33886 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 138 / Wednesday, July 18, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 2—MAIL VOLUME AND MAIL REVENUE—MONTH, FISCAL YEAR—Continued 

[Thousands] 

Current period Year-to-date 

Actual SPLY % SPLY var. Actual SPLY % SPLY var. 

Revenue 

USPS Marketing Mail: 

Volume 

Revenue 

Package Services: 

Volume 

Revenue 

All Other Market Dominant Mail: 

Volume 

Revenue 

Total Market Dominant Products: 

Volume 

Revenue 

Total Competitive Products 

Volume 

Revenue 

Total Operating Revenue: 

Total Volume 

* * * * * 

(c) National Consolidated Trial 

Balances and the Revenue and Expense 

Summary on the 24th day of the 

following month, except that the reports 

for the last month of Quarters 1, 2, and 

3 of the fiscal year shall be provided at 

the time that the Form 10–Q report is 

provided and the report for the last 

month of Quarter 4 of the fiscal year 

shall be provided at the time that the 

Form 10–K report is provided; 

* * * * * 

■ 5. Amend § 3050.60 by revising 

paragraph (c) to read as follows: 

§ 3050.60 Miscellaneous reports and 

documents. 

* * * * * 

(c) The items listed in paragraph (b) 

of this section in electronic form; 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2018–15326 Filed 7–17–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7710–FW–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R08–OAR–2018–0309 and EPA–R10– 

OAR–2018–0316: FRL–9980–88—Region 8] 

Determination of Attainment by the 

Attainment Date and Clean Data 

Determination for the Logan, UT-ID 

2006 24-Hour PM2.5 Nonattainment 

Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing a 

determination of attainment by the 

attainment date and a clean data 

determination (CDD) for the 2006 24- 

hour fine particulate matter (PM2.5) 

Logan, Utah (UT)-Idaho (ID) 

nonattainment area. The determination 

is based upon quality-assured, qualitycontrolled and certified ambient air 

monitoring data showing that the area 

has attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) based on 2015–2017 data 

available in the EPA’s Air Quality 

System (AQS) database. Based on the 

proposed determination that the Logan, 

UT-ID nonattainment area is currently 

attaining the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, the 

EPA is also proposing to determine that 

the obligation for Utah and Idaho to 

make submissions to meet certain Clean 

Air Act (CAA or the Act) requirements 

related to attainment of the NAAQS for 

this area is not applicable for as long as 

the area continues to attain the NAAQS. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 17, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08– 

OAR–2018–0309 and/or Docket ID No. 

EPA–R10–OAR–2018–0316 at https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from 

www.regulations.gov. The EPA may 

publish any comment received to its 

public docket. Do not submit 

electronically any information you 

consider to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

the disclosure of which is restricted by 

statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, 

video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 

written comment. The written comment 

is considered the official comment and 

should include discussion of all points 

you wish to make. The EPA will 

generally not consider comments or 

comment contents located outside of the 

primary submission (i.e., on the web, 

cloud, or other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Crystal Ostigaard, Air Program, EPA, 

Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595 

Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 

80202–1129, (303) 312–6602, 

ostigaard.crystal@epa.gov, or Matthew 

Jentgen, Air Planning Unit, Office of Air 

and Waste (OAW–150), EPA, Region 10, 

1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle, 

Washington 98101; (206) 553–0340; 

jentgen.matthew@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, wherever 

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

intended to refer to the EPA. 

I. Background 

A. Designation and Classification of 

PM2.5 Nonattainment Areas 

On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), 

the EPA revised the level of the 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS, lowering the primary 

and secondary standards from the 1997 

standard of 65 micrograms per cubic 

meter (mg/m3) to 35 mg/m3. The EPA 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 138 / Wednesday, July 18, 2018 / Proposed Rules 33887 

1 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013). 

2Each of the extension requests from Idaho and 

Utah can be found in the Region 8 and Region 10 

dockets for the Logan, UT-ID nonattainment area 

proposed extension request actions. See EPA–R08– 

OAR–2017–0216 and EPA–R10–OAR–2017–0193. 

3The EPA extended the effective date of this 

partial approval and partial disapproval to April 20, 

2017. See 82 FR 14463. 

retained the form of the 1997 24-hour 

standard, that is, the 98th percentile of 

the annual 24-hour concentrations at 

each population-oriented monitor 

within an area, averaged over 3 years. 71 

FR 61164–5 (October 17, 2006). 

On November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688), 

the EPA designated a number of areas as 

nonattainment for the 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS of 35 mg/m3, including the 

Logan, UT-ID nonattainment area. The 

EPA originally designated these areas 

under the general provisions of CAA 

title I, part D, subpart 1 (‘‘subpart 1’’), 

under which attainment plans must 

provide for the attainment of a specific 

NAAQS (in this case, the 2006 PM2.5

standards) as expeditiously as 

practicable, but no later than 5 years 

from the date the areas were designated 

nonattainment. 

Subsequently, on January 4, 2013, the 

U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit held in NRDC v. EPA 1

that the EPA should have implemented 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard based 

on both the general nonattainment area 

requirements in subpart 1 and the PMspecific requirements of CAA title I, part 

D, subpart 4 (‘‘subpart 4’’). In response 

to the Court’s decision in NRDC v. EPA, 

on June 2, 2014 (79 FR 31566), the EPA 

finalized the ‘‘Identification of 

Nonattainment Classification and 

Deadlines for Submission of State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) Provisions 

for the 1997 Fine Particulate (PM2.5) 

NAAQS and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.’’ This 

rule classified the areas that were 

designated in 2009 as nonattainment to 

Moderate, and set the attainment SIP 

submittal due date for those areas at 

December 31, 2014. 

After the court’s decision, on 

December 16, 2014, the Utah 

Department of Air Quality (UDAQ) 

withdrew all prior Logan, UT-ID PM2.5

SIP submissions and submitted a new 

SIP to address both the general 

requirements of subpart 1 and the PMspecific requirements of subpart 4 for 

Moderate areas. Additionally, on 

December 24, 2014, the Idaho 

Department of Environmental Quality 

(IDEQ) submitted a supplement to the 

2012 SIP submission (‘‘2014 

amendment’’) that included additional 

analyses intended to meet CAA subpart 

4 requirements. 

On August 24, 2016, the EPA 

finalized the Fine Particulate Matter 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards: State Implementation Plan 

Requirements (‘‘PM2.5 SIP Requirements 

Rule’’), 81 FR 58010, which addressed 

the January 4, 2013 court ruling. The 

final PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule 

provides the EPA’s interpretation of the 

requirements applicable to PM2.5

nonattainment areas and explains how 

air agencies can meet the statutory SIP 

requirements that apply under subparts 

1 and 4 to areas designated 

nonattainment for any PM2.5 NAAQS. 

B. Two, 1-Year Extensions for the Logan, 

UT-ID Nonattainment Area 

Under CAA section 188(d) and 40 

CFR 51.1005, the EPA may grant a 

state’s request to extend the attainment 

date for a Moderate area for a 24-hour 

PM2.5 standard if: ‘‘(1) the State has 

complied with all requirements and 

commitments pertaining to the area in 

the applicable implementation plan; 

and (2) the 98th percentile 24-hour 

concentration at each monitor in the 

area for the calendar year that includes 

the applicable attainment date is less 

than or equal to the level of the 

applicable 24-hour standard.’’ The EPA 

cannot issue more than two, 1-year 

extensions for a single Moderate area. 

Both the State of Utah and the State 

of Idaho submitted requests to extend 

the attainment date to December 31, 

2016, and then to December 31, 2017.2

The EPA granted those requests on 

September 8, 2017 (82 FR 42447). As a 

result, the EPA must examine monitor 

data values from 2015–2017 to 

determine whether the Logan, UT-ID 

area attained the NAAQS by the 

extended attainment date. 

C. Prior Actions on the Utah Portion of 

the Logan, UT-ID Nonattainment Area 

The EPA previously acted on the area 

source rules and reasonably available 

control measure (RACM) analyses of the 

Utah Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment 

area plan on September 9, 2015 (80 FR 

54237), February 25, 2016 (81 FR 9343), 

October 19, 2016 (81 FR 71988) and 

September 14, 2017 (82 FR 43205). We 

have not acted on, approved or 

disapproved, any other portion of the 

Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 attainment plan 

submitted by UDAQ. Since the EPA has 

not disapproved any portion of the plan, 

the clocks for sanctions under 179(a) 

and for a FIP under 110(c) are not in 

effect for the Utah portion of the Logan, 

UT-ID nonattainment area. 

Additionally, we proposed to approve 

the attainment demonstration and motor 

vehicle emission budgets (MVEB) for 

the Utah portion on December 4, 2017 

(82 FR 57183). 

D. Prior Action on the Idaho Portion of 

the Logan, UT-ID Nonattainment Area 

Initially, the EPA approved Idaho’s 

baseline emissions inventory on July 18, 

2014 (79 FR 41904), and also approved 

certain control measures, including 

local ordinances and road sanding 

agreements, submitted in Idaho’s 

attainment plan on March 24, 2014 (79 

FR 16201). Subsequently, on January 4, 

2017 (82 FR 729), the EPA published a 

partial approval and partial disapproval 

of the attainment plan for the Idaho 

portion of the Logan, UT-ID PM2.5

nonattainment area. Specifically, the 

EPA approved Idaho’s determination of 

which pollutants must be evaluated for 

control in the Idaho portion of the 

nonattainment and Idaho’s RACM and 

reasonably available control technology 

(RACT) provisions. The EPA deferred 

action on the attainment demonstration, 

reasonable further progress (RFP), 

quantitative milestone, and MVEB 

requirements. Additionally, we 

disapproved the contingency measure 

element of Idaho’s attainment plan.3

Since the EPA has disapproved this 

portion of the plan, the clocks for 

sanctions under 179(a) and for a FIP 

under 110(c) are in effect for the Idaho 

portion of the Logan, UT-ID 

nonattainment area. As discussed 

below, if the EPA finalizes this action, 

the clocks for sanctions and for a FIP 

will be deferred. 

On August 8, 2017 (82 FR 37025), 

based on newly available air quality 

monitoring data, the EPA approved 

Idaho’s attainment demonstration and 

approved Idaho’s 2014 MVEB as early 

progress budgets. Additionally, the EPA 

conditionally approved the RFP, 

quantitative milestone and revised 

MVEB requirements. Idaho committed 

to submit revisions for the conditionally 

approved elements by August 1, 2018. 

II. Determination of Attainment by the 

Attainment Date 

Under CAA section 188(b)(2), the EPA 

is required to determine within 6 

months of the applicable attainment 

date whether a nonattainment area 

attained the standard by that date. As 

discussed above, on September 8, 2017, 

the EPA extended the attainment date 

for the Logan, UT-ID area to December 

31, 2017. Under the EPA regulations at 

40 CFR 50.13 and part 50, appendix N, 

section 4.2, the 2006 primary and 

secondary 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS are 

met when the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

design value at each eligible monitoring 

site is less than or equal to 35 mg/m3. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
33888 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 138 / Wednesday, July 18, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

4May 8, 2017 EPA Region 8 Memorandum; 

Logan, Utah PM2.5 2015 Design Value. 

For the 24-hour PM2.5 standards, 

appendix N defines eligible monitoring 

sites as those that meet the technical 

requirements in 40 CFR 58.11 and 

58.30. Three years of valid annual PM2.5

98th percentile mass concentrations are 

required to produce a valid 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS design value. A year 

meets data completeness requirements 

when quarterly data capture rates for all 

four quarters are at least 75%. 

Nonetheless, where the 75% data 

capture requirement is not met, the 24- 

hour PM2.5 NAAQS design value shall 

still be considered valid if it passes the 

maximum quarterly value data 

substitution test. 

In accordance with the EPA 

regulations at 40 CFR part 50, appendix 

N, a finding of attainment of the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS must be based 

upon complete, quality-assured data 

gathered at established state and local 

air monitoring stations (SLAMS) and 

national air monitoring stations (NAMS) 

in the nonattainment area and entered 

in the EPA Air Quality System (AQS). 

Data from air monitors operated by 

state/local/tribal agencies in compliance 

with the EPA monitoring requirements 

must be submitted to AQS. Monitoring 

agencies annually certify that these data 

are accurate to the best of their 

knowledge. Accordingly, the EPA relies 

primarily on data in AQS when 

determining the attainment status of 

areas. See 40 CFR 50.13; 40 CFR part 50, 

appendix L; 40 CFR part 53; 40 CFR part 

58, and 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 50, appendix 

N. 

Additionally, a determination of 

attainment is not equivalent to a 

redesignation, and the state must still 

meet the statutory requirements for 

redesignation in order to be 

redesignated to attainment. 

A. Monitoring Network and Data 

Considerations 

Determining whether an area has 

attained the NAAQS pursuant to CAA 

section 188(b)(2) is based on monitored 

air quality data. Thus, the validity of a 

determination of attainment depends in 

part on whether the monitoring network 

adequately measures ambient PM2.5

levels in the nonattainment area. The 

UDAQ and the IDEQ are the 

governmental agencies with the 

authority and responsibilities under 

each state’s laws for collecting ambient 

air quality data for the Logan, UT-ID 

nonattainment area. Annually, UDAQ 

and IDEQ submit monitoring network 

plans to the EPA. These plans document 

the establishment and maintenance of 

the air monitoring network, as required 

under 40 CFR part 58. With respect to 

PM2.5 monitoring in the Logan, UT-ID 

nonattainment area, the EPA Regional 

offices for Region 8 and Region 10 have 

found that UDAQ’s and IDEQ’s annual 

network plans, respectively, met the 

applicable requirements under 40 CFR 

part 58 for the relevant period, 2015– 

2017, with the exception (discussed 

below) of UDAQ’s 2015 network plan. 

Also, UDAQ and IDEQ annually certify 

that the data they submit to AQS are 

quality assured. 

The UDAQ and IDEQ each operated 

PM2.5 SLAMS monitors during the 

2015–2017 period within the Logan, 

UT-ID PM2.5 nonattainment area. In 

2015, UDAQ operated two PM2.5

monitoring sites, at Logan and 

Smithfield, and in 2016 and 2017, 

UDAQ operated only the Smithfield 

monitoring site. The IDEQ monitoring 

site for 2015, 2016 and 2017 was located 

in Franklin, Idaho. 

B. Logan/Smithfield, Utah Monitoring 

The 2015 Annual Monitoring Network 

Plan (AMNP) and Five-Year Network 

Assessment was submitted by UDAQ in 

June 2015. This plan and assessment 

was not reviewed and acted on by 

Region 8 due to Region 8’s Technical 

Support Audit (TSA), which was 

completed in August 2015, and found 

major and minor/observation issues 

with the network. The objective of a 

TSA is to review a quality assurance 

(QA) system in order to evaluate the 

system’s ability to ensure quality, in this 

case, the reporting of valid data to the 

EPA’s AQS database. The QA 

requirements of 40 CFR part 58, 

appendices A through E pertain to 

regulatory air monitoring at SLAMS. A 

major finding may indicate that invalid 

data have been loaded in AQS or, if not 

corrected, future operations may result 

in collection of invalid data, and a 

minor/observation finding will not 

necessarily lead to data loss or 

invalidation, but warrant investigation, 

appropriate follow-up and audit 

response. Additional details pertaining 

to the major and minor findings can be 

found in the 2015 TSA in the Region 8 

docket (EPA–R08–OAR–2018–0309). 

Due to these monitoring issues, the 

EPA was not able to approve UDAQ’s 

2015 AMNP and a large number of 

samples from the filter-based Federal 

Reference Method (FRM) monitor in 

Logan and Smithfield were invalidated.4

The EPA worked with UDAQ to correct 

these deficiencies found in the August 

2015 TSA and after their review of the 

PM2.5 data for 2015, UDAQ removed the 

invalid samples for the Logan FRM 

monitor and left the valid samples in 

the AQS database. Additionally, some 

continuous sampler data from the Logan 

co-located Federal Equivalent Method 

(FEM) monitor were determined to have 

sufficient QA to meet NAAQS 

comparison requirements. Data from 

this co-located monitor were used to fill 

in some of the missing days in 2015, 

adding to the total number of samples 

that can be used to determine a 98th 

percentile value for that year and 

providing for a complete 2015 

monitoring year. Utah used the 

methodology found in 40 CFR part 50, 

appendix N sections 3.0(d)(2) and 3.0(e) 

to substitute FEM data for the days 

without FRM data. 

The EPA has reviewed the Logan site 

and, using the criteria found in 40 CFR 

part 58, appendix A, has determined 

that the QA for the continuous FEM 

monitor is acceptable. We therefore 

agree that the data from the FEM 

monitor can be substituted for the days 

for which the FRM monitor data was 

invalid, which would provide for a 

complete year in 2015 to be used in 

showing attainment. Pursuant to 40 CFR 

50, appendix N, the standard must be 

met at each ‘‘eligible monitoring site,’’ 

where an ‘‘eligible [monitoring] site’’ is 

defined in appendix N as a site that 

meets the requirements of 40 CFR 58.11 

and 58.30. Thus, appendix N does not 

require AMNP approval, only that the 

monitoring site meets the substantive 

requirements. Upon reviewing the 

Logan and Smithfield sites, despite the 

EPA not formally approving the 2015 

AMNP, the EPA finds that the Logan 

and Smithfield sites met the 

requirements of 40 CFR 58.11 during 

2015. On November 29, 2016, UDAQ 

submitted a letter that contained the 

AMP 430, AMP 450, AMP 256 and AMP 

450NC reports required to certify the 

2015 air quality data in Utah. UDAQ 

completed the data certification process 

in AQS and with the November 29, 2016 

letter, certified that the 2015 air quality 

data is accurate. Additional information 

related to these monitors can be found 

in the November 23, 2016 memoranda 

found in the Region 8 docket (EPA– 

R08–OAR–2018–0309). 

On March 14, 2017, the EPA approved 

Utah’s 2016 AMNP. As part of the 

approval, we approved the closing of 

the Logan monitoring station on 

December 31, 2015 (AQS ID #49–005– 

0004) and the establishment of the 

Smithfield monitoring station (AQS ID 

#49–005–0007) as a maximum 

concentration site. Additionally, on 

April 20, 2017, UDAQ submitted a letter 

that contained the AMP 600 and AMP 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 138 / Wednesday, July 18, 2018 / Proposed Rules 33889 

5 In the approval letter, the EPA noted that since 

the alteration of the FEM continuous monitor did 

not change the SLAMS network, the EPA approval 

is not needed. 

6The November 8, 2017 AMNP approval letter 

noted monitoring network deficiencies related to 

ozone monitoring and deficiencies in Idaho’s 

network monitoring plan, but these were not 

deficiencies specific to PM2.5 air quality monitoring 

in the Logan, UT-ID Metropolitan Statistical Area. 

450NC reports required to certify the 

2016 air quality data in Utah. UDAQ 

completed the data certification process 

in AQS and with the April 20, 2017 

letter, certified that the 2016 air quality 

data is accurate. 

On October 27, 2017, the EPA 

approved Utah’s 2017 AMNP, and on 

April 10, 2018, the UDAQ submitted a 

letter that contained the AMP 600 and 

AMP 450NC reports required to certify 

the 2017 air quality data in Utah. With 

the April 10, 2018 letter, UDAQ 

completed the data certification process 

in AQS and certified that the 2017 air 

quality data is accurate. 

The Smithfield monitoring site data 

was incomplete for 2015 because the 

station, including the co-located 

continuous monitor, was not operating 

in January of that year. Thus, in order 

to establish 3 years of valid data at the 

Smithfield monitoring site, the EPA 

proposes to combine the January 2015 

Logan data with Smithfield’s February 

through December 2015 data. In doing 

so, we are considering not only our 

approval of the replacement of the 

Logan monitor with the Smithfield 

monitor in the monitoring network, but 

also the consistency of the data from the 

two monitors. During 2015, data from 

the two monitors on days above 10 mg/ 

m3 was well correlated. For details, 

please see the June 13, 2018 

memorandum to the docket entitled 

‘‘Logan, Utah PM2.5 Monitoring Data Set 

Determination Memo.’’ 

C. Franklin, ID Monitoring 

Idaho submitted its 2015 AMNP on 

August 12, 2015. Until June 30, 2015, 

Idaho had two regulatory air quality 

monitors running at the Franklin, ID 

site. As part of the network plan, Idaho 

proposed to replace the very sharp cut 

cyclone (VSCC) on its FEM continuous 

monitor with a sharp cut cyclone (SCC), 

making it a special purpose monitor for 

Air Quality Index (AQI) reporting. This 

change resulted in the FEM continuous 

monitor becoming non-regulatory, as of 

June 30, 2015. The EPA approved 

Idaho’s 2015 AMNP on October 28, 

2015.5

Idaho submitted its 2016 AMNP on 

July 28, 2016. The EPA approved 

Idaho’s network plan on December 13, 

2016. The regulatory FRM monitor at 

the Franklin, ID site did not meet the 

completeness requirements in Quarter 2 

of 2016. Per 40 CFR part 50, appendix 

N, 4.2(c), when a monitor has less than 

75% capture in a quarter (but greater 

than 50%), a substitution test can be 

performed to determine the validity of 

the data. The Franklin monitor had 70% 

completeness in Quarter 2 of 2016. Per 

the substitution test, the highest Quarter 

2 value for the 3-year period under 

consideration is substituted for all 

missing data in the deficient quarter. 

The 2015–2017 design value is the 3- 

year period under consideration in this 

case. The highest value is 10.3 mg/m3

within the 3-year period during that 

quarter of the year. Applying the 

maximum 10.3 mg/m3 PM2.5 value to the 

missing data for the deficient quarter 

(Quarter 2, 2016) does not affect the 

2015–2017 design value at the Franklin 

monitor. 

Idaho submitted its initial 2017 

AMNP on June 29, 2017, and submitted 

an addendum on October 31, 2017. The 

addendum requested changing the run 

schedule of the regulatory FRM monitor 

at the Franklin, ID site from every third 

day to daily. The EPA approved the 

2017 AMNP, including the run schedule 

change, on November 8, 2017.6

D. Evaluation of Current Attainment 

As discussed above, the EPA’s 

evaluation of whether the Logan, UT-ID 

PM2.5 nonattainment area has attained 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS is based 

on our review of the monitoring data, 

and takes into account the adequacy of 

the PM2.5 monitoring network in the 

nonattainment area and the reliability of 

the data collected by the network as 

discussed in the previous section of this 

document. 

Based on our review, the PM2.5

monitoring network for the Logan, UTID nonattainment area meets the 

requirements stated above and is 

therefore adequate for use in 

determining whether the area attained 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Additionally, the EPA has reviewed the 

data for the most recent 3-year period 

(2015–2017) for completeness and has 

determined that the data collected by 

UDAQ and IDEQ meets the 

completeness criterion for all 12 

quarters at the Smithfield, Utah and 

Franklin, Idaho monitors. 

The EPA reviewed the PM2.5 ambient 

air monitoring data from the Smithfield, 

Utah (AQS site 49–005–0007) and 

Franklin, Idaho (AQS site 16–041–0001) 

monitoring sites consistent with the 

requirements contained in 40 CFR part 

50, as recorded in the EPA AQS 

database for the Logan, UT-ID 

nonattainment area. For purposes of 

determining attainment by the 

December 31, 2017 extended attainment 

date, the EPA determined that the data 

recorded in the AQS database was 

certified and complete. 

Additionally, UDAQ submitted 

exceptional events demonstrations for 

the year 2017. The PM2.5 SIP 

Requirements Rule (81 FR 58010, 

August 24, 2016) states: 

Air quality monitoring data that the 

EPA determines to have been influenced 

by an exceptional event under the 

procedural steps, substantive criteria, 

and schedule specified in the 

Exceptional Events Rule may be 

excluded from regulatory decisions such 

as initial area designations decisions 

and decisions associated with 

implementing the PM2.5 NAAQS such as 

clean data determinations (CDD), 

evaluation of attainment 

demonstrations, and discretionary or 

mandatory reclassifications of 

nonattainment areas from Moderate to 

Serious. While the EPA may agree with 

the state’s request to exclude eventinfluenced air quality monitoring data 

from regulatory decisions, these 

regulatory actions require the EPA to 

provide an opportunity for public 

comment on the claimed exceptional 

event and all supporting data prior to 

the EPA taking final agency action. 

The EPA concurred on these 

exceptional events on June 15, 2018, 

and the concurrence is included in the 

Region 8 docket for this action (EPA– 

R08–OAR–2018–0309). This proposed 

determination of attainment and CDD 

provides the public with an opportunity 

to comment on the claimed exceptional 

events, all supporting documents and 

the EPA’s concurrence with the State of 

Utah’s requests. 

The design value for the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS for the years 2015–2017 

at the Smithfield, Utah site was 33 mg/ 

m3 and 30 mg/m3 at the Franklin, Idaho 

site, which is less than the standard of 

35 mg/m3. See Table 1 below for the 

annual 98th percentiles and 3-year 

design value for the 2015–2017 

monitoring period. On the basis of this 

review, we are proposing to determine 

that the Logan, UT-ID nonattainment 

area attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS by the attainment date. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
33890 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 138 / Wednesday, July 18, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

7 40 CFR 93.101. 

8 40 CFR 93.101. 

TABLE 1—2015–2017 LOGAN UT-ID NONATTAINMENT AREA PM2.5 MONITORING DATA

Monitor name AQS site ID 

98th percentile (μg/m3) 2015–2017 

24-hour design 

value 

(μg/m3) 2015 2016 2017 

Smithfield, UT ...................................................................... 49–005–0007 a 28.9 34.4 36.0 a 33 

Franklin, ID ........................................................................... 16–041–0001 18.8 33.3 b 38.3 b 30 

aThis value combines monitor data from the Logan, UT and Smithfield, UT monitors. The EPA concurred exceptional events are excluded. bThis value includes 1 in 3 monitoring frequency from January 1–August 9, 2017, and daily monitoring frequency from August 10–December 

31, 2017. 

III. Clean Data Determination 

Over the past 2 decades, the EPA has 

consistently applied its ‘‘Clean Data 

Policy’’ interpretation to attainment 

related provisions of subparts 1, 2, and 

4 of the CAA. The EPA codified the 

approach in the Clean Data Policy in the 

PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule (40 CFR 

51.1015(a)) for the implementation of 

current and future PM2.5 NAAQS. See 

81 FR 58010, 58161 (August 24, 2016). 

For a complete discussion of the Clean 

Data Policy’s history and the EPA’s 

longstanding interpretation under the 

CAA, please refer to the August 24, 2016 

PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule (81 FR 

58010). 

The general requirements of subpart 1 

apply in conjunction with the more 

specific requirements of subpart 4, to 

the extent they are not superseded or 

subsumed by the subpart 4 

requirements. Subpart 1 contains 

general air quality planning 

requirements for areas designated 

nonattainment. See section 172(c). 

Subpart 4 itself contains specific 

planning and scheduling requirements 

for particulate matter nonattainment 

areas, See section188. The final PM2.5

SIP Requirements Rule interprets the 

CAA specific to PM2.5 and provides 

information on the statutory 

requirements for SIPs for PM2.5

nonattainment areas. See 81 FR 58010 

(August 24, 2016). 

As provided in 40 CFR 51.1015, so 

long as an area continues to meet the 

standard, finalization of a CDD 

suspends the requirements for a 

nonattainment area to submit an 

attainment demonstration, associated 

RACM, RFP plan, contingency measures 

and any other planning SIP 

requirements related to the attainment 

of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. For purposes 

of this NAAQS, the requirement to 

submit a projected attainment inventory 

as part of an attainment demonstration 

or RFP is also suspended by this 

determination. As discussed in the 2016 

PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule, the 

nonattainment base emissions inventory 

required by section 172(c)(3) is not 

suspended by this determination 

because the base inventory is a 

requirement independent of planning 

for an area’s attainment. See 81 FR 

58009 at 58028 and 58127–8 and 80 FR 

15340 at 15441–2. Additionally, 

nonattainment New Source Review 

(NNSR) requirements are discussed in 

the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule, and 

required by CAA sections 110(a)(2)(C); 

172(c)(5); 173; 189(a); and 189(e), as not 

being suspended by a CDD because this 

requirement is independent of the area’s 

attainment planning. See 81 FR 58010 at 

58107 and 58127. 

By extension, the requirement to 

submit a MVEB for the attainment year 

for the purposes of transportation 

conformity is also suspended. A MVEB 

is that portion of the total allowable 

emissions defined in the submitted or 

approved control strategy 

implementation plan revision or 

maintenance plan for a certain date for 

the purpose of meeting RFP milestones 

or demonstrating attainment or 

maintenance of the NAAQS, for any 

criteria pollutant or its precursors, 

allocated to highway and transit vehicle 

use and emissions.7 For the purposes of 

the transportation conformity 

regulations, the control strategy 

implementation plan revision is the 

implementation plan which contains 

specific strategies for controlling the 

emissions of and reducing ambient 

levels of pollutants in order to satisfy 

CAA requirements for demonstrations of 

RFP and attainment.8 Given that MVEBs 

are required to support the RFP and 

attainment demonstration requirements 

in the attainment plan, suspension of 

the RFP and attainment demonstration 

requirements through a CDD, also 

suspends the requirement to submit 

MVEBs for the attainment and RFP 

years. The suspension of planning 

requirements pursuant to 40 CFR 

51.1015, does not preclude the state 

from submitting suspended elements of 

its moderate area attainment plan for 

EPA approval for the purposes of 

strengthening the state’s SIP. 

The suspension of the obligation to 

submit such requirements applies 

regardless of when the plan submissions 

are due. The CDD does not suspend 

CAA requirements that are independent 

of helping the area achieve attainment, 

such as the requirements to submit an 

emissions inventory and NNSR 

requirements. A clean data 

determination is not equivalent to a 

redesignation, and the state must still 

meet the statutory requirements for 

redesignation in order to be 

redesignated to attainment. 

In accordance with 40 CFR 

51.1015(a)(1) and (2), the CDD suspends 

the aforementioned SIP obligations until 

such time as the area is redesignated to 

attainment, after which such 

requirements are permanently 

discharged; or the EPA determines that 

the area has re-violated the PM2.5

NAAQS, at which time the state shall 

submit such attainment plan elements 

for the Moderate nonattainment area by 

a future date to be determined by the 

EPA and announced through 

publication in the Federal Register at 

the time the EPA determines the area is 

violating the PM2.5 NAAQS. 

A. Clean Data Determination for the 

Logan, UT-ID Nonattainment Area 

Based on the same monitoring data for 

the period 2015–2017, the EPA is also 

proposing to determine that the area has 

clean data for demonstrating attainment 

of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. In 

accordance with 40 CFR 51.1015, a CDD 

can be made upon a determination by 

the EPA that a Moderate PM2.5 NAA is 

attaining the PM2.5 NAAQS. As 

provided in 40 CFR 51.1015, so long as 

the EPA does not determine that the 

area has re-violated the standard, 

finalization of this determination 

suspends the requirements for this area 

to submit an attainment demonstration, 

associated RACM, RFP plan, 

contingency measures, and any other 

SIP planning requirements related to the 

attainment of the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

For purposes of this NAAQS, the 

requirement to submit an attainment 

year projected inventory for the 

nonattainment area as part of an 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 138 / Wednesday, July 18, 2018 / Proposed Rules 33891 

9 In accordance with 40 CFR 93.109(c)(5), Idaho 

will rely on the 2014 early progress MVEB 

approved on August 8, 2017, for the purposes of 

transportation conformity. 82 FR 37025. 

10Pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(4), the EPA 

conditionally approved the RFP, quantitative 

milestones, and attainment year MVEB elements 

based on an April 25, 2017, commitment from the 

IDEQ to submit the elements by August 1, 2018. 82 

FR 37028. If finalized, the CDD would suspend the 

state’s obligation to meet this commitment. 

However, the CDD does not preclude the state from 

submitting the suspended elements. 

11As discussed in sections I.C. and I.D. of this 

Federal Register action, both Utah and Idaho have 

implemented RACM. In addition, Idaho has not 

adopted contingency measures as part of its 

Moderate area SIP. 

12Meeting the requirements of 40 CFR part 50, 

appendix N, and part 58. 

attainment demonstration or RFP as 

well as MVEB are also suspended by 

this determination. As discussed in the 

PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule, the base 

year inventory for the nonattainment 

area required by section 172(c)(3) is not 

suspended by this determination 

because the base year inventory is a 

requirement independent of planning 

for an area’s attainment. See 81 FR 

58009 at 58028 and 58127–8 and 80 FR 

15340 at 15441–2. Additionally, NNSR 

requirements are discussed in the PM2.5

SIP Requirements Rule, and required by 

CAA sections 110(a)(2)(C); 172(c)(5); 

173; 189(a); and 189(e), as not being 

suspended by this determination 

because this requirement is independent 

of the area’s attainment planning. See 81 

FR 58010 at 58107 and 58127. 

Under a CDD, the planning 

requirements noted above shall be 

suspended until such time as the area is 

redesignated to attainment, after which 

such requirements are permanently 

discharged. Specific to Idaho, we are 

proposing to suspend the requirements 

to submit RFP, quantitative milestones, 

attainment year MVEB9 and 

contingency measures.10 If we finalize 

today’s proposed CDD, any sanctions 

clocks under CAA section 179(a) or 

requirements that we promulgate a 

Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) 

under CAA section 110(c) for these SIP 

requirements will be suspended for the 

pendency of the CDD. If the EPA 

subsequently determines that the area is 

in violation of the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS, the EPA would rescind the 

CDD, the states would again be required 

to submit the suspended attainment 

plan elements to the EPA, and the FIP 

and sanctions clocks would resume. See 

40 CFR 51.1015(a)(2). 

Neither the proposed finding of 

attainment by the attainment date nor 

the proposed CDD is equivalent to the 

redesignation of the area to attainment. 

This proposed action, if finalized, will 

not constitute a redesignation to 

attainment under CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E), because the states must 

have an approved maintenance plan for 

the area as required under section 175A 

of the CAA, and the EPA must 

determine that the area has met the 

other requirements for redesignation in 

order to be redesignated to attainment. 

The designation status of the area will 

remain nonattainment for the 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS until such time as the 

EPA determines that the area meets the 

CAA requirements for redesignation to 

attainment in CAA section 107(d)(3)(E). 

It is possible, although not expected, 

that the Logan, UT-ID area could violate 

the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS before a 

maintenance plan is adopted, submitted 

and approved, and the area is 

redesignated to attainment. Pursuant to 

40 CFR 51.1015(a)(2), if the EPA 

determines that the area has re-violated 

the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, the states 

shall be required to submit the 

suspended attainment plan elements. 

Even so, submission of the suspended 

elements may be insufficient to 

eliminate future violations.11 Therefore, 

the issuance of a SIP call under section 

110(k)(5) could be an appropriate 

response. This SIP call could require the 

states to submit, by a reasonable 

deadline not to exceed 18 months, a 

revised plan demonstrating expeditious 

attainment and complying with other 

requirements applicable to the area at 

the time of such finding. Under CAA 

section 172(d), the EPA may reasonably 

adjust the dates applicable to these 

requirements. 

IV. Proposed Action 

Pursuant to CAA section 188(b)(2), 

the EPA is proposing to determine, 

based on the most recent 3 years (2015– 

2017) of valid data,12 that the Logan, 

UT-ID nonattainment area has attained 

the 2006 primary and secondary 24- 

hour PM2.5 NAAQS by the December 31, 

2017, attainment date. 

In addition, pursuant to the Clean 

Data Policy codified at 40 CFR 

51.1015(a), and based upon our 

proposed determination that the Logan, 

UT-ID nonattainment area has attained 

the standard, the EPA proposes to 

determine that the obligation to submit 

any remaining attainment-related SIP 

revisions arising from classification of 

the Logan, UT-ID area as a Moderate 

nonattainment area under subpart 4 of 

part D (of title I of the Act) for the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS is not applicable 

for so long as the area continues to 

attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

If today’s action is finalized as 

proposed, the sanctions and FIP clocks 

triggered by the partial disapproval of 

the contingency measure element of the 

Idaho portion of the Logan, UT-ID PM2.5

SIP will be suspended. This proposed 

action, if finalized, would not constitute 

a redesignation to attainment under 

CAA section 107(d)(3). 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

This action proposes to make a 

determination of attainment based on 

air quality and to suspend certain 

federal requirements, and thus would 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

this reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

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

January 21, 2011); 

• is not expected to be an Executive 

Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 

2017) regulatory action because this 

action is not significant under Executive 

Order 12866; 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• does not provide the EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed action does 

not have tribal implications as specified 

by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1
33892 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 138 / Wednesday, July 18, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

obligations discussed herein do not 

apply to Indian tribes and thus this 

proposed action 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, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: June 25, 2018. 

Debra H. Thomas, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

Dated: June 26, 2018. 

Chris Hladick, 

Regional Administrator, Region 10. 

[FR Doc. 2018–15343 Filed 7–17–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2018–0509; FRL–9980– 

89—Region 10] 

Air Plan Approval; Idaho; Interstate 

Transport Requirements for the 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Clean Air Act (CAA) 

requires each State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) to contain adequate provisions 

prohibiting emissions that will have 

certain adverse air quality effects in 

other states. On December 23, 2015, the 

State of Idaho made a submission to the 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

to address these requirements. The EPA 

is proposing to approve the submission 

as meeting the requirement that each 

SIP contain adequate provisions to 

prohibit emissions that will contribute 

significantly to nonattainment or 

interfere with maintenance of the 2012 

annual fine particulate matter (PM2.5) 

national ambient air quality standard 

(NAAQS) in any other state. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 17, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10– 

OAR–2018–0509 at https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

The EPA may publish any comment 

received to its public docket. Do not 

submit electronically any information 

you consider to be Confidential 

Business Information (CBI) or other 

information the disclosure of which is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

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

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff 

Hunt, Air Planning Unit, Office of Air 

and Waste (OAW–150), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 10, 1200 

Sixth Ave, Suite 155, Seattle, WA 

98101; telephone number: (206) 553– 

0256; email address: hunt.jeff@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. What is the background of this SIP 

submission? 

II. What guidance or information is the EPA 

using to evaluate this SIP submission? 

III. The EPA’s Review 

IV. What action is the EPA taking? 

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is the background of this SIP 

submission? 

This rulemaking addresses a 

submission from the Idaho Department 

of Environmental Quality (IDEQ) 

assessing interstate transport 

requirements for the 2012 annual PM2.5

NAAQS. The requirement for states to 

make a SIP submission of this type 

arises from section 110(a)(1) of the CAA. 

Pursuant to section 110(a)(1), states 

must submit within 3 years (or such 

shorter period as the Administrator may 

prescribe) after the promulgation of a 

national primary ambient air quality 

standard (or any revision thereof), a 

plan that provides for the 

implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement of such NAAQS. The 

statute directly imposes on states the 

duty to make these SIP submissions, 

and the requirement to make the 

submissions is not conditioned upon 

the EPA taking any action other than 

promulgating a new or revised NAAQS. 

Section 110(a)(2) includes a list of 

specific elements that ‘‘[e]ach such 

plan’’ submission must address. The 

EPA commonly refers to such state 

plans as ‘‘infrastructure SIPs.’’ 

Specifically, this rulemaking addresses 

the requirements under CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), otherwise known as 

the ‘‘good neighbor’’ provision, which 

requires SIPs to contain adequate 

provisions to prohibit emissions that 

will contribute significantly to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the NAAQS in any other 

state. 

II. What guidance or information is the 

EPA using to evaluate this SIP 

submission? 

The most recent relevant document 

was a memorandum published on 

March 17, 2016, titled ‘‘Information on 

the Interstate Transport ‘‘Good 

Neighbor’’ Provision for the 2012 Fine 

Particulate Matter National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards under Clean Air Act 

Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)’’ 

(memorandum). The memorandum 

describes the EPA’s past approach to 

addressing interstate transport, and 

provides the EPA’s general review of 

relevant modeling data and air quality 

projections as they relate to the 2012 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The 

memorandum provides information 

relevant to the EPA regional office 

review of the CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) ‘‘good neighbor’’ 

provision in infrastructure SIPs with 

respect to the 2012 annual PM2.5

NAAQS. This rulemaking considers 

information provided in that 

memorandum. 

The memorandum also provides 

states and the EPA regional offices with 

future year annual PM2.5 design values 

for monitors in the United States based 

on quality assured and certified ambient 

monitoring data and air quality 

modeling. The memorandum describes 

how these projected potential design 

values can be used to help determine 

which monitors should be further 

evaluated to potentially address 

whether emissions from other states 

significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 annual PM2.5

NAAQS at those sites. The 

memorandum explains that the 

pertinent year for evaluating air quality 

for purposes of addressing interstate 

transport for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS is 

2021, the attainment deadline for 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS nonattainment areas 

classified as Moderate. 


amozie on DSK3GDR082PROD with PROPOSALS1