Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 17161 

Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629 

(Feb. 16, 1994)) establishes Federal 

executive policy on environmental 

justice. Its main provision directs 

Federal agencies, to the greatest extent 

practicable and permitted by law, to 

make environmental justice part of their 

mission by identifying and addressing, 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA lacks the discretionary authority 

to address environmental justice in this 

proposed action. In reviewing SIP 

submissions, EPA’s role is to approve or 

disapprove State choices, based on the 

criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 

action merely proposes to disapproves 

certain State requirements for inclusion 

into the SIP under section 110 and 

subchapter I, part D of the CAA and will 

not in-and-of itself create any new 

requirements. Accordingly, it does 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. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Sulfur oxides. 

Dated: March 8, 2013. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2013–06419 Filed 3–19–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0132; FRL– 9792–3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; District 

of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia; 

Attainment Demonstration for the 1997 

8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard for the Washington, 

DC–MD–VA Moderate Nonattainment 

Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

the attainment demonstration portion of 

the attainment plan submitted by the 

District of Columbia, the State of 

Maryland and the Commonwealth of 

Virginia as revisions to each of their 

State Implementation Plans (SIPs). 

These revisions demonstrate attainment 

of the 1997 8-hour ozone national 

ambient air quality standard (1997 

ozone NAAQS) for the Washington, DC– 

MD–VA, moderate nonattainment area 

(the Washington Area) by the applicable 

attainment date of June 2010. EPA has 

determined that each of the three SIP 

revisions meet the applicable 

requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). This action is being taken in 

accordance with the CAA. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before April 19, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R03–OAR–2013–0132 by one of the 

following methods: 

A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

B. Email: fernandez.cristinia@epa.gov. 

C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0132, 

Cristina Fernandez, Associate Director, 

Office of Air Planning Program, 

Mailcode 3AP30, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 

Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

19103. 

D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2013– 

0132. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change, and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy during normal business 

hours at the Air Protection Division, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the States’ submittals are 

available at the District of Columbia, 

Department of the Environment, Air 

Quality Division, 1200 1st Street NE., 

5th floor, Washington, DC 20002; 

Maryland Department of the 

Environment, 1800 Washington 

Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore, 

Maryland 21230; and the Virginia 

Department of Environmental Quality, 

629 East Main Street, Richmond, 

Virginia 23219. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Christopher Cripps, (215) 814–2179, or 

by email at cripps.christopher@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

following is provided to aid in locating 

information in this preamble. 

I. Summary of Proposed Action 

II. Background Information 

III. CAA Requirements for Moderate 8-Hour 

Ozone Nonattainment Areas 

IV. Description of the States’ SIP Submittals 

V. EPA’s Review of the States’ Modeled 

Attainment Demonstration and Weight of 

Evidence Analysis for the Washington 

Area 

VI. Description of the Control Measures and 

Emission Reductions Included in the 

Plan for Attainment and Contingency 

Measures 

VII. Transportation Conformity Budgets 

VIII. Proposed Action 

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Summary of Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

attainment demonstration, failure to 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
17162 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

1Section 302(d) confers upon the District of 

Columbia the same rights and responsibilities for 

air pollution control as the 50 states. 

attain contingency measures elements 

and the associated motor vehicle 

emission budgets (MVEBs) of the SIP 

revisions submitted by the District of 

Columbia, the State of Maryland and the 

Commonwealth of Virginia (hereafter 

‘‘the 3 States’’ 1) to EPA on June 12, 

2007, June 4, 2007 and June 12, 2007, 

respectively (hereafter the ‘‘June 2007 

SIP revisions’’). The June 2007 SIP 

revisions included, among other things, 

the attainment plan and failure-to-attain 

contingency measures elements for the 

1997 ozone NAAQS in the Washington 

Area. With the June 2007 SIP revisions, 

the 3 States submitted an attainment 

demonstration for the Washington Area 

and its associated proposed MVEBs 

used for transportation conformity 

purposes in the Washington Area. With 

the June 2007 SIP revisions, the 3 States 

also submitted a 2002 base year 

emissions inventory, an analysis of 

reasonably available control measures/ 

reasonably available control technology 

(RACM/RACT), the 2008 reasonable 

further progress (RFP) plan and its 

associated MVEBs for 2008, and 

contingency measures. The RFP plan 

with its MVEBs, the RACM/RACT 

analysis, the 2002 base year emissions 

inventory, and contingency measures 

for any failure to make RFP in the June 

2007 SIP revisions were approved by 

EPA on September 20, 2011 (76 FR 

58116) (the ‘‘September 20, 2011 final 

rule’’). Therefore, in this action, EPA is 

only proposing to approve what remains 

from the June 2007 SIP revisions 

including the attainment demonstration, 

failure to attain contingency measures, 

and the associated MVEBs for the 1997 

ozone NAAQS for the Washington Area. 

EPA has determined that the 3 States’ 

attainment demonstration meets the 

applicable requirements of the CAA 

because it demonstrates attainment by 

the applicable attainment date of June 

15, 2010. EPA’s analysis and findings 

are discussed in this proposed 

rulemaking. In addition, a technical 

support document (TSD) for this 

proposal entitled ‘‘Technical Support 

Document for Approval and 

Promulgation of Air Quality 

Implementation Plans; District of 

Columbia, Maryland and Virginia; 

Attainment Demonstration for the 1997 

8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard for the Washington, 

DC–MD–VA Moderate Nonattainment 

Area’’ (referred to hereafter as the 

‘‘Attainment TSD’’) is available on line 

at www.regulations.gov, Docket No. 

EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0132. The 

Attainment TSD provides additional 

explanation on EPA’s analysis 

supporting this proposed approval of 

the attainment demonstration. 

II. Background Information 

A. Background on the 1997 Ozone 

NAAQS and Designation of the 

Washington Area 

On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38856), EPA 

promulgated the 1997 ozone NAAQS 

which revised the health-based NAAQS 

for ozone by setting the NAAQS at 0.08 

parts per million (ppm) averaged over 

an 8-hour time frame. EPA set the 1997 

ozone NAAQS based on scientific 

evidence demonstrating that ozone 

causes adverse health effects at lower 

ozone concentrations and over longer 

periods of time than was understood 

when the pre-existing 1-hour ozone 

standard was set. EPA determined that 

the 1997 ozone NAAQS would be more 

protective of human health, especially 

for children and adults who are active 

outdoors, and individuals with a preexisting respiratory disease, such as 

asthma. 

On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23951), EPA 

finalized the attainment/nonattainment 

designations for areas across the country 

with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS. 

These actions became effective on June 

15, 2004. Among those nonattainment 

areas was the Washington Area. The 

Washington Area is comprised of: the 

entire District of Columbia (the District); 

a portion of Maryland (Calvert, Charles, 

Frederick, Montgomery, and Prince 

George’s Counties); and a portion of 

Virginia (Alexandria City, Arlington 

County, Fairfax City, Fairfax County, 

Falls Church City, Manassas and 

Manassas Park Cities, and Prince 

William County). 

In addition, on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 

23951), EPA promulgated its Phase 1 

Implementation Rule which provided 

how areas designated nonattainment for 

the 1997 ozone NAAQS would be 

classified using the design value for 

each nonattainment area. Based upon its 

design value for the three-year period 

2001–2003, the Washington Area was 

classified as a moderate ozone 

nonattainment area under the 1997 

ozone NAAQS. See 40 CFR 81.309, 

81.321, and 81.347. 

Moderate areas are required to attain 

the 1997 ozone NAAQS by no later than 

six years after designation. Therefore, 

the Washington Area was to attain by no 

later than June 15, 2010. See 40 CFR 

51.903 and 69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004. 

B. Actions Regarding Determination of 

Attainment of the 1997 Ozone NAAQS 

by the Washington Area 

On February 28, 2012 (77 FR 11739), 

EPA published two determinations 

regarding the 1997 ozone NAAQS for 

the Washington Area. First, EPA made 

a clean data determination that the 

Washington Area had attained the 1997 

ozone NAAQS. 

This determination was based upon 

complete, quality assured, and certified 

ambient air monitoring data that 

showed the Washington Area had 

monitored attainment of the 1997 ozone 

NAAQS for the 2008–2010 monitoring 

period. Ambient air monitoring data for 

the 2009–2011 monitoring period is 

consistent with continued attainment. 

Second, pursuant to section 181(b)(2)(A) 

of the CAA, EPA made a determination 

of attainment that the Washington Area 

had attained the 1997 ozone NAAQS by 

its attainment date of June 15, 2010 as 

required by section 181 of the CAA as 

interpreted by the implementation rule 

(40 CFR 51.903) for the 1997 ozone 

NAAQS. 

Even though the attainment date for 

the Washington Area has passed and the 

area has in fact attained the 1997 ozone 

NAAQS by that date, EPA believes that 

approval of the attainment 

demonstration and contingency 

measures plan in the June 2007 SIP 

revisions is important because such 

approval strengthens the ozone SIP of 

each of the 3 States by reserving 

reductions from various measures for air 

quality purposes and by approving 

lower MVEBs into the SIP than those 

associated with the 2008 RFP plan. 

C. Adequacy of the 2009 and 2010 

MVEBs 

EPA conducted the process to 

determine the adequacy of the MVEBs 

for the entire Washington Area 

associated with the attainment 

demonstration portions of the June 2007 

SIP revisions for the Washington Area. 

On September 27, 2012, EPA posted a 

notice on EPA’s Web site at http:// 

www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/

transconf/currsips.htm for the purpose 

of opening a 30-day public comment 

period on the adequacy of the MVEBs 

for the Washington Area in the June 

2007 SIP revisions’ attainment 

demonstration for the Washington Area. 

That notice informed the public of the 

availability of the June 2007 SIP 

revisions. EPA’s public comment period 

closed on October 29, 2012, and no 

comments were received. EPA 

published a notice of adequacy in the 

Federal Register on February 7, 2013 

(78 FR 9044) which announced EPA had 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 17163 

2See 64 FR 70460 at 70465, December 16, 1999 

and 70 FR 6796 at 6799, February 9, 2005, citing 

CAA section 176(c)(2)(A). 

determined that the MVEBs were 

adequate. EPA’s determination that the 

2009 and 2010 MVEBs in the June 2007 

SIP revisions has the effect of making 

the 2009 volatile organic compounds 

(VOC) and 2010 nitrogen oxides (NOX) 

MVEBs the MVEBs applicable for 

transportation conformity purposes as of 

February 22, 2013. This proposed 

action, if issued as a final rule, would 

approve these budgets into the ozone 

SIP of each of the 3 States. 

III. CAA Requirements for Moderate 8- 

Hour Ozone Nonattainment Areas 

Pursuant to the Phase 1 

Implementation Rule, the Washington 

Area was classified under subpart 2 as 

a moderate nonattainment area. On 

November 29, 2005 (70 FR 71612), EPA 

promulgated the second phase of the 

implementation rule (Phase 2 

Implementation Rule) for the 1997 

ozone NAAQS. The Phase 2 

Implementation Rule set forth the 

submission deadlines and the remaining 

substantive requirements for the 

attainment demonstration, contingency 

measures and RFP requirements of 

section 172(c) as supplemented by 

section 182(b) of the CAA. 

The Phase 2 Implementation Rule 

addressed the control obligations that 

apply to areas classified under subpart 

2. Among other things, the Phase 1 and 

2 Implementation Rules outline the 

required SIP elements and deadlines for 

those various requirements in areas 

designated as moderate nonattainment. 

The requirements regarding a 

demonstration of attainment of the 1997 

ozone NAAQS are: 

1. A demonstration that the SIP 

contains enough reductions in VOC 

emissions and NOX emissions to attain 

the 1997 ozone NAAQS as 

expeditiously as practicable but no later 

than June 15, 2010. See section 172(c)(1) 

as amended by section 182(b)(1) as 

codified in 40 CFR 51.908. However, 

because compliance with the 1997 

ozone NAAQS must be determined 

using three years of complete, qualityassured air quality monitoring data, any 

determination of attainment by June 15, 

2010 would have to be made upon the 

most recent three years of air quality 

monitoring data available which would 

be 2007, 2008 and 2009. For this reason, 

the Phase 1 Implementation Rule (40 

CFR 51.908) required that the emission 

reduction measures needed to be 

implemented no later than the 

beginning of the 2009 ozone season and 

that the MVEBs associated with the 

attainment demonstration be for 2009. 

As a result, the modeling demonstration 

needed to use projected 2009 emissions 

inventories reflecting the control 

strategies and predicted 2009 design 

values; 

2. A demonstration that the SIP 

provides for the implementation of all 

RACM (including at a minimum RACT 

on existing sources). Section 172(c)(1) 

includes two elements: (a) Under 

section 172(c)(1) RACM/RACT, a state 

must ‘‘consider all potentially available 

measures to determine whether they 

[a]re reasonably available for 

implementation in the area, and 

whether they would advance the [area’s] 

attainment date.’’ See 66 FR 585, 608 

(January 3, 2001); and (b) under CAA 

section 182(b)(2), the CAA sets a 

requirement for RACT not related to 

expeditious attainment but requires a 

State adopt rules for any category of 

VOC sources for which EPA has issued 

a control technique guideline (CTG) and 

for any other major stationary sources of 

VOC emissions in the area. Section 

182(f) extends the requirement for 

RACT under section 182(b)(2)(C) to any 

major stationary sources of NOX

emissions in the area. 

3. A demonstration that the SIP 

provides a minimum RFP towards 

attainment by reducing baseline 

emissions of VOC and/or NOX by 15 

percent before December 31, 2008 and 

contains adequate MVEBs for 2008; 

4. A 2002 baseline inventory from 

which the 15 percent reduction in 

baseline emissions is to be determined; 

and 

5. Specific measures to be undertaken 

if the area fails to: (a) attain the 1997 

ozone NAAQS by June 15, 2010, or (b) 

fails to achieve RFP. See section 

179(c)(9). 

6. Adequate MVEBs: 2 In the case of 

moderate nonattainment areas under the 

1997 ozone NAAQS, RFP plans and 

attainment demonstrations must contain 

adequate MVEBs for 2008 and 2009, 

respectively. In the June 2007 SIP 

revisions, the 3 States also included a 

2010 MVEB for NOX as part of the 

contingency plan to address a failure to 

attain. 

IV. Description of the States’ SIP 

Submittals 

In the June 2007 SIP revisions, the 3 

States submitted a comprehensive 

attainment plan for the 1997 ozone 

NAAQS. The June 2007 SIP revisions 

included an attainment demonstration 

with 2009 MVEBs, the RFP plan with 

2008 MVEBs, a RACM/RACT analysis, 

the 2002 base year emissions inventory, 

and contingency measures for any 

failure to make RFP. This rulemaking 

action only addresses the portions of the 

June 2007 SIP revisions not previously 

approved by EPA including the 

attainment demonstration, contingency 

measures for failure to attain, and 

associated 2009 and 2010 MVEBs. By a 

separate and concurrent process, EPA 

had already determined that the 2009 

and 2010 MVEBs associated with the 

ozone attainment demonstration and 

contingency measures portions in the 

June 2007 SIP revisions are adequate. In 

this proposed rule, EPA proposes to 

approve those 2009 and 2010 MVEBs 

into the SIPs of each of the 3 States. As 

stated in section I of this document, the 

other elements—including the RFP plan 

with MVEBs, a RACM/RACT analysis, 

the 2002 base year emissions inventory, 

and contingency measures for any 

failure to make RFP—in the June 2007 

SIP revisions were approved by the 

September 20, 2011 final rule. 

V. EPA’s Review of the States’ Modeled 

Attainment Demonstration and Weight 

of Evidence Analysis for the 

Washington Area 

Section 110(a)(2)(K) of the CAA 

requires states to prepare air quality 

modeling to show how they will meet 

ambient air quality standards. EPA 

determined that areas classified as 

moderate or above must use 

photochemical grid modeling or any 

other analytical method determined by 

the Administrator to be at least as 

effective to demonstrate attainment of 

the ozone health-based standard by the 

required attainment date. See 40 CFR 

51.908. On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23951 

and 40 CFR 51.903), EPA specified how 

areas would be classified with regard to 

the 8-hour ozone standard set by EPA in 

1997. On April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23858), 

EPA followed these procedures and 

classified the Washington Area as 

moderate, and the nonattainment area 

was required to attain the 1997 ozone 

NAAQS by June 2010. Because the 

attainment date was June 2010 for 

moderate areas, states had to achieve 

emission reductions by the ozone 

season of 2009 in order for ozone 

concentrations to be reduced and show 

attainment during the last complete 

ozone season before the 2010 deadline. 

A. EPA Guidance for Using Models To 

Determine Attainment 

EPA’s photochemical modeling 

guidance is found at Guidance on the 

Use of Models and Other Analyses for 

Demonstrating Attainment of Air 

Quality Goals for Ozone, PM2.5, and 

Regional Haze, EPA–454/B–07–002, 

April 2007. The photochemical 

modeling guidance is divided into two 

parts. One part describes how to use a 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
17164 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

photochemical grid model for ozone to 

assess whether an area will come into 

attainment of the air quality standard. A 

second part describes how the user 

should perform supplemental analyses, 

using various analytical methods, to 

determine if the model over predicts, 

under predicts, or accurately predicts 

the air quality improvement projected to 

occur by the attainment date. The 

guidance indicates that states should 

review these supplemental analyses, in 

combination with the modeling 

analysis, in a ‘‘weight of evidence’’ 

assessment to determine whether each 

area is likely to achieve timely 

attainment. 

A description of how the attainment 

demonstration from the June 2007 SIP 

revisions addresses this EPA modeling 

guidance for a modeled attainment 

demonstration can be found in the 

Attainment TSD titled ‘‘Technical 

Support Document for Approval and 

Promulgation of Air Quality 

Implementation Plans; District of 

Columbia, Maryland and Virginia; 

Attainment Demonstration for the 1997 

8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard for the Washington, 

DC–MD–VA Moderate Nonattainment 

Area,’’ available on line at 

www.regulations.gov, Docket number 

EPA–R03–OAR–2013–0132. 

In the June 2007 SIP revisions, the 

photochemical grid model used 

projected emissions for 2009, including 

emission changes due to regulations the 

3 States and neighboring states were 

planning to implement or had already 

implemented and due to expected 

growth by the 2009 ozone season. 

Meteorological conditions from 2002, 

the same as the base year modeling, 

were used in the projection modeling 

for 2009. Using base case meteorology 

allows the effect of changes in states’ 

emissions to be determined without 

being influenced by yearly fluctuations 

in meteorology and is consistent with 

EPA guidance. 

The attainment test used in the 

Washington Area modeling 

demonstration involved the application 

of model-based relative response factors 

(RRFs) to base year design values at 

each monitor to produce projected 

future year design values for 2009. The 

projected 2009 design values represent 

design values that should result from 

emission controls the 3 States and other 

states planned to have in place in 2009. 

As discussed in the Attainment TSD, 

the 2009 design values should be less 

than or equal to 84 parts per billion 

(ppb) at all monitoring stations to meet 

the attainment test. The SIP modeling 

predicts that in 2009, the Washington 

Area will not pass the attainment test 

because the design values at two 

monitors are projected to be 1 or 2 ppb 

over the 84 ppb standard. 

In summary, the basic photochemical 

grid modeling presented in the 3 States’ 

June 2007 SIP revisions meets EPA’s 

guidelines and when used with the 

methods recommended in EPA’s 

modeling guidance, is acceptable to 

EPA. However, when EPA’s attainment 

test is applied to the modeling results, 

two of the seventeen monitors in the 

Washington Area had 2009 projected 

ozone design values predicted to exceed 

the 84 ppb standard with design values 

of 85 and 86 ppb. Thus, based solely 

upon consideration of EPA’s modeled 

attainment test, the 3 States have not 

conclusively demonstrated that the 

Washington Area will reach attainment 

of the 1997 ozone NAAQS in the 

attainment year with the modeled 

emission reduction strategies committed 

to by the 3 States and neighboring 

states. Therefore, a weight of evidence 

(WOE) analysis was used by the 3 States 

and reviewed by EPA to demonstrate 

attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS in 

the Washington Area in accordance 

with EPA guidance. 

B. Weight of Evidence Demonstration 

EPA’s modeling guidance describes 

how to use a photochemical grid model 

and additional analytical methods to 

complete a WOE analysis to estimate if 

emissions control strategies will 

demonstrate attainment of the 1997 

ozone NAAQS. This modeling guidance 

recommends a WOE analysis beyond 

basic supplemental analyses if any 

future predicted design values fall 

within the range of 82 to 87 ppb 

(inclusive). Only four monitors in the 

Washington Area had model-predicted 

2009 design values within this range. 

The rest of the monitors in the 

Washington Area had model-predicted 

design values of 81 ppb or less. A WOE 

analysis is a supporting analysis that 

helps to determine if the results of the 

photochemical modeling system are 

correctly (or not correctly) predicting 

future air quality. The WOE analysis 

presented in the 3 States’ June 2007 SIP 

revisions describes the analyses 

performed, databases used, key 

assumptions and outcomes of each 

analysis, and why the evidence, viewed 

as a whole, supports a conclusion that 

the Washington Area will attain the 

1997 ozone NAAQS despite the model 

prediction that some monitors’ future 

design values exceed the levels of the 

1997 ozone NAAQS. 

EPA’s review of the 3 States’ WOE 

analysis in the Attainment TSD includes 

the following: (1) A comparison of 

model-predicted 2009 ozone design 

values to monitored design values for 

2003–2011; (2) an analysis of recent 

ozone trends in the Washington Area; 

and (3) alternative methods for 

calculating the predicted 2009 ozone 

design value using modeling results. 

Further, in the Attainment TSD, EPA’s 

analysis concurs with the 3 States’ 

analysis of significant declining trends 

for the ozone design values, number of 

exceedances, ratio of exceedance days to 

days with a maximum ambient 

temperature over 90 degrees Fahrenheit 

and spatial extent of exceedances of the 

1997 ozone NAAQS in the Washington 

Area. 

As discussed in detail in the 

Attainment TSD, the 3 States’ 

attainment demonstration also asserted 

an alternative baseline concentration 

could be used to demonstrate 

attainment. However, EPA determined 

in the Attainment TSD that the 

modeling would still not pass the basic 

modeled attainment test even with this 

alternative baseline value. Likewise, 

EPA determined in the Attainment TSD 

that the 3 States’ recalculation of 2009 

modeled ozone design values with a 

relative response factor calculated using 

the alternative methods presented in the 

3 States’ June 2007 SIP revisions 

reduced the modeled 2009 ozone design 

values slightly but not always below 85 

ppb. The 3 States presented a range of 

predicted 2009 design values based 

upon the modeling in terms of 

maximum and minimum predicted 2009 

design values. All of the minimum 

values were 82 ppb and lower but three 

of the maximum values were 85 ppb or 

above. The 3 States’ methodology can 

yield up to nine separate 2009 predicted 

design values within the range. For all 

but one monitor, the average value for 

the nine separate 2009 predicted design 

values were below 85 ppb. 

As discussed in the Attainment TSD, 

EPA concurs that the model over 

predicted 2009 ozone design values 

relative to the actual monitored 2009 to 

2011 design values for most cases and 

always for those four monitors for 

which the modeled design values were 

in the range of 82 to 87 ppb when 

determined using EPA’s preferred 

method for calculating the baseline 

design value and the relative response 

factor. The Attainment TSD notes that 

monitored ozone design values for each 

of the Washington Area monitors 

continued to decline and that each 

monitor continued to show attainment 

in 2010 and 2011. 

In conclusion, in the Attainment TSD, 

EPA determined with the benefit of 

2009 monitored design values that the 

model in the 3 States’ June 2007 SIP 

revisions over predicted 2009 predicted 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 17165 

3Refer to ‘‘Technical Support Document—District 

of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia; 2002 Base 

Year Emissions Inventory, Reasonable Further 

Progress Plan, Contingency Measures, Reasonably 

Available Control Measures, and Transportation 

Conformity Budgets for the Metropolitan 

Washington, DC 1997 8-Hour Ozone Moderate 

Nonattainment Area,’’ dated May 26, 2011, a copy 

of which has been included in the docket for this 

proposed rule. 

4The District of Columbia committed to adopting 

and submitting as a SIP revision regulations 

conforming to those of the ‘‘model rules’’ prepared 

by the OTC for these similar categories, but any 

emission reductions arising from these measures in 

the District were not applied to the emissions 

reductions upon which the attainment modeling 

and contingency measure demonstration relied. 

design values when compared to actual 

monitored design values since 2009. 

EPA has determined that the 3 States’ 

photochemical grid modeling results 

predict a 2009 projected design value at 

most 2 ppb above the 1997 ozone 

NAAQS for the Washington Area. 

However, after taking into account WOE 

arguments regarding model over 

prediction of the 2009 monitored design 

values, recent ozone design value 

trends, and the Washington Area’s 

attainment of the standard by 2010, EPA 

has determined that the 3 States’ June 

2007 SIP revisions demonstrate 

attainment of the ozone standard by the 

attainment date of June 2010 as 

discussed in detail in the Attainment 

TSD. 

VI. Description of the Control Measures 

and Emission Reductions Included in 

the Plan for Attainment and 

Contingency Measures 

A. RFP Measures 

All of the measures which were used 

to demonstrate RFP in the June 2007 SIP 

revisions are part of the measures for 

obtaining the reductions needed for 

attainment. These are described in the 

TSD prepared for the approval of the 

RFP plan.3 The RFP plan relied solely 

upon VOC reductions from these 

measures. See Table 6 in the June 30, 

2011 notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPR) (73 FR 38334, 38337) for the 

September 20, 2011 final rule approving 

the RFP plan. Some of these measures 

also provide reductions in NOX

emissions as well. These include most 

of the Federal nonroad and on-road 

mobile sources emissions standards and 

other on-road mobile sources controls 

such as enhanced motor vehicle 

inspection and maintenance (I/M) 

programs or the transportation control 

measures. Most of the contingency 

measure reductions to address any 

failure to achieve RFP were NOX

reductions. See Section II.E of the June 

30, 2011 NPR (73 FR 38334, 38337– 

38338). 

Most of the RFP plan measures also 

provide additional VOC reductions in 

the 2009 attainment year over and above 

those projected for the RFP year of 2008. 

These include Federal nonroad and onroad mobile sources emissions 

standards and area source rules such as 

those covering portable fuel containers, 

older vehicles and engines. 

B. Additional Measures Beyond the RFP 

Plan 

The attainment demonstration for the 

Washington Area relied upon some 

additional measures beyond those used 

to demonstrate RFP. Some of the RFP 

measures also provide reductions in 

NOX emissions in addition to the VOC 

reductions credited towards the RFP 

requirement. 

These included amending existing 

state regulations for area source 

categories to add emission standards for 

additional categories of consumer 

products and stricter standards for 

previously regulated products such as 

portable fuel containers. Also, the 3 

States adopted regulations for industrial 

adhesives and sealants. Specifically, the 

attainment plan also relied upon the 

following new measures: 

1. Regulations controlling VOC 

emissions from industrial adhesives and 

sealants in Maryland and Virginia 

conforming to the emission standards of 

a ‘‘model rule’’ prepared by the Ozone 

Transport Commissions (OTC); 

2. Stricter standards representing a 

second ‘‘phase’’ of control by Virginia 

on VOC emissions from portable fuel 

containers conforming to those of a 

‘‘model rule’’ prepared by the OTC; and 

3. Emissions standards for additional 

classes of consumer products in a 

second ‘‘phase’’ of VOC control by 

Virginia on VOC emissions conforming 

to those of a ‘‘model rule’’ prepared by 

the OTC. 

All of these rules have been fully 

approved by EPA into the applicable 

State SIP. See 76 FR 64237 (October 18, 

2011) and 76 FR 51925 (August 19, 

2011) (regarding Maryland adhesives 

and sealants rule), and 77 FR 3928 

(January 26, 2012) and 76 FR 69214 

(November 8, 2011) (regarding Virginia’s 

adhesives and sealants rule, phase 2 

portable fuel containers rule, and phase 

2 consumer products rule). 

Maryland also instituted a second 

phase of control on consumer products 

and portable fuel containers conforming 

to a ‘‘model rule’’ prepared by the OTC, 

but Maryland’s rules required 

compliance before the end of calendar 

year 2008 and so are not rules beyond 

those for the RFP plan.4

In addition, some of emission 

reductions in the contingency plan for 

a failure to achieve adequate RFP by the 

end of calendar year 2008 provide part 

of the reductions for the attainment 

demonstration. These are emission 

reductions in the Washington Area 

scheduled to occur after 2008 but during 

2009 such as the portable fuel 

containers rules (additional reductions 

occurring as a result of rule phases 1 

and 2) and reductions from beyond 

RACT level control of NOX sources. 

Table 1 provides a summary of the 

attainment plan’s measures and the 

projected 2009 emission reductions. 

TABLE 1—CONTROL MEASURES AND 2009 EMISSION REDUCTIONS IN THE WASHINGTON AREA

Source sector 

Reductions (tons per day) 

VOC NOX

Point Source Measures ................................................................................................................................... 0.00 128.76 

Area Sources Measures .................................................................................................................................. 36.97 0.00 

Nonroad Measures (NONROAD Model) ......................................................................................................... 42.44 14.76 

Locomotive Standards ..................................................................................................................................... 0.06 2.74 

On-road Measures (MOBILE Model) ............................................................................................................... 7.17 37.63 

Transportation Control Measures .................................................................................................................... 0.18 0.45 

Voluntary Bundle ............................................................................................................................................. 0.19 0.30 

Totals ........................................................................................................................................................ 87.01 184.64 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
17166 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

5EPA has already approved contingency 

measures for failure to make RFP as discussed in 

section IV.B of this document. This proposed rule 

therefore only applies to approval of contingency 

measures needed to address the failure to attain by 

the applicable attainment date ‘‘prong’’ in section 

179(c)(9). 

6Such a result comports well with section 

182(b)(1)(A) which requires a moderate area plan to 

provide for ‘‘reductions in volatile organic 

compounds and oxides of nitrogen as necessary to 

attain’’ the 1997 ozone NAAQS by the applicable 

attainment date for moderate areas. 

D. Contingency Plan Reductions 

Section 172(c)(9) of the CAA requires 

that SIPs contain additional contingency 

measures that will take effect without 

further action by the state or EPA if an 

area fails to attain an ambient air quality 

standard by the applicable attainment 

date or fails to achieve sufficient RFP.5

The CAA does not specify how many 

contingency measures are needed or the 

magnitude of emissions reductions that 

must be provided by these measures. 

However, EPA provided initial guidance 

interpreting the contingency measure 

requirements of section 172(c)(9) in the 

April 16, 1992, General Preamble for 

Implementation of the Act. See 57 FR 

13498, 13510 (April 16, 1992). In the 

April 16, 1992 initial guidance, EPA 

indicated that states with ozone 

nonattainment areas classified as 

moderate and above should include 

sufficient contingency measures so that, 

upon implementation of such measures, 

additional emission reductions of up to 

3 percent of the emissions in the 

adjusted base year inventory (or such 

lesser percentage that will cure the 

identified failure) would be achieved in 

the year following the year in which the 

failure has been identified. The state 

must show that the contingency 

measures can be implemented with 

minimal further action on their part and 

with no additional rulemaking actions. 

EPA allows areas to use as 

contingency measures one or more 

Federal or local measures that are in 

place and provide reductions that are in 

excess to the attainment demonstration 

(or RFP plan). See 70 FR 71612, 71651 

(November 29, 2005). Further, EPA 

believes that any additional reductions 

resulting from measures in the 

attainment strategy occurring after the 

applicable attainment date are clearly in 

excess to those needed for attainment. 

The modeling demonstration for the 

Washington Area was based upon 

projected emissions levels for the year 

2009, and therefore reductions 

occurring after the end of calendar year 

2009 would be excess to attainment 

needs. 

The applicable attainment date for the 

Washington Area was June 15, 2010 

based upon an effective date of 

designation under the 1997 ozone 

NAAQS of June 15, 2004. See 69 FR 

28858 (April 30, 2004) and Table 1 in 

40 CFR 51.903. The earliest EPA could 

have made a determination of 

attainment or failure to achieve 

attainment for the Washington Area was 

in June 2010; therefore, under the April 

16, 1992 initial guidance, the earliest 

the ‘‘year following the year the failure 

was indentified’’ would have been in 

2011. Therefore, EPA believes that 

reductions that occur after 2009 and as 

early as 2010 and as late as 2011 would 

qualify for contingency measures to 

address any failure to attain as satisfying 

both the excess to attainment and the 

timing of reductions requirements. 

Excess reductions from measures 

already in place meet the requirement 

that contingency measures be 

implemented with minimal further 

action by the state and with no 

additional rulemaking actions. For more 

information on contingency measures, 

see the April 16, 1992 General Preamble 

(57 FR 13512) and the November 29, 

2005 Phase 2 Implementation Rule (70 

FR 71612, 71650). 

Because the Washington Area’s 

attainment demonstration relies upon 

both VOC and NOX reductions, 

acceptable contingency measures can 

include NOX and VOC reductions.6 For 

the failure to attain contingency 

requirement, the 3 States identified 

specific measures yielding 8.46 tons per 

day of VOC emissions reductions and 

6.05 tons per day of NOX emissions 

reductions. These reductions represent a 

1.941 percent reduction in VOC 

emissions and a 1.069 percent reduction 

in NOX emissions as shown in Table 2 

of this document. 

TABLE 2—CALCULATION OF VOC AND NOX REDUCTIONS FOR ATTAINMENT CONTINGENCY

Item Description 

(Ozone season tons per day) 

VOC NOX

(a) 2002 Base-Year Inventory ................................................................................................. 448 .28 597 .22 

(b) Non-creditable Emissions Reduction ................................................................................. 12 .45 31 .61 

(c) Adjusted Base-Year Inventory = Item (a) minus Item (b) ................................................. 435 .83 565 .61 

(d) 1.941% VOC Reduction Required for Attainment .............................................................

Contingency = (1.941/100) times Item (c) .........................................................................

8 .459 ..............................

(e) 1.069% NOX Reduction Required for Attainment .............................................................

Contingency = (1.069/100) times Item (c) .........................................................................

.............................. 6 .046 

The approved base year inventory for 

the Washington Area under the 1997 

ozone NAAQS is from Table 2 of the 

NPR for the September 20, 2011 final 

rule. See 76 FR 38334, 38336 (June 30, 

2011). In Table 3, the 3 States identified 

the following specific Federal and state 

measures as providing contingency 

measures. 

TABLE 3—CONTINGENCY MEASURES FOR FAILURE TO ATTAIN

Contingency measure 

(Ozone season tons per day) 

Source category affected VOC NOX

Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emission Standards ......................................... On-road mobile ........................... 0 1 .77 

Phase I and Phase II Emissions Standards for Gasoline-Powered 

Non-Road Utility Engines.

Nonroad Mobile ........................... 1 .49 0 .04 

Emissions Standards for Diesel-Powered Non-Road Utility Engines 

of 50 or More Horsepower.

Nonroad Mobile ........................... 0 .39 3 .28 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 17167 

TABLE 3—CONTINGENCY MEASURES FOR FAILURE TO ATTAIN—Continued 

Contingency measure 

(Ozone season tons per day) 

Source category affected VOC NOX

Emissions Standards for Spark Ignition Marine Engine .................... Nonroad Mobile ........................... 1 .42 0 

Emissions Standards for Large Spark Ignition Engines .................... Nonroad Mobile ........................... 0 .54 0 .96 

Portable Fuel Containers Phase 1 and 2 Rules ............................... Area ............................................. 4 .62 0 

Total Reductions ......................................................................... ...................................................... 8 .46 6 .05 

The reductions from the Tier 2 motor 

vehicle emission standards occurred 

between 2009 and 2010. The reductions 

from the other identified measures 

occurred between 2009 and 2011. The 3 

States have implemented the 

contingency reductions from the onroad mobile sources through 

establishment of a 2010 MVEB for NOX. 

Even though additional reductions in 

VOC emissions from on-road mobile 

sources may have occurred between 

2009 and 2010, the States have elected 

not to count these towards the 

contingency requirement. Thus, the 

2010 NOX MVEB reflects only a 

reduction in NOX emissions. EPA 

believes that all of these measures 

achieve additional reductions beyond 

those needed to offset growth in activity 

levels as new motor vehicles, nonroad 

vehicle and locomotive engines, or 

portable fuel containers replace older 

items which either were subject to less 

stringent emissions standards or no 

emission standards regulations. 

VII. Transportation Conformity Budgets 

Transportation conformity is required 

by CAA section 176(c). EPA’s 

conformity rule requires that 

transportation plans, programs and 

projects conform to state air quality 

implementation plans and establishes 

the criteria and procedure for 

determining whether or not they do. 

Conformity to a SIP means that 

transportation activities will not 

produce new air quality violations, 

worsen existing violations, or delay 

timely attainment of a national ambient 

air quality standard such as the 1997 

ozone NAAQS. The criteria by which 

EPA determines whether a SIP’s MVEBs 

are adequate for conformity purposes 

are outlined in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). The 

process for determining the adequacy of 

submitted SIP budgets is described in 40 

CFR 93.118(f). 

For an attainment demonstration 

states must establish VOC and NOX

MVEBs for the attainment year and 

submit these MVEBs to EPA for 

approval. Upon adequacy determination 

or approval by EPA, states must conduct 

transportation conformity analysis for 

their Transportation Improvement 

Programs (TIPs) and long range 

transportation plans to ensure highway 

vehicle emissions will not exceed 

applicable MVEBs. Failure to 

demonstrate such transportation 

conformity results in freezing of Federal 

highway funds and all Federal highway 

projects in the lapsed area. The States 

discuss transportation conformity in 

Section 8.0 of the June 2007 SIP 

revisions. The States describe their 

methods and provide detailed input 

parameters used in modeling the 

inventories in Appendices E1 and E2 of 

the June 2007 SIP revisions. In the 

Washington Area, the Metropolitan 

Washington Air Quality Committee 

(MWAQC) consulted with the 

Transportation Planning Board (TPB) to 

establish mobile source emissions 

budgets. In addition to the 2009 MVEBs 

required for the attainment year, the 3 

States have implemented the NOX

contingency reductions from on-road 

mobile sources by establishing a 2010 

MVEB for NOX. 

The Washington Area MVEBs for the 

attainment demonstration and 

contingency measures are based on 

projected 2009 and 2010 mobile source 

emissions, accounting for all mobile 

control measures and transportation 

control measures. As discussed in 

section II. C herein, EPA has already 

determined these MVEBs are adequate. 

See 78 FR 9044. The MVEBs for the 

2009 attainment demonstration and the 

2010 contingency plan NOX MVEBs are 

shown in Table 4. 

TABLE 4—THE WASHINGTON AREA MVEBS FOR THE 2009 ATTAINMENT PLAN AND 2010 CONTINGENCY PLAN

Budget type Budget year 

MVEBs 

VOC 

(tons per day) 

NOX

(tons per day) 

Attainment Demonstration ............................................................................................... 2009 66.5 146.1 

Contingency Plan ............................................................................................................. 2010 N/A 144.3 

VIII. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve the 1997 

ozone NAAQS attainment 

demonstration, included in the 3 States’ 

June 2007 SIP revisions, as 

demonstrating attainment for the 

Washington Area by the applicable 

attainment date of June 15, 2010. On 

February 28, 2012 (77 FR 11739), EPA 

determined that the Washington Area 

attained the 1997 ozone NAAQS by its 

attainment date. EPA is also proposing 

to approve the contingency measures 

plan from the June 2007 SIP revisions 

and the MVEBs associated with the 

attainment demonstration and 

contingency measures. EPA is soliciting 

public comments on the issues 

discussed in this document. These 

comments will be considered before 

taking final action. 

IX. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely proposes to approve state law as 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
17168 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed rule, 

pertaining to the 1997 8-hour ozone 

attainment demonstration, contingency 

measures and MVEBs for the 

Washington Area submitted by the State 

of Maryland, the District of Columbia 

and the Commonwealth of Virginia on 

June 4, 2007, June 12, 2007 and June 12, 

2007 respectively, does not have tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), because the SIP is not approved 

to apply in Indian country located in the 

states, and EPA notes that it will not 

impose substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

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

Dated: March 13, 2013. 

W. C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2013–06421 Filed 3–19–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0582; FRL–9792–6] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Tennessee; 

110(a)(1) and (2) Infrastructure 

Requirements for the 2008 Lead 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve, 

and in the alternative, conditionally 

approve in part, the State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision, 

submitted by the State of Tennessee, 

through the Department of Environment 

and Conservation, demonstrating that 

the State meets the requirements of 

sections 110(a)(1) and (2) of the Clean 

Air Act (CAA or the Act) for the 2008 

Lead national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS). Section 110(a) of 

the CAA requires that each state adopt 

and submit a SIP for the 

implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement of each NAAQS 

promulgated by EPA, which is 

commonly referred to as an 

‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP. Tennessee certified 

that the Tennessee SIP contains 

provisions that ensure the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS is implemented, enforced, and 

maintained in Tennessee (hereafter 

referred to as an ‘‘infrastructure 

submission’’). EPA is proposing to 

conditionally approve portions of 

sections 110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), 

and 110(a)(2)(J) related to prevention of 

significant deterioration (PSD) 

requirements, and a portion of section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) of Tennessee’s October 

19, 2009, infrastructure submission. The 

current Tennessee SIP does not include 

provisions to comply with these 

requirements; however, Tennessee has 

committed to submit SIP revisions to 

address these deficiencies. EPA is also 

proposing, in the alternative, to approve 

the entire Tennessee SIP, including the 

sections described above, as meeting the 

applicable infrastructure requirements 

for the 2008 Lead NAAQS. Should 

Tennessee submit, and EPA approve, 

the necessary provisions to correct the 

identified infrastructure SIP deficiencies 

prior to EPA taking final action on the 

October 19, 2009, infrastructure 

submission, EPA anticipates finalizing 

full approval of the infrastructure SIP. If 

EPA does not approve these necessary 

provisions prior to taking final action on 

the October 19, 2009, infrastructure 

submission, EPA anticipates finalizing 

conditional approvals for those 

elements for which the Tennessee 

infrastructure SIP remains deficient. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before April 19, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2012–0582, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: R4-RDS@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2012– 

0582,’’ Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae 

Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2012– 

0582. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through 

www.regulations.gov or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS