Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 18, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 48439 

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 December 18, 2017. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action 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. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, rather than 

file an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking. This action may 

not be challenged later in proceedings to 

enforce its requirements. (See section 

307(b)(2)). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: September 28, 2017. 

Robert A. Kaplan, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. In § 52.1170, the table in paragraph 

(e) is amended by adding the entry 

‘‘Regional Haze Progress Report’’ to 

follow the entry titled ‘‘Regional Haze 

Plan’’ to read as follows: 

§ 52.1170 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED MICHIGAN NONREGULATORY AND QUASI-REGULATORY PROVISIONS

Name of nonregulatory SIP provision 

Applicable 

geographic or 

nonattainment area 

State 

submittal 

date 

EPA approval date Comments 

*******

Regional Haze Progress Report ............... Statewide ................. 1/12/2016 10/18/2017, [insert Federal Register citation].

* * * * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2017–22510 Filed 10–17–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0701; FRL–9969–51– 

Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; District 

of Columbia; Interstate Transport 

Requirements for the 2010 1-Hour 

Sulfur Dioxide Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is taking direct final 

action to approve a state 

implementation plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the District of Columbia 

(the District). This revision pertains to 

the infrastructure requirement for 

interstate transport of pollution with 

respect to the 2010 1-hour sulfur 

dioxide (SO2) national ambient air 

quality standards (NAAQS). EPA is 

approving this revision in accordance 

with the requirements of the Clean Air 

Act (CAA). 

DATES: This rule is effective on 

December 18, 2017 without further 

notice, unless EPA receives adverse 

written comment by November 17, 

2017. 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 Docket ID No. EPA–R03– 

OAR–2014–0701 at https://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

stahl.cynthia@epa.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. For either manner of 

submission, EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

confidential business information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. EPA will generally not consider 

comments or comment contents located 

outside of the primary submission (i.e. 

on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 

system). For additional submission 

methods, please contact the person 

identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the 

full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

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

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Joseph Schulingkamp, (215) 814–2021, 

or by email at schulingkamp.joseph@

epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 

17, 2014, the District of Columbia (the 

District) through the District Department 

of Energy and the Environment 

(DDOEE) submitted a SIP revision 

addressing the infrastructure 

requirements under section 110(a)(2) of 

the CAA for the 2010 1-hour SO2

NAAQS. 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
48440 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 18, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

1SIP revisions that are intended to meet the 

requirements of section 110(a) of the CAA are often 

referred to as infrastructure SIPs and the elements 

under 110(a) are referred to as infrastructure 

requirements. 

2 In the April 13, 2015 action, the EPA also 

approved the District’s infrastructure SIPs for the 

2008 ozone and 2010 NO2 NAAQS, with the 

exception of the transport elements in 

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

3For the EPA’s explanation of its ability to act on 

discrete elements of section 110(a)(2), see 80 FR 

2865 (Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality 

Implementation Plans; District of Columbia; 

Infrastructure Requirements for the 2008 Ozone, 

2010 Nitrogen Dioxide, and 2010 Sulfur Dioxide 

National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Approval 

of Air Pollution Emergency Episode Plan (January 

21, 2015)). 

I. Background 

On June 2, 2010, the EPA 

strengthened the SO2 primary standards, 

establishing a new 1-hour primary 

standard at the level of 75 parts per 

billion (ppb), based on the 3-year 

average of the annual 99th percentile of 

1-hour daily maximum concentrations 

(hereafter ‘‘the 2010 1-hour SO2

NAAQS’’). At the same time, the EPA 

also revoked the previous 24-hour and 

annual primary SO2 standards. See 75 

FR 35520 (June 22, 2010). See 40 CFR 

50.11. The previous SO2 air quality 

standards were set in 1971, including a 

24-hour average primary standard at 140 

ppb and an annual average primary 

standard at 30 ppb. See 36 FR 8186 

(April 30, 1971). 

SO2 is one of a group of highly 

reactive gases known as ‘‘oxides of 

sulfur.’’ Nationally, the largest sources 

of SO2 emissions are fossil fuel 

combustion at power plants and other 

industrial facilities. Smaller sources of 

SO2 emissions include industrial 

processes such as extracting metal from 

ore, and the burning of high sulfur 

containing fuels by locomotives, large 

ships, and non-road equipment. SO2 is 

linked with a number of adverse effects 

on the respiratory system. 

The CAA requires states to submit, 

within three years after promulgation of 

a new or revised NAAQS, SIPs meeting 

the applicable elements of sections 

110(a)(1) and (2).1 Several of these 

applicable elements are delineated 

within section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the 

CAA. Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) generally 

requires SIPs to contain adequate 

provisions to prohibit in-state emissions 

activities from having certain adverse 

air quality effects on neighboring states 

due to interstate transport of air 

pollution. There are four prongs within 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA; 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) contains prongs 

1 and 2, while section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) 

includes prongs 3 and 4. According to 

the CAA’s good neighbor provision 

located within section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), 

a state’s SIP must contain adequate 

provisions to prohibit any source or 

other type of emissions activity within 

the state from emitting air pollutants 

that ‘‘contribute significantly to 

nonattainment in, or interfere with 

maintenance by, any other state with 

respect to any such national primary or 

secondary ambient air quality 

standard.’’ Under section 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the CAA, EPA gives 

independent significance to the matter 

of nonattainment (prong 1) and to that 

of maintenance (prong 2). 

II. Summary of SIP Revisions and EPA 

Analysis 

On July 17, 2014, the District, through 

DDOEE, submitted a revision to its SIP 

to satisfy the infrastructure 

requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the 

CAA for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS, 

including section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). On 

April 13, 2015 (80 FR 19538), the EPA 

approved the District’s infrastructure 

SIP submittal for the 2010 1-hour SO2

NAAQS for all applicable elements of 

section 110(a)(2) with the exception of 

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I).2 This rulemaking 

action is addressing the portions of the 

District’s infrastructure submittal for the 

2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS that pertain to 

transport requirements.3

The portion of the District’s July 17, 

2014 SIP submittal addressing interstate 

transport (for section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)) 

includes an emissions inventory and air 

quality data that concludes that the 

District does not have sources that can 

contribute with respect to the 2010 1- 

hour SO2 NAAQS to nonattainment in, 

or interfere with maintenance in, any 

other state. The submittal also included 

currently available air quality 

monitoring data which alleged that SO2

levels continue to be well below the 

2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS in the District 

and in any areas surrounding or 

bordering the District. EPA has 

reviewed current monitoring data for 

SO2 and finds monitor data within the 

District, and in areas surrounding the 

District, continue to show no 

nonattainment issues with regards to the 

SO2 NAAQS. 

Additionally, the District described in 

its submittal several existing SIPapproved measures and other federally 

enforceable source-specific measures, 

including measures pursuant to 

permitting requirements under the CAA, 

that apply to SO2 sources within the 

District. The District alleges with these 

measures, SO2 emissions within the 

District are minimal. The EPA finds that 

the District’s existing SIP provisions, as 

identified in the July 17, 2014 SIP 

submittal, are adequate to prevent the 

District’s emission sources from 

significantly contributing to 

nonattainment or interfering with 

maintenance in another state with 

respect to the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS. 

In light of these measures, the EPA does 

not expect SO2 emissions in the District 

to increase significantly, and therefore 

does not expect monitors in the District 

and nearby states to have difficulty 

continuing to attain or maintain 

attainment of the NAAQS. A detailed 

summary of EPA’s review and rationale 

for approval of this SIP revision as 

meeting CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 

for the 2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS may be 

found in the Technical Support 

Document (TSD) for this rulemaking 

action, which is available online at 

www.regulations.gov, Docket number 

EPA–R03–OAR–2014–0701. 

III. Final Action 

EPA is approving the portions of the 

District’s July 17, 2014 SIP revision 

addressing interstate transport for the 

2010 1-hour SO2 NAAQS as these 

portions meet the requirements in 

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

EPA is publishing this rule without 

prior proposal because EPA views this 

as a noncontroversial amendment and 

anticipates no adverse comment. 

However, in the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ 

section of this Federal Register, EPA is 

publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposal to approve the 

SIP revision if adverse comments are 

filed. This rule will be effective on 

December 18, 2017 without further 

notice unless EPA receives adverse 

comment by November 17, 2017. 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 all 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. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

A. General Requirements 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

federal requirements and does not 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 18, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 48441 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

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

January 21, 2011); 

• does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• does not have federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

B. Submission to Congress and the 

Comptroller General 

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 action 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). 

C. Petitions for Judicial Review 

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 December 18, 2017. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action 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. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of this Federal Register, rather than file 

an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking action. This 

action, addressing the District’s 

interstate transport for the 2010 1-hour 

SO2 NAAQS, may not be challenged 

later in proceedings to enforce its 

requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Sulfur oxides. 

Dated: September 29, 2017. 

Cecil Rodrigues, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart J—District of Columbia 

■ 2. In § 52.470, the table in paragraph 

(e) is amended by adding a second entry 

for ‘‘Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure 

Requirements for the 2010 SO2

NAAQS’’ before the entry for 

‘‘Emergency Air Pollution Plan’’ to read 

as follows: 

§ 52.470 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(e) * * * 

Name of non-regulatory 

SIP revision 

Applicable 

geographic 

area 

State 

submittal 

date 

EPA approval date Additional explanation 

*******

Section 110(a)(2) Infrastructure 

Requirements for the 2010 SO2

NAAQS District-wide.

District-wide ........... 07/18/14 10/18/2017, [Insert Federal Register citation].This action addresses the infrastructure element of CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I), or the 

good neighbor provision, for the 

2010 SO2 NAAQS. 

* * * * * * * 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
48442 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 200 / Wednesday, October 18, 2017 / Rules and Regulations 

[FR Doc. 2017–22253 Filed 10–17–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2017–0256; FRL–9969–67– 

Region 5] 

Air Plan Approval; Ohio; 

Redesignation of the Fulton County 

Area to Attainment of the 2008 Lead 

Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is approving the State of 

Ohio’s request to revise the designation 

of, or ‘‘redesignate,’’ the Fulton County 

nonattainment area (Fulton County) to 

attainment of the 2008 National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS or standard) for lead. EPA is 

also approving the maintenance plan 

and related elements of the 

redesignation. EPA is approving 

reasonably available control measure 

(RACM)/reasonably available control 

technology (RACT) measures and a 

comprehensive emissions inventory as 

meeting the Clean Air Act (CAA) 

requirements. EPA is taking these 

actions in accordance with the CAA and 

EPA’s implementation regulations 

regarding the 2008 lead NAAQS. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective December 18, 2017, unless EPA 

receives relevant adverse comments by 

November 17, 2017. If adverse 

comments are received, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule in the Federal Register 

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2017–0256 at http://

www.regulations.gov or via email to 

blakley.pamela@epa.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. For either manner of 

submission, EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. EPA will generally not consider 

comments or comment contents located 

outside of the primary submission (i.e. 

on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 

system). For additional submission 

methods, please contact the person 

identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the 

full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

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

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt 

Rau, Environmental Engineer, Control 

Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch 

(AR–18J), Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, 

(312) 886–6524, rau.matthew@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. Why is EPA concerned about lead? 

II. What is the background for these actions? 

III. What are the criteria for redesignation to 

attainment? 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of Ohio’s request? 

V. What action is EPA taking? 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Why is EPA concerned about lead? 

Lead is a metal found naturally in the 

environment and present in some 

manufactured products. However, lead 

has serious public health effects and 

depending on the level of exposure can 

adversely affect the nervous system, 

kidney function, immune system, 

reproductive and developmental 

systems and the cardiovascular system. 

Infants and young children are 

especially sensitive to even low levels of 

lead, which may contribute to 

behavioral problems, learning deficits 

and lowered intelligence quotient. The 

major sources of lead for air emissions 

have historically been from fuels used 

in on-road motor vehicles (such as cars 

and trucks) and industrial sources. As a 

result of EPA’s regulatory efforts to 

remove lead from on-road motor vehicle 

gasoline, emissions of lead from the 

transportation sector declined by 95 

percent between 1980 and 1999, and 

levels of lead in the air decreased by 94 

percent between 1980 and 1999. 

II. What is the background for these 

actions? 

On November 12, 2008 (73 FR 66964), 

EPA established the 2008 primary and 

secondary lead NAAQS at 0.15 

micrograms per cubic meter (mg/m3) 

based on a maximum arithmetic threemonth mean concentration for a threeyear period. 40 CFR 50.16. 

On November 22, 2010 (75 FR 71033), 

EPA published its initial air quality 

designations and classifications for the 

2008 lead NAAQS based upon air 

quality monitoring data for calendar 

years 2007–2009. These designations 

became effective on December 31, 2010. 

A portion of Fulton County was 

designated as nonattainment for lead, 

specifically portions of Swan Creek and 

York Townships. 40 CFR 81.336. 

On April 27, 2017, Ohio requested 

EPA to designate the applicable Fulton 

County area as attainment of the lead 

NAAQS. Ohio documented that its 

request meets the redesignation criteria 

of CAA section 107. 

Ohio used the emissions inventory to 

find that there were no area, mobile, or 

nonroad sources of lead emissions that 

contributed to nonattainment. The 

Bunting Bearings LLC facility (Bunting) 

in the village of Delta is the only point 

source of lead emissions in the 

nonattainment area. Bunting 

manufactures continuous cast products 

in copper alloys, typically bronze, that 

contain lead. The lead component of the 

alloys is important as it allows for 

machining the bronze. 

III. What are the criteria for 

redesignation to attainment? 

The requirements for redesignating an 

area from nonattainment to attainment 

are found in CAA section 107(d)(3)(E). 

There are five criteria for redesignating 

an area. First, the Administrator must 

determine that the area has attained the 

applicable NAAQS based on current air 

quality data. Second, the Administrator 

must have fully approved the applicable 

SIP for the area under CAA section 

110(k). The third criterion is for the 

Administrator to determine that the air 

quality improvement is the result of 

permanent and enforceable emission 

reductions. Fourth, the Administrator 

must have fully approved a 

maintenance plan meeting the CAA 

section 175A requirements. The fifth 

criterion is that the state has met all of 

the applicable requirements of CAA 

section 110 and part D. 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of Ohio’s 

request? 

A. Attainment Determination and 

Redesignation 

1. The Area Has Attained the 2008 Lead 

NAAQS (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)) 

On May 26, 2015, EPA determined 

that Fulton County has attained the 

2008 lead NAAQS. 80 FR 29964. EPA 

made its clean data determination based 


ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES