17168 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed rule, 

pertaining to the 1997 8-hour ozone 

attainment demonstration, contingency 

measures and MVEBs for the 

Washington Area submitted by the State 

of Maryland, the District of Columbia 

and the Commonwealth of Virginia on 

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

2007 respectively, does not have tribal 

implications as specified by Executive 

Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 

2000), because the SIP is not approved 

to apply in Indian country located in the 

states, and EPA notes that it will not 

impose substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

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

Dated: March 13, 2013. 

W. C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

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

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0582; FRL–9792–6] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Tennessee; 

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

Requirements for the 2008 Lead 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve, 

and in the alternative, conditionally 

approve in part, the State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision, 

submitted by the State of Tennessee, 

through the Department of Environment 

and Conservation, demonstrating that 

the State meets the requirements of 

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

Air Act (CAA or the Act) for the 2008 

Lead national ambient air quality 

standards (NAAQS). Section 110(a) of 

the CAA requires that each state adopt 

and submit a SIP for the 

implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement of each NAAQS 

promulgated by EPA, which is 

commonly referred to as an 

‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP. Tennessee certified 

that the Tennessee SIP contains 

provisions that ensure the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS is implemented, enforced, and 

maintained in Tennessee (hereafter 

referred to as an ‘‘infrastructure 

submission’’). EPA is proposing to 

conditionally approve portions of 

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

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

significant deterioration (PSD) 

requirements, and a portion of section 

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

19, 2009, infrastructure submission. The 

current Tennessee SIP does not include 

provisions to comply with these 

requirements; however, Tennessee has 

committed to submit SIP revisions to 

address these deficiencies. EPA is also 

proposing, in the alternative, to approve 

the entire Tennessee SIP, including the 

sections described above, as meeting the 

applicable infrastructure requirements 

for the 2008 Lead NAAQS. Should 

Tennessee submit, and EPA approve, 

the necessary provisions to correct the 

identified infrastructure SIP deficiencies 

prior to EPA taking final action on the 

October 19, 2009, infrastructure 

submission, EPA anticipates finalizing 

full approval of the infrastructure SIP. If 

EPA does not approve these necessary 

provisions prior to taking final action on 

the October 19, 2009, infrastructure 

submission, EPA anticipates finalizing 

conditional approvals for those 

elements for which the Tennessee 

infrastructure SIP remains deficient. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before April 19, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R04– 

OAR–2012–0582, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

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

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: ‘‘EPA–R04–OAR–2012– 

0582,’’ Regulatory Development Section, 

Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Lynorae 

Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 

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

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2012– 

0582. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through 

www.regulations.gov or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 17169 

1On June 27, 2012, the Center for Biological 

Diversity and the Center for Environmental Health 

sued EPA for allegedly failing to take certain 

mandatory actions related to the ‘‘infrastructure’’ 

requirements associated with the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS. Included with this complaint was EPA’s 

alleged failure to take action on Tennessee’s 2008 

Lead infrastructure SIP within the applicable 

statutory timeframe. 

2See the final rulemaking entitled ‘‘Final Rule 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) for 

Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers 

(PM2.5)—Increments, Significant Impact Levels 

(SILs) and Significant monitoring Concentration 

(SMC): Final Rule’’ (75 FR 64864). 

3Two elements identified in section 110(a)(2) are 

not governed by the three year submission deadline 

of section 110(a)(1) because SIPs incorporating 

necessary local nonattainment area controls are not 

due within three years after promulgation of a new 

or revised NAAQS, but rather due at the time the 

nonattainment area plan requirements are due 

pursuant to section 172. These requirements are: (1) 

Submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(C) to the 

extent that subsection refers to a permit program as 

required in part D Title I of the CAA, and (2) 

submissions required by section 110(a)(2)(I) which 

pertain to the nonattainment planning requirements 

Continued 

If you send an email comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

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

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy at the Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 

excluding federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Zuri 

Farngalo, Regulatory Development 

Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, 

Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. The 

telephone number is (404) 562–9152. 

Mr. Farngalo can be reached via 

electronic mail at 

farngalo.zuri@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. What elements are required under sections 

110(a)(1) and (2)? 

III. Scope of Infrastructure SIPs 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of how Tennessee 

addressed the elements of sections 

110(a)(1) and (2) ‘‘Infrastructure’’ 

provisions? 

V. Proposed Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On October 5, 1978, EPA promulgated 

primary and secondary NAAQS for Lead 

under section 109 of the Act. See 43 FR 

46246. Both primary and secondary 

standards were set at a level of 1.5 

micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3), 

measured as Lead in total suspended 

particulate matter (Pb-TSP), not to be 

exceeded by the maximum arithmetic 

mean concentration averaged over a 

calendar quarter. This standard was 

based on the ‘‘1977 Air Quality Criteria 

for Lead’’ guidance document (USEPA, 

August 7, 1977). On November 12, 2008 

(75 FR 81126), EPA issued a final rule 

to revise the primary and secondary 

Lead NAAQS. The revised primary and 

secondary Lead NAAQS were revised to 

0.15 mg/m3. By statute, SIPs meeting the 

requirements of sections 110(a)(1) and 

(2) are to be submitted by states within 

three years after promulgation of a new 

or revised NAAQS. Sections 110(a)(1) 

and (2) require states to address basic 

SIP requirements, including emissions 

inventories, monitoring, and modeling 

to assure attainment and maintenance of 

the NAAQS. States were required to 

submit such SIPs to EPA no later than 

October 15, 2011, for the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS. Tennessee submitted its 

infrastructure SIP for the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS on October 19, 2009.1

Today’s action is proposing to 

approve Tennessee’s infrastructure 

submission for the 2008 Lead NAAQS. 

In addition, EPA is also proposing, in 

the alternative, to conditionally approve 

a subset of the sections required as part 

of the State’s 2008 Lead infrastructure 

SIP. Specifically, EPA is also proposing, 

in the alternative, to conditionally 

approve, Tennessee’s infrastructure 

submission for portions of sections 

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

110(a)(2)(J) as they relate to a 2010 PSD 

rulemaking for Particulate Matter Less 

Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5).2 In 

addition, EPA is also proposing to 

conditionally approve, in the 

alternative, the portion of section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) pertaining to CAA 

section 128(a)(1) significant portion of 

income requirements. Today’s action is 

not proposing approval of any specific 

rule; but rather, proposing that 

Tennessee’s already approved SIP 

meets—or in the case of the elements 

proposed for conditional approval, will 

meet, with changes—certain CAA 

requirements. 

II. What elements are required under 

sections 110(a)(1) and (2)? 

Section 110(a) of the CAA requires 

states to submit SIPs to provide for the 

implementation, maintenance, and 

enforcement of a new or revised 

NAAQS within three years following 

the promulgation of such NAAQS, or 

within such shorter period as EPA may 

prescribe. Section 110(a) imposes the 

obligation upon states to make a SIP 

submission to EPA for a new or revised 

NAAQS, but the contents of that 

submission may vary depending upon 

the facts and circumstances. In 

particular, the data and analytical tools 

available at the time the state develops 

and submits the SIP for a new or revised 

NAAQS affects the content of the 

submission. The contents of such SIP 

submissions may also vary depending 

upon what provisions the state’s 

existing SIP already contains. In the 

case of the 2008 Lead NAAQS, states 

typically have met the basic program 

elements required in section 110(a)(2) 

through earlier SIP submissions in 

connection with the 1978 Lead NAAQS. 

Section 110(a)(1) provides the 

procedural and timing requirements for 

SIPs. Section 110(a)(2) lists specific 

elements that states must meet for 

‘‘infrastructure’’ SIP requirements 

related to a newly established or revised 

NAAQS. As mentioned above, these 

requirements include SIP infrastructure 

elements such as modeling, monitoring, 

and emissions inventories that are 

designed to assure attainment and 

maintenance of the NAAQS. The 

requirements that are the subject of this 

proposed rulemaking are listed below 3


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
17170 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

of part D, Title I of the CAA. Today’s proposed 

rulemaking does not address infrastructure 

elements related to section 110(a)(2)(I) or the 

nonattainment planning requirements of 

110(a)(2)(C). 

4This rulemaking only addresses requirements 

for this element as they relate to attainment areas. 

and in EPA’s October 14, 2011, 

memorandum entitled ‘‘Guidance on 

Infrastructure State Implementation 

Plan (SIP) Elements Required Under 

Sections 110(a)(1) and 110(a)(2) for the 

2008 Lead (Pb) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS).’’ 

• 110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and 

other control measures. 

• 110(a)(2)(B): Ambient air quality 

monitoring/data system. 

• 110(a)(2)(C): Program for 

enforcement, PSD and new source 

review (NSR).4

• 110(a)(2)(D): Interstate and 

international transport provisions. 

• 110(a)(2)(E): Adequate personnel, 

funding, and authority. 

• 110(a)(2)(F): Stationary source 

monitoring and reporting. 

• 110(a)(2)(G): Emergency episodes. 

• 110(a)(2)(H): Future SIP revisions. 

• 110(a)(2)(J): Consultation with 

government officials; public 

notification; and PSD and visibility 

protection. 

• 110(a)(2)(K): Air quality modeling/ 

data. 

• 110(a)(2)(L): Permitting fees. 

• 110(a)(2)(M): Consultation/ 

participation by affected local entities. 

III. Scope of Infrastructure SIPs 

This rulemaking will not cover four 

substantive issues that are not integral 

to acting on a state’s infrastructure SIP 

submission: (i) Existing provisions 

related to excess emissions during 

periods of start-up, shutdown, or 

malfunction at sources (SSM), that may 

be contrary to the CAA and EPA’s 

policies addressing such excess 

emissions; (ii) existing provisions 

related to ‘‘director’s variance’’ or 

‘‘director’s discretion’’ that purport to 

permit revisions to SIP approved 

emissions limits with limited public 

process or without requiring further 

approval by EPA, that may be contrary 

to the CAA (director’s discretion); (iii) 

existing provisions for minor source 

NSR programs that may be inconsistent 

with the requirements of the CAA and 

EPA’s regulations that pertain to such 

programs (minor source NSR); and, (iv) 

existing provisions for PSD programs 

that may be inconsistent with current 

requirements of EPA’s ‘‘Final NSR 

Improvement Rule,’’ 67 FR 80186 

(December 31, 2002), as amended by 72 

FR 32526 (June 13, 2007) (NSR Reform). 

Instead, EPA has indicated that it has 

other authority to address any such 

existing SIP defects in other 

rulemakings, as appropriate. A detailed 

rationale for why these four substantive 

issues are not part of the scope of 

infrastructure SIP rulemakings can be 

found in EPA’s June 11, 2012, proposed 

rule entitled, ‘‘Approval and 

Promulgation of Implementation Plans; 

Tennessee 110(a)(1) and (2) 

Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 

and 2006 Fine Particulate Matter 

National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards’’ in the section entitled, 

‘‘Scope of Infrastructure SIPs’’ (See 77 

FR 34306). It can also be found in EPA’s 

August 22, 2012, proposed rule entitled, 

‘‘Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Tennessee 

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

Requirements for the 2008 8-Hour 

Ozone Matter National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards’’ in the section 

entitled, ‘‘Scope of Infrastructure SIPs.’’ 

See 77 FR 50651. 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of how 

Tennessee addressed the elements of 

sections 110(a)(1) and (2) 

‘‘Infrastructure’’ provisions? 

The Tennessee infrastructure 

submission addresses the provisions of 

sections 110(a)(1) and (2) as described 

below. 

1. 110(a)(2)(A): Emission limits and 

other control measures: Several 

regulations within Tennessee’s SIP 

provide Tennessee Air Pollution Control 

Regulations relevant to air quality 

control regulations. The regulations 

described below have been federally 

approved in the Tennessee SIP and 

include enforceable emission 

limitations and other control measures. 

Chapters 1200–3–1, General Provisions; 

1200–3–3, Air Quality Standards; 1200– 

3–22, Lead Emission Standards; and 

1200–3–8, Fugitive Dust Control 

Regulations of the Tennessee SIP 

establish emission limits for lead and 

address the required control measures, 

means, and techniques for compliance 

with the 2008 Lead NAAQS. EPA has 

made the preliminary determination 

that the provisions contained in these 

chapters and Tennessee’s practices are 

adequate to protect the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS in the State. 

In this action, EPA is not proposing to 

approve or disapprove any existing 

State provisions with regard to excess 

emissions during SSM of operations at 

a facility. EPA believes that a number of 

states have SSM provisions which are 

contrary to the CAA and existing EPA 

guidance, ‘‘State Implementation Plans: 

Policy Regarding Excess Emissions 

During Malfunctions, Startup, and 

Shutdown’’ (September 20, 1999), and 

the Agency plans to address such state 

regulations in the future. In the 

meantime, EPA encourages any state 

having a deficient SSM provision to take 

steps to correct it as soon as possible. 

Additionally, in this action, EPA is 

not proposing to approve or disapprove 

any existing State rules with regard to 

director’s discretion or variance 

provisions. EPA believes that a number 

of states have such provisions which are 

contrary to the CAA and existing EPA 

guidance (52 FR 45109 (November 24, 

1987)), and the Agency plans to take 

action in the future to address such state 

regulations. In the meantime, EPA 

encourages any state having a director’s 

discretion or variance provision which 

is contrary to the CAA and EPA 

guidance to take steps to correct the 

deficiency as soon as possible. 

2. 110(a)(2)(B) Ambient air quality 

monitoring/data system: Tennessee’s 

Air Pollution Control Requirements, 

Chapter 1200–3–12, Procedures for 

Ambient Sampling and Analysis, of the 

Tennessee SIP, along with the 

Tennessee Network Description and 

Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan, 

provide for an ambient air quality 

monitoring system in the State. 

Annually, EPA approves the ambient air 

monitoring network plan for the state 

agencies. On July 9, 2012, Tennessee 

submitted its plan to EPA. On 

September 21, 2012, EPA approved 

Tennessee’s monitoring network plan. 

Tennessee’s approved monitoring 

network plan can be accessed at 

www.regulations.gov using Docket ID 

No. EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0582. EPA 

has made the preliminary determination 

that Tennessee’s SIP and practices are 

adequate for the ambient air quality 

monitoring and data system related to 

the 2008 Lead NAAQS. 

3. 110(a)(2)(C) Program for 

enforcement of control measures 

including review of proposed new 

sources. In this action, EPA is proposing 

to approve, and in the alternative, 

conditionally approve in part, 

Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP for the 

2008 Lead NAAQS with respect to the 

general requirement in section 

110(a)(2)(C) to include a program in the 

SIP that regulates the modification and 

construction of any stationary source as 

necessary to assure that the NAAQS are 

achieved. Chapter 1200–3–9, 

Construction and Operating Permits, of 

Tennessee’s SIP pertains to the 

construction of any new major 

stationary source or any project at an 

existing major stationary source in an 

area designated as nonattainment, 

attainment or unclassifiable. Chapter 

1200–3–22, Lead Emission Standards, 

of Tennessee’s SIP, published on August 

12, 1985, specifies requirements for 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 17171 

5On January 4, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals, 

in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, No. 

08–1250, 2013 WL 45653 (D.C. Cir., filed July 15, 

2008) (consolidated with 09–1102, 11–1430), issued 

a judgment that remanded EPA’s 2007 and 2008 

rules implementing the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. The 

court ordered EPA to ‘‘repromulgate these rules 

pursuant to Subpart 4 consistent with this 

opinion.’’ Id. at * 8. Subpart 4 of Part D, Title 1 of 

the CAA establishes additional provisions for 

particulate matter nonattainment areas. 

The 2008 implementation rule addressed by the 

court decision, ‘‘Implementation of New Source 

Review (NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less 

Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5),’’ 73 FR 28321 (May 

16, 2008), promulgated NSR requirements for 

implementation of PM2.5 in both nonattainment 

areas (nonattainment NSR) and attainment/ 

unclassifiable areas (PSD). As the requirements of 

Subpart 4 only pertain to nonattainment areas, EPA 

does not consider the portions of the 2008 rule that 

address requirements for PM2.5 attainment and 

unclassifiable areas to be affected by the court’s 

opinion. Moreover, EPA does not anticipate the 

need to revise any PSD requirements promulgated 

in the 2008 rule in order to comply with the court’s 

decision. Accordingly, EPA’s approval in part and 

conditional approval in part of Tennessee’s 

infrastructure SIP as to elements (C), (D)(i)(II), or (J) 

with respect to the PSD requirements promulgated 

by the 2008 implementation rule does not conflict 

with the court’s opinion. 

The court’s decision with respect to the 

nonattainment NSR requirements promulgated by 

the 2008 implementation rule also does not affect 

EPA’s action on the present infrastructure action. 

EPA interprets the Act to exclude nonattainment 

area requirements, including requirements 

associated with a nonattainment NSR program, 

from infrastructure SIP submissions due 3 years 

after adoption or revision of a NAAQS. Instead, 

these elements are typically referred to as 

nonattainment SIP or attainment plan elements, 

which would be due by the dates statutorily 

prescribed under subpart 2 through 5 under part D, 

extending as far as 10 years following designations 

for some elements. 

6Full approval of this section would require EPA 

to take final action approving the increment 

portions of Tennessee’s PSD PM2.5 Increments, SILs 

and SMC Rule revision prior to, or concurrently 

with, final action to approve section 110(a)(2)(C). 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology for significant existing 

sources of Lead (October 29, 2001, 66 

FR 44632). 

In addition to these requirements, 

there are four other revisions to the 

Tennessee SIP that that are necessary to 

meet the requirements of infrastructure 

element 110(a)(2)(C). These four 

revisions are related to 1) the Ozone 

Implementation NSR Update (November 

29, 2005, 70 FR 71612); 2) the 

‘‘Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring 

Rule’’ (June 3, 2010, 75 FR 31514); 3) 

the NSR PM2.5 Rule (May 16, 2008, 73 

FR 28321); 5 and 4) the final rulemaking 

entitled ‘‘Final Rule Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) for 

Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 

Micrometers (PM2.5)—Increments, 

Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and 

Significant monitoring Concentration 

(SMC): Final Rule’’ hereafter referred to 

as ‘‘PM2.5 PSD Increment-SILs-SMC 

Rule’’ (75 FR 64864). 

The first necessary revision to the 

Tennessee SIP (Ozone Implementation 

NSR Update revision) was submitted by 

TDEC on May 28, 2009. This revision 

modified provisions of the State’s 

implementation plan at Chapter 1200– 

3–9, Construction and Operating 

Permits, in order to meet the applicable 

requirements of the Ozone 

Implementation NSR Update. EPA 

approved this revision on February 7, 

2012. See 77 FR 6016. 

The second necessary revision 

pertains to changes in the PSD program 

that were promulgated in the 

Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Tailoring Rule. 

TDEC submitted a revision to EPA on 

January 11, 2012, to address these 

changes. The revision establishes 

appropriate emission thresholds for 

determining which new stationary 

sources and modification projects 

become subject to Tennessee’s PSD 

permitting requirements for their GHG 

emissions, and thereby addresses the 

thresholds for GHG permitting 

applicability in Tennessee. EPA 

approved this revision on February 28, 

2012. See 77 FR 11744. 

The third necessary revision pertains 

to the adoption of PSD and 

Nonattainment New Source Review 

(NNSR) requirements related to the 

implementation of the NSR PM2.5 Rule. 

On July 29, 2011, TDEC submitted 

revisions to its PSD/NSR regulations for 

EPA approval to revise the Tennessee 

SIP in Chapter 1200–03–09–.01, 

Construction Permits. This revision 

addresses the required federal PSD and 

NNSR permitting provisions governing 

the implementation of the NSR program 

for PM2.5 as promulgated in the NSR 

PM2.5 Rule. See 73 FR 28321 (May 16, 

2008). EPA finalized approval of 

Tennessee’s July 29, 2011, submittal on 

July 30, 2012. See 77 FR 44481. 

The fourth necessary revision pertains 

to the increments portion of the PM2.5

PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule. This 

rule requires states to regulate the 

construction and modification of any 

major stationary source locating in an 

attainment or unclassifiable area, where 

the source’s emissions may cause or 

contribute to a violation of the NAAQS. 

Currently, Tennessee’s SIP does not 

contain provisions to address this 

requirement. On October 4, 2012, 

Tennessee submitted a letter to EPA 

with a schedule and commitment to 

approve the necessary specific 

enforceable SIP revision to address its 

SIP deficiencies related to the October 

20, 2010, PSD PM2.5 Increments, SILs 

and SMC Rule increments requirements. 

The Tennessee letter, which commits 

the State to submitting this revision to 

EPA within one year, can be accessed at 

www.regulations.gov using Docket ID 

No. EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0582. Based 

on Tennessee’s commitment, EPA is 

proposing to conditionally approve the 

portion of section 110(a)(2)(C) related to 

the increments requirements of the 

PM2.5 Increments, SILs and SMC Rule 

consistent with section 110(k)(4) of the 

Act. Failure by Tennessee to provide 

this revision by March 6, 2014 would 

automatically result in the conditional 

approval converting to a disapproval. 

Should that occur, EPA would provide 

the public with notice of such a 

disapproval in the Federal Register. 

As described above, EPA is also 

proposing, in the alternative, to approve 

section 110(a)(2)(C) related to the 

increments requirements of the PM2.5

Increments, SILs and SMC Rule. In this 

action, EPA is proposing to approve in 

part, and in the alternative conditionally 

approve in part, Tennessee’s 

infrastructure SIP for the 2008 lead 

NAAQS with respect to the general 

requirement in section 110(a)(2)(C) to 

include a program in the SIP that 

regulates the modification and 

construction of any stationary source as 

necessary to assure that the NAAQS are 

achieved. Minor sources are subject to 

the statutory requirements in section 

110(a)(2)(C) of the CAA which requires 

‘‘ * * * regulations of the modification 

and construction of any stationary 

source * * * as necessary to assure that 

the NAAQS are achieved.’’ These 

programs should be established in each 

state within 3 years of the promulgation 

of a new revised NAAQS, and may be 

particularly important because virtually 

all sources of lead are minor sources. 

EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that Tennessee’s SIP 

(with the exception of the requirements 

related to PM2.5 increments) and 

practices are adequate for program 

enforcement of control measures 

including review of proposed new 

sources related to the 2008 lead 

NAAQS. 

Should Tennessee submit its revision 

to address the applicable portions of 

this Rule before EPA finalizes a 

conditional approval this portion of 

section 110(a)(2)(C), EPA intends 

finalize full approval for this section.6

In the event, EPA does not approve the 

increments portion of Tennessee PSD 

PM2.5 Increments, SILs and SMC Rule 

revision into the SIP prior to final action 

on the State’s infrastructure SIP, EPA 

intends to finalize a conditional approve 

of this section 110(a)(2)(C) 

requirements. 

Collectively, the above-described SIP 

revisions address requisite requirements 

of infrastructure element 110(a)(2)(C) 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
17172 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

7For example EPA’s experience with the initial 

lead designations suggest that sources that emit less 

than 0.5 tpy or that are located more than two miles 

from the state border generally appear unlikely to 

contribute significantly to the nonattainment in 

another state. 

8The first facility, Exide Technologies, is located 

at 364 Exide Drive in Bristol Tennessee, which is 

approximately 5 miles from the nearest border. The 

second facility is Gerdau Ameristeel, located at 

4615 Coster Road NE in Knoxville, Tennessee, 

which is approximately 100 miles from the nearest 

border. 

9 (1) EPA’s approval of Tennessee’s PSD/NSR 

regulations which address the Ozone 

Implementation NSR Update requirements, (2) 

EPA’s approval of Tennessee’s PSD GHG Tailoring 

Rule revisions which addresses the thresholds for 

GHG permitting applicability in Tennessee, and (3) 

EPA’s approval of Tennessee’s NSR PM2.5 Rule, 

which adopts required federal PSD and NNSR 

permitting provisions governing the 

implementation of the NSR program for PM2.5 as 

promulgated in the NSR PM2.5 Rule. 

For additional detailed information on these 

requirements, see section 3 above. 

10Refer to EPA’s proposed rulemaking entitled 

‘‘Approval and Promulgation of Implementation 

Plans: Region 4 States; 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) 

Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 and 2006 

Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards,’’ for more detailed information 

in support of EPA’s proposed approval of 

and are necessary for today’s 

rulemaking to propose approval of 

infrastructure SIP element 110(a)(2)(C). 

EPA also notes that today’s action is not 

proposing to approve or disapprove the 

State’s existing minor NSR program 

itself to the extent that it is inconsistent 

with EPA’s regulations governing this 

program. EPA believes that a number of 

states may have minor NSR provisions 

that are contrary to the existing EPA 

regulations for this program. EPA 

intends to work with states to reconcile 

state minor NSR programs with EPA’s 

regulatory provisions for the program. 

The statutory requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(C) provide for considerable 

flexibility in designing minor NSR 

programs, and EPA believes it may be 

time to revisit the regulatory 

requirements for this program to give 

the states an appropriate level of 

flexibility to design a program that 

meets their particular air quality 

concerns, while assuring reasonable 

consistency across the country in 

protecting the NAAQS with respect to 

new and modified minor sources. 

4. 110(a)(2)(D)(i) and (ii) Interstate 

and International transport provisions: 

EPA is proposing to approve, and in the 

alternative conditionally approve in 

part, Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP for 

the 2008 lead NAAQS with respect to 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) to include a 

program in the SIP that regulates the 

modification and construction of any 

stationary source subject to PSD as 

necessary to assure that the NAAQS are 

achieved. Specifically, as mentioned 

above, in this action, EPA is proposing 

to approve in part and in the alternative, 

conditionally approve in part 

Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP for the 

2008 Lead NAAQS related to the PM2.5

PSD increments and with respect to the 

general requirement in section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) to include a program in 

the SIP that regulates the modification 

and construction of any stationary 

source as necessary to assure that the 

NAAQS are achieved. Minor sources are 

subject to the statutory requirements in 

section 110(a)(2)(C) of the CAA which 

requires ‘‘* * * regulations of the 

modification and construction of any 

stationary source * * * as necessary to 

assure that the NAAQS are achieved.’’ 

These programs should be established 

in each state within 3 years of the 

promulgation of a new revised NAAQS, 

and may be particularly important 

because virtually all sources of lead are 

minor sources. 

Chapter 1200–9–.01(5) Growth Policy; 

1200–3–9–.01(4) Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration of Air Quality; 

and Chapter 1200–3–22 Lead Emission 

of the Tennessee SIP outline how the 

State will notify neighboring states of 

potential impacts from new or modified 

sources. Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) provides 

for infrastructure SIPs to include 

provisions prohibiting any source or 

other type of emissions activity in one 

state from contributing significantly to 

nonattainment, or interfering with 

maintenance, of the NAAQS in another 

state. The preceding requirements, from 

subsection 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), 

respectively refer to what may be called 

prongs 1 and 2. The physical properties 

of lead prevent lead emission from 

experiencing that same travel or 

formation phenomena as PM2.5 and 

ozone for interstate transport as outlined 

in prongs 1 and 2. More specifically, 

there is a sharp decrease in the lead 

concentrations, at least in the coarse 

fraction, as the distance from a lead 

source increases. EPA believes that the 

requirements of prongs 1 and 2 can be 

satisfied through a state’s assessment as 

to whether a lead source located within 

its State in close proximity to a state 

border has emissions that contribute 

significantly to the nonattainment or 

interfere with maintenance of the 

NAAQS in the neighboring state.7

Tennessee has two lead sources that 

have emissions of lead over 0.5 tons per 

year (tpy). Both sources are located well 

beyond 2 miles from the State border.8

Therefore, EPA has made the 

preliminary determination that 

Tennessee’s SIP meets the requirements 

of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). 

Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), as it relates 

to PSD requirements, (referred to as 

prong 3) may be met by the State’s 

confirmation in an infrastructure SIP 

submission that new major sources and 

major modifications in the state are 

subject to PSD and (if the state contains 

a nonattainment area for the relevant 

pollutant) NNSR programs that 

implement the 2008 Lead NAAQS. 

As discussed above in the discussion 

for the PSD requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(C), Tennessee’s SIP currently 

contains three of the four necessary 

provisions for the State’s PSD program.9

On October 4, 2012, Tennessee 

submitted a letter to EPA with a 

schedule and commitment to provide 

the necessary SIP revision to address its 

SIP deficiencies related to the October 

20, 2010, PSD PM2.5 Increments, SILs, 

and SMC Rule requirements. Based on 

Tennessee’s commitment, EPA is 

proposing to conditionally approve the 

portion section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), 

related to the increments requirements 

of the PM2.5 Increments, SILs and SMC 

Rule consistent with section 110(k)(4) of 

the Act. EPA’s proposed conditional of 

prong 3, if finalized, would obligate 

Tennessee to provide the SIP revision to 

address the increment portion of the 

PSD PM2.5 Increments, SILs and SMC 

Rule by March 6, 2014. Failure by 

Tennessee to provide this revision by 

that date would automatically result in 

such a conditional approval converting 

to a disapproval. Should that occur, 

EPA would provide the public with 

notice of such a disapproval in the 

Federal Register. 

EPA is also today proposing full 

approval of prong 3. In the event that 

Tennessee submits a revision to address 

increments portion of the PSD PM2.5

Increments, SILs and SMC Rule, and 

EPA approves that submission prior to 

finalizing this infrastructure SIP action, 

EPA believes Tennessee’s 2008 Lead 

infrastructure SIP for prong 3 of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) will then be fully 

approvable. 

With regard to section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), the visibility subelement, referred to as prong 4, 

significant impacts from lead emissions 

from stationary sources are expected to 

be limited to short distances from the 

source. Lead stationary sources in 

Tennessee are located at distances from 

Class I areas such that visibility impacts 

are negligible. Where a state’s regional 

haze SIP has been approved as meeting 

all current obligations, EPA has 

determined that such an approved plan 

demonstrates compliance with the 

prong 4 requirements. EPA completed a 

limited approval and limited 

disapproval of Tennessee’s regional 

haze SIP,10 with the exception of the 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 17173 

Tennessee’s 2008 lead infrastructure submission as 

it relates to visibility. See 78 FR 11805 (February 

20, 2013). 

11 July 23, 2012, is one year from the approval 

date of EPA’s final rulemaking to conditionally 

approve sub-section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) regarding 

section 128(a)(1) for purposes of the 1997 8-hour 

Ozone NAAQS. 

best available retrofit technology 

(BART) for the Eastman Chemical 

Company portion, on April, 24, 2012. 

See 77 FR 24392. On November 27, 

2012, EPA approved the Eastman 

Chemical Company BART portion of 

Tennessee’s regional haze submittal. See 

77 FR 70689. 

With regard to the requirements of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(ii), Tennessee does 

not have any pending obligation under 

sections 115 and 126 of the CAA. With 

the exception of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II), related to PSD, EPA 

has made the preliminary determination 

that Tennessee’s SIP and practices are 

adequate for insuring compliance with 

the applicable requirements relating to 

interstate and international pollution 

abatement for the 2008 lead NAAQS. 

For the reasons described above, EPA is 

proposing full approval of section 

110(a)(2)(D), and in the alternative, 

conditional approval of section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i) prong 3 related to the 

increment requirements of the PSD 

PM2.5 Increments, SILs and SMC Rule. 

5. 110(a)(2)(E) Adequate resources: 

Section 110(a)(2)(E) requires that each 

implementation plan provide (i) 

necessary assurances that the State will 

have adequate personnel, funding, and 

authority under state law to carry out its 

implementation plan, (ii) that the State 

comply with the requirements 

respecting State Boards pursuant to 

section 128 of the Act, and (iii) 

necessary assurances that, where the 

State has relied on a local or regional 

government, agency, or instrumentality 

for the implementation of any plan 

provision, the State has responsibility 

for ensuring adequate implementation 

of such plan provisions. EPA is 

proposing to approve Tennessee’s SIP as 

meeting the requirements of sections 

110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii). With respect to 

section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) (regarding state 

boards), EPA is proposing to approve, 

and in the alternative conditionally 

approve in part, this sub-element. EPA’s 

rationale for today’s proposals 

respecting each section of 110(a)(2)(E) is 

described in turn below. 

With respect to sections 110(a)(2)(E)(i) 

and (iii), TDEC, through the Tennessee 

Air Pollution Control Board, is 

responsible for promulgating rules and 

regulations for the NAAQS, emissions 

standards general policies, a system of 

permits, fee schedules for the review of 

plans, and other planning needs. As 

evidence of the adequacy of TDEC’s 

resources regarding sections 

110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (iii), EPA submitted a 

letter to Tennessee on April 24, 2012, 

outlining 105 grant commitments and 

current status of these commitments for 

fiscal year 2011. The letter EPA 

submitted to Tennessee can be accessed 

at www.regulations.gov using Docket ID 

No. EPA–R04–OAR–2012–0582. 

Annually, states update these grant 

commitments based on current SIP 

requirements, air quality planning, and 

applicable requirements related to the 

NAAQS. There were no outstanding 

issues in relation to the SIP for fiscal 

year 2011, therefore, Tennessee’s grants 

were finalized and closed out. EPA has 

made the preliminary determination 

that Tennessee has adequate resources 

for implementation of the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS. 

With respect to section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii), EPA is proposing to 

approve, and in the alternative, to 

conditionally approve in part 

Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP as to this 

requirement. Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) 

provides that infrastructure SIPs must 

require compliance with section 128 of 

CAA requirements respecting State 

boards. Section 128, in turn, provides at 

subsection (a)(1) that each SIP shall 

require that any board or body which 

approves permits or enforcement orders 

shall be subject to the described public 

interest and income restrictions therein. 

Subsection 128(a)(2) requires that any 

board or body, or the head of an 

executive agency with similar power to 

approve permits or enforcement orders 

under the CAA, shall also be subject to 

conflict of interest disclosure 

requirements. 

EPA believes the Tennessee SIP 

currently meets the requirements of 

section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) with respect to 

section 128(a)(2) obligations, but does 

not meet the section 128(a)(1) 

obligations. To address section 128(a)(2) 

requirements, the provisions of 

Tennessee Rule Chapter 1200–3–17 

have been incorporated into the 

Tennessee SIP. See 67 FR 55322. 

Regarding section 128(a)(1) 

requirements, Tennessee previously 

committed to adopt specific enforceable 

measures into its SIP within one year to 

address the applicable portions of 

section 128(a)(1) for the infrastructure 

SIP of another NAAQS. Tennessee’s 

section 128(a)(1) commitment letter to 

EPA, dated March 28, 2012, can be 

accessed at www.regulations.gov using 

docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2011– 

0353. Based upon that commitment, on 

July 23, 2012, EPA took final action to 

conditionally approve infrastructure 

sub-element 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) regarding 

section 128(a)(1) requirements for 

purposes of the 1997 8-hour Ozone 

NAAQS. See 77 FR 42997. EPA is today 

proposing to conditionally approve 

Tennessee’s 2008 Lead infrastructure 

SIP for section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii) related to 

the section 128(a)(1) requirements based 

upon the State’s earlier commitment to 

adopt the specific enforceable measures 

by July 23, 2013.11 Failure by the State 

to adopt these provisions and submit 

them to EPA for incorporation into the 

SIP by July 23, 2013, would result in 

today’s conditional approval being 

treated as a disapproval. Should that 

occur, EPA would provide the public 

with notice of such a disapproval in the 

Federal Register. 

As with the conditional approvals 

proposed in this action, EPA is also 

proposing, in the alternative, to fully 

approve infrastructure section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) regarding section 

128(a)(1) requirements. In the event that 

Tennessee submits a revision to address 

the section 128(a)(1) requirements, and 

EPA approves that submission prior to 

finalizing this infrastructure SIP action, 

EPA believes Tennessee’s 2008 Lead 

infrastructure SIP for section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) will then be fully 

approvable. EPA has made the 

preliminary determination that 

Tennessee, once the above described 

changes have been incorporated into the 

SIP, will have adequate resources for 

implementation of 2008 Lead NAAQS. 

6. 110(a)(2)(F) Stationary source 

monitoring system: Tennessee’s 

infrastructure submission describes how 

the State has established requirements 

for compliance testing by emissions 

sampling and analysis, and for 

emissions and operation monitoring to 

ensure the quality of data in the State. 

TDEC uses these data to track progress 

towards maintaining the NAAQS, 

develop control and maintenance 

strategies, identify sources and general 

emission levels, and determine 

compliance with emission regulations 

and additional EPA requirements. These 

requirements are provided in Chapter 

1200–3–10, Required Sampling, 

Recording and Reporting, of the 

Tennessee SIP. 

Additionally, Tennessee is required to 

submit emissions data to EPA for 

purposes of the National Emissions 

Inventory (NEI). The NEI is EPA’s 

central repository for air emissions data. 

EPA published the Air Emissions 

Reporting Rule (AERR) on December 5, 

2008, which modified the requirements 

for collecting and reporting air 

emissions data (73 FR 76539). The 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
17174 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

12 (1) EPA’s approval of Tennessee’s PSD/NSR 

regulations which address the Ozone 

Implementation NSR Update requirements, (2) 

EPA’s approval of Tennessee’s PSD GHG Tailoring 

Rule revisions which addresses the thresholds for 

GHG permitting applicability in Tennessee, and (3) 

EPA’s approval of Tennessee’s NSR PM2.5 Rule, 

which adopts required federal PSD and NNSR 

permitting provisions governing the 

implementation of the NSR program for PM2.5 as 

promulgated in the NSR PM2.5 Rule. 

For additional detailed information on these 

requirements, see section 3 above. 

AERR shortened the time states had to 

report emissions data from 17 to 12 

months, giving states one calendar year 

to submit emissions data. All states are 

required to submit a comprehensive 

emissions inventory every three years 

and report emissions for certain larger 

sources annually through EPA’s online 

Emissions Inventory System. States 

report emissions data for the six criteria 

pollutants and their associated 

precursors—nitrogen oxides, sulfur 

dioxide, ammonia, lead, carbon 

monoxide, particulate matter, and 

volatile organic compounds. Many 

states also voluntarily report emissions 

of hazardous air pollutants. Tennessee 

made its latest update to the NEI on 

September 11, 2012. EPA compiles the 

emissions data, supplementing it where 

necessary, and releases it to the general 

public through the Web site http:// 

www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ 

eiinformation.html. EPA has made the 

preliminary determination that 

Tennessee’s SIP and practices are 

adequate for the stationary source 

monitoring systems related to the 2008 

lead NAAQS. 

7. 110(a)(2)(G) Emergency power: 

Chapter 1200–3–15, Emergency Episode 

Requirements, of the Tennessee SIP 

identifies air pollution emergency 

episodes and preplanned abatement 

strategies. These criteria have 

previously been approved by EPA. EPA 

has made the preliminary determination 

that Tennessee’s SIP and practices are 

adequate for emergency powers related 

to the 2008 Lead NAAQS. 

8. 110(a)(2)(H) Future SIP revisions: 

As previously discussed, TDEC is 

responsible for adopting air quality 

rules and revising SIPs as needed to 

attain or maintain the NAAQS. 

Tennessee has the ability and authority 

to respond to calls for SIP revisions, and 

has provided a number of SIP revisions 

over the years for implementation of the 

NAAQS. 

Tennessee has one area, Bristol, TN, 

that is designated as nonattainment for 

the 2008 Lead NAAQS. On August 29, 

2012, EPA finalized a clean data 

determination for Bristol, TN. See 77 FR 

52232. This determination of attaining 

data is based upon complete, qualityassured and certified ambient air 

monitoring data for the 2009–2011 

period showing that the Area has 

monitored attainment of the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS. Additionally, as a result of this 

determination, the requirements for the 

Area to submit an attainment 

demonstration, together with reasonably 

available control measures, a reasonable 

further progress (RFP) plan, and 

contingency measures for failure to meet 

RFP and attainment deadlines are 

suspended for so long as the Area 

continues to attain the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS. EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that Tennessee’s SIP and 

practices adequately demonstrate a 

commitment to provide future SIP 

revisions related to the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS when necessary. 

9. 110(a)(2)(J). EPA is proposing to 

approve in part, and conditionally 

approve in part to approve Tennessee’s 

infrastructure SIP for the 2008 lead 

NAAQS with respect to the general 

requirement in section 110(a)(2)(J) to 

include a program in the SIP that 

provides for meeting the applicable 

consultation requirements of section 

121, the public notification 

requirements of section 127; and the 

PSD and visibility protection 

requirements of part C of the Act. 

110(a)(2)(J) (121 consultation) 

Consultation with government officials: 

Chapter 1200–3–9 Construction and 

Operating Permits, as well as the 

Regional Haze Implementation Plan 

(which allows for consultation between 

appropriate state, local, and tribal air 

pollution control agencies as well as the 

corresponding Federal Land Managers), 

provide for consultation with 

government officials whose jurisdictions 

might be affected by SIP development 

activities. Tennessee adopted state-wide 

consultation procedures for the 

implementation of transportation 

conformity. These consultation 

procedures include considerations 

associated with the development of 

mobile inventories for SIPs. 

Implementation of transportation 

conformity as outlined in the 

consultation procedures requires TDEC 

to consult with federal, state and local 

transportation and air quality agency 

officials on the development of motor 

vehicle emissions budgets. EPA 

approved Tennessee’s consultation 

procedures on May 16, 2003 (68 FR 

26492). While transportation conformity 

requirements do not apply for lead 

because of the nature of the standard, 

the consultation procedures that TDEC 

has in place to implement 

transportation conformity requirements 

provides evidence of the State’s ability 

to consult with other governmental 

agencies on air quality issues. EPA has 

made the preliminary determination 

that Tennessee’s SIP and practices 

adequately demonstrate consultation 

with government officials related to the 

2008 Lead NAAQS when necessary. 

110(a)(2)(J) (127 public notification) 

Public notification: Chapter 1200–3–15, 

Emergency Episode Requirements, 

requires that TDEC notify the public of 

any air pollution episode or NAAQS 

violation. EPA has made the 

preliminary determination that 

Tennessee’s SIP and practices 

adequately demonstrate the State’s 

ability to provide public notification 

related to the 2008 Lead NAAQS when 

necessary. 

110(a)(2)(J) (Part C) PSD and visibility 

protection: In this action, EPA is 

proposing to approve in part, and 

conditionally approve in part 

Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP for the 

2008 lead NAAQS with respect to the 

general requirement in section 

110(a)(2)(J) to include a program in the 

SIP that regulates the modification and 

construction of any stationary source as 

necessary to assure that the NAAQS are 

achieved. Chapter 1200–3–9, 

Construction and Operating Permits, of 

Tennessee’s SIP pertains to the 

construction of any new major 

stationary source or any project at an 

existing major stationary source in an 

area designated as nonattainment, 

attainment or unclassifiable. Chapter 

1200–3–22, Lead Emission Standards, 

of Tennessee’s SIP, published on August 

12, 1985, specifies requirements for 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology for significant existing 

sources of lead (October 29, 2001, 66 FR 

44632). There are four other revisions to 

the Tennessee SIP that are necessary to 

meet the requirements of infrastructure 

element 110(a)(2)(C). These four 

revisions are related to the Ozone 

Implementation NSR Update (November 

29, 2005, 70 FR 71612), the ‘‘Prevention 

of Significant Deterioration and Title V 

Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule’’ (June 3, 

2010, 75 FR 31514), the NSR PM2.5 Rule 

(May 16, 2008, 73 FR 28321), and PM2.5

PSD Increment-SILs-SMC Rule (October 

20, 2010, 75 FR 64864). 

Tennessee’s SIP contains provisions 

for the State’s PSD program for three of 

the four program requirements.12 On 

October 4, 2012, Tennessee submitted a 

letter to EPA with a schedule and 

commitment to provide the necessary 

SIP revision to address its SIP 

deficiencies related to the October 20, 

2010, final rulemaking related to PSD 

PM2.5 Increments, SILs, and SMC Rule 

requirements. Based on Tennessee’s 

commitment, EPA is proposing to 

conditionally approve section 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 17175 

13 (1) EPA’s approval of Tennessee’s PSD/NSR 

regulations which address the Ozone 

Implementation NSR Update requirements, (2) 

EPA’s approval of Tennessee’s PSD GHG Tailoring 

Rule revisions which addresses the thresholds for 

GHG permitting applicability in Tennessee, (3) 

EPA’s approval of Tennessee’s NSR PM2.5 Rule, 

which adopts required federal PSD and NNSR 

permitting provisions governing the 

implementation of the NSR program for PM2.5 as 

promulgated in the NSR PM2.5 Rule, and (4) EPA’s 

proposed conditional approval of Tennessee’s PSD 

PM2.5 Increments, SILs, and SMC rulemaking which 

addresses rules that regulate the construction and 

modification of any major stationary source locating 

in an attainment or unclassifiable area, where the 

source’s emissions may cause or contribute to a 

violation of the NAAQS. 

. 

110(a)(2)(J), related to PSD consistent 

with section 110(k)(4) of the Act. 

These SIP revisions 13 address 

requisite requirements of infrastructure 

element 110(a)(2)(J) and are necessary 

for today’s rulemaking to propose to 

approve, in part, and conditionally 

approve, in part, infrastructure SIP 

element 110(a)(2)(J). EPA also notes that 

today’s action is not proposing to 

approve or disapprove the State’s 

existing minor NSR program itself to the 

extent that it is inconsistent with EPA’s 

regulations governing this program. EPA 

believes that a number of states may 

have minor NSR provisions that are 

contrary to the existing EPA regulations 

for this program. EPA intends to work 

with states to reconcile state minor NSR 

programs with EPA’s regulatory 

provisions for the program. The 

statutory requirements of section 

110(a)(2)(J) provide for considerable 

flexibility in designing minor NSR 

programs, and EPA believes it may be 

time to revisit the regulatory 

requirements for this program to give 

the states an appropriate level of 

flexibility to design a program that 

meets their particular air quality 

concerns, while assuring reasonable 

consistency across the country in 

protecting the NAAQS with respect to 

new and modified minor sources. 

In this action, EPA is also proposing 

to conditionally approve Tennessee’s 

infrastructure SIP for the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS with respect to the general 

requirement in section 110(a)(2)(J) to 

include a program in the SIP that 

regulates the modification and 

construction of any stationary source as 

necessary to assure that the NAAQS are 

achieved. Minor sources are subject to 

the statutory requirements in section 

110(a)(2)(C) of the CAA which requires 

‘‘* * * regulations of the modification 

and construction of any stationary 

source * * * as necessary to assure that 

the NAAQS are achieved.’’ These 

programs should be established in each 

state within 3 years of the promulgation 

of a new revised NAAQS, and may be 

particularly important because virtually 

all sources of lead are minor sources. 

EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that Tennessee’s SIP and 

practices are adequate for program 

enforcement of control measures 

including review of proposed new 

sources related to the 2008 lead 

NAAQS. 

With regard to the applicable 

requirements for visibility protection, 

EPA recognizes that states are subject to 

visibility and regional haze program 

requirements under part C of the Act 

(which includes sections 169A and 

169B). In the event of the establishment 

of a new NAAQS, however, the 

visibility and regional haze program 

requirements under part C do not 

change. Thus, EPA finds that there is no 

new visibility obligation ‘‘triggered’’ 

under section 110(a)(2)(J) when a new 

NAAQS becomes effective. This would 

be the case even in the event a 

secondary PM2.5 NAAQS for visibility is 

established, because this NAAQS would 

not affect visibility requirements under 

part C. Tennessee has submitted SIP 

revisions for approval to satisfy the 

requirements of the CAA Section 169A 

and 169B, and the regional haze and 

best available retrofit technology rules 

contained in 40 CFR 51.308. On April 

24, 2012, EPA published a final 

rulemaking regarding Tennessee’s 

regional haze program. See 77 FR 24392. 

On November 27, 2012, EPA approved 

the Eastman Chemical Company BART 

portion of Tennessee’s regional haze 

submittal. See 77 FR 70689. EPA has 

made the preliminary determination 

that Tennessee’s SIP and practices 

adequately demonstrate the State’s 

ability to implement PSD programs and 

to provide for visibility protection 

related to the 2008 Lead NAAQS when 

necessary. 

10. 110(a)(2)(K) Air quality and 

modeling/data: Chapter 1200–3–9– 

.01(4)(k), Air Quality Models, of the 

Tennessee SIP specify that required air 

modeling be conducted in accordance 

with 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix W 

‘‘Guideline on Air Quality Models,’’ as 

incorporated into the Tennessee SIP. 

These standards demonstrate that 

Tennessee has the authority to provide 

relevant data for the purpose of 

predicting the effect on ambient air 

quality of the Lead NAAQS. 

Additionally, Tennessee supports a 

regional effort to coordinate the 

development of emissions inventories 

and conduct regional modeling for 

several NAAQS, including the Lead 

NAAQS, for the southeastern states. 

Taken as a whole, Tennessee’s air 

quality regulations and practices 

demonstrate that TDEC has the 

authority to provide relevant data for 

the purpose of predicting the effect on 

ambient air quality of the Lead NAAQS. 

EPA has made the preliminary 

determination that Tennessee’s SIP and 

practices adequately demonstrate the 

State’s ability to provide for air quality 

and modeling, along with analysis of the 

associated data, related to the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS when necessary. 

11. 110(a)(2)(L) Permitting fees: As 

discussed above, Tennessee’s SIP 

provides for the review of construction 

permits. Permitting fees in Tennessee 

are collected through the State’s 

federally-approved title V fees program 

and consistent with Chapter 1200–03– 

26-.02, Permit-Related Fees, of the 

Tennessee Code. EPA has made the 

preliminary determination that 

Tennessee’s SIP and practices 

adequately provide for permitting fees 

related to the 2008 Lead NAAQS when 

necessary. 

12. 110(a)(2)(M) Consultation/ 

participation by affected local entities: 

Chapter 1200–3–9–.01(4)(k), Public 

Participation, of the Tennessee SIP 

requires that TDEC notify the public of 

an application, preliminary 

determination, the activity or activities 

involved in the permit action, any 

emissions change associated with any 

permit modification, and the 

opportunity for comment prior to 

making a final permitting decision. By 

way of example, TDEC has recently 

worked closely with local political 

subdivisions during the development of 

its Transportation Conformity SIP, 

Regional Haze Implementation Plan, 

and Early Action Compacts. EPA has 

made the preliminary determination 

that Tennessee’s SIP and practices 

adequately demonstrate consultation 

with affected local entities related to the 

2008 Lead NAAQS when necessary. 

V. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing alternative actions 

to (1) approve in full and (2) approve in 

part and conditionally approve in part. 

With the exception of sections 

110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) related to 

PSD, 110(a)(2)(E)(ii), and 110(a)(2)(J) 

related to PSD, EPA is proposing to 

determine that Tennessee’s 

infrastructure submission, provided to 

EPA on October 19, 2009, addressed the 

required infrastructure elements for the 

2008 Lead NAAQS. EPA is proposing to 

approve in part and conditionally 

approve in part, Tennessee’s SIP 

submission consistent with section 

110(k)(3) of the CAA. 

As described above, with the 

exception of sections 110(a)(2)(C), 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) related to PSD, 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
17176 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 54 / Wednesday, March 20, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) (as it relates to section 

128(a)(1), and 110(a)(2)(J) related to PSD 

TDEC has addressed the elements of the 

CAA 110(a)(1) and (2) SIP requirements 

pursuant to section 110 of the CAA to 

ensure that the 2008 lead NAAQS are 

implemented, enforced, and maintained 

in Tennessee. With respect to sections 

110(a)(2)(C), 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) related to 

PSD, and 110(a)(2)(J) related to PSD, 

EPA is proposing to conditionally 

approve Tennessee’s infrastructure SIP 

based on an October 4, 2012, 

commitment that TDEC will provide the 

necessary SIP revision to address its SIP 

deficiencies related to the October 20, 

2010, final rulemaking related to PSD 

PM2.5 Increments, SILs, and SMC Rule 

requirements. With respect to section 

110(a)(2)(E)(ii) (referencing section 128 

of the CAA), EPA is proposing to 

conditionally approve Tennessee’s 

infrastructure SIP based on a March 28, 

2012, commitment that TDEC will adopt 

specific enforceable measures into its 

SIP and submit these revisions to EPA 

July 23, 2013, to address the applicable 

portions of section 128. EPA intends to 

move forward with finalizing the 

conditional approval for these elements 

consistent with section 110(k)(4) of the 

Act. EPA is also proposing to approve 

Tennessee’s infrastructure submission 

for the 2008 Lead NAAQS, with the 

exception of section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii), 

because its October 19, 2009, 

submission is consistent with section 

110 of the CAA. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed 

action merely approves state law as 

meeting federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed rule does 

not have tribal implications as specified 

by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Lead, and Recordkeeping requirements. 

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

Dated: March 11, 2013. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2013–06418 Filed 3–19–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

GENERAL SERVICES 

ADMINISTRATION 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND 

SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

48 CFR Part 52 

[FAR Case 2012–016; Docket 2012–0016; 

Sequence 1] 

RIN 9000–AM50 

Federal Acquisition Regulation; 

Defense Base Act 

AGENCIES: Department of Defense (DoD), 

General Services Administration (GSA), 

and National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (NASA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: DoD, GSA, and NASA are 

proposing to amend the Federal 

Acquisition Regulation (FAR) to clarify 

contractor and subcontractor 

responsibilities to obtain workers’ 

compensation insurance or to qualify as 

a self-insurer, and other requirements, 

under the terms of the Longshore and 

Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act as 

extended by the Defense Base Act. 

DATES: Interested parties should submit 

written comments to the Regulatory 

Secretariat at one of the addressees 

shown below on or before May 20, 2013 

to be considered in the formation of the 

final rule. 

ADDRESSES: Submit comments in 

response to FAR Case 2012–016 by any 

of the following methods: 

• Regulations.gov: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Submit comments 

via the Federal eRulemaking portal by 

searching for ‘‘FAR Case 2012–016.’’ 

Select the link ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ 

that corresponds with ‘‘FAR Case 2012– 

016.’’ Follow the instructions provided 

at the ‘‘Submit a Comment’’ screen. 

Please include your name, company 

name (if any), and ‘‘FAR Case 2012– 

016’’ on your attached document. 

• Fax: 202–501–4067. 

• Mail: General Services 

Administration, Regulatory Secretariat 

(MVCB), ATTN: Hada Flowers, 1275 

First Street NE., 7th Floor, Washington, 

DC 20417. 

Instructions: Please submit comments 

only and cite FAR Case 2012–016, in all 

correspondence related to this case. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal and/or business confidential 

information provided. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. 

Edward N. Chambers, Procurement 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS