21842 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Designations and 

classifications, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, and 

Volatile organic compounds. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Designations and 

classifications, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, and Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Michael Regan, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2022–07509 Filed 4–12–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2021–0742; FRL–8425–01– 

OAR] 

RIN 2060–AV32 

Determinations of Attainment by the 

Attainment Date, Extensions of the 

Attainment Date, and Reclassification 

of Areas Classified as Marginal for the 

2015 Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA or Agency) is proposing 

three actions pursuant to section 

181(b)(2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) 

related to the attainment date for 31 

areas classified as ‘‘Marginal’’ 

nonattainment for the 2015 ozone 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS). First, the Agency is 

proposing to determine that six areas 

attained the standard by the applicable 

August 3, 2021, attainment date. 

Second, the Agency is proposing to 

grant a 1-year attainment date extension 

for the Uinta Basin, Utah, 

nonattainment area. Third, the Agency 

is proposing to determine that 24 areas 

failed to attain the standard by their 

applicable attainment date and. The 

effect of failing to attain by the 

attainment date is that such areas will 

be reclassified by operation of law to 

‘‘Moderate’’ upon the effective date of 

the final reclassification notice. 

Consequently, the responsible state air 

agencies must submit state 

implementation plan (SIP) revisions 

required to satisfy the statutory and 

regulatory requirements for Moderate 

areas for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. The 

EPA proposes deadlines for submission 

of those SIP revisions and 

implementation of the related control 

requirements. This action, when 

finalized, will fulfill the EPA’s statutory 

obligation to determine whether ozone 

nonattainment areas attained the 

NAAQS by the attainment date and to 

publish a document in the Federal 

Register identifying each area that is 

determined as having failed to attain 

and identifying the reclassification. 

Several areas included in this proposed 

rule are also addressed in a separate 

rulemaking to determine whether areas 

classified as ‘‘Serious’’ for the 2008 

ozone NAAQS attained the standard by 

the applicable attainment date of July 

20, 2021 (see Docket ID EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2021–0741). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before June 13, 2022. Virtual public 

hearing: The virtual hearing will be held 

on May 9, 2022. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ– 

OAR–2021–0742, by any of the 

following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

https://www.regulations.gov/ (our 

preferred method). Follow the online 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Email: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov. 

Include Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR– 

2021–0742 in the subject line of the 

message. 

• Fax: (202) 566–9744. 

• Mail: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA Docket Center, 

Office of Air and Radiation Docket, Mail 

Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania 

Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier (by 

scheduled appointment only): EPA 

Docket Center, WJC West Building, 

Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue 

NW, Washington, DC 20004. The Docket 

Center’s hours of operations are 8:30 

a.m.–4:30 p.m., Monday–Friday (except 

Federal Holidays). 

Instructions: All submissions received 

must include the Docket ID No. for this 

rulemaking. Comments received may be 

posted without change to https://

www.regulations.gov/, including any 

personal information provided. For 

detailed instructions on sending 

comments and additional information 

on the rulemaking process, see the 

‘‘Public Participation’’ heading of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 

this notice. Out of an abundance of 

caution for members of the public and 

our staff, the EPA Docket Center and 

Reading Room are open to the public by 

appointment only to reduce the risk of 

transmitting COVID–19. Our Docket 

Center staff also continues to provide 

remote customer service via email, 

phone, and webform. Hand deliveries 

and couriers may be received by 

scheduled appointment only. For 

further information on EPA Docket 

Center services and the current status, 

please visit us online at https://

www.epa.gov/dockets. 

Submitting Confidential Business 

Information (CBI). Do not submit 

information containing CBI to the EPA 

through https://www.regulations.gov/. 

Clearly mark the part or all of the 

information that you claim to be CBI. 

For CBI information on any digital 

storage media that you mail to the EPA, 

mark the outside of the digital storage 

media as CBI and then identify 

electronically within the digital storage 

media the specific information that is 

claimed as CBI. In addition to one 

complete version of the comments that 

includes information claimed as CBI, 

you must submit a copy of the 

comments that does not contain the 

information claimed as CBI directly to 

the public docket through the 

procedures outlined in Instructions 

above. If you submit any digital storage 

media that does not contain CBI, mark 

the outside of the digital storage media 

clearly that it does not contain CBI. 

Information not marked as CBI will be 

included in the public docket and the 

EPA’s electronic public docket without 

prior notice. Information marked as CBI 

will not be disclosed except in 

accordance with procedures set forth in 

40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 

part 2. Our preferred method to receive 

CBI is for it to be transmitted to 

electronically using email attachments, 

File Transfer Protocol (FTP), or other 

online file sharing services (e.g., 

Dropbox, OneDrive, Google Drive). 

Electronic submissions must be 

transmitted directly to the OAQPS CBI 

Office using the email address, 

oaqpscbi@epa.gov, and should include 

clear CBI markings as described earlier. 

If assistance is needed with submitting 

large electronic files that exceed the file 

size limit for email attachments, and if 

you do not have your own file sharing 

service, please email oaqpscbi@epa.gov 

to request a file transfer link. If sending 

CBI information through the postal 

service, please send it to the following 

address: OAQPS Document Control 

Officer (C404–02), OAQPS, U.S. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 21843 

1Because the 2015 primary and secondary 

NAAQS for ozone are identical, for convenience, 

the EPA refers to them in the singular as ‘‘the 2015 

ozone NAAQS’’ or as ‘‘the standard.’’ 

2A design value is a statistic used to compare 

data collected at an ambient air quality monitoring 

site to the applicable NAAQS to determine 

compliance with the standard. The DV for the 2015 

ozone NAAQS is the 3-year average of the annual 

fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average 

ozone concentration. The DV is calculated for each 

Continued 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 

27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA– 

HQ–OAR–2021–0742. The mailed CBI 

material should be double wrapped and 

clearly marked. Any CBI markings 

should not show through the outer 

envelope. 

Virtual public hearing. The virtual 

hearing will be held on May 9, 2022. 

The hearing will be held in three 

sessions: 9:00 a.m. to noon (Eastern 

time), 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. (Eastern 

time), and 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. 

(Eastern time). We invite the public to 

register to speak using https://

www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozonepollution/proposed-determinationsattainment-attainment-date-extensions0 or (919) 541–0641. The EPA will 

confirm your approximate speaking 

time by May 9, 2022 and we will post 

a list of registered speakers in 

approximate speaking order at: https:// 

www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozonepollution/proposed-determinationsattainment-attainment-date-extensions0. If we reach a point in any session 

where all present, registered speakers 

have been called on and no one else 

wishes to provide testimony we will 

adjourn that session early. Refer to the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below for additional information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information about this proposed rule, 

contact Emily Millar, U.S. EPA, Office 

of Air Quality Planning and Standards, 

Air Quality Policy Division, C539–01 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709; 

telephone number: (919) 541–2619; 

email address: millar.emily@epa.gov; or 

Robert Lingard, U.S. EPA, Office of Air 

Quality Planning and Standards, Air 

Quality Policy Division, C539–01 

Research Triangle Park, NC 27709; by 

telephone number: (919) 541–5272; 

email address: lingard.robert@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Participation in virtual public hearing. 

Because of current Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention 

recommendations, as well as state and 

local orders for social distancing to limit 

the spread of COVID–19, the EPA 

cannot hold in-person public meetings 

at this time. 

The EPA will begin pre-registering 

speakers and attendees for the hearing 

upon publication of this notice in the 

Federal Register. The EPA will accept 

registrations on an individual basis. To 

register to speak at the virtual hearing, 

individuals may use the online 

registration form available via the EPA’s 

2015 Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) 

Nonattainment Actions web page for 

this hearing (https://www.epa.gov/ 

ground-level-ozone-pollution/proposeddeterminations-attainment-attainmentdate-extensions-0) or contact Pam Long 

at (919) 541–0641 or long.pam@epa.gov. 

The last day to pre-register to speak at 

the hearing will be May 9, 2022. On 

May 9, 2022 the EPA will post a general 

agenda for the hearing that will list preregistered speakers in approximate 

order at: https://www.epa.gov/groundlevel-ozone-pollution/proposeddeterminations-attainment-attainmentdate-extensions-0. 

The EPA will make every effort to 

follow the schedule as closely as 

possible on the day of the hearing; 

however, please plan for the hearings to 

run either ahead of schedule or behind 

schedule. 

Each commenter will have 3 minutes 

to provide oral testimony. The EPA 

encourages commenters to provide the 

EPA with a copy of their oral testimony 

electronically (via email) by emailing it 

to Pam Long at long.pam@epa.gov. The 

EPA also recommends submitting the 

text of your oral comments as written 

comments to the rulemaking docket. 

The EPA may ask clarifying questions 

during the oral presentations but will 

not respond to the presentations at that 

time. Written statements and supporting 

information submitted during the 

comment period will be considered 

with the same weight as oral comments 

and supporting information presented at 

the public hearing. 

Please note that any updates made to 

any aspect of the hearing is posted 

online at https://www.epa.gov/groundlevel-ozone-pollution/proposeddeterminations-attainment-attainmentdate-extensions-0. While the EPA 

expects the hearing to go forward as set 

forth previously, please monitor our 

website or contact Pam Long at (919) 

541–0641 or long.pam@epa.gov to 

determine if there are any updates. The 

EPA does not intend to publish a 

document in the Federal Register 

announcing updates. 

A Spanish interpreter will be 

provided. If you require the services of 

an interpreter for any language other 

than Spanish or special 

accommodations such as audio 

description, please pre-register for the 

hearing with Pam Long and describe 

your needs by May 4, 2022. The EPA 

may not be able to arrange 

accommodations without advanced 

notice. 

Throughout this document ‘‘we,’’ 

‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ means the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Overview and Basis of Proposal 

A. Overview of Proposal 

B. What is the background for the proposed 

actions? 

C. What is the statutory authority for the 

proposed actions? 

D. How does the EPA determine whether 

an area has attained the 2015 ozone 

standard? 

II. What is the EPA proposing and what is the 

rationale? 

A. Determinations of Attainment by the 

Attainment Date 

B. Extensions of Marginal Area Attainment 

Date 

C. Determinations of Failure To Attain and 

Reclassification 

1. International Transport and 

Requirements for CAA Section 179B 

D. Moderate Area SIP Revisions 

1. Required Submission Elements 

2. Submission and Implementation 

Deadlines 

III. Environmental Justice Considerations 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

I. National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal Actions 

To Address Environmental Justice in 

Minority Populations and Low-Income 

Populations 

K. Judicial Review 

I. Overview and Basis of Proposal 

A. Overview of Proposal 

The EPA is required to determine 

whether areas designated nonattainment 

for an ozone NAAQS attained the 

standard by the applicable attainment 

date, and to take certain steps for areas 

that failed to attain (see CAA section 

181(b)(2)). For a concentration-based 

standard, such as the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS,1 a determination of attainment 

is based on a nonattainment area’s 

design value (DV).2


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
21844 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

air quality monitor in an area, and the DV for an 

area is the highest DV among the individual 

monitoring sites located in the area. 

3For general purposes, further references to the 

2015 ozone NAAQS Marginal area attainment date 

in this notice will indicate August 3, 2021, except 

where otherwise indicated. 

4Two Marginal nonattainment areas have been 

redesignated to maintenance for the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS. Columbus, Ohio (84 FR 43508, August 21, 

2019) and Door County, Wisconsin (85 FR 35377, 

June 10, 2020). See Section II.C of this notice for 

additional information regarding EPA’s designation 

and redesignation actions for Door County. 

5 In separate rulemakings, the EPA is proposing 

to redesignate the following Marginal 

nonattainment areas to attainment for the 2015 

ozone NAAQS based upon complete, qualityassured, and certified ozone monitoring data from 

calendar years 2019, 2020, and 2021: Manitowoc 

County, WI (87 FR 5438, February 1, 2022); Ohio 

portion of Cincinnati, OH-KY (87 FR 7978, February 

11, 2022); Door County-Revised, WI (87 FR 12020, 

March 3, 2022); and Detroit, MI (87 FR 14210, 

March 14, 2022). If any of these areas is fully 

redesignated prior to EPA finalizing this proposal, 

EPA would not finalize its proposed action for the 

area. 

6CAA section 179B(b) provides that where a state 

demonstrates to the Administrator’s satisfaction 

that an ozone nonattainment area would have 

attained the NAAQS by the applicable attainment 

date but for emissions emanating from outside the 

United States, that area shall not be subject to the 

mandatory reclassification provision, CAA section 

181(b)(2). Note that the statute cites 42 U.S.C. 

7511(a)(2), but that provision establishes ozone 

attainment deadlines for severe areas under the 1- 

hour standard. The EPA has long interpreted the 

citation in CAA section 179B(b) to be a scrivener’s 

error that was supposed to refer to 42 U.S.C. 

7511(b)(2), which refers to consequences for failure 

to attain by the attainment date. 

7CAA section 319(b) defines an exceptional event 

as an event that (i) affects air quality; (ii) is not 

reasonably controllable or preventable; (iii) is an 

event caused by human activity that is unlikely to 

recur at a particular location or a natural event; and 

(iv) is determined by the Administrator through a 

process established in regulation to be an 

exceptional event. 

8 Includes the Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI, 

Dallas-Fort Worth, TX, Denver-Boulder-Greeley-Ft. 

Collins-Loveland, Colorado, Greater Connecticut, 

Connecticut, and Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, 

Texas areas. 

The 2015 ozone NAAQS is met at an 

EPA regulatory monitoring site when 

the DV does not exceed 0.070 parts per 

million (ppm). For areas classified as 

Marginal nonattainment for the 2015 

ozone NAAQS, the attainment date was 

August 3, 2021, except for the San 

Antonio, Texas area that had an 

attainment date of September 24, 2021.3

Because the DV is based on the three 

most recent, complete calendar years of 

data, attainment must occur no later 

than December 31 of the year prior to 

the attainment date (i.e., December 31, 

2020, in the case of Marginal 

nonattainment areas for the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS). As such, the EPA’s proposed 

determinations for each area are based 

upon the complete, quality-assured, and 

certified ozone monitoring data from 

calendar years 2018, 2019, and 2020. 

This proposed action addresses 31 of 

the 40 nonattainment areas that were 

classified as Marginal for the 2015 

ozone NAAQS as of the Marginal area 

attainment date of August 3, 2021.4 5

The remaining nine areas will be 

addressed in separate actions, as 

follows: 

(1) The Imperial County, California 

area is not included in this action. The 

EPA received the CAA section 179B(b) 

demonstration from the California Air 

Resources Board on August 16, 2021, for 

the Imperial County nonattainment 

area.6 Actions taken by the EPA on the 

demonstration may affect a 

determination of attainment by the 

attainment date for the area and at this 

time the EPA is still assessing the merits 

of the state’s submission. 

(2) The El Paso-Las Cruces, TexasNew Mexico, Marginal nonattainment 

area is not included in this proposed 

action. On November 30, 2021, the EPA 

completed its response to the D.C. 

Circuit Court’s remand of certain air 

quality designations for the 2015 Ozone 

NAAQS by expanding its initial 

designations for the Don ̃ a Ana County 

(Sunland Park Area), New Mexico 

nonattainment area. The nonattainment 

area now includes all of El Paso County, 

Texas, and has been renamed the El 

Paso-Las Cruces, Texas-New Mexico 

nonattainment area, with an attainment 

date of August 3, 2021, applying to the 

entire area. The State of New Mexico 

submitted a CAA section 179B(b) 

demonstration for the Don ̃ a Ana County 

(Sunland Park) nonattainment area on 

June 3, 2021. Texas Commission on 

Environmental Quality (TCEQ) 

submitted a CAA section 179B(b) 

demonstration for the El Paso County, 

Texas, nonattainment area on February 

28, 2022. At this time, the EPA is still 

assessing the merits of each state’s 

submission and plans to address the 

attainment status of the El Paso-Las 

Cruces, Texas-New Mexico 

nonattainment area, including 

considering each submitted CAA 

section 179B(b) demonstrations from 

both states. 

(3) The Las Vegas, Nevada 

nonattainment area is not included in 

this action. The Clark County 

Department of Environment and 

Sustainability (CCDES) has submitted a 

number of exceptional events (EE) 

demonstrations for the Las Vegas, 

Nevada area. Specifically, on July 1, 

2021, the Clark County Department of 

Environment and Sustainability 

(CCDES) submitted EE demonstrations 

for 2 days in 2018 and 6 days in 2020 

with exceedances of the standard. On 

September 2, 2021, the CCDES 

submitted additional EE demonstrations 

for 13 days in 2018 and for 7 days in 

2020. The EPA’s concurrence decision 

on this demonstration may affect 

determinations of attainment by the 

attainment date for this area.7 The EE 

initial notification, EE demonstration, 

and the EPA’s response to the initial 

notification are provided in the docket 

for this rulemaking. 

(4) The Butte County, Calaveras 

County, San Luis Obispo, Sutter Buttes, 

Tuolumne County, and Tuscan Buttes 

County nonattainment areas in 

California are not included in this 

action. On September 3, 2021, the 

California Air Resources Board (CARB) 

submitted EE demonstrations for the 

San Luis Obispo area for five days with 

exceedances of the standard in 2018, 

and on September 17, 2021, CARB 

submitted EE demonstrations for 

multiple days in 2018 with exceedances 

of the standard in the Calaveras County, 

Butte County, Tuolumne County, Sutter 

Buttes, and Tuscan Buttes areas. 

Specifically, CARB submitted 

demonstrations for eight exceedances in 

2018 for the Calaveras County area, 11 

exceedances in 2018 for the Butte 

County area, 11 exceedances in 2018 for 

the Tuolumne County area, 9 

exceedances in 2018 for the Sutter 

Buttes area, and 9 exceedances in 2018 

for the Tuscan Buttes area. In addition, 

on November 18, 2021, CARB submitted 

EE demonstrations for multiple days in 

2020 with exceedances of the standard 

in the Tuolumne County and Sutter 

Buttes areas, and on December 8, 2021, 

CARB submitted EE demonstrations for 

multiple days in 2020 with exceedances 

of the standard in the San Luis Obispo 

area. Specifically, CARB submitted 

demonstrations for three exceedances in 

2020 for the Tuolumne County area, two 

exceedances in 2020 for the Sutter 

Buttes area, and eight exceedances in 

2020 for the San Luis Obispo area. The 

EPA’s concurrence decision on these 

demonstrations may affect 

determinations of attainment by the 

attainment date for these areas. The EE 

initial notifications, EE demonstrations, 

and the EPA’s responses to the initial 

notifications are provided in the docket 

for this rulemaking. 

Table 1 provides a summary of the 

DVs and the EPA’s proposed air qualitybased determinations for the 31 

Marginal areas addressed in this action. 

Several areas included in this proposed 

rule are also addressed in a separate 

rulemaking to determine whether areas 

classified as Serious for the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS attained the standard by the 

applicable attainment date of July 20, 

2021.8


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 21845 

10 ‘‘Technical Support Document Regarding 

Ozone Monitoring Data—Determinations of 

Attainment, 1-Year Attainment Date Extensions, 

and Reclassifications for Marginal Areas under the 

2015 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards (NAAQS),’’ available in the docket for 

this rulemaking. 

TABLE 1—2015 OZONE NAAQS MARGINAL NONATTAINMENT AREA EVALUATION SUMMARY

2015 NAAQS nonattainment area 2018–2020 DV 

(ppm) 

2015 NAAQS attained 

by the marginal 

attainment date 

2020 4th highest daily 

maximum 8-hr average 

(ppm) 

Area failed to attain 

2015 NAAQS but state 

requested 1-year 

attainment date 

extension based on 

2020 4th highest 

daily maximum 8-hr 

average ≤0.070 ppm 

Allegan County, MI ............................................. 0.073 Failed to Attain .............. 0.076 ............................ No. 

Amador County, CA ........................................... 0.069 Attained ......................... Not applicable .............. Not applicable. 

Atlanta, GA ......................................................... 0.070 Attained ......................... Not applicable .............. Not applicable. 

Baltimore, MD ..................................................... 0.072 Failed to Attain .............. 0.069 ............................ No. 

Berrien County, MI ............................................. 0.072 Failed to Attain .............. 0.078 ............................ No. 

Chicago, IL-IN-WI ............................................... 0.077 Failed to Attain .............. 0.079 ............................ No. 

Cincinnati, OH-KY .............................................. 0.074 Failed to Attain .............. 0.071 ............................ No. 

Cleveland, OH .................................................... 0.074 Failed to Attain .............. 0.075 ............................ No. 

Dallas-Fort Worth, TX ......................................... 0.076 Failed to Attain .............. 0.077 ............................ No. 

Denver Metro/North Front Range, CO ............... 0.081 Failed to Attain .............. 0.087 ............................ No. 

Detroit, MI ........................................................... 0.072 Failed to Attain .............. 0.074 ............................ No. 

Door County-Revised, WI (Rural Transport 

Area (RTA)) *.

0.072 Failed to Attain .............. 0.075 ............................ No. 

Greater Connecticut, CT .................................... 0.073 Failed to Attain .............. 0.071 ............................ No. 

Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX ........................ 0.079 Failed to Attain .............. 0.075 ............................ No. 

Louisville, KY-IN ................................................. 0.072 Failed to Attain .............. 0.071 ............................ No. 

Manitowoc County, WI ....................................... 0.070 Attained ......................... Not applicable .............. Not applicable. 

Mariposa County, CA ......................................... 0.079 Failed to Attain .............. 0.091 ............................ No. 

Milwaukee, WI .................................................... 0.071 Failed to Attain .............. 0.077 ............................ No. 

Muskegon County, MI ........................................ 0.076 Failed to Attain .............. 0.080 ............................ No. 

Northern Wasatch Front, UT ** ........................... 0.077 Failed to Attain .............. 0. 080 ........................... No.

Pechanga Band of Luisen ̃o Mission Indians *** 0.078 Failed to Attain .............. 0.084 ............................ No. 

Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City, PA-NJMD-DE.0.074 Failed to Attain .............. 0.071 ............................ No. 

Phoenix-Mesa, AZ .............................................. 0.079 Failed to Attain .............. 0.087 ............................ No. 

San Antonio, TX **** ........................................... 0.072 Failed to Attain .............. 0.074 ............................ No. 

San Francisco Bay, CA ...................................... 0.069 Attained ......................... Not applicable .............. Not applicable. 

Sheboygan County, WI ...................................... 0.075 Failed to Attain .............. 0.076 ............................ No. 

Southern Wasatch Front, UT ............................. 0.069 Attained ......................... Not applicable .............. Not applicable. 

St. Louis, MO-IL ................................................. 0.071 Failed to Attain .............. 0.074 ............................ No. 

Uinta Basin, UT .................................................. 0.076 Failed to Attain .............. 0.066 ............................ Yes. 

Washington, DC-MD-VA ..................................... 0.071 Failed to Attain .............. 0.065 ............................ No.9

Yuma, AZ ............................................................ 0.068 Attained ......................... Not applicable .............. Not applicable. 

* Door County-Revised, Wisconsin, is an RTA and therefore will remain subject to Marginal area requirements if the EPA finalizes its proposed 

determination of failure to timely attain and reclassification to Moderate. For more information see Section II.C of this notice. 

** On May 28, 2021, the State of Utah submitted a CAA section 179B demonstration for the Northern Wasatch Front nonattainment area that 

EPA found does not meet the criteria for such a demonstration. For more information, see Section II.C.1.b of this notice. 

*** Concentrations listed are for the Temecula monitor (AQS ID 06–065–0016); quality assurance issues with the data from the Pechanga monitor resulted in the 2018 data year not being appropriate for comparison to the NAAQS, and an invalid 2020 DV per DV calculation requirements 

contained in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix U, section 4(b). Ozone data collected at the Temecula monitoring site was used in previous regulatory 

actions and deemed representative of ozone conditions on the Pechanga Reservation. E.g., 80 FR 18120, April 3, 2015, at 18121–18122 (final 

rule redesignating the Pechanga air quality planning area from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 ozone NAAQS). 

**** On July 13, 2020, the State of Texas submitted a CAA section 179B demonstration for the San Antonio nonattainment area that the EPA 

found does not meet the criteria for such a demonstration. For more information, see Section II.C.1.b of this notice. 

The data used to calculate both the 

2018–2020 DVs and the 2020 fourth 

highest daily maximum 8-hour averages 

are provided in the technical support 

document (TSD) which can be found in 

the docket for this rulemaking.10

The EPA proposes to find that the 

Atlanta, Georgia; Manitowoc County, 

Wisconsin; Southern Wasatch Front, 

Utah; Amador County, California; San 

Francisco Bay, California; and Yuma, 

Arizona Marginal nonattainment areas 

attained by the attainment date based on 

the 2018–2020 DVs presented in Table 

1, which do not exceed 0.070 ppm. The 

EPA is also proposing to grant a 1-year 

attainment date extension for the Uinta 

Basin, Utah, nonattainment area 

(Section II.B of this notice). Finally, the 

EPA is proposing to determine that 24 

Marginal areas with 2018–2020 DVs 

greater than 0.070 ppm did not attain by 

their attainment dates and do not 

qualify for a 1-year attainment date 

extension. If the EPA determines that a 

nonattainment area classified as 

Marginal failed to attain by the 

attainment date, CAA section 

181(b)(2)(B) requires the EPA to publish 

the identity of each such area in the 

Federal Register no later than 6 months 

following the attainment date and 

identify the reclassification level. 

Furthermore, as required under CAA 

section 181(b)(2)(A), if the EPA finalizes 

the determinations that these 24 areas 

failed to attain by their attainment dates, 

they will be reclassified to Moderate by 

operation of law. The reclassified areas 

will then be subject to the Moderate area 

requirement to attain the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable, 

but not later than August 3, 2024 

(September 24, 2024, for the San 

Antonio, Texas, area). 

Once reclassified as Moderate, the 

relevant states must submit to the EPA 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
21846 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

11See Section II.C of this notice for additional 

information regarding the Door County-Revised, 

Wisconsin, area. 

12All nonattainment areas named in this notice 

that failed to attain by the attainment date would 

be classified to the next higher classification, 

Moderate. None of the affected areas has a DV that 

would otherwise place an area in a higher 

classification (i.e., see CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) 

reference to Extreme areas). 

the SIP revisions for these areas that 

satisfy the statutory and regulatory 

requirements applicable to Moderate 

areas 11 established in CAA section 

182(b) and in the 2015 Ozone NAAQS 

SIP Requirements Rule (see 83 FR 

62998, December 6, 2018). The EPA 

proposes to establish deadlines for 

submitting SIP revisions for these 

reclassified areas, consistent with CAA 

section 182(i). As discussed in Section 

II.D. of this notice, the EPA proposes 

that the new SIP revisions associated 

with these reclassifications will be due 

to the EPA by no later than January 1, 

2023. Under the CAA and the Tribal 

Authority Rule (TAR), tribes may, but 

are not required to, submit 

implementation plans to the EPA for 

approval (see CAA section 301(d) and 

40 CFR part 49). Accordingly, for the 

Pechanga Band of Luisen ̃ o Mission 

Indians nonattainment area, the 

Pechanga Tribe would not be required 

to submit any tribal implementation 

plan (TIP) revisions applicable to 

Moderate areas established in CAA 

section 182(b) and in the 2015 Ozone 

NAAQS SIP Requirements Rule. Tribes 

that are part of multi-jurisdictional 

nonattainment areas are also not 

required to submit implementation plan 

revisions applicable to Moderate areas. 

B. What is the background for the 

proposed actions? 

On October 26, 2015, the EPA issued 

its final action to revise the NAAQS for 

ozone to establish a new 8-hour 

standard (see 80 FR 65452, October 26, 

2015). In that action, the EPA 

promulgated identical tighter primary 

and secondary ozone standards 

designed to protect public health and 

welfare that specified an 8-hour ozone 

level of 0.070 ppm. Specifically, the 

standards require that the 3-year average 

of the annual fourth highest daily 

maximum 8-hour average ozone 

concentration may not exceed 0.070 

ppm. 

Effective on August 3, 2018, the EPA 

designated 52 areas throughout the 

country as nonattainment for the 2015 

ozone NAAQS (see 83 FR 25776, June 

4, 2018). The EPA later designated the 

San Antonio, Texas, area as a 2015 

ozone NAAQS nonattainment area 

effective September 24, 2018 (see 83 FR 

35136, July 25, 2018). In a separate 

action, the EPA assigned classification 

thresholds and attainment dates based 

on the severity of an area’s ozone 

problem, determined by the area’s DV 

(see 83 FR 10376, May 8, 2018). The 

EPA established the attainment date for 

Marginal and Moderate nonattainment 

areas as 3 years and 6 years, 

respectively, from the effective date of 

the final designations. Thus, the 

attainment date for Marginal 

nonattainment areas for the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS was August 3, 2021, and the 

attainment date for Moderate areas is 

August 3, 2024 (September 24, 2021, 

and September 24, 2024, respectively, 

for the San Antonio, Texas, area). 

C. What is the statutory authority for the 

proposed actions? 

The statutory authority for the actions 

proposed in this document is provided 

by the CAA, as amended (42 U.S.C. 

7401 et seq.). Relevant portions of the 

CAA include, but are not necessarily 

limited to, sections 181(a)(5), 181(b)(2) 

and 182(i). 

CAA section 107(d) provides that 

when the EPA establishes or revises a 

NAAQS, the agency must designate 

areas of the country as nonattainment, 

attainment, or unclassifiable based on 

whether an area is not meeting (or is 

contributing to air quality in a nearby 

area that is not meeting) the NAAQS, 

meeting the NAAQS, or cannot be 

classified as meeting or not meeting the 

NAAQS, respectively. Subpart 2 of part 

D of title I of the CAA governs the 

classification, state planning, and 

emissions control requirements for any 

areas designated as nonattainment for a 

revised primary ozone NAAQS. In 

particular, CAA section 181(a)(1) 

requires each area designated as 

nonattainment for a revised ozone 

NAAQS to be classified at the same time 

as the area is designated based on the 

extent of the ozone problem in the area 

(as determined based on the area’s DV). 

Classifications for ozone nonattainment 

areas range from ‘‘Marginal’’ to 

‘‘Extreme.’’ CAA section 182 provides 

the specific attainment planning and 

additional requirements that apply to 

each ozone nonattainment area based on 

its classification. CAA section 182, as 

interpreted by the EPA’s implementing 

regulations at 40 CFR 51.1308 through 

51.1317, also establishes the timeframes 

by which air agencies must submit and 

implement SIP revisions to satisfy the 

applicable attainment planning 

elements, and the timeframes by which 

nonattainment areas must attain the 

2015 ozone NAAQS. For reclassified 

areas, CAA section 182(i) provides that 

the Administrator may adjust applicable 

deadlines other than attainment dates if 

such adjustment is necessary or 

appropriate to assure consistency among 

the required submissions. Therefore, the 

EPA is proposing in Section II.D of this 

notice to adjust the SIP revision and 

implementation deadlines for newly 

reclassified Moderate nonattainment 

areas. 

Section 181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA 

requires that within 6 months following 

the applicable attainment date, the EPA 

shall determine whether an ozone 

nonattainment area attained the ozone 

standard based on the area’s DV as of 

that date. Upon application by any state, 

the EPA may grant a 1-year extension of 

the attainment date for qualifying areas 

(Section II.B of this notice). In the event 

an area fails to attain the ozone NAAQS 

by the applicable attainment date and is 

not granted a 1-year attainment date 

extension, CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) 

requires the EPA to make the 

determination that an ozone 

nonattainment area failed to attain the 

ozone standard by the applicable 

attainment date, and requires the area to 

be reclassified by operation of law to the 

higher of: (1) The next higher 

classification for the area, or (2) the 

classification applicable to the area’s DV 

as of the determination of failure to 

attain.12 Section 181(b)(2)(B) of the CAA 

requires the EPA to publish the 

determination of failure to attain and 

accompanying reclassification in the 

Federal Register no later than 6 months 

after the attainment date, which in the 

case of the Marginal nonattainment 

areas considered in this proposal was 

February 3, 2022. 

Once an area is reclassified, each state 

that contains a reclassified area is 

required to submit certain SIP revisions 

in accordance with its more stringent 

classification. The SIP revisions are 

intended to, among other things, 

demonstrate how the area will attain the 

NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable, 

but no later than August 3, 2024, the 

Moderate area attainment date for the 

2015 ozone NAAQS (September 24, 

2024, for the San Antonio, Texas, area). 

Per CAA section 182(i), a state with a 

reclassified ozone nonattainment area 

must submit the applicable attainment 

plan requirements ‘‘according to the 

schedules prescribed in connection with 

such requirements’’ in CAA section 

182(b) for Moderate areas, but the EPA 

‘‘may adjust applicable deadlines (other 

than attainment dates) to the extent 

such adjustment is necessary or 

appropriate to assure consistency among 

the required submissions.’’ In Section 

II.D of this notice, the EPA explains its 

proposal to adjust such deadlines. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 21847 

13The EPA maintains the AQS, a database that 

contains ambient air pollution data collected by the 

EPA, state, local, and tribal air pollution control 

agencies. The AQS also contains meteorological 

data, descriptive information about each monitoring 

station (including its geographic location and its 

operator) and data quality assurance/quality control 

information. The AQS data is used to (1) assess air 

quality, (2) assist in attainment/non-attainment 

designations, (3) evaluate SIPs for non-attainment 

areas, (4) perform modeling for permit review 

analysis, and (5) prepare reports for Congress as 

mandated by the CAA. Access is through the 

website at https://www.epa.gov/aqs. 

14See 40 CFR part 50, appendix U, section 4(b). 

15Bird, Bryce, Director, UDAQ. ‘‘Request for Oneyear Extension of the 2015 Ozone National Ambient 

Air Quality Standard Attainment Date for the Uinta 

Basin Marginal Nonattainment Area.’’ March 29, 

2021. 

16The attainment year is the calendar year 

corresponding with the final ozone season for 

determining attainment; ‘‘attainment year ozone 

season’’ is defined as the ozone season immediately 

preceding a nonattainment area’s maximum 

attainment date (see 40 CFR 51.1300(g)). 

D. How does the EPA determine whether 

an area has attained the 2015 ozone 

standard? 

Under the EPA regulations at 40 CFR 

part 50, appendix U, the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS is attained at a site when the 3- 

year average of the annual fourth 

highest daily maximum 8-hour average 

ambient air quality ozone concentration 

(i.e., DV) does not exceed 0.070 ppm. 

When the DV does not exceed 0.070 

ppm at each ambient air quality 

monitoring site within the area, the area 

is deemed to be attaining the ozone 

NAAQS. The rounding convention in 

Appendix P dictates that concentrations 

shall be reported in ‘‘ppm’’ to the third 

decimal place, with additional digits to 

the right being truncated. Thus, a 

computed 3-year average ozone 

concentration of 0.071 ppm is greater 

than 0.070 ppm and would exceed the 

standard, but a DV of 0.0709 is 

truncated to 0.070 and attains the 2015 

ozone NAAQS. 

The EPA’s determination of 

attainment is based upon data that have 

been collected and quality-assured in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and 

recorded in the EPA’s Air Quality 

System (AQS) database.13 Ambient air 

quality monitoring data for the 3-year 

period preceding the attainment date 

(2018–2020 for the 2015 ozone NAAQS 

Marginal areas) must meet the data 

completeness requirements in Appendix 

U.14 The completeness requirements are 

met for the 3-year period at a monitoring 

site if daily maximum 8-hour average 

concentrations of ozone are available for 

at least 90 percent of the days within the 

ozone monitoring season, on average, 

for the 3-year period, and no single year 

has less than 75 percent data 

completeness. 

II. What is the EPA proposing and what 

is the rationale? 

The EPA is proposing this action to 

fulfill its statutory obligation under 

CAA section 181(b)(2) to determine 

whether 31 Marginal ozone 

nonattainment areas attained the 2015 

ozone NAAQS as of the attainment date 

of August 3, 2021 (September 24, 2021, 

for the San Antonio, Texas, area). The 

EPA evaluated air quality monitoring 

data submitted by the appropriate state, 

local, and tribal air agencies to 

determine the attainment status of the 

31 areas as of their applicable Marginal 

area attainment dates. This section 

describes the separate determinations 

and actions being proposed in this 

document. 

A. Determinations of Attainment by the 

Attainment Date 

The EPA is proposing to determine, in 

accordance with CAA section 

181(b)(2)(A) and the provisions of the 

2015 Ozone NAAQS SIP Requirements 

Rule (40 CFR 51.1303), that the Atlanta, 

Georgia; Manitowoc County, Wisconsin; 

Southern Wasatch Front, Utah; Amador 

County, California; San Francisco Bay, 

California; and Yuma, Arizona areas 

attained the 2015 ozone NAAQS by the 

Marginal area attainment date of August 

3, 2021, based on their 2018–2020 DV 

(Table 1). 

These proposed determinations of 

attainment by the attainment date do 

not constitute formal redesignation to 

attainment as provided for under CAA 

section 107(d)(3). Redesignations to 

attainment require, among other things, 

that the states responsible for ensuring 

attainment and maintenance of the 

NAAQS have met the applicable 

requirements under CAA section 110 

and part D, and to submit to EPA for 

approval a maintenance plan to ensure 

continued attainment of the standard for 

10 years following redesignation, as 

provided under CAA section 175A. 

The EPA requests comment on these 

proposed determinations of attainment 

by the applicable attainment date for the 

Atlanta, Georgia; Manitowoc County, 

Wisconsin; Southern Wasatch Front, 

Utah; Amador County, California; San 

Francisco Bay, California; and Yuma, 

Arizona areas. Further technical 

analysis supporting these proposed 

determinations are in the TSD for this 

proposed rule, which is available in the 

docket for this rulemaking. 

B. Extension of Marginal Area 

Attainment Date 

1. Summary of Proposed Action 

By way of letter dated March 29, 

2021, the Utah Division of Air Quality 

(UDAQ) requested an extension of the 

Uinta Basin area Marginal area 

attainment date; the letter is provided in 

the docket for this rulemaking.15 We 

propose to grant UDAQ’s request and 

extend the August 3, 2021, Marginal 

area attainment date to August 3, 2022, 

for the Uinta Basin area, based on our 

finding that the state meets the two 

criteria under CAA section 181(a)(5) as 

interpreted by the EPA in 40 CFR 

51.1307 and that no other facts or 

circumstances compel the EPA 

Administrator to consider information 

beyond the statutory criteria—i.e., (1) 

the state has complied with all 

requirements and commitments 

pertaining to the area in the applicable 

implementation plan; and (2) for a first 

attainment date extension, an area’s 

fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour 

value for the attainment year must not 

exceed the level of the standard.16

2. Proposed Action To Grant the 

Requested 1-Year Attainment Date 

Extension 

Section 181(a)(5) of the CAA provides 

the EPA the discretion (i.e., ‘‘the 

Administrator may’’) to extend an area’s 

applicable attainment date by 1 

additional year upon application by any 

state if the state meets the two criteria 

under CAA section 181(a)(5) as 

interpreted by the EPA in 40 CFR 

51.1307. 

With respect to the first criterion, the 

EPA interprets the provision as having 

been satisfied if a state can demonstrate 

that it is in compliance with its 

approved implementation plan. See 

Delaware Dept. of Nat. Resources and 

Envtl. Control v. EPA, 895 F.3d 90, 101 

(D.C. Cir. 2018) (holding that the CAA 

requires only that an applying state with 

jurisdiction over a nonattainment area 

comply with the requirements in its 

applicable SIP, not every requirement of 

the Act); see also Vigil v. Leavitt, 381 

F.3d 826, 846 (9th Cir. 2004). A state 

may meet this requirement by certifying 

its compliance, and in the absence of 

such certification, the EPA may make a 

determination as to whether the 

criterion has been met. See Delaware, 

895 F.3d at 101–102. 

With respect to the second criterion, 

the EPA has interpreted CAA section 

181(a)(5)(B)’s exceedance-based air 

quality requirement of the extension 

criteria for purposes of a concentrationbased standard like the 2015 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS (see 40 CFR 51.1307). 

For purposes of the 2015 ozone NAAQS, 

the EPA has interpreted the air quality 

criterion of CAA section 181(a)(5)(B) to 

mean that an area’s fourth highest daily 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
21848 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

17See 40 CFR 51.1307 pertaining to determining 

eligibility under CAA section 181(a)(5)(B) for the 

first and the second 1-year attainment date 

extensions for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. 

18Chapoose, Shaun, Chairman, Ute Indian Tribe 

Business Committee. ‘‘Request for One Year 

Extension of the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard Attainment Date for the Uinta 

Basin Marginal Nonattainment Area.’’ May 25, 

2021. 

19 Daly, Carl, Acting Director, Air and Radiation 

Division, U.S. EPA Region 8. ‘‘Request for One-Year 

Extension of the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard Attainment Date for the Uinta 

Basin Marginal Nonattainment Area and 

Consultation on the Draft Proposal for the National 

Determination of Attainment by the Attainment 

Date.’’ September 10, 2021. 

20See EPA Policy on Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribes, May 4, 2011, 

https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2013-08/ 

documents/cons-and-coord-with-indian-tribespolicy.pdf. 

21 ‘‘Proposed Rule: Federal Implementation Plan 

for Managing Emissions From Oil and Natural Gas 

Sources on Indian Country Lands Within the 

Uintah and Ouray Indian Reservation in Utah’’ (85 

FR 3492, January 21, 2020). 

22For the proposed FIP, the EPA estimated, using 

2014 emissions inventory data, that of the 

approximately 10,400 individual existing active 

O&NG wells in the Uinta Basin, over 7,900 wells, 

or about 76 percent, were on Indian country lands 

within the U&O Reservation. Over 6,700 individual 

O&NG (primarily well sites) were processing fluids 

from those wells. Additionally, EPA estimated that 

the majority of the O&NG sources were 

uncontrolled and over 2,100 of those sources would 

be subject to the substantive VOC emissions control 

requirements of a final and effective U&O FIP (see 

85 FR 3500–3501 and 3512). The draft final FIP is 

being analyzed using 2017 emissions inventory 

data, so the impacts of the final rule may differ from 

the numbers of sources used to analyze the 

proposed FIP. 

23As of February 9, 2022, the Uinta Basin area’s 

preliminary 2019–2021 DV was 0.078 ppm and the 

preliminary 2021 fourth highest daily maximum 8- 

hour value was 0.072 ppm, available at https://

www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data/downloaddaily-data. 

24To qualify for a second 1-year extension, an 

area’s fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour value, 

averaged over both the original attainment year and 

the first extension year, must be 0.070 ppm or less 

(40 CFR 51.1307(a)(2)). If the preliminary 2021 

ozone data are certified, then the fourth highest 

daily maximum 8-hour value, averaged over 2020 

and 2021, would be 0.069 ppm. 

25Some winters may have one or more multi-day 

episodes with conducive meteorological conditions 

maximum 8-hour value for the 

attainment year must not exceed the 

level of the standard (0.070 ppm).17

We have evaluated the information 

submitted by UDAQ and propose to 

determine that the area meets the two 

necessary statutory criteria for the 1- 

year extension under CAA section 

181(a)(5) and 40 CFR 51.1307(a)(1), and 

that no other facts or circumstances 

compel the EPA Administrator to 

consider information beyond the 

statutory criteria. UDAQ has certified 

that they have complied with all 

requirements and commitments 

pertaining to these areas in their 

approved implementation plan. 

Additionally, the fourth highest daily 

maximum 8-hour average ozone 

concentration recorded during 2020 for 

the Uinta Basin was 0.066 ppm, well 

below the level of the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS of 0.070 ppm (Table 1 of this 

notice). The EPA proposes to grant the 

requested 1-year extension of the 

August 3, 2021, Marginal area 

attainment date for the Uinta Basin area. 

If we finalize this proposal, on the 

effective date of the final action the 

attainment date for the Uinta Basin area 

would be extended to August 3, 2022. 

The area would then remain classified 

as Marginal for the 2015 ozone NAAQS 

until the EPA either made a 

determination that the area had failed to 

attain the NAAQS by the new 

attainment date, granted a second 1-year 

attainment date extension, or 

redesignated the area to attainment. The 

EPA solicits comments on our proposal 

to grant the requested 1-year attainment 

date extension for the Uinta Basin 

Marginal nonattainment area, and 

whether there are any particular 

circumstances, such as disproportionate 

environmental exposure or burdens, 

that the EPA should consider before 

granting the request. 

3. Additional Information 

In evaluating Utah’s request for a 1- 

year extension of the Marginal 

attainment date, the EPA considered 

other facts and circumstances, and we 

propose to find that these 

considerations do not weigh against our 

proposal to grant Utah’s request. 

i. Ute Tribe Support for 1-Year 

Extension 

In a letter dated May 25, 2021, the Ute 

Indian Tribe also requested an 

attainment date extension for the area.18

This letter is provided in the docket for 

this rulemaking. The EPA’s proposed 

extension is based on the request from 

UDAQ for the entire Uinta Basin area, 

but we note the tribe’s independent 

support for an attainment date 

extension. In accordance with the EPA 

Policy on Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribes, the 

EPA offered an opportunity for 

consultation to seek the Tribe’s input 

during the development of this 

notice.19 20 The Ute Indian Tribe met 

with the EPA on October 6, 2021. In this 

meeting tribal leadership reiterated their 

support for the emissions controls in 

EPA’s proposed Federal Implementation 

Plan (FIP) for Managing Emissions from 

Oil and Natural Gas Sources on Indian 

Country Lands within the Uintah and 

Ouray (U&O) Indian Reservation in Utah 

(U&O FIP) 21 as a way to make 

regulations related to oil and natural gas 

more consistent across the basin and 

urged EPA to finalize the U&O FIP. 

ii. FIP for Managing Emissions From Oil 

and Natural Gas Sources on Indian 

Country Lands Within the U&O Indian 

Reservation in Utah (U&O FIP) 

The proposed U&O FIP would require 

new, modified, and existing oil and 

natural gas (O&NG) sources on Indian 

country lands within the U&O 

Reservation to implement new control 

requirements. While the FIP is not 

designed to bring the area into 

attainment, the EPA expects these 

emission limits to reduce ozone 

precursor emissions and improve air 

quality in the area. The EPA proposed 

the U&O FIP in January 2020 and is 

working to finalize it. Most VOC 

emissions within the Basin are from 

existing O&NG activity, and most of 

those O&NG emissions are from existing 

sources on the U&O Indian Reservation 

and in the nonattainment area.22 VOC 

emissions control requirements for 

existing O&NG sources currently exist 

in areas of the Uinta Basin under Utah 

jurisdiction, but do not exist in the U&O 

Indian Reservation where most sources 

are uncontrolled. To this end, we expect 

the new control requirements in the 

final U&O FIP to make a meaningful 

improvement in air quality and address 

winter ozone exceedances on the 

reservation, and in the nonattainment 

area and larger Uinta Basin region. 

iii. Air Quality Trends 

As shown in Table 1 of this notice, 

the Uinta Basin area did not attain the 

2015 ozone NAAQS by the Marginal 

area attainment date of August 3, 2021, 

based on its final 2018–2020 DV of 

0.076 ppm. The Uinta Basin area meets 

the specific air quality criteria for an 

initial 1-year extension under 40 CFR 

51.1307(a)(1) with an attainment year 

(2020) fourth highest daily maximum 8- 

hour average concentration of 0.066 

ppm. Preliminary 2021 ozone 

monitoring data indicate that the area 

may not attain the 2015 ozone NAAQS 

by the extended August 3, 2022, 

attainment date; 23 however, it appears 

that the area could meet the air quality 

criteria for a second 1-year extension.24

The Uinta Basin nonattainment area 

has a wintertime ozone problem, which 

means that violating ozone 

concentrations are driven by local ozone 

precursor emissions from existing 

O&NG sources and are dependent on 

stagnant winter conditions associated 

with snow cover and strong temperature 

inversions. These winter meteorological 

conditions occur periodically,25 as 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 21849 

while in other years these conditions may not occur 

at all. 

26We use the fourth highest daily maximum 

average ozone 8-hour concentrations here for 

illustration, but these values, by definition, are not 

the highest values recorded for a monitoring site. 

Values presented are for AQS Site Number 

490472003; see Table 5 of ‘‘o3_designvalues_2017_

2019_final_05_26_20.xlsx’’ available at https://

www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-design-values. 

27Message from the EPA Administrator, Our 

Commitment to Environmental Justice (issued April 

7, 2021) at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/ 

files/2021-04/documents/reganmessageoncommitmenttoenvironmentaljusticeapril072021.pdf. 

28See E.O. 13985 (‘‘Executive Order on 

Advancing Racial Equity and Support for 

Underserved Communities Through the Federal 

Government,’’ issued January 20, 2021, available at 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/ 

presidential-actions/2021/01/20/executive-orderadvancing-racial-equity-and-support-forunderserved-communities-through-the-federalgovernment/ and 86 FR 7009 (January 25, 2021)) 

and E.O. 12898 (‘‘Federal Actions To Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations,’’ issued February 11, 

1994, available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/ 

production/files/2015-02/documents/exec_order_

12898.pdf and 59 FR 7629 (February 16, 1994)). 29The EPA has defined environmental justice as 

‘‘the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of 

all people regardless of race, color, national origin, 

or income with respect to the development, 

implementation and enforcement of environmental 

laws, regulations and policies.’’ See https://

www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/learn-aboutenvironmental-justice. 30The EJ SCREEN tool is available at https://

www.epa.gov/ejscreen. 31See https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/ 

geography/about/glossary.html. 32The ozone metric in EJSCREEN represents the 

summer seasonal average of daily maximum 8-hour 

concentrations (parts per billion, ppb) and was not 

used in our EJ analyses because this metric is not 

informative of peak ozone concentrations for this 

area, which are instead represented here by the 

design value metric. Ozone design values are the 

basis of attainment determinations in this proposed 

action, and we consider it a more informative 

indicator of pollution burden from ozone in the 

Uinta Basin area. 

33AQS Site IDs: 49–013–0002, 49–013–7011, 49– 

047–2002, 49–047–2003, 49–047–7022. 

34EJSCREEN examines multiple environmental 

indicators including, e.g., particulate matter, traffic 

proximity and volume, lead paint in housing, and 

proximity scores for Superfund, RMP and 

hazardous waste facilities. 

evidenced by elevated fourth highest 

daily maximum average ozone 8-hour 

concentrations of 0.103 ppm (2017) and 

0.098 ppm (2019), which were 

measured in Indian country near Ouray, 

Utah.26 The Uinta Basin area could 

potentially attain the 2015 ozone 

standard by a second extended 

attainment date (August 3, 2023) if the 

fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour 

average concentrations for 2021 and 

2022 remain consistent with the final 

value for 2020 (0.066 ppm), e.g., 0.072 

ppm (2021 preliminary) and 0.072 ppm 

(2022 hypothetical) that, when averaged 

with the 2020 value, would result in an 

attaining 2020–2022 DV of 0.070 ppm. 

iv. Environmental Justice 

Where the statute has provided the 

Administrator a discretionary authority 

in the attainment date extension 

provisions, we think it is reasonable to 

consider the existing environmental 

burden in the area in question, and what 

impact our action may have on that 

burden. Consideration of the existing 

pollution burden already borne by the 

population that will be impacted by our 

action is a relevant factor of reasoned 

decisionmaking. The EPA therefore 

performed screening analyses to better 

understand the pollution burdens borne 

by the population that will be affected 

by the requested extension in order to 

fully understand the potential public 

health ramifications of the extension. 

That analysis did not indicate 

disproportionate pollution exposure or 

burdens for populations in the Uinta 

Basin area compared to the wider U.S. 

population. 

The EPA’s inquiry is also consistent 

with multiple executive orders 

addressing environmental justice as 

well as an April 7, 2021, directive by the 

EPA Administrator.27 28 In that 

directive, the Administrator instructed 

all EPA offices to take immediate and 

affirmative steps to incorporate EJ 

considerations into their work, 

including assessing impacts to 

pollution-burdened, underserved, and 

Tribal communities in regulatory 

development processes and considering 

regulatory options to maximize benefits 

to these communities.29

Screening Analyses 

To conduct the screening analyses, we 

used EJSCREEN, an EJ mapping and 

screening tool that provides EPA with a 

nationally consistent dataset and 

approach for combining various 

environmental and demographic 

indicators.30 The EJSCREEN tool 

presents these indicators at a Census 

block group (CBG) level or a larger userspecified ‘‘buffer’’ area that covers 

multiple CBGs.31 An individual CBG is 

a cluster of contiguous blocks within the 

same census tract and generally 

contains between 600 and 3,000 people. 

EJSCREEN is not a tool for performing 

in-depth risk analysis, but is instead a 

screening tool that provides an initial 

representation of indicators related to 

EJ. We also examined ozone design 

value data for the Uinta Basin area.32

With respect to the Uinta Basin, the 

EPA conducted an EJSCREEN analysis 

for the two counties (Duchesne and 

Uintah) that encompass the entire Uinta 

Basin nonattainment area, as well as 

analyses of five-kilometer buffers 

around the five monitors inside the 

nonattainment area that showed a fourth 

highest daily maximum value that 

exceeded the ozone NAAQS between 

2018 and 2020.33 The results of our 

screening analysis did not indicate 

disproportionate exposure or burdens 

with respect to the non-ozone 

environmental indicators assessed in 

EJSCREEN,34 either between the 

monitor site buffer areas and the 2- 

county (Duchesne and Uintah) area, or 

relative to the U.S. as a whole. (The full 

results of our analyses are provided in 

the docket for this rulemaking.) 

The EPA considered the information 

described above in evaluating Utah’s 

request for a 1-year extension of the 

Marginal attainment date, and we 

propose to find that this information 

does not weigh against our proposal to 

grant Utah’s request. Again, we seek 

comment on our proposal to grant the 

attainment date extension request for 

the Uinta Basin, Utah, 2015 ozone 

NAAQS nonattainment area. 

C. Determinations of Failure to Attain 

and Reclassification 

The EPA is proposing to determine 

that 24 Marginal nonattainment areas 

failed to attain the 2015 ozone NAAQS 

by the attainment date of August 3, 2021 

(September 24, 2021, for the San 

Antonio area). The 24 areas are: Allegan 

County, Michigan; Baltimore, Maryland; 

Berrien County, Michigan; Chicago, ILIN-WI; Cincinnati, OH-KY; Cleveland, 

Ohio; Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas; Denver 

Metro/North Front Range, Colorado; 

Detroit, Michigan; Door County-Revised, 

Wisconsin; Greater Connecticut, 

Connecticut; Houston-GalvestonBrazoria, Texas; Louisville, KY-IN; 

Mariposa, California; Milwaukee, 

Wisconsin; Muskegon County, 

Michigan; North Wasatch Front, Utah; 

Pechanga Band of Luisen ̃o Mission 

Indians; Philadelphia-WilmingtonAtlantic City, PA-NJ-MD-DE; PhoenixMesa, Arizona; San Antonio, Texas; 

Sheboygan County, Wisconsin; St. 

Louis, Missouri; and Washington DCMD-VA. These areas are not eligible for 

a 1-year attainment date extension and 

because they do not meet the extension 

criteria under CAA section 181(a)(5) as 

interpreted by the EPA in 40 CFR 

51.1307. The areas’ ozone DVs for 2018– 

2020 are shown in Table 1. 

We note that the State of Texas and 

the State of Utah submitted CAA section 

179B demonstrations for the San 

Antonio and Northern Wasatch Front 

areas, respectively. In this action, the 

EPA is proposing to disapprove these 

CAA section 179B demonstrations and 

to determine that these areas failed to 

attain. The basis for the proposed 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
21850 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

35The EPA’s Clean Data Policy, as codified for the 

2015 ozone NAAQS at 40 CFR 51.1318, suspends 

the requirements for states to submit certain 

attainment planning SIPs such as the attainment 

demonstrations, including RACM, RFP, and 

contingency measures for so long as an area 

continues to attain the standard. 

36Section 182(h) of the CAA allows the EPA to 

determine that a designated nonattainment area can 

be treated as an RTA if: the area does not contain 

emission sources that make significant contribution 

to monitored ozone concentration in the area or 

other areas; and the area does not include and is 

not adjacent to a Metropolitan Statistical Area. The 

General Preamble further states that ‘‘Any RTA that 

fails to meet the Marginal area attainment deadlines 

is subject to bump-up to the appropriate higher 

nonattainment status. However, if the area still 

qualifies as an RTA, although the area will be 

subject to the attainment date for the higher 

classification, it remains subject only to the 

submittal and implementation requirements for 

Marginal areas. If it is found that the area no longer 

qualifies as an RTA, the area will be treated as the 

higher classified area for SIP requirements as well.’’ 

(57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992). 

37 In a separate rulemaking, the EPA is proposing 

to redesignate the Door County-Revised, WI 

Marginal nonattainment area to attainment for the 

2015 ozone NAAQS based upon complete, qualityassured, and certified ozone monitoring data from 

calendar years 2019, 2020, and 2021 (87 FR 12020, 

March 3, 2022). If this area is fully redesignated 

prior to EPA finalizing this proposal, EPA would 

not finalize its proposed action for the area. 

38All references to CAA section 179B are to 42 

U.S.C. 7509a. International border areas, as added 

Public Law 101–549, title VIII, § 818, 104 Stat. 2697 

(November 15, 1990). See the docket for this 

rulemaking for the full statutory text. 

disapprovals is explained in more detail 

in Section II.C.1 of this notice. 

If we finalize our action as proposed, 

each of these areas will be reclassified 

as Moderate nonattainment for the 2015 

ozone NAAQS, the next higher 

classification, as provided under CAA 

section 181(b)(2)(A)(i) and codified at 40 

CFR 51.1303. These areas would then be 

required to attain the standard ‘‘as 

expeditiously as practicable’’ but no 

later than 6 years after the initial 

designation as nonattainment, which in 

this case would be no later than August 

3, 2024 (September 24, 2024, for the San 

Antonio, Texas, area). If an area attains 

the 2015 ozone NAAQS, the relevant 

state may seek a Clean Data 

Determination, under which certain 

attainment planning requirements for 

the area would be suspended under 40 

CFR 51.1318. If an area meets all the 

other applicable statutory criteria, the 

state with an attaining nonattainment 

area could also seek a redesignation to 

attainment.35

On July 14, 2021, the EPA finalized 

the Revised Air Quality Designations for 

the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards action which 

expanded the boundaries of the Door 

County, Wisconsin, nonattainment area 

(see 86 FR 31438, 31444, July 14, 2021). 

We recognize that the original Door 

County area (comprising only Newport 

State Park) was redesignated to 

attainment in 2020 (see 85 FR 35377, 

June 10, 2020), prior to the EPA revising 

the boundaries of the nonattainment 

area to respond to the court’s remand in 

Clean Wisconsin v. EPA, 964 F.3d 1145 

(D.C. Cir. 2020). Given the different 

implementation deadlines for the 

different portions of Door County, the 

EPA has labeled the original area as 

‘‘Door County, WI’’ and the expanded 

area as ‘‘Door County-Revised, WI’’ in 

the amended 40 CFR part 81 tables for 

the revised designations. In this current 

action, the EPA is proposing to 

reclassify the Door County-Revised, 

Wisconsin, area from Marginal to 

Moderate for the 2015 ozone NAAQS; 

the EPA is not proposing any action 

related to the Door County, Wisconsin, 

area because it is no longer subject to 

the attainment determination 

requirements of CAA section 181(b)(2) 

due to the fact that it has been 

redesignated to attainment (i.e., it is a 

maintenance area for the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS). However, because the Door 

County-Revised, Wisconsin, area is also 

a Rural Transport Area (RTA) under 

CAA section 182(h), and the EPA does 

not have information indicating that the 

bases for treating the Door CountyRevised, Wisconsin, area as an RTA 

under CAA section 182(h) have 

changed, Wisconsin would not be 

required to submit Moderate area SIP 

revisions for the area, if this proposal is 

finalized.36,37

The EPA requests comment on our 

proposal to determine that these 24 

nonattainment areas did not attain the 

2015 ozone NAAQS by the Marginal 

area attainment date. 

1. International Transport and 

Requirements for CAA Section 179B 

CAA section 179B(b) provides that 

where a state demonstrates to the 

Administrator’s satisfaction that an 

ozone nonattainment area would have 

attained the NAAQS by the applicable 

attainment date but for emissions 

emanating from outside the United 

States, that area shall not be subject to 

the mandatory reclassification 

provision, CAA section 181(b)(2). The 

State of Texas submitted a CAA section 

179B demonstration for the San Antonio 

nonattainment area on July 13, 2020. 

Additionally, the State of Utah 

submitted a CAA section 179B 

demonstration for the Northern Wasatch 

Front nonattainment area on May 28, 

2021. As described in this subsection, 

the EPA is proposing to disapprove the 

demonstrations for San Antonio and 

Northern Wasatch Front, resulting in the 

proposed determinations that both areas 

failed to timely attain the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS discussed previously in this 

section. 

a. Background for the Proposed Actions 

Anthropogenic emission sources 

outside of the U.S. can affect to varying 

degrees the ability of some air agencies 

to attain and maintain the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS in areas within their 

jurisdiction. In a nonattainment area 

affected by international emissions, an 

air agency may elect under CAA section 

179B 38 to develop and submit to the 

EPA a demonstration intended to show 

that a nonattainment area would attain, 

or would have attained, the relevant 

NAAQS by the applicable statutory 

attainment date ‘‘but for’’ emissions 

emanating from outside the U.S. Under 

CAA section 179B, the EPA evaluates 

such demonstrations, and if it agrees 

with the air agency’s demonstration, the 

EPA considers the impacts of 

international emissions in taking 

specific regulatory actions. 

CAA section 179B provides the EPA 

with authority to consider impacts from 

international emissions in two contexts: 

(1) A ‘‘prospective’’ state demonstration 

submitted as part of an attainment plan, 

which the EPA considers when 

determining whether the SIP adequately 

demonstrates that a nonattainment area 

will attain the NAAQS by its future 

attainment date (see CAA section 

179B(a)); or (2) a ‘‘retrospective’’ state 

demonstration, which the EPA 

considers after the attainment date in 

determining whether a nonattainment 

area attained the NAAQS by the 

attainment date (see CAA section 

179B(b)–(d)). 

First, CAA section 179B(a) provides 

that, ‘‘[N]otwithstanding any other 

provision of law, an implementation 

plan or plan revision required under 

this chapter shall be approved by the 

Administrator if (1) such plan or 

revision meets all the requirements 

applicable to it . . . other than a 

requirement that such plan or revision 

demonstrate attainment and 

maintenance of the relevant national 

ambient air quality standards by the 

attainment date specified under the 

applicable provision of this chapter, or 

in a regulation promulgated under such 

provision, and (2) the submitting state 

establishes to the satisfaction of the 

Administrator that the implementation 

plan of such state would be adequate to 

attain and maintain the relevant 

national ambient air quality standards 

by the attainment date . . . but for 

emissions emanating from outside of the 

United States,’’ (emphasis added). The 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 21851 

39Section 182(a) of the CAA, which describes 

nonattainment area requirements for ozone 

Marginal areas, states that the requirements of 

section 182(a) ‘‘shall apply in lieu of any 

requirement that the State submit a demonstration 

that the applicable implementation plan provides 

for attainment of the ozone standard by the 

applicable attainment date in any Marginal Area.’’ 

In other words, there is no prospective relief that 

can be granted by the EPA under section 179B(a) 

for ozone nonattainment areas classified as 

Marginal. 

40The EPA’s longstanding view is that CAA 

section 179B(b) contains an erroneous reference to 

section 181(a)(2), and that Congress actually 

intended to refer here to section 181(b)(2), which 

addresses reclassification requirements for ozone 

nonattainment areas. See ‘‘State Implementation 

Plans; General Preamble for the Implementation of 

Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990,’’ 

57 FR 13498, 13569 n.41 (April 16, 1992). 

41 ‘‘Guidance on the Preparation of Clean Air Act 

Section 179B Demonstrations for Nonattainment 

Areas Affected by International Transport of 

Emissions’’ issued on December 18, 2020; available 

at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2020-12/ 

documents/final_caa_179b_guidance_december_

2020_with_disclaimer_ogc.pdf. The EPA also issued 

a notice of availability in the Federal Register on 

January 7, 2021 (86 FR 1107). 

42The regulatory relief a state would receive from 

a satisfactory prospective CAA section 179B(a) 

demonstration is limited to approval of an 

attainment plan that does not demonstrate 

attainment and maintenance of the relevant 

NAAQS, but meets all other applicable 

requirements. CAA section 179B(a) is not germane 

to this proposal. 

EPA refers to CAA section 179B(a) 

demonstrations as ‘‘prospective’’ 

demonstrations because they are 

intended to assess future air quality, 

taking into consideration the impact of 

international emissions. Thus, if EPA 

approves a prospective demonstration, 

the state is relieved from the 

requirement to submit to the EPA a 

demonstration showing that the 

nonattainment area will attain the 

NAAQS by the attainment date.39

Second, CAA section 179B(b) 

provides that, for ozone nonattainment 

areas, ‘‘[n]otwithstanding any other 

provision of law, any State that 

establishes to the satisfaction of the 

Administrator that . . . such State 

would have attained the national 

ambient air quality standard . . . by the 

applicable attainment date but for 

emissions emanating from outside of the 

United States,’’ (emphasis added) shall 

not be subject to reclassification to a 

higher classification category by 

operation of law, as otherwise required 

in CAA section 181(b)(2).40 The EPA 

refers to demonstrations developed 

under CAA section 179B(b) as 

‘‘retrospective’’ demonstrations because 

they involve analyses of past air quality 

(e.g., air quality data from the years to 

be evaluated for determining whether an 

area attained by the attainment date). 

Thus, an EPA-approved retrospective 

demonstration provides relief from 

reclassification that would have resulted 

from the EPA determining that the area 

failed to attain the NAAQS by the 

relevant attainment date. 

Irrespective of developing and 

submitting a prospective or 

retrospective demonstration, states still 

have to meet all nonattainment area 

requirements applicable for the relevant 

NAAQS and area classification. The 

2015 ozone NAAQS SIP Requirements 

Rule did not include regulatory 

requirements specific to CAA section 

179B but did provide guidance on 

certain points. In the rule, the EPA 

confirmed that: (1) Only areas classified 

Moderate and higher must show that 

they have implemented reasonably 

available control measures and 

reasonably available control technology 

(RACM/RACT); (2) CAA section 179B 

demonstrations are not geographically 

limited to nonattainment areas 

adjoining an international border; and, 

(3) a state demonstration prepared 

under CAA section 179B can consider 

emissions emanating from sources in 

North America (i.e., Canada or Mexico) 

or sources on other continents (see 86 

FR 62998, 63009, December 6, 2018). In 

that rule, the EPA encouraged air 

agencies to consult with the appropriate 

EPA regional office to determine 

technical requirements for the CAA 

section 179B demonstrations. In 

addition, the EPA noted its 

development of supplementary 

technical information and guidance to 

assist air agencies in preparing 

demonstrations that meet the 

requirements of CAA section 179B. 

The EPA issued more detailed 

guidance regarding CAA section 179B 

on December 18, 2020, that includes 

recommendations to assist state, local, 

and tribal air agencies that intend to 

develop a CAA section 179B 

demonstration.41 The guidance 

describes and provides examples of the 

kinds of information and analyses that 

the EPA recommends air agencies 

consider for inclusion in a CAA section 

179B demonstration. 

In the guidance, the EPA confirmed 

that while approval of a CAA section 

179B demonstration provides specific 

forms of regulatory relief for air 

agencies, the EPA’s approval does not 

relieve air agencies from obligations to 

meet the remaining applicable planning 

or emission reduction requirements in 

the CAA. It also does not provide a basis 

either for excluding air monitoring data 

influenced by international transport 

from regulatory determinations related 

to attainment and nonattainment, or for 

redesignating an area to attainment. If 

an air agency is contemplating a CAA 

section 179B demonstration in either 

the CAA section 179B(a) ‘‘prospective’’ 

context or the CAA section 179B(b) 

‘‘retrospective’’ context, the EPA 

encourages communication throughout 

the demonstration development and 

submission process, along the lines of 

these basic steps: (1) The air agency 

contacts its EPA Regional office to 

discuss CAA section 179B regulatory 

interests and conceptual model; (2) the 

air agency begins gathering information 

and developing analyses for a 

demonstration; (3) the air agency 

submits a draft CAA section 179B 

demonstration to its EPA Regional office 

for review and discussion; and (4) the 

air agency submits its final CAA section 

179B demonstration to the EPA. After 

that process is complete, the EPA makes 

a determination as to the sufficiency of 

the demonstration after a public notice 

and comment process. EPA may act on 

a prospective demonstration when 

taking action on an area’s attainment 

plan. For a retrospective demonstration, 

EPA may determine its adequacy when 

taking action to determine whether the 

area attained by the attainment date and 

is subject to reclassification. 

The EPA’s consideration of the CAA 

section 179B demonstrations submitted 

by states in connection with 

reclassification of ozone nonattainment 

areas, as is relevant to this action, is 

governed by CAA section 179B(b).42

Pursuant to that provision, the state 

must establish ‘‘to the satisfaction of the 

Administrator that, with respect to [the 

relevant] ozone nonattainment area in 

such State, such State would have 

attained the [2015 ozone NAAQS] by 

the applicable attainment date, but for 

emissions emanating from outside of the 

United States . . .’’ Because the 

wording in CAA section 179B(b) is in 

the past tense, it is reasonable for EPA 

to conclude that such demonstrations 

should be retrospective in nature. In 

other words, the demonstration should 

include analyses showing that the air 

quality data on specific days in the time 

period used to assess attainment were 

affected by international emissions to an 

extent that prevented the area from 

attaining the standard by the attainment 

date. By definition, states can only make 

such a demonstration after air quality 

data collected pursuant to Federal 

reference or equivalent monitoring 

methods are certified and indicate that 

the area failed to attain by the 

attainment date. Where the EPA 

approves a state’s CAA section 179B(b) 

retrospective demonstration, the area 

retains its nonattainment designation 

and is still subject to all applicable 

requirements for the area’s current 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
21852 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

classification, but is not subject to the 

applicable requirements for any higher 

classification. 

The CAA does not specify what 

technical analyses would be sufficient 

to demonstrate ‘‘to the satisfaction of the 

Administrator’’ that a ‘‘State would have 

attained the [NAAQS for the pollutant 

in question] by the applicable 

attainment date, but for’’ international 

emissions. The EPA recognizes that the 

relationship between certain NAAQS 

exceedances and associated 

international transport is clearer in 

some cases than in others. The 

following characteristics would suggest 

the need for a more detailed 

demonstration with additional 

evidence: (1) Affected monitors are not 

located near an international border; (2) 

specific international sources and/or 

their contributing emissions are not 

identified or are difficult to identify; (3) 

exceedances on internationally 

influenced days are in the range of 

typical exceedances attributable to local 

sources; and, (4) exceedances occurred 

in association with other processes and 

sources of pollutants, or on days where 

meteorological conditions were 

conducive to local pollutant formation 

(e.g., for ozone, clear skies and elevated 

temperatures). Therefore, CAA section 

179B demonstrations for non-border 

areas may involve additional technical 

rigor, analyses and resources compared 

to demonstrations for border areas. 

Given the extensive number of 

technical factors and meteorological 

conditions that can affect international 

transport of air pollution, and the lack 

of specific guidance in the Act, the EPA 

has decided to evaluate CAA section 

179B demonstrations based on the 

weight of evidence of all information 

and analyses provided by the air agency. 

The appropriate level of supporting 

documentation will vary on a case-bycase basis depending on the nature and 

severity of international influence, as 

well as the factors identified above. The 

EPA considers and qualitatively weighs 

all evidence based on its relevance to 

CAA section 179B and the nature of 

international contributions as described 

in the demonstration’s conceptual 

model. Every demonstration should 

include fact-specific analyses tailored to 

the nonattainment area in question. 

When a CAA section 179B 

demonstration shows that international 

contributions are larger than domestic 

contributions, the weight of evidence 

will be more compelling than if the 

demonstration shows domestic 

contributions exceeding international 

contributions. In contrast, when a CAA 

section 179B demonstration shows that 

international emissions have a lower 

contribution to ozone concentrations 

than domestic emissions, and/or 

international transport is not 

significantly different on local 

exceedance days compared to nonexceedance days, then the weight of 

evidence will not be supportive of a 

conclusion that a nonattainment area 

would attain or would have attained the 

relevant NAAQS by the statutory 

attainment date ‘‘but for’’ emissions 

emanating from outside the U.S. 

The EPA also considers in evaluating 

a CAA section 179B demonstration what 

measures an air agency has 

implemented to control local emissions. 

At a minimum, states are still subject to 

all applicable requirements based on the 

requirements of that area’s 

classification. For EPA to concur with a 

state’s CAA section 179B retrospective 

demonstration, the weight of evidence 

should show the area could not attain 

with on-the-books measures and 

potential reductions associated with 

required controls for that particular 

NAAQS and classification that are to be 

implemented by the attainment date. 

Because CAA section 179B does not 

relieve an air agency of its planning or 

control obligations, the air agency 

should show that it has implemented all 

required emissions controls at the local 

level as part of its demonstration. 

b. Summary of the 2015 Ozone NAAQS 

CAA Section 179B Demonstrations 

Submitted to the EPA and Proposed 

Actions 

As part of meeting its duty to 

determine whether the San Antonio and 

Northern Wasatch Front areas attained 

the 2015 ozone NAAQS by the Marginal 

attainment date, the EPA has evaluated 

the CAA section 179B demonstrations 

submitted by Texas and Utah for these 

areas. The states submitted the CAA 

section 179B demonstrations to support 

claims that the San Antonio and 

Northern Wasatch Front nonattainment 

areas would have attained the 2015 

ozone NAAQS by the applicable 

attainment date, but for emissions 

emanating from outside of the United 

States. If the EPA were to approve these 

demonstrations, then the EPA would 

not reclassify these areas from Marginal 

to Moderate. 

After a thorough review, the EPA is 

proposing to disapprove the CAA 

section 179B demonstrations for both 

areas. The San Antonio, Texas, 

nonattainment area is a non-border area 

for which the submitted technical 

analysis and weight of evidence of 

multiple factors (for example, whether 

international contributions are large in 

comparison to domestic contributions) 

does not establish that the area would 

have attained but for international 

transport impacts. Similarly, the 

submitted demonstration for the 

Northern Wasatch Front, Utah, 

nonattainment area—a non-border 

area—does not establish that the area 

would have attained but for 

international transport impacts. The full 

rationale supporting each proposed 

disapproval is included in the related 

technical support documents provided 

in the docket for this rulemaking. 

The EPA solicits comment on each of 

these proposed CAA section 179B 

demonstration disapprovals. Once 

again, the EPA also requests comment 

on its proposal to determine that the 

San Antonio and Northern Wasatch 

Front areas—as well as the other 22 

nonattainment areas referenced in 

Section II.C. of this notice—did not 

attain the 2015 ozone NAAQS by the 

Marginal area attainment date. 

D. Moderate Area SIP Revisions 

Marginal nonattainment areas that the 

EPA has determined failed to attain the 

2015 ozone NAAQS by the attainment 

date will be reclassified as Moderate by 

operation of law upon the effective date 

of the final reclassification rule. Each 

responsible state air agency must submit 

SIP revisions that satisfy the general air 

quality planning requirements under 

CAA section 172(c) and the ozone 

specific requirements for Moderate 

nonattainment areas under CAA section 

182(b), as interpreted and described in 

EPA’s implementing regulations for the 

2015 ozone NAAQS (see 40 CFR 

51.1300 et seq.). This section describes 

the required Moderate area submission 

elements, provides additional 

discussion of the vehicle inspection and 

maintenance program requirement, and 

proposes submission and 

implementation deadlines for Moderate 

area SIP revisions required by 

reclassification. 

As discussed in Section II.C. of this 

notice, Wisconsin would not be 

required to submit Moderate area SIP 

revisions for the Door County-Revised, 

Wisconsin area if this proposal is 

finalized. As noted previously, for the 

Pechanga Band of Luisen ̃ o Mission 

Indians nonattainment area, the 

Pechanga Tribe would not be required 

to submit a Moderate area TIP revision. 

Tribes that are part of multijurisdictional nonattainment areas 

would also not be required to submit 

implementation plan revisions 

applicable to Moderate areas. 

1. Required Submission Elements 

SIP requirements that apply to 

Moderate areas are cumulative of CAA 

requirements for the Marginal 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 21853 

43See Memo from John Seitz, ‘‘Reasonable 

Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and 

Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment 

Areas Meeting the Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard’’ (1995), at 5 (explaining that 

Subpart 2 requirements linked to the attainment 

demonstration are suspended by a finding that a 

nonattainment area is attaining but that 

requirements such as RACT and I/M must be met 

whether or not an area has attained the standard); 

see also 40 CFR 51.1318 (suspending attainment 

demonstrations, RACM, RFP, contingency 

measures, and other attainment planning SIPs with 

a finding of attainment). 

44Though not directly a part of a nonattainment 

area RACM analysis, the EPA has interpreted CAA 

section 172(c)(6) to require that air agencies also 

consider the impacts of emissions from sources 

outside an ozone nonattainment area (but within a 

state’s boundaries) and must require other control 

measures on these intrastate sources if doing so is 

necessary to provide for attainment of the 

applicable ozone NAAQS within the area by the 

applicable attainment date. For discussion of this 

‘‘other control measures’’ provision see also the 

final rule to implement the 2015 ozone NAAQS (83 

FR 63015, December 6, 2018), the Phase 2 proposed 

rulemaking (68 FR 32829, June 2, 2003) and final 

rule to implement the 8-hour ozone NAAQS (70 FR 

71623, November 29, 2005), and the final rule to 

implement the PM2.5 NAAQS (81 FR 58035, August 

24, 2016). 

45See EPA’s I/M website for a fact sheet and link 

to the I/M regulations at https://www.epa.gov/stateand-local-transportation/vehicle-emissionsinspection-and-maintenance-im-regulations. 

46The EPA is not proposing changes to its I/M 

regulations in this notice; however, additional 

clarification in this preamble is provided to assist 

states with nonattainment areas subject to Basic I/ 

M in understanding specific I/M program 

requirements due to being reclassified as Moderate. 

47 40 CFR 51.372(a)(2). An I/M performance 

standard is a collection of program design elements 

which defines a benchmark program to which a 

state’s proposed program is compared in terms of 

its potential to reduce emissions of the ozone 

precursors, VOC, and NOX. 

48See Implementation of the 2015 National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone: 

Nonattainment Area Classifications and State 

Implementation Plan Requirements, 83 FR 63001– 

63002. Performance standard modeling is also 

required for Enhanced I/M programs for the 2015 

ozone NAAQS in Serious and above ozone 

nonattainment areas for that NAAQS. 

classification and include additional 

Moderate area requirements as 

interpreted and described in the final 

SIP Requirements Rule for the 2015 

ozone NAAQS (see CAA sections 

172(c)(1) and 182(a) and (b), and 40 CFR 

51.1300 et seq.). We are providing 

additional discussion in the following 

sections for these Moderate area 

requirements: (a) RACM and RACT and 

(b) Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance. 

a. RACM and RACT 

States with jurisdiction over all or a 

portion of an ozone nonattainment area 

classified as Moderate or higher must 

provide an analysis of—and adopt all— 

RACM, including RACT, needed for 

purposes of meeting RFP and 

expeditiously attaining the ozone 

NAAQS in that area. The EPA interprets 

the RACM provision at CAA section 

172(c) to require a demonstration that 

the state has adopted all technologically 

and economically feasible measures 

(including RACT) to meet RFP 

requirements and to demonstrate 

attainment as expeditiously as 

practicable, and thus that no additional 

measures that are reasonably available 

will advance the attainment date or 

contribute to RFP for the area (see 80 FR 

12264, 12282, March 6, 2015; and 40 

CFR 51.1312(c)). For areas reclassified 

as Moderate, such an analysis should 

include an evaluation of currently 

available RACT for sources that emit, or 

have the potential to emit, 100 tons per 

year or more of VOC or NOX, as well as 

an evaluation of RACT for all sources 

subject to a Control Techniques 

Guideline (see CAA sections 

182(b)(2)(A–C) and 182(f)). 

The EPA has long taken the position 

that the statutory requirement for states 

to assess and adopt RACT for sources in 

ozone nonattainment areas classified 

Moderate and higher generally exists 

independently from the attainment 

planning requirements for such areas.43

In addition to the independent RACT 

requirement, states have a statutory 

obligation to apply RACM and adopt 

such measures needed to meet RFP 

requirements and to demonstrate 

attainment as expeditiously as 

practicable when also considering 

emissions reductions associated with 

the implementation of RACT on sources 

in the area.44 Therefore, to the extent 

that a state adopts new or additional 

control measures as RACT to meet RFP 

requirements or to demonstrate 

attainment as expeditiously as 

practicable, those states must include 

such RACT revisions with the other SIP 

elements due as part of the attainment 

plan required under CAA sections 

172(c) and 182(b). 

b. Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance 

(I/M) 

Background on I/M. Motor vehicles 

are a major contributor of ozone 

precursor (VOC and NOX) emissions. I/ 

M programs reduce these emissions by 

ensuring on-road motor vehicles are 

maintained to meet vehicle emission 

standards as certified, identify excessive 

emissions, and assure vehicle repairs.45

As mentioned in the preceding 

section, a Basic I/M program is a 

required Moderate area SIP submission 

element for the 2015 ozone NAAQS. 

The applicable Basic I/M requirements 

for Moderate ozone nonattainment areas 

are described in CAA sections 

182(a)(2)(B) and 182(b)(4) and further 

defined in the EPA’s I/M regulations (40 

CFR part 51, subpart S).46 Only 

Moderate ozone nonattainment areas in 

areas with a 1990 Census-defined 

population of 200,000 or more 

(urbanized areas) are required to 

implement Basic I/M programs (see 40 

CFR 51.350(a)(4)). 

Areas subject to Basic I/M program 

requirements for the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS. A Basic I/M program is 

required for all urbanized Moderate 

areas under the 2015 ozone NAAQS, 

including for areas with and without an 

existing I/M program that may have 

been implemented to meet the CAA 

requirements for a previous ozone 

NAAQS. Most of the Marginal 

nonattainment areas being proposed in 

this action for reclassification to 

Moderate under the 2015 ozone NAAQS 

are already operating I/M programs for 

a variety of reasons, including being 

designated nonattainment and classified 

as Moderate or above under a prior 

ozone standard and/or as part of a 

maintenance plan for a prior NAAQS. 

Consistent with the I/M regulations, 

states with existing I/M programs would 

need to conduct and submit a 

performance standard modeling analysis 

as well as make any necessary program 

revisions as part of their Moderate area 

SIP submissions to ensure that I/M 

programs are operating at or above the 

Basic I/M performance standard level 

for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.47 States 

may determine through the performance 

standard modeling analysis that an 

existing SIP-approved program would 

meet the performance standard for 

purposes of the 2015 ozone NAAQS 

without modification. In this case, the 

state could submit a SIP revision with 

the associated performance modeling 

and a written statement certifying their 

determination in lieu of submitting new 

revised regulations.48 With the passage 

of time and changes in fleet mix, it is 

appropriate for States to confirm 

existing programs’ compliance with the 

performance standard. 

In addition, the EPA recognizes that 

there are four Marginal nonattainment 

areas being proposed in this action for 

reclassification to Moderate under the 

2015 ozone NAAQS that do not 

currently operate an I/M program but 

meet the population criteria for Basic I/ 

M programs: Cincinnati, OhioKentucky; Detroit, Michigan; Louisville, 

Kentucky-Indiana; and San Antonio, 

Texas. If we finalize our action as 

proposed, these newly reclassified 

Moderate nonattainment areas would 

need to submit a SIP revision. Such a 

revision would address the Basic I/M 

program requirements to be fully 

implemented as expeditiously as 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
21854 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

49 I/M program design elements are program 

features that have a direct impact on the ability of 

the program to reduce levels of the ozone 

precursors, VOC, and NOX. These design elements 

include test frequency (annual or biennial), waiver/ 

compliance rate, vehicle type coverage, model year 

(MY) coverage, network type (centralized or 

decentralized), and test type (e.g., idle, onboard 

diagnostics (OBD)). 

50The California Bureau of Automotive Repair’s 

Consumer Assistance Program offers eligible 

consumers repair assistance and vehicle retirement 

options to help improve air quality. For more 

information, see https://www.bar.ca.gov/consumer/ 

Consumer_Assistance_Program/. 

51Utah’s Vehicle Repair and Replacement 

Assistance Program provides funding assistance to 

individuals whose vehicles are failing vehicle 

emission standards to either replace their failing 

vehicle with a newer, cleaner one or to repair it. For 

more information see https://deq.utah.gov/airquality/incentive-programs-aq/vehicle-repair-andreplacement-assistance-program. 

52For more information, see https://

www.azdeq.gov/node/4525. 

53See 40 CFR 51.372(a)(2) and 51.352. 

54Areas that intend to use I/M emission 

reductions for attainment or RFP SIPs, can also 

consider adding the testing of light-duty trucks (or 

other Enhanced I/M program elements) to their I/ 

M testing regimen to increase the emission 

reduction benefits of I/M, especially considering the 

increased fraction of light-duty trucks in the local 

vehicle fleet over the last two decades. 

practicable but no later than the 

implementation deadline determined by 

the final action reclassifying these areas 

as discussed in Section II.D.2.c. of this 

notice. 

The EPA has already established the 

SIP elements for meeting Basic I/M 

program requirements. These elements 

will need to be detailed in a state’s I/M 

SIP submission; the I/M regulations at 

40 CFR 51.372 address I/M SIP 

submissions with paragraphs (a)(1)–(8) 

outlining the required elements. The 

first required element is a schedule for 

the I/M program implementation and 

interim milestones leading to mandatory 

testing. This list of milestones to be 

scheduled in the SIP includes such 

things as passage of enabling statutory 

or other legal authority; proposal of 

draft regulations and promulgation of 

final regulations; issuance of final 

specifications and procedures; issuance 

of final Request for Proposals (if 

applicable); licensing or certifications of 

stations and inspectors; the date 

mandatory testing will begin for each 

model year to be covered by the 

program; etc. (see 40 CFR 51.372(a)(1)). 

The other seven elements that the I/ 

M SIP will need to address include a 

performance standard modeling analysis 

of the proposed I/M program; the 

geographic applicability of the I/M 

program; a detailed discussion of each 

of the required design elements; 49 legal 

authority requiring or allowing 

implementation of the I/M program and 

providing either broad or specific 

authority to perform all required 

elements of the program; legal authority 

for I/M program operation until such 

time as it is no longer necessary; 

implementing regulations, interagency 

agreements, and memoranda of 

understanding; and evidence of 

adequate funding and resources to 

implement all aspects of the program 

(see 40 CFR 51.372(a)(2)–(8)). Not all of 

these I/M program SIP elements need to 

be established in full prior to the due 

date of the I/M SIP submission (see 

Section II.D.2.a. of this notice), but 

rather, the I/M SIP needs to establish 

deadlines for certain I/M program 

elements leading to full implementation 

of the I/M program as expeditiously as 

practicable but in no case later than the 

implementation deadline determined by 

the final action to this proposal, as 

discussed in Section II.D.2.c. of this 

notice. 

I/M and Environmental Justice. While 

vehicle emissions-per-mile have 

decreased due to advances in vehicle 

emission control technology, those 

controls can degrade over time which 

can lead to excess pollution in ozone 

nonattainment areas. I/M programs 

ensure that vehicles are operating 

according to EPA’s vehicle emissions 

standards and adequately protecting 

public health. However, any Basic I/M 

program for the 2015 ozone NAAQS 

may present potential economic 

hardship and other concerns for lowincome individuals of newly 

reclassified Moderate ozone 

nonattainment areas. Specifically, these 

residents might own older, highemitting vehicles and be less able to pay 

for car repairs needed as the result of a 

failed I/M test. To address this disparity 

in other I/M programs, some states such 

as Arizona, California,50 and Utah 51

fund vehicle repair or replacement 

assistance. For example, the Arizona 

Voluntary Vehicle Repair Program 

provides owners of eligible vehicles 

with financial assistance toward the cost 

of repairs after a failed emissions test. 

Since 2018, more than 2,700 vehicles 

have been repaired through this 

program, saving Arizona motorists more 

than $1.3 million and eliminating more 

than 560 tons of emissions.52 The EPA 

believes the implementation of Basic I/ 

M programs in communities with lowincome individuals is an important 

issue. We encourage states that are not 

already providing such assistance 

programs to work with interested parties 

in their nonattainment areas to address 

such concerns. 

Basic I/M Program Design Element 

Considerations and Meeting the 

Performance Standard. There are 

several program design elements 

described in EPA’s existing I/M 

regulations that should be considered 

for Basic I/M programs. 

To determine whether a given set of 

program design elements meets the 

applicable I/M performance standard, it 

is necessary to conduct performance 

standard modeling.53 The performance 

standard for Basic I/M programs in areas 

designated nonattainment for the 2015 

ozone NAAQS includes, among other 

things, annual inspections of light-duty 

vehicles in a centralized test program by 

conducting idle testing of 1968–2000 

Model Year (MY) subject vehicles and 

on-board diagnostics (OBD) checks on 

2001 and newer subject vehicles (see 40 

CFR 51.352(e)). The EPA believes that 

this Basic I/M performance standard can 

be met by a state program that exempts 

1995 MY and older vehicles from 

tailpipe testing by performing the OBD 

test on 1996 and newer OBD-equipped 

light-duty vehicles. In this case, the 

relatively small benefit of tailpipe idle 

testing is surpassed by the addition of 

1996–2000 MY light-duty vehicles to 

the OBD testing coverage. Additional 

flexibilities in designing the I/M 

program (such as allowing newer MY 

exemptions, and/or permitting the 

testing of vehicles biennially as opposed 

to annually) might be realized by 

increasing the level of certain design 

elements beyond that of this Basic I/M 

performance standard such as the 

inclusion of OBD testing of light-duty 

trucks or increasing the Gross Vehicle 

Weight Range of the subject fleet.54 The 

degree to which this Basic I/M 

performance standard allows for 

additional forms of flexibility will 

depend largely upon the local 

conditions within the I/M program area, 

such as the local fleet characteristics 

like age distribution and vehicle market 

share, and local meteorological 

characteristics. The EPA intends to 

provide technical assistance for Basic I/ 

M programs under the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS separate from this rulemaking. 

2. Submission and Implementation 

Deadlines 

a. Submission Deadline for SIP 

Revisions 

On August 3, 2018 (September 24, 

2018, for the San Antonio, Texas, area), 

when final nonattainment designations 

became effective for the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS, states responsible for areas 

initially classified as Moderate were 

required to prepare and submit SIP 

revisions by deadlines relative to that 

effective date. For those areas, the 

submission deadlines ranged from 2 to 

3 years after the effective date of 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 21855 

55 ‘‘Final Rule—Determinations of Attainment by 

the Attainment Date, Extensions of the Attainment 

Date, and Reclassification of Several Areas for the 

2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards’’ (81 FR 26697, 26705, May 4, 2016). 

56 40 CFR 51.372(b)(2). 

designation, depending on the SIP 

element required (e.g., 2 years for the 

RACT SIP, 3 years for the attainment 

plan with RACM and attainment 

demonstration, and 3 years for a Basic 

I/M program SIP if required). Areas 

initially classified as Moderate are also 

required to implement RACM and 

RACT as expeditiously as practicable 

but no later than January 1 of the 5th 

year after the effective date of 

designations, i.e., January 1, 2023, with 

2023 being the Moderate area 

attainment year. 

CAA section 182(i) provides that areas 

reclassified under CAA section 181(b)(2) 

shall generally meet the requirements 

associated with their new classifications 

‘‘according to the schedules prescribed 

in connection with such requirements, 

except that the Administrator may 

adjust any applicable deadlines (other 

than attainment dates) to the extent 

such adjustment is necessary or 

appropriate to assure consistency among 

the required submissions.’’ The SIP 

submission deadlines for areas initially 

designated as Moderate have passed, 

therefore the EPA is proposing to use its 

discretion under CAA section 182(i) to 

adjust SIP submission deadlines that 

would otherwise apply. We recognize 

that the time between the anticipated 

effective date of reclassification and the 

Moderate area attainment date in 2024 

(and, critically, the attainment year of 

2023) is far less than the 6 years that 

initially designated Moderate areas have 

between designation and the attainment 

date. Given this compressed timeline, 

we are proposing, as discussed in more 

detail later, to set the SIP submission 

deadlines for all the various 

requirements for the newly reclassified 

Moderate areas as January 1, 2023. 

While not all of the ‘‘schedules 

prescribed in connection with’’ the 

various Subpart 2 requirements are the 

same (e.g., the statute provides 3 years 

to submit SIPs for some requirements 

and 2 years for others), we think 

coordinating the submissions with the 

same deadline is necessary and 

appropriate in this situation given the 

compressed timeline and the need to 

achieve consistency among those 

submissions. 

With respect to the SIP requirements 

for Moderate areas, the ‘‘schedules 

prescribed in connection’’ with those 

requirements are 2 years from the 

effective date of designation for RACT 

and 3 years from the effective date of 

designation for an attainment plan (see 

CAA sections 182(b)(1), 181(b)(2) and 

182(i)). The 2-year and 3-year deadlines 

that applied to areas initially designated 

Moderate have already passed (August 

3, 2021, or September 24, 2021, for San 

Antonio), and we do not find it 

appropriate to provide deadlines of 2 

and 3 years from the effective date of a 

final action on this determination, 

either, as those deadlines would fall 

after the Moderate area attainment date 

of August 3, 2024. Given that attainment 

for these newly reclassified Moderate 

areas will be determined based on air 

quality monitoring data from the DV 

period of 2021–2023 (i.e., 2023 is the 

attainment year, or the last calendar 

year of data prior to the attainment 

date), in order for any of the Moderate 

area controls to influence attainment by 

the Moderate area attainment date, they 

would need to be implemented by the 

beginning of the 2023 ozone season at 

the latest. We further recognize that the 

San Antonio, Texas, nonattainment area 

was designated later than the other areas 

being reclassified to Moderate, however, 

we are proposing that the SIP 

submission deadline for requirements 

associated with the Moderate area 

classification be due for all newly 

reclassified areas on January 1, 2023, in 

order to ensure consistency among 

submissions. 

With respect to the SIP submission 

deadlines for RACT, the EPA’s 

implementing regulations for the 2015 

ozone NAAQS established a RACT SIP 

submission deadline for areas classified 

Moderate or higher of either 24 months 

from the reclassification effective date 

or a deadline established by the 

Administrator in the reclassification 

action using their discretion under CAA 

section 182(i) (see 40 CFR 

51.1312(a)(2)(ii)). In the case of the 

potential newly reclassified Moderate 

areas addressed in this proposal, a 

RACT SIP submission deadline of 24 

months after an anticipated 2022 

effective date would fall in 2024, 

potentially near or after the applicable 

Moderate area attainment date of August 

3, 2024 (September 24, 2024, for the San 

Antonio area). We believe it would be 

reasonable to instead align the SIP 

submission deadline for RACT with the 

proposed January 1, 2023, submission 

deadline for other Moderate area 

requirements, given the compressed 

timeline and the need to achieve 

consistency among those submissions as 

discussed previously. The EPA adopted 

this approach previously for Marginal 

areas reclassified to Moderate for failure 

to timely attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS, 

to achieve consistency among required 

SIP submissions for areas facing a 

similar compressed timeframe between 

the effective date of reclassifications and 

the Moderate area attainment date.55

Similarly, with respect to the SIP 

submission deadlines for I/M, we are 

proposing a January 1, 2023, deadline. 

This is consistent with the I/M 

regulations which provide that an I/M 

SIP shall be submitted no later than the 

deadline for submitting the area’s 

attainment SIP.56

b. RACM and RACT Implementation 

Deadline 

With respect to implementation 

deadlines, the EPA’s implementing 

regulations for the 2015 ozone NAAQS 

require that, for areas initially classified 

as Moderate or higher, a state shall 

provide for implementation of RACT as 

expeditiously as practicable but no later 

than January 1 of the 5th year after the 

effective date of designation (see 40 CFR 

51.1312(a)(3)(i)), which corresponds 

with the beginning of the attainment 

year for initially classified Moderate 

areas (January 1, 2023). The modeling 

and attainment demonstration 

requirements for 2015 ozone NAAQS 

areas classified Moderate or higher 

require that a state must provide for 

implementation of all control measures 

needed for attainment no later than the 

beginning of the attainment year ozone 

season, notwithstanding any alternative 

deadline established per 40 CFR 

51.1312 (see 40 CFR 51.1308(d)). The 

EPA’s implementing regulations for the 

2015 ozone NAAQS require that the 

state shall provide for implementation 

of RACT as expeditiously as practicable, 

but no later than the start of the 

attainment year ozone season associated 

with the area’s new attainment 

deadline, or January 1 of the third year 

after the associated SIP submission 

deadline, whichever is earlier; or the 

deadline established by the 

Administrator in the final action issuing 

the area reclassification (see 40 CFR 

51.1312(a)(3)(ii)). 

In the case of the potential reclassified 

Moderate areas addressed in this 

proposal, the start of the ozone season 

varies among states and is either January 

or March for potential reclassified 

Moderate areas addressed in this 

proposal (see 40 CFR part 58, appendix 

D, section 4.1, Table D–3).The EPA 

rejected an approach that would 

establish variable RACM/RACT 

implementation deadlines 

corresponding to an area’s defined 

ozone season starting month because of 

the inconsistencies that such an 

approach would perpetuate. Instead, the 

EPA is proposing a consistent single 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
21856 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

57The I/M program implementation deadline at 

40 CFR 51.373(b) states: ‘‘For areas newly required 

to implement Basic I/M as a result of designation 

under the 8-hour ozone standard, the required 

program shall be fully implemented no later than 

4 years after the effective date of designation and 

classification under the 8-hour ozone standard.’’ A 

start date for I/M programs of 4 years after the 

effective date of designation and classification 

under the 8-hour ozone standard is also cited in the 

Basic I/M performance standard at 40 CFR 51.352(c) 

and (e)(2). 

58 John S. Seitz, Memo, ‘‘Reasonable Further 

Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and Related 

Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas 

Meeting the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard,’’ May 10, 1995, at 4. 

RACM/RACT implementation deadline 

for all newly reclassified Moderate areas 

corresponding with the beginning of the 

applicable attainment year, i.e., January 

1, 2023. This proposed deadline is the 

same as the single RACT 

implementation deadline for all areas 

initially classified Moderate per 40 CFR 

51.1312(a)(3) and would require 

implementation of any identified 

RACM/RACT as early as possible in the 

attainment year to influence an area’s 

air quality and 2021–2023 attainment 

DV. The proposed RACT 

implementation deadline would also 

align with the proposed SIP submission 

deadline of January 1, 2023, and ensure 

that SIPs requiring control measures 

needed for attainment, including 

RACM, would be submitted no later 

than when those controls are required to 

be implemented. A single deadline for 

the Moderate area SIP submissions and 

RACT implementation would also treat 

states consistently, in keeping with CAA 

section 182(i). 

The EPA requests comment on 

requiring that RACM/RACT be 

implemented as expeditiously as 

practicable but no later than the 

beginning of the applicable attainment 

year, i.e., January 1, 2023. 

c. I/M Implementation Deadline 

With respect to the implementation 

deadline for Basic I/M programs, states 

wishing to use emission reductions from 

their newly required Basic I/M program 

for the 2015 ozone NAAQS would need 

to have such programs fully established 

and start testing as expeditiously as 

practicable but no later than the 

beginning of the applicable attainment 

year, i.e., January 1, 2023. However, 

given the unique nature of I/M 

programs, there are many challenges, 

tasks, and milestones that must be met 

in establishing and implementing an I/ 

M program. The EPA realizes that 

implementing a brand new or revised I/ 

M program on an accelerated timeline 

may be difficult to achieve in practice, 

especially for states with no I/M 

programs elsewhere within their 

jurisdiction, so, for the states that do not 

intend to rely upon emission reductions 

from their Basic I/M program in 

attainment or RFP SIPs, we are 

proposing to allow Basic I/M programs 

to be fully implemented no later than 4 

years after the effective date of 

reclassification, explained as follows. 

Under CAA section 182(i), reclassified 

areas are generally required to meet the 

requirements associated with their new 

classification ‘‘according to the 

schedules prescribed in connection with 

such requirements.’’ The I/M 

regulations provide just such a 

prescribed schedule in stating that 

newly required I/M programs are to be 

implemented as expeditiously as 

practicable. The I/M regulations also 

allow areas newly required to 

implement Basic I/M up to ‘‘4 years 

after the effective date of designation 

and classification’’ to fully implement 

the I/M program.57 With the effective 

date of this notice expected to be in 

2022, the implementation deadline for 

Basic I/M programs for the 2015 ozone 

NAAQS under the proposal would be in 

2026. This proposed implementation 

deadline is beyond the Moderate area 

attainment date of August 3, 2024 (or 

September 24, 2024, for the San Antonio 

area). However, by proposing such a 

deadline for newly reclassified 

Moderate areas required to implement a 

Basic I/M program (but not needing I/M 

emission reductions for attainment or 

RFP SIP purposes), the EPA maintains 

that these newly required Basic I/M 

programs could reasonably be 

implemented after the attainment year 

ozone season (i.e., after 2023) relevant to 

the Moderate area attainment date if 

reductions from an I/M program are not 

necessary for an area to achieve timely 

attainment of the 2015 ozone NAAQS. 

The EPA has long taken the position 

that, like VOC RACT, the statutory 

requirement for states to implement I/M 

in ozone nonattainment areas classified 

Moderate and higher generally exists 

independently from the attainment 

planning requirements for such areas 

(see RACT discussion above in Section 

II.D.1.a. of this notice).58 Considering 

the numerous challenges and milestones 

necessary in implementing a Basic I/M 

program, this proposed implementation 

deadline of up to 4 years is reasonable. 

Alternately, EPA is also seeking 

comment on allowing any newly 

reclassified areas required to implement 

a Basic I/M program (but not needing I/ 

M for attainment or RFP SIP purposes) 

to fully implement the Basic I/M 

program by no later than the Moderate 

area attainment date of August 3, 2024 

(September 24, 2024, for the San 

Antonio area). CAA section 182(i) also 

gives the EPA the discretion to adjust 

deadlines for reclassified areas ‘‘to the 

extent such adjustment is necessary or 

appropriate to assure consistency among 

the required submissions.’’ As discussed 

previously, although Basic I/M is not 

explicitly tied to an area’s ability to 

achieve timely attainment, this alternate 

implementation deadline would more 

closely align with that of the other 

required Moderate area elements. 

The EPA believes the proposed 4-year 

implementation deadline offers the 

states that will be required to implement 

Basic I/M due to reclassifications, if 

those reclassifications are finalized as 

proposed, the flexibility to fully 

implement the I/M programs on a 

timeline that addresses the challenges, 

especially for states starting new Basic 

I/M programs. The EPA also requests 

comments on aligning the I/M 

implementation deadline with that of 

the other required Moderate area 

elements. 

III. Environmental Justice 

Considerations 

As discussed in Section II.B of this 

notice, the EPA proposes to grant a 

request for a 1-year attainment date 

extension for the Uinta Basin, Utah, 

nonattainment area and extend the 

August 3, 2021, Marginal area 

attainment date to August 3, 2022, based 

on our finding that the state meets the 

two criteria under CAA section 181(a)(5) 

as interpreted by the EPA in 40 CFR 

51.1307 and there are no particular facts 

or circumstances that would compel the 

EPA Administrator to consider 

information beyond the statutory 

criteria. To that end, the EPA conducted 

an EJSCREEN analysis for the area to 

evaluate whether communities in the 

Uinta Basin area may be exposed to 

disproportionate pollution burdens. The 

results of our screening analysis did not 

indicate disproportionate exposure or 

burdens with respect to the non-ozone 

environmental indicators assessed in 

EJSCREEN. 

As discussed in Section II.D.1.b of 

this notice, a Basic vehicle I/M program 

is required for all urbanized Moderate 

areas under the 2015 ozone NAAQS, 

including for areas with and without an 

existing I/M program that may have 

been implemented to meet the CAA 

requirements for a previous ozone 

NAAQS. I/M programs ensure that 

vehicles are operating according to 

EPA’s vehicle emissions standards and 

adequately protecting public health. 

However, any Basic I/M program for the 

2015 ozone NAAQS may present 

potential economic hardship and other 

concerns for low-income individuals of 

newly reclassified Moderate ozone 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 21857 

59On April 30, 2018, the OMB approved EPA’s 

request for renewal of the previously approved 

information collection request (ICR). The renewed 

request expired on April 30, 2021, 3 years after the 

approval date (see OMB Control Number 2060–0695 

and ICR Reference Number 201801–2060–003 for 

EPA ICR No. 2347.03). On April 30, 2021, the OMB 

published the final 30-day Notice (86 FR 22959) for 

the ICR renewal titled ‘‘Implementation of the 8- 

Hour National Ambient Air Quality Standards for 

Ozone (Renewal)’’ (see OMB Control Number 2060– 

0695 and ICR Reference No: 202104–2060–004 for 

EPA ICR Number 2347.04). The ICR renewal is 

pending OMB final approval. 

nonattainment areas, and we encourage 

states that are not already providing I/ 

M assistance programs to work with 

interested parties in their nonattainment 

areas to address such concerns. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review and Executive 

Order 13563: Improving Regulation and 

Regulatory Review 

This action is not a significant 

regulatory action and was therefore not 

submitted to the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) for review. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This proposed rule does not impose 

any new information collection burden 

under the PRA not already approved by 

the Office of Management and Budget. 

This action proposes to: (1) Find that 

certain Marginal ozone nonattainment 

areas listed in Table 1 failed to attain 

the 2015 NAAQS by the applicable 

attainment date; (2) identify those areas 

subject to reclassification as Moderate 

ozone nonattainment areas by operation 

of law upon the effective date of the 

reclassification notice; and (3) adjust 

any applicable implementation 

deadlines. Thus, the proposed action 

does not establish any new information 

collection burden that has not already 

been identified and approved in the 

EPA’s information collection request.59

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) 

I certify that this action will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the RFA. This action will not 

impose any requirements on small 

entities. The proposed determinations of 

attainment and failure to attain the 2008 

ozone NAAQS (and resulting 

reclassifications), and the proposed 

determination to deny or grant a 1-year 

attainment date extension do not in and 

of themselves create any new 

requirements beyond what is mandated 

by the CAA. Instead, this rulemaking 

only makes factual determinations, and 

does not directly regulate any entities. 

D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

(UMRA) 

This action does not contain any 

unfunded mandate as described in 

UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, and does 

not significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. This action imposes no 

enforceable duty on any state, local or 

tribal governments or the private sector. 

E. Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action does not have federalism 

implications. It will not have substantial 

direct effects on the states, on the 

relationship between the national 

government and the states, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. The division of 

responsibility between the Federal 

Government and the states for purposes 

of implementing the NAAQS is 

established under the CAA. 

F. Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This action has tribal implications. 

However, it will neither impose 

substantial direct compliance costs on 

federally recognized tribal governments, 

nor preempt tribal law. 

The EPA has identified tribal areas 

within the nonattainment areas covered 

by this proposed rule, that would be 

potentially affected by this rulemaking. 

Specifically, eight of the nonattainment 

areas addressed in this proposal have 

tribes located within their boundaries: 

Amador, California (Jackson Rancheria 

of Me-Wuk Indians), Berrien County, 

Michigan (Pokagon Band of Potawatomi 

Indians), Greater Connecticut, 

Connecticut (Mashantucket Pequot 

Tribal Nation and Mohegan Indian 

Tribe), Northern Wasatch Front, Utah 

(Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians), 

Phoenix-Mesa, Arizona (Fort McDowell 

Yavapai Nation, Gila River Indian 

Community of the Gila River Indian 

Reservation, Salt River Pima-Maricopa 

Indian Community of the Salt River 

Reservation, and Tohono O’odham 

Nation), San Francisco, California 

(Lytton Rancheria), Uinta Basin, Utah 

(Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah & Ouray 

Reservation), and Yuma, Arizona 

(Cocopah Tribe and Quechan Tribe of 

the Fort Yuma Indian Reservation). One 

of the nonattainment areas addressed in 

this document is a separate tribal 

nonattainment area (Pechanga Band of 

Luisen ̃ o Mission Indians of the 

Pechanga Reservation, California). 

The EPA has concluded that the 

proposed rule may have tribal 

implications for these tribes for the 

purposes of Executive Order 13175 but 

would not impose substantial direct 

costs upon the tribes, nor would it 

preempt tribal law. As noted previously, 

a tribe that is part of an area that is 

reclassified from Marginal to Moderate 

nonattainment is not required to submit 

a TIP revision to address new Moderate 

area requirements. However, if the EPA 

finalizes the determinations of failure to 

attain proposed in this action, the NNSR 

major source threshold and offset 

requirements would change for 

stationary sources seeking 

preconstruction permits in any 

nonattainment areas newly reclassified 

as Severe (Section II.D.1 of this notice), 

including on tribal lands within these 

nonattainment areas. Areas that are 

already classified Moderate for a 

previous ozone NAAQS are already 

subject to these higher offset ratios and 

lower thresholds, so a reclassification to 

Moderate for the 2015 ozone NAAQS 

would have no effect on NNSR 

permitting requirements for tribal lands 

in those areas. 

The EPA has communicated or 

intends to communicate with the 

potentially affected tribes located within 

the boundaries of the nonattainment 

areas addressed in this proposal, 

including offering government-togovernment consultation, as 

appropriate. 

G. Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

The EPA interprets Executive Order 

13045 as applying only to those 

regulatory actions that concern 

environmental health or safety risks that 

the EPA has reason to believe may 

disproportionately affect children, per 

the definition of ‘‘covered regulatory 

action’’ in section 2–202 of the 

Executive Order. This action is not 

subject to Executive Order 13045 

because it does not establish an 

environmental standard intended to 

mitigate health or safety risks. 

H. Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

This action is not subject to Executive 

Order 13211, because it is not a 

significant regulatory action under 

Executive Order 12866. 

I. National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act (NTTAA) 

This rulemaking does not involve 

technical standards. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
21858 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

60 In deciding whether to invoke the exception by 

making and publishing a finding that this action, if 

finalized, is based on a determination of nationwide 

scope or effect, the Administrator intends to take 

into account a number of policy considerations, 

including his judgment balancing the benefit of 

obtaining the D.C. Circuit’s authoritative centralized 

review versus allowing development of the issue in 

other contexts and the best use of agency resources. 

61 In the report on the 1977 Amendments that 

revised CAA section 307(b)(1), Congress noted that 

the Administrator’s determination that the 

‘‘nationwide scope or effect’’ exception applies 

would be appropriate for any action that has a 

scope or effect beyond a single judicial circuit. See 

H.R. Rep. No. 95–294 at 323–24, reprinted in 1977 

U.S.C.C.A.N. 1402–03. 

J. Executive Order 12898: Federal 

Actions To Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations 

The EPA believes that this action does 

not have disproportionately high and 

adverse human health or environmental 

effects on minority populations, lowincome poulations and/or indigenous 

peoples, as specified in Executive Order 

12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

The documentation for this 

determination is presented in Section 

II.B of this action, ‘‘Extension of 

Marginal Area Attainment Date,’’ and 

summarized in Section III of this action, 

‘‘Environmental Justice 

Considerations,’’ and the relevant 

documents have been placed in the 

public docket for this action. 

With respect to the determinations of 

whether areas have attained the NAAQS 

by the attainment date, the EPA has no 

discretionary authority to address EJ in 

these determinations. The CAA directs 

that within 6 months following the 

applicable attainment date, the 

Administrator shall determine, based on 

the area’s design value as of the 

attainment date, whether the area 

attained the standard by that date. CAA 

section 181(b)(2)(A). Except for any 

Severe or Extreme area, any area that the 

Administrator finds has not attained the 

standard by that date shall be 

reclassified by operation of law to either 

the next higher classification or the 

classification applicable to the area’s 

design value. Id. 

K. Judicial Review 

Section 307(b)(1) of the CAA governs 

judicial review of final actions by the 

EPA. This section provides, in part, that 

petitions for review must be filed in the 

Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit: (i) When the agency 

action consists of ‘‘nationally applicable 

regulations promulgated, or final actions 

taken, by the Administrator,’’ or (ii) 

when such action is locally or regionally 

applicable, if ‘‘such action is based on 

a determination of nationwide scope or 

effect and if in taking such action the 

Administrator finds and publishes that 

such action is based on such a 

determination.’’ For locally or regionally 

applicable final actions, the CAA 

reserves to the EPA complete discretion 

whether to invoke the exception in 

(ii).60

The EPA is proposing findings 

regarding attainment of the NAAQS in 

nonattainment areas within 18 states 

located in nine of the ten EPA regions 

pursuant to a uniform process and 

standard. The EPA is also proposing to 

establish SIP submission and 

implementation deadlines for all newly 

reclassified areas in the identified states 

using a common, nationwide method. 

The jurisdictions that would be affected 

by this action, if finalized, represent a 

wide geographic area, and fall within 

several different judicial circuits. 

If the Administrator takes final action 

on this proposal, then, in consideration 

of the effects of the action across the 

country, the EPA views this action to be 

‘‘nationally applicable’’ within the 

meaning of CAA section 307(b)(1). In 

the alternative, to the extent a court 

finds this proposal, if finalized, to be 

locally or regionally applicable, the 

Administrator intends to exercise the 

complete discretion afforded to him 

under the CAA to make and publish a 

finding that this action is based on a 

determination of ‘‘nationwide scope or 

effect’’ within the meaning of CAA 

section 307(b)(1).61

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Designations and 

classifications, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, 

Administrative practice and procedure, 

Air pollution control, Designations and 

classifications, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Michael Regan, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 2022–07513 Filed 4–12–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 660 

[Docket No. 220407–0087] 

RIN 0648–BL21 

Magnuson-Stevens Act Provisions; 

Fisheries Off West Coast States; 

Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; 2022 

Harvest Specifications for Pacific 

Whiting, and 2022 Pacific Whiting 

Tribal Allocation 

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 

Commerce. 

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: NMFS issues this proposed 

rule for the 2022 Pacific whiting fishery 

under the authority of the Pacific Coast 

Groundfish Fishery Management Plan, 

the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act, the 

Pacific Whiting Act of 2006 (Whiting 

Act), and other applicable laws. This 

proposed rule would establish the 

domestic 2022 harvest specifications for 

Pacific whiting including the 2022 tribal 

allocation for the Pacific whiting 

fishery, the non-tribal sector allocations, 

and set-asides for incidental mortality in 

research activities and non-groundfish 

fisheries. The proposed measures are 

intended to help prevent overfishing, 

achieve optimum yield, ensure that 

management measures are based on the 

best scientific information available, 

and provide for the implementation of 

tribal treaty fishing rights. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule 

must be received no later than April 28, 

2022. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

on this document, identified by NOAA– 

NMFS–2022–0034 by any of the 

following methods: 

• Electronic Submission: Submit all 

electronic public comments via the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to 

https://www.regulations.gov and enter 

NOAA–NMFS–2022–0034 in the Search 

box. Click on the ‘‘Comment’’ icon, 

complete the required fields, and enter 

or attach your comments. 

Instructions: Comments sent by any 

other method, to any other address or 

individual, or received after the end of 

the comment period, may not be 

considered by NMFS. All comments 

received are part of the public record 

and will generally be posted for public 

viewing on www.regulations.gov 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1