58640 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 189 / Wednesday, September 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

provisions of the Act and applicable 

Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 

40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP 

submissions, the EPA’s role is to 

approve State choices, provided that 

they meet the criteria of the Clean Air 

Act. Accordingly, this proposed action 

merely proposes to approve 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 Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, and legally permissible 

methods under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed action 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, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: September 14, 2015. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2015–24870 Filed 9–29–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2015–0633; FRL–9934–94– 

Region 9] 

PM10 Plans and Redesignation 

Request; Truckee Meadows, Nevada; 

Deletion of TSP Area Designation 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

two revisions to the Nevada state 

implementation plan (SIP). The first 

revision provides a demonstration of 

implementation of best available control 

measures (BACM) for control of 

particulate matter with an aerodynamic 

diameter less than or equal to a nominal 

ten micrometers (PM10) within Truckee 

Meadows. The second revision is a plan 

that provides for the maintenance of the 

national ambient air quality standard for 

PM10 in Truckee Meadows through 

2030, includes an emissions inventory 

consistent with attainment, and 

establishes motor vehicle emissions 

budgets. In connection with these 

proposed approvals, the EPA is 

proposing to determine that major 

stationary sources of PM10 precursors do 

not contribute significantly to elevated 

PM10 levels in the area. Also, based in 

part on the proposed approvals of the 

BACM demonstration and maintenance 

plan and proposed determination 

regarding PM10 precursors, the EPA is 

proposing to approve the State of 

Nevada’s request for redesignation of 

the Truckee Meadows nonattainment 

area to attainment for the PM10

standard. Lastly, the EPA is proposing 

to delete the area designation for 

Truckee Meadows for the revoked 

national ambient air quality standard for 

total suspended particulate (TSP). The 

EPA is proposing these actions because 

the SIP revisions meet the applicable 

statutory and regulatory requirements 

for such plans and related motor vehicle 

emissions budgets and because the area 

meets the Clean Air Act requirements 

for redesignation of nonattainment areas 

to attainment. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before October 30, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R09–OAR–2015–0633, by one of the 

following methods: 

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

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: ungvarsky.john@epa.gov. 

3. Mail or deliver: John Ungvarsky 

(AIR–2), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region IX, 75 Hawthorne 

Street, San Francisco, CA 94105–3901. 

Deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. 

Instructions: All comments 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 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Information that 

you consider CBI or otherwise protected 

should be clearly identified as such 

and should not be submitted through 

http://www.regulations.gov or email. 

http://www.regulations.gov is an 

anonymous access system, and the EPA 

will not know your identity or contact 

information unless you provide it in the 

body of your comment. If you send 

email directly to EPA, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the public 

comment. If the EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

the EPA may not be able to consider 

your comment. 

Docket: The index to the docket and 

documents in the docket for this action 

are generally available electronically at 

www.regulations.gov and in hard copy 

at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, 

San Francisco, California. While all 

documents in the docket are listed at 

www.regulations.gov, some information 

may be publicly available only at the 

hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted 

material, large maps), and some may not 

be publicly available in either location 

(e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy 

materials, please schedule an 

appointment during normal business 

hours with the contact listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John 

Ungvarsky, Air Planning Office (AIR–2), 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 189 / Wednesday, September 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 58641 

1Particulate matter is the generic term for a broad 

class of chemically and physically diverse 

substances that exist as discrete particles (liquid 

droplets or solids) over a wide range of sizes. 

Particles originate from a variety of anthropogenic 

stationary and mobile sources as well as from 

natural sources. Particles may be emitted directly or 

form in the atmosphere by transformations of 

gaseous emissions such as sulfur oxides (SOX), 

nitrogen oxides (NOX), and volatile organic 

compounds (VOC). The chemical and physical 

properties of particulate matter vary greatly with 

time, region, meteorology, and source category. 

SOX, NOX, and VOC are referred to as PM10

precursors. As discussed later in this proposed rule, 

precursor emissions do not contribute significantly 

to elevated ambient PM10 concentrations in Truckee 

Meadows. 

2Truckee Meadows, also referred to as the ‘‘Reno 

planning area,’’ lies in the far southern part of 

Washoe County. Washoe County is located in the 

northwestern portion of Nevada and is bordered by 

the State of California to the west and the State of 

Oregon to the north. Within the State of Nevada, the 

counties of Humboldt, Pershing, Storey, Churchill, 

Lyon, and the city of Carson City bound Washoe 

County to the east and south. Located at an average 

elevation of 4,500 feet above sea level, Truckee 

Meadows encompasses a land area of 

approximately 200 square miles and is surrounded 

by mountain ranges, which can lead to persistent 

wintertime temperature inversions where a layer of 

cold air is trapped in the valley. Warmer air above 

the inversion acts as a lid, containing and 

concentrating air pollutants at ground level. 

Approximately two-thirds of Washoe County’s 

population lives in the Truckee Meadows area. 

Anthropogenic activities, such as automobile use 

and residential wood combustion, are also 

concentrated here. Washoe County has experienced 

significant growth in population since 1990, with 

an increase in population from approximately 

257,000 in 1990 to approximately 422,000 in 2011, 

an increase of 64 percent over that 21-year period. 

The two major cities in Truckee Meadows are Reno 

and Sparks. 

3The reference here is to the TSP portions of the 

Truckee Meadows Air Quality Implementation Plan 

(December 6, 1978). 

4 In 2006, the EPA retained the 24-hour PM10

standard but revoked the annual PM10 standard. 71 

FR 61144 (October 17, 2006). More recently, as part 

of the Agency’s periodic review of the NAAQS, EPA 

reaffirmed the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS. 78 FR 3086 

(January 15, 2013). See 40 CFR 50.6 (‘‘National 

primary and secondary ambient air quality 

standards for PM10’’). 

Region IX, (415) 972–3963, 

ungvarsky.john@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

the EPA. This supplementary 

information section is arranged as 

follows: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. The State’s Submittals 

III. Procedural Requirements for Adoption 

and Submittal of SIP Revisions 

IV. Clean Air Act Requirements for 

Redesignation to Attainment 

V. Evaluation of the State’s Redesignation 

Request for Truckee Meadows 

A. The Area Has Attained the PM10

NAAQS 

B. The Area Has Met All Applicable 

Requirements for Purposes of 

Redesignation Under Section 110 and 

Part D of the CAA and Has a Fully 

Approved Applicable Implementation 

Plan Under Section 110(k) of the CAA 

1. Basic SIP Requirements Under CAA 

Section 110 

2. SIP Requirements Under Part D 

a. Emissions Inventory 

b. Permits for New and Modified 

Stationary Sources 

c. Best Available Control Measures 

d. Control Requirements for PM10

Precursors 

e. Transportation Conformity 

3. Conclusion With Respect to Section 110 

and Part D Requirements 

C. The Improvement in Air Quality Is Due 

to Permanent and Enforceable 

Reductions in Emissions 

D. The Area Has a Fully-Approved 

Maintenance Plan, Including a 

Contingency Plan, Under CAA Section 

175A 

1. Attainment Inventory 

2. Maintenance Demonstration 

3. Monitoring Network 

4. Verification of Continued Attainment 

5. Contingency Plan 

6. Transportation Conformity and Motor 

Vehicle Emissions Budgets 

7. Conclusion 

VI. Proposed Deletion of TSP Designation for 

Truckee Meadows 

A. General Considerations 

B. Deletion of TSP Nonattainment Area 

Designation for Truckee Meadows 

VII. Proposed Actions and Request for Public 

Comment 

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On April 30, 1971 (36 FR 8186), 

pursuant to section 109 of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA), as amended in 1970, the 

EPA promulgated the original national 

ambient air quality standards (NAAQS 

or ‘‘standards’’) for the ‘‘criteria’’ 

pollutants, which included carbon 

monoxide, hydrocarbons, nitrogen 

dioxide, photochemical oxidant, sulfur 

dioxide, and particulate matter.1 The 

NAAQS are set at concentrations 

intended to protect public health and 

welfare. The original NAAQS for 

particulate matter were defined in terms 

of a reference method that called for 

measuring particulate matter up to a 

nominal size of 25 to 45 micrometers or 

microns. This fraction of total ambient 

particulate matter is referred to as ‘‘total 

suspended particulate’’ or TSP. Within 

nine months of promulgation of the 

original NAAQS, each state was 

required under section 110 of the 1970 

amended Act to adopt and submit to the 

EPA a plan, referred to as a SIP, which 

provides for the implementation, 

maintenance, and enforcement of each 

of the NAAQS within each State. The 

State of Nevada submitted its SIP on 

January 28, 1972, and the EPA took 

action on it later that year. 37 FR 10842 

(May 31, 1972). 

Generally, SIPs were to provide for 

attainment of the NAAQS within three 

years after EPA approval of the plan. 

However, many areas of the country did 

not attain the NAAQS within the 

statutory period. In response, Congress 

amended the Act in 1977 to establish a 

new approach, based on area 

designations, for attaining the NAAQS. 

Under section 107(d) of the 1977 

amended Act, states were to make 

recommendations for all areas within 

their borders as attainment, 

nonattainment, or unclassifiable for 

each of the NAAQS, including TSP, and 

the EPA was to designate areas based on 

those recommendations, as modified if 

appropriate. For the State of Nevada, the 

state recommended, and the EPA 

approved, the use of hydrographic areas 

as the geographic basis for designating 

air quality planning areas. 67 FR 12474 

(March 19, 2002). For the TSP NAAQS, 

the EPA designated a number of areas in 

Nevada as ‘‘nonattainment,’’ including 

Truckee Meadows 2 (hydrographic area 

(HA) #87). 43 FR 8962, at 9012 (March 

3, 1978). The area designations for air 

quality planning purposes within the 

State of Nevada are codified at 40 CFR 

81.329. 

As amended in 1977, the CAA 

required states to revise their SIPs by 

January 1979 for all designated 

nonattainment areas. The various local 

entities and the State of Nevada 

responded by developing and 

submitting attainment plans for the TSP 

nonattainment areas, including Truckee 

Meadows,3 and in 1981, the EPA 

approved these plans on condition that 

the State submit, within a prescribed 

period of time, revisions to correct 

certain deficiencies. 46 FR 21758 (April 

14, 1981). In 1982, we found that the 

state had submitted the required 

revisions correcting the identified 

deficiencies, and we revoked the 

conditions placed on our approval of 

the TSP plans. 47 FR 15790 (April 13, 

1982). 

In 1987, the EPA revised the NAAQS 

for particulate matter, eliminating TSP 

as the indicator for the NAAQS and 

replacing it with the ‘‘PM10’’ indicator. 

52 FR 24634 (July 1, 1987). PM10 refers 

to particles with an aerodynamic 

diameter less than or equal to a nominal 

10 microns. At that time, EPA 

established two PM10 standards: A 24- 

hour standard of 150 micrograms per 

cubic meter (mg/m3) and an annual 

standard of 50 mg/m3.4 We indicated in 

the preamble to our regulations 

implementing the then-new PM10

NAAQS that we would consider 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

58642 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 189 / Wednesday, September 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

5 In June 1992, the State of Nevada requested that 

we reclassify the eight existing TSP nonattainment 

areas in Nevada to ‘‘unclassifiable’’ status. See letter 

from L.H. Dodgion, Administrator, NDEP, to Daniel 

W. McGovern, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 

IX, dated June 15, 1992. We believe that deletion 

of the TSP nonattainment designations is 

administratively more efficient than redesignation 

of the area to unclassifiable. As noted above, we 

have already deleted seven of the TSP 

nonattainment area designations and are proposing 

to delete the one for Truckee Meadows herein. 

deletion of TSP area designations once 

the EPA had reviewed and approved 

revised SIPs that include control 

strategies for the PM10 NAAQS and once 

the EPA had promulgated PM10

increments for the prevention of 

significant deterioration (PSD) program. 

52 FR 24672, at 24682 (July 1, 1987). 

Under our regulations for 

implementing the revised particulate 

matter NAAQS (i.e., the PM10 NAAQS), 

the EPA did not designate areas as 

nonattainment, attainment, or 

unclassifiable but categorized areas into 

three groups, referred to as Group I, 

Group II, or Group III. Group I areas 

were those that had a probability of not 

attaining the PM10 NAAQS (based on 

existing TSP data) of at least 90%. 

Group I areas were required to submit 

SIP revisions that contain full PM10

control strategies including a 

demonstration of attainment. 52 FR 

24672, at 24681 (July 1, 1987). We 

identified the Las Vegas (HA #212) and 

Reno (HA #87, i.e., Truckee Meadows) 

planning areas as Group I areas. 52 FR 

29383 (August 7, 1987) and 55 FR 45799 

(October 31, 1990). 

The CAA was significantly amended 

in 1990. Under the 1990 amended Act, 

Congress replaced the PM10 regulatory 

approach established by the EPA in 

1987 with the area designation concept 

and designated former ‘‘Group I’’ areas 

and certain other areas as nonattainment 

areas for PM10 by operation of law. See 

CAA section 107(d)(4)(B). As former 

‘‘Group I’’ areas, the Reno planning area 

(i.e., Truckee Meadows) was designated 

as a nonattainment area for PM10 by 

operation of law. 56 FR 11101 (March 

15, 1991). Truckee Meadows was 

initially classified as a ‘‘Moderate’’ PM10

nonattainment area with an applicable 

attainment date of December 31, 1994, 

but despite improvements in ambient 

particulate conditions, Truckee 

Meadows was later reclassified by 

operation of law to ‘‘Serious’’ upon the 

EPA’s determination that the area had 

failed to attain the standard by the 

‘‘Moderate’’ area attainment date (i.e., 

based on ambient PM10 data for the 

1992–1994 period). 66 FR 1268 (January 

8, 2001). States with ‘‘Serious’’ PM10

nonattainment areas were required 

under the CAA, as amended in 1990, to 

submit revisions to their SIPs to, among 

other things, demonstrate attainment of 

the PM10 standard as expeditiously as 

practicable, but no later than December 

31, 2001. See CAA section 188(c). 

Despite further improvements, Truckee 

Meadows failed to attain the December 

31, 2001 attainment date based on 

ambient PM10 data for the 1999–2001 

period. Such areas are required to 

submit an attainment plan under CAA 

section 189(d) (referred to as a ‘‘Five 

Percent’’ plan), but the SIP submittal 

requirement for a Five Percent plan for 

Truckee Meadows was suspended by a 

‘‘clean data’’ determination by the EPA 

based on ambient PM10 data for the 

2007–2009 period. 76 FR 21807 (April 

19, 2011). 

The 1990 Act Amendments also 

provided for the continued transition 

from TSP to PM10. Specifically, section 

107(d)(4)(B) states in relevant part: 

‘‘Any designation for particulate matter 

(measured in terms of total suspended 

particulates) that the Administrator 

promulgated pursuant to this subsection 

(as in effect immediately before 

November 15, 1990) shall remain in 

effect for purposes of implementing the 

maximum allowable increases in 

concentrations of particulate matter 

(measured in terms of total suspended 

particulates) pursuant to section 163(b) 

of this title, until the Administrator 

determines that such designation is no 

longer necessary for that purpose.’’ 

Section 166(f) of the 1990 amended 

Act authorizes the EPA to replace the 

TSP increments with PM10 increments, 

and in 1993, the EPA promulgated the 

PM10 increments and revised the PSD 

regulations accordingly. 58 FR 31622 

(June 3, 1993). In our June 1993 final 

rule, we indicated that the replacement 

of the TSP increments with PM10

increments negates the need for the TSP 

attainment or unclassifiable area 

designations to be retained. We also 

indicated that we would delete such 

TSP designations in 40 CFR part 81 

upon the occurrence of, among other 

circumstances, the EPA’s approval of a 

State’s or local agency’s revised PSD 

program containing the PM10

increments. 58 FR 31622, at 31635 (June 

3, 1993). 

In November 2002, we deleted the 

TSP attainment or unclassifiable area 

designations throughout the State of 

Nevada, except for those in Clark 

County. 67 FR 68769 (November 13, 

2002). In April 2013, we deleted the 

TSP attainment or unclassifiable area 

designations within Clark County and 

also deleted the TSP nonattainment area 

designations for all of the Nevada TSP 

nonattainment areas, except for Las 

Vegas Valley and Truckee Meadows.5 78 

FR 22425 (April 16, 2013). In July 2014, 

we deleted the TSP nonattainment area 

designation for Las Vegas Valley, and in 

today’s proposed rule, we are proposing 

to delete the TSP nonattainment area 

designation for Truckee Meadows. 

II. The State’s Submittals 

The Nevada Division of 

Environmental Protection (NDEP) is the 

state agency with overall responsibility 

for the Nevada SIP and is the designated 

agency for submitting SIPs and SIP 

revisions to the EPA for approval. The 

Washoe County District Board of Health 

(‘‘Health District’’), which administers 

air quality programs through the Health 

District’s Air Quality Management 

Division (‘‘WCAQMD’’), is empowered 

under state law to develop air quality 

plans within Washoe County. The 

Health District is also empowered under 

state law to regulate stationary sources 

within Washoe County with the 

exception of certain types of power 

plants, which lie exclusively within the 

jurisdiction of the NDEP. After it adopts 

an air quality plan for Washoe County, 

the Health District submits the plan to 

NDEP for adoption as part of the Nevada 

SIP and then for submittal to the EPA 

for approval. 

As noted above, the Health District 

adopted, and the EPA approved, an air 

quality plan in the 1970s to provide for 

attainment of the TSP standard in 

Truckee Meadows. Another plan was 

required for Truckee Meadows in 

response to the area’s classification as a 

‘‘Moderate’’ nonattainment area for 

PM10 under the Clean Air Act 

Amendments of 1990. On April 15, 

1991, the NDEP submitted certain 

District regulations intended to reduce 

PM10 emissions in Truckee Meadows to 

the EPA. On October 30, 1991, the state 

submitted ‘‘Nevada State 

Implementation Plan for the Truckee 

Meadows Air Basin, Particulate Matter 

(PM10)’’ (‘‘1991 PM10 Attainment Plan’’), 

a PM10 plan for the Truckee Meadows 

area to address the requirements in CAA 

section 189(a) for ‘‘Moderate’’ PM10

nonattainment areas. The 1991 PM10

Attainment Plan included a 

demonstration that the attainment 

deadline for the Truckee Meadows 

moderate nonattainment area (December 

31, 1994) was not practicably 

achievable, and carried forward the 

District regulations that had been 

submitted previously on April 15, 1991. 

On March 7, 1994, the NDEP submitted 

amended District regulations that were 

intended to address deficiencies that the 

EPA had identified through its review of 

the regulations submitted in April 1991 

and the 1991 PM10 Attainment Plan 

submitted in October 1991. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 189 / Wednesday, September 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 58643 

As noted above, in 2001, the EPA 

reclassified the Truckee Meadows area 

to ‘‘Serious’’ nonattainment for the PM10

NAAQS, triggering the requirement for 

a new attainment plan, and on August 

5, 2002, the NDEP submitted a PM10

plan for Truckee Meadows to address 

the requirements in CAA section 189(b) 

for ‘‘Serious’’ PM10 nonattainment areas. 

See ‘‘Revisions to the Nevada 

Particulate Matter (PM10) State 

Implementation Plan for the Truckee 

Meadows Air Basin,’’ August 2002 

(‘‘2002 PM10 Attainment Plan’’). 

Generally, each subsequent air quality 

plan builds upon the foundation 

established by earlier plans, and, in this 

instance, the 2002 PM10 Attainment 

Plan built upon and superseded the 

earlier ‘‘Moderate’’ area plans. The 2002 

PM10 Attainment Plan included an 

analysis of BACM for the Truckee 

Meadows area and regulations to control 

PM10 emissions from all significant 

PM10 sources identified in that BACM 

analysis—i.e., street sanding and 

sweeping operations, fugitive dustgenerating activities, and residential 

wood combustion. The District 

Regulations submitted as part of the 

2002 PM10 Attainment Plan superseded 

those that had been submitted in April 

1991 and those submitted in March 

1994. The EPA has approved the various 

District regulations submitted in 

connection with the 2002 PM10

Attainment Plan, but has not otherwise 

taken action on the ‘‘Moderate’’ or 

‘‘Serious’’ area attainment plans. 

In 2009, based on ambient PM10

monitoring data showing that the area 

had attained the PM10 NAAQS, the 

WCAQMD developed a maintenance 

plan, and the NDEP submitted the plan 

to the EPA for approval along with a 

request to redesignate Truckee Meadows 

from nonattainment to attainment for 

the PM10 standard. See ‘‘Redesignation 

Request and Maintenance Plan for the 

Truckee Meadows 24-Hour PM10 NonAttainment Area,’’ May 28, 2009 (‘‘2009 

PM10 Maintenance Plan’’). The 2009 

PM10 Maintenance Plan included motor 

vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for 

the Truckee Meadows area, and the EPA 

found that MVEBs for PM10 contained in 

the 2009 PM10 Maintenance Plan were 

adequate for transportation conformity 

purposes. 75 FR 27776 (May 18, 2010). 

The WCAQMD subsequently revised the 

2009 PM10 Maintenance Plan in 

response to the EPA’s review of the 

plan, and on November 7, 2014, the 

NDEP submitted a new maintenance 

plan, ‘‘Redesignation Request and 

Maintenance Plan for the Truckee 

Meadows 24-Hour PM10 NonAttainment Area,’’ August 28, 2014 

(‘‘2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan’’ or 

‘‘Plan’’) for EPA approval. The 2014 

PM10 Maintenance Plan supersedes the 

2009 PM10 Maintenance Plan, and 

includes a revised maintenance plan 

under CAA section 175A, an updated 

emissions inventory under CAA section 

172(c)(3), and revised MVEBs for the 

Truckee Meadows area. 

In this proposed rule, we are 

proposing to approve the 2014 PM10

Maintenance Plan, including the 

emissions inventory, maintenance 

demonstration, and related MVEBs. 

Additionally, we are proposing to 

approve the BACM demonstration from 

the 2002 PM10 Attainment Plan but 

consider the rest of the 2002 PM10

Attainment Plan to be superseded by the 

2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan. 

III. Procedural Requirements for 

Adoption and Submittal of SIP 

Revisions 

Section 110(l) of the CAA requires 

states to provide reasonable notice and 

public hearing prior to adoption of SIP 

revisions. In this action, we are 

proposing action on the NDEP’s 

submittal of the 2014 PM10 Maintenance 

Plan as a revision to the Nevada SIP. 

The 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan 

contains evidence that reasonable notice 

of a public hearing was provided to the 

public (via newspaper advertisement) 

and that a public hearing was conducted 

prior to adoption by the Health District. 

More specifically, the Plan provides 

evidence that the Health District 

published a notice of the availability of 

the draft 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan 

and of a public hearing to be held on 

August 28, 2014 in the Reno GazetteJournal on July 25, August 11, and 

August 22, 2014. Following adoption by 

the Health District on August 28, 2014, 

the Health District forwarded the 2014 

PM10 Maintenance Plan to the NDEP. 

The NDEP then submitted the SIP 

revision to the EPA for approval on 

November 7, 2014. 

In this action, we also proposed to 

approve an element (i.e., the BACM 

demonstration) of the 2002 PM10

Attainment Plan, and it too contains 

evidence that reasonable notice of a 

public hearing was provided to the 

public (via newspaper advertisement) 

and that a public hearing was 

conducted. Following adoption by the 

Health District on July 26, 2002, the 

Health District forwarded the 2002 PM10

Attainment Plan to the NDEP, which 

then submitted the SIP revision to the 

EPA for approval. Thus, we find that 

both the 2014 PM10 Plan and the 2002 

PM10 Plan satisfy the procedural 

requirements of section 110(l) of the Act 

for revising SIPs. 

IV. Clean Air Act Requirements for 

Redesignation to Attainment 

The CAA establishes the requirements 

for redesignating a nonattainment area 

to attainment. Specifically, section 

107(d)(3)(E) allows for redesignation 

provided that the following criteria are 

met: (1) the EPA determines that the 

area has attained the applicable 

NAAQS; (2) the EPA has fully approved 

the applicable implementation plan for 

the area under section 110(k); (3) the 

EPA determines that the improvement 

in air quality is due to permanent and 

enforceable reductions in emissions 

resulting from implementation of the 

applicable SIP, applicable Federal air 

pollution control regulations, and other 

permanent and enforceable reductions; 

(4) the EPA has fully approved a 

maintenance plan for the area as 

meeting the requirements of CAA 

section 175A; and (5) the State 

containing such area has met all 

requirements applicable to the area 

under section 110 and part D of title I 

of the CAA. 

The EPA provided guidance on 

redesignations in the form of a General 

Preamble for the Implementation of 

Title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990 

published in the Federal Register on 

April 16, 1992 (57 FR 13498), as 

supplemented on April 28, 1992 (57 FR 

18070) (‘‘General Preamble’’). Other 

relevant EPA guidance documents 

include: ‘‘Procedures for Processing 

Requests to Redesignate Areas to 

Attainment,’’ Memorandum from John 

Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 

Management Division, EPA Office of Air 

Quality Planning and Standards, 

September 4, 1992 (‘‘Calcagni Memo’’); 

‘‘Part D New Source Review (part D 

NSR) Requirements for Areas 

Requesting Redesignation to 

Attainment,’’ Memorandum from Mary 

D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for 

Air and Radiation, October 14, 1994 

(‘‘Nichols Memo’’); and ‘‘State 

Implementation Plans for Serious PM10

Nonattainment Areas, and Attainment 

Date Waivers for PM10 Nonattainment 

Areas Generally; Addendum to the 

General Preamble for the 

Implementation of Title I of the Clean 

Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 59 FR 

41998 (August 16, 1994) (‘‘PM10

Addendum’’). 

For the reasons set forth below in 

section V of this document, we are 

proposing to approve the NDEP’s 

request for redesignation of the Truckee 

Meadows nonattainment area to 

attainment for the PM10 NAAQS based 

on our conclusion that all of the criteria 

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

been satisfied. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

58644 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 189 / Wednesday, September 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

6An exceedance is defined as a daily value that 

is above the level of the 24-hour standard (i.e., 150 

mg/m3) after rounding to the nearest 10 mg/m3 (i.e., 

values ending in 5 or greater are to be rounded up). 

Thus, a recorded value of 154 mg/m3 would not be 

an exceedance since it would be rounded to 150 mg/ 

m3 whereas a recorded value of 155 mg/m3 would 

be an exceedance since it would be rounded to 160 

mg/m3. See 40 CFR part 50, appendix K, section 1.0. 

7The comparison with the allowable expected 

exceedance rate of one per year is made in terms 

of a number rounded to the nearest tenth (fractional 

values equal to or greater than 0.05 are to be 

rounded up; e.g., an exceedance rate of 1.05 would 

be rounded to 1.1, which is the lowest rate for 

nonattainment). See 40 CFR part 50, appendix K, 

section 2.1(b). 

8The WCAQMD closed the ‘‘Galletti’’ site in midNovember 2014 as a result of emergency 

construction at the location of the site. The EPA has 

approved WCAQMD’s request to close the Galletti 

site, due to lease issues beyond their control as well 

as siting issues. See letter from Meredith Kurpius, 

Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, EPA Region 

IX, to Daniel Inouye, Chief, Monitoring and 

Planning, WCAQMD, April 22, 2015. 

9See letter from Meredith Kurpius, Manager, Air 

Quality Analysis Office, EPA Region IX, to Daniel 

Inouye, Director, WCAQMD, October 29, 2014. 

10See letter from Deborah Jordan, Director, Air 

Division, EPA Region IX, to Charlene Albee, 

Director, WCAQMD, August 19, 2014 and enclosed 

report titled ‘‘Technical System Audit Report, 

Washoe County Health District Air Quality 

Management Division, Ambient Air Monitoring 

Program (September 4–6, 2013),’’ dated August 

2014. 

V. Evaluation of the State’s 

Redesignation Request for Truckee 

Meadows 

A. The Area Has Attained the PM10

NAAQS 

Section 107(d)(3)(E)(i) of the CAA 

states that for an area to be redesignated 

to attainment, the EPA must determine 

that the area has attained the applicable 

NAAQS. In this case, the applicable 

NAAQS is the PM10 NAAQS. As noted 

above, in 2011 (76 FR 21807, April 19, 

2011), the EPA determined that Truckee 

Meadows had attained the PM10

standard based on 2007–2009 ambient 

data; however, to redesignate the area to 

attainment, it is necessary to update that 

determination based on the most current 

information to ensure that the area 

continues to attain the standard. 

We generally determine whether an 

area’s air quality meets the PM10

standard based upon the most recent 

period of complete, quality-assured data 

gathered at established State and Local 

Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) in the 

nonattainment area and entered into the 

EPA Air Quality System (AQS) 

database. Data from air monitors 

operated by state/local agencies in 

compliance with EPA monitoring 

requirements must be submitted to the 

EPA AQS database. Heads of monitoring 

agencies annually certify that these data 

are accurate to the best of their 

knowledge. Accordingly, the EPA relies 

primarily on data in its AQS database 

when determining the attainment status 

of areas. See 40 CFR 50.6; 40 CFR part 

50, appendix J; 40 CFR part 53; 40 CFR 

part 58, appendices A, C, D and E. All 

data are reviewed to determine the 

area’s air quality status in accordance 

with 40 CFR part 50, appendix K. 

The PM10 standard is attained when 

the expected number of days per 

calendar year with a 24-hour 

concentration in excess of the standard 

(referred to herein as ‘‘exceedance’’),6 as 

determined in accordance with 40 CFR 

part 50, appendix K, is equal to or less 

than one.7 See 40 CFR 50.6 and 40 CFR 

part 50, appendix K. For purposes of 

redesignation, the most recent three 

consecutive years of complete air 

quality data are necessary to show 

attainment of the 24-hour standard for 

PM10. See 40 CFR part 50, appendix K. 

A complete year of air quality data, as 

referred to in 40 CFR part 50, appendix 

K, includes all four calendar quarters 

with each quarter containing data from 

at least 75 percent of the scheduled 

sampling days. Id. 

The WCAQMD currently operates five 

SLAMS within the Truckee Meadows 

PM10 nonattainment area, but operated 

six such stations over most of the 2012– 

2014 period. The locations of the five 

current PM10 monitors in Truckee 

Meadows are as follows. In the City of 

Reno, the ‘‘Reno3’’ monitoring site is 

located in downtown Reno just south of 

Interstate 80; the ‘‘Plumb-Kit’’ site is in 

a graveled area close to residences, 

about half a mile west of Interstate 580 

and the Reno-Tahoe International 

Airport; and the ‘‘Toll’’ site is located 

along State Route 341, at the corner of 

the Washoe County School District 

parking lot. In South Reno, the ‘‘South 

Reno’’ monitoring site is located in an 

unpaved, vegetated area at the northeast 

corner of the Nevada Energy campus. In 

the City of Sparks, the ‘‘Sparks’’ 

monitoring site is located along a paved 

parking lot about half a mile north of 

Interstate 80. The sixth monitoring site, 

the ‘‘Galletti’’ site, which was closed in 

mid-November 2014, was located in 

downtown Reno just south of Interstate 

80.8 The locations of the monitoring 

sites are illustrated in figure 2–1 in the 

2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan, and are 

described in more detail in ‘‘Washoe 

County Health District, Air Quality 

Management Division, 2015 Ambient 

Air Monitoring Network Plan,’’ 

submitted to EPA Region IX July 1, 

2015. All of the PM10 monitor sites 

operate on a daily schedule using 

continuous monitors. Id. at 3. Despite 

the closure of the ‘‘Galletti’’ site, the 

WCAQMD PM10 network continues to 

meet minimum monitoring 

requirements per appendix D to 40 CFR 

part 58. 

WCAQMD reports the PM10 data from 

its monitors to AQS on a quarterly basis 

as required under the EPA’s monitoring 

regulations. The EPA has approved the 

WCAQMD’s monitoring network as 

satisfying the network design and data 

adequacy requirements of 40 CFR part 

58.9 The EPA’s most recent audit of 

WCAQMD’s ambient air monitoring 

program found, generally, that the 

program is robust and meets EPA 

requirements.10 As with any audit, the 

EPA uncovered some program areas that 

can be improved, but none are cause for 

data invalidation. The WCAQMD 

annually certifies that the data it 

submits to AQS are complete and 

quality-assured. See, e.g., letter dated 

April 30, 2015, from Daniel Inouye, 

Branch Chief, Monitoring and Planning, 

WCAQMD, to Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, EPA Region IX, 

‘‘Re: CY2014 Ambient Air Monitoring 

Data Certification.’’ 

Table 1 provides the highest 

measured PM10 concentrations and the 

number of expected exceedances in 

Truckee Meadows during the 2010– 

2014 period. Table 1 shows generally 

that Truckee Meadows has continued to 

attain the PM10 standard since the EPA 

made the determination of attainment in 

2011 based on 2007–2009 data; 

however, a determination of attainment 

requires a more detailed examination of 

the data for the most recent three-year 

period. For the purposes of this action, 

we are focusing our evaluation on the 

most recent three-year period for which 

data is available, i.e., 2012–2014. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 189 / Wednesday, September 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 58645 

11See letter from Meredith Kurpius, Manager, Air 

Quality Analysis Office, EPA Region IX, to Daniel 

Inouye, Chief, Monitoring and Planning, WCAQMD, 

April 22, 2015, page 2. 

TABLE 1—MONITORED PM10 CONCENTRATIONS AND EXPECTED EXCEEDANCES (2010–2014) 

Monitoring site name and AQS No. 

Maximum 24-hour 

(μg/m3) 

Expected exceedances 

(calendar year) 

Expected exceedances 

(3-year averages) 

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2010– 

2012 

2011– 

2013 

2012– 

2014 

Reno3 (32–031–0016) ...................... 142 64 46 121 134 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

South Reno (32–031–0020) .............. 52 63 61 133 106 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Galletti (32–031–0022) ...................... 87 113 77 131 * 159 0 0 0 0 ** 1 0 0 ** 0.3 

Toll (32–031–0025) ........................... 34 121 85 144 121 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Plumb-Kit (32–031–0030) ................. 77 71 92 127 136 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Sparks (32–031–1005) ...................... 55 76 100 100 135 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Source: EPA AQS database. August 7, 2015. Values shown in bold type represent exceedances of the PM10 standard. 

* The exceedance occurred on September 18, 2014 and has been flagged by WCAQMD as an exceptional event. While the EPA has not concurred on the exceedance as an exceptional event nor excluded it from our proposed determination of attainment, the Agency recognizes that the exceedance was monitored during a period when a significant regional wildfire (the King Fire) burned tens of thousands of acres in the Sierra Nevada Mountains east of Sacramento, generally upwind of 

Truckee Meadows. 

** The Galletti site closed in mid-November 2014 as a result of emergency construction at the location of the site. The EPA approved the closure of the site in April 

2015. The 2014 data is incomplete, however; the EPA has determined that the data remains valid for NAAQS comparison purposes. 

For the 2012–2014 period, with one 

exception, the AQS database contains 

complete, quality-assured and certified 

data from the six PM10 monitoring sites 

operating during this period within 

Truckee Meadows. The one exception 

relates to the ‘‘Galletti’’ site, which, as 

noted above, was closed in midNovember 2014 due to emergency 

construction at the site, and for which 

the fourth quarter’s 2014 data is 

incomplete. However, we find that the 

data from the ‘‘Galletti’’ site, while 

incomplete in one quarter of one year of 

the 2012–2014 period, remain valid for 

PM10 NAAQS comparison purposes 

based on the statistical analysis 

prepared by the WCAQMD in its March 

5, 2015 request for approval for closure 

of the ‘‘Galletti’’ site. The WCAQMD’s 

statistical analysis demonstrates, using 

the annual maximum 24-hour 

concentrations from 2009–2013, that 

there is just over a 10 percent 

probability of exceeding 80 percent of 

the PM10 NAAQS at the ‘‘Galletti’’ site 

during the next three years (2014–2016), 

and the EPA cited this statistical 

analysis in its approval of the closure of 

the Galletti site.11

Based on our review of the qualityassured, certified, and complete (or 

otherwise validated) PM10 data for the 

six PM10 monitoring sites, we find that 

the expected number of days per 

calendar year with an exceedance is less 

than 1.0 at all six sites over the most 

recent three-year period (2012–2014). 

See table 1 above. Preliminary data for 

calendar year 2015 indicate that there 

has been only one measured exceedance 

of the PM10 standard (on February 6, 

2015 at the Toll site), but this 

exceedance does not result in a 

violation of the standard at that site 

given that it has no other recorded 

exceedances since 2002. See table 1, 

above, and our proposed determination 

of attainment at 76 FR 10817 (February 

28, 2011). Thus, we find that 

preliminary 2015 data is consistent with 

continued attainment. As such, we find 

that Truckee Meadows is attaining the 

PM10 standard and thereby meets the 

criterion for redesignation in CAA 

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

B. The Area Has Met All Applicable 

Requirements for Purposes of 

Redesignation Under Section 110 and 

Part D of the CAA and Has a Fully 

Approved Applicable Implementation 

Plan Under Section 110(k) of the CAA 

Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v) require 

the EPA to determine that the area has 

a fully-approved applicable SIP under 

section 110(k) that meets all applicable 

requirements under section 110 and part 

D for the purposes of redesignation. The 

EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in 

approving a redesignation request, 

Calcagni Memo at 3; Wall v. EPA, F.3d 

416 (6th Cir. 2001), Southwestern 

Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. 

Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989–990 (6th 

Cir. 1998), as well as any additional 

measure it may approve in conjunction 

with a redesignation action. See 68 FR 

25426 (May 12, 2003) and citations 

therein. In this instance, we are 

proposing to approve several part D 

elements as part of this action [i.e., 

emissions inventory under CAA section 

172(c)(3) and the BACM demonstration 

under CAA section 189(b)(1)(B)]. With 

full approval of those two elements, the 

Truckee Meadows portion of the Nevada 

SIP will be fully approved under section 

110(k) of the Act with respect to all SIP 

elements that are applicable for the 

purposes of redesignation of the area to 

attainment. 

1. Basic SIP Requirements Under CAA 

Section 110 

The general SIP elements and 

requirements set forth in section 

110(a)(2) 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 

for Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD); provisions for air 

pollution modeling; and provisions for 

public and local agency participation in 

planning and emission control rule 

development. 

We note that SIPs must be fully 

approved only with respect to 

applicable requirements for purposes of 

redesignation in accordance with CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). The section 110 

and part D requirements that are linked 

to a particular nonattainment area’s 

designation and classification are the 

relevant measures to evaluate in 

reviewing a redesignation request. 

Requirements that apply regardless of 

the designation of any particular area in 

the state are not applicable requirements 

for purposes of redesignation, and the 

state will remain subject to these 

requirements after the nonattainment 

area is redesignated to attainment. 

Thus, for example, CAA 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, 

known as ‘‘transport SIPs.’’ Because the 

section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for 

transport SIPs are not linked to a 

particular nonattainment area’s 

designation and classification but rather 

apply regardless of attainment status, 

these are not applicable requirements 

for purposes of redesignation under 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

58646 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 189 / Wednesday, September 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

12The applicable Nevada SIP can be found at 

http://yosemite.epa.gov/r9/r9sips.nsf/

allsips?readform&state=Nevada. 

13The suspended SIP planning requirements will 

cease to apply to the Truckee Meadows area upon 

the effective date of redesignation to attainment for 

the PM10 standard. For another rulemaking action 

citing the ‘‘clean data policy’’ in the context of 

evaluating a redesignation request of a PM10

nonattainment area under CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(v), see 75 FR 36023, at 36027 (June 24, 

2010) and 75 FR 54031 (September 3, 2010) 

(proposed and final redesignation for Coso Junction, 

California). See also, 40 CFR 51.918. 

CAA section 107(d)(3)(E). This policy is 

consistent with EPA’s existing policy on 

applicability of the conformity SIP 

requirement (i.e., for redesignations). 

See discussion in 75 FR 36023, 36026 

(June 24, 2010) (proposed rule to 

redesignate Coso Junction, California, to 

attainment for the PM10 NAAQS) and 

related citations. 

On numerous occasions over the past 

40 years, NDEP has submitted, and we 

have approved, provisions addressing 

the basic CAA section 110 provisions 

for Truckee Meadows. See, e.g., 37 FR 

15080 (July 27, 1972); 77 FR 60915 

(October 5, 2012); and 77 FR 64737 

(October 23, 2012). The Truckee 

Meadows portion of the Nevada SIP 

contains enforceable emission 

limitations; requires monitoring, 

compiling and analyzing of ambient air 

quality data; requires preconstruction 

review of new or modified stationary 

sources; provides for adequate funding, 

staff, and associated resources necessary 

to implement its requirements; and 

provides the necessary assurances that 

the state maintains responsibility for 

ensuring that the CAA requirements are 

satisfied in the event that the Health 

District is unable to meet its CAA 

obligations.12 Based on our review of 

the Nevada SIP, we have concluded that 

it meets the general SIP requirements 

under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA to 

the extent they are applicable for 

purposes of redesignation of Truckee 

Meadows to attainment for the PM10

standard. 

2. SIP Requirements Under Part D 

Subparts 1 and 4 of part D, title I of 

the CAA contain air quality planning 

requirements for PM10 nonattainment 

areas. Subpart 1 contains general 

requirements for all nonattainment areas 

of any pollutant, including PM10, 

governed by a NAAQS. The subpart 1 

requirements include, in relevant part, 

provisions for implementation of 

reasonably available control measures 

(RACM), a demonstrations of reasonable 

further progress (RFP), emissions 

inventories, a program for 

preconstruction review and permitting 

of new or modified major stationary 

sources, contingency measures, 

conformity, and, for areas that fail to 

attain the standard by the applicable 

attainment date, a plan meeting the 

requirements of section 179(d). 

Subpart 4 contains specific SIP 

requirements for PM10 nonattainment 

areas. The requirements set forth in 

CAA section 189(a), (c), and (e) apply 

specifically to ‘‘Moderate’’ PM10

nonattainment areas and include, in 

relevant part: (1) Provisions for 

implementation of reasonably available 

control measures (RACM); (2) 

quantitative milestones demonstrating 

RFP toward attainment by the 

applicable attainment date; and (3) 

provisions to ensure that the control 

requirements applicable to major 

stationary sources of PM10 also apply to 

major stationary sources of PM10

precursors except where the EPA has 

determined that such sources do not 

contribute significantly to PM10 levels 

that exceed the NAAQS in the area. 

Under CAA section 189(b), ‘‘Serious’’ 

PM10 nonattainment areas, such as 

Truckee Meadows, must meet the 

subpart 1 and ‘‘Moderate’’ area 

requirements discussed above and, in 

addition, must develop and submit 

provisions to assure the implementation 

of BACM for the control of PM10. In 

addition, under CAA section 189(d), 

‘‘Serious’’ PM10 nonattainment areas 

that fail to attain the standard by the 

applicable attainment date, such as 

Truckee Meadows, must develop and 

submit plan revisions which provide for 

attainment of the PM10 standard, and 

from the date of such submission until 

attainment, for an annual reduction in 

PM10 within the area of not less than 5 

percent of the amount of such 

emissions. 

However, we have determined that, in 

accordance with our Clean Data Policy, 

the obligation to submit the following 

CAA requirements for Truckee 

Meadows is not applicable for so long 

as the area continues to attain the PM10

standard: The part D, subpart 4 

obligations to provide the RACM 

provisions of section 189(a)(1)(C), the 

RFP provisions of section 189(c), the 

requirement for a section 189(d) plan, 

the attainment demonstration, RACM, 

RFP and contingency measure 

provisions of part D, subpart 1 

contained in section 172 of the Act, and 

requirements for additional plan 

previsions in section 179(d) of the Act. 

76 FR 21807 (April 19, 2011). As 

discussed above in section V.A, Truckee 

Meadows has continued to attain the 

PM10 standard since the EPA’s 2011 

determination of attainment, which was 

based on 2007–2009 data, and we are 

specifically proposing to determine that 

the area currently meets the standard 

based on the most recent three-year 

period (2012–2014). As such, the part D 

SIP submittal requirements suspended 

by our 2011 ‘‘clean data’’ determination 

do not apply for the purposes of 

evaluating Truckee Meadows’ eligibility 

for redesignation under CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(v).13

Moreover, in the context of evaluating 

the area’s eligibility for redesignation, 

there is a separate and additional 

justification for finding that 

requirements associated with attainment 

are not applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. Prior to and 

independently of the Clean Data Policy, 

and specifically in the context of 

redesignations, the EPA interpreted 

attainment-linked requirements as not 

applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. In the General Preamble, 

the EPA stated: 

[t]he section 172(c)(9) requirements are 

directed at ensuring RFP and attainment by 

the applicable date. These requirements no 

longer apply when an area has attained the 

standard and is eligible for redesignation. 

Furthermore, section 175A for maintenance 

plans * * * provides specific requirements 

for contingency measures that effectively 

supersede the requirements of section 

172(c)(9) for these areas. General Preamble, 

57 FR 13498 at 13564 (April 16, 1992). 

See also Calcagni memorandum at 6 

(‘‘The requirements for reasonable 

further progress and other measures 

needed for attainment will not apply for 

redesignations because they only have 

meaning for areas not attaining the 

standard.’’). Thus, even if the 

requirements associated with attainment 

had not previously been suspended, 

they would not apply for purposes of 

evaluating whether an area that has 

attained the standard qualifies for 

redesignation. The EPA has enunciated 

this position since the General Preamble 

was published more than twenty years 

ago, and it represents the Agency’s 

interpretation of what constitutes 

applicable requirements under section 

107(d)(3)(E). The Courts have 

recognized the scope of EPA’s authority 

to interpret ‘‘applicable requirements’’ 

in the redesignation context. See Sierra 

Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 

2004). 

The remaining applicable part D 

requirements for serious PM10

nonattainment areas are: (1) An 

emissions inventory under section 

172(c)(3); (2) a permit program for the 

construction and operation of new and 

modified major stationary sources of 

PM10 under sections 172(c)(5) and 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 189 / Wednesday, September 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 58647 

189(a)(1)(A), including a major source 

threshold of 70 tons per year as required 

by section 189(b)(3); (3) provisions to 

assure implementation of BACM for the 

control of PM10 under section 

189(b)(1)(B); (4) control requirements for 

major stationary sources of PM10

precursors under section 189(e), except 

where the EPA determines that such 

sources do not contribute significantly 

to PM10 levels which exceed the 

standard in the area; and (5) provisions 

to ensure that Federally supported or 

funded projects conform to the air 

quality planning goals in the applicable 

SIP under section 176(c). We discuss 

each of these requirements below. 

a. Emissions Inventory 

Section 172(c)(3) of the Act requires 

the state to submit a comprehensive, 

accurate, current inventory of actual 

emissions from all sources of the 

relevant pollutant(s) in the 

nonattainment area, including periodic 

updates as required by the EPA. We 

interpret the Act such that the emission 

inventory requirement of section 

172(c)(3) is satisfied by the inventory 

requirement of the maintenance plan. 

See 57 FR 13498 at 13564 (April 16, 

1992). In this action, the EPA is 

proposing to approve the 2011 

attainment inventory submitted in the 

2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan as meeting 

the emission inventory requirement 

under section 172(c)(3). See discussion 

below in section V.D.1. 

b. Permits for New and Modified 

Stationary Sources 

Sections 172(c)(5) and 189(a)(1)(A) of 

the CAA require the state to submit SIP 

revisions that establish certain 

requirements for new or modified 

stationary sources in nonattainment 

areas, including provisions to ensure 

that major new or modified sources of 

nonattainment pollutants comply with 

the lowest achievable emission rate 

(LAER), and that increases in emissions 

from such stationary sources are offset 

so as to provide for reasonable further 

progress towards attainment in the 

nonattainment area. For ‘‘Moderate’’ 

PM10 areas that are reclassified as 

‘‘Serious,’’ such as Truckee Meadows, 

the ‘‘major source’’ threshold is reduced 

from 100 to 70 tons per year of PM10. 

The process for reviewing permit 

applications and issuing permits for 

new major sources or major 

modifications to such sources in 

nonattainment areas is referred to as 

‘‘nonattainment New Source Review’’ 

(‘‘nonattainment NSR’’ or simply 

‘‘NSR’’). 

EPA-approved District regulations 

include rules for the review of 

applications for new or modified 

stationary sources; however, the EPA 

has not approved District regulations 

specifically meeting the NSR 

requirements of sections 172(c)(5) and 

189(a)(1)(A). However, the EPA 

interprets section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) of the 

CAA such that final approval of a NSR 

program is not a prerequisite to 

approving the state’s redesignation 

request. The EPA has determined in 

past redesignations that a NSR program 

does not have to be approved prior to 

redesignation, provided that the area 

demonstrates maintenance of the 

standard without part D NSR 

requirements in effect. See generally 

Nichols Memo; see also the more 

detailed explanations in the following 

redesignation rulemakings: Detroit, 

Michigan (60 FR 12467–12468, March 7, 

1996); Cleveland-Akron-Lorrain, Ohio 

(61 FR 20458, 20469–20470, May 7, 

1996); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 

53665, 53669, October 23, 2001); Grand 

Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31831, 31836– 

31837, June 21, 1996); and San Joaquin 

Valley, California (73 FR 22307, 22313, 

April 25, 2008 and 73 FR 66759, 66766– 

67, November 12, 2008). 

The demonstration of maintenance of 

the standard in the 2014 PM10

Maintenance Plan relies on projections 

of future emissions based on various 

growth factors. For the types of 

stationary sources that are subject to 

District permitting requirements, future 

emissions are projected based on 

employment growth projections and do 

not take credit for future control 

technology requirements, such as LAER, 

or for imposition of emissions offsets. 

See appendix B of the 2014 PM10

Maintenance Plan. Thus, we find that 

the maintenance demonstration for the 

Truckee Meadows PM10 nonattainment 

area does not rely on an NSR program, 

and that the area need not have a fullyapproved nonattainment NSR program 

prior to approval of the PM10

redesignation request. 

Once Truckee Meadows has been 

redesignated to attainment, the 

requirements of the PSD program set 

forth at 40 CFR 52.21 will apply with 

respect to PM10 (PSD already applies 

with respect to the other pollutants in 

Truckee Meadows). See 40 CFR 52.1485. 

Thus, new major sources of PM10

emissions and major modifications at 

existing major sources, as defined in 40 

CFR 52.21, will be required to obtain a 

PSD permit before constructing. 

Currently, the WCAQMD has full 

responsibility for implementing and 

enforcing the Federal PSD regulations in 

40 CFR 52.21 for sources within its 

jurisdiction throughout Washoe County, 

including the Truckee Meadows area, 

under a delegation agreement with the 

EPA. See ‘‘Agreement for Delegation of 

the Federal Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) Program by the 

United States Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 9, to the Washoe County 

District Health Department,’’ dated 

March 13, 2008. The NDEP has 

permitting jurisdiction over certain 

types of power plants located anywhere 

within the State of Nevada, and if such 

a source were to locate within Truckee 

Meadows, the PSD regulations at 40 

CFR 52.21 would still apply but would 

be implemented and enforced by the 

NDEP, which also administers the 

program through a delegation agreement 

with the EPA. 

c. Best Available Control Measures 

Section 189(b)(1)(B) of the Act 

requires for any ‘‘Serious’’ PM10

nonattainment area that the state submit 

provisions to assure that BACM for the 

control of PM10 will be implemented no 

later than four years after the date the 

area is classified (or reclassified) as a 

‘‘Serious’’ area. The PM10 Addendum 

(59 FR 41998, August 16, 1994) provides 

preliminary guidance on meeting this 

BACM requirement. Even though the 

EPA previously determined that 

Truckee Meadows is attaining the PM10

24-hour standard (76 FR 21807, April 

19, 2011), the overall structure and 

purpose of title I of the CAA 

Amendments of 1990, the standard 

suggested by the word ‘‘best,’’ and the 

differences in the statute between the 

requirements for BACM as compared to 

those for RACM, lead the EPA to believe 

that, unlike RACM, BACM are to be 

established generally independent of an 

analysis of the attainment needs of the 

‘‘Serious’’ area. PM10 Addendum, at 

42011. Thus, unlike RACM, BACM 

remains an applicable requirement for 

the purposes of evaluating a 

redesignation request even though the 

area is attaining the standard. 

The EPA defines BACM as, among 

other things, the maximum degree of 

emissions reduction achievable for a 

source or source category, which is 

determined on a case-by-case basis 

considering energy, environmental, and 

economic impacts. See id. at 42010, 

42013. BACM must be implemented for 

all categories of sources in a ‘‘Serious’’ 

PM10 nonattainment area unless the 

state adequately demonstrates that a 

particular source category does not 

contribute significantly to 

nonattainment of the PM10 standard. See 

id. at 42011, 42012. The PM10

Addendum discusses the following 

steps for determining BACM: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

58648 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 189 / Wednesday, September 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

14As described further in section V.B.2.d of this 

document, we find that PM10 precursors (NOX, SOX, 

and VOC) do not significantly impact ambient PM10

concentrations in Truckee Meadows. 

15The stationary/industrial processes category 

includes a disparate group of source subcategories 

(e.g., concrete production, sand and gravel 

operations, asphalt production, etc.). For a complete 

list of the subcategories included in the stationary/ 

industrial processes category, see table 1–2 in 

appendix B of the 2002 PM10 Attainment Plan. 

16On August 22, 2013, the WCAQMD amended 

regulation 040.051, and the amendment was 

submitted to the EPA on November 26, 2013. The 

EPA is currently reviewing the submittal and 

preparing to act on it. The 2014 PM10 Maintenance 

Plan does not rely on emissions reductions from the 

amendments to the rule. 

17After BACM is applied to the significant source 

categories, the significant categories still account for 

approximately 75 percent of the WCAQMD’s 

remaining 2011 attainment year inventory of daily 

emissions during the PM10 season (November, 

December, and January). See 2014 PM10

Maintenance Plan at Appendix C (‘‘Truckee 

Meadows Projected PM10 Seasonal Emissions (lbs/ 

• Inventory the sources of PM10 and 

PM10 precursors 14 and determine which 

source categories are significant; 

• Evaluate alternative control 

techniques and their technological 

feasibility; and evaluate the costs of 

control measures or their economic 

feasibility. 

See PM10 Addendum, at 42012–42014. 

BACM must be applied to each 

significant (i.e., non-de minimis) source 

category. PM10 Addendum at 42011. In 

guidance, we have established a 

presumption that a ‘‘significant’’ source 

category is one that contributes 5 mg/m3

or more of PM10 to a location of a 

violation of the 24-hour standard. PM10

Addendum at 42011. However, whether 

the threshold should be lower than this 

in any particular area depends upon the 

specific facts of that area’s 

nonattainment problem. Specifically, it 

depends on whether requiring the 

application of BACM on source 

categories below a proposed de minimis 

level would meaningfully expedite 

attainment. Once these analyses are 

complete, the individual measures must 

then be converted into a legally 

enforceable vehicle (e.g., a regulation or 

permit process) to ensure BACM 

implementation. Also, the regulations or 

other measures should meet the EPA’s 

criteria regarding the enforceability of 

SIPs and SIP revisions. CAA sections 

172(c)(6) and 110(a)(2)(A). We use these 

steps as guidelines in our evaluation of 

the BACM analysis in the 2002 PM10

Attainment Plan. 

The first step in the BACM analysis is 

to develop a detailed emissions 

inventory of PM10 sources and source 

categories that can be used in modeling 

to determine their impact on ambient air 

quality. PM10 Addendum at 42012. The 

second step is to use this inventory in 

air quality modeling to evaluate the 

impact on PM10 concentrations over the 

standards of the various sources and 

source categories to determine which 

are significant. 

The 2002 PM10 Attainment Plan 

contains a detailed inventory of direct 

PM10 sources and source categories and, 

based on the percent contributions of 

the various source categories to the 

design day inventory, divides the design 

day concentration (of 215 mg/m3) into 

source category components, as follows: 

• Paved streets/reentrained dust/street 

sanding (142 mg/m3) 

• Residential wood combustion (36 mg/ 

m3) 

• Fugitive dust from construction 

activities (15 mg/m3) 

• Stationary/industrial processes (9 mg/ 

m3) 

• Mobile on-road (4 mg/m3) 

• Mobile non-road (3 mg/m3) 

• Unpaved streets (2 mg/m3) 

• Other fuel combustion and 

miscellaneous Area (2 mg/m3) 

• Charbroilers (1 mg/m3) 

Based on the estimated contribution of 

the various source categories to the 

design-day concentration, the following 

source categories are considered 

significant, i.e., contribute 5 mg/m3 or 

more to the exceedance: (1) Paved 

streets/reentrained dust/street sanding, 

(2) residential wood combustion, (3) 

fugitive dust from construction 

activities, and (4) other stationary/

industrial processes.15 We believe that 

the 2002 PM10 Attainment Plan presents 

an acceptable methodology to evaluate 

the impact of various PM10 sources and 

source categories on PM10 levels and to 

derive a comprehensive list of 

significant source categories. 

In preparing the list of candidate 

BACM to reduce emissions from the 

various significant source categories, the 

WCAQMD reviewed our guidance 

documents on BACM, other EPA 

documents on PM10 control, as well as 

PM10 plans and measures from other 

‘‘Serious’’ PM10 areas in the United 

States. The WCAQMD also evaluated 

controls proposed during public 

comment, sought input from work 

groups (e.g., Road Sanding and 

Sweeping Working Group) and 

requested review and comment by the 

EPA on individual measures to help 

ensure that their adopted measures 

would constitute BACM. The processes 

that the WCAQMD used to identify 

BACM are described in section V of the 

2002 PM10 Attainment Plan. We believe 

that, based on the description of the 

process in the 2002 PM10 Attainment 

Plan, the WCAQMD appropriately 

screened the list of candidate BACM to 

eliminate certain measures and 

appropriately identified and evaluated 

potential BACM for the Truckee 

Meadows area consistent with our 

guidance. 

Since 1988, the Health District has 

adopted and strengthened a number of 

regulations to reduce PM10 emissions 

from the significant source categories in 

Truckee Meadows. See 2002 PM10

Attainment Plan at 10–17. The District 

PM10 regulations were originally 

submitted to the EPA in 1991, but in the 

wake of the reclassification of Truckee 

Meadows to ‘‘Serious,’’ the Health 

District strengthened them to assure 

implementation of BACM. See id. Each 

of the Health District regulations 

intended to implement BACM was 

effective in Truckee Meadows on or 

before February 7, 2005 (i.e., within four 

years of the area’s reclassification to 

serious nonattainment on February 7, 

2001), and the EPA has approved all of 

these regulations as satisfying BACM 

control requirements. 

Specifically, we have approved the 

following Health District regulations as 

satisfying BACM control requirements: 

• District Regulation 040.005 

(‘‘Visible Air Contaminants’’) (72 FR 

33397, June 18, 2007) (stationary/

industrial processes); 

• District Regulation 040.030, ‘‘Dust 

Control’’ (72 FR 25969, May 8, 2007) 

(fugitive dust from construction 

activities and stationary/industrial 

processes); 

• District Regulation 040.031, ‘‘Street 

Sanding Operations’’ (71 FR 14386, 

March 22, 2006) (paved streets/

reentrained dust/street sanding); 

• District Regulation 040.032, ‘‘Street 

Sweeping Operations’’ (71 FR 14386, 

March 22, 2006) (paved streets/

reentrained dust/street sanding); 

• District Regulation 040.051, ‘‘Wood 

Stove/Fireplace Insert Emissions’’ (72 

FR 33397, June 18, 2007) (residential 

wood combustion); and 

• District Regulation 050.001, 

‘‘Emergency Episode Plan,’’ (72 FR 

33397, June 18, 2007) (residential wood 

combustion).16

Based on our prior approval of these 

regulations and our conclusion that they 

cover all significant PM10 source 

categories in the Truckee Meadows 

nonattainment area, we propose 

approval of the WCAQMD’s 

demonstration in Section V (‘‘Control 

Strategies’’) of the 2002 PM10

Attainment Plan as satisfying the 

requirement to assure implementation 

of BACM under CAA section 189(b) (1) 

(B).17

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 189 / Wednesday, September 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 58649 

day)’’). Based on a review of the remaining source 

categories in the 2011 inventory, no new significant 

source categories (i.e., above the de minimis 

threshold) were identified, and, therefore, no 

additional sources are subject to BACM 

requirements. 

d. Control Requirements for PM10

Precursors 

Section 189(e) of the CAA requires 

that the control requirements applicable 

under part D (of title I of the CAA) for 

major stationary sources of PM10 also 

apply to major stationary sources of 

PM10 precursors, except where the EPA 

determines that such sources do not 

contribute significantly to PM10 levels 

which exceed the standard in the area. 

In general, a major stationary source in 

a PM10 ‘‘Serious’’ area includes any 

stationary source that emits, or has the 

potential to emit, 70 tons per year of 

PM10. 

The 1991 PM10 Attainment Plan 

concluded that major stationary sources 

of PM10 precursors do not contribute 

significantly to PM10 levels which 

exceed the standard in Truckee 

Meadows based on technical study 

conducted by the Desert Research 

Institute (DRI) intended to identify the 

sources of ambient PM10 in Truckee 

Meadows. In its February 1988 report, 

PM 10 Source Apportionment the 

Truckee Meadows, Nevada, for State 

Implementation Plan Development, 

Volume I: Modeling Methods and 

Results, Final Report (‘‘DRI Report’’), 

submitted as appendix B to the 1991 

PM10 Attainment Plan, the DRI 

performed over 300 chemical mass 

balance source apportionments on fine 

and coarse particle fractions from three 

sites within the Truckee Meadows 

nonattainment area. The source 

apportionments found that that the 

PM10 contribution from precursors (i.e., 

ammonium nitrates and ammonium 

sulfates) was very small (i.e., 

approximately 5–6%) compared to the 

contributions from wood/vegetative 

burning (i.e., residential wood stoves 

and fireplaces), mobile source exhaust 

(e.g., diesel powered vehicles), and 

geologic materials (e.g., road dust, sand/ 

salt used for deicing). 

We also note that more recent 

stationary source inventory data and 

ambient PM2.5 speciation data for 

Truckee Meadows continue to support 

the WCAQMD’s 1991 conclusion 

regarding the (less-than-significant) 

contribution to elevated ambient PM10

concentrations from major stationary 

sources of PM10 precursors. First, based 

on the 2011 Periodic Emissions 

Inventory, there are no stationary 

sources in Truckee Meadows that emit 

more than 100 tons per year of NOX or 

SO2, and only two such sources that 

emit more than 100 tons per year of 

VOC. Second, ammonium nitrate and 

ammonium sulfate contributed only 

about 11% to the total ambient PM10

based on the averages for the five 

highest PM10 measurements collected 

during the winter of 2013 at the Reno3 

monitoring site (which is the only site 

operated by the WCAQMD with 

speciation capability). 

Based on the DRI Report and the more 

recent inventory and monitoring data, 

we propose to make the finding 

authorized under CAA section 189(e) 

and to determine that major sources of 

PM10 precursor emissions do not 

contribute significantly to PM10 levels 

which exceed the standard in the 

Truckee Meadows area. 

e. Transportation Conformity 

Under the Clean Air Act, as amended 

in 1990, section 176(c) of the CAA 

required the states to revise their SIPs to 

establish criteria and procedures to 

ensure that federally supported or 

funded projects in nonattainment and 

formerly nonattainment areas subject to 

a maintenance plan (referred to as 

‘‘maintenance’’ areas) ‘‘conform’’ to the 

air quality planning goals in the 

applicable SIP. SIP revisions intended 

to meet the conformity requirement in 

section 176(c) are referred to as 

‘‘conformity SIPs.’’ The requirement to 

determine conformity applies to 

transportation plans, programs and 

projects developed, funded or approved 

under Title 23 U.S.C. and the Federal 

Transit Act (‘‘transportation 

conformity’’) as well as to other 

federally supported or funded projects 

(‘‘general conformity’’). In 2005, 

Congress amended section 176(c), and 

under the amended conformity 

provisions, states are no longer required 

to submit conformity SIPs for ‘‘general 

conformity,’’ and the conformity SIP 

requirements for ‘‘transportation 

conformity’’ have been reduced to 

include only those relating to 

consultation, enforcement and 

enforceability. CAA section 176(c) (4) 

(E). 

On July 31, 1995, the NDEP submitted 

the general and transportation 

conformity procedures and criteria for 

Truckee Meadows as a revision to the 

Nevada SIP. Given the 2005 

amendments to the CAA, the NDEP has 

withdrawn the earlier conformity SIP 

submittal, and on March 21, 2013, 

submitted the Washoe County 

Transportation Conformity Plan as a 

replacement for the earlier submittal. 

We have not taken action on the March 

21, 2013 SIP revision submittal. 

However, the EPA believes it is 

reasonable to interpret the conformity 

SIP requirements as not applying for 

purposes of a redesignation request 

under section 107(d) (3) (E) (v) because 

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). 

3. Conclusion With Respect to Section 

110 and Part D Requirements 

Therefore, based on the evaluation 

presented above, and based on our 

proposed approval of the 2011 

emissions inventory submitted as part of 

the 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan (see 

section V.D.1 of this document), our 

proposed approval of the BACM 

demonstration submitted as part of the 

2002 PM10 Attainment Plan, and in light 

of our proposed determination that 

major stationary sources of PM10

precursors do not contribute 

significantly to PM10 exceedances in the 

area, we find that that the state has met 

all requirements applicable to the 

Truckee Meadows PM10 nonattainment 

area under section 110 and part D (of 

title I) of the CAA and has therefore met 

the redesignation criterion set forth in 

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

C. The Improvement in Air Quality Is 

Due to Permanent and Enforceable 

Reductions in Emissions 

Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) of the CAA 

requires the EPA, in order to approve a 

redesignation to attainment, to 

determine 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 pollution control regulations and 

other permanent and enforceable 

regulations. Improvement should not be 

a result of temporary reductions (e.g., 

economic downturns or shutdowns) or 

unusually favorable meteorology. 

Calcagni Memo at 4. 

PM10 levels in Truckee Meadows are 

driven primarily by direct PM10

emissions from re-entrained dust from 

paved roads, residential wood 

combustion, fugitive dust from 

construction activities, and emissions 

from industrial sources. See 2002 PM10

Attainment Plan at 7; and appendix C to 

the 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan. The 

peak PM10 season in Truckee Meadows 

occurs during the winter months (i.e., 

November, December, and January), due 

in large part to increased residential 

wood combustion and application of 

sanding material to paved roads for 

wintertime traction control. In addition, 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

58650 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 189 / Wednesday, September 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

18Regulation 040.051 defines ‘‘Stage 1 alert’’ by 

reference to the Health District’s Emergency 

Episode Plan (i.e., District Regulation 050.001), 

which establishes a ‘‘Stage 1 (alert)’’ episode criteria 

level of 154 mg/m3. See District Regulation 040.051 

at Section E.5 and Regulation 050.001 at Table 1. 

because Truckee Meadows sits in a 

valley surrounded by mountain ranges, 

cold winter nights create temperature 

inversions that trap pollutants in a layer 

of cold air beneath a layer of warmer air 

above. 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan at 

13. 

The 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan 

describes long-term air quality 

improvements implemented in the 

Truckee Meadows area during the 1999 

to 2011 time frame. The improvements 

in air quality occurred despite 

substantial growth in population, 

economic activity, and vehicle miles 

traveled (VMT) between 1990 and 2011, 

suggesting that the air quality 

improvements were not due to 

temporary reductions in emission rates 

or unusual meteorology but, instead, 

resulted from implementation of 

federally-enforceable PM10 control 

measures. The Plan describes the 

significant source categories of PM10

emissions in the Truckee Meadows area 

and the SIP-approved regulations that 

have significantly reduced PM10

emissions from these and other 

emission sources. According to the 2014 

PM10 Maintenance Plan, SIP-approved 

regulations collectively reduced daily 

PM10 emissions from residential wood 

combustion and street sanding and 

sweeping, and construction activities 

during the 2011 PM10 season by 

approximately 68 percent. See table 4– 

1 of the 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan. 

First, the 2014 PM10 Maintenance 

Plan cites the Health District’s 

residential wood combustion program 

(RWC) as a significant source of 

emissions reductions in Truckee 

Meadows. The program relies on two 

regulations as well as a public outreach 

program. District Regulation 040.051, 

‘‘Wood Stove/Fireplace Insert 

Emissions,’’ limits PM10 emissions 

throughout Washoe County by, among 

other things: (1) Establishing wood stove 

and fireplace insert control areas; (2) 

requiring use of seasoned wood; (3) 

requiring the removal or upgrade of 

existing solid fuel combustion devices 

upon the sale of real estate; and (4) 

establishing a mandatory burning 

curtailment during Stage 1 episodes.18

District Regulation 050.001, ‘‘Emergency 

Episode Plan,’’ requires that the 

WCAQMD take certain actions when 24- 

hour PM10 concentrations reach or are 

predicted to reach ‘‘Stage 1’’ levels (154 

mg/m3), such as: (1) Implementing 

procedures to notify the public of 

potential health problems; (2) 

prohibiting all open and prescribed 

burning; (3) prohibiting the use of 

permitted incinerators, crematoriums, 

and pathological incinerators; (4) 

prohibiting the use of solid fuel burning 

devices; and (5) activating control plans 

for the largest PM10 sources in Washoe 

County. 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan at 

11. 

In addition, the WCAQMD 

implements a ‘‘Keep it Clean, Know the 

Code’’ public outreach program 

(formerly known as the ‘‘Green, Yellow, 

Red’’ program), which runs from 

November through February and which 

consists in part of a daily burn code that 

provides the community a 

recommendation on whether RWC will 

impact air quality in Washoe County. 

The program also commits the 

WCAQMD to conduct an RWC survey at 

least once every three years to track the 

effectiveness of the public outreach 

program. The EPA has approved District 

Regulations 040.051 and 050.001, and 

the commitment to conduct the RWC 

survey as revisions of the Nevada SIP, 

making them permanent and 

enforceable for the purposes of CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii). See 72 FR 

33397 (June 18, 2007) and 73 FR 38124, 

at 38127 (July 3, 2008). According to the 

2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan, District 

Regulations 040.051 and 050.001 (as 

implemented in part through the public 

outreach program) reduced PM10

emissions in the Truckee Meadows area 

on a ‘‘typical PM10 Season Day’’ during 

2011 by approximately 800 lbs/day and 

approximately 4,300 lbs/day, 

respectively. 2014 PM10 Maintenance 

Plan at 10, 12 (Table 4–1). 

Second, the 2014 PM10 Maintenance 

Plan cites the Health District’s street 

sanding and sweeping program as a 

source of significant emissions 

reductions in Truckee Meadows. PM10

emissions from street sanding and 

sweeping are generated directly from 

application of traction control material 

(i.e., sand, salt, and chlorides) and 

indirectly from increased silt loading on 

paved streets. Motor vehicle traffic 

grinds and re-entrains the material into 

the ambient air. 2014 PM10 Maintenance 

Plan at 11. The Health District adopted 

Regulation 040.031, ‘‘Street Sanding 

Operations,’’ and Regulation 040.032, 

‘‘Street Sweeping Operations,’’ to limit 

PM10 emissions from street standing and 

sweeping activities throughout the 

urbanized portions of Washoe County 

south of Township 22N, which includes 

the cities of Reno and Sparks. See 2014 

PM10 Maintenance Plan at 11; 2002 

PM10 Attainment Plan at 12–16. 

These regulations require, among 

other things, that municipalities: (1) Use 

a harder and cleaner type of sand on 

paved roads following snow storms; (2) 

reduce the sand application rate by 50 

percent compared to 1999 rates; (3) 

remove the sand within four days after 

a storm event; and (4) only purchase 

new sweepers that are PM10 certified. 

The EPA approved District Regulations 

040.031 and 040.032 as revisions of the 

Nevada SIP in 2006, making them 

permanent and enforceable for the 

purposes of CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iii). 71 FR 14386 (March 22, 

2006). According to the 2014 PM10

Maintenance Plan, District Regulations 

040.031 and 040.032 reduced PM10

emissions in the Truckee Meadows area 

on a ‘‘typical PM10 Season Day’’ during 

2011 by approximately 1,600 lbs/day. 

2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan at 11, 12 

(Table 4–1). 

Third, the 2014 PM10 Maintenance 

Plan cites District Regulation 040.030, 

‘‘Dust Control,’’ as another source of 

significant emissions reductions in 

Truckee Meadows. District Regulation 

040.030 limits emissions of fugitive dust 

from a variety of dust generating 

activities, including, but not limited to, 

public or private construction; mining; 

processing of sand, gravel, or dirt; and 

operation and use of unpaved parking 

facilities. See section A of District 

Regulation 040.030. Specifically, 

District Regulation 040.030 establishes 

(1) stabilization requirements for 

unpaved parking lots/staging areas, 

unpaved haul/access roads, and open, 

vacant, or disturbed areas, and open 

storage piles; (2) work practice 

requirements for bulk material hauling, 

and spillage, carry-out, erosion and/or 

trackout; and (3) dust control permit 

requirements for dust generating 

activities. The EPA approved District 

Regulation 040.030 as a revision of the 

Nevada SIP in 2007 making it 

permanent and enforceable for the 

purposes of CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iii). 72 FR 25969 (May 8, 

2007). According to the 2014 PM10

Maintenance Plan, District Regulation 

040.030 reduced PM10 emissions in the 

Truckee Meadows area on a ‘‘typical 

PM10 Season Day’’ during 2011 by 

approximately 400 lbs/day. 2014 PM10

Maintenance Plan at 11, 12 (Table 4–1). 

The 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan also 

provides an analysis of economic and 

meteorological conditions in Washoe 

County during the 1990 to 2011 period 

to demonstrate that the emission 

reductions in the Truckee Meadows area 

did not result from temporary 

reductions (e.g., economic downturns or 

shutdowns) or unusually favorable 

meteorology. According to the plan, 

demographic and economic indicators 

such as population, full-time 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 189 / Wednesday, September 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 58651 

19The VMT data in this table are expressed in 

miles per day and represent only the Truckee 

Meadows portion of Washoe County. See 2011 PM10

Maintenance Plan at 13, Table 4–2 (‘‘Washoe 

County Demographic and Economic Indicators 

(1990–2011)’’). 

20PM10 precursor emissions may also be required 

depending upon the contribution of secondarilyformed particulate matter to ambient PM10

concentrations. As discussed above, a 1988 DRI 

study concluded that the PM10 contribution from 

precursors (i.e., ammonium nitrates and ammonium 

sulfates) was very small (i.e., approximately 5–6%) 

compared to the contributions of other direct PM10

sources in Truckee Meadows. As such, we find that 

the absence of PM10 precursors from the attainment 

inventory in the 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan to be 

acceptable. 

21AP–42, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission 

Factors, is a document published by the EPA as the 

primary collection of EPA approved emission factor 

information. The emission factors have been 

developed and compiled from source test data, 

material balance studies, and engineering estimates. 

employment, total industry earnings, 

and VMT demonstrated steady, positive 

growth during this period. See 2014 

PM10 Plan at 13, Table 4–2 (‘‘Washoe 

County Demographic and Economic 

Indicators (1990–2011)’’). For example, 

during the 1990–2011 period in Washoe 

County, growth in several key economic 

indicators (i.e., population 64%, fulltime employment 41%, total industry 

earnings 158%, and VMT19 86%) 

coincided with improved air quality. Id. 

With respect to meteorological 

conditions, the 2014 PM10 Maintenance 

Plan presents data from the 1990–2011 

period that indicate that wintertime 

precipitation, wind speed, and 

barometric pressure levels fluctuated 

above and below historic averages 

throughout that period. Id. at 14–16. 

Thus, we find that the improvements 

in PM10 air quality during the 1990– 

2011 period resulted from 

implementation of permanent and 

enforceable control measures that 

significantly reduced PM10 emissions in 

the Truckee Meadows area, rather than 

from temporary emission reductions or 

unusually favorable meteorology. 

During the 2011 PM10 season, 

implementation of these SIP-approved 

measures reduced daily PM10 emission 

levels by approximately 68 percent, 

indicating that these SIP control 

measures countered the emissions 

increases that otherwise would have 

occurred due to steady growth in the 

area during this period. As such, we 

find that the criterion for redesignation 

in CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) has been 

met. 

D. The Area Has a Fully-Approved 

Maintenance Plan, Including a 

Contingency Plan, Under CAA Section 

175A 

Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv) of the CAA 

requires the EPA, in order to approve a 

redesignation to attainment, to fully 

approve a maintenance plan for the area 

as meeting the requirements of section 

175A of the Act. Section 175A sets forth 

the elements of a maintenance plan for 

areas seeking redesignation from 

nonattainment to attainment. We 

interpret this section of the Act to 

require, in general, the following core 

elements: 

• An attainment emissions inventory 

to identify the level of emissions in the 

area sufficient to attain the NAAQS; 

• A demonstration of maintenance of 

the NAAQS for at least 10 years after 

redesignation; 

• Provisions for continued operation 

of an air quality monitoring network; 

• Provisions to verify continued 

attainment; and 

• Contingency provisions that the 

EPA deems necessary to assure that the 

state will promptly correct any violation 

of the NAAQS that occurs after 

redesignation of the area. 

See Calcagni Memo at 7–12. We discuss 

below how each of these core elements 

is addressed in the 2014 PM10

Maintenance Plan. 

1. Attainment Inventory 

A maintenance plan for the PM10

standard must include an inventory of 

emissions of PM10 in the area to identify 

a level of emissions sufficient to attain 

the PM10 NAAQS.20 This inventory 

must be consistent with the EPA’s most 

recent guidance on emissions 

inventories for nonattainment areas 

available at the time and should 

represent emissions during the time 

period associated with the monitoring 

data showing attainment. The inventory 

must also be comprehensive, including 

emissions from stationary sources, area 

sources, nonroad mobile sources and 

on-road mobile sources, and must be 

based on actual emissions during the 

appropriate season or episode, if 

applicable. See CAA section 172(c)(3). 

EPA’s primary guidance for developing 

PM10 emissions inventories is a 

document titled, ‘‘PM10 Emissions 

Inventory Requirements,’’ EPA–454/R– 

94–033 (September 1994). 

The 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan 

provides an emissions inventory of 

actual emissions from all direct PM10

sources within Truckee Meadows on an 

average day during the winter season 

during year 2011. See table 2 below. The 

WCAQMD developed this inventory 

based on the methods and assumptions 

presented in detail in the WCAQMD’s 

2011 Periodic Emissions Inventory 

(November 2012), with the following 

adjustments: 

• Paved road fugitive dust was recalculated based on the most recent 

VMT estimates provided by the 

Regional Transportation Commission of 

Washoe County (RTC) and the most 

recent version of EPA emission factors 

published in AP–42,21 section 13.2.1 

(‘‘Paved Roads’’), dated January 2011, 

whereas the corresponding estimates in 

the 2011 Periodic Emissions Inventory 

relied on earlier VMT estimates and an 

earlier version of AP–42 section 13.2.1 

(dated November 2006); 

• Unpaved road fugitive dust was recalculated based on the most recent 

VMT estimates provided by the RTC 

and updated silt loading factors; and 

• On-road mobile source emissions 

(combustion, brake and tire wear) were 

re-calculated based on the most recent 

VMT estimates provided by the RTC 

and a different traffic demand model. 

In addition to showing the estimated 

actual emissions in 2011, table 2 below 

also the baseline maintenance plan 

inventory used by the 2014 PM10

Maintenance Plan to demonstrate 

maintenance through 2030. The only 

difference between the 2011 actuals and 

the maintenance plan baseline is in the 

wildfire source category. An unusually 

high number of wildfires occurred 

during the winter of 2011, which greatly 

increased the contribution of wildfires 

to the overall 2011 PM10 inventory, and 

thus, for the purposes of developing a 

baseline attainment inventory for 

maintenance plan purposes, the 

WCAQMD replaced the actual PM10

emissions from wildfires in 2011 with 

the average of wildfire emissions from 

the four previous inventory years (1999, 

2002, 2005, and 2008). 2014 PM10

Maintenance Plan at 25. We find that 

adjustment to be reasonable. Even with 

the adjustment for wildfires, over 85 

percent of direct PM10 emissions is 

attributed to nonpoint sources. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

58652 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 189 / Wednesday, September 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

22The WCAQMD’s 2011 Periodic Emissions 

Inventory, dated November 2012 and submitted to 

the EPA for purposes of meeting the AERR 

requirements, provides significant detail regarding 

the assumptions and methodologies used to 

develop the 2011 PM10 inventory used in the 2014 

PM10 Maintenance Plan. The 2011 Periodic 

Emissions Inventory also includes emissions 

inventories for VOCs, NOX, SOX, and ammonia. 

AERR requires state, local and tribal agencies to 

collect and submit emissions data for criteria 

pollutants to EPA’s Emissions Inventory System. 

TABLE 2—TRUCKEE MEADOWS 2011 WINTER-SEASON EMISSION INVENTORY FOR DIRECT PM10

[lbs/day] 

Category Subcategory 

Estimated 

actual 

emissions 

Maintenance 

plan baseline 

Point Sources .................................. All ............................................................................................................... 25 25 

Nonpoint Sources Fuel Combustion ....................................................................................... 111 111 

Residential Wood Combustion .................................................................. 5,888 5,888 

Construction a ............................................................................................ 460 460 

Non-Construction Industrial Processes ..................................................... 929 929 

Paved Roads—Fugitive Dust .................................................................... 1,453 1,453 

Paved Road—Sanding and Salting .......................................................... 339 339 

Unpaved Roads—Fugitive Dust ................................................................ 2,623 2,623 

Wildfires ..................................................................................................... 10,947 21 

All Other Nonpoint ..................................................................................... 61 61 

Subtotal—Nonpoint ................................................................................... 22,812 11,885 

Non-road Mobile .............................. All ............................................................................................................... 606 606 

Onroad Mobile ................................. All ............................................................................................................... 1,183 1,183 

Totals ........................................ .................................................................................................................... 24,626 13,700 

a Construction-related emissions represents a sum of several different types of construction. One such type, road construction (178 lbs/day), is 

included in the motor vehicle emissions budget (MVEB) discussed in section V.D.6 of this proposed rule (along with paved road fugitive dust, unpaved road fugitive dust, and on-road mobile sources). 

Source: 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan, appendix C. 

Totals may not add up due to rounding. 

The EPA believes that the selection of 

2011 as the attainment year inventory is 

appropriate given that it represents 

emissions from an attainment year and 

the year for which the most recent 

emissions inventory information was 

available at the time of preparation of 

the maintenance plan. Moreover, 

preparation of a seasonal (winter) 

inventory in this instance is appropriate 

given that winter is typically the season 

when the highest ambient PM10

concentrations are monitored in 

Truckee Meadows. We find that the 

WCAQMD’s 2011 emissions inventory 

for direct PM10 is based upon reasonable 

assumptions and methodologies, as 

described in the 2014 PM10

Maintenance Plan and 2011 Periodic 

Emissions Inventory,22 and that the 

inventory is comprehensive, current and 

accurate. We therefore propose to 

approve the inventory of actual 

emissions in 2011 as meeting the 

requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3) 

and find the 2011 inventory, as adjusted 

to discount 2011 wildfire emissions, 

acceptable for use in demonstrating 

maintenance of the PM10 standard in the 

future. 

2. Maintenance Demonstration 

Section 175A of the CAA requires a 

demonstration of maintenance of the 

NAAQS for at least 10 years after 

redesignation. A state may generally 

demonstrate maintenance of the 

NAAQS by either showing that future 

emissions of a pollutant or its 

precursors will not exceed the level of 

the attainment inventory, or by 

modeling to show that the future 

anticipated mix of sources and emission 

rates will not cause a violation of the 

NAAQS. See Calcagni Memo at 9–11. 

The 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan 

demonstrates that the Truckee Meadows 

area will maintain the PM10 NAAQS 

through 2030 by comparing the adjusted 

2011 attainment inventory (also referred 

to as the maintenance plan baseline) 

against the projected emissions for 2015, 

2020, 2025, and 2030. See 2014 PM10

Maintenance Plan at 26–28 (Tables 6–4 

and 6–5) and Appendix C (‘‘Truckee 

Meadows Projected PM10 Seasonal 

Emissions (lbs/day)’’). Using the 

adjusted 2011 emissions inventory as a 

baseline and appropriate growth factors 

described in appendix B of the 2014 

PM10 Maintenance Plan, the WCAQMD 

projected emissions inventories for 

2015, 2020, 2025, and 2030. These 

projections were based on Washoe 

County’s forecasts of population, 

employment, and VMT (see 2014 PM10

Maintenance Plan at appendix B, table 

B–2), consistent with the forecasts used 

by the local metropolitan planning 

organization (MPO); the EPA nonroad 

and on-road emissions models (i.e., 

NONROAD2008a and MOVES2010a) 

that the WCAQMD used to calculate the 

2011 emissions inventory; and a survey 

of RWC activities that the WCAQMD 

conducts at least once every three years. 

See 2014 PM10 Plan at appendix B 

(‘‘Growth Factors for 2015, 2020, 2025, 

and 2030 Projections’’). The 

WCAQMD’s projected PM10 emission 

levels for 2015, 2020, 2025, and 2030 

are shown in table 3. 

TABLE 3—TRUCKEE MEADOWS PM10 MAINTENANCE PLAN PROJECTIONS FOR 2015, 2020, 2025, AND 2030 

[Average winter day, lbs/day] 

Category 

Maintenance 

plan 

baseline—2011 

2015 2020 2025 2030 

Point Sources ................................................................... 25 28 32 37 42 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 189 / Wednesday, September 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 58653 

TABLE 3—TRUCKEE MEADOWS PM10 MAINTENANCE PLAN PROJECTIONS FOR 2015, 2020, 2025, AND 2030—Continued 

[Average winter day, lbs/day] 

Category 

Maintenance 

plan 

baseline—2011 

2015 2020 2025 2030 

Nonpoint Sources ............................................................ 11,885 11,510 11,379 11,361 11,512 

Non-road Mobile .............................................................. 606 501 386 328 307 

Onroad Mobile ................................................................. 1,183 953 839 828 883 

Totals ........................................................................ 13,700 12,992 12,637 12,554 12,744 

Source: 2014 PM10 Plan at 27, Table 6–4. 

Despite expected growth in the area, 

the maintenance plan’s projected PM10

emissions in Truckee Meadows for 

2015, 2020, 2025, and 2030 are below 

the 2011 maintenance inventory of 

13,700 lbs/day. The downward trend in 

PM10 emissions reflects the offsetting 

effects of the WCAQMD’s RWC program 

and the gradual replacement over time 

of older motor vehicle and nonroad 

equipment with newer models that are 

designed to meet more stringent 

emissions standards than had applied to 

the older models. Based on our review, 

we find that the methods, growth 

factors, and assumptions used by the 

WCAQMD to project emissions to 2015, 

2020, 2025 and 2030 levels are 

reasonable. Given that the projections 

(summarized in table 3 above) show 

future emissions in 2015, 2020, 2025, 

and 2030 to be below those in 2011 (and 

that reflect attainment conditions), we 

find that the projections provide an 

adequate basis to demonstrate 

maintenance of the PM10 standard 

within Truckee Meadow through 2030. 

Also, as described further in section 

V.D.6 of this document, the WCAQMD 

has chosen to include ‘‘safety margins’’ 

in the motor vehicle emissions budgets 

for 2015 (708 lbs/day), 2020 (1,063 lbs/ 

day), 2025 (1,146 lbs/day), and 2030 

(955 lbs/day), but we find that the 

overall emissions projections, including 

the safety margins, continue to 

demonstrate maintenance because they 

do not exceed the emissions in 2011, 

and thus, the safety margins are 

consistent with maintenance through 

2030. 

Section 175A requires that the EPA 

approve a plan providing for 

maintenance in the area for at least ten 

years after redesignation. If this 

redesignation becomes effective in 2015, 

the projected 2030 inventory 

demonstrates that Truckee Meadows 

will maintain the PM10 NAAQS for 

more than 10 years beyond 

redesignation. Moreover, the projected 

emissions inventories for 2015, 2020, 

and 2025, i.e., milestone years between 

the attainment inventory and the 

maintenance plan horizon year, 

sufficiently demonstrate that Truckee 

Meadows will maintain the standard 

throughout the period from 

redesignation through 2030. As such, 

the EPA concludes that the 2014 PM10

Maintenance Plan adequately 

demonstrates maintenance of the 

standard through 2030. 

3. Monitoring Network 

Continued ambient monitoring within 

an area is required over the maintenance 

period. See Calcagni Memo at 11. In the 

2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan, the 

WCAQMD indicates its intention to 

continue to operate an air quality 

monitoring network consistent with 40 

CFR part 58 to verify the attainment 

status. 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan at 

29. The plan also notes that Washoe 

County’s PM10 monitoring network will 

be reviewed annually pursuant to 40 

CFR 58.10 to ensure the network meets 

the monitoring objectives defined in 40 

CFR part 58, appendix D. As discussed 

above in section V.A, the WCAQMD 

operates an EPA-approved air quality 

monitoring network. The WCAQMD 

obtains funding to meet the 

requirements of part 58 primarily from 

CAA section 105 grants and from the 

Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles. 

For these reasons, we find that the 2014 

PM10 Maintenance Plan provides 

adequately for continued ambient PM10

monitoring through the maintenance 

period. 

4. Verification of Continued Attainment 

Each state should ensure that it has 

the legal authority to implement and 

enforce all measures necessary to attain 

and maintain the NAAQS, including the 

acquisition of ambient and source 

emission data to demonstrate attainment 

and maintenance, pursuant to CAA 

sections 110(a)(2)(B) and (F). See 

Calcagni Memo at 11. The NDEP and the 

WCAQMD have the legal authority to 

implement and enforce the 

requirements of the 2014 PM10

Maintenance Plan. This includes the 

authority to adopt, implement and 

enforce any emission control 

contingency measures determined to be 

necessary to correct PM10 NAAQS 

violations. As noted above, to 

implement the maintenance plan, the 

WCAQMD will continue to monitor 

PM10 levels in Truckee Meadows. The 

WCAQMD will also continue to use 

three existing mechanisms to track 

emissions levels to screen for significant 

increases in actual PM10 emissions. 

First, the WCAQMD will continue to 

prepare and submit to the EPA 

comprehensive periodic PM10 emissions 

inventories on a triennial schedule. 

Second, the WCAQMD will continue to 

submit regular updates of stationary and 

area sources within Washoe County, 

consistent with the requirements of 

EPA’s Consolidated Emissions 

Reporting Rule (CERR) and AERR. 

Finally, the WCAQMD remains 

committed to conducting its residential 

wood use surveys at least once every 

three years, to estimate the number of 

devices (fireplaces, woodstoves, and 

pellet stoves), amounts of wood burned, 

and PM10 emissions from these 

activities in Washoe County. See 2014 

PM10 Maintenance Plan at 29–30. 

We find that the WCAQMD’s 

commitments to verify continued 

attainment of the PM10 NAAQS through 

continued ambient air monitoring and 

emissions tracking are acceptable. 

5. Contingency Plan 

Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires 

that maintenance plans include such 

contingency provisions as the EPA 

deems necessary to promptly correct 

any violations of the NAAQS that occur 

after redesignation of the area. These 

contingency measures are distinguished 

from those generally required for 

nonattainment areas under section 

172(c)(9) in that they are not required to 

be fully adopted measures that will take 

effect without further action by the 

state. However, the contingency plan is 

an enforceable part of the SIP and 

should ensure that the contingency 

measures are adopted expeditiously 

once they are triggered by a specified 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

58654 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 189 / Wednesday, September 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

23Section 175A(d) also requires contingency 

provisions to include a requirement that the state 

will implement all measures with respect to the 

control of the air pollutant concerned which were 

contained in the SIP for the area before 

redesignation of the area to attainment. In this case, 

no SIP measures for the control of PM10 in Truckee 

Meadows are being rescinded or relaxed, and thus, 

the contingency provisions in the 2014 PM10

Maintenance Plan need not address this 

requirement. 

24An exceedance is defined as a daily value that 

is above the level of the 24-hour standard (i.e., 150 

mg/m3) after rounding to the nearest 10 mg/m3 (i.e., 

values ending in 5 or greater are to be rounded up). 

event. The maintenance plan should 

clearly identify the measures to be 

adopted, a schedule and procedure for 

adoption and implementation, and a 

specific timeline for action by the state. 

Contingency provisions should also 

identify indicators or triggers which will 

be used to determine when the 

contingency measures need to be 

implemented. The EPA evaluates 

contingency measures on a case-by-case 

basis.23 Calcagni Memo at 12, 13. 

The 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan 

contains a contingency plan that is 

triggered upon a violation of the PM10

standard, that requires the WCAQMD to 

make certain recommendations to the 

Health District within a certain time 

period after the triggering event, and 

that commits the Health District to 

adopting and implementing such 

recommendations as promptly and 

expediently as possible, but not later 

than the next PM10 (i.e., winter) season. 

2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan at 30–32. 

More specifically, the contingency 

plan is triggered when any monitor 

operated by the WCAQMD records a 

violation of the PM10 NAAQS, as 

defined by 40 CFR part 50, Appendix K 

(i.e., when the expected number of 

exceedances at the monitoring site 

during the calendar year is greater than 

one).24 If the contingency plan is 

triggered, the WCAQMD will provide 

recommendations for implementation of 

specific contingency measures to the 

Washoe County District Board of Health 

(referred to herein as the ‘‘Health 

District.’’). The recommendations must 

occur at the next regularly scheduled 

meeting but no later than 45 days after 

the violation. The recommendations 

will include a timeline for adoption and 

implementation as expeditiously as 

possible, but no later than the next PM10

season (November, December, and 

January). The WCAQMD maintains a list 

of potential contingency measures, 

focusing on significant PM10 emission 

sources, for recommendation in such 

events. Table 4 presents the WCAQMD’s 

current list of potential contingency 

measures. 

TABLE 4—2014 PM10 MAINTENANCE PLAN CONTINGENCY MEASURES

Category Potential contingency measure 

Paved Streets ........................................................................................... D Increase stringency of street sanding and sweeping programs. 

D Improve unpaved shoulders. 

D Transportation control measures to reduce VMT. 

Unpaved Streets ....................................................................................... D Improve unpaved streets and shoulders. 

D Post speed limits to decrease vehicle speeds. 

D Restrict access to decrease Average Daily Trips and VMT. 

Dust Control .............................................................................................. D Phased mass grading. 

D Mass grading allocation system. 

D Stabilize projects during PM10 season. 

D Decrease one acre dust control permit exemption. 

Residential Wood Combustion ................................................................. D Increase one acre lot size exemption. 

D Mandatory curtailment at lower PM10 concentrations. 

D Change-out program to clean burning device. 

Mobile Sources (Diesel) ........................................................................... D Non-road diesel engine repowers and rebuilds. 

D Non-road diesel tailpipe controls (i.e., filters and catalysts). 

D Truck Stop Electrification systems for heavy-duty vehicles. 

D More stringent heavy-duty diesel vehicle idling limits. 

D Fleet modernization. 

D More stringent inspection & maintenance program of light-duty, medium-duty, and heavy-duty vehicles 

Source: 2014 PM10 Plan at 32, Table 6–7, ‘‘Potential PM10 Contingency Measures.’’ 

To address changes in growth and 

technology, which may alter the 

effectiveness of different measures over 

time, the WCAQMD will conduct a 

triennial review and reprioritization of 

these potential contingency measures in 

coordination with the periodic PM10

emissions inventory. See 2014 PM10

Plan at 31. The WCAQMD will notify 

EPA Region 9 within 30 days of 

implementation of a contingency 

measure. Id. 

In addition to the contingency plan 

described above, the maintenance plan 

identifies a SIP-approved program that 

serves as an automatically triggered 

measure when 24-hour PM10

concentrations reach or are predicted to 

reach ‘‘Stage 1’’ levels (154 mg/m3). 

Specifically, District Regulation 

050.001, ‘‘Emergency Episode Plan,’’ is 

a SIP-approved program that requires 

the WCAQMD to take certain actions 

when 24-hour PM10 concentrations 

reach or are predicted to reach ‘‘Stage 1’’ 

levels such as: (1) Implementing 

procedures to notify the public of 

potential health problems; (2) 

prohibiting all open and prescribed 

burning; (3) prohibiting the use of 

permitted incinerators, crematoriums, 

and pathological incinerators; (4) 

prohibiting the use of solid fuel burning 

devices; and (5) activating control plans 

for the largest PM10 sources in Washoe 

County. 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan at 

11. As such, implementation of District 

Regulation 050.001 acts to reduce the 

chances that the contingency plan set 

forth in the 2014 PM10 Maintenance 

Plan will be triggered. 

Based on our review of the 

contingency provisions in the 2014 

PM10 Maintenance Plan, as described 

above, we find that they are adequate to 

ensure that the Health District will 

promptly correct any violation of the 

PM10 NAAQS that occurs after 

redesignation, as required by CAA 

section 175A(d). 

6. Transportation Conformity and Motor 

Vehicle Emissions Budgets 

Transportation conformity is required 

by section 176(c) of the CAA. Our 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 189 / Wednesday, September 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 58655 

25Transportation-related emissions of volatile 

organic compounds (VOC) and/or oxides of 

nitrogen (NOX) emissions must also be specified in 

PM10 areas if the EPA or the state finds that 

transportation-related emissions of one or both of 

these precursors within the nonattainment area are 

a significant contributor to the PM10 nonattainment 

problem and has so notified the metropolitan 

planning organization (MPO) and the U.S. 

Department of Transportation (DOT), or if the 

applicable SIP revision or SIP revision submittal 

establishes an approved or adequate budget for such 

emissions as part of the RFP, attainment or 

maintenance strategy. 40 CFR 93.102(b)(2)(iii). 

Neither of these conditions apply to Truckee 

Meadows. 

transportation conformity rule (codified 

in 40 CFR part 93, subpart A) requires 

that transportation plans, programs and 

projects conform to SIPs and establishes 

the criteria and procedures for 

determining whether or not they do so. 

Conformity to the SIP means that 

transportation activities will not 

produce new air quality violations, 

worsen existing violations, or delay 

timely attainment of the NAAQS. In this 

context, ‘‘transportation activities’’ 

refers to plans, programs, and projects 

affecting the road network (paved and 

unpaved) and the public transit system 

in nonattainment areas and in former 

nonattainment areas that have been 

redesignated to attainment (commonly 

referred to as ‘‘maintenance’’ areas.). 

PM10 maintenance plan submittals 

must specify the maximum emissions of 

transportation-related PM10 emissions 25

allowed in the last year of the 

maintenance period, i.e., the motor 

vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs). 

(MVEBs may also be specified for 

additional years during the maintenance 

period.) The MVEBs serve as a ceiling 

on emissions that would result 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 describes how 

to establish MVEBs in the SIP and how 

to revise the MVEBs if needed. 

The maintenance plan submittal must 

demonstrate that these emissions levels, 

when considered with emissions from 

all other sources, are consistent with 

maintenance of the NAAQS. In order for 

us to find these emissions levels or 

‘‘budgets’’ adequate and approvable, the 

submittal must meet the conformity 

adequacy provisions of 40 CFR 

93.118(e)(4) and (5). For more 

information on the transportation 

conformity requirement and applicable 

policies on MVEBs, please visit our 

transportation conformity Web site at: 

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

stateresources/transconf/index.htm. 

EPA’s process for determining adequacy 

of a MVEB consists of three basic steps: 

(1) Notifying the public of a SIP 

submission; (2) providing the public the 

opportunity to comment on the MVEB 

during a public comment period; and, 

(3) making a finding of adequacy or 

inadequacy. The process for 

determining the adequacy of a 

submitted MVEB is codified at 40 CFR 

93.118(f). 

On January 19, 2010, the EPA 

announced the availability of the 

Truckee Meadows 2009 PM10

Maintenance Plan with MVEBs (for 

2009, 2013, 2018, and 2020) and of a 30- 

day public comment period on the 

EPA’s Adequacy Web site at: http://

www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/

transconf/currsips.htm. The comment 

period for this notification ended on 

February 19, 2010, and the EPA 

received no comments from the public. 

Later that year, the EPA found the 

MVEBs from the 2009 PM10

Maintenance Plan adequate for 

transportation conformity purposes. 75 

FR 27776 (May 18, 2010). 

The 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan 

contains PM10 MVEBs for Truckee 

Meadows for 2015, 2020, 2025, and 

2030. The MVEBs are the on-road 

mobile source primary PM10 emissions 

inventory plus a safety margin for the 

Truckee Meadows nonattainment area 

for 2015, 2020, 2025, and 2030. The 

MVEBs in the 2014 PM10 Maintenance 

Plan are presented in table 5 below. The 

derivation of the MVEBs is discussed on 

page 28 of the 2014 PM10 Maintenance 

Plan and further described below. 

TABLE 5—2014 PM10 MAINTENANCE

PLAN MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS

BUDGETS

[Average winter day, lbs/day] 

Budget year PM10

2015 ...................................... 5,638 

2020 ...................................... 6,088 

2025 ...................................... 6,473 

2030 ...................................... 6,927 

Source: 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan at 

table 6–6, page 28. 

The WCAQMD developed the MVEBs 

in the 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan by 

using the on-road motor vehicle 

emission inventory factors in 

MOVES2010b and AP–42 and recent 

vehicle activity data from TransCAD, a 

travel demand model used by the RTC, 

which is the MPO for the area. The 

components of the MVEBs are shown in 

table 6 and are comprised of direct onroad mobile source emissions, road 

construction emissions, fugitive 

emissions from paved and unpaved 

roads, and safety margins. 

TABLE 6—SOURCE CATEGORIES AND DIRECT PM10 EMISSIONS COMPRISING THE MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS

(LBS PER DAY, AVERAGE WINTER DAY) IN THE 2014 PM10 PLAN

Category 2015 2020 2025 2030 

Diesel Idling ..................................................................................................... 7 4 1 1 

Paved Road—Fugitives ................................................................................... 1,414 1,517 1,627 1,736 

Unpaved Road—Fugitives ............................................................................... 2,380 2,479 2,688 3,174 

Road Construction ........................................................................................... 183 189 185 180 

On-road Motor Vehicles a ................................................................................. 946 835 825 880 

Safety Margin ................................................................................................... 708 1,063 1,146 955 

Totals ........................................................................................................ 5,638 6,088 6,473 6,927 

aOn-road Motor Vehicles includes directly emitted PM10 from combustion and also reflects tire and brake wear. 

Source: 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan at table 6–6, page 28. 

A state may choose to apply a safety 

margin under our transportation 

conformity rule so long as such margins 

are explicitly quantified in the 

applicable plan and are shown to be 

consistent with attainment or 

maintenance of the NAAQS (whichever 

is relevant to the particular plan). See 40 

CFR 93.124(a). As shown in table 7 

below, each safety margin was 

calculated by subtracting a future 

inventory from the 2011 maintenance 

inventory. Also, see table 6–5 in the 

2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan. The safety 

margins equal the difference between 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

58656 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 189 / Wednesday, September 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

26Under the Transportation Conformity 

regulations, the EPA may review the adequacy of 

submitted motor vehicle emission budgets 

simultaneously with the EPA’s approval or 

disapproval of the submitted implementation plan. 

40 CFR 93.118(f)(2). 

27On page 28 of the 2014 Plan, the WCAQMD 

explains ‘‘For years beyond 2030, the MVEB will 

remain at the 2030 level of 6,927 bs/day.’’ This 

sentence refers to the fact that if the SIP does not 

have a budget in a particular analysis year, the 

budget established for the most recent prior year is 

used as described in 40 CFR 93.118(b)(ii). The 2014 

Plan does not establish budgets for any subsequent 

year after 2030. To avoid any ambiguity about the 

intent of the language on page 28 of the 2014 Plan, 

WCAQMD staff clarified that ‘‘For years beyond 

2030’’ means ‘‘For analysis years beyond 2030.’’ See 

September 16, 2015 email from Daniel Inouye, 

WCAQMD, to John Ungvarsky, EPA Region 9. 

the projected level of overall PM10

emissions in Truckee Meadows in each 

of the maintenance years and the 2011 

maintenance inventory. Each safety 

margin, when combined with its 

corresponding future-year inventory, is 

consistent with continued maintenance 

of the PM10 NAAQS through 2030. 

TABLE 7—CALCULATION OF SAFETY MARGINS (LBS/DAY) 

2015 2020 2025 2030 

2011 Maintenance Inventory ........................................................................... 13,700 13,700 13,700 13,700 

Future-Year Inventory ...................................................................................... 12,992 12,637 12,554 12,744 

Safety Margin ................................................................................................... 708 1,063 1,146 955 

Source: 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan at table 6–5, page 28. 

With respect to the 2014 Plan and 

related MVEBs, we have evaluated the 

budgets against our adequacy criteria in 

40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and (5) as part of 

our review of the budgets’ approvability 

and are completing the adequacy review 

of these budgets concurrent with our 

final action on the 2014 Plan.26 The 

details of the EPA’s evaluation of the 

MVEBs for compliance with the budget 

adequacy criteria of 40 CFR 93.118(e) 

are provided in the TSD for this 

proposed rulemaking. On September 10, 

2015, the EPA announced the 

availability of the 2014 Plan with 

MVEBs and a 30-day public comment 

period. This announcement was posted 

on EPA’s Adequacy Web site at: 

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

stateresources/transconf/

reg9sips.htm#nv. 

The EPA is proposing to approve the 

MVEBs for 2015, 2020, 2025 and 2030, 

shown in table 5 above, as part of our 

approval of 2014 PM10 Maintenance 

Plan. The EPA has determined that the 

MVEB emission targets are consistent 

with emission control measures in the 

SIP and are consistent with 

maintenance of the PM10 standard in 

Truckee Meadows through 2030.27 As 

noted above, we found the MVEBs (for 

years 2009, 2013, 2018, and 2020) in the 

2009 PM10 Maintenance Plan to be 

adequate for transportation purposes, 

and those are the PM10 MVEBs in effect 

for transportation conformity purposes 

today. If we finalize today’s action, as 

proposed, the PM10 MVEBs (for years 

2015, 2020, 2025, and 2030) from the 

2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan would 

replace the PM10 MVEBs previously 

found adequate. Any and all comments 

on the adequacy and approvability of 

the MVEBs in the 2014 PM10

Maintenance Plan should be submitted 

during the comment period stated in the 

DATES section of this document. 

7. Conclusion 

Based on the review presented above 

of the various elements of the state’s 

submitted maintenance plan, we are 

proposing to approve the 2014 PM10

Maintenance Plan as a revision to the 

Nevada SIP. In so doing, we find that 

the 2014 PM10 Maintenance Plan, 

adopted on August 28, 2014 by the 

Health District and submitted by the 

NDEP to the EPA on November 7, 2014, 

satisfies the requirements of section 

175A of the Act. If finalized as 

proposed, our approval of the 2014 

PM10 Maintenance Plan will satisfy the 

criterion for redesignation under CAA 

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

VI. Proposed Deletion of TSP 

Designation for Truckee Meadows 

A. General Considerations 

Consistent with CAA section 

107(d)(4)(B), we have considered the 

continued necessity for retaining the 

remaining TSP area designation in 

Nevada, and as discussed below, we 

have decided that the TSP 

nonattainment designation for Truckee 

Meadows (HA #87) is no longer 

necessary. As a result, we are proposing 

to delete it from the TSP table in 40 CFR 

81.329. 

To evaluate whether the TSP area 

designation should be retained or can be 

deleted, we have relied upon the final 

rule implementing the PM10 NAAQS 

(see 52 FR 24634, July 1, 1987), a policy 

memorandum on TSP redesignations 

(see memo dated May 20, 1992 from 

Joseph W. Paisie, Acting Chief, SO2/

Particulate Matter Programs Branch, 

EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and 

Standards, to Chief, Air Branch, Regions 

I–X, entitled ‘‘TSP Redesignation 

Request’’), and our proposed and final 

rules establishing maximum allowable 

increases in concentrations (also known 

as ‘‘increments’’) for PM10 (see the 

proposed rule at 54 FR 41218, October 

5, 1989, and the final rule at 58 FR 

31622, June 3, 1993). 

Based on the above references, we 

believe that the relevant considerations 

for evaluating whether the necessity of 

retaining the TSP area designations 

depend upon the status of a given area 

with respect to TSP and PM10. For areas 

that are nonattainment for TSP but 

attainment for PM10, we generally find 

that the TSP designations are no longer 

necessary and can be deleted when the 

EPA (1) approves a state’s revised PSD 

program containing the PM10

increments, (2) promulgates the PM10

increments into a state’s SIP where the 

State chooses not to adopt the 

increments on their own, or (3) 

approves a state’s request for delegation 

of PSD responsibility under 40 CFR 

52.21(u). See 58 FR 31622, at 31635 

(June 3, 1993). 

For areas that are nonattainment for 

TSP and nonattainment for PM10, an 

additional consideration is whether 

deletion of the TSP designations would 

automatically relax any emissions 

limitations, control measures or 

programs approved into the SIP. If such 

a relaxation would occur automatically 

with deletion of the TSP area 

designations, then we will not delete the 

designations until we are satisfied that 

the resulting SIP relaxation would not 

interfere with any applicable 

requirement concerning attainment, 

reasonable further progress (RFP), or 

maintenance of the NAAQS or any other 

requirement of the Clean Air Act in the 

affected areas. See section 110(l) of the 

Act. 

In the case of Truckee Meadows, we 

believe that the considerations for both 

types of areas described above are 

relevant because, although Truckee 

Meadows Valley is nonattainment for 

TSP and PM10, we are proposing to 

redesignate the area to attainment for 

PM10 in today’s action. Thus, we must 

take into account both the potential for 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 189 / Wednesday, September 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 58657 

28Because the TSP area designation for Truckee 

Meadows is the last such designation for the State 

of Nevada in 40 CFR 81.329, we will delete the 

entire TSP table in 40 CFR 81.329 if we finalize our 

proposed deletion of the TSP area designation for 

Truckee Meadows. 

29 If we finalize the proposed approval of the 

redesignation request for Truckee Meadows to 

attainment for the PM10 standard and the proposed 

deletion of the TSP area designation for Truckee 

Meadows, as proposed, then all areas within the 

State of Nevada will be designated attainment or 

unclassifiable for all of the current NAAQS for 

particulate matter (i.e., PM10 and PM2.5). At that 

point, the EPA’s finding at 40 CFR 52.1476(a) (‘‘The 

requirements of subpart G of this chapter are not 

met since the plan does not provide for the 

attainment and maintenance of the national 

standards for particulate matter in the Northwest 

Nevada and Nevada Intrastate Regions.’’), 

promulgated at 37 FR 10842, 10879 (May 31, 1972), 

will become obsolete, and therefore, we intend to 

delete 40 CFR 52.1476(a) if we finalize this 

proposed rule, as proposed. 

relaxation that would be inconsistent 

with continued maintenance of the 

PM10 NAAQS as well as protection of 

the PM10 increments (as applies in areas 

designated attainment or unclassifiable). 

B. Deletion of TSP Nonattainment Area 

Designation for Truckee Meadows 

With respect to protection of the PM10

increments, the TSP nonattainment 

designation is no longer necessary in 

Truckee Meadows because, even though 

the WCAQMD does not currently have 

an approved PSD program, if the EPA 

finalizes the actions in today’s proposed 

rulemaking, the federal PSD 

requirements under 40 CFR 52.21 

(including the PM10 increments) will 

apply to new major sources or major 

modifications to existing major sources 

of PM10. See 40 CFR 52.1485(b). The 

WCAQMD administers the PSD preconstruction permit program in 40 CFR 

52.21 within Washoe County except for 

coal-fired power plants, which fall 

under the jurisdiction of NDEP. Both the 

WCAQMD and the NDEP administer the 

PSD permit program in 40 CFR 52.21 

under delegation agreements with the 

EPA. 

To ensure that deletion of the TSP 

nonattainment designation for Truckee 

Meadows would not result in any 

automatic relaxations in SIP emissions 

limitations, control measures or 

programs that would interfere with 

attainment, RFP or maintenance of the 

NAAQS (including PM10) or any other 

requirement of the Act, we reviewed the 

following portions of the Nevada SIP: 

D The TSP portions of the Truckee 

Meadows Air Quality Implementation 

Plan (AQIP) adopted in response to the 

CAA, as amended in 1977; 

D Washoe County stationary source 

rules, including section 040.005 

(‘‘Visible Air Contaminants’’), section 

040.010 (‘‘Particulate Matter’’), section 

040.020 (‘‘Dust and Fumes’’), section 

040.030 (‘‘Dust Control’’), section 

040.031 (‘‘Street Sanding Operations’’), 

section 040.032 (‘‘Street Sweeping 

Operations’’), section 040.035 (‘‘Open 

Fires’’), section 040.040 (‘‘Burning 

Permit Conditions’’), section 040.045 

(‘‘Refuge Disposal’’), section 040.050 

(‘‘Incinerator Emissions’’), section 

040.051 (‘‘Wood Stove/Fireplace Insert 

Emissions’’), and section 040.060 

(‘‘Sulfur Content of Fuel’’). 

Based on our review of the TSP 

provisions in the Truckee Meadows 

AQIP and the various rules cited above, 

we find that none are contingent upon 

continuation of the TSP nonattainment 

designation, and thus deletion of the 

TSP designation would not 

automatically relax any standard. 

In summary, because upon 

redesignation the PSD PM10 increments 

will apply in Truckee Meadows and 

because the deletion of the TSP 

nonattainment designation for Truckee 

Meadows would not automatically relax 

any emissions limitation or control 

measure in the Nevada SIP, we find that 

the TSP nonattainment designation is 

no longer necessary and can be deleted. 

Based on the above discussion and 

evaluation, therefore, we are proposing 

to delete the TSP nonattainment area 

designation for Truckee Meadows (HA 

#87) from the ‘‘Nevada-TSP’’ table in 40 

CFR 81.329.28

VII. Proposed Actions and Request for 

Public Comment 

Under CAA section 110(k)(3), and for 

the reasons set forth above, the EPA is 

proposing to approve the BACM 

demonstration submitted by the NDEP 

on August 5, 2002 as part of the 2002 

Truckee Meadows PM10 Attainment 

Plan and the 2014 Truckee Meadows 

PM10 Maintenance Plan submitted by 

the NDEP on November 7, 2014 as 

revisions of the Nevada SIP. In so doing, 

the EPA finds that the 2011 attainment 

inventory in the maintenance plan 

meets the requirements of CAA section 

172(c)(3) and finds that the maintenance 

demonstration showing how Truckee 

Meadows will continue to attain the 

PM10 standard through 2030, and the 

contingency provisions describing the 

actions that the WCAQMD will take in 

the event of a future monitored 

violation, meet all applicable 

requirements for maintenance plans and 

related contingency provisions in CAA 

section 175A. The EPA is also proposing 

to approve the motor vehicle emissions 

budgets in the 2014 PM10 Maintenance 

Plan (and shown in table 5 above) 

because we find they meet the 

applicable adequacy criteria under 40 

CFR 93.118(e). 

In addition, under CAA section 

107(d)(3)(D), we are proposing to 

approve the state’s request, which 

accompanied the submittal of the 2014 

PM10 Maintenance Plan, to redesignate 

the Truckee Meadows PM10

nonattainment area to attainment for the 

PM10 standard. We are doing so based 

on our conclusion that the area has met, 

or will meet as part of this action, all of 

the criteria for redesignation under CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E). More specifically, 

we propose to find that Truckee 

Meadows has attained the PM10

standard based on the most recent threeyear period (2012–2014) of qualityassured, certified, and complete (or 

otherwise validated) PM10 data; that 

relevant portions of the Nevada SIP are, 

or will be as part of this action, fully 

approved; that the improvement in air 

quality is due to permanent and 

enforceable reductions in emissions; 

that Nevada has met all requirements 

applicable to the Truckee Meadows 

PM10 nonattainment area with respect to 

section 110 and part D of the CAA if we 

finalize our approvals of the BACM 

demonstration in the 2002 PM10

Attainment Plan and the attainment 

inventory in the 2014 PM10

Maintenance Plan, as proposed herein; 

and that Truckee Meadows will have a 

fully approved maintenance plan 

meeting the requirements of CAA 

section 175A if we finalize our approval 

of it, also as proposed herein. 

In connection with the above 

proposed approvals and determinations, 

and as authorized under CAA section 

189(e), we are proposing to determine 

that major stationary sources of PM10

precursors do not contribute 

significantly to PM10 exceedances in the 

Truckee Meadows area based on the 

information in the 1988 DRI Report and 

more recent inventory and speciation 

data available from the WCAQMD. 

Lastly, the EPA is proposing to delete 

the nonattainment area designation for 

Truckee Meadows for the revoked 

national standard for total suspended 

particulate because we have concluded 

that the designation is no longer 

necessary.29

We are soliciting comments on these 

proposed actions. We will accept 

comments from the public on this 

proposal for 30 days following 

publication of this proposal in the 

Federal Register. We will consider these 

comments before taking final action. 

VIII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, redesignation of an 

area to attainment and the 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS

58658 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 189 / Wednesday, September 30, 2015 / Proposed Rules 

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. 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. 

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 Clean Air Act. Accordingly, these 

actions merely propose to approve a 

State plan and redesignation request as 

meeting Federal requirements and do 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

these reasons, these proposed actions: 

• Are 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); 

• 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 an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Are not a significant regulatory 

action 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 Clean Air Act; 

and, 

• Do not provide the EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address 

disproportionate human health or 

environmental effects with practical, 

appropriate, and legally permissible 

methods under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, the State plan for which 

the EPA is proposing approval 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, as it 

relates to the maintenance plan, 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). However, 

the EPA has contacted the Reno-Sparks 

Indian Colony and invited them to 

consult on today’s action. The RenoSparks Indian Colony, which consists of 

members of three Great Basin Tribes— 

the Paiute, the Shoshone, and the 

Washo—and which has Indian country 

within the Truckee Meadows air quality 

planning area because the Indian 

country within the Truckee Meadows 

area would be redesignated to 

attainment along with State lands if the 

EPA were to finalize the proposed rules, 

as set forth herein. 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur dioxide. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, National parks, 

Wilderness areas. 

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

Dated: September 18, 2015. 

Jared Blumenfeld, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2015–24854 Filed 9–29–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–2015–0573, 0574, 0575, 

0576, 0578, 0579 and 0580; FRL–9934–76– 

OSWER] 

National Priorities List 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

(‘‘CERCLA’’ or ‘‘the Act’’), as amended, 

requires that the National Oil and 

Hazardous Substances Pollution 

Contingency Plan (‘‘NCP’’) include a list 

of national priorities among the known 

releases or threatened releases of 

hazardous substances, pollutants or 

contaminants throughout the United 

States. The National Priorities List 

(‘‘NPL’’) constitutes this list. The NPL is 

intended primarily to guide the 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(‘‘EPA’’ or ‘‘the agency’’) in determining 

which sites warrant further 

investigation. These further 

investigations will allow the EPA to 

assess the nature and extent of public 

health and environmental risks 

associated with the site and to 

determine what CERCLA-financed 

remedial action(s), if any, may be 

appropriate. This rule proposes to add 

seven sites to the General Superfund 

section of the NPL. 

DATES: Comments regarding any of these 

proposed listings must be submitted 

(postmarked) on or before November 30, 

2015. 

ADDRESSES: Identify the appropriate 

docket number from the table below. 

DOCKET IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS BY SITE

Site name City/county, state Docket ID No. 

PCE Former Dry Cleaner ............................................................................ Atlantic, IA ........................................ EPA–HQ–SFUND–2015–0573 

Old American Zinc Plant ............................................................................. Fairmont City, IL ............................... EPA–HQ–SFUND–2015–0574 

West Vermont Drinking Water Contamination ............................................ Indianapolis, IN ................................ EPA–HQ–SFUND–2015–0575 

SBA Shipyard .............................................................................................. Jennings, LA .................................... EPA–HQ–SFUND–2015–0576 

Iowa-Nebraska Light & Power Co ............................................................... Norfolk, NE ....................................... EPA–HQ–SFUND–2015–0578 

Former Kil-Tone Company .......................................................................... Vineland, NJ ..................................... EPA–HQ–SFUND–2015–0579 

Lea and West Second Street ...................................................................... Roswell, NM ..................................... EPA–HQ–SFUND–2015–0580 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS