Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2018 / Proposed Rules 39387 

Order 7400.11B, dated August 3, 2017, 

and effective September 15, 2017, which 

is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR 

71.1. The Class E airspace designation 

listed in this document will be 

published subsequently in the Order. 

Regulatory Notices and Analyses 

The FAA has determined that this 

proposed regulation only involves an 

established body of technical 

regulations for which frequent and 

routine amendments are necessary to 

keep them operationally current. It, 

therefore: (1) Is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under Executive 

Order 12866; (2) is not a ‘‘significant 

rule’’ under DOT Regulatory Policies 

and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 

26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant 

preparation of a Regulatory Evaluation 

as the anticipated impact is so minimal. 

Since this is a routine matter that will 

only affect air traffic procedures and air 

navigation, it is certified that this 

proposed rule, when promulgated, will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

Environmental Review 

This proposal will be subject to an 

environmental analysis in accordance 

with FAA Order 1050.1F, 

‘‘Environmental Impacts: Policies and 

Procedures’’ prior to any FAA final 

regulatory action. 

Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, 

Navigation (air). 

The Proposed Amendment 

In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

proposes to amend 14 CFR part 71 as 

follows: 

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, 

B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR 

TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND 

REPORTING POINTS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 71 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, 

40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 

1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. 

§ 71.1 [Amended] 

■ 2. The incorporation by reference in 

14 CFR 71.1 of Federal Aviation 

Administration Order 7400.11B, 

Airspace Designations and Reporting 

Points, dated August 3, 2017, and 

effective September 15, 2017, is 

amended as follows: 

Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas 

Extending Upward From 700 Feet or More 

Above the Surface of the Earth. 

* * * * * 

ASO TN E5 Knoxville, TN [Amended] 

McGhee-Tyson Airport, TN 

(Lat. 35°48′34′′ N, long. 83°59′43′′ W) 

Gatlinburg-Pigeon Forge Airport, TN 

(Lat. 35°51′28′′ N, long. 83°31′43′′ W) 

Knoxville Downtown Island Airport, TN 

(Lat. 35°57′50′′ N, long. 83°52′25′′ W) 

That airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface within a 15.4-mile 

radius of McGhee-Tyson Airport, and within 

a 13-mile radius of Gatlinburg-Pigeon Forge 

Airport, and from the 080° bearing from 

Gatlinburg-Pigeon Forge Airport clockwise to 

the 210° bearing extending from the 13-mile 

radius southeast to the 33-mile radius 

centered on Gatlinburg-Pigeon Forge Airport, 

and within an 8-mile radius of Knoxville 

Downtown Island Airport. 

ASO TN E5 Madisonville, TN [New] 

Monroe County Airport, TN, 

(Lat. 35°32′43′′ N, long. 84°22′49′′ W) 

That airspace extending upward from 700 

feet above the surface within an 8.5-mile 

radius of Monroe County Airport. 

Issued in College Park, Georgia, on July 30, 

2018. 

Ryan W. Almasy, 

Manager, Operations Support Group, Eastern 

Service Center, Air Traffic Organization. 

[FR Doc. 2018–16865 Filed 8–8–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2016–0334; FRL–9982– 

00—Region 4] 

Air Plan Approval; AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, 

NC, SC, TN; Interstate Transport for 

the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

portions of State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) submissions from Alabama, 

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, 

North Carolina, South Carolina, and 

Tennessee addressing the Clean Air Act 

(CAA or Act) interstate transport 

infrastructure SIP requirements for the 

2012 Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS). The CAA requires that each 

state adopt and submit a SIP for the 

implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement of each NAAQS 

promulgated by EPA, commonly 

referred to as an ‘‘infrastructure SIP.’’ 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

interstate transport portions of these 

infrastructure SIPs for the 

aforementioned states as demonstrating 

that air emissions in the states do not 

significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in any other state. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 30, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No EPA–R04– 

OAR–2016–0334 at http://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Once submitted, comments cannot be 

edited or removed from Regulations.gov. 

EPA may publish any comment received 

to its public docket. Do not submit 

electronically any information you 

consider to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Multimedia submissions (audio, video, 

etc.) must be accompanied by a written 

comment. The written comment is 

considered the official comment and 

should include discussion of all points 

you wish to make. EPA will generally 

not consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

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

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, the full 

EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

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

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Richard Wong of the Air Regulatory 

Management Section, Air Planning and 

Implementation Branch, Air, Pesticides 

and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, 

Georgia 30303–8960. Mr. Wong can be 

reached by telephone at (404) 562–8726 

or via electronic mail at wong.richard@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

On December 14, 2012, EPA revised 

the primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS to 

12.0 micrograms per cubic meter (mg/ 

m3). See 78 FR 3086 (January 15, 2013). 

An area meets the standard if the threeyear average of its annual average PM2.5

concentration (at each monitoring site in 

the area) is less than or equal to 12.0 mg/ 

m3. States were required to submit 

infrastructure SIP submissions for the 

2012 PM2.5 NAAQS to EPA no later than 

December 14, 2015. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
39388 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

1EPA highlighted the statutory requirement to 

submit infrastructure SIPs within three years of 

promulgation of a new NAAQS in an October 2, 

2007, guidance document entitled ‘‘Guidance on 

SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) 

and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and PM2.5

National Ambient Air Quality Standards’’ (2007 

guidance). EPA has issued additional guidance 

documents and memoranda, including a September 

13, 2013, guidance document titled ‘‘Guidance on 

Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Elements under Clean Air Act Sections 110(a)(1) 

and 110(a)(2)’’ (2013 guidance). 

2EPA notes that the Agency may not have 

received the submissions until after the date of the 

cover letter. 

3This memorandum is available in the docket for 

this rulemaking and at https://www.epa.gov/sites/ 

production/files/2016-05/documents/goodneighbor-memo_implementation.pdf. 

CAA section 110(a)(1) requires states 

to submit SIP revisions within three 

years after promulgation of a new or 

revised NAAQS in order to provide for 

the implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement of the new or revised 

NAAQS. CAA section 110(a)(2) outlines 

the applicable requirements of such SIP 

submissions, which EPA has 

historically referred to as ‘‘infrastructure 

SIP’’ submissions. Section 110(a)(2) 

requires states to address basic SIP 

elements such as monitoring, basic 

program requirements (e.g., permitting), 

and legal authority that are designed to 

assure attainment and maintenance of 

the newly established or revised 

NAAQS. Thus, section 110(a)(1) 

provides the procedural and timing 

requirements for infrastructure SIPs, 

and section 110(a)(2) lists specific 

elements that states must meet for the 

infrastructure SIP requirements related 

to a newly established or revised 

NAAQS. The contents of an 

infrastructure SIP submission may vary 

depending upon the data and analytical 

tools available to the state, as well as the 

provisions already contained in the 

state’s implementation plan at the time 

in which the state develops and submits 

the submission for a new or revised 

NAAQS. 

Section 110(a)(2)(D) has two 

subsections: 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and 

110(a)(2)(D)(ii). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) 

includes four distinct components, 

commonly referred to as ‘‘prongs,’’ that 

must be addressed in infrastructure SIP 

submissions. The first two prongs, 

which are codified in section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), require plans to 

prohibit any source or other type of 

emissions activity in one state from 

contributing significantly to 

nonattainment of the NAAQS in another 

state (prong 1) and from interfering with 

maintenance of the NAAQS in another 

state (prong 2). The third and fourth 

prongs, which are codified in section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), are provisions that 

prohibit emissions activity in one state 

from interfering with measures required 

to prevent significant deterioration of air 

quality in another state (prong 3) or 

from interfering with measures to 

protect visibility in another state (prong 

4). Section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii) requires SIPs 

to include provisions insuring 

compliance with sections 115 and 126 

of the Act, relating to interstate and 

international pollution abatement.1

Through this notice, EPA is proposing 

to approve the prong 1 and prong 2 

portions of infrastructure SIP 

submissions transmitted under cover 

letter by: Alabama (dated December 9, 

2015); Florida (dated December 14, 

2015); Georgia (dated December 14, 

2015); Kentucky (dated February 8, 

2016); Mississippi (dated December 8, 

2015); North Carolina (dated December 

4, 2015); South Carolina (dated 

December 14, 2015); and Tennessee 

(dated December 16, 2015), as 

demonstrating that these states do not 

significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in any other state.2 All other applicable 

infrastructure SIP requirements for these 

SIP submissions have been or will be 

addressed in separate rulemakings. A 

brief background regarding the 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS is provided below. For 

comprehensive information on the 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS, please refer to the 

Federal Register notice cited above. 

II. What approach is EPA using to 

evaluate these SIP submissions? 

In several federal rulemakings, EPA 

has developed and consistently applied 

a framework for addressing prongs 1 

and 2 of the interstate transport 

requirements with respect to the PM2.5

NAAQS. That framework has four basic 

steps, including: (1) Identifying 

downwind receptors that are expected 

to have problems attaining or 

maintaining the NAAQS; (2) identifying 

which upwind states contribute to these 

identified problems in amounts 

sufficient to warrant further review and 

analysis; (3) for states identified as 

contributing to downwind air quality 

problems, identifying upwind emissions 

reductions necessary to prevent an 

upwind state from significantly 

contributing to nonattainment or 

interfering with maintenance of the 

NAAQS downwind; and (4) for states 

that are found to have emissions that 

significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the NAAQS downwind, 

reducing the identified upwind 

emissions through adoption of 

permanent and enforceable measures. 

This framework was most recently 

applied with respect to PM2.5 in the 

Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), 

designed to address the 1997 and 2006 

PM2.5 standards as well as the 1997 

ozone standards. 

EPA provided additional information 

in a memorandum published on March 

17, 2016, titled ‘‘Information on the 

Interstate Transport ‘Good Neighbor’ 

Provision of the 2012 Fine Particulate 

Matter National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards under Clean Air Act Section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)’’ (2016 memorandum).3

The 2016 memorandum provides 

information relevant to 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 PM2.5 NAAQS, 

describes EPA’s past approach to 

addressing interstate transport, and 

provides EPA’s general review of 

relevant modeling data and air quality 

projections as they relate to the 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS. This proposed 

rulemaking considers information 

provided in that memorandum. 

In particular, the 2016 memorandum 

provides states and EPA Regional offices 

with information that is central to the 

first step in the 4-step framework for 

determining whether an upwind area 

contributes significantly to downwind 

air quality problems, which is the 

identification of the downwind 

receptors that may present 

nonattainment or maintenance problems 

at the appropriate time. Specifically, the 

2016 memorandum provides projected 

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 further 

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 PM2.5 NAAQS 

at those sites. The 2016 memorandum 

explains that for the purposes of 

addressing intestate transport for the 

2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, it may be 

appropriate to evaluate projected air 

quality in 2021, which is the attainment 

deadline for 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

nonattainment areas classified as 

moderate. 

In CSAPR, EPA defined 

nonattainment receptors as those 

monitoring sites that are projected to 

exceed the NAAQS in the appropriate 

future analytic year, while maintenance 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2018 / Proposed Rules 39389 

4Current design values include the 2015–2017 

available and certified data that states submitted to 

EPA on May 1, 2018, through the Air Quality 

System. 

5The 2012 contribution modeling is documented 

in EPA’s ‘‘Air Quality Modeling Final Rule 

Technical Support Document’’ (June 2011) located 

in the docket for this proposed rulemaking and at 

https://www.epa.gov/csapr/cross-state-airpollution-final-and-proposed-rules titled 

Contributions of 8-hour ozone, annual PM2.5, and 

24-hour PM2.5 from each state to each monitoring 

site (Excel). EPA used the CAMx version 5.3 to 

simulate ozone and PM2.5 concentrations for the 

2005 base year and the 2012 and 2014 future year 

scenarios. CAMx was also used for the 2012 source 

apportionment modeling to quantify interstate 

transport of ozone and PM2.5. 

receptors are monitoring sites that are 

projected to have difficulty maintaining 

the relevant NAAQS in a scenario that 

considers historical variability in air 

quality at that receptor (81 FR 74504, 

74531, October 26, 2016). Accordingly, 

EPA used the average projected design 

value to identify potential 

‘‘nonattainment’’ receptors, and the 

maximum projected design value to 

identify potential ‘‘maintenance’’ 

receptors. Since modeling results are 

only available for 2017 and 2025, one 

way to assess potential receptors for 

2021 is to assume that receptors 

projected to have average and/or 

maximum design values above the 

NAAQS in both 2017 and 2025 are also 

likely to be either nonattainment or 

maintenance receptors in 2021. 

Similarly, it may be reasonable to 

assume that receptors that are projected 

to attain the NAAQS in both 2017 and 

2025 are also likely to be attainment 

receptors in 2021. Where a potential 

receptor is projected to be 

nonattainment or maintenance in 2017, 

but projected to be attainment in 2025, 

further analysis of the emissions and 

modeling may be needed to make a 

further judgement regarding the receptor 

status in 2021. 

Based on this approach, according to 

the 2016 memorandum, all the potential 

nonattainment receptors and most of the 

maintenance receptors are in California, 

located in the San Joaquin Valley or 

South Coast nonattainment areas. 

However, there is also one potential 

maintenance receptor in Shoshone 

County, Idaho, and one potential 

maintenance receptor in Allegheny 

County, Pennsylvania. All other 

monitors in the United States that had 

at least one complete (and valid) PM2.5

design value for the annual average 

2012 NAAQS in the 2009–2013 period 

are projected to attain and maintain the 

2012 PM2.5 NAAQS in 2017 and 2025. 

The 2016 memorandum also notes 

that because of data quality problems, 

nonattainment and maintenance 

projections were not conducted for 

monitors in all or portions of Florida, 

Illinois, Idaho (outside of Shoshone 

County), Tennessee and Kentucky. EPA 

notes, however, that data quality 

problems have subsequently been 

resolved for all of the aforementioned 

areas. These areas have current design 

values 4 below the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

and are expected to continue to 

maintain the NAAQS due to downward 

emission trends for nitrogen oxides 

(NOX) and sulfur dioxide (SO2) and 

therefore are not considered potential 

receptors for the purpose of interstate 

transport for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Therefore, from ‘‘Step 1’’ of this 

evaluation, the areas identified as 

‘‘potential downwind nonattainment 

and maintenance receptors’’ are: 

• Seventeen potential receptors in 

California, located in the San Joaquin 

Valley or South Coast nonattainment 

areas; 

• Shoshone County, Idaho; and 

• Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. 

As stated above, ‘‘Step 2’’ is the 

identification of states contributing to 

downwind nonattainment and 

maintenance receptors, such that further 

analysis is required to identify 

necessary upwind reductions. For this 

step, EPA will be specifically 

determining if emissions from the eight 

southeastern states contribute to the 

potential downwind nonattainment and 

maintenance receptors identified in 

Step 1. 

For the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, 

EPA used air quality modeling and an 

air quality threshold of one percent of 

the PM2.5 NAAQS to identify upwind 

states that contribute to, and are thus 

‘‘linked’’ to, projected nonattainment or 

maintenance receptors (76 FR 48237, 

August 8, 2011).5 If an upwind state 

impacts a downwind receptor by less 

than the one percent threshold, EPA 

determined that the state is not ‘‘linked’’ 

and therefore does not contribute to 

nonattainment at the receptor. Likewise, 

if there is no linkage to a maintenance 

receptor (based, again, on an impact of 

less than the one percent threshold), 

EPA determined the upwind state does 

not contribute to maintenance concerns 

at that receptor. EPA has not set an air 

quality threshold for the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS, and does not have air quality 

modeling showing impacts on projected 

nonattainment or maintenance receptors 

for this NAAQS. 

In the absence of contribution 

modeling, EPA believes that a proper 

and well-supported weight of evidence 

approach can provide sufficient 

information for purposes of evaluating 

the impact of the southeastern states on 

potential downwind receptors with 

respect to the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. As 

part of this weight of evidence 

approach, EPA considered the CSAPR 

air quality modeling conducted for 

purposes of evaluating upwind state 

impacts on downwind air quality with 

respect to the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS of 15.0 mg/m3 (as well as the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and 1997 

Ozone NAAQS). Although not 

conducted for purposes of evaluating 

the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, as noted above, 

this modeling can inform EPA’s analysis 

regarding both the general magnitude of 

downwind PM2.5 impacts and the 

downwind distance in which states may 

contribute to receptors with respect to 

the 2012 annual PM2.5 NAAQS of 12.0 

mg/m3. In particular, if the same one 

percent contribution threshold used in 

CSAPR for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS applied to the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS, EPA could consider the fact 

that a particular state’s impact was 

below that value (that is, 0.12 mg/m3). 

EPA notes the Agency has not set an air 

quality threshold for the 2012 p.m.2.5 

NAAQS and the Agency does not have 

air quality modeling showing impacts 

on projected nonattainment or 

maintenance receptors for the 2012 

p.m.2.5 NAAQS. In addition, EPA 

considers geographical information 

(primarily the distance between the 

southeastern states and the downwind 

receptors), including whether the 

receptors are upwind or downwind, and 

other information (e.g., emission trends, 

air quality data, regulation of PM2.5 and 

precursors) provided in the states’ 

submittals. EPA notes that no single 

piece of information, by itself, is fully 

conclusive. Instead, the total weight of 

all the evidence taken together is used 

to evaluate significant contributions to 

nonattainment or interference with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in another state. 

EPA addresses Step 1 of the 

framework in section III, below, by 

discussing each of the potential 

downwind nonattainment and 

maintenance receptors. EPA mentions 

the California and Idaho receptors only 

briefly because they have little 

relevance for the eight southeastern 

states, as explained below. In section IV, 

below, EPA addresses Step 2 of the 

framework by discussing the 

southeastern states’ impacts on the 

potential receptors. This proposed 

rulemaking considers the analyses from 

Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, 

Mississippi, North Carolina, South 

Carolina, and Tennessee as well as 

additional supplemental analysis 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
39390 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

6Because EPA proposes to find that Alabama, 

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North 

Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee, 

individually, does not have emissions that 

contribute to any nonattainment or maintenance 

receptor in any other state, it is not necessary to 

evaluate steps 3 and 4 of the analytical framework 

described above. 

7As noted in the 2016 memorandum, additional 

information about emissions and trends may be 

needed to further support this conclusion. Provided 

in the docket to this proposed rulemaking are the 

infrastructure SIP submissions which include 

information related to air quality data and trends in 

all states that are the subject of this proposed 

rulemaking (Docket ID: EPA–R04–OAR–2016– 

0334). 

8EPA’s 2016 memorandum does not identify the 

Cleveland, Ohio Area (Cuyahoga and Lorain 

counties), Lebanon and Delaware counties in 

Pennsylvania as a projected nonattainment or 

maintenance area in 2017 or 2025; therefore, these 

areas were not considered potential receptors for 

purposes of interstate transport the 2012 PM2.5

standard. Furthermore, monitors in the Cuyahoga 

(Harvard Yard monitor AQS ID: 39–035–0065) and 

Lorain (AQS ID: 39–093–3002) are measuring below 

the annual standard at 11.7 mg/m3 and 7.6 mg/m3

respectively, based on 2015–2017 data. Similarly, 

monitors in Delaware and Lebanon counites are 

also measuring below the 2012 PM2.5 standard 

based on 2015–2017 design values. 

9As described in the TSD, EPA found the same 

trend during 2008–2017 in Cuyahoga and Lancaster 

Counties in Ohio, which are near Allegheny County 

in Pennsylvania. 

conducted by EPA during review of 

these submittals.6

III. Potential Receptors 

As noted above, in Step 1 of the 

framework, EPA identifies the potential 

downwind nonattainment and 

maintenance receptors. 

A. California 

California has seventeen potential 

receptors, located in the San Joaquin 

Valley or South Coast nonattainment 

areas. However, the nearest southeastern 

state is well over 1,000 miles—and 

downwind—from California. With this 

large distance and a general prevailing 

west to east wind flow, there is no 

evidence that any southeastern state 

will impact the California potential 

receptors, and as a result, EPA 

concludes that sources in Alabama, 

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, 

North Carolina, South Carolina, and 

Tennessee do not significantly 

contribute to nonattainment or interfere 

with maintenance. 

B. Shoshone County, Idaho 

Shoshone County, Idaho, has a 

potential maintenance receptor, but as 

with California, this receptor is well 

over 1,000 miles, and upwind from, the 

nearest southeastern state. With this 

distance and prevailing wind direction, 

there is no evidence that any 

southeastern state will impact this area, 

and as a result, EPA concludes that 

sources in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, 

Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, 

South Carolina, and Tennessee do not 

significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance. 

C. Allegheny County, Pennsylvania 

In the eastern United States, the 

modeling results provided in the 2016 

memorandum show that the Liberty 

monitor (AQS: 42–003–0064), located in 

Allegheny County, Pennsylvania 

(hereinafter referred to as the Liberty 

monitor or Allegheny County monitor), 

was projected to be above the 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS in the 2017 modeling (as 

a maintenance receptor). This monitor 

is, consistent with the projection, 

currently violating the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS based on available and certified 

2015–2017 ambient data measuring 13.0 

mg/m3. However, the monitor is 

projected to both attain and maintain 

the NAAQS in 2025. The 2016 

memorandum indicates that under such 

a condition (where EPA’s 

photochemical modeling indicates an 

area will attain and maintain the 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS in 2025 but not in 2017) 

further analysis of the site should be 

performed to determine if the site may 

be a nonattainment or maintenance 

receptor in 2021. A simple linear 

interpolation between the 2017 and 

2025 projected design values for the 

Allegheny County monitor leads to a 

projected 2021 design value of 11.42 

mg/m3 and a maximum design value of 

11.91 mg/m3, which are both below the 

2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, indicating the 

monitor is likely to attain the standard 

by the attainment deadline of 2021.7

In addition to the modeling 

information, emissions and air quality 

data trends can help corroborate the 

interpolated 2021 values. Over the last 

decade, local and regional emissions 

reductions of primary PM2.5, SO2, and 

NOX, have led to large reductions in 

annual PM2.5 design values in Allegheny 

County, Pennsylvania. The 2015–2017 

annual average PM2.5 design value for 

the Liberty monitor is 13.0 mg/m3, 

which is above the standard. Even so, 

expected emissions reductions in the 

next four years will lead to additional 

reductions in measured PM2.5

concentrations at the Liberty monitor. 

There are both local and regional 

components to the measured PM2.5

levels in Allegheny County and the 

greater Pittsburgh area. Previous CSAPR 

modeling showed that regional 

precursor emissions from upwind states 

contribute to PM2.5 nonattainment at the 

Liberty monitor. In recent years, large 

SO2 and NOX reductions from power 

plants have occurred in Pennsylvania 

and states upwind from the greater 

Pittsburgh region. Projected power plant 

closures and additional emission 

controls in upwind states will help 

further reduce both direct PM2.5 and 

PM2.5 precursors. Regional emissions 

reductions will continue to occur from 

current on-the-books federal and state 

regulations such as the federal on-road 

and non-road vehicle programs and 

various rules for major stationary 

emission sources. Additionally, local 

reductions to both direct PM2.5 and SO2

emissions are expected and should also 

contribute to a further decline in 

Allegheny County’s monitored PM2.5

concentrations. The Allegheny SO2 SIP 

also projects lower SO2 emissions 

resulting from vehicle fuel standards, 

reductions in general emissions due to 

declining population in the Greater 

Pittsburgh region, and several 

shutdowns of significant sources of 

emissions in Allegheny County. 

In addition, in a supplemental 

analysis for this proposed rulemaking, 

EPA conducted a long-term trend 

analysis of the PM2.5 ambient air quality 

data using the Mann-Kendall trend test 

to detect increasing or decreasing trends 

at PM2.5 monitoring sites in 

Pennsylvania (Allegheny, Delaware and 

Lebanon counties), Ohio (Cuyahoga and 

Lorain Counties) 8 and southeastern 

Region 4 states as an additional weight 

of evidence. EPA found downward 

trends in all of those counties during the 

2008–2017 time period. This trends 

analysis is discussed in the Technical 

Support Document (TSD) entitled 

Annual Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) 

Trend Analysis found in the docket for 

this proposed action (Docket ID: EPA– 

R04–OAR–2016–0334). Not only have 

emissions trended downward in 

Allegheny County because of reductions 

from CSAPR implementation across the 

CSAPR states, emissions have trended 

downward nearly universally among 

PM air quality monitors in CSAPR 

states.9 This trend is reinforced by the 

air quality data presented in the 2016 

memorandum. 

Thus, EPA’s modeling projections, the 

recent downward trends in local and 

upwind states’ emissions, the expected 

downward trend in emissions between 

2017 and 2021 and the downward trend 

in upwind monitored PM2.5 sites all 

indicate that the Liberty monitor will 

attain and be able to maintain the 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS by 2021. Accordingly, 

EPA proposes to determine that 

Allegheny County is unlikely to have 

either nonattainment or maintenance 

problems in 2021 and therefore should 

not be considered a receptor for 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2018 / Proposed Rules 39391 

10The 2012 contribution modeling is documented 

in EPA’s ‘‘Air Quality Modeling Final Rule 

Technical Support Document’’ (June 2011) located 

in the docket for this proposed rulemaking and at 

https://www.epa.gov/csapr/cross-state-airpollution-final-and-proposed-rules titled 

Contributions of 8-hour ozone, annual PM2.5, and 

24-hour PM2.5 from each state to each monitoring 

site (Excel). EPA used the CAMx version 5.3 to 

simulate ozone and PM2.5 concentrations for the 

2005 base year and the 2012 and 2014 future year 

scenarios. CAMx was also used for the 2012 source 

apportionment modeling to quantify interstate 

transport of ozone and PM2.5. 

11EPA identified four EGUs in Alabama that have 

retired units in the state including Tennessee Valley 

Authority (TVA) Colbert Fossil Plant, Colbert 

County, AL (units 1–5 retired April 30, 2016); 

Alabama Power Plant Barry, Mobile County, AL 

(unit 3 retired on August 24, 2015), TVA Widows 

Creek Fossil Plant, Jackson County, AL (units 1–6 

retired June 25, 2014; units 7 and 8 retired April 

30, 2016) and Alabama Power Plant Gorgas, Walker 

County, AL (retired units 6 and 7 on August 24, 

2015). Source https://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/ 

business-center. 

purposes of interstate transport for the 

2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

IV. EPA’s Review of How the Southeast 

States Addressed Prongs 1 and 2 

The following discussion summarizes 

EPA’s individual analyses for the 

portions of submissions from Alabama, 

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, 

North Carolina, South Carolina, and 

Tennessee intended to meet the prong 1 

and prong 2 requirements of 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) for the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS. EPA’s analysis is based on the 

supplemented CSAPR framework 

evaluation and information included in 

the states’ submissions as a collective 

weight of evidence demonstration. The 

analysis focuses on evaluating whether 

there will be any downwind 

maintenance or nonattainment receptors 

in 2021, as discussed above, and the 

extent, if any, to which emissions from 

each of the eight states may impact any 

such downwind receptor. EPA 

evaluated the contribution modeling 

conducted in support of CSAPR (CSAPR 

contribution modeling) to determine if 

any of the eight southeastern states were 

projected to contribute greater than one 

percent of the annual standard (0.12 mg/ 

m3) at certain downwind receptors with 

potential nonattainment/maintenance 

issues.10 For Alabama, Florida, Georgia, 

Mississippi, North Carolina and South 

Carolina, there are no impacts at any 

potential downwind receptor by at least 

that amount, which EPA considers an 

important indication that none of those 

states will contribute to such a receptor. 

EPA also considered information 

provided in the individual 2012 PM2.5

infrastructure SIP submissions and 

other information. 

A. Alabama 

Alabama concluded in its December 

9, 2015, PM2.5 infrastructure SIP 

submission that it does not contribute 

significantly to nonattainment or 

interfere with maintenance of the 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS in any other state for the 

following reasons: (1) There are no 

designated PM2.5 nonattainment areas in 

Alabama or in surrounding states; (2) 

available monitoring data in Alabama 

and the surrounding states for 2012– 

2014 show design values below the 

standard; (3) emissions of the PM 

precursors NOX and SO2 from point 

sources in Alabama have decreased by 

10 and 46 percent, respectively, for the 

years 2009–2013; and (4) there are 

federal and SIP-approved state 

regulations in place to control PM2.5

precursors. Based on the rationale 

discussed below, EPA proposes to 

approve Alabama’s SIP submission on 

grounds that it has adequate provisions 

to ensure that emissions from sources 

within the State will not significantly 

contribute to nonattainment or interfere 

with maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS in any other state. 

Alabama’s submission examined 

available PM2.5 monitoring data from 

2012–2014 in the State and surrounding 

states. According to this data, the 

highest design value during this period 

was 11.6 mg/m3 at the North 

Birmingham monitor (AQS: 01–073– 

0023) in Alabama. Available qualityassured, certified data for 2015–2017 in 

Alabama and in the neighboring states 

is also below the standard. The highest 

valid 2015–2017 design value in 

Alabama was 11.0 mg/m3 at the 

Arkadelphia near-road site (01–073– 

2059) in Jefferson County. The highest 

valid design values in the neighboring 

states for 2015–2017 was 10.5 mg/m3 at 

the near-road site near Georgia Institute 

of Technology Fulton County, Georgia 

(13–121–0056). EPA’s 10-year trend 

analysis indicates Alabama monitors 

generally exhibited a decreasing trend 

in PM2.5 concentrations from 2008 to 

2017. More information on air quality 

trends in Alabama are provided in the 

TSD included in the docket for this 

proposed rulemaking. 

The NOX and SO2 point source 

emissions data provided in Alabama’s 

submittal show that these emissions 

have decreased in the State by 10 and 

46 percent, respectively, for 2009–2013. 

Furthermore, as noted in the submittal, 

several coal-fired electricity generating 

units (EGUs) in Alabama were 

scheduled for retirement in 2016, 

further reducing NOX and SO2

emissions.11

In its submittal, Alabama identifies 

SIP-approved regulations at Alabama 

Administrative Code Chapter 335–3–8 

that require controls and emission limits 

for certain NOX emitting sources in the 

State. These regulations include the SIPapproved portion of the NOX SIP call 

that requires certain NOX emitting 

sources to comply with a capped NOX

emission budget. The State also 

identifies SIP-approved regulations at 

Alabama Administrative Code Chapter 

335–3–5 that require controls and 

emission limits for certain SO2 emitting 

sources in the State. Alabama further 

notes that it has implemented several 

federal programs that, while not relied 

upon to address its ‘‘good neighbor’’ 

obligations for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, 

have reduced PM2.5 precursor emissions 

within the State. Alabama also controls 

certain sources that contribute to PM2.5

concentrations in ambient air through 

its SIP-approved permitting regulations 

at Alabama Administrative Code 

Chapter 335–3–14. These permitting 

requirements help ensure that no new or 

modified sources in the State subject to 

these permitting regulations will 

contribute significantly to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

EPA evaluated whether there are 

maintenance or nonattainment receptors 

for 2021 to which Alabama’s emissions 

are linked. As noted in section III.C 

above, EPA’s 2016 memorandum 

identifies the Allegheny County Liberty 

monitor (AQS ID: 42–003–0064) as a 

potential maintenance receptor in 2017, 

but indicates that it is likely to attain 

and maintain the annual standard in 

2021. EPA’s review of the CSAPR 

contribution modeling indicates that 

Alabama will not contribute greater than 

one percent of the 2012 standard (or 

0.12 mg/m3) to the Liberty monitor in 

Allegheny County. This result is 

consistent with the fact that the monitor 

is approximately 600 miles northeast of 

the Alabama border. 

Based on the weight of the evidence 

presented above, EPA proposes to 

approve Alabama’s SIP submission on 

grounds that it adequately addresses the 

State’s 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) good neighbor 

obligation for the 2012 PM2.5 standard 

and that the State will not significantly 

contribute to nonattainment or interfere 

with maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS in any other state. 

B. Florida 

Florida concluded in its December 14, 

2015, PM2.5 infrastructure SIP 

submission that emissions from sources 

in Florida do not significantly 

contribute to nonattainment or interfere 

with maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS in any other state for the 

following reasons: (1) There are no 

designated PM2.5 nonattainment areas in 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
39392 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

Florida or in surrounding states; (2) 

PM2.5 concentrations in the Southeast 

are in compliance with the standard; (3) 

modeling conducted by EPA in support 

of CSAPR indicates that Florida’s 

contribution to any designated 2012 

PM2.5 nonattainment area is less than 

0.1 percent of the standard; (4) 

emissions of NOX and SO2 in Florida 

have decreased over the past decade; 

and (5) Florida has SIP-approved 

permitting regulations in place 

addressing certain activities that 

contribute to PM2.5 concentrations in 

ambient air. Based on the rationale 

discussed below, EPA proposes to 

approve Florida’s SIP submission on 

grounds that it has adequate provisions 

to ensure that emissions from sources 

within the State will not significantly 

contribute to nonattainment or interfere 

with maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS in any other state. 

Florida’s submittal considered EPA’s 

CSAPR contribution modeling and 

concluded that Florida’s contribution to 

the designated nonattainment areas for 

the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS is less than 

0.013 mg/m3 (approximately 0.1 percent 

of the standard). The State’s submittal 

also notes that NOX and SO2 emissions 

in Florida have decreased by 50 percent 

and 70 percent, respectively, over the 

past decade. Florida states that these 

reductions lower Florida’s potential 

impact on PM2.5 concentrations in other 

states. 

Florida also identified SIP-approved 

regulations in the Florida 

Administrative Code, including 

Chapters 62–210, 62–212, and 62–296, 

that provide for the implementation of 

a permitting program required under 

Title I, Parts C and D of the CAA for 

certain activities that contribute to 

ambient PM2.5 concentrations. These 

permitting requirements help ensure 

that no new or modified sources in the 

State subject to these permitting 

regulations will contribute significantly 

to nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Chapter 62–296 also contains additional 

SIP-approved regulations that control 

certain sources that contribute to PM2.5

concentrations in the ambient air. 

Furthermore, as Florida notes in its 

submittal, the nearest designated 

nonattainment area is over 1,000 

kilometers (or 621.371 miles) from its 

northern border, and most of the direct 

and precursor PM2.5 emissions in the 

State are located in central and south 

Florida. Available quality-assured, 

certified data for 2015–2017 in Florida 

and in the neighboring states is also 

below the standard. The highest valid 

2015–2017 design value in Florida was 

8.0 mg/m3 at the Sydney site (AQS ID: 

12–057–3002) in Hillsborough County. 

The highest valid design value in the 

neighboring states was 11.0 mg/m3 at the 

Arkadelphia near-road site (AQS ID: 01– 

073–2059) in Jefferson County, 

Alabama. EPA’s 10-year trend analysis 

indicates that Florida monitors 

generally exhibited a decreasing trend 

in PM2.5 concentrations from 2008 to 

2017. More information on air quality 

trends in Florida are provided in the 

TSD included in the docket for this 

proposed rulemaking. 

EPA’s supplemental analysis focused 

on whether there are maintenance or 

nonattainment receptors for 2021 to 

which Florida’s emissions are linked. 

As noted in section III.C above, EPA’s 

2016 memorandum identifies the 

Allegheny County Liberty monitor (AQS 

ID: 42–003–0064) as a potential 

maintenance receptor in 2017, but 

indicates that it is likely to attain and 

maintain the annual standard in 2021. 

EPA’s review of the CSAPR contribution 

modeling indicates that Florida’s 

contribution to the Liberty monitor is 

less than one percent of the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS which is consistent with 

Florida’s determination that sources in 

the State will not contribute to greater 

than one percent of the standard. In 

addition, the Allegheny County Liberty 

monitoring site is approximately 700 

miles from the Florida state border. 

Based on weight of the evidence 

presented above, EPA proposes to 

approve Florida’s SIP submission on 

grounds that it addresses the State’s 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) good neighbor 

obligation for the 2012 PM2.5 standard 

and that the State will not significantly 

contribute to nonattainment or interfere 

with maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS in any other state. 

C. Georgia 

Georgia concluded in its December 

14, 2015, PM2.5 infrastructure SIP 

submission that it does not contribute 

significantly to nonattainment or 

interfere with maintenance of the 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS in any other state for the 

following reasons: (1) Modeling 

conducted by EPA in support of CSAPR 

indicates that Georgia’s contribution to 

any designated 2012 PM2.5

nonattainment area is less than one 

percent of the standard; and (2) Georgia 

has SIP-approved permitting regulations 

that control certain sources that 

contribute to PM2.5 concentrations in 

ambient air. Furthermore, there are 

currently no designated nonattainment 

areas in Georgia or in the surrounding 

states. Based on the rationale discussed 

below, EPA proposes to approve 

Georgia’s SIP submission on grounds 

that it has adequate provisions to ensure 

that emissions from sources within the 

State will not significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in any other state. 

Based on Georgia’s review of the 

CSAPR contribution modeling, the State 

concluded that its maximum potential 

contribution to the designated 

nonattainment areas for the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS is less than 0.081 mg/m3 (less 

than 0.7 percent of the standard), and 

therefore, sources in the State do not 

contribute to downwind receptors with 

potential downwind nonattainment 

and/or maintenance issues. In addition, 

Georgia identifies SIP-approved 

permitting regulations in Georgia Rules 

for Air Quality 391–3–1–.02 and –.03 

that implement the permitting programs 

required under Title I, Parts C and D of 

the CAA for certain activities that 

contribute to ambient PM2.5

concentrations. These permitting 

requirements help ensure that no new or 

modified sources in the State subject to 

these permitting regulations will 

contribute significantly to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Georgia also identified several SIPapproved Rules that require enforceable 

limits and control measures for PM2.5

and precursor emissions within the 

State as well as other federallyenforceable measures not part of the 

approved SIP that require reduction in 

SO2 emission for certain sources in the 

State. Available quality-assured, 

certified data for 2015–2017 indicate 

that the highest design value in Georgia 

was 10.5 mg/m3 at the near road site by 

Georgia Institute of Technology in 

Fulton County (AQS ID: 13–121–0056). 

The highest design value in the 

surrounding states was 11.0 mg/m3 at the 

Arkadelphia near-road site in Jefferson 

County, Alabama (AQS ID: 01–073– 

2059). EPA’s 10-year trend analysis 

indicated that Georgia monitors 

generally exhibited a decreasing trend 

in PM2.5 concentrations from 2008 to 

2017. More information on air quality 

trends in Georgia are provided in the 

TSD included in the docket for this 

proposed rulemaking. 

EPA’s supplemental analysis focused 

on whether there are maintenance or 

nonattainment receptors for 2021 to 

which Georgia’s emissions are linked. 

As noted in section III.C above, EPA’s 

2016 memorandum identifies the 

Allegheny County Liberty monitor (AQS 

ID: 42–003–0064) as a potential 

maintenance receptor in 2017, but 

indicates that it is likely to attain and 

maintain the annual standard in 2021. 

Georgia’s review of the CSAPR 

contribution modeling, as provided in 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2018 / Proposed Rules 39393 

12 Kentucky also identifies the Cleveland Area 

(Cuyahoga and Lorain Counties) as the only PM2.5

nonattainment area in a neighboring state. This area 

is approximately 200 miles from the Kentucky 

border. The Cuyahoga County Harvard Yard 

monitor (AQS ID: 39–035–0065) and Lorain monitor 

(AQS ID: 39–093–3002) in the Cleveland Area are 

both are measuring below the annual standard at 

11.7 mg/m3 and 7.6 mg/m3 respectively, based on 

2015–2017 air quality data. EPA’s 2016 

memorandum does not identify the Cleveland Area 

as a projected potential nonattainment or 

maintenance area in 2017 or 2025. Therefore, this 

area was not considered a downwind receptor for 

the 2012 PM2.5 standard. 

13The 2014 NEI v2 emissions are available in the 

docket for this rulemaking. 

14The CSAPR modeled SO2 emissions numbers, 

for the 2012 contribution case, can be found in this 

TSD in Table 7–4 at https://www.epa.gov/sites/ 

production/files/2017-06/documents/epa-hq-oar2009-0491-4522.pdf. 

the State’s 2015 SIP submittal, indicates 

that sources in the State will contribute 

less than one percent of the 2012 

standard to the Liberty monitor which is 

consistent with EPA’s review of the 

projected contribution modeling. In 

addition, the Allegheny Liberty monitor 

(AQS ID: 42–003–0064) is 

approximately 500 miles away from the 

Georgia state border. 

Based on the weight of the evidence 

presented above, EPA proposes to 

approve Georgia’s SIP submission on 

grounds that it adequately addresses the 

State’s 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) good neighbor 

obligation for the 2012 PM2.5 standard 

and that the State will not significantly 

contribute to nonattainment or interfere 

with maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS in any other state. 

D. Kentucky 

Kentucky concluded in its February 8, 

2016, PM2.5 infrastructure SIP 

submission that the Commonwealth will 

not contribute significantly to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in any other state for the following 

reasons: (1) Available monitoring data 

in Kentucky and in the surrounding 

states for 2012–2014 (with the exception 

of the Cleveland, Ohio nonattainment 

area) have shown design values below 

the standard; (2) air quality monitors 

between Kentucky and the Cleveland 

Area (the only designated 2012 PM2.5

nonattainment area in a neighboring 

state) show attainment from 2012–2014; 

and (3) Kentucky has SIP-approved 

regulations to assure that the State is not 

interfering with attainment or 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in any other state. Based on the 

rationale discussed below, EPA 

proposes to approve Kentucky’s SIP 

submission on grounds that it has 

adequate provisions to ensure that 

emissions from sources within the 

Commonwealth will not significantly 

contribute to nonattainment or interfere 

with maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS in any other state. 

Kentucky’s SIP submission indicates 

that the most significant sources of 

PM2.5 and its precursors are coal-fired 

power plants, industrial boilers, and 

other combustion sources. 

Kentucky’s 2015 infrastructure SIP 

submission identifies several SIPapproved regulations that regulate 

sources of PM2.5 precursor emissions (as 

well as other federally-enforceable 

measures not part of the federallyapproved SIP); reductions in PM2.5

precursor emissions in Kentucky due to 

permanent and enforceable emission 

reduction measures; and the downward 

trend of PM2.5 monitored concentrations 

in Kentucky and surrounding states.12

Kentucky identifies SIP-approved 

permitting regulations at 40 Kentucky 

Administrative Rules (KAR) 51:017 and 

51:052 used to control certain sources 

that contribute to PM2.5 concentrations 

in ambient air. These permitting 

requirements help ensure that no new or 

modified sources in the Commonwealth 

subject to these permitting regulations 

will significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Kentucky also controls emissions of 

PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors at certain 

sources through source-specific 

measures pursuant to other SIPapproved regulations such as 40 KAR 

51:150 (NOX requirements for stationary 

internal combustion engines). Kentucky 

also identifies CSAPR as yielding 

residual NOX and SO2 emission 

reductions. 

Kentucky examined available PM2.5

monitoring data from 2012–2014 in the 

Commonwealth and in surrounding 

states. According to this data, the 

highest valid design values in Kentucky 

and surrounding states (excluding the 

Cleveland Area) was 11.8 mg/m3 at the 

W. 18th St. monitor in Marion County, 

Indiana. Available quality-assured, 

certified data for 2015–2017 in 

Kentucky and the surrounding states are 

also below the standard. The highest 

design value in Kentucky was 9.7 mg/m3

at the Southwick (AQS ID: 21–111– 

0043) site in Jefferson County. The 

highest valid design value in the 

neighboring states was 11.7 mg/m3 at the 

Harvard Yard monitor in Cuyahoga 

County, Ohio, within the Cleveland 

Area. Furthermore, the monitors 

between the Commonwealth and the 

Cleveland Area show attaining 2015– 

2017 design values. EPA’s 10-year trend 

analysis indicates that Kentucky 

monitors generally exhibited a 

decreasing trend in PM2.5 concentrations 

from 2008 to 2017. More information on 

air quality trends in Kentucky are 

provided in the TSD included in the 

docket for this proposed rulemaking. 

EPA’s supplemental analysis focused 

on whether there are maintenance or 

nonattainment receptors for 2021 to 

which source emissions in Kentucky 

emissions are linked. As discussed in 

section III.C above, EPA’s 2016 

memorandum identifies the Allegheny 

County Liberty monitor (AQS ID: 42– 

003–0064) as a potential maintenance 

receptor in 2017, but indicates that the 

monitor is likely to attain and maintain 

by 2021. EPA’s review of the CSAPR 

contribution modeling indicates that 

sources in the Commonwealth 

contribute 0.273 mg/m3 to the Liberty 

monitoring site which is greater than 

one percent of the 2012 standard. EPA 

notes that current SO2 emissions in 

Kentucky are 204,812 tons,13 lower than 

modeled SO2 emissions of 520,546 tons 

for the CSAPR.14 Kentucky’s highest 

contribution when considering all 

Allegheny monitors is at the Liberty 

monitor. The Allegheny County Liberty 

monitoring site is approximately 400 

miles upwind from the Kentucky 

border. 

As discussed in section III.C, above, 

local and regional emissions reductions 

of primary PM2.5, SO2, and NOX, have 

led to large reductions in annual PM2.5

design values in Allegheny County, 

Pennsylvania. Based on EPA’s modeling 

projections, the recent downward trend 

in local and regional emissions 

reductions, the expected continued 

downward trend in emissions between 

2017 and 2021, and the downward trend 

in monitored PM2.5 concentrations, EPA 

expects that the Liberty monitor will 

attain and be able to maintain the 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS by the 2021 attainment 

deadline without additional PM2.5

precursor emission reductions from 

Kentucky. As mentioned above, the 

2015–2017 annual average PM2.5 design 

value for the Liberty monitor is 13.0 mg/ 

m3, which is above the 2012 PM2.5

standard. Even so, expected emissions 

reductions in the next four years will 

lead to additional reductions in 

measured PM2.5 concentrations at the 

Liberty monitor. Therefore, EPA 

proposes to determine that additional 

emission reductions from sources in the 

Commonwealth are not necessary to 

satisfy the Commonwealth’s obligations 

under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the 

CAA. For these reasons, EPA proposes 

to determine that Kentucky’s emissions 

will not significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

for Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
39394 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

15 Due to incomplete data as a result of quality 

assurance findings in a Technical Systems Audit 

conducted by the EPA, none of the PM2.5

monitoring sites in Mississippi collected enough 

data to produce a valid annual mean during 2012– 

2014. Despite this missing data, in EPA’s 

assessment, the trends analysis still provides 

informative results for the Mississippi sites. Most of 

the sites did collect complete annual means during 

the most recent years, 2015, 2016, and 2017. Also, 

many of the sites collected five, six, or seven valid 

annual means during the 2008–2017 period, which 

met the minimum completeness criteria developed 

for the trends analysis. 

16See Table 3—Trends in North Carolina’s 

Annual Statewide Emissions (Thousand Tons/Year) 

in North Carolina’s 2015 SIP submission. For 1990 

through 2011, emissions are from the EPA’s 

National Emissions Inventory located at http://

www3.epa.gov/ttn/chief/eiinformation.html. For 

2013, emissions were estimated by the State. For 

2017, emissions are from the EPA’s 2017 v6.2 

modeling platform emissions summary, located at: 

ftp://ftp.epa.gov/EmisInventory/2011v6/v2platform/ 

reports/2017eh_cb6v2_v6_11g_state_sector_

totals.xlsx. 

17North Carolina identifies a number of SIPapproved state regulations that control emissions or 

PM2.5 precursors within the State as well as some 

Based on the weight of the evidence 

presented above, EPA proposes to 

approve Kentucky’s SIP submission on 

grounds that it adequately addresses the 

Commonwealth’s 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) good 

neighbor obligation for the 2012 PM2.5

standard and that the Commonwealth 

will not significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in any other state. 

E. Mississippi 

Mississippi concluded in its 

December 8, 2015, PM2.5 infrastructure 

SIP submission that it does not 

contribute significantly to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in any other state for the following 

reasons: (1) There are no designated 

PM2.5 nonattainment areas in 

Mississippi or in surrounding states; (2) 

available monitoring data in Mississippi 

and in the surrounding states for 2011– 

2014 show annual average 

concentrations below the standard; and 

(3) there are SIP-approved state 

regulations in place to control emissions 

of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors. Based on 

the rationale discussed below, EPA 

proposes to approve Mississippi’s SIP 

submission on grounds that it has 

adequate provisions to ensure that 

emissions from sources within the State 

will not significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in any other state. 

Mississippi’s 2015 submittal 

identifies SIP-approved permitting 

regulations at Mississippi 

Administrative Code APC–S–2 used to 

control sources of precursor emissions 

that contribute to PM2.5 concentrations 

in ambient air. These permitting 

requirements help ensure that no new or 

modified sources in the State subject to 

these permitting regulations will 

significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Mississippi’s SIP submittal also 

reviewed available PM2.5 monitoring 

data from 2009–2014 in the State and in 

surrounding states. The State concluded 

that design values during this period 

were generally trending downward and 

the highest design value for 2012–2014 

was 11.3 mg/m3 at a monitor in 

Alabama. EPA’s review of available 

quality-assured, certified data for 2015– 

2017 determined that the highest design 

value in Mississippi was 8.9 mg/m3 at 

the Hattiesburg, Mississippi site (AQS 

ID: 28–035–0004). In the neighboring 

states, the highest valid 2015–2017 

design value was 11.0 mg/m3 at the 

Arkadelphia near-road site in Jefferson 

County, Alabama (AQS ID: 01–073– 

2059). EPA’s 10-year trend analysis 

indicated that Mississippi monitors 

generally exhibited a decreasing trend 

in PM2.5 concentrations from 2008 to 

2017.15 More information on air quality 

trends in Mississippi are provided in 

the TSD included in the docket for this 

proposed rulemaking. 

EPA’s supplemental analysis focused 

on whether there are maintenance or 

nonattainment receptors for 2021 to 

which Mississippi’s emissions are 

linked. As noted in section III.C above, 

EPA’s 2016 memorandum identifies the 

Allegheny County Liberty monitor (AQS 

ID: 42–003–0064) as a potential 

maintenance receptor in 2017, but 

indicates that it is likely to attain and 

maintain the annual standard in 2021. 

EPA’s review of the CSAPR contribution 

modeling indicates that Mississippi 

does not contribute greater than one 

percent of the 2012 standard to that site. 

This is consistent with the fact that the 

monitor is approximately 600 miles 

northeast of the Mississippi state border. 

Based on the weight of the evidence 

presented above, EPA proposes to 

approve Mississippi’s SIP submission 

on grounds that it adequately addresses 

the State’s 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) good 

neighbor obligation for the 2012 PM2.5

standard and that the State will not 

significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in any other state. 

F. North Carolina 

North Carolina concluded in its 

December 4, 2015, PM2.5 infrastructure 

SIP submission that it does not 

contribute significantly to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in any other state for the following 

reasons: (1) There are no designated 

PM2.5 nonattainment areas in North 

Carolina or in surrounding states; (2) 

available monitoring data in North 

Carolina and in the surrounding states 

for 2011–2014 show design values 

below the standard; (3) PM2.5, NOX, and 

SO2 emissions in the State have 

declined since 1996; and (4) there are 

federal and SIP-approved state 

regulations in place to ensure that North 

Carolina is not interfering with 

attainment or maintenance of the 

standard in downwind states. Based on 

the rationale discussed below, EPA 

proposes to approve North Carolina’s 

SIP submission on the grounds that it 

has adequate provisions to ensure that 

emissions from sources within the State 

will not significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in any other state. 

The State’s implementation plan 

submittal reviewed emissions data and 

projections from 1996–2017 and 

concluded that PM2.5, NOX, and SO2

emissions within North Carolina 

declined by approximately 36, 48, and 

80 percent, respectively, from 1996– 

2011 and are projected to decrease by an 

additional 31, 39, and 50 percent, 

respectively, from 2011–2017 due to 

state and federal programs.16 The State 

estimates that emissions of these 

pollutants will continue to decrease 

beyond 2017. 

North Carolina reviewed EPA’s air 

quality modeling analyses conducted in 

support of the decision to revise the 

annual PM2.5 standard to 12.0 mg/m3

where EPA concluded that all states 

downwind of North Carolina would 

attain the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS by 2020; 

one year prior to the 2021 attainment 

year for the three areas in Pennsylvania 

designated as moderate nonattainment 

areas (see Table 2 in North Carolina’s 

December 4, 2015 submittal). North 

Carolina does not believe that it has any 

significant contribution to annual PM2.5

concentrations in these areas in 

Pennsylvania because the entire state of 

North Carolina and the states between 

North Carolina and Pennsylvania (i.e., 

Virginia, West Virginia and Maryland) 

were attaining the annual standard at 

the time of the State’s submittal in 2015. 

North Carolina’s SIP submission also 

cites to a number of State regulations 

that address additional control 

measures, means, and techniques to 

reduce relevant emissions in North 

Carolina.17 Several of these measures, 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2018 / Proposed Rules 39395 

State regulations that are not part of the federallyapproved SIP. 

18EPA approved the CSA emissions caps into 

North Carolina’s SIP on September 26, 2011. See 76 

FR 59250. The first cap was effective in 2007 and 

a significant step forward towards complying with 

1997 PM2.5 and 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

19CSAPR currently caps EGUs in the State at 

specific NOX and SO2 emission budgets. 

20Title V of the CAA requires major sources of 

air pollutants, and certain other sources, to obtain 

and operate in compliance with an operating 

permit. 

means, and techniques are SIPapproved, such as 15A North Carolina 

Administrative Code (NCAC) 02D.1409 

(addressing NOX emissions from certain 

stationary internal combustion engines) 

and the NOX and SO2 emissions caps 

under the State’s 2002 Clean 

Smokestack Act (CSA) 18 that apply to 

certain coal-fired power plants in the 

State. North Carolina also identifies a 

number of federal programs such as 

CSAPR that, while not relied upon to 

address its ‘‘good neighbor’’ obligations 

for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS, reduce 

emissions of PM2.5 and/or PM2.5

precursors.19

In addition, North Carolina examined 

available PM2.5 monitoring data from 

2011–2014 in the State and surrounding 

states. According to this data, the 

highest valid design value for 2012– 

2014 was 10.9 mg/m3 at the Macon 

Allied monitor in Bibb County, Georgia 

(AQS ID: 13–021–0007). The highest 

valid 2015–2017 design values in North 

Carolina is 8.8 mg/m3 at two sites 

(Durham Armory site in Durham 

County; AQS ID: 37–063–0015, 

Millbrook School site in Wake County; 

AQS ID: 37–183–0014). The highest 

valid design value in the neighboring 

states was 10.5 mg/m3 at the near road 

site by Georgia Institute of Technology 

in Fulton County, Georgia (AQS ID: 13– 

121–0056). Also, EPA’s 10-year trend 

analysis indicates that North Carolina 

monitors generally exhibited a 

decreasing trend in PM2.5 concentrations 

from 2008 to 2017. More information on 

air quality trends in North Carolina are 

provided in the TSD included in the 

docket for this proposed rulemaking. 

EPA’s supplemental analysis focused 

on whether there are maintenance or 

nonattainment receptors for 2021 to 

which source emissions in North 

Carolina emissions are linked. As noted 

in section III.C above, EPA’s 2016 

memorandum identifies the Allegheny 

County Liberty monitor (AQS ID: 42– 

003–0064) as a potential maintenance 

receptor in 2017, but indicates that it is 

likely to attain and maintain the annual 

standard in 2021. EPA’s review of the 

CSAPR contribution modeling indicates 

that North Carolina does not contribute 

greater than one percent of the 2012 

standard. 

Based on the weight of the evidence 

presented above, EPA proposes to 

approve North Carolina’s SIP 

submission on grounds that it 

adequately addresses the State’s 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) good neighbor 

obligation for the 2012 PM2.5 standard 

and that the State will not significantly 

contribute to nonattainment or interfere 

with maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS in any other state. 

G. South Carolina 

South Carolina concluded in its 

December 14, 2015, PM2.5 infrastructure 

SIP submission that it does not 

contribute significantly to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in any other state for the following 

reasons: (1) There are no designated 

PM2.5 nonattainment areas in South 

Carolina or in surrounding states; (2) 

available monitoring data in South 

Carolina for 2010–2014 show design 

values below the standard and PM2.5

concentrations have declined over the 

majority of the Southeast since 2006; (3) 

estimated PM2.5 emissions from title V 

sources in the State have declined 

overall from 2003–2014; 20 and (4) there 

are SIP-approved state regulations in 

place to control PM2.5 and PM2.5

precursor emissions. Based on the 

rationale discussed below, EPA 

proposes to approve South Carolina’s 

SIP submission on grounds that it has 

adequate provisions to ensure that 

emissions from sources within the State 

will not significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in any other state. 

South Carolina’s SIP submission 

identifies SIP-approved permitting 

regulations at South Carolina Code of 

Regulations 61–62.5, Standard No. 7 

and Standard No. 7.1 used to control 

certain sources that contribute to PM2.5

concentrations in ambient air. These 

permitting requirements help ensure 

that no new or modified sources in the 

State subject to these permitting 

regulations will significantly contribute 

to nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

South Carolina also controls emissions 

of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors at certain 

sources through source-specific 

measures pursuant to other SIPapproved regulations such as Regulation 

61–62.2 (prohibitions on open burning), 

Regulation 61–62.5, Standard No. 1 

(emissions from fuel burning 

operations), and Regulation 61–62.6 

(control of fugitive particulate matter). 

In addition, South Carolina provided 

estimated PM2.5 emissions data for title 

V sources in the State showing that 

these emissions have decreased by 

approximately 66 percent from 2003– 

2014, and the State reports that PM2.5

emissions continue to decrease in South 

Carolina. Furthermore, there are 

currently no designated nonattainment 

areas in South Carolina or in the 

surrounding states. South Carolina 

examined PM2.5 monitoring data from 

2005–August 2015 in the State and 

determined that the design values have 

been below the standard since 2010. 

The State also determined that PM2.5

design values over most of the Southeast 

have declined since 2006. Available 

certified design value for 2015–2017 in 

South Carolina and in the surrounding 

states is also below the standard. The 

highest valid 2015–2017 design value in 

South Carolina was 9.1 mg/m3 at the 

Greenville ESC site in Greenville 

County (AQS ID: 45–045–0015). The 

highest valid design value in the 

neighboring states was 10.5 mg/m3 at the 

near road site by Georgia Institute of 

Technology in Fulton County, Georgia 

(AQS ID: 13–121–0056). EPA’s 10-year 

trend analysis indicates that South 

Carolina monitors generally exhibited a 

decreasing trend in PM2.5 concentrations 

from 2008 to 2017. More information on 

air quality trends in South Carolina are 

provided in the TSD included in the 

docket for this proposed rulemaking. 

EPA’s supplemental analysis focused 

on whether there are maintenance or 

nonattainment receptors for 2021 to 

which source emissions in South 

Carolina are linked. As noted in section 

III.C above, EPA’s 2016 memorandum 

identifies the Allegheny County Liberty 

monitor (AQS ID: 42–003–0064) as a 

potential maintenance receptor in 2017, 

but indicates that it is likely to attain 

and maintain the annual standard in 

2021. EPA’s review of the CSAPR 

contribution modeling indicates that 

North Carolina will not contribute 

greater than one percent of the 2012 

standard to the Liberty monitor. This is 

consistent with the fact that the monitor 

is approximately 365 miles northeast of 

the South Carolina border. 

Based on the weight of the evidence 

presented above, EPA proposes to 

approve South Carolina’s SIP 

submission on grounds that it 

adequately addresses the State’s 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) good neighbor 

obligation for the 2012 PM2.5 standard 

and that the State will not significantly 

contribute to nonattainment or interfere 

with maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS in any other state. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
39396 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

21Federal Facilities Compliance Agreement 

Between the United States Environmental 

Protection Agency and the Tennessee Valley 

Authority, In the Matter of: Tennessee Valley 

Authority, Docket No. CAA–04–2010–1760. The 

FFCA is available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/ 

production/files/documents/tva-ffca.pdf. 

22State of Alabama et. al. v. TVA, Civil Action 

No. 3:11–cv–00170 (E.D. Tenn., approved June 30, 

2011) imposes certain requirements on various TVA 

facilities that are enforceable in accordance with the 

terms of that agreement. The consent decree is 

available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/ 

files/documents/tvacoal-fired-cd.pdf. 

23See Table 1 in Tennessee’s SIP submittal. 

24See Table 4 in Tennessee’s SIP submittal. 

25The 2014 NEI v2 emissions are available in the 

docket for this rulemaking. 

26The CSAPR modeled SO2 emissions numbers, 

for the 2012 contribution case, can be found in this 

TSD in Table 7–4 at https://www.epa.gov/sites/ 

production/files/2017-06/documents/epa-hq-oar2009-0491-4522.pdf. 

H. Tennessee 

Tennessee concluded in its December 

16, 2015 PM2.5 infrastructure SIP 

submission that it does not contribute 

significantly to nonattainment or 

interfere with maintenance of the 2012 

PM2.5 NAAQS in any other state for the 

following reasons: (1) There are no 

designated PM2.5 nonattainment areas in 

Tennessee or in surrounding states; (2) 

available monitoring data in Tennessee 

show design values below the standard 

and PM2.5 concentrations have declined 

over the majority of the Southeast since 

2006; (3) estimated PM2.5 precursor 

emissions from Tennessee EGUs have 

declined; and (4) there are SIP-approved 

state regulations in place to control 

PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursor emissions. 

Based on the rationale discussed below, 

EPA proposes to approve Tennessee’s 

SIP submission on grounds that it has 

adequate provisions to ensure that 

emissions from sources within the State 

will not significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in any other state. 

Tennessee indicated that a number of 

SO2 control measures are being 

implemented at many of the State’s 

largest sources. For example, the 

Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) is 

subject to a Federal Facilities 

Compliance Agreement (FFCA) 21 and a 

consent decree 22 that require TVA to 

retire several coal-fired units and to take 

a number of other measures to reduce 

SO2 emissions. Tennessee estimated 

that the retirements alone will decrease 

emissions by roughly 27,268 tons of SO2

from 2014 levels, a 46 percent 

reduction. Additionally, the FFCA and 

the consent decree require certain TVA 

coal-fired units to install selective 

catalytic reduction system and flue gas 

desulfurization system controls and 

require units with these controls to 

operate the controls continuously. 

Additionally, Tennessee notes that all 

coal-fired EGUs in the State are subject 

to 40 CFR 63 Subpart UUUUU, Mercury 

and Air Toxics Standards, which 

require further unit level reductions to 

emissions of mercury, particulate 

matter, SO2, hydrogen chloride, and 

several other hazardous pollutants. 

Tennessee estimated that PM2.5

emissions data for title V sources in the 

state have decreased by approximately 

66 percent from 2003–2014, and are 

expected to continue to decrease. 

Tennessee also identified several SIPapproved Tennessee Air Pollution 

Control Rules that require enforceable 

limits and control measures for PM2.5

and precursor emissions 23 within the 

State as well as other federallyenforceable measures not part of the 

federal-approved SIP that require 

reduction in SO2 emissions for certain 

sources in the State. Currently available 

quality-assured, certified data for 2015– 

2017 in Tennessee and in the 

surrounding states is below the annual 

standard. The highest valid 2015–2017 

design value in Tennessee was 10.0 mg/ 

m3 at the Air Lab site in Knox County 

(AQS ID: 47–093–1013). The highest 

valid design value in the neighboring 

states was 11.0 mg/m3 at the 

Arkadelphia near-road site in Jefferson 

County, Alabama (AQS ID: 01–073– 

2059). EPA’s 10-year trend analysis 

indicate that Tennessee monitors 

generally exhibited a decreasing trend 

in PM2.5 concentrations from 2008 to 

2017. More information on air quality 

trends in Tennessee are provided in the 

TSD included in the docket for this 

proposed rulemaking. 

EPA’s supplemental analysis focused 

on whether there are maintenance or 

nonattainment receptors for 2021 to 

which source emissions in Tennessee 

emissions are linked. As noted in 

section III.C above, EPA’s 2016 

memorandum identifies the Allegheny 

County Liberty monitor (AQS ID: 42– 

003–0064) as a potential maintenance 

receptor in 2017, but indicates that it is 

likely to attain and maintain the annual 

standard in 2021. Tennessee’s review of 

the CSAPR contribution modeling, as 

provided in the State’s 2015 SIP 

submittal, indicates that sources in the 

State contribute 0.133 mg/m3 to the 

Liberty monitoring site which is greater 

than one percent of the 2012 standard 

and consistent with EPA’s review of the 

CSAPR contribution modeling.24 The 

Allegheny County monitor is 

approximately 300 miles upwind from 

the Tennessee border. EPA notes that 

current precursor SO2 emissions in 

Tennessee are 58,450 tons,25 lower than 

modeled SO2 emissions of 324,377 tons, 

for the CSAPR.26

Tennessee’s 2015 SIP submission 

identifies several SIP-approved 

regulations that regulate sources of 

PM2.5 precursor emissions (as well as 

other federally-enforceable measures not 

part of the federally-approved SIP), 

reductions in PM2.5 precursor emissions 

due to permanent and enforceable 

emission reduction measures, and the 

downward trend of PM2.5 monitored 

concentrations in Tennessee and 

surrounding states. Additionally, as 

discussed in section III.C above, both 

local and regional emissions reductions 

of primary PM2.5, SO2, and NOX, have 

led to large reductions in annual PM2.5

design values in Allegheny County, 

Pennsylvania. The Liberty monitor is 

already close to attaining the NAAQS. 

As mentioned above, the 2015–2017 

annual average PM2.5 design value for 

the Liberty monitor is 13.0 mg/m3, 

which is above the 2012 PM2.5 standard. 

Even so, expected emissions reductions 

in the next four years will lead to 

additional reductions in measured PM2.5

concentrations at the Liberty monitor. 

Based on EPA’s modeling projections, 

the recent downward trend in local and 

regional emissions reductions, the 

expected continued downward trend in 

emissions between 2017 and 2021, and 

the downward trend in monitored PM2.5

concentrations, EPA expects that the 

Liberty monitor will attain and be able 

to maintain the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS by 

the 2021 attainment deadline without 

additional PM2.5 precursor emission 

reductions from Tennessee. Therefore, 

EPA proposes to determine that 

additional emission reductions from 

sources in Tennessee are not necessary 

to satisfy the State’s obligations under 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA. For 

these reasons, EPA proposes to 

determine that Tennessee’s emissions 

will not significantly contribute to 

nonattainment or interfere with 

maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

for Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. 

Based on the weight of the evidence 

presented above, EPA proposes to 

approve Tennessee’s SIP submission on 

grounds that it adequately addresses the 

State’s 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) good neighbor 

obligation for the 2012 PM2.5 standard 

and that the State will not significantly 

contribute to nonattainment or interfere 

with maintenance of the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS in any other state. 

IV. Proposed Action 

As described above, EPA is proposing 

to approve the portions of the 

aforementioned infrastructure 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 154 / Thursday, August 9, 2018 / Proposed Rules 39397 

submissions from Alabama, Florida, 

Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North 

Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee 

addressing prongs 1 and 2 of CAA 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS. 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable Federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. This 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, 

these proposed actions: 

• Are not significant regulatory 

actions subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

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

January 21, 2011); 

• Are not Executive Order 13771 (82 

FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory 

actions because SIP approvals are 

exempted under Executive Order 12866; 

• Do not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Are certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• Do not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Do not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Are not economically significant 

regulatory actions based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Are not significant regulatory 

actions subject to Executive Order 

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

• Are not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

this rulemaking does not involve 

technical standards; and 

• Do not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

The SIPs subject to these proposed 

actions, with the exception of the South 

Carolina SIP, are not approved to apply 

on any Indian reservation land or in any 

other area where EPA or an Indian tribe 

has demonstrated that a tribe has 

jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 

country, the rule does not have tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), nor will it impose substantial 

direct costs on tribal governments or 

preempt tribal law. With respect to the 

South Carolina SIP, EPA notes that the 

Catawba Indian Nation Reservation is 

located within South Carolina, and 

pursuant to the Catawba Indian Claims 

Settlement Act, S.C. Code Ann. 27–16– 

120, ‘‘all state and local environmental 

laws and regulations apply to the 

Catawba Indian Nation and Reservation 

and are fully enforceable by all relevant 

state and local agencies and 

authorities.’’ Thus, the South Carolina 

SIP applies to the Catawba Reservation; 

however, because the proposed action 

related to South Carolina is not 

proposing to approve any specific rule 

into the South Carolina SIP, but rather 

proposing to find that the State’s already 

approved SIP meets certain CAA 

requirements, EPA proposes to 

determine that there are no substantial 

direct effects on the Catawba Indian 

Nation. EPA has also preliminarily 

determined that the proposed action 

related to South Carolina’s SIP will not 

impose any 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 dioxide, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

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

Dated: July 31, 2018. 

Onis ‘‘Trey’’ Glenn, III, 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2018–16991 Filed 8–8–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES 

Centers for Medicare & Medicaid 

Services 

42 CFR Parts 405, 410, 411, 414, 415, 

and 495 

[CMS–1693–P] 

RIN 0938–AT31 

Medicare Program; Revisions to 

Payment Policies Under the Physician 

Fee Schedule and Other Revisions to 

Part B for CY 2019; Medicare Shared 

Savings Program Requirements; 

Quality Payment Program; and 

Medicaid Promoting Interoperability 

Program 

Correction 

In proposed rule document 2018– 

14985, appearing on pages 35704 

through 36368 in the issue of Friday, 

July 27, 2018, make the following 

correction: 

On page 35978, Figure A is corrected 

to read as set forth below. 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS