[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 183 (Thursday, September 22, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 55559-55568]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18953]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[R04-OAR-2005-TN-0007-200527(a) FRL-7973-5]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation 
of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Tennessee; Redesignation of 
the Montgomery County, Tennessee Portion of the Clarksville-
Hopkinsville 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area to Attainment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On August 10, 2005, the State of Tennessee, through the 
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), Air 
Pollution Control Division, submitted a final request: To redesignate 
the Montgomery County, Tennessee portion of the Clarksville-
Hopkinsville 8-hour ozone nonattainment area to attainment for the 8-
hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS), and to 
approve a Tennessee State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision containing 
a 12-year maintenance plan for Montgomery County, Tennessee. The 
interstate Clarksville-Hopkinsville 8-hour ozone nonattainment area is 
comprised of two counties (i.e., Christian County, Kentucky and 
Montgomery County, Tennessee). EPA is approving the 8-hour ozone 
redesignation request for the Montgomery County, Tennessee portion of 
the Clarksville-Hopkinsville 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. 
Additionally, EPA is approving the 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for 
Montgomery County, Tennessee. This approval is based on EPA's 
determination that the State of Tennessee has demonstrated that 
Montgomery County, Tennessee has met the criteria for redesignation to 
attainment specified in the Clean Air Act (CAA), including the 
determination that the entire Clarksville-Hopkinsville 8-hour ozone 
nonattainment area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard. On March 21, 
2005, the Commonwealth of Kentucky submitted a redesignation request 
and maintenance plan for the Christian County, Kentucky portion of this 
area for EPA parallel processing. In this action, EPA is also providing 
information on the status of its transportation conformity adequacy 
determination for the new motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for 
the year 2016 that are contained in the 12-year 8-hour ozone 
maintenance plan for Montgomery County, Tennessee. EPA is approving 
such MVEBs.

DATES: This rule is effective on November 21, 2005, without further 
notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comments by October 24, 
2005. If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely 
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform 
the public that the rule will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Regional Material in 
EDocket (RME) ID No. R04-OAR-2005-TN-0007, by one of the following 
methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    2. Agency Web site: http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/RME. EPA's 
electronic public docket and comment system is EPA's preferred method 
for receiving comments. Once in the system, select ``quick search,'' 
then key in the appropriate RME Docket identification number. Follow 
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    3. E-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#355d5a535358545b1b545b5b505854475c50755045541b525a43"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1e76717878737f70307f70707b737f6c777b5e7b6e7f30797168">[email protected]</span></a> or <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a7d0c8c8c389c6cac6c9c2d3d3c6e7c2d7c689c0c8d1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2d5a424249034c404c434859594c6d485d4c034a425b">[email protected]</span></a>.
    4. Fax: (404) 562-9019.
    5. Mail: ``R04-OAR-2005-TN-0007,'' Regulatory Development Section, 
Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    6. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Anne Marie 
Hoffman or Amanetta Wood, Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning 
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are only accepted during 
the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's 
official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 
excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to RME ID No. R04-OAR-2005-TN-
0007. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in 
the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, including any personal information 
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be 
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose 
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you 
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through RME, regulations.gov, 
or e-mail. The EPA RME Web site and the Federal regulations.gov Web 
site are ``anonymous access'' systems, which means EPA will not know 
your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body 
of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without 
going through RME or regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be 
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is 
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you 
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name 
and other contact information in

[[Page 55560]]

the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA 
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot 
contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your 
comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, 
any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
RME index at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. Although listed in the 
index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other 
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet 
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly 
available docket materials are available either electronically in RME 
or in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning 
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., 
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you 
contact the contact listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section to schedule your inspection.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anne Marie Hoffman of the Regulatory 
Development Section or Amanetta Wood of the Air Quality Modeling and 
Transportation Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 
Management Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 
Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number 
is (404) 562-9074 or (404) 562-9025. Ms. Anne Marie Hoffman can be 
reached via electronic mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#026a6d64646f636c2c636c6c676f63706b67426772632c656d74"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1971767f7f747877377877777c74786b707c597c6978377e766f">[email protected]</span></a>. Ms. Amanetta 
Wood can also be reached via electronic mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#34435b5b501a5559555a51404055745144551a535b42"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="374058585319565a5659524343567752475619505841">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. What are the Actions EPA is Taking?
II. What is the Background for the Actions?
III What are the Redesignation Review Criteria?
IV. Why is EPA Taking These Actions?
V. What is the Effect of EPA's Actions?
VI. What is EPA's Analysis of the Request?
VII. What is an Adequacy Determination and What is the Status of 
EPA's Adequacy Determination for the Montgomery County's Proposed 
New MVEB for the Year 2016?
VIII. Action on the Redesignation Request, the Maintenance Plan SIP 
Revision Including Approval of the 2016 MVEBs
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Are the Actions EPA Is Taking?

    Through this rulemaking, EPA is taking several related actions. EPA 
is making the determination that the Clarksville-Hopkinsville 8-hour 
ozone nonattainment area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard, and 
the Montgomery County, Tennessee portion has met the requirements for 
redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. The Clarksville-
Hopkinsville area is a basic 8-hour nonattainment ozone area. 
Montgomery County is located in the Clarksville-Hopkinsville, 
Tennessee-Kentucky Metropolitan Statistical Area, which contains 
Christian County, Kentucky and Montgomery County, Tennessee. EPA is 
approving a request to change the legal designation of Montgomery 
County, Tennessee from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS.
    EPA is also approving Tennessee's 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for 
Montgomery County (such approval being one of the CAA criteria for 
redesignation to attainment status). The maintenance plan is designed 
to help keep the Clarksville-Hopkinsville area (of which Montgomery 
County is a part) in attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the next 
12 years.
    Additionally, through this rulemaking, EPA is announcing its action 
on the Adequacy Process for the newly-established 2016 MVEBs for 
Montgomery County, Tennessee. The Adequacy comment period for the 2016 
MVEBs began on July 12, 2005, with EPA's posting of the availability of 
this submittal on EPA's Adequacy Web site (at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/transp/conform/adequacy.htm). The Adequacy comment period for these 
MVEBs closed on August 11, 2005. No requests or adverse comments on 
this submittal were received during EPA's Adequacy comment period. 
Please see section VII of this rulemaking for further explanation of 
this process.

II. What Is the Background for the Action?

    Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather, 
emissions of nitrogen oxides (NO<INF>X</INF>) and volatile organic 
compounds (VOC) react in the presence of sunlight to form ground-level 
ozone. NO<INF>X</INF> and VOC are referred to as precursors of ozone. 
The CAA establishes a process for air quality management through the 
NAAQS.
    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone standard 
of 0.08 parts per million (ppm). This new standard is more stringent 
than the previous 1-hour ozone standard. Under EPA regulations at 40 
CFR part 50, the 8-hour ozone standard is attained when the 3-year 
average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average 
ambient air quality ozone concentrations is less than or equal to 0.08 
ppm (i.e. 0.084 ppm when rounding is considered). (See 69 FR 23857 
(April 30, 2004) for further information). Ambient air quality 
monitoring data for the 3-year period must meet a data completeness 
requirement. The ambient air quality monitoring data completeness 
requirement is met when the average percent of days with valid ambient 
monitoring data is greater than 90 percent, and no single year has less 
than 75 percent data completeness as determined in Appendix I of part 
50. Specifically, section 2.3 of 40 CFR part 50, Appendix I,

    ``Comparisons with the Primary and Secondary Ozone Standards'' 
states: ``The primary and secondary ozone ambient air quality 
standards are met at an ambient air quality monitoring site when the 
3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour 
average ozone concentration is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm. The 
number of significant figures in the level of the standard dictates 
the rounding convention for comparing the computed 3-year average 
annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone 
concentration with the level of the standard. The third decimal 
place of the computed value is rounded, with values equal to or 
greater than 5 rounding up. Thus, a computed 3-year average ozone 
concentration of 0.085 ppm is the smallest value that is greater 
than 0.08 ppm.''

    The CAA required EPA to designate as nonattainment any area that 
was violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the three most recent 
years of ambient air quality data. The Clarksville-Hopkinsville 8-hour 
ozone nonattainment area was designated using 2001 to 2003 ambient air 
quality data. The Federal Register notice making these designations was 
signed on April 15, 2004, and published on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 
23857). The CAA contains two sets of provisions--subpart 1 and subpart 
2--that address planning and control requirements for ozone 
nonattainment areas. (Both are found in title I, part D.) Subpart 1 
(which covers areas that EPA refers to as ``basic'' nonattainment) 
contains general, less prescriptive, requirements for nonattainment 
areas for any pollutant--including ozone--governed by a NAAQS. Subpart 
2 (which covers areas that EPA refers to as ``classified'' 
nonattainment) provides more specific requirements for certain ozone 
nonattainment areas. Some 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are subject

[[Page 55561]]

only to the provisions of subpart 1. Other 8-hour ozone nonattainment 
areas are also subject to the provisions of subpart 2. Under EPA's 
Phase-1 8-Hour Ozone Implementation Rule, signed on April 15, 2004, an 
area was to be classified under subpart 2 based on its 8-hour ozone 
design value (i.e., the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest 
daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations), if it had a 1-hour 
design value at or above 0.121 ppm (the lowest 1-hour design value in 
Table 1 of subpart 2). All other areas are covered under subpart 1, 
based upon their 8-hour ambient air quality design values. The 
Clarksville-Hopkinsville area was originally designated as a ``basic'' 
8-hour ozone nonattainment area by EPA on April 30, 2004, (69 FR 23857) 
and is subject to subpart 1 of part D. In 2004, the ambient ozone data 
for the interstate Clarksville-Hopkinsville nonattainment area 
indicated no further violation of the 8-hour ozone standard, using data 
from the 3-year period of 2002-2004 (with the 2002-2004 design value of 
0.082 ppm ), to demonstrate attainment. Available preliminary 
monitoring data through August 2005 indicates continued attainment of 
the 8-hour ozone standard.
    On March 21, 2005, the Commonwealth of Kentucky, through the 
Kentucky Division for Air Quality (KDAQ), submitted a request for 
parallel processing and on May 20, 2005, submitted a final request: (1) 
To redesignate the Christian County, Kentucky portion of the 
Clarksville-Hopkinsville 8-hour ozone nonattainment area to attainment 
for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and (2) for EPA approval of a Kentucky 
State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision containing a 12-year 
maintenance plan for Christian County, Kentucky. EPA is taking action 
on the request to redesignate the Kentucky portion of the area (i.e., 
Christian County) to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in a 
separate action.
    On August 10, 2005, the State of Tennessee requested redesignation 
to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard for the Montgomery County, 
Tennessee portion of the Clarksville-Hopkinsville interstate 8-hour 
ozone area. The redesignation request includes three years of complete, 
quality-assured ambient air quality data for the ozone seasons of 2002 
through 2004, indicating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS had been achieved for 
the Clarksville-Hopkinsville area (of which Montgomery County, 
Tennessee is a part). The ozone season for this area is from April 1 
until September 30 of a calendar year. Under the CAA, nonattainment 
areas may be redesignated to attainment if sufficient, complete, 
quality-assured data is available for the Administrator to determine 
that the area has attained the standard and the area meets the other 
CAA redesignation requirements in section 107(d)(3)(E).

III. What Are the Redesignation Review Criteria?

    The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment 
area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) allows for 
redesignation providing that: (1) The Administrator determines that the 
area has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) the Administrator has fully 
approved the applicable implementation plan for the area under section 
110(k); (3) the Administrator determines that the improvement in air 
quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions 
resulting from implementation of the applicable SIP and applicable 
Federal air pollutant control regulations and other permanent and 
enforceable reductions; (4) the Administrator has fully approved a 
maintenance plan for the area as meeting the requirements of section 
175A; and, (5) the State containing such area has met all requirements 
applicable to the area under section 110 and part D.
    EPA provided guidance on redesignation in the General Preamble for 
the Implementation of Title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990, on April 
16, 1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented this guidance on April 28, 
1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has provided further guidance on processing 
redesignation requests in the following documents:
    1. ``Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations,'' 
Memorandum from Bill Laxton, June 18, 1990;
    2. ``Maintenance Plans for Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon 
Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief, 
Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, April 30, 1992;
    3. ``Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) 
Redesignations,'' Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon 
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 1992;
    4. ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to 
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 
Management Division, September 4, 1992;
    5. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response 
to Clean Air Act (ACT) Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, 
Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;
    6. ``Technical Support Documents (TSD's) for Redesignation of Ozone 
and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas, Memorandum from G.T. 
Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17, 1993;
    7. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas 
Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and 
Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) On 
or After November 15, 1992,'' Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, 
Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17, 
1993;
    8. ``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for 
Ozone and CO Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, 
Acting Director, Air Quality Management Division, November 30, 1993;
    9. ``Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for Areas 
Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Memorandum from Mary D. 
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14, 
1994; and
    10. ``Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and 
Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone 
National Ambient Air Quality Standard,'' Memorandum from John S. Seitz, 
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, May 10, 1995.

IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?

    On August 10, 2005, the State of Tennessee requested redesignation 
of the Montgomery County, Tennessee portion of the Clarksville-
Hopkinsville 8-hour ozone nonattainment area to attainment for the 8-
hour ozone standard. EPA believes that the State of Tennessee has 
demonstrated that Montgomery County, Tennessee (as part of the 
Clarksville-Hopkinsville area) has attained the standard and has met 
the requirements for redesignation set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of 
CAA.

V. What Is the Effect of EPA's Actions?

    Approval of this redesignation request would change the official 
designation of Montgomery County, Tennessee for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS 
found at 40 CFR part 81. It would also incorporate into the Tennessee 
SIP a plan for maintaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the area through 
2016. The maintenance plan includes contingency measures to remedy 
future violations of

[[Page 55562]]

the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and would establish MVEBs of 3.00 tons per day 
(tpd) for VOC and 9.05 tpd for NO<INF>X</INF> for the year 2016.

VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Request?

    EPA is making the determination that the Clarksville-Hopkinsville 
8-hour ozone nonattainment area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard, 
and that all other redesignation criteria have been met. The basis for 
EPA's determination is as follows:
    (1) The Clarksville-Hopkinsville area has attained the 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS.
    EPA is making the determination that the area has attained the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. For ozone, an area may be considered to be attaining 
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS if there are no violations, as determined in 
accordance with 40 CFR 50.10 and appendix I of part 50, based on three 
complete, consecutive calendar years of quality-assured air quality 
monitoring data. To attain this standard, the 3-year average of the 
fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations 
measured at each monitor within an area over each year must not exceed 
0.08 ppm. Based on the rounding convention described in 40 CFR part 50, 
appendix I, the standard is attained if the design value is 0.084 ppm 
or below. The data must be collected and quality-assured in accordance 
with 40 CFR part 58, and recorded in the EPA Air Quality System (AQS). 
The monitors generally should have remained at the same location for 
the duration of the monitoring period required for demonstrating 
attainment.
    KDAQ, on behalf of Tennessee, submitted ozone monitoring data to 
EPA for the ozone season from 2002 to 2004. There is currently one 
monitor measuring ozone, located within Christian County, Kentucky, 
which provides air quality data for the entire Clarksville-Hopkinsville 
8-hour ozone nonattainment area. The State of Tennessee relies on 
Kentucky's monitoring data for this area. This data has been quality 
assured and is recorded in AQS. The fourth-highest averages for 2002, 
2003 and 2004, and the 3-year average of these values (i.e., design 
value), are summarized in the following table:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               County                 2002    2003    2004    2002-2004
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Christian..........................   0.093   0.080   0.074        0.082
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Available preliminary monitoring data through August 2005 indicates 
continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard. In addition, as 
discussed below with respect to the maintenance plan, KDAQ has 
committed to continue monitoring in these areas in accordance with 40 
CFR part 58. In summary, EPA believes that the data submitted by 
Kentucky provides an adequate demonstration that the Clarksville-
Hopkinsville 8-hour ozone nonattainment area has attained the 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS.
    (2) Tennessee has a fully approved SIP under section 110(k) for 
Montgomery County and (5) has met all applicable requirements under 
section 110 and part D of the CAA. Below is a summary of how these two 
criteria were met.
    EPA has determined that Tennessee has met all applicable SIP 
requirements for Montgomery County under section 110 of the CAA 
(general SIP requirements). EPA has also determined that the Tennessee 
SIP satisfies the criterion that it meets applicable SIP requirements 
under part D of title I of the CAA (requirements specific to subpart 1 
basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas) in accordance with section 
107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, EPA has determined that the SIP is fully 
approved with respect to all applicable requirements in accordance with 
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these determinations, EPA 
ascertained which requirements are applicable to the area and that if 
applicable they are fully approved under section 110(k). SIPs must be 
fully approved only with respect to applicable requirements.
    a. Montgomery County, Tennessee has met all applicable requirements 
under section 110 and part D of the CAA. The September 4, 1992, 
Calcagni memorandum (see ``Procedures for Processing Requests to 
Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, 
Director, Air Quality Management Division, September 4, 1992) describes 
EPA's interpretation of section 107(d)(3)(E). Under this 
interpretation, to qualify for redesignation, states requesting 
redesignation to attainment must meet only the relevant CAA 
requirements that come due prior to the submittal of a complete 
redesignation request. See also Michael Shapiro memorandum, September 
17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66 (March 7, 1995) (redesignation of 
Detroit-Ann Arbor, MI). Applicable requirements of the CAA that come 
due subsequent to the area's submittal of a complete redesignation 
request remain applicable until a redesignation is approved, but are 
not required as a prerequisite to redesignation. See section 175A(c) of 
the CAA; Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also 68 
FR 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of St. Louis, MO).
    General SIP requirements: Section 110(a)(2) of title I of the CAA 
delineates the general requirements for a SIP, which include 
enforceable emissions limitations and other control measures, means, or 
techniques, provisions for the establishment and operation of 
appropriate devices necessary to collect data on ambient air quality, 
and programs to enforce the limitations. General SIP elements and 
requirements are delineated in section 110(a)(2) of title I, part A of 
the CAA. These requirements include, but are not limited to, the 
following: Submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the state after 
reasonable public notice and hearing; provisions for establishment and 
operation of appropriate procedures needed to monitor ambient air 
quality; implementation of a source permit program; provisions for the 
implementation of part C requirement (Prevention of Significant 
Deterioration (PSD)) and provisions for the implementation of part D 
requirements (New Source Review (NSR) permit programs); provisions for 
air pollution modeling; and provisions for public and local agency 
participation in planning and emission control rule development. These 
requirements are discussed in the following EPA documents: ``Procedures 
for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' 
Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management 
Division, September 4, 1992; ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions 
Submitted in Response to Clean Air Act (CAA) Deadlines,'' memorandum 
from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 
28, 1992; and ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas 
Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and 
Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) on 
or after November 15, 1992,'' Memorandum

[[Page 55563]]

from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator, September 17, 
1993. See also guidance documents listed in section III above.
    Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to 
prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air 
quality problems in another state. To implement this provision, EPA has 
required certain states to establish programs to address the transport 
of air pollutants (NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call, Clean Air Interstate Rule 
(CAIR)). EPA has also found, generally, that states have not submitted 
SIPs under section 110(a)(1) to meet the interstate transport 
requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i). However, the section 
110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a state are not linked with a particular 
nonattainment area's designation and classification in that state. EPA 
believes that the requirements linked with a particular nonattainment 
area's designation and classification are the relevant measures to 
evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. The transport SIP 
submittal requirements, where applicable, continue to apply to a state 
regardless of the designation of any one particular area in the state.
    Thus, we do not believe that these requirements should be construed 
to be applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. In 
addition, EPA believes that the other section 110 elements not 
connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not linked with an 
area's attainment status are not applicable requirements for purposes 
of redesignation. The State will still be subject to these requirements 
after the area is redesignated. The section 110 and part D 
requirements, which are linked with a particular area's designation and 
classification, are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a 
redesignation request. This policy is consistent with EPA's existing 
policy on applicability (i.e., for redesignations) of conformity and 
oxygenated fuels requirements, as well as with section 184 ozone 
transport requirements. See Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final 
rulemakings (61 FR 53174-53176, October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7, 
1997); Cleveland-Akron-Loraine, Ohio, final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, 
May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida, final rulemaking at (60 FR 62748, 
December 7, 1995). See also the discussion on this issue in the 
Cincinnati redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 2000), and in the 
Pittsburgh redesignation (66 FR 50399, October 19, 2001). In addition, 
Tennessee's response to the CAIR rule is not due until September 2006.
    EPA believes that section 110 elements not linked to the area's 
nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation. 
Nonetheless, EPA also notes that it has previously approved provisions 
in the Tennessee SIP addressing section 110 elements under the 1-hour 
standard (45 FR 53809, August 13, 1980; 47 FR 27267, June 24, 1982). 
EPA believes that the section 110 SIP approved for the 1-hour standard 
is sufficient to meet requirements under the 8-hour standard as well.
    Part D requirements: EPA has also determined that the Tennessee SIP 
meets applicable SIP requirements under part D of the CAA since no 
requirements became due prior to the submission of the area's 
redesignation request. Sections 172-176 of the CAA, found in subpart 1 
of part D, set forth the basic nonattainment requirements applicable to 
all nonattainment areas. Section 182 of the CAA, found in subpart 2 of 
part D, establishes additional specific requirements depending on the 
area's nonattainment classification. Subpart 2 is not applicable to the 
Clarksville-Hopkinsville area.
    Part D, subpart 1 applicable SIP requirements: For purposes of 
evaluating this redesignation request, the applicable part D, subpart 1 
SIP requirements for all nonattainment areas are contained in sections 
172(c)(1)-(9). A thorough discussion of the requirements contained in 
section 172 can be found in the General Preamble for Implementation of 
Title I (57 FR 13498). None of the requirements under part D became due 
prior to the submission of the redesignation request, and therefore 
none are applicable to the area for purposes of redesignation. For 
example, the requirements for an attainment demonstration that meets 
the requirements of section 172(c)(1) are not yet applicable, nor are 
the requirements for Reasonably Achievable Control Technology (RACT) 
and Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) (section 172(c)(1), 
reasonable further progress (RFP) (section 172(c)(2)) and contingency 
measures (section 172(c)(9)).
    In addition to the fact that these part D requirements did not 
become due prior to submission of the redesignation request and 
therefore are not applicable, EPA believes it is reasonable to 
interpret the conformity and new source review requirements as not 
requiring approval prior to redesignation.
    Section 176 Conformity Requirements: Section 176(c) of the CAA 
requires states to establish criteria and procedures to ensure that 
Federally supported or funded projects conform to the air quality 
planning goals in the applicable SIP. The requirement to determine 
conformity applies to transportation plans, programs and projects 
developed, funded or approved under title 23 of the United States Code 
(U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act (``transportation conformity'') as 
well as to all other Federally supported or funded projects (``general 
conformity''). State conformity revisions must be consistent with 
Federal conformity regulations that the CAA required the EPA to 
promulgate.
    EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity 
requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating the 
redesignation request under section 107(d) because state conformity 
rules are still required after redesignation and Federal conformity 
rules apply where state rules have not been approved. See Wall v. EPA, 
265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding this interpretation. See also 
60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995, Tampa, FL).
    EPA has also determined that areas being redesignated need not 
comply with the requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to 
redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the 
standard without part D NSR in effect since PSD requirements will apply 
after redesignation. The rationale for this view is described in a 
memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and 
Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled ``Part D New Source Review 
Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.'' The 
State has demonstrated that the area will be able to maintain the 
standard without part D NSR in effect, and therefore, the State need 
not have a fully approved part D NSR program prior to approval of the 
redesignation request. The State's PSD program will become effective in 
the area upon redesignation to attainment. See rulemakings for Detroit, 
MI (60 FR 12467-12468, March 7, 1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorraine, OH (61 
FR 20458, 20469-70, May 7, 1996); Louisville, KY (66 FR 53665, October 
23, 2001); Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31834-31837, June 21, 1996). 
Thus, the area has satisfied all applicable requirements under section 
110 and part D of the CAA.
    b. The area has a fully approved applicable SIP under section 
110(k) of the CAA. EPA has fully approved the applicable Tennessee SIP 
for the Montgomery County area under section 110(k) of the Clean Air 
Act. EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a redesignation 
request, Calcagni Memo

[[Page 55564]]

at p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F.3d 
984, 989-90 (6th Cir. 1998); Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), 
plus any additional measures it may approve in conjunction with a 
redesignation action. See 68 FR 25426 (May 12, 2003) and citations 
therein. Following passage of the CAA of 1970, Tennessee has adopted 
and submitted, and EPA has fully approved at various times, provisions 
addressing the various 1-hour ozone standard SIP elements applicable in 
the Montgomery County area (45 FR 53809, August 13, 1980 and 49 FR 
1342, January 11, 1984). As indicated above, EPA believes that the 
section 110 elements not connected with nonattainment plan submissions 
and not linked to the area's nonattainment status are not applicable 
requirements for purposes of redesignation. EPA also believes that 
since the part D requirements did not become due prior to submission of 
the redesignation request, they also are therefore not applicable 
requirements for purposes of redesignation.
    (3) The air quality improvement in the Clarksville-Hopkinsville 8-
hour ozone area is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in 
emissions resulting from implementation of the SIP and applicable 
Federal air pollution control regulations and other permanent and 
enforceable reductions.
    EPA believes that the State has demonstrated that the observed air 
quality improvement in the area is due to permanent and enforceable 
reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the SIP, 
Federal measures, and other state-adopted measures. EPA has determined 
that the implementation of the following permanent and enforceable 
emissions controls, that occurred from 2001-2004, have reduced local 
VOC and NO<INF>X</INF> emissions and brought the area into attainment:

--Federal Motor Vehicle Control Standards in Tennessee;
--EPA's Tier 2/Low Sulfur Gasoline program;
--EPA's Heavy-Duty Engine and Vehicle and Fuel Standards;
--Federal controls on certain nonroad engines implemented during the 
2002-2004 period;
--Reductions due to the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call;

    In addition to the reductions mentioned above, the State of 
Tennessee is also relying on the following controls to maintain the 8-
hour standard:

--Prevention of Significant Deterioration requirements;
--Federal controls on certain nonroad engines after 2000;
--Federal control through Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) 
of Hazardous Air Pollutants emissions will also contribute to 
maintaining the standard in the area.

    The State has demonstrated that the implementation of permanent and 
enforceable emissions controls have reduced local VOC and 
NO<INF>X</INF> emissions. Most of the reductions are attributable to 
Federal programs such as EPA's Tier 2/Low Sulfur Gasoline program and 
other national clean fuel programs that began implementation in 2004. 
Additionally, the State has indicated in its submittal that the 
Clarksville-Hopkinsville area has benefited from emissions reductions 
that have been achieved and will continue to be achieved through 
implementation of the NO<INF>X</INF> SIP Call, beginning in 2002. The 
State has also demonstrated that year-to-year meteorological changes 
and trends are not the likely source of the overall, long-term 
improvement in ozone levels. Also, the following non-highway mobile 
source reduction programs were implemented during the 2002-2004 period: 
small spark-ignition engines, large-spark ignition engines, locomotives 
and land-based diesel engines. EPA believes that permanent and 
enforceable emissions reductions in and surrounding the nonattainment 
area are the cause of the long-term improvement in ozone levels, and 
are the cause of the area achieving attainment of the ozone standard.
    (4) The area has a fully approved maintenance plan pursuant to 
section 175A of the CAA. In conjunction with its request to redesignate 
the Montgomery County, Tennessee portion of the Clarksville-
Hopkinsville 8-hour ozone nonattainment area to attainment status, TDEC 
submitted a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of the 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS in the Montgomery County area for at least 10 years after 
the effective date of redesignation to attainment.

a. What Is Required in a Maintenance Plan?

    Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance 
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. 
Under section 175A, the plan must demonstrate continued attainment of 
the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after the Administrator 
approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after the 
redesignation, the State must submit a revised maintenance plan which 
demonstrates that attainment will continue to be maintained for the 10 
years following the initial 10-year period. To address the possibility 
of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must contain such 
contingency measures, with a schedule for implementation as EPA deems 
necessary to assure prompt correction of any future 8-hour ozone 
violations. Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a 
maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to 
attainment. The Calcagni memorandum, dated September 4, 1992, provides 
additional guidance on the content of a maintenance plan. An ozone 
maintenance plan should address five requirements: the attainment 
emissions inventory, maintenance demonstration, monitoring, 
verification of continued attainment, and a contingency plan.

b. Attainment Emissions Inventory

    The Clarksville-Hopkinsville area has selected 2004 as ``the 
attainment year'' for purposes of demonstrating attainment of the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. The 2004 VOC and NO<INF>X</INF> emissions for the 
Montgomery County area were developed consistent with EPA guidance and 
are summarized in the table in the following subsection.

c. Maintenance Demonstration

    The August 10, 2005, submittal includes a 12-year maintenance plan 
for Montgomery County. This demonstration:
    (i) Shows compliance and maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard 
by assuring that current and future emissions of VOC and NO<INF>X</INF> 
remain at or below attainment year 2004 emissions levels. The year 2004 
was chosen as the attainment year because it is one of the most recent 
three years (i.e., 2002, 2003, and 2004) for which the Clarksville-
Hopkinsville area has clean air quality data for the 8-hour ozone 
standard.
    (ii) Uses 2004 as the attainment year and includes future inventory 
projected years for 2007, 2010, 2013, and 2016.
    (iii) Identifies an ``out year,'' at least 10 years after the time 
necessary for EPA to review and approve the maintenance plan. Per 40 
CFR part 93, a MVEB was established for the last year of the 
maintenance plan. See section VII below.
    (iv) Provides the following actual and projected emissions 
inventories for Montgomery County.

[[Page 55565]]



                                    NOX Emissions (tpd) for Montgomery County
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Source category                           2004      2007      2010      2013      2016
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point.........................................................      0.79      0.90      0.99      1.08      1.18
Area..........................................................      1.26      1.27      1.26      1.27      1.27
Mobile........................................................     12.39     10.52      8.54      6.38      4.88
Nonroad.......................................................      4.22      3.95      3.63      3.33      2.99
                                                               -----------
    Total.....................................................     18.66     16.65     14.42     12.06     10.32
                                                               ===========
Safety Margin.................................................  ........      2.02      4.25      6.61      8.34
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                    VOC Emissions (tpd) for Montgomery County
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Source category                           2004      2007      2010      2013      2016
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point.........................................................      2.22      2.45      2.64      2.90      3.18
Area..........................................................     11.60     12.10     12.40     12.90     13.30
Mobile........................................................      5.27      4.35      3.68      3.15      2.82
Nonroad.......................................................      1.46      1.32      1.14      1.00      0.90
                                                               -----------
    Total.....................................................     20.56     20.22     19.86     19.95     20.20
                                                               ===========
Safety Margin.................................................  ........      0.34      0.70      0.61      0.36
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A safety Margin is the difference between the attainment level of 
emissions (from all sources) and the projected level of emissions (from 
all sources) in the maintenance plan. The attainment level of emissions 
is the level of emissions during one of the years in which the area met 
the NAAQS.

d. Monitoring Network

    There is currently one monitor measuring ozone, located within 
Christian County, Kentucky, which provides air quality data for the 
entire Clarksville-Hopkinsville 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. The 
Commonwealth of Kentucky has committed in its maintenance plan to 
continue operation of the ozone monitor in compliance with 40 CFR part 
58, and has addressed the requirement for monitoring. Kentucky's 
approved SIP commitment satisfies Tennessee's obligation for continued 
monitoring for the Clarksville-Hopkinsville area.

e. Verification of Continued Attainment

    The State has the legal authority to enforce and implement the 
requirements of the ozone maintenance plan for Montgomery County, 
Tennessee. This includes the authority to adopt, implement and enforce 
any subsequent emissions control contingency measures determined to be 
necessary to correct future ozone attainment problems.
    Tennessee will track the progress of the maintenance plan by 
performing future reviews of actual emissions for the area using the 
latest emissions factors, models and methodologies. For these periodic 
inventories the State will review the assumptions made for the purpose 
of the maintenance demonstration concerning projected growth of 
activity levels. If any of these assumptions appear to have changed 
substantially, the State will re-project emissions.

g. Contingency Plan

    The contingency plan provisions are designed to promptly correct a 
violation of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. Section 175A of 
the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include such contingency 
measures as EPA deems necessary to assure that the State will promptly 
correct a violation of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The 
maintenance plan should identify the contingency measures to be 
adopted, a schedule and procedure for adoption and implementation, and 
a time limit for action by the state. A state should also identify 
specific indicators to be used to determine when the contingency 
measures need to be implemented. The maintenance plan must include a 
requirement that a state will implement all measures with respect to 
control of the pollutant that were contained in the SIP before 
redesignation of the area to attainment in accordance with section 
175A(d).
    In the August 10, 2005, submittal, Tennessee affirms that all 
programs instituted by the State and EPA will remain enforceable, and 
that sources are prohibited from reducing emissions controls following 
the redesignation of the area. In the submittal, if there is a measured 
violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Clarksville-Hopkinsville 
nonattainment area, the State of Tennessee commits to develop 
regulations for at least one of the following control measures for 
submission to the EPA within nine months. The State will also submit a 
control plan to EPA within twelve months. All regulatory programs will 
be implemented in twenty-four months from a measured violation. The 
State will consider one or more of the following contingency measures 
to re-attain the standard.
<bullet> RACT for NO<INF>X</INF> sources.
<bullet> Programs or incentives to decrease motor vehicle use.
<bullet> Trip reduction ordinances.
<bullet> Implementation of a program to require additional emissions 
reductions on stationary sources.
<bullet> Implementation of a program to enhance inspection of 
stationary sources to ensure emissions control equipment is functioning 
properly.
<bullet> Implementation of fuel programs, including incentives for 
alternative fuels.
<bullet> Restrictions of certain roads or lanes for, or construction of 
such roads or lanes for use by, passenger buses or high--occupancy 
vehicles.
<bullet> Employer-based transportation management plans, including 
incentives programs to limit or restrict vehicle use in downtown areas, 
or other areas of high emissions concentration, particularly during 
periods of peak use.
<bullet> Programs for new construction and major reconstruction of 
paths for use by pedestrians or by non-motorized vehicles when 
economically feasible and in the public interest.

[[Page 55566]]

    In addition, the maintenance plan provides that in the event that a 
measured violation of the 8-hour ozone design value occurs in any 
portion of the maintenance area, or if periodic emissions inventory 
updates reveal excessive or unanticipated growth greater than 10 
percent in ozone precursor emissions, the State will evaluate existing 
control measures to see if any further emissions reduction measures 
should be implemented at that time.
    EPA has concluded that the maintenance plan adequately addresses 
the five basic components of a maintenance plan: Attainment inventory, 
maintenance demonstration, monitoring network, verification of 
continued attainment, and a contingency plan. The maintenance plan SIP 
revision submitted by Tennessee for Montgomery County meets the 
requirements of section 175A of the CAA.

VII. What Is an Adequacy Determination and What is the Status of EPA's 
Adequacy Determination for Montgomery County's Proposed New MVEBs for 
the Year 2016?

    Under the CAA, States are required to submit, at various times, 
control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone areas. These 
control strategy SIPs (e.g. reasonable further progress SIPs and 
attainment demonstration SIPs) and maintenance plans create MVEBs for 
criteria pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution from 
cars and trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, a MVEB is established for the last 
year of the maintenance plan. The MVEB is the portion of the total 
allowable emissions in the maintenance demonstration that is allocated 
to highway and transit vehicle use and emissions. The MVEB serves as a 
ceiling on emissions from an area's planned transportation system. The 
MVEB concept is further explained in the preamble to the November 24, 
1993, transportation conformity rule (58 FR 62188). The preamble also 
describes how to establish the MVEB in the SIP and revise the MVEB.
    Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation projects, such 
as the construction of new highways, must ``conform'' to (i.e., be 
consistent with) the part of the State's air quality plan that 
addresses pollution from cars and trucks. ``Conformity'' to the SIP 
means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality 
violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of 
the NAAQS. If a transportation plan does not ``conform,'' most new 
projects that would expand the capacity of roadways cannot go forward. 
Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth EPA policy, criteria, and 
procedures for demonstrating and assuring conformity of such 
transportation activities to a SIP.
    When reviewing submitted ``control strategy'' SIPs or maintenance 
plans containing MVEBs, EPA must affirmatively find the MVEB contained 
therein ``adequate'' for use in determining transportation conformity. 
Once EPA affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB is adequate for 
transportation conformity purposes, that MVEB can be used by state and 
Federal agencies in determining whether proposed transportation 
projects ``conform'' to the SIP as required by section 176(c) of the 
Clean Air Act. EPA's substantive criteria for determining ``adequacy'' 
of an MVEB are set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4).
    EPA's process for determining ``adequacy'' consists of three basic 
steps: public notification of a SIP submission, a public comment 
period, and EPA's adequacy finding. This process for determining the 
adequacy of submitted SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in EPA's May 14, 
1999 guidance, ``Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2, 
1999, Conformity Court Decision.'' This guidance was finalized in the 
Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for the ``New 8-Hour Ozone 
and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Miscellaneous 
Revisions for Existing Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule 
Amendments--Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Change'' on 
July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). EPA follows this guidance and rulemaking in 
making its adequacy determinations.
    Montgomery County's 12-year maintenance plan submission contained 
new VOC and NO<INF>X</INF> MVEBs for the year 2016. The availability of 
the SIP submission with the 2016 MVEBs was announced for public comment 
on EPA's adequacy Web page on July 12, 2005, at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/transp/conform/currsips.htm. The EPA public comment period on the 
adequacy of the 2016 MVEBs for Montgomery County, Tennessee closed on 
August 11, 2005. EPA did not receive any adverse comments or requests 
for the submittal.
    Through this rulemaking, EPA is finding adequate and approving 
those MVEBs for use to determine transportation conformity because EPA 
has determined that the area maintains the standard with emissions at 
the levels of the budgets. These MVEBs will be separate state area 
budgets for the Montgomery County, Tennessee area. The Commonwealth of 
Kentucky has established MVEBs for the Christian County portion of the 
Clarksville-Hopkinsville area through the Kentucky SIP. The following 
table defines the 2016 MVEBs for Montgomery County, Tennessee.

          Montgomery County 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Area MVEBs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  2016
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX (tpd)....................................................      9.05
VOC (tpd)....................................................      3.00
------------------------------------------------------------------------

VIII. Action on the Redesignation Request, the Maintenance Plan SIP 
Revision Including Approval of the 2016 MVEBs

    EPA is making the determination that the Clarksville-Hopkinsville 
area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is approving the 
redesignation of the Montgomery County, Tennessee portion of the area 
from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. After 
evaluating the State of Tennessee's redesignation request, EPA has 
determined that it meets the redesignation criteria set forth in 
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act. EPA believes that the 
redesignation request and monitoring data demonstrate that the 
Clarksville-Hopkinsville area (of which Montgomery County is a part) 
has attained the 8-hour ozone standard. The final approval of this 
redesignation request would change the official designation for the 
Montgomery County area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour 
ozone standard.
    EPA is also approving the maintenance plan SIP revision. Approval 
of the maintenance plan for Montgomery County is allowable, because the 
State of Tennessee has demonstrated that the plan meets the 
requirements of section 175A as described more fully in this 
rulemaking. Additionally, EPA is finding adequate and approving the new 
2016 MVEBs, submitted by Tennessee for Montgomery County, in 
conjunction with its redesignation request. Within 24 months from the 
effective date of this action, the transportation partners will need to 
demonstrate conformity to these new MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR 93.104(e). 
EPA is publishing this rule without prior approval because the Agency 
views this as noncontroversial and anticipates no adverse comment. 
However, in the Proposed Rules section of today's Federal Register EPA 
is publishing a proposal to approve the redesignation and maintenance 
plan that will serve as the proposal if adverse comments are filed. 
This rule will be

[[Page 55567]]

effective on November 21, 2005 unless EPA receives adverse comments by 
October 24, 2005. If EPA receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a 
timely withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the 
rule will not take effect. EPA will address the public comments in a 
subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not 
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties 
interested in commenting must do so at this time.

IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action 
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Redesignation of an area to attainment under section 107(d)(3)(E) of 
the Clean Air Act does not impose any new requirements on small 
entities. Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a 
geographical area and does not impose any new regulatory requirements 
on sources. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule 
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of 
small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et 
seq.). Because this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state 
law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that 
required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or 
significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism 
implications because it does 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, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely affects the status of a 
geographical area, does not impose any new requirements on sources, or 
allows a state to avoid adopting or implementing other requirements, 
and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and 
responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This rule also is 
not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of Children from 
Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 
1997), because it is not economically significant and because the 
Agency does not have reason to believe that the rule concerns an 
environmental health risk or safety risk that may disproportionately 
affect children.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be 
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP 
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise 
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Redesignation is an 
action that affects the status of a geographical area but does not 
impose any new requirements on sources. Thus, the requirements of 
section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act 
of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an 
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by November 21, 2005. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does 
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be 
filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. 
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its 
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2)).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks, 
Wilderness areas.

    Dated: September 13, 2005.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.


0
40 CFR part 52 and 81 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

Subpart RR--Tennessee

0
2. Section 52.2220(e) is amended by adding a new entry at the end of 
the table for ``8-Hour Ozone Maintenance plan for the Montgomery 
County, Tennessee area'' to read as follows:


Sec.  52.2220  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

[[Page 55568]]



                                EPA-Approved Tennessee Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Applicable
    Name of nonregulatory SIP        geographic or      State effective   EPA approval date       Explanation
            provision              nonattainment area        date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
8-Hour Ozone Maintenance plan     Montgomery County..        08/10/2005  09/22/2005 [Insert
 for the Montgomery County,                                               first page of
 Tennessee area.                                                          publication]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 81--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

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


0
2. In Sec.  81.318, the table entitled ``Tennessee-Ozone (8-Hour 
Standard)'' is amended by revising the entry for ``Clarksville-
Hopkinsville, TN-KY: Montgomery County'' to read as follows:


Sec.  81.343  Tennessee.

* * * * *

                                                                    Tennessee--Ozone
                                                                    [8-Hour Standard]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Designation \a\                                     Category/Classification
             Designated area             ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Date \b\                      Type                      Date \b\                      Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
Clarksville-Hopkinsville, TN-KY Area:
    Montgomery County...................  October 24, 2005                           Attainment.
 
                                                                     * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
\b\ This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-18953 Filed 9-21-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>