Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 21825 

Dated: April 7, 2022. 

Martha Guzman Aceves, 

Regional Administrator, Region IX. 

[FR Doc. 2022–07918 Filed 4–12–22; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2021–0741; FRL–8426–01– 

OAR] 

RIN 2060–AV33 

Determinations of Attainment by the 

Attainment Date, Extension of the 

Attainment Date, and Reclassification 

of Areas Classified as Serious for the 

2008 Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) proposes three actions 

pursuant to section 181(b)(2) of the 

Clean Air Act (CAA) related to seven 

areas classified as ‘‘Serious’’ for the 

2008 ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS). First, the 

Agency proposes to determine that one 

area attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS by 

the July 20, 2021, attainment date. 

Second, the Agency proposes to deny a 

request for a 1-year attainment date 

extension for one area and to determine 

that the area failed to attain the 2008 

ozone NAAQS by the attainment date, 

while also taking comment on granting 

that request. Third, the Agency proposes 

to determine that five areas failed to 

attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the 

attainment date and do not qualify for 

a 1-year attainment date extension.. The 

effect of failing to attain by the 

attainment date is that such areas will 

be reclassified by operation of law to 

‘‘Severe’’ upon the effective date of the 

final reclassification notice. Except for 

one separate tribal area, states will need 

to submit state implementation plan 

(SIP) revisions that meet the statutory 

and regulatory requirements for any 

areas reclassified as Severe for the 2008 

ozone NAAQS. The EPA proposes 

deadlines for submission of those SIP 

revisions and for implementation of the 

related control requirements. 

Additionally, for any areas reclassified 

as Severe, where not already prohibited, 

the CAA would prohibit the sale of 

conventional gasoline and require that 

federal reformulated gasoline instead be 

sold beginning 1 year after the effective 

date of the reclassification. 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 ‘‘Marginal’’ 

for the 2015 ozone NAAQS attained the 

standard by the applicable attainment 

date of August 3, 2021 (see Docket ID 

EPA–HQ–OAR–2021–0742). 

DATES: Comments. Written 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–2021–0741, 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– 

2021–0741 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 document. 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 above. 

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. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 

27711, Attention Docket ID No. EPA– 

HQ–OAR–2021–0741. 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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
21826 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

1Because the 2008 primary and secondary 

NAAQS for ozone are identical, for convenience, 

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

NAAQS’’ or ‘‘the standard.’’ 

2A DV 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 2008 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 air 

quality monitor in an area and the area’s DV is the 

highest DV among the individual monitoring sites 

in the area. 

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/2008-ozone-national-ambientair-quality-standards-naaqsnonattainment 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/2008-ozone-national-ambientair-quality-standards-naaqsnonattainment. 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 

for additional information. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information about this proposed rule, 

contact 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; 

or 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. 

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 document 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 

2008 Ozone National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) 

Nonattainment Actions web page for 

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

ground-level-ozone-pollution/2008- 

ozone-national-ambient-air-qualitystandards-naaqs-nonattainment) or 

contact Pam Long at 919–541–0641 or 

long.pam@epa.gov. The last day to preregister 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 pre-registered 

speakers in approximate order at: 

https://www.epa.gov/ground-levelozone-pollution/2008-ozone-nationalambient-air-quality-standards-naaqsnonattainment. 

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/2008-ozonenational-ambient-air-quality-standardsnaaqs-nonattainment. 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 2008 ozone 

standard? 

II. What is the EPA proposing and what is the 

rationale? 

A. Determinations of Attainment by the 

Attainment Date 

B. Extension of Serious Area Attainment 

Date 

C. Determinations of Failure To Attain and 

Reclassification 

D. Severe Area SIP Revisions 

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 Clean Air Act 

(CAA) section 181(b)(2)). For a 

concentration-based standard, such as 

the 2008 ozone NAAQS,1 a 

determination of attainment is based on 

a nonattainment area’s design value 

(DV).2

The 2008 ozone NAAQS is met at an 

EPA regulatory monitoring site when 

the DV does not exceed 0.075 parts per 

million (ppm). For areas classified as 

Serious nonattainment for the 2008 

ozone NAAQS, the attainment date was 

July 20, 2021. 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 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 21827 

3Prior to July 20, 2021, two additional Serious 

areas were reclassified from Serious to Severe, and 

thus are not addressed in this action. The San Diego 

County, California, nonattainment area was 

reclassified from Serious to Severe effective July 2, 

2021, in response to a voluntary reclassification 

request submitted by the state of California (see 86 

FR 29522, June 2, 2021). SIP revisions addressing 

Severe area requirements for San Diego County will 

be due no later than July 2, 2022. The Eastern Kern, 

California, nonattainment area was reclassified from 

Serious to Severe effective July 7, 2021, in response 

to a voluntary reclassification request submitted by 

the state of California (see 86 FR 30204, June 7, 

2021). In a separate action, the EPA finalized a rule 

establishing that SIP revisions addressing Severe 

area requirements for Eastern Kern would be due 

no later than 18 months from the effective date of 

reclassification (i.e., January 7, 2023) and that any 

new RACT rules for Eastern Kern must be 

implemented as expeditiously as practicable but no 

later than 18 months following the RACT SIP due 

date (i.e., July 7, 2024) (see 86 FR 47580, August 

26, 2021). Both the San Diego County and Eastern 

Kern areas must attain the 2008 ozone standard by 

July 20, 2027. 

4 In separate rulemakings, the EPA is proposing 

to redesignate all portions of the ChicagoNaperville, IL-IN-WI Serious nonattainment area to 

attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS based upon 

complete, quality-assured, and certified ozone 

monitoring data from calendar years 2019, 2020, 

and 2021: Wisconsin portion (87 FR 6806, February 

7, 2022); Indiana portion (87 FR 12033, March 3, 

2022); and, Illinois portion (87 FR 13668, March 10, 

2022). If all portions of the area are redesignated 

prior to EPA finalizing this proposal, EPA would 

not finalize its proposed action for this area. 

5CAA 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 the 

process established in regulation to be an EE. CARB 

submitted its initial notification and 

demonstrations pursuant to 40 CFR 50.14, which 

establishes the process by which states may request 

that the Administrator determine that air quality 

monitoring data showing exceedances or violations 

of the NAAQS that are directly due to an EE may 

be excluded from certain regulatory determinations, 

including whether a nonattainment area has met the 

NAAQS by its deadline. 

6 ‘‘Technical Support Document Regarding Ozone 

Monitoring Data—Determinations of Attainment, 1- 

Year Attainment Date Extensions, and 

Reclassifications for Serious Areas under the 2008 

8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

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

this rulemaking. 

Serious nonattainment areas for the 

2008 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 seven 

of the nine nonattainment areas that 

were classified as Serious for the 2008 

ozone NAAQS as of the Serious area 

attainment date of July 20, 2021.3 4 The 

remaining two areas will be addressed 

in separate actions, as follows: 

(1) The Nevada County (Western 

Part), California, Serious nonattainment 

area is not included in this proposed 

action. On September 17, 2021, the 

California Air Resources Board (CARB) 

submitted exceptional events (EE) 

demonstrations for 11 days in 2018 with 

exceedances of the standard, and on 

November 18, 2021, CARB submitted EE 

demonstrations for five days in 2020 

with exceedances of the standard. The 

EPA’s action on these demonstrations 

may affect a determination of attainment 

by the attainment date for this area.5

The EE initial notification, EE 

demonstrations, and the EPA’s response 

to the initial notification are provided in 

the docket for this rulemaking (Docket 

ID EPA–HQ–OAR–2021–0741). The 

proposed action to determine 

attainment for the Nevada County 

(Western Part), California, area by the 

Serious attainment date for the 2008 

ozone NAAQS will be addressed in a 

separate Federal Register document. 

(2) The Ventura, California, Serious 

nonattainment area is also not included 

in this proposed action. On December 8, 

2021, CARB submitted EE 

demonstrations for five days in 2020 

with exceedances of the standard . The 

EPA’s action on these demonstrations 

may affect a determination of attainment 

by the attainment date for this area. The 

EE initial notification, EE 

demonstrations and the EPA’s response 

to the initial notification are provided in 

the docket for this rulemaking. The 

proposed action to determine 

attainment for the Ventura County, 

California, area by the Serious 

attainment date for the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS will be addressed in a separate 

Federal Register document. 

Table 1 of this action provides a 

summary of the ozone air quality DVs 

and the EPA’s proposed air qualitybased determinations for the seven 

Serious areas addressed in this action. 

TABLE 1—2008 OZONE NAAQS SERIOUS NONATTAINMENT AREA EVALUATION SUMMARY

2008 NAAQS 

nonattainment area 

2018–2020 DV 

(ppm) 

2008 NAAQS 

attained by the 

serious area 

attainment date 

2020 4th 

Highest daily 

maximum 8-hr 

average 

(ppm) 

Area failed to attain 2008 

NAAQS but state requested 

1-year attainment date 

extension based on 2020 4th 

highest daily maximum 8-hr 

average ≤0.075 ppm 

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

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

Denver-Boulder-Greeley-Ft. Collins-Loveland, 

CO.

0.081 Failed to Attain ....................... 0.087 No. 

Greater Connecticut, CT ................................. 0.073 Attained .................................. 0.071 N/A. 

Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX .................... 0.079 Failed to Attain ....................... 0.075 Yes. 

Morongo Band of Mission Indians .................. 0.099 Failed to Attain ....................... 0.103 No. 

New York-N. New Jersey-Long Island, CTNJ-NY.0.082 Failed to Attain ....................... 0.080 No. 

* In a letter to the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency dated July 30, 2021, EPA Region 5 indicated that it did not concur on EE demonstrations for the Chicago-Naperville area submitted to the EPA on February 1, 2021; a copy of this letter and the supporting EPA technical review is provided in the docket for this rulemaking. 

** In a letter to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality dated June 30, 2021, EPA Region 6 indicated that it did not concur on EE 

demonstrations for the Dallas-Fort Worth area submitted to the EPA on May 28, 2021; a copy of this letter and the supporting EPA technical review is provided in the docket for this rulemaking. 

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) provided in the docket 

for this rulemaking.6

The EPA proposes to find that the 

Greater Connecticut, Connecticut, 

Serious nonattainment area attained by 

the attainment date based on the 2018– 

2020 DV presented in Table 1 of this 

action, which does not exceed 0.075 

ppm. The EPA also proposes to deny a 

request for a 1-year attainment date 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
21828 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

7See CAA section 181(a)(5) and 40 CFR 51.1107. 

8 In South Coast Air Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, 

882 F.3d 1138 (D.C. Cir. 2018), the D.C. Circuit 

granted in part and denied in part petitions for 

review challenging the 2008 Ozone NAAQS SIP 

Requirements Rule. Among other things, the D.C. 

Circuit vacated the portion of the rule that allowed 

states to select an alternative baseline year (i.e., a 

year other than 2011) for purposes of calculating 

reasonable further progress. See id. at 882 F.3d at 

1152–53. The South Coast Air Quality Management 

District petitioned the Court for rehearing on this 

issue and the Court denied that petition. South 

Coast, No. 15–1123, Order No. 1750751 (D.C. Cir. 

September 14, 2018). 

9See CAA section 301(d) and 40 CFR part 49. 

10 Initial classifications for the 46 areas 

designated nonattainment for the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS included 36 Marginal, three Moderate, two 

Serious, three Severe, and two Extreme areas. 

11See 40 CFR 51.1103(a) and 80 FR 12264, 12267 

(March 6, 2015). 

extension for the Houston-GalvestonBrazoria, Texas, nonattainment area 

(herein referred to as the Houston area) 

taking into account applicable statutory 

and regulatory criteria,7 current air 

quality trends, and potential 

environmental justice (EJ) concerns 

within the area (Section II.B of this 

action). Finally, the EPA proposes to 

determine that the five remaining 

Serious areas with a 2018–2020 DV 

greater than 0.075 ppm did not attain by 

the attainment date and do not qualify 

for a 1-year attainment date extension. 

If the EPA determines that a 

nonattainment area classified as Serious 

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 areas 

failed to attain by the attainment date, 

they will be reclassified as Severe by 

operation of law. Also, these 

determinations will trigger contingency 

measures approved into the area’s SIP. 

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

that these measures must take effect 

without any further action by the state 

or the EPA. Accordingly, 

implementation of the contingency 

measures must commence upon the 

effective date of the EPA’s 

determination that an area failed to 

timely attain (see 80 FR 12264, 12285, 

March 6, 2015). The reclassified areas 

will then be subject to the Severe area 

requirement to attain the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable, 

but not later than July 20, 2027. 

Once reclassified as Severe, the 

relevant states must submit to the EPA 

the SIP revisions for these areas that 

satisfy the statutory and regulatory 

requirements applicable to Severe areas 

established in CAA section 182(d) and 

in the 2008 Ozone NAAQS SIP 

Requirements Rule (see 80 FR 12264, 

March 6, 2015).8 Because the deadlines 

specified in section 182(d) have passed 

for plan submissions applicable to areas 

initially classified as Severe for the 2008 

ozone NAAQS, the EPA is exercising 

the discretion granted under CAA 

section 182(i) to propose adjusting the 

deadlines for submitting SIP revisions 

that would otherwise apply under CAA 

section 182(d). As discussed in Section 

II.D of this action, the EPA proposes an 

overall 36-month schedule for both 

submission of SIP revisions addressing 

all required elements of a Severe area 

plan and implementation of any related 

emissions controls, including 

reasonably available control technology 

(RACT) and transportation-related 

measures. Under the CAA and the 

Tribal Authority Rule (TAR),9 tribes 

may, but are not required to, submit 

implementation plans to the EPA for 

approval. Accordingly, for the Morongo 

Band of Mission Indians nonattainment 

area, the Morongo Tribe would not be 

required to submit any tribal 

implementation plan (TIP) revisions 

applicable to Severe areas established in 

CAA section 182(d) and in the 2008 

Ozone SIP Requirements Rule. 

B. What is the background for the 

proposed actions? 

On March 12, 2008, the EPA issued its 

final action to revise the NAAQS for 

ozone to establish new 8-hour standards 

(see 73 FR 16436, March 27, 2008). In 

that action, the EPA promulgated 

identical revised primary and secondary 

ozone standards designed to protect 

public health and welfare that specified 

an 8-hour ozone level of 0.075 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 

0.075 ppm. 

Effective on July 20, 2012, the EPA 

designated 46 areas throughout the 

country as nonattainment for the 2008 

ozone NAAQS (see 77 FR 30088, May 

21, 2012; and 77 FR 34221, June 11, 

2012). In a separate action, the EPA 

assigned classification thresholds and 

attainment dates based on the severity 

of each nonattainment area’s ozone 

problem, determined by the area’s DV 

(see 77 FR 30160, May 21, 2012).10 The 

attainment dates for Serious and Severe 

nonattainment areas are 9 years and 15 

years, respectively, from the effective 

date of the final designation, July 20, 

2012.11 Thus, the attainment date for 

Serious nonattainment areas for the 

2008 ozone NAAQS was July 20, 2021, 

and the attainment date for Severe areas 

is July 20, 2027. In a separate action 

effective on September 23, 2019, the 

EPA reclassified seven of the 11 

Moderate areas to Serious for failing to 

attain the NAAQS by the July 20, 2018, 

Moderate area attainment date (see 84 

FR 44238, August 23, 2019). In that 

action, two Moderate areas received 1- 

year attainment date extensions. These 

two areas were later redesignated to 

attainment (Inland Sheboygan County, 

Wisconsin—85 FR 41400, July 10, 2020, 

and Shoreline Sheboygan County, 

Wisconsin—85 FR 41405, July 10, 

2020). 

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 51.1108 through 

51.1117, 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 

2008 ozone NAAQS. For reclassified 

areas, CAA section 182(i) provides that 

the Administrator may adjust applicable 

deadlines other than attainment dates if 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 21829 

12All nonattainment areas named in this action 

that failed to attain by the attainment date would 

be classified to the next higher classification, 

Severe. None of the affected areas has a DV that 

would otherwise place an area in a higher 

classification (also, see CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) 

exception for Extreme areas). 

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 nonattainment 

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 P, section 2.3(b). 

15More information about the Clean Data Policy 

and redesignation guidance is available at https:// 

www.epa.gov/ozone-pollution/redesignation-andclean-data-policy-cdp. 

16For the Greater Connecticut, CT, area, the final 

2008 ozone NAAQS Clean Data Determination was 

effective on August 12, 2020 (85 FR 41924, July 13, 

2020). 

such adjustment is necessary or 

appropriate to assure consistency among 

the required submissions. Therefore, the 

EPA proposes in Section II.D of this 

action to adjust the deadlines for SIP 

revisions for any newly reclassified 

Severe 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 

upon application by any state (Section 

II.B of this action). 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 the ozone 

nonattainment area failed to attain the 

ozone standard by the applicable 

attainment date, and reclassifies the area 

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 

Serious nonattainment areas considered 

in this proposal was January 20, 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 the Severe area 

attainment date of July 20, 2027. Per 

CAA section 182(i), each state 

containing an ozone nonattainment area 

reclassified as Severe under CAA 

section 181(b)(2) shall submit SIP 

revisions consistent with the schedules 

contained in CAA section 182(b) for 

Moderate areas, 182(c) for Serious areas 

and 182(d) for Severe 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 action, the EPA explains its 

proposal to adjust such deadlines. 

D. How does the EPA determine whether 

an area has attained the 2008 ozone 

standard? 

Under the EPA regulations at 40 CFR 

part 50, appendix P, the 2008 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 0.075 ppm. 

When the DV does not exceed 0.075 

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 parts per million to 

the third decimal place, with additional 

digits to the right being truncated. Thus, 

a computed 3-year average ozone 

concentration of 0.076 ppm is greater 

than 0.075 ppm and would exceed the 

standard, but a DV of 0.0759 is 

truncated to 0.075 and attains the 2008 

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).13 Ambient air quality 

monitoring data for the 3-year period 

preceding the year of the attainment 

date (2018–2020 for the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS Serious areas) must meet the 

data completeness requirements in 

Appendix P.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 proposes this action to fulfill 

its statutory obligation under CAA 

section 181(b)(2) to determine whether 

seven Serious ozone nonattainment 

areas attained the 2008 ozone NAAQS 

as of the attainment date of July 20, 

2021. The EPA evaluated air quality 

monitoring data submitted by the 

appropriate state and local air agencies 

to determine the attainment status of the 

seven areas as of the applicable 

attainment date of July 20, 2021. This 

section describes the separate 

determinations and actions being 

proposed in this document. 

A. Determinations of Attainment by the 

Attainment Date 

The EPA proposes to determine, in 

accordance with CAA section 

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

2008 Ozone NAAQS SIP Requirements 

Rule (40 CFR 51.1103), that the Greater 

Connecticut, CT, area attained the 2008 

ozone NAAQS by the Serious area 

attainment date of July 20, 2021, based 

on its 2018–2020 DV (Table 1 of this 

action). 

The EPA’s Clean Data Policy,15 as 

codified for the 2008 ozone NAAQS at 

40 CFR 51.1118, suspends the 

requirements for states to submit certain 

attainment planning SIPs such as the 

attainment demonstration, including 

reasonably available control measures 

(RACM), reasonable further progress 

(RFP), and contingency measures for so 

long as an area continues to attain the 

standard. The EPA determined 

previously that the Greater Connecticut, 

CT, area was attaining the 2008 ozone 

standard and, therefore, suspended the 

requirements for the state to submit an 

attainment demonstration and 

associated RACM, RFP plans, 

contingency measures, and other 

attainment planning elements, in 

accordance with 40 CFR 51.1118.16 Per 

that Clean Data Determination, these 

requirements will remain suspended 

until the area is redesignated to 

attainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS 

(at which time the submission 

requirements would no longer apply), or 

the EPA determines that the area has 

violated the 2008 ozone standard, at 

which time the Clean Data 

Determination would be rescinded and 

the state would again be required to 

submit such Serious area elements for 

the Greater Connecticut, CT, 

nonattainment area. 

This proposed determination of 

attainment by the attainment date does 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
21830 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

17Baer, Tonya, Director, Office of Air, TCEQ. 

‘‘Request for a One-Year Extension of the HoustonGalveston-Brazoria (HGB) 2008 Eight-Hour Ozone 

Standard Attainment Date.’’ April 5, 2021. 

18See 40 CFR 51.1107 pertaining to determining 

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

first and the second 1-year attainment date 

extensions for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. 

not constitute formal redesignation to 

attainment as provided for under CAA 

section 107(d)(3). Redesignations to 

attainment require the states responsible 

for ensuring attainment and 

maintenance of the NAAQS to meet the 

requirements under CAA section 110 

and part D, including submitting for 

EPA 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 this 

proposed determination of attainment 

by the attainment date for the Greater 

Connecticut, CT, area. Further technical 

analysis supporting this proposed 

determination is in the TSD for this 

action, which is provided in the docket 

for this rulemaking. 

B. Extension of Serious Area Attainment 

Date 

1. Summary of Proposed Action for the 

Houston area 

By way of letter dated April 5, 2021, 

the Texas Commission on 

Environmental Quality (TCEQ) 

requested an extension of the Houston 

area Serious area attainment date, which 

is provided in the docket for this 

rulemaking.17 In this action, the EPA is 

proposing to deny TCEQ’s request, but 

is also soliciting comment on whether it 

would be appropriate to grant the state’s 

request. 

By proposing to deny the requested 1- 

year attainment date extension for the 

Houston area and determining that the 

area failed to attain by the Serious area 

attainment date, this action, if finalized, 

would result in the area being 

reclassified as Severe. As described 

below, CAA section 181(a)(5) makes 

clear that the Administrator may 

exercise reasoned discretion to deny a 

request for a 1-year extension even 

where the statutory criteria for an 

extension are met. Here, even though 

the state meets the two statutory criteria 

for an extension, we propose to find that 

other considerations weigh in favor of 

not granting the state’s request for an 

extension. First, as discussed in Section 

II.B.2.b of this action, preliminary data 

indicate that the area will not attain by 

an extended attainment date of July 20, 

2022, nor is the area likely to qualify for 

a second extension. The EPA is 

concerned that extending the July 20, 

2021, attainment date by an additional 

year, when preliminary data indicate 

the area will not reach attainment with 

that extension, would delay attainment 

planning requirements (including 

emissions control requirements) that are 

necessary for the area to expeditiously 

attain the NAAQS. Second, as discussed 

in Section II.B.2.b of this action, 

screening level analyses of portions of 

the Houston area indicate that 

individuals residing and working near 

the Houston Ship Channel and violating 

regulatory ozone monitoring sites may 

already be exposed to a significant 

pollution burden. Delays in 

implementing the more stringent 

requirements associated with 

reclassification would delay related air 

quality improvements and human 

health benefits for residents across the 

Houston area, including those that may 

already bear a disproportionate burden 

of pollution. Under these circumstances, 

we propose that it is a reasonable 

exercise of the Administrator’s 

discretion under CAA section 181(a)(5) 

to deny the state’s request. 

2. Proposal To Deny the Requested 1- 

Year Attainment Date Extension and 

Determine the Houston Area Failed To 

Timely Attain 

a. Summary and Legal Background 

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

the EPA the discretion to (i.e., ‘‘the 

Administrator may’’) 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 

51.1107. 

With respect to the first criterion, the 

EPA interprets the provision as having 

been satisfied if a state can certify 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. TCEQ certified 

that it is complying with its applicable 

SIP in its attainment date extension 

request, which is provided in the docket 

for this rulemaking. 

With respect to the second criterion, 

the EPA has interpreted CAA section 

181(a)(5)(B)’s exceedance-based air 

quality requirement for purposes of a 

concentration-based standard like the 

2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS (see 40 CFR 

51.1107). For the 2008 ozone NAAQS, 

the EPA has interpreted the air-quality 

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

mean that, for the 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 (0.075 ppm).18 The 

Houston area’s fourth highest daily 

maximum 8-hour value for 2020 was 

0.075 ppm. 

However, CAA section 181(a)(5) gives 

the EPA the discretion to either grant or 

deny a state’s requested 1-year 

attainment date extension even where 

an area meets both of the statutory 

criteria. Specifically, that provision 

states, ‘‘Upon application by any State, 

the Administrator may extend for 1 

additional year . . . [the attainment 

date] if’’ the two criteria are met. CAA 

section 181(a)(5) (emphasis added). 

Under this provision, the two 

enumerated criteria are necessary 

conditions, but, by granting discretion, 

the statute contemplates that in certain 

circumstances, it may still be reasonable 

to deny a state’s request even if both 

conditions are met. The D.C. Circuit 

recently upheld the EPA’s interpretation 

of a similarly constructed CAA 

provision, finding that ‘‘[t]he statute 

requires this showing to be made, but 

once it has been made, the statute 

provides only that EPA ‘may’ expand 

the region, not that it ‘shall’ or ‘must’ do 

so . . . . In other words, this 

requirement is a necessary but not 

sufficient condition for expansion of the 

region.’’ New York v. EPA, 921 F.3d 257, 

298 (D.C. Cir. 2019) (internal citations 

omitted). 

With respect to CAA section 181(a)(5), 

the D.C. Circuit has acknowledged that 

the provision grants the EPA discretion 

to look beyond the enumerated factors. 

Delaware, 895 F.3d 90, 100 (D.C. Cir. 

2018) (noting that despite its holding 

that the EPA was not required to 

determine every state in a multi-state 

nonattainment area’s compliance with 

its SIP under section 181(a)(5)(A), ‘‘EPA 

nevertheless retained discretion to 

consider Delaware’s compliance, given 

that the Act only dictates that EPA ‘may’ 

grant an extension when the statute’s 

requirements are met’’) (emphasis 

added). The court added that the EPA’s 

exercise of discretion under this 

provision is subject to arbitrary-andcapricious review, such that the Agency 

‘‘must cogently explain why it has 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 21831 

19CAA section 181(a)(1). 

20See, e.g., CAA section 171(1) (defining 

reasonable further progress as annual incremental 

reductions in emissions of the relevant air pollutant 

. . . for the purpose of ensuring attainment of the 

applicable [NAAQS] by the applicable date’’); CAA 

section 172(a)(2)(A) (establishing attainment dates 

for the primary NAAQS as ‘‘the date by which 

attainment can be achieved as expeditiously as 

practicable, but no later than 5 years from the date 

such area was designated nonattainment under 

[107(d)] of this title . . . ’’); CAA section 172(c)(1) 

(requiring implementation of all reasonably 

available control measures as expeditiously as 

practicable and that plans provide for attainment of 

the NAAQS); CAA section 172(c)(6) (requiring state 

plans to include enforceable emission limitations, 

and such other control measures, means or 

techniques, as well as schedules and timetables for 

compliance, as may be necessary or appropriate to 

provide for attainment of the NAAQS by the 

applicable attainment date). 

21CAA section 101(b)(1). 

22CAA section 101(c). 

23Current TCEQ data report is available at https:// 

www.tceq.texas.gov/cgi-bin/compliance/monops/ 

8hr_attainment.pl. 

24 0.083 ppm [2021 preliminary fourth high] + 

0.075 ppm [2020 fourth high] = 0.158/2 = 0.079 

ppm. 

exercised its discretion in a given 

manner.’’ Id. (emphasis in original) 

(citing Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass’n of the 

U.S., Inc. v. State Farm Auto. Ins. Co., 

463 U.S. 29, 48 (1983)). The statute does 

not compel the Agency to grant an 

extension when the two criteria are met, 

and it is reasonable to exercise our 

discretionary authority in light of the 

Act’s goals. 

CAA section 181(a)(5), which 

establishes the extension process for 

ozone nonattainment areas, mirrors the 

extension process established in the 

general nonattainment area provisions 

at CAA section 172(a)(2)(C), and is 

appropriately read in light of the Act’s 

focus on the expeditious attainment of 

the NAAQS—both in subpart 2 

specifically 19 and in Part D more 

generally. The ultimate goal of Part D of 

the CAA, which governs planning 

requirements for nonattainment areas, 

and the responsibility of states and the 

EPA under that section of the Act, is to 

drive progress in nonattainment areas 

towards attainment as expeditiously as 

practicable but by no later than the 

maximum attainment dates prescribed 

by the Act.20 We think the EPA’s 

discretion under the extension 

provision should also be exercised 

consistent with the broader purposes of 

the Act ‘‘to protect and enhance the 

quality of the Nation’s air resources so 

as to promote the public health and 

welfare and the productive capacity of 

its population’’ 21 and Congress’s 

‘‘primary goal’’ in enacting the Clean 

Air Act to encourage and promote 

actions ‘‘for pollution prevention.’’ 22

The EPA therefore proposes to evaluate 

TCEQ’s request mindful of the intent of 

the CAA’s Part D nonattainment 

planning requirements to promote 

expeditious attainment to protect public 

health, as well as the Act’s broader 

purposes. 

In proposing this approach, we 

recognize that the CAA, and in 

particular those provisions of the Act 

related to implementation of 

requirements that are designed to 

achieve criteria pollutant standards (i.e., 

attain the NAAQS), embodies principles 

of cooperative federalism. After the EPA 

sets the NAAQS to be protective of 

human health and the environment, the 

states, subject to the general 

nonattainment planning requirements of 

part D, subpart 1 and the pollutantspecific planning requirements of the 

additional subparts (in this case, part D, 

subpart 2), are generally permitted 

flexibility in deciding how to achieve 

those standards. However, within this 

context, we think the discretion 

provided by CAA section 181(a)(5) 

permits the EPA to weigh a state’s 

prerogative to plan for attainment with 

other important considerations such as 

ensuring expeditious attainment of the 

NAAQS or mitigating particular impacts 

an action might have. CAA section 

181(a)(5) is intended to provide 

flexibility where an area is close to 

achieving attainment and can likely do 

so with a bit more time, but we do not 

think it is appropriate to employ that 

process in a way that frustrates the goal 

of expeditious attainment, particularly 

where additional burden from delaying 

expeditious attainment would fall on 

already overburdened populations, as 

will be discussed later in this section. It 

is fully consistent with EPA’s role in 

overseeing the state planning process to 

exercise its discretion to ensure that 

extensions under CAA section 181(a)(5) 

advance, rather than frustrate, the Act’s 

ultimate goal of expeditious attainment 

to protect public health. 

In this case, we do not think an 

attainment date extension would serve 

the purposes of the NAAQS extension 

provision, Part D’s focus on timely 

attainment, or the Act’s broader 

emphasis on public health protection. 

As discussed further in section II.B.2.b, 

Houston does not need only a little 

additional time to come into attainment 

of the 2008 ozone NAAQS; even with an 

extension, preliminary air quality data 

for 2021 indicate that the area will not 

attain. Granting an extension under 

these circumstances would amount only 

to delaying today’s determination and 

reclassification, and ultimately could 

delay expeditious attainment of the 

NAAQS. As discussed further in section 

II.B.2.c., we also think it is reasonable 

for the EPA to consider whether those 

who will bear the additional burden 

caused by the extension are already 

overburdened by pollution, and we 

provide screening analyses indicating 

populations in the Houston area may be 

exposed to higher levels of ozone 

pollution and other burdens of 

pollution, relative to other Americans. 

We therefore propose to deny TCEQ’s 

request for an extension, after 

considering that it is not prudent in this 

case to delay controls that are designed 

to achieve expeditious attainment of the 

NAAQS, and that delay would impact 

populations that may already bear a 

disproportionately high pollution 

burden, relative to the rest of the United 

States. 

b. Air Quality Trends 

The NAAQS are set at levels 

necessary to protect public health with 

an adequate margin of safety and to 

protect public welfare, and expeditious 

attainment of the standards would result 

in public health benefits across the 

Houston area. As shown in Table 1 of 

this action, the Houston nonattainment 

area did not attain the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS by the Serious area attainment 

date of July 20, 2021, based on its final 

2018–2020 DV of 0.079 ppm. Moreover, 

while the Houston area meets the 

specific air quality criterion for an 

initial 1-year extension under 40 CFR 

51.1107(a)(1), the area met that criterion 

with no room to spare—its attainment 

year fourth highest daily maximum 8- 

hour average concentration was 0.075 

ppm (Table 1 of this action), i.e., right 

at the level of the 2008 ozone NAAQS. 

Preliminary 2021 ozone monitoring data 

indicate the area likely will not attain 

the 2008 ozone NAAQS by July 20, 

2022, nor qualify for a second 1-year 

extension. As of December 31, 2021, the 

Houston area’s preliminary 2019–2021 

DV was 0.077 ppm and the preliminary 

2021 fourth highest daily maximum 8- 

hour value was 0.083 ppm.23 With 

respect to a second 1-year extension, in 

order to qualify, an area’s fourth highest 

daily maximum 8-hour value, averaged 

over both the original attainment year 

and the first extension year, must be 

0.075 ppm or less (40 CFR 

51.1107(a)(2)). Based on 2021 

preliminary data, the average of the two 

extension years for Houston would be 

0.079 ppm.24

In addition, even if Houston were able 

to qualify for a second extension to July 

20, 2023, historical air quality trends 

suggest it could be difficult for the area 

to attain the 2008 ozone standard by 

that date. As shown in Table 2, 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
21832 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

25Also at https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/airquality-design-values. 

26Message 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. 

27See 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)). 28The 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. 

29EJ SCREEN tool is available at https://

www.epa.gov/ejscreen/what-ejscreen. 

30See https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/ 

geography/about/glossary.html. 

31 In addition, EJSCREEN relies on the five-year 

block group estimates from the U.S. Census 

American Community Survey. The advantage of 

using five-year over single-year estimates is 

increased statistical reliability of the data (i.e., 

lower sampling error), particularly for small 

geographic areas and population groups. For more 

information, see https://www.census.gov/content/ 

dam/Census/library/publications/2020/acs/acs_

general_handbook_2020.pdf. 

historical DVs for the area (2014–2020) 

have fluctuated between 0.078 and 

0.081 ppm without a consistent 

downward trend during this time 

period,25 and the area would need a DV 

of 0.075 ppm to attain. 

TABLE 2—HOUSTON NONATTAINMENT AREA HISTORICAL OZONE DVS

Values (ppm) for DV Period 

2012–2014 2013–2015 2014–2016 2015–2017 2016–2018 2017–2019 2018–2020 

0.080 0.080 0.079 0.081 0.078 0.081 0.079 

We note that in addition to the state’s 

obligation to attain the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS, Houston is also well out of 

attainment of the 2015 ozone NAAQS, 

which is set at 0.070 ppm. CAA 

emissions reduction measures 

associated with reclassification that are 

designed to help Houston achieve 

attainment of the less stringent 2008 

ozone NAAQS would also aid the area 

in attaining the newer, more stringent 

2015 ozone standard. The EPA is 

proposing in a separate action to find 

that the Houston area failed to attain the 

2015 ozone NAAQS by its Marginal area 

attainment date of August 3, 2021; if 

finalized, the area would be reclassified 

as Moderate for the 2015 ozone NAAQS 

and subject to a new attainment date of 

August 3, 2024, for that NAAQS. We are 

concerned that granting the state’s 

request for an attainment date extension 

for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, when the 

area’s 2020 fourth high daily maximum 

average concentration just barely met 

the regulatory criterion and the 

preliminary 2021 fourth high daily 

maximum average concentration is 

above the regulatory criterion, would 

not facilitate the area’s expeditious 

attainment of that standard. As noted, 

the purpose of the Act’s extension 

provisions is to provide limited 

flexibility in the attainment date for 

areas that are close to attaining the 

NAAQS and likely could do so with a 

bit more time. We do not think that 

purpose is served by extending the 

attainment date where the preliminary 

data indicate that an extension that 

would simply delay a determination 

that the area failed to timely attain the 

2008 ozone NAAQS, which would in 

turn delay the implementation of Severe 

area permitting and control 

requirements that may be necessary for 

the area’s attainment. 

c. 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. Granting the state’s request 

would by definition prolong the ozone 

air quality problem; it would extend the 

deadline by which the Houston area 

must achieve the applicable air quality 

standards that were set at a level to 

protect public health (and in fact have 

been further tightened since). 

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 demonstrated that there 

are populations in the Houston area that 

are potentially already significantly 

overburded by pollution compared to 

the wider U.S. population, and who 

would be adversely affected by an 

extension of the attainment date. 

Our proposed action is also consistent 

with multiple executive orders 

addressing environmental justice as 

well as an April 7, 2021 directive by the 

EPA Administrator.26 27 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.28

Screening Analyses 

To conduct the screening analyses, we 

used the EJSCREEN tool, an EJ mapping 

and screening tool that provides EPA 

with a nationally consistent dataset and 

approach for combining various 

environmental and demographic 

indicators, to undertake these 

analyses.29 The EJSCREEN tool presents 

these indicators at a Census block group 

(CBG) level.30 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 

and is subject to uncertainty in some 

underlying data (e.g., some 

environmental indicators are based on 

monitoring data which are not 

uniformly available; others are based on 

self-reported data).31 To help mitigate 

this uncertainty, we have summarized 

EJSCREEN data within larger ‘‘buffer’’ 

areas covering multiple block groups 

and representing the average resident 

within the buffer areas, as well as a 

summary report covering the 8-county 

Houston nonattainment area included in 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 21833 

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 it does not 

represent summertime peak ozone concentrations, 

which are instead represented here by the DV 

metric. Ozone DVs are the basis of attainment 

determinations in this proposed action, and in this 

case we consider it a more informative indicator of 

pollution burden relative to the overall Houston 

area and the U.S. as a whole. 

33For additional information on environmental 

indicators and proximity scores in EJSCREEN, see 

‘‘EJSCREEN Environmental Justice Mapping and 

Screening Tool: EJSCREEN Technical 

Documentation,’’ Chapter 3 and Appendix C 

(September 2019) at https://www.epa.gov/sites/ 

default/files/2021-04/documents/ejscreen_

technical_document.pdf. 

34Ozone pollution is not generally directly 

emitted but is formed near the ground when 

precursor pollutants chemically react in sunlight; 

these ozone precursors include nitrogen oxides 

(NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) 

emitted by vehicles and industrial sources, and can 

include VOCs that are hazardous air pollutants 

(HAPs). 

35The American Society of Civil Engineers 

describes the Houston Ship Channel as stretching 

from the Gulf of Mexico through Galveston Bay and 

up the San Jacinto River, ending four miles east of 

downtown Houston, and supporting the second 

largest petrochemical complex in the world; see 

https://www.asce.org/project/houston-shipchannel/. 

36The Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, Texas 

nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone NAAQS is 

comprised of the following eight counties: Brazoria, 

Chambers, Fort Bend, Galveston, Harris, Liberty, 

Montgomery, and Waller County. See also https:// 

www3.epa.gov/airquality/greenbook/hbcs.html#TX. 

the docket for this rulemaking. We 

present ozone DVs for 2018–2020 as an 

indicator of potential ozone pollution 

exposure,32 as well as additional 

EJSCREEN environmental indicators to 

help screen for locations where 

residents may experience a higher 

overall pollution burden than would be 

expected for a block group with the 

same total population. These additional 

indicators of overall pollution burden 

include estimates of ambient particulate 

matter (PM2.5) concentration, a score for 

traffic proximity and volume, 

percentage of pre-1960 housing units 

(lead paint indicator), and scores for 

proximity to Superfund sites, risk 

management plan (RMP) sites, and 

hazardous waste facilities.33 EJSCREEN 

also provides information on 

demographic indicators, including 

percent low-income, communities of 

color, linguistic isolation, and less than 

high school education. 

We focused these analyses on 

portions of the Houston nonattainment 

area in close proximity to the Port of 

Houston’s Ship Channel and its 

industrial sources and activities, and on 

portions of the Houston nonattainment 

area surrounding violating ozone 

regulatory air quality monitor sites. We 

examined the extent to which residents 

living in these areas are exposed to high 

ozone concentrations and may be 

exposed to other pollution sources, 

relative to the Houston area and the U.S. 

population as a whole.34

Screening Analysis Results for Port of 

Houston Ship Channel 

We elected to center an analysis on 

the Port of Houston’s Ship Channel 

because we are aware of the dense 

concentration of industrial and 

commercial facilities and infrastructure 

located along the Channel.35 Houston 

and the surrounding areas experience 

some of the highest economic and 

population growth rates in the U.S., and 

the Port of Houston region is ranked the 

highest in the U.S. for total waterborne 

cargo tonnage. Each year, more than 247 

million tons of cargo move through the 

greater Port of Houston, carried by more 

than 8,200 vessels and 215,000 barges. 

The Port of Houston includes the public 

terminals owned, managed, operated, 

and leased by the Port of Houston 

Authority and the 150-plus private 

industrial companies along the 52-milelong Houston Ship Channel. Typical 

sources of air emissions from portrelated operations include heavy-duty 

vehicles, cargo handling equipment, 

locomotives, harbor vessels, ocean-going 

vessels, and liquids loading and 

unloading operations. 

The EPA prepared three EJSCREEN 

reports covering buffer areas of 

approximately 1-, 2- and 3-mile 

diameters around the analyzed section 

of the Channel, and a report covering 

the 8-county Houston nonattainment 

area.36 The analyzed section falls 

between the Channel’s upstream 

terminus (referred to as the Turning 

Basin) and a selected downstream 

boundary corresponding with the 

Washburn Tunnel (Federal Road), 

which connects the Houston suburbs of 

Galena Park and Pasadena. In addition 

to residential sections of Galena Park 

and Pasadena, the buffer areas also 

include, e.g., parts of the Second Ward, 

Greater East End, Pecan Park and 

Harrisburg/Manchester communities. 

Table 3 presents a summary of results 

from the EPA’s screening-level analysis 

for the Houston Ship Channel area 

compared to the overall Houston 

nonattainment area and the U.S. as a 

whole (the four detailed EJSCREEN 

reports are provided in the docket for 

this rulemaking). Table 3 also includes 

ozone DVs that were not reported by 

EJSCREEN (see Footnote 28). 

TABLE 3—HOUSTON SHIP CHANNEL EJSCREEN ANALYSIS SUMMARY

Variables 

Values for buffer areas (diameter), the Houston nonattainment area, and the U.S. 

(percentile within U.S. where indicated) 

1 mile 2 miles 3 miles Houston area U.S. 

Pollution Burden Indicators: 

Ozone DV for 2018–2020 * .................... 69 ppb (78th %ile) .... 69 ppb (78th %ile) .... 69 ppb (78th %ile) .... 79 ppb (95th %ile) .... 65 ppb (—) 

Particulate matter (PM2.5), annual average.9.97 μg/m3 (89th 

%ile).

9.93 μg/m3 (89th 

%ile).

9.92 μg/m3 (89th 

%ile).

9.25 μg/m3 (72nd 

%ile).

8.55μg/m3 (—) 

Traffic proximity and volume score ** .... 620 (72nd %ile) ........ 1,100 (83rd %ile) ...... 1,300 (85th %ile) ...... 245 (48th %ile) ......... 750 (—) 

Lead paint (percentage pre-1960 housing).0.65% (85th %ile) ..... 0.61% (83rd %ile) ..... 0.59% (82nd %ile) .... 0.09% (36th %ile) ..... 0.28% (—) 

Superfund proximity score ** .................. 0.26 (90th %ile) ........ 0.31 (91st %ile) ........ 0.35 (92nd %ile) ....... 0.09 (56th %ile) ........ 0.13 (—) 

RMP proximity score ** .......................... 4.1 (98th %ile) .......... 4.5 (98th %ile) .......... 4 (97th %ile) ............. 0.95 (69th %ile) ........ 0.74 (—) 

Hazardous waste proximity score ** ...... 4.7 (83rd %ile) .......... 4.8 (83rd %ile) .......... 4.5 (82nd %ile) ......... 0.71 (41st %ile) ........ 5 (—) 

Demographic Indicators: 

People of color population ..................... 95% (94th %ile) ........ 95% (93rd %ile) ........ 93% (92nd %ile) ....... 49% (64th %ile) ........ 39% (—) 

Low-income population .......................... 59% (87th %ile) ........ 56% (85th %ile) ........ 55% (84th %ile) ........ 30% (51st %ile) ........ 33% (—) 

Linguistically isolated population ........... 31% (97th %ile) ........ 30% (97th %ile) ........ 26% (96th %ile) ........ 6% (72nd %ile) ......... 4% (—) 

Population with less than high school 

education.

48% (97th %ile) ........ 46% (97th %ile) ........ 44% (97th %ile) ........ 15% (67th %ile) ........ 13% (—) 

Population under 5 years of age ........... 7% (66th %ile) .......... 8% (69th %ile) .......... 8% (72nd %ile) ......... 7% (63rd %ile) .......... 6% 

Population over 64 years of age ........... 12% (40th %ile) ........ 10% (29th %ile) ........ 9% (27th %ile) .......... 12% (38th %ile) ........ 15% (—) 

* The buffer areas are assigned the DV for the single monitor site within the analyzed buffer diameter (Clinton). The Houston nonattainment area DV is based on 

the highest DV among the individual monitor sites in the area (Aldine). 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
21834 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

38See Table 5 (Site Status) of the spreadsheet 

containing EPA’s final 2020 Ozone Design Values 

report, available at https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/ 

air-quality-design-values#report and provided in 

the docket for this rulemaking. 

** The traffic proximity and volume indicator is a score calculated by daily traffic count divided by distance in meters to the road. The Superfund proximity, RMP 

proximity, and hazardous waste proximity indicators are all scores calculated by site or facility counts divided by distance in kilometers. 

Our screening-level analysis of the 

Houston Ship Channel area strongly 

suggests that communities within the 

selected buffer areas bear a 

disproportionate overall pollution 

burden as indicated by high percentile 

values for ozone and multiple 

EJSCREEN environmental indicators. 

Screening Analysis Results for Violating 

Regulatory Ozone Monitor Sites 

The EPA also ran an EJSCREEN 

analysis focused on areas within the 

Houston nonattainment area that are 

highly exposed to ozone pollution. 

Specifically, we selected representative 

locations by examining historical DV 

trends for the 20 regulatory ozone 

monitoring sites in the Houston area 

(five most recent DV periods covering 

2014–2016 to 2018–2020), identifying 

the monitor sites most frequently 

included in the top three highest DVs, 

and preparing 1-mile diameter buffer 

area reports for the resulting four sites. 

The four analyzed monitor sites and 

their number of top-3 DV periods were 

Aldine (5 of 5 DV periods), Bayland 

Park (4 of 5 DV periods), Galveston 99th 

Street (3 of 5 DV periods), and Conroe 

Relocated (2 of 5 DV periods).37

Table 4 presents a summary of results 

from the EPA’s screening-level analysis 

of 1-mile diameter buffer areas around 

the four analyzed regulatory ozone 

monitor sites in the Houston area 

compared to the overall Houston 

nonattainment area and the U.S. as a 

whole (detailed EJSCREEN reports are 

provided in the docket for this 

rulemaking). Table 4 also presents 

ozone DV information for the monitor 

sites (see Footnote 28). 

TABLE 4—HOUSTON AREA VIOLATING OZONE MONITOR EJSCREEN ANALYSIS SUMMARY

Variables 

Values for monitor site (1-mile buffer), the Houston 

nonattainment area, and the U.S. 

(percentile within U.S. where indicated) 

Aldine Bayland Park Galveston 99th St. Conroe relocated Houston area U.S. 

Pollution Burden Indicators: 

Ozone DV for 2018–2020 .. 79 ppb (95th %ile) 76 ppb (92nd %ile) 74 ppb (90th %ile) 74 ppb (90th %ile) 79 ppb * (95th %ile) 65 ppb (—)

Particulate matter (PM2.5), 

annual average.

10 μg/m3 (90th 

%ile).

9.95 μg/m3 (89th 

%ile).

8 μg/m3 (32nd 

%ile).

9.62 μg/m3 (84th 

%ile).

9.25 μg/m3 (72nd 

%ile).

8.55 μg/m3 (—) 

Traffic proximity and volume 

score **.

800 (78th %ile) ...... 870 (79th %ile) ...... 380 (62nd %ile) ..... 84 (32nd %ile) ....... 245 (48th %ile) ...... 750 (—) 

Superfund proximity 

score **.

0.092 (63rd %ile) ... 0.14 (78th %ile) ..... 0.1 (68th %ile) ....... 0.83 (97th %ile) ..... 0.09 (56th %ile) ..... 0.13 (—) 

RMP proximity score ** ....... 0.13 (23rd %ile) ..... 0.37 (53rd %ile) ..... 1.2 (80th %ile) ....... 0.97 (75th %ile) ..... 0.95 (69th %ile) ..... 0.74 (—) 

Hazardous waste proximity 

score **.

2.1 (66th %ile) ....... 0.94 (49th %ile) ..... 0.083 (11th %ile) ... 1.2 (53rd %ile) ....... 0.71 (41st %ile) ..... 5 (—) 

Demographic Indicators: 

People of color population .. 96% (94th %ile) ..... 84% (86th %ile) ..... 31% (50th %ile) ..... 38% (56th %ile) ..... 49% (64th %ile) ..... 39% (—) 

Low-income population ....... 61% (89th %ile) ..... 60% (88th %ile) ..... 35% (60th %ile) ..... 28% (49th %ile) ..... 30% (51st %ile) ..... 33% (—) 

Linguistically isolated population.54% (99th %ile) ..... 29% (97th %ile) ..... 1% (50th %ile) ....... 7% (79th %ile) ....... 6% (72nd %ile) ...... 4% (—) 

Population with less than 

high school education.

54% (98th %ile) ..... 33% (92nd %ile) .... 8% (47th %ile) ....... 19% (77th %ile) ..... 15% (67th %ile) ..... 13% (—) 

Population under 5 years of 

age.

8% (71st %ile) ....... 9% (81st %ile) ....... 2% (11th %ile) ....... 7% (65th %ile) ....... 7% (63rd %ile) ...... 6% (—) 

Population over 64 years of 

age.

9% (24th %ile) ....... 7% (16th %ile) ....... 17% (66th %ile) ..... 15% (55th %ile) ..... 12% (38th %ile) ..... 15% (—) 

* The Houston nonattainment area DV for 2018–2020 is based on the highest DV among the individual monitor sites in the area (Aldine). 

** The traffic proximity and volume indicator is a score calculated by daily traffic count divided by distance in meters to the road. The Superfund proximity, RMP 

proximity, and hazardous waste proximity indicators are all scores calculated by site or facility counts divided by distance in kilometers. 

Ozone DV information for the four 

Houston area ozone monitor sites with 

the highest historical ozone DVs 

indicates that these areas bear a 

disproportionate ozone pollution 

burden when compared to the U.S. as a 

whole. The average U.S. ozone DV for 

the 2018–2020 timeframe was 65.4 ppb; 

for the four Houston monitors 

examined, ozone DVs were 9–14 ppb 

higher during the same time period. We 

also note that, while Table 4 indicates 

the Houston area ozone DV for 2018– 

2020 was 0.079 ppm, that DV is based 

on the reading from the Aldine monitor 

(area DVs are based on the monitor in 

the area with the highest recorded 

values). Ozone air quality near these 

monitors is considerably worse than the 

rest of Houston; for the five most recent 

DV periods considered in these 

analyses, approximately 75 percent of 

the Houston area ozone monitor sites 

have had attaining DVs.38 Residents 

living near these monitors are therefore 

subject to ozone concentrations that are 

well in excess of the national average, 

and high even relative to the rest of 

Houston. The screening-level analysis 

with respect to other pollution burdens 

(as reflected in the environmental 

indicators from EJSCREEN) shows that 

communities around violating monitors 

may also experience significant burdens 

with respect to, e.g., particulate matter 

pollution and proximity to traffic. 

Conclusion 

As discussed earlier, screening 

analyses for portions of the Houston 

nonattainment area indicated that there 

are populations in the area that may be 

exposed to a significant and 

disproportionate burden of ozone 

pollution and other sources of pollution, 

relative to the greater Houston area and 

the U.S. as a whole. Recognizing that 

CAA section 181(a)(5) permits some 

exercise of discretion beyond the 

enumerated criteria, the EPA believes it 

is appropriate to consider existing 

pollution burdens in the area when 

deciding whether to grant an extension. 

Given the EPA’s findings regarding the 

area’s air quality trends, our 

consideration of existing pollution 

burdens in the area weighs in favor of 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 21835 

39For additional discussion of factors affecting 

public participation in the environmental decisionmaking process see ‘‘Guidance on Considering 

Environmental Justice During the Development of 

Regulatory Actions,’’ Part 1, Section F (May 2015) 

at https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2015-06/ 

documents/considering-ej-in-rulemaking-guidefinal.pdf. 

40NNSR major source thresholds and LAER are 

defined in 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A) and 

(a)(1)(xiii), respectively; emission offset ratios are 

defined in appendix S to 40 CFR part 51 paragraph 

IV.G.2. 

electing the more protective approach of 

not extending the attainment date. 

d. Stakeholder Input and Agency 

Outreach 

EPA’s screening analyses for both the 

Houston Ship Channel and areas 

surrounding violating ozone monitors 

indicated the presence of significant 

populations of low-income individuals, 

communities of color, individuals with 

less than a high school education, and 

linguistically isolated individuals, 

relative to the greater Houston area and 

to the U.S. as a whole. 

As part of the EPA’s outreach for this 

proposed rule, we will notify our 

national EJ contacts and the advocacy 

organizations with whom we have 

engaged previously on Houston-area EJ 

concerns about the availability of the 

pre-publication version of this proposed 

rule, the conduct of a 60-day public 

comment period, and the anticipated 

timing of a virtual public hearing (see 

the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

of this document). The EPA will also 

make available a fact sheet in English 

and Spanish-language versions for this 

proposed rule, explaining the proposed 

actions and their implications in nontechnical terms to better engage a broad 

audience that includes residents that 

may be particularly impacted by 

existing pollution or would be impacted 

by the EPA’s determination. We are 

hopeful these steps will improve the 

capacity of all residents in the Houston 

area to participate in this proposed 

rulemaking.39

e. Proposed Action 

Based on the analysis of air quality 

trends and EJ considerations presented 

above, the EPA proposes to deny the 

requested 1-year extension of the 

attainment date and to find that the 

Houston area failed to attain by the July 

20, 2021, Serious area attainment date. 

This proposal is based on a number of 

considerations that, taken together, 

weigh in favor of proposing to deny the 

state’s request, even though the area 

meets the statutory criteria for an 

extension. Specifically, the EPA’s 

assessment of air quality trends in the 

Houston area indicates the area likely 

will not qualify for a second 1-year 

extension of the attainment date, nor 

will the area likely timely attain by a 

first extended attainment date of July 

20, 2022. We are also cognizant of the 

area’s obligations to attain the newer, 

more stringent 2015 standard. In 

addition, the EPA’s screening-level 

analyses of communities near the 

Houston Ship Channel and of 

communities around violating ozone 

regulatory monitor sites in the Houston 

area indicate communities that are 

exposed to elevated ozone levels 

relative to other parts of Houston and 

the country, and may be exposed to 

additional pollution burdens as well. 

Denying the extension request and 

determining that the Houston area failed 

to attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS by its 

attainment date would, by operation of 

law, reclassify the area to Severe for the 

2008 ozone NAAQS. Per Congress’s 

scheme for ozone implementation under 

part D, subpart 2 of the CAA, such a 

reclassification would trigger a set of 

more protective Severe area attainment 

planning requirements. Such 

requirements would include the 

immediate implementation of more 

stringent Severe area nonattainment 

new source review (NNSR) permitting 

requirements for new and modified 

major stationary sources. These Severe 

area NNSR permitting requirements 

would expand required implementation 

of lowest achievable emission rate 

(LAER) to smaller sources (changing the 

major source threshold of potential to 

emit from 50 tpy to 25 tpy) in addition 

to imposing more stringent 

requirements to offset new emissions 

with emissions reductions from existing 

sources (offset ratio of 1.3:1, rather than 

1.2:1).40 The reclassification would also 

require Texas to develop, submit, and 

implement RACT controls on additional 

sources, by lowering the major source 

threshold for RACT applicability to the 

potential to emit 25 tpy (CAA section 

182(d)). 

The more stringent Severe area 

attainment planning requirements are 

designed to promote expeditious 

attainment of the ozone NAAQS, which 

would benefit all residents of the 

Houston area. As discussed previously, 

preliminary air quality data for 2021 

indicates that the area likely will not 

attain by the extended attainment date 

nor will it likely qualify for a second 

extension. Given the preliminary 2021 

data and air quality trends in the area, 

it is likely that the Houston area will be 

subject to these more stringent 

requirements and the question before 

the Agency is whether to impose them 

sooner rather than later. We propose 

that avoiding delay of the requirements 

is appropriate under these 

circumstances in order to facilitate the 

area attaining as expeditiously as 

practicable, and applying a protective 

approach is particularly warranted 

where the Agency has identified 

populations that may already be 

overburdened with pollution. 

The EPA is soliciting comments on 

our proposal to deny TCEQ’s requested 

1-year attainment date extension for the 

Houston Serious nonattainment area. 

3. Solicitation of Comment on Granting 

the Requested 1-Year Attainment Date 

Extension for the Houston Area 

As noted above, we have evaluated 

the information submitted by TCEQ and 

the information indicates that the 

Houston area meets the two statutory 

criteria for the 1-year extension under 

CAA section 181(a)(5) and 40 CFR 

51.1107(a)(1). We take comment on 

whether the EPA should grant the 

requested 1-year extension of the July 

20, 2021, Serious area attainment date 

for the Houston area. 

If made effective, the attainment date 

for the Houston area would be extended 

to July 20, 2022. This means the area 

would remain classified as Serious for 

the 2008 ozone NAAQS unless and until 

the EPA makes a determination that the 

area failed to attain the NAAQS by the 

new attainment date (based on the area’s 

2019–2021 DV) and thus reclassifies the 

area to Severe by operation of law, or 

redesignates the area to attainment. The 

EPA solicits comments on granting the 

1-year attainment date extension for the 

Houston Serious nonattainment area. 

C. Determinations of Failure To Attain 

and Reclassification 

The EPA proposes to determine that 

five Serious nonattainment areas failed 

to attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the 

attainment date of July 20, 2021. These 

areas are not eligible for a 1-year 

attainment date extension because they 

do not meet the extension criteria under 

CAA section 181(a)(5) as interpreted by 

the EPA in 40 CFR 51.1107. The areas’ 

ozone DVs for 2018–2020 are shown in 

Table 1 of this action. 

If we finalize our action as proposed, 

each of these areas will be reclassified 

as Severe nonattainment for the 2008 

ozone NAAQS, the next higher 

classification, as provided under CAA 

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

CFR 51.1103. These areas would then be 

required to attain the standard as 

expeditiously as practicable but no later 

than 15 years after the initial 

designation as nonattainment, which in 

this case would be no later than July 20, 

2027. If an area attains the 2008 ozone 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
21836 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

41 ‘‘For any Severe Area, the terms ‘major source’ 

and ‘major stationary source’ include (in addition 

to the sources described in section 7602 of this title) 

any stationary source or group of sources located 

within a contiguous area and under common 

control that emits, or has the potential to emit, at 

least 25 tons per year of volatile organic 

compounds.’’ CAA section 182(d). 

42See CAA section 182(d)(2). If a state’s plan 

requires all existing major sources in the 

nonattainment area to use best available control 

technology for VOCs consistent with CAA section 

169(3), the required offset ratio is 1.2 to 1. 

43Air agencies should review any existing 

regulation that was previously approved by the EPA 

to determine whether it is sufficient to fulfill 

obligations triggered by the revised ozone NAAQS. 

This review should include determining whether 

the nonattainment area boundary for the current 

ozone NAAQS is consistent with the boundary for 

the previous standards. Where an air agency 

determines that an existing regulation is adequate 

to meet applicable nonattainment area planning 

requirements of CAA section 182 (or ozone 

transport region RACT requirements of CAA section 

184) for a revised ozone NAAQS, that air agency’s 

SIP revision may provide a written statement 

certifying that determination in lieu of submitting 

new revised regulations. 

44See 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 must be met whether 

or not an area has attained the standard); see also 

40 CFR 51.1118 (suspending attainment 

demonstrations, RACM, RFP, contingency 

measures, and other attainment planning SIPs with 

a finding of attainment). 

45Though 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 include in the RACM 

NAAQS, the relevant state may seek a 

Clean Data Determination, under which 

certain attainment planning SIPs for the 

area would be suspended under 40 CFR 

51.1118. If an area meets all the other 

applicable statutory criteria, the state 

could seek a redesignation to attainment 

(Section II.A of this action). 

The EPA requests comment on this 

proposal for determining that these 

areas did not attain the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS by the Serious area attainment 

date. 

D. Severe Area SIP Revisions 

Serious nonattainment areas that the 

EPA has determined failed to attain the 

2008 ozone NAAQS by the attainment 

date will be reclassified as Severe by 

operation of law upon the effective date 

of the final reclassification action. 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 Severe 

nonattainment areas under CAA section 

182(d), as interpreted and described in 

the final SIP Requirements Rule for the 

2008 ozone NAAQS (see 40 CFR 

51.1100 et seq.). This section provides 

discussion of particular Severe area plan 

elements (RACM and RACT, fee 

program, and transportation-related 

requirements), and proposes submission 

and implementation deadlines for 

Severe area SIP revisions required by 

reclassification. As noted previously, 

tribes are not required to submit TIP 

revisions to address Severe area plan 

elements. 

1. Required Submission Elements 

SIP requirements that apply to Severe 

areas are cumulative of CAA 

requirements for lower area 

classifications (i.e., Marginal through 

Serious) and include additional Severe 

area requirements as interpreted and 

described in the final SIP Requirements 

Rule for the 2008 ozone NAAQS (see 

CAA sections 172(c)(1) and 182(a)–(d), 

and 40 CFR 51.1100 et seq.). For areas 

reclassified as Severe, SIP submissions 

must address the more stringent major 

source threshold of 25 tons per year 

(tpy) 41 for RACT and NNSR, and the 

more stringent NNSR emissions offset 

ratio of 1.3:1.42 In order to fulfill their 

Severe area SIP submission 

requirements, states may, where 

appropriate, certify that existing SIP 

provisions for an area are adequate to 

address one or more Severe area 

requirements. Such certifications must 

be submitted as a SIP revision.43 We are 

providing additional discussion in the 

following sections for these Severe area 

requirements: (a) RACM and RACT; (b) 

fee program for major sources if the 

Severe area fails to attain (CAA section 

185); and (c) vehicle miles traveled 

offset demonstration and related 

elements (CAA section 182(d)(1)). 

Although not a required SIP submission, 

we are also providing a discussion of 

federal reformulated gasoline 

requirements (CAA section 

211(k)(10)(D)) that would apply in 

newly reclassified Severe areas (Section 

II.D.1.d of this action). 

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 timely 

attaining the ozone NAAQS in that area. 

EPA interprets the RACM provision 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 (80 FR 

12264, 12282 March 6, 2015). For areas 

reclassified as Severe, such an analysis 

should primarily include an evaluation 

of currently available RACT controls for 

sources that emit or have the potential 

to emit 25 tpy or more, consistent with 

the Severe area classification. CAA 

section 182(d) establishes a major 

source threshold of 25 tpy for areas 

designated Severe. Under CAA section 

182(b)(2)(C), states must provide a SIP 

submission to adopt RACT for all major 

sources of VOC located in the 

nonattainment area, and section 182(f) 

applies this requirement to NOX. As 

such, areas classified as Severe must 

adopt RACT for all sources in the 

nonattainment area that emit, or have 

the potential to emit, at least 25 tpy of 

VOC or NOX. The EPA recognizes that 

in the context of a reclassification to 

Severe, these areas should already have 

RACT in place to address the lower 

classifications’ requirements (those 

required when the areas were 

previously classified as Moderate and/or 

Serious); RACT should already be 

implemented in these areas for sources 

that emit, or have the potential to emit, 

at least 50 tpy of VOC or NOX. CAA 

subpart 2 requirements are cumulative 

and Severe areas are required to address 

not only those requirements listed in 

CAA section 182(d) but also in sections 

182(a) and (c), to the extent those 

requirements are not superseded by the 

more stringent requirements in section 

182(d) and/or have not been previously 

addressed. However, states with areas 

reclassified as Severe should be 

primarily focused on identifying and 

adopting new RACT measures required 

to control sources with the potential to 

emit between 25 to 50 tpy of VOC or 

NOX. 

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.44

In addition to the independent RACT 

requirement, states have a statutory 

obligation to evaluate potential 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.45 Therefore, to the extent 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 21837 

analysis 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, and 40 CFR 51.1312(c)), 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). 

46The EPA interprets CAA section 181(b)(2)(A) as 

prohibiting reclassification of any nonattainment 

area by operation of law to Extreme for failure to 

timely attain; however, states may request, and the 

Administrator shall grant, a state’s request for 

voluntary area reclassification to Extreme under 

CAA section 181(b)(3). 

47Transportation control strategies include diesel 

engine and vehicle replacement programs and 

TCMs include mass transit improvements and 

bicycle and pedestrian programs. 

48 Guidance on implementing the CAA section 

182(d)(1)(A) requirement for offsetting growth in 

emissions due to growth in VMT is available at 

https://www.epa.gov/state-and-localtransportation/transportation-related-documentsstate-and-local-transportation. 

49The MOVES3 VMT offset tool is available at 

https://www.epa.gov/moves/tools-develop-orconvert-moves-inputs#special-inputs. 

50CAA section 211(k)(10)(D) required that the 

‘‘. . . 9 ozone nonattainment areas having a 1980 

population in excess of 250,000 and having the 

highest ozone DV during the period 1987 through 

1989 shall be ‘covered areas’ for purposes of this 

subsection.’’ 

that a state adopts new or additional 

RACT controls 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(d). 

b. Fee Program for Severe Areas That 

Fail To Attain in the Future 

CAA section 185 requires that states 

develop SIP revisions for Severe and 

Extreme areas that provide that, if the 

area fails to timely attain the ozone 

NAAQS in the future, each major 

stationary source of VOCs located in the 

area shall (except in the case of an 

attainment date extension) pay a fee to 

the State as a penalty for such failure. 

Section 185(b) of the CAA specifies the 

method for computing the fee amount. 

The fee is payable for each calendar year 

beginning after the attainment date, 

until the area is redesignated as an 

attainment area for ozone. Each such 

plan revision should include procedures 

for assessment and collection of such 

fees. 

The EPA’s fee program provisions, 

codified for the 2008 ozone NAAQS at 

40 CFR 51.1117, require states with 

ozone nonattainment areas initially 

classified Severe or Extreme to submit a 

SIP revision that meets the requirements 

of CAA section 185 within 10 years of 

the effective date of an area’s 

nonattainment designation. For 

nonattainment areas reclassified as 

Severe or Extreme 46 from a lower 

classification after the date of their 

initial nonattainment designation, the 

EPA retains the ability to set an 

alternative deadline for the CAA section 

185 SIP submission, which is discussed 

in Section II.D.2 of this action. 

c. Vehicle Miles Traveled Offset 

Demonstration and Related Elements 

CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) requires a 

state with a Severe or Extreme ozone 

nonattainment area to submit a SIP 

revision that identifies and adopts 

specific enforceable transportation 

control strategies and transportation 

control measures (TCMs) to offset any 

growth in emissions from growth in 

vehicle miles traveled (VMT) or number 

of vehicle trips in such area.47 The EPA 

has provided guidance titled, 

‘‘Implementing Clean Air Act Section 

182(d)(1)(A): Transportation Control 

Measures and Transportation Control 

Strategies to Offset Growth in Emissions 

Due to Growth in Vehicle Miles 

Travelled.’’ 48 The guidance describes 

how to demonstrate whether there has 

been any growth in emissions from 

growth in VMT or growth in the number 

of vehicle trips. The EPA has also 

developed a tool for use with the 

MOVES3 emission factor model that 

allows states to perform the calculations 

described in the guidance.49 If the 

demonstration shows that there has 

been an increase in emissions due to 

growth in VMT or vehicle trips, the state 

must adopt transportation control 

strategies or TCMs to offset the 

identified increase in emissions due to 

growth in VMT or vehicle trips in the 

nonattainment area and submit those 

transportation control strategies or 

TCMs as a SIP revision. 

CAA section 182(d)(1)(A) additionally 

requires that states with Severe and 

Extreme ozone nonattainment areas 

submit a SIP revision that identifies and 

adopts specific enforceable 

transportation control strategies and 

TCMs to obtain reductions in motor 

vehicle emissions as necessary, in 

combination with other emission 

reduction requirements, to comply with 

RFP requirements. Finally, CAA section 

182(d)(1)(A) requires states to consider 

measures specified in CAA section 

108(f) and choose from among those 

measures and implement such measures 

as necessary to demonstrate attainment 

with the relevant ozone NAAQS. CAA 

section 182(d)(1)(A) also requires that in 

considering these measures, states 

should ensure adequate access to 

downtown, other commercial, and 

residential areas and should avoid 

measures that increase or relocate 

emissions and congestion rather than 

reduce them. Section II.D.2 of this 

action discusses the proposed SIP 

submission and implementation 

deadlines for the VMT offset 

demonstration and any necessary 

transportation control strategies and 

TCMs for newly reclassified Severe 

areas. 

d. Reformulated Gasoline 

The CAA prohibits the sale of 

conventional gasoline in any ozone 

nonattainment area that is reclassified 

as Severe and requires that federal 

reformulated gasoline (RFG) must 

instead be sold. The prohibition on the 

sale of conventional gasoline takes effect 

1 year after the effective date of the 

reclassification (see CAA section 

211(k)(10)(D)). Many of the areas 

discussed in today’s proposal already 

sell RFG because of their 1987–1989 

DVs for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS 50 or 

because states opted areas into RFG 

under CAA section 211(k)(6)(A). Areas 

already subject to federal RFG 

requirements are listed in 40 CFR 

1090.285(a)–(d). Following is a 

discussion of how subject areas would 

be impacted if the EPA finalizes its 

proposed determinations of failure to 

attain and reclassifications to Severe for 

the 2008 ozone NAAQS. It is important 

to note that for any areas that are 

reclassified as Severe for the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS, states would not promulgate 

state fuel rules for implementing federal 

RFG because the CAA requirements 

would be implemented as written. Air 

agencies are thus not required to submit 

a SIP revision addressing RFG 

requirements, and we are not proposing 

related SIP submission and 

implementation deadlines. The EPA 

would instead publish another final rule 

at a later date to appropriately revise the 

lists of RFG covered areas in 40 CFR 

1090.285 for administrative purposes 

(see 40 CFR 1090.290(e)). 

New York-N. New Jersey-Long Island, 

NY-NJ-CT 

The New York-N. New Jersey-Long 

Island, NY-NJ-CT area (herein referred 

to as the New York City area) is one of 

the nine federal RFG areas where the 

sale of conventional gasoline is 

currently prohibited because of its 

1987–1989 1-hour ozone NAAQS DV. 

However, there are some geographic 

differences between the New YorkNorthern New Jersey-Long IslandConnecticut federal RFG area and the 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
21838 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

51See, e.g., 75 FR 79302 (December 20, 2010) 

(Dallas-Ft. Worth, Texas, reclassification to Serious 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS); 69 FR 16483 

(March 30, 2004) (Beaumont-Port Arthur, Texas, 

reclassification to Serious for the 1979 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS); 68 FR 4836 (January 30, 2003) (St. Louis, 

Missouri, reclassification to Serious for the 1979 1- 

hour ozone NAAQS). 

52Nonattainment areas are required to attain the 

ozone NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable but 

not later than the applicable attainment date (see 

CAA section 181(a)(1)); this ‘‘not later than’’ date 

is also referred to as the maximum attainment date. 

2008 ozone NAAQS nonattainment area. 

Warren County, NJ and all of Fairfield, 

Middlesex and New Haven Counties in 

Connecticut are part of the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS nonattainment area but are not 

included in the current New YorkNorthern New Jersey-Long IslandConnecticut federal RFG area. However, 

the sale of conventional gasoline is 

already prohibited in these four 

counties as follows. Warren County, NJ 

is an RFG opt-in area (see 40 CFR 

1090.285(c)). A portion of Fairfield 

County, Connecticut is already part of 

the New York-Northern New JerseyLong Island-Connecticut federal RFG 

area and the remainder of Fairfield 

County is already part of the Greater 

Connecticut, CT, federal RFG area. 

Finally, Middlesex and New Haven 

Counties in Connecticut are already part 

of the Greater Connecticut, CT, federal 

RFG area (see 40 CFR 1090.285(a)). 

Therefore, if the New York City area 

is reclassified as Severe for the 2008 

ozone NAAQS, it will not result in any 

changes to where federal RFG is sold in 

the nonattainment area. 

Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI 

The Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI area 

(herein referred to as the Chicago area) 

is one of the nine federal RFG areas 

where the sale of conventional gasoline 

is prohibited because of its 1987–1989 

1-hour ozone NAAQS DV (see 40 CFR 

1090.285(a)). However, there is one 

difference between the Chicago-GaryLake County federal RFG area and the 

Chicago 2008 ozone NAAQS 

nonattainment area. Part of Kenosha 

County, WI is included in the Chicago 

2008 ozone nonattainment area. The 

sale of conventional gasoline is already 

prohibited in Kenosha County, WI 

because it is part of the MilwaukeeRacine federal RFG area. Therefore, if 

the Chicago area is reclassified as Severe 

for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, it will not 

result in any changes to where federal 

RFG is sold in the nonattainment area 

(see 40 CFR 1090.285(a)). 

Houston-Galveston-Brazoria, TX 

The Houston-Galveston-Brazoria area 

(herein referred to as the Houston area) 

is one of the nine federal RFG areas 

where the sale of conventional gasoline 

is prohibited because of its 1987–1989 

1-hour ozone NAAQS DV (see 40 CFR 

1090.285(a)). The Houston 2008 ozone 

NAAQS nonattainment area and the 

Houston-Galveston-Brazoria federal RFG 

area are identical. Therefore, whether or 

not the Houston area is reclassified as 

Severe for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, it 

will not result in any changes to where 

federal RFG is sold in the nonattainment 

area. 

Dallas-Fort Worth, TX 

The sale of conventional gasoline is 

already prohibited in Colin, Dallas, 

Denton, and Tarrant Counties because 

Texas chose to opt the 4-county DallasFort Worth 1-hour ozone nonattainment 

area into RFG (see 57 FR 46316, October 

8, 1992, and 40 CFR 1090.285(c)). If the 

10-county Dallas-Fort Worth 2008 ozone 

NAAQS nonattainment area is 

reclassified as Severe, the prohibition 

on the sale of conventional gasoline 

under CAA section 211(k)(10)(D) and 

the sale of federal RFG would apply to 

the 10-county nonattainment area 1 year 

after the effective date of the 

reclassification. 

Denver-Boulder-Greeley-Ft. CollinsLoveland, CO 

If the Denver-Boulder-Greeley-Ft. 

Collins-Loveland area (herein referred to 

as the Denver area) is reclassified as 

Severe for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the 

prohibition on the sale of conventional 

gasoline would apply to the entire area 

under CAA section 211(k)(10)(D). This 

would be a new requirement for the area 

as federal RFG is not currently required 

to be sold in any part of the Denver 2008 

ozone NAAQS nonattainment area. The 

sale of federal RFG would apply to the 

entire nonattainment area 1 year after 

the effective date of the reclassification. 

Morongo Band of Mission Indians Area 

If the Morongo Band of Mission 

Indians area is reclassified as Severe for 

the 2008 ozone NAAQS, the prohibition 

on the sale of conventional gasoline 

would apply in the area. However, the 

Morongo Band of Mission Indians area 

is within the Los Angeles-AnaheimRiverside federal RFG area, which is one 

of the nine areas where the sale of 

conventional gasoline is already 

prohibited because of its 1987–1989 1- 

hour ozone NAAQS DV (see 40 CFR 

1090.285(a)). Therefore, if this proposal 

is finalized and the Morongo Band of 

Mission Indians area is reclassified as 

Severe for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, it 

will not result in any changes to federal 

RFG requirements for the nonattainment 

area. 

2. Submission and Implementation 

Deadlines 

On July 20, 2012, when final 

nonattainment designations became 

effective for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, 

states responsible for areas initially 

classified as Severe 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 10 years after 

July 20, 2012, depending on the SIP 

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

RACT SIP and VMT offset 

demonstration, 4 years for the 

attainment demonstration, 10 years for 

the section 185 fee program). Initial 

Severe areas were also required to 

implement RACT as expeditiously as 

practicable but no later than January 1 

of the 5th year after July 20, 2012 (i.e., 

January 1, 2017). Except for the section 

185 fee program submission deadline, 

those deadlines have passed, and the 

EPA proposes to use its discretion under 

CAA section 182(i) to adjust the SIP 

deadlines that would otherwise apply. 

We discuss submission and 

implementation deadlines for areas 

reclassified as Severe in the following 

sections: (a) Submission deadline for 

SIP revisions, and (b) implementation 

deadline for required controls. 

a. Submission Deadline for SIP 

Revisions 

The EPA proposes that states submit 

SIP revisions addressing all Severe area 

requirements (Section II.D.1 of this 

action) no later than 18 months after the 

effective date of the final reclassification 

action. With the exception of SIP 

revisions addressing CAA section 185 

fee program requirements (discussed as 

follows in this section), the SIP revision 

submission deadlines for areas initially 

classified as Severe have passed (see 40 

CFR 51.1100 et seq.). 

For newly reclassified Severe areas, 

the EPA believes that an 18-month 

deadline for the attainment planning 

requirements ‘‘is necessary and 

appropriate’’ to assure consistency 

among these submissions (per CAA 

section 182(i)). For ozone areas 

reclassified by operation of law under 

CAA section 181(b)(2) from Moderate to 

Serious, we have generally established 

12-month SIP submission deadlines.51

However, we now propose that an 18- 

month schedule for submission of SIP 

revisions is appropriate for 

reclassifications from Serious to Severe 

given the longer interval to the 

‘‘maximum’’ attainment date associated 

with areas reclassified from Serious to 

Severe as compared to areas reclassified 

from Moderate to Serious.52 That is, 

there is generally a 3-year interval 

between the attainment dates for areas 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 21839 

53 ‘‘Attainment year ozone season’’ is defined as 

the ozone season immediately preceding a 

nonattainment area’s maximum attainment date 

(see 40 CFR 51.1100(h)), with the attainment year 

being the calendar year corresponding with that 

final ozone season for determining attainment. 

reclassified from Moderate to Serious 

(with exceptions for areas that states can 

demonstrate can attain the NAAQS 

more quickly and for areas once they are 

granted attainment date extensions). 

However, there is a 6-year interval 

between maximum attainment dates for 

areas reclassified from Serious to Severe 

(see 40 CFR 51.1103). Given the longer 

interval between the Serious and Severe 

maximum attainment dates, we find that 

providing a longer period for 

submission of SIP revisions addressing 

Severe area requirements for reclassified 

areas is appropriate and will allow air 

agencies time to finish reviews of 

available control measures, adopt 

revisions to necessary control strategies, 

address other SIP requirements and 

complete the public notice process 

necessary to adopt and submit timely 

SIP revisions. As discussed in Section 

II.D.2.b of this action, we are proposing 

that any controls that air agencies 

determine are needed for meeting CAA 

requirements must be implemented as 

expeditiously as practicable but no later 

than 18 months from the proposed SIP 

submission deadline. In combination 

with our proposed submission deadline, 

the proposed overall 36-month schedule 

for controls implementation could result 

in meaningful emissions reductions by 

the Severe area attainment DV time 

period (2024–2026). 

RACM and RACT. The EPA proposes 

that the SIP revision to address RACM 

and RACT requirements will be due 18 

months after the effective date of 

reclassification, consistent with all other 

required Severe area plan elements. We 

believe this deadline would provide a 

reasonable planning schedule and 

consistency across submissions (per 

CAA section 182(i)) while not unduly 

delaying implementation of additional 

needed controls. As noted previously, 

states with areas reclassified as Severe 

should be primarily focused on 

identifying and adopting new RACT 

measures required to control sources 

with the potential to emit between 25 to 

50 tpy of VOC or NOX. The slightly 

longer timeframe to prepare and adopt 

SIP revisions for reclassified Severe 

areas (compared to approximately 12 

months for previous 2008 ozone 

reclassification actions) could result in 

states determining that additional 

controls are reasonable (compared to 

what controls the state may be able to 

assess in a shorter 12-month timeframe), 

which could then help expedite air 

quality improvements in these areas. We 

believe an 18-month submission 

deadline would best balance the goals of 

more robust SIP revisions and—in 

combination with our proposed controls 

implementation deadline—expeditious 

and meaningful emissions reductions 

for areas reclassified as Severe (Section 

II.D.2.b of this action). The EPA requests 

comment on this proposed deadline for 

RACM and RACT submissions. 

CAA section 185 fee programs. The 

EPA proposes that the SIP revision to 

address the section 185 fee program 

requirements will be due 18 months 

after the effective date of 

reclassification, consistent with all other 

required Severe area plan elements. As 

previously described, the due date for 

the section 185 fee programs for the 

2008 NAAQS for an area initially 

classified as Severe is 10 years from the 

effective date of designation, or July 20, 

2022, as codified at 40 CFR 51.1117. 

This 2022 date was chosen because it 

followed the approach laid out in CAA 

section 182(d)(3), which established a 

section 185 fee program due date of 

December 31, 2000, for areas classified 

Severe by operation of law under the 

1990 CAA Amendments (see 80 FR 

12264, 12266, March 6, 2015). CAA 

section 181(a) assigned these same areas 

an attainment date of November 15, 

2005. These deadlines are intended to 

ensure that the section 185 fee program 

was submitted to EPA for approval well 

in advance of (i.e., just short of 5 years 

before) the attainment date. This 

allowance gives EPA time to review and 

act on the program submission, which 

in turn ensures that the air agency’s fee 

program infrastructure will be in place 

in advance of the actual Severe area 

attainment date. This is important in 

ensuring smooth implementation of the 

program if the area fails to timely attain, 

because collection of fees is required 

under section 185 to begin for the 

calendar year immediately following the 

Severe area attainment date. For the 

2008 NAAQS, the July 20, 2022, date for 

initial Severe areas is consistent with 

that approach. However, Congress did 

not specify dates for areas reclassified as 

Severe, and we believe there are timing 

considerations that warrant a later date 

here. A later date would also provide 

consistency with other proposed Severe 

area SIP submission deadlines for the 

areas currently being reclassified. 

Applying the July 20, 2022, date to 

areas reclassified as Severe would result 

in an unreasonably short time for air 

agencies to develop their section 185 fee 

programs, especially since these 

agencies will also be working to address 

all the other Severe area requirements 

discussed in this action. Accordingly, 

the EPA believes it is reasonable to set 

the section 185 fee program due date at 

18 months after reclassification, in line 

with the other elements. Although this 

will reduce implementation lead time 

compared to that in CAA section 

182(d)(3) and 40 CFR 51.1117 for 

initially classified Severe areas, we 

anticipate that this timing would still be 

adequate to get the fee program in place 

ahead of the Severe area attainment 

date. The EPA recognizes the effort 

required to develop a section 185 fee 

program, but we also note the 

opportunities to synchronize the 

adoption process for the section 185 

program with that of the other Severe 

area requirements. Providing longer 

than 18 months for submission of the 

section 185 program element would 

create inconsistent deadlines and would 

reduce the lead time for implementing 

the program by an even greater amount 

than the EPA’s proposal. Accordingly, 

we are proposing a deadline of 18 

months for submission of the section 

185 fee program element. The EPA 

requests comment on this proposed 

deadline. 

VMT offset demonstration and related 

elements. The EPA proposes that a SIP 

revision to address the VMT offset 

demonstration will be due 18 months 

after the effective date of 

reclassification, consistent with all other 

Severe area requirements. If the 

demonstration shows that a state must 

adopt transportation control strategies 

or TCMs to offset any identified increase 

in emissions due to growth in VMT or 

vehicle trips, we are proposing that the 

transportation control strategies and/or 

TCMs be submitted at that same time as 

the SIP revision to address the VMT 

offset demonstration. The EPA requests 

comment on this proposed deadline. 

b. Implementation Deadline for 

Required Controls 

As required by 40 CFR 51.1108(d) the 

state must provide for implementation 

of all control measures needed for 

attainment no later than the beginning 

of the attainment year ozone season.53

Further, the EPA proposes that any 

controls that air agencies determine are 

needed for meeting CAA requirements 

must be implemented as expeditiously 

as practicable but no later than 18 

months from the proposed SIP 

submission deadline. These controls 

would include any identified RACT, 

and any needed transportation control 

strategies or TCMs indicated in the VMT 

offset demonstration. In combination 

with our proposed submission deadline 

for Severe area SIP revisions (no later 

than 18 months after the effective date 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
21840 Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 

of the final reclassification action, as 

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

action), air agencies and affected 

sources would have an overall schedule 

of 36 months to identify, adopt, and 

implement new pollution controls. 

The EPA’s proposed implementation 

deadline is intended to balance the time 

needed for sources to install and 

implement new required controls with 

the time needed for resulting emissions 

reductions to meaningfully contribute to 

RFP and timely attainment in newly 

reclassified Severe areas. As a general 

matter, the Act requires implementation 

of RACM and RACT requirements 

needed for timely attainment ‘‘as 

expeditiously as practicable’’ (see CAA 

section 172(c)(1)). The EPA’s 

implementing regulations for the 2008 

ozone NAAQS require that, for areas 

initially classified as Moderate or 

higher, a state shall provide for 

implementation of RACM and RACT as 

expeditiously as practicable but no later 

than January 1 of the 5th year after the 

effective date of designation (see 40 CFR 

51.1112(a)(3)), which corresponded 

with the beginning of the attainment 

year for initial Moderate areas (January 

1, 2017). The modeling and attainment 

demonstration requirements for 2008 

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 (see 40 

CFR 51.1108(d)). These regulations 

allow a comparable amount of time for 

sources to meet RACT requirements as 

originally anticipated under the 1990 

CAA Amendments (see CAA section 

182(b)(2)), with the objective that RACT 

measures be in place to influence an 

area’s attainment year air quality and 

DV. Although the CAA does not 

establish an implementation deadline 

for transportation control strategies or 

TCMs (see CAA section 182(d)(1)(A)), 

we believe the same timing rationale 

would apply and that it would be 

appropriate to align the implementation 

deadline for RACT and these 

transportation-related controls. 

In the case of newly reclassified 

Severe areas, the longer interval 

between the Serious and Severe 

maximum attainment dates means that 

the proposed 36-month schedule for 

controls implementation could result in 

meaningful emissions reductions even 

earlier in the attainment DV time period 

(2024–2026). For areas implementing 

both the 2008 and the 2015 ozone 

standards, we believe allowing adequate 

time to identify and implement 

additional controls will help 

nonattainment areas attain both 

standards more expeditiously. 

The EPA requests comment on 

aligning the implementation deadlines 

for RACT and transportation-related 

controls and requiring that any controls 

needed for meeting RFP or timely 

attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS be 

implemented as expeditiously as 

practicable but no later than 18 months 

after the proposed SIP submission 

deadline. We also request comment on 

providing an overall 36-month schedule 

for SIP submission and controls 

implementation. 

III. Environmental Justice 

Considerations 

As discussed in Section II.B of this 

action, the EPA proposes to deny a 

request for a 1-year attainment date 

extension for the Houston-GalvestonBrazoria, Texas, nonattainment area and 

to determine that the area failed to 

attain the 2008 ozone NAAQS by the 

attainment date. The proposal to deny 

the extension request is based on our 

assessment of air quality trends in the 

Houston area, and, given our findings 

that the area is not likely to attain by an 

extended attainment date or qualify for 

a second extension, our consideration of 

the impact of our action on existing 

pollution burdens in the area. 

Screening-level EJ analyses indicate an 

already disproportionate pollution 

burden for communities near the 

Houston Ship Channel and 

communities around violating ozone 

regulatory monitor sites in the Houston 

area. Denying the state’s request to 

extend the attainment date would result 

in the area’s reclassification to Severe, 

and in more timely application in this 

area of the Act’s more stringent controls 

associated with that higher 

classification. Expeditious attainment of 

the NAAQS will protect all those 

residing, working, attending school, or 

otherwise present in those areas, 

including communities of color and 

low-income communities. 

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 exempt from review by 

the Office of Management and Budget 

because it responds to the CAA 

requirement 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. 

B. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) 

This action does not impose any new 

information collection burden under the 

PRA. OMB has previously approved the 

information collection activities 

contained in the existing regulations 

and has assigned OMB control number 

2060–0695. This action proposes to: (1) 

Find that certain Serious ozone 

nonattainment areas listed in Table 1 of 

this action failed to attain the 2008 

NAAQS by the applicable attainment 

date; (2) identify those areas subject to 

reclassification as Severe 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. 

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 either to grant or to deny 

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. 


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 71 / Wednesday, April 13, 2022 / Proposed Rules 21841 

54 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. 

55 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. 

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 rule. 

Specifically, two of the nonattainment 

areas addressed in this proposal have 

tribes located within their boundaries: 

the Greater Connecticut, CT, area 

(Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation and 

Mohegan Indian Tribe), and the New 

York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, 

CT–NJ–NY area (Shinnecock Indian 

Nation). One of the nonattainment areas 

addressed in this document is a separate 

tribal nonattainment area (Morongo 

Band of Mission Indians, California 

area). 

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 Serious to Severe 

nonattainment is not required to submit 

a TIP revision to address new Severe 

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 action), 

including on tribal lands within these 

nonattainment areas. Areas that are 

already classified Severe for a previous 

ozone NAAQS are already subject to 

these higher offset ratios and lower 

thresholds, so a reclassification to 

Severe for the 2008 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. 

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 Serious 

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).54

The EPA is proposing findings 

regarding attainment of the NAAQS in 

nonattainment areas within nine states 

located in six 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).55


jspears on DSK121TN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
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