Document ID: EPA-R08-OAR-2018-0353-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Utah-Clean Data Determination; Provo 2006 Fine Particulate Matter Standards Nonattainment Area
Posted Date: 2019-02-12T05:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 29 (Tuesday, February 12, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 3373-3376]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-01909]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R08-OAR-2018-0353: FRL-9988-98--Region 8]

Clean Data Determination; Provo, Utah 2006 Fine Particulate 
Matter Standards Nonattainment Area

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to make 
a clean data determination (CDD) for the 2006 24-hour fine particulate 
matter (PM2.5) Provo, Utah (UT) nonattainment area (NAA). 
The proposed determination is based upon quality-assured, quality-
controlled, and certified ambient air monitoring data for the period 
2015-2017, available in the EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) database, 
showing the area has monitored attainment of the 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Based 
on our proposed determination that the Provo, UT NAA is currently 
attaining the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, the EPA is also proposing 
to determine that the obligation for Utah to make submissions to meet 
certain Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act) requirements related to 
attainment of the NAAQS for this area is not applicable for as long as 
the area continues to attain the NAAQS.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before March 14, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2018-0353 at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot 
be edited or removed from www.regulations.gov. The 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 the disclosure of which 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. The 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, the full EPA 
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, 
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Crystal Ostigaard, Air Program, U.S. 
EPA, Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595 Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 
80202-1129, (303) 312-6602, ostigaard.crystal@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, wherever ``we'', 
``us'' or ``our'' is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA.

I. Background

    On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), the EPA revised the level of the 
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, lowering the primary and secondary 
standards from the 1997 standard of 65 micrograms per cubic meter 
([micro]g/m\3\) to 35 [micro]g/m\3\. The EPA retained the form of the 
1997 24-hour standard, that is, the 98th percentile of the annual 24-
hour concentrations at each population-oriented monitor within an area, 
averaged over 3 years. See 71 FR 61164-5 (October 17, 2006).
    On November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688), the EPA designated a number of 
areas as nonattainment for the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS of 35 
[micro]g/m\3\, including the Provo, UT NAA. The EPA originally 
designated these areas under the general provisions of CAA title I, 
part D, subpart 1 (``subpart 1''), under which attainment plans must 
provide for the attainment of a specific NAAQS (in this case, the 2006 
PM2.5 standards) as expeditiously as practicable, but no 
later than 5 years from the date the areas were designated 
nonattainment.
    Subsequently, on January 4, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 
District of Columbia Circuit held in NRDC v. EPA \1\ that the EPA 
should have implemented the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standard 
based on both the general NAA requirements in subpart 1 and the PM-
specific requirements of CAA title I, part D, subpart 4 (``subpart 
4''). In response to the Court's decision in NRDC v. EPA, on June 2, 
2014 (79 FR 31566), the EPA finalized the ``Identification of 
Nonattainment Classification and Deadlines for Submission of State 
Implementation Plan (SIP) Provisions for the 1997 Fine Particulate 
(PM2.5) NAAQS and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.'' This rule 
classified the areas that were designated in 2009 as nonattainment to 
Moderate and set the attainment SIP submittal due date for those areas 
at December 31, 2014. After the court's decision and the EPA's June 2, 
2014 rule, on December 16, 2014 the Utah Division of Air Quality (UDAQ) 
withdrew all prior Provo, UT PM2.5 SIP submissions and 
submitted a new SIP to address both the general requirements of subpart 
1 and the PM-specific requirements of subpart 4 for Moderate areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On August 24, 2016, the EPA finalized the Fine Particulate Matter 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards: State Implementation Plan 
Requirements (``PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule''), 81 FR 58010, 
which addressed the January 4, 2013, court ruling. The final 
PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule provides the EPA's 
interpretation of the requirements applicable to PM2.5 NAAs 
and explains how air agencies can meet the statutory SIP requirements 
that apply under subparts 1 and 4 to areas designated nonattainment for 
any PM2.5 NAAQS.
    The EPA has previously acted on portions of Utah's Moderate area 
attainment plan for the Provo, UT NAA. Specifically, we approved 
certain area source rules and related reasonably available control 
measure (RACM) analyses on February 25, 2016 (81 FR 9343), October 19, 
2016 (81 FR 71988) and September 14, 2017 (82 FR 43205). We have not 
disapproved any portions of the plan; as a result, the clocks for 
sanctions under 179(a) and for a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP) 
under 110(c) are not in effect for the Provo, UT NAA.
    Finally, on May 10, 2017 (82 FR 21711), the EPA determined that the 
Provo, UT NAA failed to attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 
by the Moderate attainment date of December 31, 2015. With this 
determination, the Provo, UT NAA was reclassified as a ``Serious'' area 
for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, with a new attainment date 
of December

[[Page 3374]]

31, 2019. This reclassification triggered an obligation for Utah to 
submit a new, Serious area attainment plan consisting of several 
elements, including a control strategy and demonstration of attainment 
by the new attainment date. See 40 CFR 51.1003(b)(1).

II. Clean Data Determination

    Over the past two decades, the EPA has consistently applied its 
``Clean Data Policy'' interpretation to attainment related provisions 
of Part D of the CAA. The EPA codified the Clean Data Policy in the 
PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule (40 CFR 51.1015(a)) for the 
implementation of current and future PM2.5 NAAQS. See 81 FR 
58010, 58161 (August 24, 2016). For a complete discussion of the Clean 
Data Policy's history and the EPA's longstanding interpretation under 
the CAA, please refer to the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule.
    As codified at 40 CFR 51.1015(a) in the PM2.5 SIP 
Requirements Rule, upon a determination by the EPA that a Moderate 
PM2.5 NAA has attained the PM2.5 NAAQS, the 
requirements for the State to submit an attainment demonstration, 
provisions demonstrating timely implementation of RACM (including 
reasonably available control technology (RACT)), a reasonable further 
progress (RFP) plan, quantitative milestones and quantitative milestone 
reports, and contingency measures shall be suspended. Additionally, 
under 40 CFR 51.1015(b), upon determination by the EPA that a Serious 
PM2.5 NAA has attained the PM2.5 NAAQS, the 
requirements for the State to submit an attainment demonstration, RFP, 
quantitative milestones and quantitative milestone reports, and 
contingency measures for the area will be suspended. However, the EPA's 
longstanding policy for the best available control measure (BACM)/best 
available control technology (BACT) requirement of CAA section 
189(b)(1)(B) is that the requirement is independent of attainment. 
Thus, a CDD would not suspend the obligation for UDAQ to submit any 
applicable outstanding BACM/BACT requirements or other requirements 
that are independent of attainment.
    By extension, the requirement to submit a motor vehicle emission 
budget (MVEB) for the attainment year (both for a Moderate and Serious 
NAA) for the purposes of transportation conformity is also suspended. A 
MVEB is that portion of the total allowable emissions defined in the 
submitted or approved control strategy implementation plan revision or 
maintenance plan for a certain date for the purpose of meeting RFP 
milestones or demonstrating attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS, for 
any criteria pollutant or its precursors, allocated to highway and 
transit vehicle use and emissions.\2\ For the purposes of the 
transportation conformity regulations, the control strategy 
implementation plan revision is the implementation plan which contains 
specific strategies for controlling the emissions of and reducing 
ambient levels of pollutants in order to satisfy CAA requirements for 
demonstrations of RFP and attainment.\3\ Given that MVEBs are required 
to support the RFP and attainment demonstration requirements in the 
attainment plan, suspension of the RFP and attainment demonstration 
requirements through a CDD also suspends the requirement to submit 
MVEBs for the attainment and RFP years. The suspension of planning 
requirements pursuant to 40 CFR 51.1015 does not preclude the State 
from submitting suspended elements of its Moderate and Serious area 
attainment plans for the EPA approval for the purposes of strengthening 
the State's SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ 40 CFR 93.101.
    \3\ 40 CFR 93.101.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The planning elements under subpart 1 and subpart 4 generally 
include RFP, attainment demonstrations, RACM/RACT, NAA contingency 
measures, and other state planning requirements related to attaining 
the NAAQS.\4\ The suspension of the obligation to submit such 
requirements applies regardless of when the plan submissions are due. 
The CDD does not suspend CAA requirements that are independent of 
helping the area achieve attainment, such as the requirements to submit 
an emissions inventory, nonattainment new source review (NNSR), and 
BACM/BACT requirements. The determination of attainment is not 
equivalent to a redesignation, and the State must still meet the 
statutory requirements for redesignation in order to be redesignated to 
attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule (81 FR 58010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In accordance with 40 CFR 51.1015(a) and (b), the CDD suspends the 
aforementioned SIP obligations until such time as the area is 
redesignated to attainment, after which such requirements are 
permanently discharged; or the EPA determines that the area has re-
violated the PM2.5 NAAQS, at which time the State shall 
submit such attainment plan elements for the Moderate and Serious NAA 
plans by a future date to be determined by the EPA and announced 
through publication in the Federal Register at the time the EPA 
determines the area is violating the PM2.5 NAAQS.

A. Monitoring Network Considerations

    Determining whether an area has attained the NAAQS is based on 
monitored air quality data; thus, the validity of a determination of 
attainment depends in part on whether the monitoring network adequately 
measures ambient PM2.5 levels in the NAA. The UDAQ is the 
governmental agency with the authority and responsibilities under the 
State's laws for collecting ambient air quality data for the Provo, UT 
NAA and submitting the data to AQS. UDAQ annually certifies that the 
data they submit to AQS are quality assured. UDAQ also submits an 
annual monitoring network plan (AMNP) to the EPA. These plans discuss 
the status of the air monitoring network, as required under 40 CFR part 
58. With respect to PM2.5 monitoring in the Provo, UT NAA, 
the EPA found that UDAQ's annual network plans met the applicable 
requirements under 40 CFR part 58 for the relevant period, 2015-2017, 
with the exception (discussed below) of UDAQ's 2015 network plan.\5\ 
The UDAQ operated three PM2.5 State and Local Air Monitoring 
Station (SLAMS) monitors during the 2015-2017 period within the Provo, 
UT PM2.5 NAA: North Provo, Lindon and Spanish Fork.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ In letters dated April 20, 2017, and April 10, 2018, UDAQ 
completed the data certification process in AQS and certified that 
the 2016 and 2017 air quality data are accurate. The 2015 data is 
discussed below with the discussion of UDAQ's 2015 network plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Provo, UT Monitoring During 2015

    UDAQ submitted the 2015 AMNP and 5-Year Network Assessment in June 
2015. UDAQ's submissions were not reviewed and acted on by Region 8 
because the Region was conducting a Technical Support Audit (TSA) of 
UDAQ's ambient air monitoring program at the time. The TSA was 
completed in August 2015 and found major and minor/observation issues 
with the monitoring program. The objective of a TSA is to review a 
monitoring program's quality assurance (QA) system, in this case the 
reporting of valid data to the EPA's AQS database. See 40 CFR part 58, 
appendices A through E. A major finding may indicate that invalid data 
have been loaded in AQS or that future operations may result in the 
collection of invalid data. A minor/observation finding will not 
necessarily lead to data loss or invalidation, but warrants 
investigation, appropriate follow-up, and audit response. Additional 
details pertaining to the major and minor findings can be

[[Page 3375]]

found in the August 2015 TSA, available in the docket.
    Due to these monitoring issues, the EPA did not approve UDAQ's 2015 
AMNP and a large number of samples from the filter-based Federal 
Reference Method (FRM) monitors in the Provo, UT NAA were 
invalidated.\6\ The EPA worked with UDAQ to correct the deficiencies 
found in the August 2015 TSA and after their review of the 
PM2.5 data for 2015, UDAQ removed the invalid samples for 
the Provo, UT FRM monitors and left the valid samples in the AQS 
database. However, some continuous sampler data from the Provo, UT co-
located Federal Equivalent Method (FEM) monitors were determined to 
have sufficient QA to meet NAAQS comparison requirements. Data from 
these co-located monitors were used to fill in some of the missing days 
in 2015, adding to the total number of samples that can be used to 
determine a 98th percentile value for that year and providing for a 
complete 2015 monitoring year. Utah used the methodology found in 40 
CFR part 50, appendix N 3.0(d)(2) and 3.0(e) to substitute FEM data for 
the days without FRM data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ April 19, 2017 EPA Region 8 Memorandum; Salt Lake and Provo, 
Utah PM2.5 2013-2015 24-hour Design Value.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The EPA has reviewed the Provo, UT monitoring sites and, using the 
criteria found in 40 CFR part 58, appendix A, has determined that the 
QA for the continuous FEM monitors is acceptable. We therefore agree 
that the data from the FEM monitors can be substituted for the days for 
which the FRM monitor data was invalid. The data from the FEM monitor 
at the Spanish Fork monitoring site was used to substitute for invalid 
FRM data; however, 2015 was still incomplete. Further discussion on the 
Spanish Fork monitoring site can be found below.
    On November 29, 2016, UDAQ submitted a letter that contained the 
Air Monitoring Program (AMP) 430, AMP 450, AMP 256, and AMP 450NC 
reports required to certify the 2015 air quality data in Utah. UDAQ 
completed the data certification process in AQS and with the November 
29, 2016 letter, certified that the 2015 air quality data is accurate. 
Additional information related to these monitors can be found in the 
November 23, 2016 memoranda found in the docket for this proposed 
action. Additional details and evaluation of the 2015-2017 AMNPs can be 
found in our notice proposing to issue a CDD for the Logan, UT-ID 
Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment area. See 83 FR 33886 (July 18, 
2018). The Logan, UT-ID CDD was subsequently finalized on October 19, 
2018 (83 FR 52983).

C. Evaluation of Current Attainment

    The EPA's evaluation of whether the Provo, UT PM2.5 NAA 
has attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS is based on our 
review of all valid monitoring data ``produced by suitable monitors 
that are required to be submitted to AQS, or otherwise available to EPA 
. . . .'' See Appendix N, 3.0(a). Based on our review, the 
PM2.5 monitoring network for the Provo, UT NAA meets the 
requirements stated above and is therefore adequate for use in 
determining whether the area attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 
NAAQS.
    The EPA reviewed the PM2.5 ambient air monitoring data 
from the North Provo (AQS site 49-049-0002), Lindon (AQS site 49-049-
4001), and Spanish Fork (AQS site 49-049-5010) monitoring sites 
consistent with the requirements contained in 40 CFR part 50, as 
recorded in the EPA AQS database for the Provo, UT NAA. As shown in 
Table 1 below, the North Provo monitor in the Provo, UT NAA has 
collected complete data since 2011 and is trending downward overall. 
The Lindon monitor had incomplete data in 2012; however, all other 
years have been complete and the monitor shows a downward trend too.
    The Spanish Fork monitor had incomplete data during the first 
quarter of 2015 and 2016 and is not eligible for the high value data 
substitution test in 40 CFR part 50, appendix N. However, based upon 
the analysis detailed in the monitoring memorandum located in the 
docket for today's action,\7\ the EPA has preliminarily determined that 
the upper end of the probable range for the 2015-2017 design value at 
the Spanish Fork monitor (30 [micro]g/m\3\) is well below the NAAQS. As 
a result, the EPA has preliminarily concluded that the Provo, UT NAA 
continues to meet the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS of 35 
[micro]g/m\3\ for the period 2015-2017, the most recent 3-year period 
of certified data availability. Should there be a subsequent violation 
of the 2006 PM2.5 standards in the Provo, UT NAA, the EPA 
will withdraw the CDD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ Memorandum; Subject: Utah Clean Data Determination of the 
2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality 
Standard for the Provo, Utah Nonattainment Area.

   Table 1--Design Value Concentrations for the Provo, UT NAA for the 2006 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS [[micro]g/m\3\]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       3-Year design values
          Monitor site             Monitor ID   ----------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  2011-2013    2012-2014    2013-2015    2014-2016    2015-2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lindon.........................     49-049-4001       \a\ 44       \a\ 43           43           31           31
North Provo....................     49-049-0002           45           42           44           29           28
Spanish Fork...................     49-049-5010       \b\ 47       \b\ 45       \b\ 46       \b\ 28       \b\ 28
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Invalid design values--Lindon monitor had incomplete data in 2012.
\b\ Invalid design values--Spanish Fork had incomplete data in 2013, 2015, and 2016.

D. Clean Data Determination for the Provo, UT Nonattainment Area

    Based on the monitoring data for the period 2015-2017, the EPA is 
proposing to determine that the area has clean data for demonstrating 
attainment of the 2006 24-hr PM2.5 NAAQS. In accordance with 
40 CFR 51.1015, a CDD can be made upon a determination by the EPA that 
a Moderate or Serious PM2.5 NAA is attaining the 
PM2.5 NAAQS. As provided in 40 CFR 51.1015, so long as this 
area continues to meet the standard, finalization of this determination 
suspends the requirements for this area to submit an attainment 
demonstration, associated RACM/RACT, RFP plan, contingency measures, 
and any other planning SIP requirements related to the attainment of 
the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. For purposes of this NAAQS, the 
requirements to submit a projected attainment inventory as part of an 
attainment demonstration or RFP as well as a MVEB are also suspended by 
this determination.
    As discussed in the PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule, the 
nonattainment base emissions inventory required by section 172(c)(3) is 
not suspended by this determination because the base

[[Page 3376]]

inventory is a requirement independent of planning for an area's 
attainment. See 81 FR 58009 at 58028 and 58127-8 and 80 FR 15340 at 
15441-2. Additionally, NNSR requirements are discussed in the 
PM2.5 SIP Requirements Rule and required by CAA sections 
110(a)(2)(C); 172(c)(5); 173; 189(a); and 189(e), as not being 
suspended by a CDD because this requirement is independent of the 
area's attainment planning. See 81 FR 58010 at 58107 and 58127. 
Furthermore, the BACM/BACT requirements found in CAA section 
189(b)(1)(B) are not suspended with a CDD for a Serious NAA due to this 
requirement being independent of attainment. See 81 FR 58010 at 58128.
    Under the proposed CDD, the planning requirements noted above (for 
both Moderate and Serious areas) shall be suspended, until such time as 
the area is redesignated to attainment, after which such requirements 
are permanently discharged. This proposed action, if finalized, will 
not constitute a redesignation to attainment under CAA section 
107(d)(3)(E), because the State must have an approved maintenance plan 
for the area as required under section 175A of the CAA, and the EPA 
must determine that the area has met the other requirements for 
redesignation in order to be redesignated to attainment. The 
designation status of the area will remain nonattainment for the 2006 
PM2.5 NAAQS until such time as the EPA determines that the 
area meets the CAA requirements for redesignation to attainment under 
CAA section 107(d)(3)(E).
    It is possible, although not expected, that the Provo, UT area 
could violate the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS before a maintenance 
plan is adopted, submitted, and approved, and the area is redesignated 
to attainment. Under 40 CFR 51.1015(a)(2) and (b)(2), if the EPA 
determines that the area has re-violated the 24-hour PM2.5 
NAAQS, the EPA will rescind the CDD and the State shall be required to 
submit the suspended attainment plan elements. Even so, submission of 
the suspended elements may be insufficient to eliminate future 
violations. Therefore, the issuance of a SIP call under section 
110(k)(5) could be an appropriate response. This SIP call could require 
the State to submit, by a reasonable deadline not to exceed 18 months, 
a revised plan demonstrating expeditious attainment and complying with 
other requirements applicable to the area at the time of this finding. 
Under CAA section 172(d), the EPA may reasonably adjust the dates 
applicable to these requirements.

III. Proposed Action

    The EPA is proposing to make a CDD for the 2006 24-hour 
PM2.5 Provo, Utah (UT) NAA based on the area's current 
attainment of the standard. Pursuant to 40 CFR 51.1015(a) and (b), the 
EPA proposes to determine that the obligation to submit any remaining 
attainment-related SIP revisions arising from classification of the 
Provo, UT area as a Moderate NAA and subsequent reclassification as a 
Serious NAA under subpart 4 of part D (of title I of the Act) for the 
2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS is not applicable for so long as 
the area continues to attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 
However, the CDD does not suspend UDAQ's obligation to submit non-
attainment-related requirements, which includes the base-year emission 
inventory, NNSR revisions, and BACM/BACT. This proposed action, if 
finalized, would not constitute a redesignation to attainment under CAA 
section 107(d)(3).

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    This action proposes to issue a determination of attainment based 
on air quality and to suspend certain federal requirements, and thus, 
would not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state 
law. For this reason, this proposed 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);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under 
Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this proposed action does not apply on any Indian 
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has 
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 
country, the proposed rule does not have tribal implications and will 
not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt 
tribal law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 
9, 2000).

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.

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

    Dated: February 6, 2019.
Douglas Benevento,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2019-01909 Filed 2-11-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P