow 

the online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

regulations.gov. The EPA may publish 

any comment received to its public 

docket. Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Adam Clark, Air Program, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 

Wynkoop, Denver, Colorado 80202– 

1129, (303) 312–7104, clark.adam@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information 

What should I consider as I prepare my 

comments for EPA? 

1. Submitting Confidential Business 

Information (CBI). Do not submit CBI to 

the EPA through www.regulations.gov or 

email. Clearly mark the part or all of the 

information that you claim to be CBI. 

For CBI information in a disk or CD 

ROM that you mail to the EPA, mark the 

outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI 

and then identify electronically within 

the disk or CD ROM the specific 

information that is claimed as CBI. In 

addition to one complete version of the 

comment that includes information 

claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment 

that does not contain the information 

claimed as CBI must be submitted for 

inclusion in the public docket. 

Information so marked will not be 

disclosed except in accordance with 

procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2. 

2. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. 

When submitting comments, remember 

to: 

• Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

• Follow directions—The agency may 

ask you to respond to specific questions 

or organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

• Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

• Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

• If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

• Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns and suggest 

alternatives. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

11728 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

1 40 CFR part 50, appendix T, section 3(b). 

2CAA section 107(d)(1)(A)(i). 

3The EPA finalized nonattainment designations 

for 29 areas of the U.S. that contained SO2 monitors 

violating the NAAQS on August 5, 2013 (78 FR 

47191, 47205), and took no designation-related 

action on the rest of the country. The EPA was 

placed under a binding schedule for designation of 

the remaining portions of the U.S. for the 2010 

1-hour SO2 NAAQS on March 2, 2015. See, Sierra 

Club, et al. v. McCarthy, Case No. 13–cv–03953–SI 

(N.D. Cal., March 2, 2015). 

4Montana’s recommended alternative boundary, 

now the Billings 2010 SO2 Nonattainment Area, can 

be found in the Billings Redesignation Request at 

13. 

5CAA section 192. 

6CAA section 191. 

7The Billings 2010 SO2 Clean Data Request is 

available in the docket for this action. 

• Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

• Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

II. What is the background for the 

EPA’s proposed actions? 

On June 2, 2010, the EPA revised the 

primary SO2 NAAQS, establishing a 

new 1-hour SO2 standard of 75 parts per 

billion (ppb). See 75 FR 35520 (June 2, 

2010). Under the EPA’s regulations at 40 

CFR part 50, the 2010 1-hour SO2

NAAQS is met at a monitoring site 

when the 3-year average of the annual 

99th percentile of 1-hour daily 

maximum concentrations is less than or 

equal to 75 ppb (based on the rounding 

convention in 40 CFR part 50, appendix 

T). See 40 CFR 50.17. Ambient air 

quality monitoring data for the 3-year 

period must meet a data completeness 

requirement. A year meets data 

completeness requirements when all 4 

quarters are complete, and a quarter is 

complete when at least 75 percent of the 

sampling days for each quarter have 

complete data. A sampling day has 

complete data if 75 percent of the 

hourly concentration values, including 

state-flagged data affected by 

exceptional events which have been 

approved for exclusion by the 

Administrator, are reported.1

Upon promulgation of a new or 

revised NAAQS, the CAA requires the 

EPA to designate as nonattainment any 

area that does not meet (or that 

contributes to ambient air quality in a 

nearby area that does not meet) the 

NAAQS.2 At the time the EPA 

conducted the initial round of 

designations for the 2010 1-hour SO2

primary NAAQS,3 Billings contained an 

SO2 monitor (Coburn Road) which 

registered violations of the standard 

based on the three most recent years of 

complete, quality assured, and certified 

ambient air quality data. In a letter to 

the EPA, Montana Governor Brian 

Schweitzer requested that all 56 

counties in Montana be designated as 

attainment or unclassifiable. The EPA 

responded to Montana’s initial 

designations request in a February 6, 

2013 letter in which the EPA disagreed 

with Montana’s request to classify 

Yellowstone County (which includes 

Billings) as unclassifiable for the 2010 1- 

hour SO2 standard and presented the 

case that all of Yellowstone County 

should be designated as nonattainment. 

In an April 3, 2013 letter to the EPA, 

Montana reiterated its request that 

Yellowstone County be designated 

unclassifiable, but requested an 

alternative nonattainment area 

boundary consisting of only a small 

portion of Billings if the EPA 

determined that a nonattainment 

designation was appropriate. The EPA 

agreed with the State’s technical 

rationale for reducing the nonattainment 

area to a small portion of Billings which 

included only one source of SO2: The 

PPL Corette Power Plant.4 The EPA 

found that Montana’s technical analysis 

demonstrated that the PPL Corette plant 

was the key contributor to the 2010 SO2

NAAQS violations at the Coburn Road 

monitor. The EPA, therefore, designated 

the area recommended by Montana as 

nonattainment for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS 

on August 5, 2013, (effective October 4, 

2013) using 2009–2011 ambient air 

quality data, leaving the remaining 

portion of Billings and Yellowstone 

County undesignated and subject to 

future analysis and designation. See 78 

FR 47191 (August 5, 2013). This 

nonattainment designation established 

an attainment date five years after the 

October 4, 2013, effective date for areas 

classified as nonattainment for the 2010 

1-hour SO2 NAAQS.5 Therefore, the 

Billings SO2 nonattainment area’s 

attainment date is October 4, 2018. The 

Montana Department of Environmental 

Quality (MDEQ) was also required to 

submit an attainment SIP to EPA within 

18 months following the October 4, 

2013 effective date of designation, or by 

April 6, 2015.6

On January 16, 2015, MDEQ 

submitted a request for the EPA to 

determine that the Billings SO2

nonattainment area has attained the 

2010 SO2 NAAQS per the EPA’s ‘‘clean 

data policy’’ (Billings 2010 SO2 Clean 

Data Request).7 The clean data policy 

represents the EPA’s interpretation that 

certain planning-related requirements of 

part D of the Act, such as the attainment 

demonstration, reasonably available 

control measures (RACM), and 

reasonable further progress (RFP), are 

suspended for areas that are in fact 

attaining the NAAQS. The clean data 

policy will be explained further in 

Section IV of this proposed rulemaking. 

A determination of attainment, or clean 

data determination, does not constitute 

a formal redesignation to attainment. If 

EPA subsequently determines that an 

area is no longer attaining the standard, 

those requirements that were suspended 

by the clean data determination are once 

again due. 

On April 10, 2015, James Parker of 

PPL Montana sent a letter to Ed Warner 

of MDEQ notifying him that the PPL 

Corette Plant was officially retired on 

March 18, 2015, and had consumed its 

last coal on March 3, 2015. On May 13, 

2015, Gordon Criswell of PPL Montana 

sent a letter to MDEQ requesting a 

revocation of the Montana Air Quality 

Permit (MAQP) #2953–00 and Title V 

Operating Permit #OP2953–08. On May 

21, 2015, David Klemp of MDEQ sent a 

letter to Mr. Criswell informing him that 

MDEQ was revoking both permits, as 

PPL had requested, effective 

immediately. 

On December 14, 2015, the State 

submitted to the EPA a request for 

redesignation of the Billings 2010 SO2

nonattainment area to attainment and a 

SIP revision containing a maintenance 

plan for the area. 

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 of a nonattainment area 

provided 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, the 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 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules 11729 

8See 2010 SO2 NAA Guidance, at 62. 

9Billings Redesignation Request at 8–12. 

10On page 58 of the 2010 SO2 NAA Guidance, 

EPA recommends that air agencies follow the Draft 

‘‘SO2 NAAQS Designations Source-Oriented 

Monitoring Technical Assistance Document,’’ 

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air 

Quality Assessment Division. Although this 2010 

SO2 NAA Guidance references the Draft monitoring 

TAD with regard to reviewing clean data 

determinations, the EPA also considers the TAD 

recommendations applicable to attainment 

demonstrations. 

11See 2010 SO2 NAA Guidance, at 56. 

April 28, 1992 (57 FR 18070). The EPA 

has provided further guidance on 

processing redesignation requests in 

several guidance documents. For the 

purposes of this action, the EPA will be 

referencing two of these documents: (1) 

The September 4, 1992 Memorandum 

from John Calcagni titled ‘‘Procedures 

for Processing Requests to Redesignate 

Areas to Attainment,’’ (hereafter referred 

to as the ‘‘Calcagni Memo’’); and (2) The 

April 23, 2014 Memorandum from 

Stephen D. Page titled ‘‘Guidance for 1- 

Hour SO2 Nonattainment Area SIP 

Submissions,’’ (hereafter referred to as 

‘‘2010 SO2 NAA Guidance’’). 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of the 

request? 

EPA’s evaluation of Montana’s 

redesignation request and maintenance 

plan was based on consideration of the 

five redesignation criteria provided 

under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E). 

Criteria (1)—The Billings SO2

Nonattainment Area Has Attained the 

2010 1-Hour SO2 NAAQS 

For redesignating a nonattainment 

area to attainment, the CAA requires the 

EPA to determine that the area has 

attained the applicable NAAQS (CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). The two primary 

methods for evaluating ambient air 

quality impacted by SO2 emissions are 

through dispersion modeling and air 

quality monitoring. For SO2, an area 

may in some circumstances be 

considered to be attaining the 2010 

1-hour SO2 NAAQS if it meets the 

NAAQS as determined in accordance 

with 40 CFR 50.17 and Appendix T of 

part 50, based on three complete, 

consecutive calendar years of qualityassured air quality monitoring data. To 

attain the NAAQS based on monitoring, 

the 3-year average of the annual 99th 

percentile (fourth highest value) of 1- 

hour daily maximum concentrations 

measured at each monitor within an 

area must be less than or equal to 75 

ppb. 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 EPA’s 

determination of attainment can be 

based on monitoring data alone, without 

the need for dispersion modeling 

analyses, if the air agency provides an 

analysis demonstrating that the 

monitor(s) for the affected area is 

located in the area of maximum ambient 

concentration of SO2.8

In this action, the EPA is determining 

that the Billings SO2 nonattainment area 

is attaining the 2010 1-hour SO2

NAAQS. The EPA reviewed SO2

monitoring data from the lone 

monitoring station inside the Billings 

SO2 nonattainment area, the Coburn 

Road station. The Coburn Road monitor 

data have been quality-assured, are 

recorded in AQS, and indicate that the 

area is attaining the 2010 1-hour SO2

NAAQS. The fourth-highest 1-hour SO2

values at the Coburn Road monitor for 

the 3-year averages of these values (i.e., 

design values), are summarized in Table 

1, below. 

TABLE 1—COBURN ROAD MONITORED SO2 CONCENTRATIONS

2012 2013 2014 

2012–2014 

Design 

value 

Annual 99th Percentile .................................................................................................... 70 48 93 70 

As shown, the 3-year design value for 

2012–2014 at the Coburn Road monitor 

meets the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. Further, 

the EPA expects the SO2 emissions at 

this monitor to decrease significantly 

following the shutdown of the PPL 

Corette facility. Since the facility last 

operated on March 3, 2015, the values 

at the Coburn Road monitor have not 

exceeded 19 ppb SO2. This trend is 

anticipated to be permanent, as the State 

indicated in its analysis that SO2

emissions have since 2010 consistently 

decreased to levels well below the 

NAAQS during times when PPL Corette 

was not operating.9

As part of Montana’s redesignation 

request, the State submitted information 

to support a showing that the Coburn 

Road monitor was sited in the area of 

maximum ambient SO2 concentration 

within the Billings SO2 nonattainment 

area in accordance with the 2010 SO2

NAA Guidance. This showing included 

data from historical monitors near the 

Coburn Road monitor which 

consistently showed lower values than 

those at Coburn Road. The EPA has 

reviewed Montana’s information 

regarding this showing, but finds that it 

is no longer applicable to the current 

SO2 emissions mix in the Billings SO2

nonattainment area because the sole SO2

source in the area (PPL Corette) has shut 

down. The EPA does not find it 

necessary to require the State to conduct 

new modeling or exploratory 

monitoring as recommended by EPA’s 

May 2013 Draft Monitoring Technical 

Assistance Document (TAD)10 to 

determine the point of maximum 

concentration in the nonattainment area 

because the source of concern in the 

area has shut down and been 

dismantled, resulting in SO2

concentrations well below the standard. 

In this action, the EPA is proposing to 

determine that the Billings SO2

nonattainment area is attaining the 2010 

1-hour SO2 NAAQS, and therefore 

meets the requirements of CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(i). If the 3-year design value 

exceeds the NAAQS prior to the EPA 

taking action in response to the State’s 

request, the EPA will not take final 

action to approve the redesignation 

request.11 As discussed in more detail 

below, Montana has committed to 

continue monitoring in this area in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 58. 

As noted, Montana separately 

submitted to the EPA a request for a 

determination of clean data for the 

Billings SO2 nonattainment area on 

January 16, 2015. The clean data policy 

represents the EPA’s interpretation that 

certain requirements of part D of title I 

of the Act are suspended for areas that 

are currently attaining the NAAQS. The 

requirements that are suspended in an 

area attaining the standard include the 

requirements to submit an ‘‘attainment 

SIP’’ that provides for: Attainment of the 

NAAQS; implementation of all RACM; 

RFP; and implementation of 

contingency measures for failure to meet 

deadlines for RFP and attainment. In the 

2010 SO2 NAA guidance, the EPA 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

11730 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

12 Id. at 52. 

13 Id. at 58. 

explained our intention to apply the 

EPA’s clean data policy to the 2010 SO2

primary NAAQS.12 Because EPA’s 

analysis in determining whether an area 

has attained under the clean data policy 

is the same as its analysis under the first 

redesignation criterion, EPA is also here 

proposing that the Billings SO2

nonattainment area qualifies for a 

determination of attainment under the 

clean data policy, based on the 2012– 

2014 monitoring data from the Coburn 

Road monitor. In the event that EPA 

does not finalize the proposed 

redesignation, EPA may choose to 

separately finalize the clean data 

determination, thereby suspending 

Montana’s obligation to submit the 

attainment planning-related 

requirements for the area for as long as 

the area continues to attain the 

standard. As with its analysis that the 

area has attained under the 

redesignation requirements, for 

purposes of the clean data 

determination, the EPA is not requiring 

Montana to demonstrate that the 

monitor is located in the area of 

maximum concentration in accordance 

with the 2010 SO2 NAA Guidance due 

to the unique circumstances associated 

with the PPL Corette shutdown.13

Criteria (2)—Montana Has a Fully 

Approved SIP Under Section 110(k); 

and Criteria (5)—Montana Has Met All 

Applicable Requirements Under Section 

110 and Part D of Title I of the CAA 

For redesignating a nonattainment 

area to attainment under a NAAQS, the 

CAA requires the EPA to determine that 

the state has met all applicable 

requirements for that NAAQS under 

section 110 and part D of title I of the 

CAA (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(v)) and 

that the state has a fully approved SIP 

under section 110(k) for that NAAQS for 

the area (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)). 

The EPA proposes to find that Montana 

has met all applicable SIP requirements 

for the Billings SO2 nonattainment area 

for the 2010 SO2 NAAQS under section 

110 of the CAA (general SIP 

requirements) for purposes of 

redesignation. Additionally, the EPA 

proposes to find that the Montana SIP 

satisfies the criterion that it meets 

applicable SIP requirements for 

purposes of redesignation under part D 

of title I of the CAA in accordance with 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). Further, the EPA 

proposes to determine that the SIP is 

fully approved with respect to all 

requirements applicable for the 2010 

SO2 NAAQS for purposes of 

redesignation in accordance with 

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

determinations, the EPA ascertained 

which requirements are applicable to 

the Billings SO2 nonattainment area 

and, if applicable, that they are fully 

approved under section 110(k). 

a. The Billings SO2 Nonattainment Area 

Has Met All Applicable Requirements 

Under Section 110 and Part D of the 

CAA 

General SIP requirements. 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 

(New Source Review (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, the EPA has required certain 

states to establish programs to address 

the interstate transport of air pollutants. 

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. The 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, the EPA does not 

believe that the CAA’s interstate 

transport requirements should be 

construed to be applicable requirements 

for purposes of redesignation. 

In addition, the EPA believes other 

section 110 elements that are neither 

connected with nonattainment plan 

submissions nor linked with an area’s 

attainment status are 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 the 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, 

2008); 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). 

Title I, Part D, applicable SIP 

requirements. Section 172(c) of the CAA 

sets forth the basic requirements of 

attainment plans for nonattainment 

areas that are required to submit them 

pursuant to section 172(b). Subpart 5 of 

part D, which includes section 191 and 

192 of the CAA, establishes 

requirements for SO2, nitrogen dioxide 

and lead nonattainment areas. A 

thorough discussion of the requirements 

contained in sections 172(c) can be 

found in the General Preamble for 

Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498). 

Subpart 5 Section 172 Requirements. 

Section 172(c)(1) requires the plans for 

all nonattainment areas to provide for 

the implementation of all RACM as 

expeditiously as practicable and to 

provide for attainment of the NAAQS. 

The 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. Under 

section 172, states with nonattainment 

areas must submit plans providing for 

timely attainment and meeting a variety 

of other requirements. 

The EPA’s longstanding interpretation 

of the nonattainment planning 

requirements of section 172 is that once 

an area is attaining the NAAQS, those 

requirements are not ‘‘applicable’’ for 

purposes of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) 

and therefore need not be approved into 

the SIP before the EPA can redesignate 

the area. In the 1992 General Preamble 

for Implementation of Title I, the EPA 

set forth its interpretation of applicable 

requirements for purposes of evaluating 

redesignation requests when an area is 

attaining a standard. See 57 FR 13498, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules 11731 

14Calcagni Memo at 6. 

13564 (April 16, 1992). The EPA noted 

that the requirements for RFP and other 

measures designed to provide for 

attainment do not apply in evaluating 

redesignation requests because those 

nonattainment planning requirements 

‘‘have no meaning’’ for an area that has 

already attained the standard. Id. This 

interpretation was also set forth in the 

Calcagni Memo. The EPA’s 

understanding of section 172 also forms 

the basis of its Clean Data Policy, which 

was articulated with regard to SO2 in 

the 2010 SO2 NAA Guidance, and 

suspends a state’s obligation to submit 

most of the attainment planning 

requirements that would otherwise 

apply, including an attainment 

demonstration and planning SIPs to 

provide for RFP, RACM, and 

contingency measures under section 

172(c)(9). Courts have upheld the EPA’s 

interpretation of section 172(c)(1) for 

‘‘reasonably available’’ control measures 

and control technology as meaning only 

those controls that advance attainment, 

which precludes the need to require 

additional measures where an area is 

already attaining. NRDC v. EPA, 571 

F.3d 1245, 1252 (D.C. Cir. 2009); Sierra 

Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d 155, 162 (D.C. 

Cir. 2002); Sierra Club v. EPA, 314 F.3d 

735, 744 (5th Cir. 2002); Sierra Club v. 

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

see Sierra Club v. EPA, 793 F.3d 656 

(6th Cir. 2015). 

Therefore, because attainment has 

been reached in the Billings SO2

nonattainment area, no additional 

measures are needed to provide for 

attainment, and section 172(c)(1) 

requirements for an attainment 

demonstration and RACM are not part 

of the ‘‘applicable implementation 

plan’’ required to have been approved 

prior to redesignation per CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(ii). The other section 172 

requirements that are designed to help 

an area achieve attainment—the section 

172(c)(2) requirement that 

nonattainment plans contain provisions 

promoting reasonable further progress, 

the requirement to submit the section 

172(c)(9) contingency measures, and the 

section 172(c)(6) requirement for the SIP 

to contain control measures necessary to 

provide for attainment of the NAAQS— 

are also not required to be approved as 

part of the ‘‘applicable implementation 

plan’’ for purposes of satisfying CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). 

Section 172(c)(3) requires submission 

and approval of a comprehensive, 

accurate, and current inventory of actual 

emissions. The requirement for an 

emission inventory can be satisfied by 

meeting the inventory requirements of 

the maintenance plan.14 MDEQ 

submitted an emissions inventory as 

part of the maintenance plan for the 

Billings SO2 nonattainment area, and 

this inventory will be discussed further 

in the maintenance plan portion of this 

proposed action. 

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. 

The 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.’’ MDEQ 

has demonstrated that the Billings SO2

nonattainment area will be able to 

maintain the NAAQS without part D 

NSR in effect, and therefore Montana 

need not have fully approved part D 

NSR programs prior to approval of the 

redesignation request. Montana’s PSD 

program will become effective in the 

Billings SO2 nonattainment area upon 

redesignation to attainment. 

Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to 

meet the applicable provisions of 

section 110(a)(2). As noted above, the 

EPA believes the Montana 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 federally 

supported 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 that are developed, funded, or 

approved under title 23 of the United 

States Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal 

Transit Act (transportation conformity) 

as well as to all other federally 

supported or funded projects (general 

conformity). State transportation 

conformity SIP revisions must be 

consistent with federal conformity 

regulations relating to consultation, 

enforcement, and enforceability that the 

EPA promulgated pursuant to its 

authority under the CAA. 

Montana has an approved general 

conformity SIP for the Billings area. See 

67 FR 62392 (October 7, 2002). 

Moreover, the EPA interprets the 

conformity SIP requirements as not 

applying for purposes of evaluating a 

redesignation request under section 

107(d) because, like other requirements 

listed above, state conformity rules are 

still required after redesignation and 

federal conformity rules apply where 

state rules have not been approved. See 

Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 

2001) (upholding this interpretation); 

see also 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 

1995) (redesignation of Tampa, Florida). 

For these reasons, the EPA proposes 

to find that Montana has satisfied all 

applicable requirements for purposes of 

redesignation of the Billings SO2

nonattainment area under section 110 

and part D of title I of the CAA. 

b. The Billings SO2 Nonattainment Area 

Has a Fully Approved Applicable SIP 

Under Section 110(k) of the CAA 

The EPA has fully approved the 

applicable Montana SIP for the Billings 

Area under section 110(k) of the CAA 

for all requirements applicable for 

purposes of redesignation. As indicated 

above, the EPA believes that the section 

110 elements that are neither connected 

with nonattainment plan submissions 

nor linked to an area’s nonattainment 

status are not applicable requirements 

for purposes of redesignation. The EPA 

has approved all part D requirements 

applicable under the 2010 SO2 NAAQS, 

as identified above, for purposes of this 

redesignation. 

Criteria (3)—The Air Quality 

Improvement in the Billings SO2

Nonattainment Area Is Due to 

Permanent and Enforceable Reductions 

in Emissions 

For redesignating a nonattainment 

area to attainment, the CAA requires the 

EPA to determine that the air quality 

improvement in the area is due to 

permanent and enforceable reductions 

in emissions resulting from 

implementation of the SIP, applicable 

federal air pollution control regulations, 

and other permanent and enforceable 

reductions (CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iii)). The EPA proposes to 

find that Montana has demonstrated 

that the observed air quality 

improvement in the Billings SO2

nonattainment area is due to permanent 

and enforceable reductions in 

emissions. Specifically, the EPA 

considers the shutdown of the PPL 

Corette Plant, identified as the key 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

11732 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

15See EPA’s final Technical Support Document 

(TSD) for the Billings SO2 Nonattainment Area, in 

the docket for EPA’s initial round of 2010 SO2

designations at EPA–HQ–OAR–2012–0233–0318. 

16The Corette facility did not operate for several 

consecutive months in both 2012 and 2014. 17Calcagni Memo at 10. 18Permit revocation letters are included in the 

docket for this action. 

19See 2010 SO2 NAA Guidance, at 66. 

20PPL Corette did not operate for nearly five 

months during 2014. 

21See 2010 SO2 NAA Guidance at 67. 

contributor to the SO2 NAAQS 

violations at the Coburn Road 

monitor,15 to be both permanent and 

enforceable. The EPA notes that the 

Corette facility was still operating 

(though not continuously) 16 during the 

2012–2014 period during which the 

2010 SO2 NAAQS was attained in the 

Billings nonattainment area. Given the 

well-established correlation of much 

lower SO2 emissions at the Coburn Road 

monitor during periods when Corette 

has not operated, EPA anticipates that 

the SO2 NAAQS will only attain by a 

greater margin following the facility’s 

shutdown. As stated in the Calcagni 

Memo, ‘‘Emission reductions from 

source shutdowns can be considered 

permanent and enforceable to the extent 

that those shutdowns have been 

reflected in the SIP and all applicable 

permits have been modified 

accordingly.’’ 17 MDEQ revoked PPL’s 

Title V (operating) and NSR permits for 

the Corette facility.18 Further, the PPL 

Corette facility has been dismantled, 

making its future operation impossible 

and thus displaying the permanence of 

the emissions reductions in the 

nonattainment area. Any new sources 

that may come into being within the 

area would be required to demonstrate 

that their new SO2 emissions would not 

interfere with attainment and 

maintenance of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. 

Therefore, the EPA is proposing to find 

that the air quality improvement in the 

Billings SO2 nonattainment area is due 

to permanent and enforceable 

reductions in emissions. 

Criteria (4)—The Billings SO2

Nonattainment Area Has a Fully 

Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant 

to Section 175A of the CAA 

To redesignate a nonattainment area 

to attainment, the CAA requires the EPA 

to determine that the area has a fully 

approved maintenance plan pursuant to 

section 175A of the CAA (CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iv)). In conjunction with its 

request to redesignate the Billings SO2

nonattainment area to attainment for the 

2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, MDEQ 

submitted a SIP revision to provide for 

the maintenance of the 2010 1-hour SO2

NAAQS for at least 10 years after the 

effective date of redesignation to 

attainment. The EPA is proposing to 

find that this maintenance plan for the 

area meets the requirements for 

approval under section 175A of the 

CAA. 

a. What is required in a maintenance 

plan? 

CAA section 175A 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 must 

submit a revised maintenance plan 

demonstrating 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 

contingency measures as the EPA deems 

necessary to assure prompt correction of 

any future 2010 1-hour SO2 violations. 

The Calcagni Memo provides further 

guidance on the content of a 

maintenance plan, explaining that a 

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, the EPA 

is proposing to determine that 

Montana’s maintenance plan includes 

all the necessary components and is 

thus proposing to approve it as a 

revision to the Montana SIP. 

b. Attainment Emissions Inventory 

As part of a state’s maintenance plan 

for a 2010 SO2 nonattainment area, the 

air agency should develop an attainment 

inventory to identify the level of 

emissions in the affected area which is 

sufficient to attain and maintain the SO2

NAAQS.19 Montana selected 2014 as the 

base year (i.e., attainment emissions 

inventory year) for developing an 

emissions inventory for SO2 in the 

nonattainment area through 2024. In 

2014, the final full calendar year in 

which PPL Corette was permitted to 

operate prior to the March 2015 

shutdown, the facility emitted 1,433 

tons of SO2.20

In 2014, the Coburn Road monitor 

reported exceedances of the 2010 SO2

NAAQS on eight different days, giving 

the monitor a 99th percentile (4th 

highest 1-hour daily maximum 

concentration) of 93 ppb. Regardless, 

the 2014 emissions level of 1,433 tons 

of SO2 is the lowest level of any year in 

the attaining 2012 to 2014 period, 

making it the most conservative option 

for the purposes of ensuring future 

maintenance of the NAAQS (see Table 

2). The EPA has therefore determined 

that this is a level sufficient to attain the 

2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, and is 

proposing to find that the attainment 

inventory submitted as part of 

Montana’s maintenance plan meets the 

‘‘Attainment Emissions Inventory’’ 

requirement. 

TABLE 2—ANNUAL SO2 EMISSIONS IN BILLINGS NONATTAINMENT AREA

Year 2012 2013 2014 

Annual SO2 Emissions (tons) .................................................................................................................. 1,884 2,247 1,433 

The EPA notes that the permanent 

shutdown of PPL Corette has left the 

Billings SO2 nonattainment area with no 

sources of SO2, and the maintenance 

plan for the area contains an emissions 

inventory (in the ‘‘Maintenance 

Demonstration’’ section) which projects 

a level of zero SO2 emissions in the 

nonattainment area for each year from 

2016 through 2024. The EPA therefore 

does not anticipate emissions activity in 

the 2010 SO2 nonattainment area that 

will approach 1,433 tons of SO2. 

c. Maintenance Demonstration 

An air agency may generally 

demonstrate maintenance of the 

NAAQS by either showing that future 

emissions of SO2 will not exceed the 

level of the attainment inventory, or by 

modeling to show that the future mix of 

sources and emission rates will not 

cause a violation of the NAAQS.21

Montana has demonstrated maintenance 

by showing that future year emissions 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules 11733 

22The State’s emissions inventory projection is 

listed as Figure 3.2 in the Billings SO2

Redesignation Request, at 23. 

23 2010 SO2 Guidance at 67–68. 24EPA last determined that Montana’s SIP was 

sufficient to meet the requirements of 110(a)(2)(E)(i) 

of the CAA on July 30, 2013 (78 FR 45864). 

(through ‘‘out year’’ 2024) of SO2 in the 

maintenance area are expected to 

remain at zero following the PPL Corette 

shutdown. The State’s projected 

emissions inventory 22 has been 

reproduced as Table 3, below: 

TABLE 3—BILLINGS SO2 NONATTAINMENT AREA SO2 PROJECTED EMISSIONS INVENTORY

Year 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 

Annual SO2 Emissions (tons) ...................................................... 1433 460 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

The EPA considers the inventory 

projection of zero emissions sufficient to 

attain and maintain the SO2 NAAQS. 

The EPA is therefore also proposing to 

find that the State’s ‘‘Maintenance 

Demonstration’’ requirement is met 

based on this projected emissions 

inventory. 

d. Monitoring Network 

Montana has committed to continue 

operating the Coburn Road monitor at 

its current location in the Billings SO2

nonattainment area. The State also 

committed to operating the monitor in 

accordance with the requirements of 40 

CFR part 58, and have thus addressed 

the requirement for monitoring. The 

EPA approved Montana’s monitoring 

plan on January 13, 2015. The EPA is 

proposing to find that Montana’s 

maintenance plan meets the 

‘‘Monitoring Network’’ requirement. 

e. Verification of Continued Attainment 

Each air agency should ensure that it 

has the legal authority to implement and 

enforce all measures necessary to attain 

and maintain the 2010 SO2 NAAQS. 

The air agency’s submittal should 

indicate how it will track the progress 

of the maintenance plan for the area 

either through air quality monitoring or 

modeling.23

The State of Montana has the legal 

authority to enforce and implement the 

maintenance plan for the Billings 2010 

SO2 nonattainment area. This includes 

the authority to adopt, implement, and 

enforce any subsequent emissions 

control contingency measures 

determined to be necessary to correct 

future SO2 attainment problems.24 As 

noted, the State will track the progress 

of the maintenance plan by continuing 

to operate the Coburn Road monitor. For 

these reasons, the EPA is proposing to 

find that Montana’s maintenance plan 

meets the ‘‘Verification of Continued 

Attainment’’ requirement. 

f. Contingency Measures in the 

Maintenance Plan 

Section 175A of the CAA requires that 

a maintenance plan include such 

contingency measures as the 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 also 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). 

The contingency plan includes a 

triggering mechanism to determine 

when contingency measures are needed 

and a process of developing and 

implementing appropriate control 

measures. The State listed two types of 

triggers of its contingency plan. The 

first, a ‘‘warning level response,’’ will be 

triggered by a 99th percentile of 1-hour 

daily maximum SO2 values greater than 

65 ppb in a single calendar year. The 

second, an ‘‘action level response,’’ is 

triggered when such a value exceeds 70 

ppb in a single calendar year. 

If the warning level response is 

triggered, the State must conduct a 

study to determine whether the SO2

values near the level of the 2010 SO2

NAAQS (75 ppb) are the result of a 

trend, and if so, what control measures 

are necessary to reverse that trend. The 

implementation of the control measures 

stemming from a warning level response 

will take place no later than 18 months 

after the end of the calendar year in 

which a determination requiring control 

measures was made. If the action level 

response is triggered and is not found to 

be due to an exceptional event as 

defined at 40 CFR part 50.1(j), the State 

will work with the entity or entities 

believed to be responsible for the high 

levels of SO2 to evaluate control 

measures necessary to ensure future 

attainment of the NAAQS. Montana 

must submit to the EPA its analysis 

demonstrating that the proposed control 

measures are adequate to ensure 

continued maintenance of the 2010 SO2

NAAQS in the area or to return the area 

to attainment of the NAAQS. The 

implementation of the control measures 

stemming from an action level response 

will take place no later than 18 months 

after the end of the calendar year in 

which the action level response was 

prompted. Montana noted that, since 

the only source in the nonattainment 

area has shut down, it is not possible at 

this time to develop specific 

contingency measures until the cause of 

the elevated concentrations is known. 

The EPA is proposing to find that 

Montana’s maintenance plan meets the 

‘‘Contingency Measures’’ requirement. 

The EPA has concluded that the 

maintenance plan adequately addresses 

the five basic components of a 

maintenance plan: The attainment 

emissions inventory, maintenance 

demonstration, monitoring, verification 

of continued attainment, and a 

contingency plan. Therefore, the EPA 

proposes to find that the maintenance 

plan SIP revision submitted by Montana 

for the Billings 2010 SO2 nonattainment 

area meets the requirements of section 

175A of the CAA and is approvable. 

V. What are the actions the EPA is 

proposing to take? 

The EPA is proposing to take the 

following four separate but related 

actions: (1) Determine that the Billings 

SO2 nonattainment area is attaining the 

2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS; (2) Approve 

Montana’s plan for maintaining the 

2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS (maintenance 

plan); (3) Redesignate the Billings SO2

nonattainment area to attainment for the 

2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS; and (4) 

determine that the Billings SO2

nonattainment area has clean 

monitoring data. Section IV of this 

notice provides a discussion of each of 

these proposed actions. 

The EPA proposes to determine that 

the Billings SO2 nonattainment area has 

attained the 2010 1-hour SO2 standard 

by the October 4, 2018, required 

attainment date. This determination is 

based on complete, quality-assured, and 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

11734 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 44 / Monday, March 7, 2016 / Proposed Rules 

certified monitoring data for the 2012– 

2014 monitoring period. The EPA is also 

proposing to approve the maintenance 

plan under the 2010 NAAQS for the 

Billings SO2 nonattainment area into the 

Montana SIP (under CAA section 175A). 

The maintenance plan demonstrates 

that the area will continue to maintain 

the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, and 

includes a process to develop 

contingency measures to remedy any 

future violations of the 2010 1-hour SO2

NAAQS and procedures for evaluation 

of potential violations. 

Additionally, the EPA is proposing to 

determine that the Billings SO2

nonattainment area has met the criteria 

under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E) for 

redesignation from nonattainment to 

attainment for the 2010 1-hour SO2

NAAQS. On this basis, the EPA is 

proposing to approve Montana’s 

redesignation request for the area. Final 

approval of Montana’s redesignation 

request would change the legal 

designation of the portion of 

Yellowstone County designated 

nonattainment at 40 CFR part 81.327 to 

attainment for the 2010 1-hour SO2

NAAQS. 

The EPA is also proposing to 

determine that the Billings SO2

nonattainment area has attaining 

monitoring data for the 2010 SO2

primary NAAQS based on the most 

recent complete three-year period 

(2012–2014) design value period that 

meets the clean data policy. As noted 

elsewhere, in the event that EPA does 

not finalize the proposed redesignation, 

EPA may choose to separately finalize 

the clean data determination, thereby 

suspending the attainment planningrelated requirements for the area. 

In this action, the EPA is not 

proposing to take any action on the 

Billings/Laurel SO2 area that was the 

subject of a SIP Call (67 FR 22168, May 

2, 2002) and for which EPA 

promulgated a FIP (77 FR 21418, April 

21, 2008) under the prior 24-hour SO2

primary NAAQS and the still-current 

SO2 secondary NAAQS. EPA is also not 

proposing any action to revoke the prior 

(1971) SO2 primary NAAQS in either 

the 2010 Billings SO2 nonattainment 

area or the larger Billings/Laurel area 

addressed by the May 2, 2002 SIP Call. 

VI. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, the EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with the 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

the Billings SO2 Redesignation and 

Maintenance Plan for action which are 

identified within this notice of proposed 

rulemaking. The EPA has made, and 

will continue to make, these documents 

generally available electronically 

through www.regulations.gov and/or in 

hard copy at the appropriate EPA office 

(see the ADDRESSES section of this rule’s 

preamble for more information). 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, redesignation of an 

area to attainment and the 

accompanying approval of a 

maintenance plan under section 

107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the 

status of a geographical area and do not 

impose any additional regulatory 

requirements on sources beyond those 

imposed by state law. A redesignation to 

attainment does not in and of itself 

create any new requirements, but rather 

results in the applicability of 

requirements contained in the CAA for 

areas that have been redesignated to 

attainment. Moreover, the Administrator 

is required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, these proposed 

actions merely propose to approve state 

law as meeting Federal requirements 

and do not impose additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. For this reason, these 

proposed actions: 

• Are not significant regulatory 

actions subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• Do not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Are certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Do not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Do not have federalism implications 

as specified in Executive Order 13132 

(64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); 

• Are not economically significant 

regulatory actions based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Are not significant regulatory 

actions subject to Executive Order 

13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Are not subject to requirements of 

section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Do not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, the SIP does not apply on 

any Indian reservation land or in any 

other area where the EPA or an Indian 

tribe has demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, the proposed rule does not 

have tribal implications and will not 

impose substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: February 23, 2016. 

Richard D. Buhl, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2016–04900 Filed 3–4–16; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Railroad Administration 

49 CFR Part 222 

[Docket No. FRA–2016–0010, Notice No. 1] 

Use of Locomotive Horns at Public 

Highway-Rail Grade Crossings; Notice 

of Safety Inquiry 

AGENCY: Federal Railroad 

Administration (FRA), Department of 

Transportation (DOT). 

ACTION: Notice of safety inquiry. 

SUMMARY: FRA is conducting a 

retrospective review of its locomotive 

train horn regulations in 49 CFR part 

222. As part of its review, FRA is 

soliciting public comment on whether 

FRA should modify, streamline, or 

expand any requirements of FRA’s 

locomotive train horn regulations to 

reduce paperwork and other economic 

burdens on the rail industry and States 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS