14210 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

that in determining whether to apply for 

CSP funds, an eligible entity would 

evaluate the requirements of preparing 

an application and any associated costs 

and weigh them against the benefits 

likely to be achieved by receiving CSP 

grant. An eligible entity will probably 

apply only if it determines that the 

likely benefits exceed the costs of 

preparing an application. 

The proposed priorities, 

requirements, definitions, and selection 

criteria would impose some additional 

burden on a small entity applying for a 

grant relative to the burden the entity 

would face in the absence of the 

proposed action. 

This proposed regulatory action 

would not have a significant economic 

impact on a small entity once it receives 

a grant because it would be able to meet 

the costs of compliance using the funds 

provided under this program. We invite 

comments from small entities as to 

whether they believe this proposed 

regulatory action would have a 

significant economic impact on them 

and, if so, request evidence to support 

that belief. 

Intergovernmental Review: This 

program is subject to Executive Order 

12372 and the regulations in 34 CFR 

part 79. One of the objectives of the 

Executive order is to foster an 

intergovernmental partnership and a 

strengthened federalism. The Executive 

order relies on processes developed by 

State and local governments for 

coordination and review of proposed 

Federal financial assistance. 

This document provides early 

notification of our specific plans and 

actions for this program. 

Accessible Format: On request to the 

program contact person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, 

individuals with disabilities can obtain 

this document in an accessible format. 

The Department will provide the 

requestor with an accessible format that 

may include Rich Text Format (RTF) or 

text format (txt), a thumb drive, an MP3 

file, braille, large print, audiotape, or 

compact disc, or another accessible 

format. 

Electronic Access to This Document: 

The official version of this document is 

the document published in the Federal 

Register. You may access the official 

edition of the Federal Register and the 

Code of Federal Regulations at 

www.govinfo.gov. At this site you can 

view this document, as well as all other 

documents of this Department 

published in the Federal Register, in 

text or Portable Document Format 

(PDF). To use PDF you must have 

Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is 

available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Ruth E. Ryder, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and 

Programs, Office of Elementary and 

Secondary Education. 

[FR Doc. 2022–05463 Filed 3–11–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2020–0730; EPA–R05– 

OAR–2020–0731; EPA–R05–OAR–2022– 

0004; FRL–9629–01–R5] 

Air Plan Approval; Michigan; 

Redesignation of the Detroit, MI Area 

to Attainment of the 2015 Ozone 

Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to find that 

the Detroit, Michigan area is attaining 

the 2015 primary and secondary ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS), and to act in accordance with 

a request from the Michigan Department 

of Environment, Great Lakes, and 

Energy (EGLE) to redesignate the area to 

attainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS 

because the request meets the statutory 

requirements for redesignation under 

the Clean Air Act (CAA). The Detroit 

area includes Livingston, Macomb, 

Monroe, Oakland, St. Clair, Washtenaw, 

and Wayne Counties. EGLE submitted 

this request on January 3, 2022. EPA is 

proposing to approve, as a revision to 

the Michigan State Implementation Plan 

(SIP), the State’s plan for maintaining 

the 2015 ozone NAAQS through 2035 in 

the Detroit area. EPA is also proposing 

to approve Michigan’s 2025 and 2035 

volatile organic compound (VOC) and 

oxides of nitrogen (NOX) motor vehicle 

emissions budgets (budgets) for the 

Detroit area and initiating the adequacy 

review process for these budgets. 

Finally, EPA is proposing to approve 

portions of separate December 18, 2020, 

submittals as meeting the applicable 

requirements for a base year emissions 

inventory and emissions statement 

program. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before April 13, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2020–0730, EPA–R05–OAR– 

2020–0731, or EPA–R05–OAR–2022– 

0004 at http://www.regulations.gov, or 

via email to arra.sarah@epa.gov. For 

comments submitted at Regulations.gov, 

follow the online instructions for 

submitting comments. Once submitted, 

comments cannot be edited or removed 

from Regulations.gov. For either manner 

of submission, EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. EPA will generally not consider 

comments or comment contents located 

outside of the primary submission (i.e., 

on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 

system). For additional submission 

methods, please contact the person 

identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the 

full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

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

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric 

Svingen, Environmental Engineer, 

Attainment Planning and Maintenance 

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–4489, 

svingen.eric@epa.gov. The EPA Region 5 

office is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 

p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding 

Federal holidays and facility closures 

due to COVID–19. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. 

I. What is EPA proposing? 

EPA is proposing to take several 

related actions. EPA is proposing to 

determine that the Detroit 

nonattainment area is attaining the 2015 

ozone NAAQS, based on quality-assured 

and certified monitoring data for 2019– 

2021, and that the Detroit area has met 

the requirements for redesignation 

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

EPA is thus proposing to change the 

legal designation of the Detroit area 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 14211 

1The ozone season is defined by state in 40 CFR 

58, appendix D. The ozone season for Michigan is 

March-October. See 80 FR 65292, 65466–67 

(October 26, 2015). 

from nonattainment to attainment for 

the 2015 ozone NAAQS. EPA is also 

proposing to approve, as a revision to 

the Michigan SIP, the State’s 

maintenance plan for the area. The 

maintenance plan is designed to keep 

the Detroit area in attainment of the 

2015 ozone NAAQS through 2035. EPA 

is proposing to approve the newly 

established 2025 and 2035 motor 

vehicle emissions budgets for the 

Detroit area and is initiating the 

adequacy process for these budgets. 

Finally, EPA is proposing to approve 

portions of Michigan’s separate 

December 18, 2020, submittals, because 

they satisfy the applicable CAA 

requirements for a base year emissions 

inventory and emissions statement 

program for the Detroit area. 

II. What is the background for these 

actions? 

EPA has determined that ground-level 

ozone is detrimental to human health. 

On October 1, 2015, EPA promulgated a 

revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.070 

parts per million (ppm). See 80 FR 

65292 (October 26, 2015). Under EPA’s 

regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 2015 

ozone NAAQS is attained in an area 

when the 3-year average of the annual 

fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour 

average concentration is equal to or less 

than 0.070 ppm, when truncated after 

the thousandth decimal place, at all of 

the ozone monitoring sites in the area. 

See 40 CFR 50.19 and appendix U to 40 

CFR part 50. 

Upon promulgation of a new or 

revised NAAQS, section 107(d)(1)(B) of 

the CAA requires EPA to designate as 

nonattainment any areas that are 

violating the NAAQS, based on the most 

recent three years of quality assured 

ozone monitoring data. The Detroit area 

was designated as a Marginal 

nonattainment area for the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS on June 4, 2018 (83 FR 25776) 

(effective August 3, 2018). 

III. What are the criteria for 

redesignation? 

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

allows redesignation of an area to 

attainment of the NAAQS provided that: 

(1) The Administrator (EPA) determines 

that the area has attained the NAAQS; 

(2) the Administrator has fully approved 

the applicable implementation plan for 

the area under section 110(k) of the 

CAA; (3) the Administrator determines 

that the improvement in air quality is 

due to permanent and enforceable 

reductions in emissions resulting from 

implementation of the applicable SIP, 

applicable Federal air pollutant control 

regulations, and other permanent and 

enforceable emission reductions; (4) the 

Administrator has fully approved a 

maintenance plan for the area as 

meeting the requirements of section 

175A of the CAA; and (5) the state 

containing the area has met all 

requirements applicable to the area for 

the purposes of redesignation under 

section 110 and part D of the CAA. 

On April 16, 1992, EPA provided 

guidance on redesignations in the 

General Preamble for the 

Implementation of Title I of the CAA 

Amendments of 1990 (57 FR 13498) and 

supplemented this guidance on April 

28, 1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has 

provided further guidance on processing 

redesignation requests in policy 

memoranda. 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of 

Michigan’s redesignation request? 

A. Has the Detroit area attained the 

2015 ozone NAAQS? 

For redesignation of a nonattainment 

area to attainment, the CAA requires 

EPA to determine that the area has 

attained the applicable NAAQS (CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). An area is 

attaining the 2015 ozone NAAQS if it 

meets the 2015 ozone NAAQS, as 

determined in accordance with 40 CFR 

50.19 and appendix U of part 50, based 

on three complete, consecutive calendar 

years of quality-assured air quality data 

for all monitoring sites in the area. To 

attain the 2015 ozone NAAQS, the 3- 

year average of the annual fourthhighest daily maximum 8-hour average 

ozone concentrations (ozone design 

values) at each monitor must not exceed 

0.070 ppm. The air quality data must be 

collected and quality-assured in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and 

recorded in EPA’s Air Quality System 

(AQS). Ambient air quality monitoring 

data for the 3-year period must also 

meet data completeness requirements. 

An ozone design value is valid if daily 

maximum 8-hour average 

concentrations are available for at least 

90% of the days within the ozone 

monitoring seasons,1 on average, for the 

3-year period, with a minimum data 

completeness of 75% during the ozone 

monitoring season of any year during 

the 3-year period. See section 4 of 

appendix U to 40 CFR part 50. 

EPA has reviewed the available ozone 

monitoring data from EGLE’s 

monitoring sites in the Detroit area for 

the 2019–2021 period. These data have 

been quality assured, are recorded in the 

AQS, and were certified in advance of 

EPA’s publication of this proposal. 

These data demonstrate that the Detroit 

area is attaining the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS. The annual fourth-highest 8- 

hour ozone concentrations and the 3- 

year average of these concentrations 

(monitoring site ozone design values) 

for all monitoring sites are summarized 

in Table 1. 

TABLE 1—ANNUAL FOURTH-HIGHEST DAILY MAXIMUM 8-HOUR OZONE CONCENTRATIONS AND 3-YEAR AVERAGE OF THE

FOURTH-HIGHEST DAILY MAXIMUM 8-HOUR OZONE CONCENTRATIONS FOR THE DETROIT AREA

County Monitor 

2019 

4th high 

(ppm) 

2020 

4th high 

(ppm) 

2021 

4th high 

(ppm) 

2019–2021 

average 

(ppm) 

Macomb ............................................................................... 26–099–0009 

26–099–1003 

0.063 

0.062 

0.074 

0.070 

0.068 

0.067 

0.068 

0.066 

Oakland ................................................................................ 26–125–0001 0.066 0.074 0.068 0.069 

St. Clair ................................................................................ 26–147–0005 0.070 0.069 0.072 0.070 

Washtenaw .......................................................................... 26–161–0008 

26–161–9991 

0.060 

0.058 

0.072 

0.067 

0.066 

0.063 

0.066 

0.062 

Wayne .................................................................................. 26–163–0001 

26–163–0019 

0.062 

0.068 

0.070 

0.073 

0.069 

0.069 

0.067 

0.070 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
14212 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

2The monitor ozone design value for the monitor 

with the highest 3-year averaged concentration. 

3EPA is, in a separate action, proposing to find 

that the Detroit area failed to attain the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS by its attainment date. If that determination 

were finalized, the area would be reclassified to 

Moderate by operation of law. However, because of 

EPA’s interpretation and the date by which 

Michigan submitted its request, those Moderate area 

requirements are not considered applicable 

requirements for purposes of redesignating the 

Detroit area. Specifically, at the time Michigan 

submitted its request, EPA had not yet determined 

that the area failed to attain and had not yet 

reclassified the area. Per CAA section 182(i) and 

consistent with CAA section 179(d), EPA typically 

adjusts the deadlines for SIP submissions that are 

required for newly reclassified areas. Therefore, 

even if EPA were to finalize today the 

determination that the area failed to attain and 

reclassify the area, the deadline for the 

requirements associated with the reclassification 

would be set at some point in the future. Michigan 

submitted its request to redesignate well in advance 

of any hypothetical due date associated with 

Moderate area requirements. 

The Detroit area’s 3-year ozone design 

value for 2019–2021 is 0.070 ppm,2

which meets the 2015 ozone NAAQS. 

Therefore, in today’s action, EPA 

proposes to determine that the Detroit 

area is attaining the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS. 

EPA will not take final action to 

determine that the Detroit area is 

attaining the NAAQS nor to approve the 

redesignation of this area if the design 

value of a monitoring site in the area 

violates the NAAQS prior to final 

approval of the redesignation. As 

discussed in section IV.D.3. below, 

EGLE has committed to continue 

monitoring ozone in this area to verify 

maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS. 

B. Has Michigan met all applicable 

requirements of section 110 and part D 

of the CAA for the Detroit area, and 

does Michigan have a fully approved 

SIP for the area under section 110(k) of 

the CAA? 

For redesignation of an area from 

nonattainment to attainment of a 

NAAQS, the CAA requires EPA to 

determine that the state has met all 

applicable requirements under section 

110 and part D of title I of the CAA (see 

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

that the state has a fully approved SIP 

under section 110(k) of the CAA (see 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) of the CAA). EPA 

proposes to find that Michigan has met 

all applicable SIP requirements for 

purposes of redesignation under section 

119 and part D of title I of the CAA 

(requirements specific to nonattainment 

areas for the 2015 ozone NAAQA). 

Additionally, with the exception of the 

base year emissions inventory 

requirement of section 182(a)(1) of the 

CAA and the emissions statement 

requirement of section 182(a)(3)(B) of 

the CAA, EPA proposes to find that 

Michigan has a fully approved SIP 

under section 110(k) of the CAA. As 

discussed in sections VI. and VII. below, 

EPA is proposing to approve Michigan’s 

base year emissions inventory and 

emissions statement program as meeting 

the requirements of sections 182(a)(1) 

and 182(a)(3), respectively, for the 2015 

ozone NAAQS. Upon final approval of 

these SIP elements, all applicable 

requirements of the Michigan SIP for the 

area will have been fully approved 

under section 110(k) of the CAA. In 

making these proposed determinations, 

EPA ascertained which requirements are 

applicable for purposes of 

redesignation, and whether the required 

Michigan SIP elements are fully 

approved under section 110(k) and part 

D of the CAA. As discussed more fully 

below, SIPs must be fully approved only 

with respect to these applicable 

requirements of the CAA. 

The September 4, 1992, memorandum 

from John Calcagni, Director, Air 

Quality Management Division, entitled 

‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to 

Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’ 

describes EPA’s interpretation of which 

requirements are ‘‘applicable’’ for 

purposes of redesignation under section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. Under this 

interpretation, a requirement is not 

‘‘applicable’’ unless it was due prior to 

the state’s submittal of a complete 

redesignation request for the area. See 

also the September 17, 1993, 

memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, 

entitled ‘‘State Implementation Plan 

(SIP) Requirements for Areas Submitting 

Requests for Redesignation to 

Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon 

Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) On or After 

November 15, 1992,’’ and 60 FR 12459, 

12465–66 (March 7, 1995) 

(redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor, 

Michigan to attainment of the 1hour 

ozone NAAQS). Applicable 

requirements of the CAA that come due 

subsequent to the state’s submittal of a 

complete request remain applicable 

until a redesignation to attainment is 

approved but are not required as a 

prerequisite to redesignation.3 See 

section 175A(c) of the CAA. Sierra Club 

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

also 68 FR 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) 

(redesignation of the St. Louis/East St. 

Louis area to attainment of the 1hour 

ozone NAAQS). 

1. Michigan has met all applicable 

requirements of section 110 and part D 

of the CAA applicable to the Detroit area 

for purposes of redesignation. 

a. Section 110 General Requirements for 

Implementation Plans 

Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA 

delineates the general requirements for 

a SIP. Section 110(a)(2) provides that 

the SIP must have been adopted by the 

state after reasonable public notice and 

hearing, and that, among other things, it 

must: (1) Include enforceable emission 

limitations and other control measures, 

means or techniques necessary to meet 

the requirements of the CAA; (2) 

provide for establishment and operation 

of appropriate devices, methods, 

systems and procedures necessary to 

monitor ambient air quality; (3) provide 

for implementation of a source permit 

program to regulate the modification 

and construction of stationary sources 

within the areas covered by the plan; (4) 

include provisions for the 

implementation of part C prevention of 

significant deterioration (PSD) and part 

D new source review (NSR) permit 

programs; (5) include provisions for 

stationary source emission control 

measures, monitoring, and reporting; (6) 

include provisions for air quality 

modeling; and, (7) provide for public 

and local agency participation in 

planning and emission control rule 

development. 

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

requires SIPs to contain measures to 

prevent sources in a state from 

significantly contributing to air quality 

problems in another state. To 

implement this provision, EPA has 

required certain states to establish 

programs to address transport of certain 

air pollutants, e.g., NOX SIP call, the 

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), and 

the Cross State Air Pollution Rule 

(CSAPR). However, like many of the 

110(a)(2) requirements, the section 

110(a)(2)(D) SIP requirements are not 

linked with a particular area’s ozone 

designation and classification. EPA 

concludes that the SIP requirements 

linked with the area’s ozone designation 

and classification are the relevant 

measures to evaluate when reviewing a 

redesignation request for the area. The 

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

where applicable, continue to apply to 

a state regardless of the designation of 

any one particular area within the state. 

Thus, we believe these requirements are 

not applicable requirements for 

purposes of redesignation. See 65 FR 

37890 (June 15, 2000), 66 FR 50399 

(October 19, 2001), 68 FR 25418, 25426– 

27 (May 13, 2003). 

In addition, EPA believes that other 

section 110 elements that are neither 

connected with nonattainment plan 

submissions nor linked with an area’s 

ozone attainment status are not 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 14213 

4CAA section 176(c)(4)(E) requires states to 

submit revisions to their SIPs to reflect certain 

Federal criteria and procedures for determining 

transportation conformity. Transportation 

conformity SIPs are different from SIPs requiring 

the development of motor vehicle emissions 

budgets, such as control strategy SIPs and 

maintenance plans. 

applicable requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. The area will still be 

subject to these requirements after the 

area is redesignated to attainment of the 

2015 ozone NAAQS. The section 110 

and part D requirements which are 

linked with a particular area’s 

designation and classification are the 

relevant measures to evaluate in 

reviewing a redesignation request. This 

approach is consistent with EPA’s 

existing policy on applicability (i.e., for 

redesignations) of conformity 

requirements, as well as with section 

184 ozone transport requirements. See 

Reading, Pennsylvania proposed and 

final rulemakings, 61 FR 53174–53176 

(October 10, 1996) and 62 FR 24826 

(May 7, 1997); Cleveland-AkronLoraine, Ohio final rulemaking, 61 FR 

20458 (May 7, 1996); and Tampa, 

Florida final rulemaking, 60 FR 62748 

(December 7, 1995). See also the 

discussion of this issue in the 

Cincinnati, Ohio ozone redesignation 

(65 FR 37890, June 19, 2000), and the 

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania ozone 

redesignation (66 FR 50399, October 19, 

2001). 

We have reviewed Michigan’s SIP and 

propose to find that it meets the general 

SIP requirements under section 110 of 

the CAA, to the extent those 

requirements are applicable for 

purposes of redesignation. In any case, 

on September 28, 2021 (86 FR 53550), 

EPA approved elements of the SIP 

submitted by Michigan to meet the 

requirements of section 110 for the 2015 

ozone standard. 

b. Part D Requirements 

Section 172(c) of the CAA sets forth 

the basic requirements of air quality 

plans for states with nonattainment 

areas that are required to submit them 

pursuant to section 172(b). Subpart 2 of 

part D, which includes section 182 of 

the CAA, establishes specific 

requirements for ozone nonattainment 

areas depending on the areas’ 

nonattainment classifications. 

The Detroit area was classified as 

Marginal under subpart 2 for the 2015 

ozone NAAQS. As such, the area is 

subject to the subpart 1 requirements 

contained in section 172(c) and section 

176. Similarly, the area is subject to the 

subpart 2 requirements contained in 

section 182(a) (Marginal nonattainment 

area requirements). A thorough 

discussion of the requirements 

contained in section 172(c) and 182 can 

be found in the General Preamble for 

Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498). 

i. Subpart 1 Section 172 Requirements 

As provided in subpart 2, for Marginal 

ozone nonattainment areas such as the 

Detroit area, the specific requirements of 

section 182(a) apply in lieu of the 

attainment planning requirements that 

would otherwise apply under section 

172(c), including the attainment 

demonstration and reasonably available 

control measures (RACM) under section 

172(c)(1), reasonable further progress 

(RFP) under section 172(c)(2), and 

contingency measures under section 

172(c)(9). 42 U.S.C. 7511a(a). 

Section 172(c)(3) requires submission 

and approval of a comprehensive, 

accurate and current inventory of actual 

emissions. This requirement is 

superseded by the inventory 

requirement in section 182(a)(1) 

discussed below. 

Section 172(c)(4) requires the 

identification and quantification of 

allowable emissions for major new and 

modified stationary sources in an area, 

and section 172(c)(5) requires source 

permits for the construction and 

operation of new and modified major 

stationary sources anywhere in the 

nonattainment area. EPA approved 

Michigan’s NSR program on December 

16, 2013 (78 FR 76064), and most 

recently approved revisions to 

Michigan’s NSR program on May 12, 

2021 (86 FR 25954). Nonetheless, EPA 

has determined that, since PSD 

requirements will apply after 

redesignation, areas being redesignated 

need not comply with the requirement 

that a NSR program be approved prior 

to redesignation, provided that the area 

demonstrates maintenance of the 

NAAQS without part D NSR. A more 

detailed rationale for this view is 

described in the October 14, 1994, 

memorandum from Mary Nichols, 

Assistant Administrator for Air and 

Radiation, entitled, ‘‘Part D New Source 

Review Requirements for Areas 

Requesting Redesignation to 

Attainment.’’ See rulemakings for 

Detroit, Michigan (60 FR 12467–12468, 

March 7, 1995); Cleveland-AkronLorain, Ohio (61 FR 20458, 20469– 

20470, May 7, 1996); Louisville, 

Kentucky (66 FR 53665, October 23, 

2001); and Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 

FR 31834–31837, June 21, 1996). 

Michigan’s PSD program will become 

effective in the Detroit area upon 

redesignation to attainment. EPA 

conditionally approved Michigan’s PSD 

program on September 16, 2008 (73 FR 

53366), fully approved Michigan’s PSD 

program on March 25, 2010 (75 FR 

14352), and most recently approved 

revisions to Michigan’s PSD program on 

May 12, 2021 (86 FR 25954). 

Section 172(c)(6) requires the SIP to 

contain control measures necessary to 

provide for attainment of the NAAQS. 

Because attainment has been reached, 

no additional measures are needed to 

provide for attainment. 

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

meet the applicable provisions of 

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

believe the Michigan SIP meets the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2) for 

purposes of redesignation. 

ii. Section 176 Conformity 

Requirements 

Section 176(c) of the CAA requires 

that federally supported or funded 

projects conform to the applicable SIP. 

The requirement to determine 

conformity applies to transportation 

plans, programs and projects that are 

developed, funded or approved under 

title 23 of the United States Code 

(U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act 

(transportation conformity) as well as to 

all other federally supported or funded 

projects (general conformity). State 

transportation conformity SIP revisions 

must be consistent with Federal 

conformity regulations relating to 

consultation, enforcement and 

enforceability that EPA promulgated 

pursuant to its authority under the CAA. 

EPA interprets the conformity SIP 

requirements 4 as not applying for 

purposes of evaluating a redesignation 

request under section 107(d) because 

state conformity rules are still required 

after redesignation and Federal 

conformity rules apply where state 

conformity rules have not been 

approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 

426 (6th Cir. 2001) (upholding this 

interpretation); see also 60 FR 62748 

(December 7, 1995) (redesignation of 

Tampa, Florida). Nonetheless, Michigan 

has an approved conformity SIP for the 

Detroit area. See 61 FR 66609 (December 

18, 1996) and 82 FR 17134 (April 10, 

2017). 

iii. Section 182(a) Requirements 

Section 182(a)(1) requires states to 

submit a comprehensive, accurate, and 

current inventory of actual emissions 

from sources of NOX and VOC emitted 

within the boundaries of the ozone 

nonattainment area within two years of 

designation. On December 18, 2020, 

Michigan submitted emissions 

inventories for the Detroit area for the 

2017 base year. As described in section 

VI. below, EPA is proposing to approve 

Michigan’s base year emissions 

inventory as meeting the requirements 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
14214 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

of section 182(a)(1) for the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS. 

Under section 182(a)(2)(A), states 

with ozone nonattainment areas that 

were designated prior to the enactment 

of the 1990 CAA amendments were 

required to submit, within six months of 

classification, all rules and corrections 

to existing VOC reasonably available 

control technology (RACT) rules that 

were required under section 172(b)(3) 

prior to the 1990 CAA amendments. The 

Detroit area is not subject to the section 

182(a)(2) RACT ‘‘fix up’’ requirement for 

the 2015 ozone NAAQS because it was 

designated as nonattainment for this 

standard after the enactment of the 1990 

CAA amendments and, in any case, 

Michigan complied with this 

requirement for the Detroit area under 

the prior 1-hour ozone NAAQS. See 60 

FR 46182 (September 7, 1994). 

Section 182(a)(2)(B) requires each 

state with a Marginal ozone 

nonattainment area that implemented or 

was required to implement a vehicle 

inspection and maintenance (I/M) 

program prior to the 1990 CAA 

amendments to submit a SIP revision for 

an I/M program no less stringent than 

that required prior to the 1990 CAA 

amendments or already in the SIP at the 

time of the CAA amendments, 

whichever is more stringent. For the 

purposes of the 2015 ozone NAAQS and 

the consideration of Michigan’s 

redesignation request for this standard, 

the Detroit area is not subject to the 

section 182(a)(2)(B) requirement 

because the Detroit area was designated 

as nonattainment for the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS after the enactment of the 1990 

CAA amendments and because 

Michigan complied with this 

requirement for the Detroit area under 

the prior 1-hour ozone NAAQS. 

Regarding the source permitting and 

offset requirements of section 

182(a)(2)(C) and section 182(a)(4), 

Michigan currently has a fully approved 

part D NSR program in place. EPA 

approved Michigan’s NSR program on 

December 16, 2013 (78 FR 76064), and 

most recently approved revisions to 

Michigan’s NSR program on May 12, 

2021 (86 FR 25954). In addition, EPA 

conditionally approved Michigan’s PSD 

program on September 16, 2008 (73 FR 

53366), fully approved Michigan’s PSD 

program on March 25, 2010 (75 FR 

14352), and most recently approved 

revisions to Michigan’s PSD program on 

May 12, 2021 (86 FR 25954). The state’s 

PSD program will become effective in 

the Detroit area upon redesignation to 

attainment. 

Section 182(a)(3)(A) requires states to 

submit periodic emission inventories 

and section 182(a)(3)(B) requires states 

to submit a revision to the SIP to require 

the owners or operators of stationary 

sources to annually submit emissions 

statements documenting actual NOX and 

VOC emissions. As discussed below in 

section IV.D.4. of this proposed rule, 

Michigan will continue to update its 

emissions inventory at least once every 

three years. With regard to stationary 

source emissions statements, EPA 

approved Michigan’s emissions 

statement program on March 8, 1994 (49 

FR 10752). On December 18, 2020, 

Michigan submitted a separate request 

to strengthen its SIP-approved 

emissions statement program by adding, 

removing, and updating certain statutes 

and reporting forms. As described in 

section VII. below, EPA is proposing to 

approve most portions of Michigan’s 

emissions statement submittal as 

meeting the requirements of section 

182(a)(3)(B) for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. 

Upon approval of Michigan’s 

emissions inventory and emissions 

statements rules, the Detroit area will 

have satisfied all applicable 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation under section 110 and 

part D of title I of the CAA. 

2. The Detroit area has a fully 

approved SIP for purposes of 

redesignation under section 110(k) of 

the CAA. 

At various times, Michigan has 

adopted and submitted, and EPA has 

approved, provisions addressing the 

various SIP elements applicable for the 

ozone NAAQS. As discussed above, if 

EPA finalizes approval of Michigan’s 

section 182(a)(1) base year inventory 

requirements and section 182(a)(3)(B) 

emission statement requirements, EPA 

will have fully approved the Michigan 

SIP for the Detroit area under section 

110(k) for all requirements applicable 

for purposes of redesignation under the 

2015 ozone NAAQS. EPA may rely on 

prior SIP approvals in approving a 

redesignation request (see the Calcagni 

memorandum at page 3; Southwestern 

Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. 

Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989–990 (6th 

Cir. 1998); Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426). 

Additional measures may also be 

approved in conjunction with a 

redesignation action (see 68 FR 25426 

(May 12, 2003) and citations therein). 

C. Are the air quality improvements in 

the Detroit area due to permanent and 

enforceable emission reductions? 

To redesignate an area from 

nonattainment to attainment, section 

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

EPA to determine that the air quality 

improvement in the area is due to 

permanent and enforceable reductions 

in emissions resulting from the 

implementation of the SIP and 

applicable Federal air pollution control 

regulations and other permanent and 

enforceable emission reductions. EPA 

proposes to determine that Michigan 

has demonstrated that that the observed 

ozone air quality improvement in the 

Detroit area is due to permanent and 

enforceable reductions in VOC and NOX

emissions resulting from state measures 

adopted into the SIP and Federal 

measures. 

In making this demonstration, the 

State has calculated the change in 

emissions between 2014 and 2019. The 

reduction in emissions and the 

corresponding improvement in air 

quality over this time period can be 

attributed to several regulatory control 

measures that the Detroit area and 

upwind areas have implemented in 

recent years. In addition, Michigan 

provided an analysis to demonstrate the 

improvement in air quality was not due 

to unusually favorable meteorology. 

Based on the information summarized 

below, EPA proposes to find that 

Michigan has adequately demonstrated 

that the improvement in air quality is 

due to permanent and enforceable 

emissions reductions. 

1. Permanent and Enforceable Emission 

Controls Implemented 

a. Regional NOX Controls 

CAIR/CSAPR. Under the ‘‘good 

neighbor provision’’ of CAA section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), states are required to 

address interstate transport of air 

pollution. Specifically, the good 

neighbor provision provides that each 

state’s SIP must contain provisions 

prohibiting emissions from within that 

state which will contribute significantly 

to nonattainment of the NAAQS, or 

interfere with maintenance of the 

NAAQS, in any other state. 

On May 12, 2005, EPA published 

CAIR, which required eastern states, 

including Michigan, to prohibit 

emissions consistent with annual and 

ozone season NOX budgets and annual 

sulfur dioxide (SO2) budgets (70 FR 

25152). CAIR addressed the good 

neighbor provision for the 1997 ozone 

NAAQS and 1997 fine particulate 

matter (PM2.5) NAAQS and was 

designed to mitigate the impact of 

transported NOX emissions, a precursor 

of both ozone and PM2.5, as well as 

transported SO2 emissions, another 

precursor of PM2.5. The United States 

Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) 

remanded CAIR to EPA for replacement 

in 2008. North Carolina v. EPA, 531 

F.3d 896, modified, 550 F.3d 1176 

(2008). While EPA worked on 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 14215 

5 In a December 27, 2011 rulemaking, EPA 

included Michigan in the ozone season NOX

program, addressing the 1997 ozone NAAQS (76 FR 

80760). 

developing a replacement rule, 

implementation of the CAIR program 

continued as planned with the NOX

annual and ozone season programs 

beginning in 2009 and the SO2 annual 

program beginning in 2010. 

On August 8, 2011 (76 FR 48208), 

acting on the D.C. Circuit’s remand, EPA 

published CSAPR to replace CAIR and 

to address the good neighbor provision 

for the 1997 ozone NAAQS, the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS, and the 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS.5 Through Federal 

Implementation Plans, CSAPR required 

electric generating units (EGUs) in 

eastern states, including Michigan, to 

meet annual and ozone season NOX

budgets and annual SO2 budgets 

implemented through new trading 

programs. After delays caused by 

litigation, EPA started implementing the 

CSAPR trading programs in 2015, 

simultaneously discontinuing 

administration of the CAIR trading 

programs. On October 26, 2016, EPA 

published the CSAPR Update, which 

established, starting in 2017, a new 

ozone season NOX trading program for 

EGUs in eastern states, including 

Michigan, to address the good neighbor 

provision for the 2008 ozone NAAQS 

(81 FR 74504). The CSAPR Update was 

estimated to result in a 20% reduction 

in ozone season NOX emissions from 

EGUs in the eastern United States, a 

reduction of 80,000 tons in 2017 

compared to 2015 levels. On April 30, 

2021, EPA published the Revised 

CSAPR Update, which fully resolved 

the obligations of eastern states, 

including Michigan, under the good 

neighbor provision for the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS (82 FR 23054). The Revised 

CSAPR Update is estimated to reduce 

ozone season NOX emissions from EGUs 

by 17,000 tons beginning in 2021, 

compared to emissions without the rule. 

The reduction in NOX emissions from 

the implementation of CAIR and then 

CSAPR occurred by the attainment years 

and additional emission reductions will 

occur throughout the maintenance 

period. 

b. Federal Emission Control Measures 

Reductions in VOC and NOX

emissions have occurred statewide and 

in upwind areas as a result of Federal 

emission control measures, with 

additional emission reductions expected 

to occur in the future. Federal emission 

control measures include the following: 

Tier 2 Emission Standards for 

Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur Standards. 

On February 10, 2000 (65 FR 6698), EPA 

promulgated Tier 2 motor vehicle 

emission standards and gasoline sulfur 

control requirements. These emission 

control requirements result in lower 

VOC and NOX emissions from new cars 

and light duty trucks, including sport 

utility vehicles. With respect to fuels, 

this rule required refiners and importers 

of gasoline to meet lower standards for 

sulfur, which were phased in between 

2004 and 2006. By 2006, refiners and 

importers were required to meet a 30 

ppm average sulfur level, with a 

maximum cap of 80 ppm. This 

reduction in fuel sulfur content ensures 

the effectiveness of low emissioncontrol technologies. The Tier 2 tailpipe 

standards established in this rule were 

phased in for new vehicles between 

2004 and 2009. At the time of 

promulgation of Tier 2 standards, EPA 

estimated that this rule would cut NOX

and VOC emissions from light-duty 

vehicles and light-duty trucks by 

approximately 76% and 28%, 

respectively. NOX and VOC reductions 

from medium-duty passenger vehicles 

included as part of the Tier 2 vehicle 

program were estimated to be 

approximately 37,000 and 9,500 tons 

per year, respectively, when fully 

implemented. As projected by these 

estimates and demonstrated in the onroad emission modeling for the Detroit 

area, a portion of these emission 

reductions occurred during the period 

2014 through 2016, i.e., after the area 

was designated nonattainment for the 

2015 ozone NAAQS. As discussed 

below, the Tier 2 vehicle and gasoline 

sulfur standards were replaced by the 

Tier 3 emission standards for vehicles 

and gasoline sulfur standards beginning 

on January 1, 2017. 

Tier 3 Emission Standards for 

Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur Standards. 

On April 28, 2014 (79 FR 23414), EPA 

promulgated Tier 3 motor vehicle 

emission and fuel standards to reduce 

both tailpipe and evaporative emissions 

and to further reduce the sulfur content 

in fuels. The rule is being phased in 

between 2017 and 2025. Tier 3 sets new 

tailpipe standards for non-methane 

organic gases (NMOG) and NOX, 

presented as NMOG+NOX, and for 

particulate matter. The VOC and NOX

tailpipe standards for light-duty 

vehicles represent approximately an 

80% reduction in fleet average 

NMOG+NOX and a 70% reduction in 

per-vehicle particulate matter (PM) 

standards, relative to the fleet average at 

the time of phase-in. Heavy-duty 

tailpipe standards represent about a 

60% reduction in both fleet average 

NMOG+NOX and per-vehicle PM 

standards. The evaporative emissions 

requirements in the rule will result in 

approximately a 50% reduction from 

previous standards and apply to all 

light-duty and on-road gasolinepowered heavy-duty vehicles. Finally, 

the rule lowered the sulfur content of 

gasoline to an annual average of 10 ppm 

starting in January 2017. As projected by 

these estimates and demonstrated in the 

on-road emission modeling for the 

Detroit area, some of these emission 

reductions occurred by the attainment 

years and additional emission 

reductions will occur throughout the 

maintenance period, as older vehicles 

are replaced with newer, compliant 

model years. 

Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Rules. In 

July 2000, EPA issued a rule for on-road 

heavy-duty diesel engines that includes 

standards limiting the sulfur content of 

diesel fuel. Emissions standards for 

NOX, VOC and PM were phased in 

between model years 2007 and 2010. In 

addition, the rule reduced the highway 

diesel fuel sulfur content to 15 parts per 

million by 2007, leading to additional 

reductions in combustion NOX and VOC 

emissions. EPA has estimated future 

year emission reductions due to 

implementation of this rule. EPA 

estimated that by 2015 NOX and VOC 

emissions would decrease nationally by 

1,260,000 tons and 54,000 tons, 

respectively, and that by 2030 NOX and 

VOC emissions will decrease nationally 

by 2,570,000 tons and 115,000 tons, 

respectively. As projected by these 

estimates and demonstrated in the onroad emission modeling for the Detroit 

area, some of these emission reductions 

occurred by the attainment years and 

additional emission reductions will 

occur throughout the maintenance 

period, as older vehicles are replaced 

with newer, compliant model years. 

Nonroad Diesel Rule. On June 29, 

2004 (69 FR 38958), EPA issued a rule 

adopting emissions standards for 

nonroad diesel engines and sulfur 

reductions in nonroad diesel fuel. This 

rule applies to diesel engines used 

primarily in construction, agricultural, 

and industrial applications. Emission 

standards were phased in for the 2008 

through 2015 model years based on 

engine size. The sulfur limits for 

nonroad diesel fuels were phased in 

from 2007 through 2012. EPA estimates 

that when fully implemented, 

compliance with this rule will cut NOX

emissions from these nonroad diesel 

engines by approximately 90%. As 

projected by these estimates and 

demonstrated in the nonroad emission 

modeling for the Detroit area, some of 

these emission reductions occurred by 

the attainment years and additional 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
14216 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

6https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/ 

2014-national-emissions-inventory-nei-technicalsupport-document-tsd and https://www.epa.gov/airemissions-modeling/2016-version-2-technicalsupport-document. 

7For both NOX and VOC, EGLE’s 2019 inventory 

shows emissions levels that are lower than the 

levels of actual emissions derived by EPA from EIS. 

By relying on the lower level of point source 

emissions from the 2016v2 modeling platform in 

setting the level of its attainment inventory, 

Michigan’s inventories for the maintenance period, 

described in section IV.D.2. below, are more 

cautious than necessary in setting levels of 

emissions that are sufficient to attain the standard. 

emission reductions will occur 

throughout the maintenance period. 

Nonroad Spark-Ignition Engines and 

Recreational Engine Standards. On 

November 8, 2002 (67 FR 68242), EPA 

adopted emission standards for large 

spark-ignition engines such as those 

used in forklifts and airport groundservice equipment; recreational vehicles 

such as off-highway motorcycles, allterrain vehicles, and snowmobiles; and 

recreational marine diesel engines. 

These emission standards were phased 

in from model years 2004 through 2012. 

When fully implemented, EPA estimates 

an overall 72% reduction in national 

VOC emissions from these engines and 

an 80% reduction in national NOX

emissions. As projected by these 

estimates and demonstrated in the 

nonroad emission modeling for the 

Detroit area, some of these emission 

reductions occurred by the attainment 

years and additional emission 

reductions will occur throughout the 

maintenance period. 

Category 3 Marine Diesel Engine 

Standards. On April 30, 2010 (75 FR 

22896), EPA issued emission standards 

for marine compression-ignition engines 

at or above 30 liters per cylinder. Tier 

2 emission standards apply beginning in 

2011 and are expected to result in a 15 

to 25% reduction in NOX emissions 

from these engines. Final Tier 3 

emission standards apply beginning in 

2016 and are expected to result in 

approximately an 80% reduction in 

NOX from these engines. As projected 

by these estimates and demonstrated in 

the nonroad emission modeling for the 

Detroit area, some of these emission 

reductions occurred by the attainment 

years and additional emission 

reductions will occur throughout the 

maintenance period. 

c. Detroit Point Source NOX Reductions. 

The DTE Energy River Rouge power 

plant ceased operations in May 2021. In 

its submittal, EGLE estimated this 

shutdown would reduce annual point 

source NOX emissions by 2,716 tons. 

d. Detroit Low Reid Vapor Pressure 

(RVP) Program. 

RVP is a measure of a fuel’s volatility 

and thereby affects the rate at which 

gasoline evaporates and emits VOCs. 

The lower a fuel’s RVP, the lower the 

rate of evaporation of the fuel. Lowering 

RVP in the summer months can offset 

the effect of summer temperature upon 

the evaporation of gasoline, which in 

turn lowers emissions of VOCs. 

Michigan’s Low RVP program requires 

the sale of 7.0 psi RVP gasoline in the 

Detroit area during the summer months, 

as compared to the 9.0 psi RVP 

originally required under Federal RVP 

controls. EPA approved Michigan’s Low 

RVP program for the Detroit area on 

January 31, 2007 (72 FR 4432). 

2. Emission Reductions 

Michigan is using a 2014 emissions 

inventory to represent nonattainment 

level emissions (nonattainment year 

inventory or nonattainment inventory), 

which is appropriate because it was one 

of the years used to designate the area 

as nonattainment due to an exceedance 

of the NAAQS. Michigan is using a 2019 

emissions inventory to represent 

attainment level emissions (attainment 

year inventory or attainment inventory), 

which is appropriate because it is one 

of the years in the 2019–2021 period 

used to demonstrate monitored 

attainment with the NAAQS. 

For both 2014 and 2019, Michigan has 

provided inventories for point, 

nonpoint, on-road, and nonroad 

sources. The point source category 

includes facilities that report their 

emissions directly to EGLE, as well as 

sources such as airports and rail yards. 

Nonpoint sources, sometimes called 

area sources, include emissions from 

sources that are more ubiquitous, such 

as consumer products or architectural 

coatings. On-road sources are vehicles 

that are primarily used on public 

roadways, such as cars, trucks, and 

motorcycles. Nonroad sources include 

engine-based emissions that do not 

occur on roads, such as trains or boats. 

For its on-road emissions inventory, 

Michigan submitted an analysis by the 

Southeast Michigan Council of 

Governments (SEMCOG). This analysis 

used EPA’s MOVES3 model to generate 

July weekday on-road emissions for 

both 2014 and 2019. SEMCOG’s analysis 

relied on local travel inputs including 

demographic data, travel demand 

forecasting, road types, Vehicle Miles of 

Travel (VMT), Vehicle Hours of Travel, 

vehicle population, and vehicle age, as 

well as meteorological data. In 

Attachment B of its submittal, Michigan 

has included a detailed narrative of 

SEMCOG’s methods. 

For its point, nonpoint, and nonroad 

emissions inventories, Michigan’s 

primary data sources were EPA’s 2014 

National Emissions Inventory (NEI)— 

Version 2 dataset and EPA’s 2016v2 

modeling platform. The 2014 NEI 

includes emissions data only for the 

year 2014, and the 2016v2 modeling 

platform includes emissions data for the 

years 2016, 2023, 2026 and 2032. EGLE 

used the 2014 NEI as the basis of its 

point, nonpoint, and nonroad 

inventories for 2014. To derive point, 

nonpoint, and nonroad inventories for 

2019, EGLE interpolated between 2016 

and 2023 data from the 2016v2 

modeling platform. The 2016v2 

modeling platform and 2014 NEI have 

been quality-assured, and 

documentation regarding these datasets 

and their methods is available on EPA’s 

website.6 In Attachment B of its 

submittal, Michigan has included a 

detailed listing of the facilities used to 

create the point source inventory for 

2014. 

To obtain the inventories for source 

categories other than on-road, EGLE 

summed the annual totals of NOX and 

VOC emissions for each county and 

each source category. Then, to convert 

the annual totals to a value of tons per 

ozone season day, EGLE calculated a 

conversion factor for each county and 

each source category, using outputs 

from the 2016v2 modeling platform. 

This conversion factor was generated by 

taking the July category emissions and 

dividing them by the annual category 

emissions, and then dividing by 31 to 

represent the number of days in July. It 

was not necessary to determine a 

conversion factor for on-road emissions 

because SEMCOG provided results for a 

July weekday. EGLE selected July as the 

standard ozone season month, due to an 

analysis showing that July had the most 

days with high ozone values in recent 

years. 

Because Michigan’s inventory for 

2019 relies on data from the 2016v2 

modeling platform, EPA compared 

EGLE’s inventory of point source 

emissions against records of actual point 

source emissions available to EPA 

through the Emissions Inventory System 

(EIS). To ensure that the two agencies’ 

calculations for point source emissions 

for 2019 would be comparable, EPA 

converted annual totals of NOX and 

VOC emissions to a value of tons per 

ozone season day using the same 

conversion factors calculated by EGLE. 

Both EGLE’s analysis and EPA’s 

analysis show a decrease in point source 

emissions from 2014 to 2019.7

Using the inventories described above 

for all categories of sources, Michigan’s 

submittal documents changes in NOX

and VOC emissions from 2014 to 2019 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 14217 

for the Detroit area. Emissions data are shown in Table 2. Data are expressed in 

terms of tons per ozone season day. 

TABLE 2—NOX AND VOC EMISSIONS IN THE DETROIT AREA FOR THE 2014 NONATTAINMENT YEAR AND 2019 

ATTAINMENT YEAR

[Tons per ozone season day] 

NOX VOC 

2014 2019 Net change 

(2014–2019) 2014 2019 Net change (2014–2019) 

Point ......................................................................................... 166.86 97.01 ¥69.85 32.24 13.74 ¥18.50 

Nonpoint ................................................................................... 36.69 27.98 ¥8.71 149.93 134.77 ¥15.16 

On-road .................................................................................... 192.70 105.80 ¥86.90 83.20 51.70 ¥31.50 

Nonroad ................................................................................... 60.26 22.51 ¥37.75 69.63 30.46 ¥39.17 

Total .................................................................................. 456.51 253.30 ¥203.21 335.00 230.67 ¥104.33 

As shown in Table 2, Michigan’s 

inventories demonstrate that NOX and 

VOC emissions in the Detroit area 

declined by 203.21 tons per ozone 

season day and 104.33 tons per ozone 

season day, respectively, between 2014 

and 2019. 

3. Meteorology and Temporary Adverse 

Economic Conditions 

Michigan performed several analyses 

to further support its demonstration that 

the improvement in air quality is due to 

permanent and enforceable emission 

reductions, and not unusually favorable 

meteorology or temporary adverse 

economic conditions. 

EGLE conducted a meteorological 

analysis based on 22 years of data 

collected at the three monitors that have 

historically monitored the highest ozone 

concentrations in the Detroit area. 

Michigan analyzed ozone values for 

May, June, July, August, and September, 

for years 2000 to 2021. First, the 

maximum 8-hour ozone concentration 

at each monitor was compared to the 

number of days where the maximum 

temperature was greater than or equal to 

80 °F. Second, EGLE examined the 

relationship between the average 

summer temperature for each year of the 

2000–2021 period and the fourthhighest 8-hour ozone concentration. 

Third, the number of days with an 8- 

hour average greater than 70 ppb was 

compared to the number of days where 

the maximum temperature was greater 

than or equal to 80 °F. These analyses 

show that over the last 22 years, ozone 

concentrations at the Detroit monitors 

have decreased substantially. In 

contrast, temperatures have increased, 

with the area showing an overall 

warming trend. Because the correlation 

between temperature and ozone 

formation is well established, these data 

suggest that reductions in precursors are 

responsible for the reductions in ozone 

concentrations in the area, and not 

unusually favorable summer 

temperatures. 

To further support EGLE’s 

demonstration that the improvement in 

air quality is not due to unusually 

favorable meteorology, an analysis was 

performed by the Lake Michigan Air 

Directors Consortium (LADCO). A 

classification and regression tree 

(CART) analysis was conducted with 

2005 through 2019 data from Detroit 

area ozone sites. The goal of the analysis 

was to determine the meteorological and 

air quality conditions associated with 

ozone episodes, and construct trends for 

the days identified as sharing similar 

meteorological conditions. Regression 

trees were developed for the Detroit area 

ozone data to classify each summer day 

by its ozone concentration and 

associated meteorological conditions. 

By grouping days with similar 

meteorology, the influence of 

meteorological variability on the 

underlying trend in ozone 

concentrations is partially removed and 

the remaining trend is presumed to be 

due to trends in precursor emissions or 

other non-meteorological influences. 

The CART analysis showed the 

resulting trends in ozone concentrations 

declining over the period examined, 

supporting the conclusion that the 

improvement in air quality was not due 

to unusually favorable meteorology. 

Michigan conducted an additional 

analysis to assess whether the 

improvement in air quality was caused 

by temporary adverse economic 

conditions, especially the economic 

conditions associated with the COVID– 

19 pandemic which first impacted 

Michigan in 2020. First, EGLE charted 

point source VOC emissions in the 

Detroit area from 2012 to 2020. Second, 

EGLE charted point source NOX

emissions in the Detroit area for the 

same period. These two charts show the 

overall downward trend in point source 

emissions from 2012 to 2020. Third, for 

2014 to 2021, EGLE compared the 

maximum 8-hour ozone concentration 

against VMT and employment. This 

chart shows that VMT and employment 

had a direct correlation to one another, 

but these economic indicators had no 

correlation to ozone values. The impacts 

of the COVID–19 pandemic are apparent 

in data showing a decrease in point 

source emissions, VMT, and 

employment between 2019 and 2020. 

But these decreases were not associated 

with a corresponding decline in ozone 

values from 2019 to 2020. Instead, there 

was an increase in the fourth-highest 8- 

hour ozone concentration from 2019 to 

2020. Together, these analyses show 

that economic conditions associated 

with the COVID–19 pandemic were not 

correlated with the improved air quality 

and strengthen Michigan’s 

demonstration that the improved air 

quality is due to permanent and 

enforceable emissions reductions. 

As discussed above, Michigan 

identified numerous Federal rules that 

resulted in the reduction of VOC and 

NOX emissions from 2014 to 2019. In 

addition, Michigan’s analyses of 

meteorological variables associated with 

ozone formation demonstrate that the 

improvement in air quality in the area 

between the year violations occurred 

and the year attainment was achieved is 

not due to unusually favorable 

meteorology. Michigan also showed that 

emissions reductions were not due to 

temporary adverse economic conditions, 

but rather were consistent with a longerterm trend. Therefore, EPA proposes to 

find that Michigan has shown that the 

air quality improvements in the Detroit 

area are due to permanent and 

enforceable emissions reductions. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
14218 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

D. Does Michigan have a fully 

approvable ozone maintenance plan for 

the Detroit area? 

To redesignate an area from 

nonattainment to attainment, section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iv) of the CAA requires EPA 

to determine that the area has a fully 

approved maintenance plan pursuant to 

section 175A of the CAA. Section 175A 

of the CAA sets forth the elements of a 

maintenance plan for areas seeking 

redesignation from nonattainment to 

attainment. Under section 175A, the 

maintenance plan must demonstrate 

continued attainment of the NAAQS for 

at least 10 years after the Administrator 

approves a redesignation to attainment. 

Eight years after the redesignation, the 

state must submit a revised maintenance 

plan which demonstrates that 

attainment of the NAAQS will continue 

for an additional 10 years beyond the 

initial 10-year maintenance period. To 

address the possibility of future NAAQS 

violations, the maintenance plan must 

contain contingency measures, as EPA 

deems necessary, to assure prompt 

correction of the future NAAQS 

violation. 

The Calcagni Memorandum provides 

further guidance on the content of a 

maintenance plan, explaining that a 

maintenance plan should address five 

elements: (1) An attainment emission 

inventory; (2) a maintenance 

demonstration; (3) a commitment for 

continued air quality monitoring; (4) a 

process for verification of continued 

attainment; and (5) a contingency plan. 

In conjunction with its request to 

redesignate the Detroit area to 

attainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS, 

Michigan submitted a SIP revision to 

provide for maintenance of the 2015 

ozone NAAQS through 2035, more than 

10 years after the expected effective date 

of the redesignation to attainment. As 

discussed below, EPA proposes to find 

that Michigan’s ozone maintenance plan 

includes the necessary components and 

to approve the maintenance plan as a 

revision of the Michigan SIP. 

1. Attainment Inventory 

EPA is proposing to determine that 

the Detroit area has attained the 2015 

ozone NAAQS based on monitoring data 

for the period of 2019–2021. Michigan 

selected 2019 as the attainment 

emissions inventory year to establish 

attainment emission levels for VOC and 

NOX. The attainment emissions 

inventory identifies the levels of 

emissions in the Detroit area that are 

sufficient to attain the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS. The derivation of the 

attainment year emissions is discussed 

above in section IV.C.2. of this proposed 

rule. The emissions for the 2019 

attainment year, by source category, are 

summarized in Table 2 above. 

2. Has the state demonstrated 

maintenance of the ozone standard in 

the Detroit area? 

Michigan has demonstrated 

maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS 

through 2035 by projecting that current 

and future emissions of VOC and NOX

for the Detroit area remain at or below 

attainment year emission levels. A 

maintenance demonstration need not be 

based on modeling. See Wall v. EPA, 

265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), Sierra Club 

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

See also 66 FR 53094, 53099–53100 

(October 19, 2001), 68 FR 25413, 25430– 

25432 (May 12, 2003). 

Michigan is using emissions 

inventories for the years 2025 and 2035 

to demonstrate maintenance. 2035 was 

selected because it is more than 10 years 

after the expected effective date of the 

redesignation to attainment, and 2025 

was selected to demonstrate that 

emissions are not expected to spike in 

the interim between the 2019 attainment 

year and the 2035 final maintenance 

year. 

To develop emissions inventories for 

the years 2025 and 2035, Michigan used 

the same data sources discussed above 

in section IV.C.2. of this proposed rule. 

For its on-road emissions inventory, 

Michigan again relied upon the 

SEMCOG analysis, which used EPA’s 

MOVES3 model to generate July 

weekday on-road emissions for 2025 

and 2035. SEMCOG’s analysis relied on 

local travel inputs including 

demographic data, travel demand 

forecasting, road types, VMT, Vehicle 

Hours of Travel, vehicle population, and 

vehicle age, as well as meteorological 

data. In Attachment B of its submittal, 

Michigan has included a detailed 

narrative of SEMCOG’s methods. 

For its point, nonpoint, and nonroad 

emissions inventories, Michigan again 

used EPA’s 2016v2 modeling platform. 

To derive inventories for 2025, EGLE 

interpolated between 2023 and 2026 

data from the 2016v2 modeling 

platform. To derive inventories for 2035, 

EGLE extrapolated forward from the 

2016v2 modeling platform data using 

the 2026 and 2032 years. For both the 

2025 and 2035 inventories, to convert 

annual emissions totals into a value of 

tons per ozone season day, EGLE 

calculated conversion factors using the 

same methodology described in section 

IV.C.2. of this proposed rule. 

By calculating its inventories through 

interpolation and extrapolation, EGLE 

projects that changes within a source 

category and county are linearly 

constant. For point sources, actual 

reductions may not align with 

inventories derived from linear 

interpolation, because shutdowns and 

the operation of new control equipment 

may be staggered across several years. 

However, given the magnitude of the 

reductions in other categories of 

sources, any uncertainty caused by 

linear interpolation would be 

outweighed by the emissions reductions 

in other sectors. Similarly, inventories 

derived from extrapolation may not 

align with actual reductions for some 

types of sources. However, even if 

Michigan as a cautious measure had 

projected that emissions from the 

2016v2 modeling platform for the year 

2032 would remain constant through 

2035, this level of emissions would still 

have been sufficient to show that the 

area would maintain the standard 

through 2035. Although the 2016v2 

modeling platform does not project 

emissions beyond 2032, some amount of 

additional reductions into future years 

is likely. 

Emissions data for the 2014 

nonattainment year, 2019 attainment 

year, 2025 interim year, and 2035 

maintenance year are shown in Tables 

3 and 4 below. Data are expressed in 

terms of tons per ozone season day. 

TABLE 3—NOX EMISSIONS IN THE DETROIT AREA FOR THE 2014 NONATTAINMENT YEAR, 2019 ATTAINMENT YEAR, 2025 

INTERIM YEAR, AND 2035 MAINTENANCE YEAR

[Tons per ozone season day] 

2014 2019 2025 2035 Net change 

(2019–2035) 

Point ..................................................................................................................... 166.86 97.01 80.83 76.44 ¥20.57 

Nonpoint ............................................................................................................... 36.69 27.98 27.39 25.84 ¥2.14 

On-road ................................................................................................................ 192.70 105.80 61.20 40.30 ¥65.50 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 14219 

8https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-modeling/ 

2016v2-platform. 

TABLE 3—NOX EMISSIONS IN THE DETROIT AREA FOR THE 2014 NONATTAINMENT YEAR, 2019 ATTAINMENT YEAR, 2025 

INTERIM YEAR, AND 2035 MAINTENANCE YEAR—Continued 

[Tons per ozone season day] 

2014 2019 2025 2035 Net change 

(2019–2035) 

Nonroad ............................................................................................................... 60.26 22.51 17.49 15.17 ¥7.34 

Total .............................................................................................................. 456.51 253.30 186.91 157.75 ¥95.55 

TABLE 4—VOC EMISSIONS IN THE DETROIT AREA FOR THE 2014 NONATTAINMENT YEAR, 2019 ATTAINMENT YEAR, 2025 

INTERIM YEAR, AND 2035 MAINTENANCE YEAR

[Tons per ozone season day] 

2014 2019 2025 2035 Net change 

(2019–2035) 

Point ..................................................................................................................... 32.24 13.74 14.06 14.12 +0.38 

Nonpoint ............................................................................................................... 149.93 134.77 134.12 133.11 ¥1.66 

On-road ................................................................................................................ 83.20 51.70 34.40 22.00 ¥29.70 

Nonroad ............................................................................................................... 69.63 30.46 27.39 26.56 ¥3.90 

Total .............................................................................................................. 335.00 230.67 209.97 195.79 ¥34.88 

As shown in Tables 3 and 4, NOX and 

VOC emissions in the Detroit area are 

projected to decrease by 95.55 tons per 

ozone season day and 34.88 tons per 

ozone season day, respectively, between 

the 2019 attainment year and 2035 

maintenance year. Michigan’s 

maintenance demonstration for the 

Detroit area shows maintenance of the 

2015 ozone NAAQS by providing 

emissions information to support the 

demonstration that future emissions of 

NOX and VOC will remain at or below 

2019 emission levels when considering 

both future source growth and 

implementation of future controls. 

In addition, EPA’s 2016v2 modeling 

platform includes updated air quality 

modeling of the contiguous United 

States, projecting ozone concentrations 

at all air quality monitors in 2023, 2026, 

and 2032.8 That modeling incorporates 

the most recent updates to emissions 

inventories, including on-the-books 

emissions reductions, and meteorology. 

This modeling indicates that EPA does 

not project the Detroit area to be in 

nonattainment of the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS, nor does EPA expect the area 

to struggle with maintenance, in those 

modeled future years. We propose to 

find that EPA’s ozone transport air 

quality modeling further supports 

Michigan’s demonstration that the 

Detroit area will continue to maintain 

the 2015 ozone NAAQS. 

3. Continued Air Quality Monitoring 

Michigan has committed to continue 

to operate its ozone monitors in the 

Detroit area for the duration of the 

maintenance period. Michigan remains 

obligated to meet monitoring 

requirements, to continue to quality 

assure monitoring data in accordance 

with 40 CFR part 58, and to enter all 

data into the AQS in accordance with 

Federal guidelines. 

4. Verification of Continued Attainment 

Michigan has confirmed that it has 

the legal authority to enforce and 

implement the requirements of its SIP. 

Michigan has further committed that it 

has the authority to implement the 

requested SIP revision, which would 

include the maintenance plan for the 

Detroit area. This includes the authority 

to adopt, implement, and enforce any 

subsequent emission control measures 

determined to be necessary to correct 

future ozone attainment problems. 

Verification of continued attainment 

is accomplished through operation of 

the ambient ozone monitoring network 

and the periodic update of the area’s 

emissions inventory. Michigan will 

continue to operate the ozone monitors 

located in the Detroit area. There are no 

plans to discontinue operation, relocate, 

or otherwise change the existing ozone 

monitoring network other than through 

revisions in the network approved by 

EPA. 

In addition, to track future levels of 

emissions, Michigan will continue to 

develop and submit to EPA updated 

emission inventories for all source 

categories at least once every three 

years, consistent with the requirements 

of 40 CFR part 51, subpart A, and in 40 

CFR 51.122. The Consolidated 

Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) was 

promulgated by EPA on June 10, 2002 

(67 FR 39602). The CERR was replaced 

by the Annual Emissions Reporting 

Requirements on December 17, 2008 (73 

FR 76539). The most recent triennial 

inventory for Michigan was compiled 

for 2017, and 2020 is in progress. Point 

source facilities covered by Michigan’s 

emission statement program, described 

below in section VII., will continue to 

submit VOC and NOX emissions on an 

annual basis. 

5. What is the contingency plan for the 

Detroit area? 

Section 175A of the CAA requires that 

the state adopt a maintenance plan as a 

SIP revision that includes such 

contingency measures as EPA deems 

necessary to assure that the state will 

promptly correct a violation of the 

NAAQS that occurs after redesignation 

of the area to attainment of the NAAQS. 

The maintenance plan must identify: 

The contingency measures to be 

considered and, if needed for 

maintenance, adopted and 

implemented; a schedule and procedure 

for adoption and implementation; and a 

time limit for action by the state. The 

state should also identify specific 

indicators to be used to determine when 

the contingency measures need to be 

considered, adopted, and implemented. 

The maintenance plan must include a 

commitment that the state will 

implement all measures with respect to 

the control of the pollutant that were 

contained in the SIP before 

redesignation of the area to attainment 

in accordance with section 175A(d) of 

the CAA. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
14220 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

9See 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2) for requirements 

associated with making adequacy findings through 

rulemaking on a submitted SIP. 

As required by section 175A of the 

CAA, Michigan has adopted a 

contingency plan for the Detroit area to 

address possible future ozone air quality 

problems. The contingency plan 

adopted by Detroit has two levels of 

response, a warning level response and 

an action level response. 

In Michigan’s plan, a warning level 

response will be triggered when an 

annual fourth-highest monitored value 

of 0.074 ppm or higher is monitored 

within the maintenance area. A warning 

level response will require Michigan to 

conduct a study. The study would 

assess whether the ozone value 

indicates a trend toward a higher ozone 

value and whether emissions appear to 

be increasing. The study will evaluate 

whether the trend, if any, is likely to 

continue and, if so, the control measures 

necessary to reverse the trend, taking 

into account ease and timing of 

implementation. Any implementation of 

necessary controls in response to a 

warning level response trigger will 

occur within 18 months of the 

conclusion of the ozone season. 

In Michigan’s plan, an action level 

response would be triggered when the 

fourth-highest monitored value, 

averaged over two years, of 0.071 ppm 

or higher is monitored within the 

maintenance area. The action level 

response will also be triggered if a threeyear design value exceeds the level of 

the 2015 ozone NAAQS (0.070 ppm). 

When an action level response is 

triggered and not found to be due to an 

exceptional event, malfunction, or 

noncompliance with a permit condition 

or rule requirement, Michigan will 

determine what additional control 

measures are needed to assure future 

attainment of the 2015 ozone NAAQS. 

Control measures selected will be 

adopted and implemented within 18 

months from the close of the ozone 

season that prompted the action level. 

Michigan may also consider if 

significant new regulations not 

currently included as part of the 

maintenance provisions will be 

implemented in a timely manner and 

would thus constitute an adequate 

contingency measure response. 

Michigan included the following list 

of potential contingency measures in its 

maintenance plan. However, Michigan 

is not limited to the measures on this 

list: 

1. VOC or NOX RACT rules for existing 

sources covered by Control 

Technique Guidelines, Alternative 

Control Guidelines, or other 

appropriate guidance 

2. Application of VOC RACT on existing 

smaller sources 

3. Alternative fuel and diesel retrofit 

programs for fleet vehicle 

operations 

4. VOC or NOX control on sources 

emitting less than 100 tons per year 

5. Increased VOC or NOX emission 

offsets for new and modified major 

sources 

6. Reduced idling programs 

7. Trip reduction programs 

8. Traffic flow and transit improvements 

9. Increased turnover of legacy natural 

gas distribution pipelines 

10. Stationary engine controls 

11. Rules under the American 

Innovation and Manufacturing Act 

12. Rules for consumer products 

13. Additional measures identified by 

EGLE 

To qualify as a contingency measure, 

emissions reductions from that measure 

must not be factored into the emissions 

projections used in the maintenance 

plan. 

EPA has concluded that Michigan’s 

maintenance plan adequately addresses 

the five basic components of a 

maintenance plan: Attainment 

inventory, maintenance demonstration, 

monitoring network, verification of 

continued attainment, and a 

contingency plan. In addition, as 

required by section 175A(b) of the CAA, 

Michigan has committed to submit to 

EPA an updated ozone maintenance 

plan eight years after redesignation of 

the Detroit area to cover an additional 

ten years beyond the initial 10-year 

maintenance period. Thus, EPA finds 

that the maintenance plan SIP revision 

submitted by Michigan for the Detroit 

area meets the requirements of section 

175A of the CAA, and EPA proposes to 

approve it as a revision to the Michigan 

SIP. 

V. Has the state adopted approvable 

motor vehicle emission budgets? 

A. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets 

Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new 

transportation plans, programs, or 

projects that receive Federal funding or 

support, such as the construction of new 

highways, must ‘‘conform’’ to (i.e., be 

consistent with) the SIP. Conformity to 

the SIP means that transportation 

activities will not cause or contribute to 

any new air quality violations, increase 

the frequency or severity of any existing 

air quality problems, or delay timely 

attainment or any required interim 

emissions reductions or any other 

milestones. Regulations at 40 CFR part 

93 set forth EPA policy, criteria, and 

procedures for demonstrating and 

ensuring conformity of transportation 

activities to a SIP. 

Transportation conformity is a 

requirement for nonattainment and 

maintenance areas. Maintenance areas 

are areas that were previously 

nonattainment for a particular NAAQS, 

but that have been redesignated to 

attainment with an approved CAA 

section 175A maintenance plan for the 

NAAQS. 

Under the CAA, states are required to 

submit, at various times, control strategy 

SIPs for nonattainment areas and 

maintenance plans for areas seeking 

redesignations to attainment of the 

ozone standard and maintenance areas. 

See the SIP requirements for the 2015 

ozone standard in EPA’s December 6, 

2018, implementation rule (83 FR 

62998). These control strategy SIPs 

(including reasonable further progress 

plans and attainment plans) and 

maintenance plans must include motor 

vehicle emissions budgets for criteria 

pollutants, including ozone, and their 

precursor pollutants (VOC and NOX) to 

address pollution from on-road 

transportation sources. The budgets are 

the portion of the total allowable 

emissions that are allocated to highway 

and transit vehicle use that, together 

with emissions from other sources in 

the area, will provide for attainment or 

maintenance. See 40 CFR 93.101. 

Under 40 CFR part 93, a budget for an 

area seeking a redesignation to 

attainment must be established, at 

minimum, for the last year of the 

maintenance plan. A state may adopt 

budgets for other years as well. The 

budget serves as a ceiling on emissions 

from an area’s planned transportation 

system. The budget concept is further 

explained in the preamble to the 

November 24, 1993, Transportation 

Conformity Rule (58 FR 62188). The 

preamble also describes how to 

establish the budget(s) in the SIP and 

how to revise the budget(s), if needed, 

after initially establishing a budget in 

the SIP. 

As discussed earlier, Michigan’s 

maintenance plan includes NOX and 

VOC budgets for the Detroit area for 

2025, which is an interim year, as well 

as 2035, which is the last year of the 

maintenance period. EPA has reviewed 

Michigan’s NOX and VOC budgets for 

the area and, in this action, is proposing 

to approve them.9 We are also starting 

the adequacy review process for these 

budgets to determine if they meet the 

adequacy criteria in the transportation 

conformity regulations (40 CFR 

93.118(e)(4)). Michigan’s January 3, 

2022, maintenance plan submission, 

including the budgets for this area, is 

available for public comment via this 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 14221 

10Allocation of a safety margin to an area’s motor 

vehicle emissions budgets is provided for by the 

transportation conformity rule. See 40 CFR 

93.124(a). 

11The RFP requirements specified in CAA section 

182(b)(1) applies to all ozone nonattainment areas 

classified Moderate or higher. 

12https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016- 

12/documents/2016_ei_guidance_for_naaqs.pdf. 

proposed rulemaking. The submission 

was endorsed by the Governor’s 

designee and Michigan provided 

opportunity for a public hearing. The 

budgets were developed as part of an 

interagency consultation process which 

includes Federal, state, and local 

agencies. The budgets were clearly 

identified and precisely quantified. 

These budgets, when considered 

together with all other emissions 

sources, are consistent with 

maintenance of the 2015 ozone NAAQS. 

TABLE 5—MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS FOR THE DETROIT AREA FOR THE 2025 INTERIM YEAR AND 2035 

MAINTENANCE YEAR

[Tons per ozone season day] 

2025 Interim year 2035 Maintenance year 

Projected 

on-road 

emissions 

Safety 

margin 

allocation 

Total 

budget 

Projected 

on-road 

emissions 

Safety 

margin 

allocation 

Total 

budget 

NOX .................................................................................. 61.20 43.15 104.35 40.30 62.11 102.41 

VOCs ................................................................................ 34.40 13.46 47.86 22.00 22.67 44.67 

As shown in Table 5, the 2025 and 

2035 budgets exceed the estimated 2025 

and 2035 on-road sector emissions. To 

accommodate future variations in VMT 

in the area, EGLE allocated to the 

mobile sector a portion of the safety 

margin, as described further below.10

Michigan has demonstrated that the 

Detroit area can maintain the 2015 

ozone NAAQS in the 2035 maintenance 

year with mobile source emissions of 

102.41 tons per ozone season day of 

NOX and 44.67 tons per ozone season 

day of VOCs. Similarly, the Detroit area 

can maintain the 2015 ozone NAAQS in 

the 2025 interim year with mobile 

source emissions of 104.35 tons per 

ozone season day of NOX and 47.86 tons 

per ozone season day of VOCs. Despite 

partial allocation of the safety margin, 

emissions will remain under emission 

levels in the 2019 attainment year. 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

budgets for use to determine 

transportation conformity in the Detroit 

area, because EPA has determined that 

the area can maintain attainment of the 

2015 ozone NAAQS for the relevant 

maintenance period with mobile source 

emissions at the levels of the budgets. 

B. What is a safety margin? 

A ‘‘safety margin’’ is the amount by 

which the total projected emissions 

from all sources of a given pollutant are 

less than the total emissions that would 

satisfy the applicable requirement for 

maintenance. 40 CFR 93.101. As noted 

in Tables 3 and 4, the emissions in the 

Detroit area are projected to have safety 

margins of 95.55 tons per ozone season 

day for NOX and 34.88 tons per ozone 

season day for VOC in 2035 (the 

difference between emissions in the 

2019 attainment year, and projected 

emissions in the 2035 maintenance year, 

for all sources in the Detroit area). 

Similarly, there is a safety margin of 

66.39 tons per ozone season day for 

NOX and 20.69 tons per ozone season 

day for VOC in 2025. Even if emissions 

exceeded projected levels by the full 

amount of the safety margin, the 

counties would still demonstrate 

maintenance since emission levels 

would equal those in the attainment 

year. 

As shown in Table 5 above, Michigan 

is allocating a portion of that safety 

margin to the mobile source sector. 

Specifically, in 2025, Michigan is 

allocating 43.15 tons per ozone season 

day and 13.46 tons per ozone season 

day of the NOX and VOC safety margins, 

respectively. In 2035, Michigan is 

allocating 62.11 tons per ozone season 

day and 22.67 tons per ozone season 

day of the NOX and VOC safety margins, 

respectively. Michigan is not requesting 

allocation to the budgets of the entire 

available safety margins reflected in the 

demonstration of maintenance. In fact, 

the amount allocated to the budgets 

represents only a portion of the 2025 

and 2035 safety margins. Therefore, 

even though the State is requesting 

budgets that exceed the projected onroad mobile source emissions for 2025 

and 2035 contained in the 

demonstration of maintenance, the 

increase in on-road mobile source 

emissions that can be considered for 

transportation conformity purposes is 

within the safety margins of the ozone 

maintenance demonstration. Further, 

once allocated to mobile sources, these 

safety margins will not be available for 

use by other sources. 

VI. Base Year Emissions Inventory 

As discussed above, sections 172(c)(3) 

and 182(a)(1) of the CAA require states 

to submit a comprehensive, accurate, 

and current inventory of actual 

emissions from sources of NOX and 

VOC emitted within the boundaries of 

the ozone nonattainment area. For the 

2015 ozone NAAQS, EPA specifies that 

states submit ozone season day 

emissions estimates for an inventory 

calendar year to be consistent with the 

base year for RFP plans as required by 

40 CFR 51.1310(b). For the RFP base 

year for the 2015 ozone NAAQS under 

40 CFR 51.1310(b), states may use a 

calendar year for the most recently 

available complete triennial emissions 

inventory (40 CFR 51, subpart A) 

preceding the year of the area’s effective 

date of designation as a nonattainment 

area (83 FR 62998).11 See the SIP 

requirements for the 2015 ozone 

standard in EPA’s December 6, 2018, 

implementation rule (83 FR 62998), and 

EPA’s 2017 document ‘‘Emissions 

Inventory Guidance for Implementation 

of Ozone and Particulate Matter 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) and Regional Haze 

Regulations.’’ 12

In its December 18, 2020, submittal, 

Michigan requested that EPA approve 

into its SIP an inventory addressing the 

emissions inventory requirement of 

CAA section 182(a)(1). Michigan’s SIP 

revision included inventories of NOX

and VOC emissions for several 

nonattainment areas, including the 

Detroit area, for the year 2017. At the 

time of its submittal, data for 2017 was 

the most recent comprehensive, 

accurate, and quality assured triennial 

emissions inventory in the NEI 

database. Michigan’s submittal included 

estimates of NOX and VOC emissions for 

four general classes of anthropogenic 

sources, point, nonpoint, on-road 

mobile, and nonroad mobile; biogenic 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
14222 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

13https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-modeling/ 

2016v1-platform. 

emissions; and event emissions, which 

are discrete and short-lived sources 

such as wildfires. 

To develop emissions inventories for 

the year 2017, Michigan began with 

annual emissions data contained in the 

2017 NEI for the point, nonpoint, onroad, nonroad, biogenic, and event 

categories. In developing ozone season 

day emissions, Michigan again used July 

as the representative ozone season 

month. EGLE also analyzed the 

prevalence of weekend days with ozone 

values exceeding the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS and determined that including 

weekend days in the typical ozone 

season day emission derivation is 

appropriate. To convert annual 

emissions data to ozone season day 

values, EGLE extracted data from EPA’s 

2016v1 modeling platform and 

calculated a conversion factor for the 

point, nonpoint, on-road, nonroad, and 

biogenic data categories.13 EGLE 

determined the event category 

emissions were too low and too variable 

from year to year to benefit from 

applying a conversion factor. 

Under CAA section 182(a)(1) and 40 

CFR 51.1115, states must submit a base 

year emissions inventory within two 

years of the effective date of designation 

of each nonattainment area for the 2015 

ozone NAAQS. For the Detroit area, this 

requirement became due on August 3, 

2020. At the time that EGLE prepared its 

inventory of 2017 emissions to address 

the requirements of section 182(a)(1), 

several improvements in data sources 

were not yet available. Specifically, 

EGLE relied upon a version of the 2017 

NEI that did not include a revised point 

source inventory to correct airport 

emissions. Additionally, EGLE relied 

upon the 2016v1 modeling platform, 

which did not yet include 

improvements from the 2016v2 

modeling platform including updated 

information from the 2017 NEI, 

MOVES3, and revised inventory 

methodologies. EPA is not evaluating 

Michigan’s 2017 emissions inventory 

against platforms or data sources that 

were not available at the time of 

submission. 

NOX and VOC emissions data for the 

year 2017 are shown in Tables 6 and 7 

below. Data are expressed in terms of 

tons per ozone season day. 

TABLE 6—NOX EMISSIONS FOR COUNTIES IN THE DETROIT AREA FOR THE 2017 BASE YEAR

[Tons per ozone season day] 

Point Nonpoint On-road Nonroad Biogenic Event Total 

Livingston ............................................................................. 1.53 0.72 5.78 1.13 1.32 0.04 10.52 

Macomb ............................................................................... 2.55 3.78 16.19 3.83 1.21 0.02 27.58 

Monroe ................................................................................. 16.05 1.43 5.22 1.31 2.29 0.01 26.31 

Oakland ................................................................................ 2.83 5.22 29.68 7.54 1.37 0.08 46.72 

St. Clair ................................................................................ 55.62 3.04 3.98 1.42 1.99 0.03 66.08 

Washtenaw .......................................................................... 2.56 1.45 9.35 1.64 1.73 0.05 16.78 

Wayne .................................................................................. 41.35 7.77 36.79 2.71 1.00 0.05 89.67 

Total .............................................................................. 122.49 23.41 106.99 19.58 10.91 0.28 283.66 

TABLE 7—VOC EMISSIONS FOR COUNTIES IN THE DETROIT AREA FOR THE 2017 BASE YEAR

[Tons per ozone season day] 

Point Nonpoint On-road Nonroad Biogenic Event Total 

Livingston ............................................................................. 0.42 6.10 3.14 1.77 22.11 0.65 34.19 

Macomb ............................................................................... 8.22 28.46 11.50 4.77 13.64 0.47 67.06 

Monroe ................................................................................. 0.97 5.79 2.66 2.02 13.17 0.18 24.79 

Oakland ................................................................................ 2.61 36.72 18.55 10.62 33.00 1.48 102.98

St. Clair ................................................................................ 3.16 5.68 2.45 2.41 28.77 0.59 43.06 

Washtenaw .......................................................................... 0.61 15.56 5.12 2.59 22.67 0.77 47.32 

Wayne .................................................................................. 15.19 57.45 21.74 8.50 24.51 1.05 128.44

Total .............................................................................. 31.18 155.76 65.16 32.68 157.87 5.19 447.84 

As shown in Table 6, total NOX

emissions in the Detroit area for the 

2017 base year are 283.66 tons per 

summer day. As shown in Table 7, total 

VOC emissions in the Detroit area for 

the 2017 base year are 447.84 tons per 

summer day. 

Michigan’s December 18, 2020, 

emissions inventory submission 

includes a demonstration showing that 

approval of this SIP revision is 

consistent with CAA section 110(l). 

Section 110(l) provides that EPA cannot 

approve a SIP revision if the revision 

would interfere with attainment and 

maintenance of the NAAQS, reasonable 

further progress, or any other applicable 

requirement of the CAA. EGLE is 

making this submission as required by 

CAA sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1), 

and approval of the 2017 base year 

inventories would strengthen the 

Michigan SIP and would not interfere 

with any applicable CAA requirement. 

EPA reviewed Michigan’s December 

18, 2020, submittal for consistency with 

sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) of the 

CAA, and with EPA’s emissions 

inventory requirements. In particular, 

EPA reviewed the techniques used by 

EGLE to derive and quality assure the 

emissions estimates. The documentation 

of the emissions estimation procedures 

is thorough and is adequate for EPA to 

determine that Michigan followed 

acceptable procedures to estimate the 

emissions. Accordingly, we propose to 

conclude that Michigan has developed 

inventories of NOX and VOC emissions 

that are comprehensive and complete. 

EPA therefore proposes to approve the 

emissions inventory for the Detroit area 

in Michigan’s December 18, 2020, 

submittal and shown above in Tables 6 

and 7 as meeting the emissions 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 14223 

inventory requirements of sections 

172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1) of the CAA. 

In this rulemaking, EPA is only 

evaluating the portions of Michigan’s 

December 18, 2020, emissions inventory 

submittal relating to the Detroit area. 

EPA is not evaluating inventories 

relating to other nonattainment areas. 

Instead, EPA will evaluate these 

inventories in a separate rulemaking. 

VII. Emissions Statement 

Section 182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA 

requires states with ozone 

nonattainment areas to submit revisions 

to their SIP to require the owner or 

operator of each stationary source of 

NOX or VOC to provide the state with 

an annual statement documenting the 

actual emissions of NOX and VOC from 

their source. Under section 

182(a)(3)(B)(ii), a state may waive the 

emissions statement requirement for any 

class or category of stationary sources 

which emits less than 25 tons per year 

of VOC or NOX if the state, in its base 

year emissions inventory, provides an 

inventory of emissions from such class 

or category of sources based on the 

EPA’s emission factors, or other method 

acceptable to the EPA. 

On March 8, 1994, EPA approved 

Michigan’s emission statement program 

as a revision to the SIP (59 FR 10752). 

Specifically, EPA approved into the SIP 

the following: Section 5 of the 1965 Air 

Pollution Act 348 (1965 PA 348), 

Section 14a of 1965 PA 348, Air 

Pollution Control Rule 336.202 (Rule 2), 

and the 1993 Michigan Air Pollution 

Reporting Forms, Reference Tables, and 

General Instructions. 

In a separate SIP submittal also dated 

December 18, 2020, Michigan requested 

that EPA revise the emissions statement 

program in its SIP by adding, removing, 

and updating certain statutes and 

reporting forms. 

First, Michigan requests that EPA 

remove from the SIP Section 5 of 1965 

PA 348 and approve into the SIP 

Michigan Complied Laws (MCL) 

324.5503, Section 5503 of 1994 PA 451. 

At the time that EPA approved Section 

5 of 1965 PA 348 in 1994, this measure 

conferred several authorities onto the 

Michigan Commission on the 

Environment, including the authority to 

require sources to report their 

emissions. In 1995, 1965 PA 348 was 

repealed by the Michigan Legislature 

and replaced with 1994 PA 451, and all 

Commission powers were transferred to 

the department. EGLE’s current 

authority to require emissions reports, 

which Michigan is now requesting EPA 

approve into the SIP, is provided at 

MCL 324.5503, Section 5503 of 1994 PA 

451. 

Second, Michigan requests that EPA 

remove from the SIP Section 14a of 1965 

PA 348, which relates to surveillance 

fees. In its submittal, Michigan states its 

belief that Section 14a was incorrectly 

submitted to and approved into the SIP 

as part of the emissions statement 

program, and that this measure is not 

required as part of an emissions 

statement program. In this rulemaking, 

EPA is not evaluating the portion of 

Michigan’s submittal requesting the 

removal of Section 14a of 1965 PA 348 

from its SIP. Instead, EPA will evaluate 

this request in a separate rulemaking. 

Third, Michigan requests that EPA 

retain in its SIP Rule 2 and strengthen 

this rule by approving into the SIP 

AQD–013, Last Revision Date: July 22, 

2020, entitled ‘‘Criteria Pollutant 

Threshold Levels for Point Sources’’ 

(AQD–013), of EGLE’s AQD Policy and 

Procedure. Michigan’s remaining 

authority to require emissions reports 

from certain sources is provided at Rule 

2; since EPA approved Rule 2 into its 

SIP, Michigan has developed specific 

policies and procedures to determine 

which stationary sources must comply 

with Rule 2. These policies and 

procedures, including specific 

thresholds of emissions that trigger Rule 

2 applicability, are provided at AQD– 

013. Additionally, AQD–013 is 

applicable to the emissions reporting 

requirements of Air Pollution Control 

Rule 336.1212 (Rule 212), which EPA 

approved into the SIP on August 31, 

2018 (83 FR 44485). Michigan first 

developed AQD–013 in 1996 and most 

recently updated AQD–013 in 2020. 

Fourth, Michigan requests that EPA 

remove from the SIP its 1993 Michigan 

Air Pollution Reporting forms and 

reference tables and strengthen its SIP 

by replacing them with the 2019 version 

of certain Michigan Air Emissions 

Reporting System (MAERS) forms. 

Specifically, Michigan is requesting that 

EPA approve into the SIP the 2019 

version of five forms: MAERS form SB– 

101 Submit, MAERS form S–101 

Source, MAERS form A–101 Activity, 

MAERS form EU–101 Emission Unit, 

and MAERS form E–101 Emissions. 

These forms satisfy requirements under 

EPA’s 1992 Guidance on the 

Implementation of an Emission 

Statement Program relating to 

certification of data accuracy, source 

identification information, operating 

schedule, emissions information, 

control equipment information, and 

process data. 

Fifth, Michigan requests that EPA 

remove from its SIP the 1993 general 

instructions and strengthen its SIP by 

replacing them with the January 2020 

MAERS User Guide. EGLE no longer 

uses the 1993 general instructions that 

are currently in the SIP, and instead 

provides sources with its 2020 user 

guide, which clearly defines terms used 

in the MAERS forms and aids the 

sources in completing their MAERS 

submittal via the electronic format for 

all required pollutants. 

Michigan’s December 18, 2020, 

emissions statement submission also 

includes a demonstration showing that 

approval of this SIP revision is 

consistent with CAA section 110(l). The 

revisions EPA is proposing to approve 

would strengthen Michigan’s SIPapproved emissions statement program 

by removing from the SIP outdated 

reporting forms and a statute that has 

been repealed by the state legislature 

and replacing those measures with the 

statute containing the state’s current 

authority to require the reporting of 

emissions, as well as updated program 

forms, policies and procedures, and user 

information. These revisions would not 

interfere with any applicable CAA 

requirement. 

EPA reviewed Michigan’s December 

18, 2020, submittal for consistency with 

182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA and EPA’s 

Guidance on the Implementation of an 

Emission Statement Program. Section 

182(a)(3)(B) requires annual submission 

emissions from stationary sources with 

emissions greater than 25 tons per year 

(tpy) of NOX and VOC. At AQD–013, 

Michigan requires annual reports from 

sources with VOC emissions of 10 tpy 

or greater statewide, and NOX emissions 

of 25 tpy or greater in ozone 

nonattainment areas and 40 tpy in all 

other areas of the state. As described 

above, EPA will address the portion of 

Michigan’s submittal requesting the 

removal of Section 14a of 1965 PA 348 

from its SIP in a separate action. The 

remaining portions of Michigan’s 

submittal are consistent with 

182(a)(3)(B) of the CAA and relevant 

guidance and would strengthen 

Michigan’s SIP-approved emissions 

statement program. EPA therefore 

proposes to approve the remaining 

portions of Michigan’s December 18, 

2020, emissions statement submittal as 

meeting the emissions statement 

requirements of section 182(a)(3)(B) of 

the CAA. 

VIII. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is proposing to determine that 

the Detroit nonattainment area is 

attaining the 2015 ozone NAAQS, based 

on quality-assured and certified 

monitoring data for 2019–2021. EPA is 

proposing to approve portions of 

Michigan’s December 18, 2020, 

submittals as meeting the base year 

emissions inventory and emissions 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
14224 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

statement requirements of sections 

182(a)(1) and 182(a)(3), respectively. 

EPA is also proposing to approve, as a 

revision to the Michigan SIP, the state’s 

maintenance plan for the area. The 

maintenance plan is designed to keep 

the Detroit area in attainment of the 

2015 ozone NAAQS through 2035. EPA 

is proposing to determine that upon 

final approval of Michigan’s 2017 base 

year emissions inventory, emission 

statement SIP, and maintenance plan 

SIP, the area will have met the 

requirements for redesignation under 

section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is 

thus proposing to change the legal 

designation of the Detroit area from 

nonattainment to attainment for the 

2015 ozone NAAQS. Finally, EPA is 

proposing to approve the newly 

established 2025 and 2035 motor 

vehicle emissions budgets for the 

Detroit area and initiating the adequacy 

process for these budgets. 

IX. Incorporation by Reference 

In this rule, EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

Michigan Act 451, Section 5503, 

effective March 30, 1995. EPA has 

made, and will continue to make, these 

documents generally available through 

www.regulations.gov and at the EPA 

Region 5 Office (please contact the 

person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

preamble for more information). 

X. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, redesignation of an 

area to attainment and the 

accompanying approval of a 

maintenance plan under section 

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

status of a geographical area and do not 

impose any additional regulatory 

requirements on sources beyond those 

imposed by state law. A redesignation to 

attainment does not in and of itself 

create any new requirements, but rather 

results in the applicability of 

requirements contained in the CAA for 

areas that have been redesignated to 

attainment. Moreover, the Administrator 

is required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

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, the proposed 

actions to approve Michigan’s SIP 

submissions merely approve state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and do 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

these reasons, this action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

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

January 21, 2011); 

• 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, the SIP is 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), because 

redesignation is an action that affects 

the status of a geographical area and 

does not impose any new regulatory 

requirements on tribes, impact any 

existing sources of air pollution on 

tribal lands, nor impair the maintenance 

of ozone national ambient air quality 

standards in tribal lands. 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, National parks, 

Wilderness areas. 

Dated: March 7, 2022. 

Debra Shore, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2022–05253 Filed 3–11–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 312 

[EPA–HQ–OLEM–2021–0946; FRL–9334– 

01–OLEM] 

Standards and Practices for All 

Appropriate Inquiries 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to amend 

the Standards and Practices for All 

Appropriate Inquiries to reference a 

standard practice recently made 

available by ASTM International, a 

widely recognized standards 

development organization. Specifically, 

EPA is proposing to amend the All 

Appropriate Inquiries Rule to reference 

ASTM International’s E1527–21 

‘‘Standard Practice for Environmental 

Site Assessments: Phase I 

Environmental Site Assessment 

Process’’ and allow for its use to satisfy 

the requirements for conducting all 

appropriate inquiries under the 

Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act. In the ‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ 

section in this issue of Federal Register, 

EPA is amending the All Appropriate 

Inquiries Rule to reference ASTM 

International’s E1527–21 standard 

practice as a direct final rule without a 

prior proposed rule. If we receive no 

adverse comment, we will not take 

further action on this proposed rule. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received by April 13, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OLEM–2021–0946 at 

www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1