Document ID: EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0323-0001
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designations of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes: Tennessee:  Bristol; Determination of Attainment for the 2008 Lead Standards
Posted Date: 2012-06-14T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 115 (Thursday, June 14, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35652-35656]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-14566]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2012-0323; FRL-9686-7]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and 
Designations of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Tennessee: 
Bristol; Determination of Attainment for the 2008 Lead Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: On April 4, 2012, the State of Tennessee, through the 
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), submitted 
a request to EPA to make a determination that the Bristol nonattainment 
area for the 2008 lead national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or 
standard) has attained the 2008 lead NAAQS. In this action, EPA is 
proposing to determine that the Bristol nonattainment area (hereafter 
also referred to as the ``Bristol Area'' or ``Area'') has attained the 
2008 lead NAAQS. This proposed determination of attainment is based 
upon complete, quality-assured and certified ambient air monitoring 
data for the 2009--2011 period showing that the Area has monitored 
attainment of the 2008 lead NAAQS. EPA is further proposing that, if 
EPA finalizes this proposed determination of attainment, the 
requirements for the Area to submit an attainment demonstration, 
together with reasonably available control measures (RACM), a 
reasonable further progress (RFP) plan, and contingency measures for 
failure to meet RFP and attainment deadlines shall be suspended for so 
long as the Area continues to attain the 2008 lead NAAQS.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 16, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2012-0323, by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. Email: R4-RDS@epa.gov.
    3. Fax: (404) 562-9040.
    4. Mail: EPA-R04-OAR-2012-023, Regulatory Development Section, Air 
Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960.
    5. Hand Delivery: Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory Development 
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management 
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth 
Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Such deliveries are only 
accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of operation, and 
special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed 
information. The Regional Office official hours of business are Monday 
through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-OAR-
2012-0323. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, 
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Do not submit through www.regulations.gov or 
email, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. 
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, 
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information 
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email 
comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your 
email address will be automatically captured and included as part of 
the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on 
the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that 
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your 
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your 
comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for 
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic 
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of 
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional 
information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center 
homepage at http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
    Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be 
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket 
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or 
in hard copy at the Regulatory Development Section, Air Planning 
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all possible, you 
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT 
section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official 
hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 
excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Scofield or Richard Wong, 
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.

[[Page 35653]]

Mr. Scofield may be reached by phone at (404) 562-9034 or via 
electronic mail at scofield.steve@epa.gov. Mr. Wong may be reached by 
phone at (404) 562-8726 or via electronic mail at wong.richard@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. What actions is EPA taking?
II. What is the background for these actions?
III. Application of EPA's Clean Data Policy to the 2008 Lead NAAQS
IV. Does the Bristol area meet the 2008 lead NAAQS?
    A. Criteria
    B. Bristol Area Air Quality
V. What is the effect of these actions?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What actions is EPA taking?

    EPA is proposing to determine that the Bristol Area (comprising the 
portion of Sullivan County bounded by a 1.25 kilometer radius 
surrounding the Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates 4042923 
meters E, 386267 meters N, Zone 17, which surrounds the Exide 
Technologies Facility) has attained the 2008 lead NAAQS. This proposal 
is based upon complete, quality-assured and certified ambient air 
monitoring data for the 2009-2011 monitoring period that show that the 
Area has monitored attainment of the 2008 lead NAAQS.
    Further, EPA is proposing that, if this proposed determination of 
attainment is made final, the requirements for the Bristol Area to 
submit an attainment demonstration together with RACM, a RFP plan, and 
contingency measures for failure to meet RFP and attainment deadlines 
would be suspended for so long as the Area continues to attain the 2008 
lead NAAQS. As discussed below, EPA's proposal is consistent with EPA's 
regulations and with its longstanding interpretation of subpart 1 of 
part D of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).
    If this proposed rulemaking is finalized and EPA subsequently 
determines, after notice-and-comment rulemaking in the Federal 
Register, that the Area has violated the 2008 lead NAAQS, the basis for 
the suspension of these attainment planning requirements would no 
longer exist for the Bristol Area, and the Area would thereafter have 
to address such requirements.

II. What is the background for these actions?

    On November 12, 2008 (73 FR 66964), EPA established a 2008 primary 
and secondary lead NAAQS at 0.15 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/
m\3\) based on a maximum arithmetic 3-month mean concentration for a 3-
year period. See 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 from those 
monitors for calendar years 2007-2009. These designations became 
effective on December 31, 2010.\1\ The Bristol Area was designated 
nonattainment for the 2008 lead NAAQS. See 40 CFR 81.343.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ EPA completed a second and final round of designations for 
the 2008 Lead NAAQS on November 22, 2011. See 76 FR 72097. No 
additional areas in Sullivan County, Tennessee were designated as 
nonattainment for the 2008 Lead NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 4, 2012, the State of Tennessee, through TDEC, submitted a 
request to EPA to make a determination that the Bristol Area for the 
2008 lead NAAQS has attained that standard based on complete, quality-
assured, quality-controlled monitoring data from 2009 through 2011.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ This Area has ambient air monitoring data for forty-seven 
(47) months for the period of February 2008 through December 31, 
2011, which show attainment of the 2008 lead NAAQS. Preliminary 2012 
data indicates that this Area is continuing to attain the 2008 lead 
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Application of EPA's Clean Data Policy to the 2008 Lead NAAQS

    Following enactment of the CAA Amendments of 1990, EPA promulgated 
its interpretation of the requirements for implementing the NAAQS in 
the general preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the CAA 
Amendments of 1990 (General Preamble) 57 FR 13498, 13564 (April 16, 
1992). In 1995, based on the interpretation of CAA sections 171 and 
172, and section 182 in the General Preamble, EPA set forth what has 
become known as its ``Clean Data Policy'' for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. 
See Memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality 
Planning and Standards, ``RFP, Attainment Demonstration, and Related 
Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone National 
Ambient Air Quality Standard'' (May 10, 1995). In 2004, EPA indicated 
its intention to extend the Clean Data Policy to the PM2.5 
NAAQS. See Memorandum from Steve Page, Director, EPA Office of Air 
Quality Planning and Standards, ``Clean Data Policy for the Fine 
Particle National Ambient Air Quality Standards'' (December 14, 2004).
    Since 1995, EPA has applied its interpretation under the Clean Data 
Policy in many rulemakings, suspending certain attainment-related 
planning requirements for individual areas, based on a determination of 
attainment. See 60 FR 36723 (July 18, 1995) (Salt Lake and Davis 
Counties, Utah, 1-hour ozone); 61 FR 20458 (May 7, 1996) (Cleveland 
Akron-Lorain, Ohio, 1-hour ozone); 61 FR 31832 (June 21, 1996) (Grand 
Rapids, Michigan, 1-hour ozone); 65 FR 37879 (June 19, 2000) 
(Cincinnati-Hamilton, Ohio-Kentucky, 1-hour ozone); 66 FR 53094 
(October 19, 2001) (Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, Pennsylvania, 1-hour 
ozone); 68 FR 25418 (May 12, 2003) (St Louis, Missouri, 1-hour ozone); 
69 FR 21717 (April 22, 2004) (San Francisco Bay Area, 1-hour ozone), 75 
FR 6570 (February 10, 2010) (Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 1-hour ozone), 75 
FR 27944 (May 19, 2010) (Coso Junction, California, PM10).
    EPA also incorporated its interpretation under the Clean Data 
Policy in implementation rules. See Clean Air Fine Particle 
Implementation Rule, 72 FR 20586 (April 25, 2007); Final Rule To 
Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard--Phase 
2, 70 FR 71612 (November 29, 2005). The Court of Appeals for the 
District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) upheld EPA's rule embodying 
the Clean Data Policy for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. NRDC v. EPA, 
571 F.3d 1245 (D.C. Cir. 2009). Other courts have reviewed and 
considered rulemakings applying EPA's Clean Data Policy, and have 
consistently upheld them. Sierra Club v. EPA, 99 F. 3d 1551 (10th Cir. 
1996); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F. 3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004); Our 
Children's Earth Foundation v. EPA, No. 04-73032 (9th Cir. June 28, 
2005 (Memorandum Opinion)), Latino Issues Forum v. EPA, Nos. 06-75831 
and 08-71238 (9th Cir. March 2, 2009 (Memorandum Opinion)). EPA sets 
forth below a brief explanation of the Clean Data Policy. EPA also 
incorporates the discussions of its interpretation set forth in prior 
rulemakings, including the PM2.5 implementation rulemaking. 
See also 75 FR 31288 (June 3, 2010) (Rhode Island, 1997 8-hour ozone), 
75 FR 62470 (October 12, 2010) (Knoxville, Tennessee, 1997 8-hour 
ozone), 75 FR 53219 (August 31, 2010) (Greater Connecticut Area, 1997 
8-hour ozone), 75 FR 54778 (September 9, 2010) (Baton Rouge, Louisiana, 
1997 8-hour ozone), 75 FR 64949 (October 21, 2010) (Providence, Rhode 
Island, 1997 8-hour ozone), 76 FR 11080 (March 1, 2011) (Milwaukee-
Racine and Sheboygan Areas, 1997 8-hour ozone), 76 FR 31273 (May 31, 
2011) (Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, 1997 8-hour ozone), 76 FR 33647 (June 
9, 2011) (St. Louis, Missouri-Illinois, 1997 8-hour ozone), 76 FR 7145 
(November 15, 2011) (Charlotte, North Carolina-South Carolina, 1997 8-
hour ozone), 77 FR 31496 (May 29, 2012)

[[Page 35654]]

(Boston-Lawrence-Worchester, Massachusetts, 1997 8-hour ozone). See 
also, 75 FR 56 (January 4, 2010) (Greensboro-Winston-Salem-High Point, 
1997 PM2.5), 75 FR 230 (January 5, 2010) (Hickory-Morganton, 
Lenoir, 1997 PM2.5), 75 FR 57186 (September 20, 2010) 
(Birmingham, Alabama, 2006 PM2.5) 76 FR 12860 (March 9, 
2011) (Louisville, Kentucky-Indiana, 1997 PM2.5), 76 FR 1850 
(April 5, 2011) (Rome, Georgia, 1997 PM2.5), 76 FR 31239 
(May 31, 2011) (Chattanooga, Tennessee-Georgia-Alabama, 1997 
PM2.5), 76 FR 31858 (June 2, 2011) (Macon, Georgia, 1997 
PM2.5), 76 FR 36873 (June 23, 2011) (Atlanta, Georgia 1997 
PM2.5), 76 FR 38023 (June 29, 2011) (Birmingham, Alabama 
1997 PM2.5), 76 FR 5542 (September 7, 2011) (Huntington-
Ashland, West Virginia-Kentucky-Ohio, 1997 PM2.5), 76 FR 
60373 (September 29, 2011) (Cincinnati, Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana, 1997 
PM2.5), (November 18, 2011) (Charleston, West Virginia, 2006 
PM2.5), 77 FR 18922 (March 29, 2012) (Harrisburg-Lebonon-
Carlisle-York Allentown, Johnstown and Lancaster, 1997 
PM2.5)
    The Clean Data Policy represents EPA's interpretation that certain 
requirements of subpart 1 of part D of the Act are by their terms not 
applicable to areas that are attaining the NAAQS.\3\ As explained 
below, the specific requirements that are inapplicable to an area 
attaining the standard are the requirements to submit a SIP that 
provides for: Attainment of the NAAQS; implementation of all reasonably 
available control measures; reasonable further progress; and 
implementation of contingency measures for failure to meet deadlines 
for RFP and attainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ This discussion refers to subpart 1 because subparts 1 and 5 
contain the requirements relating to attainment of the lead NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CAA section 172(c)(1), the requirement for an attainment 
demonstration, provides in relevant part that SIPs ``shall provide for 
attainment of the [NAAQS].'' EPA has interpreted this requirement as 
not applying to areas that have attained the standard. If an area has 
attained the standard, there is no need to submit a plan demonstrating 
how the area will reach attainment. In the General Preamble (57 FR 
13564), EPA stated that no other measures to provide for attainment 
would be needed by areas seeking redesignation to attainment since 
``attainment will have been reached.'' See also Memorandum from John 
Calcagni, ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to 
Attainment,'' (September 4, 1992), at page 6.
    A component of the attainment plan specified under section 
172(c)(1) is the requirement to provide for ``the implementation of all 
reasonably available control measures as expeditiously as practicable'' 
(RACM). Since RACM is an element of the attainment demonstration, see 
General Preamble (57 FR 13560), for the same reason the attainment 
demonstration no longer applies by its own terms, RACM also no longer 
applies. Furthermore, EPA has consistently interpreted this provision 
to require only implementation of potential RACM measures that could 
advance attainment.\4\ Thus, where an area is already attaining the 
standard, no additional RACM measures are required. EPA' s 
interpretation that the statute requires only implementation of RACM 
measures that would advance attainment was upheld by the United States 
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (Sierra Club v. EPA, 314 F. 3d 
735, 743-745, 5th Cir. 2002) and by the United States Court of Appeals 
for the D.C. Circuit (Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F. 3d 155, 162-163, D.C. 
Cir. 2002). See also the final rulemakings for Pittsburgh-Beaver 
Valley, Pennsylvania, 66 FR 53096 (October 19, 2001) and St. Louis, 68 
FR 25418 (May 12, 2003).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ This interpretation was adopted in the General Preamble, see 
57 FR 13498, and has been upheld as applied to the Clean Data 
Policy, as well as to nonattainment SIP submissions. See NRDC v. 
EPA, 571 F.3d 1245 (D.C. Cir. 2009); Sierra Club v. EPA, 294 F.3d 
155 (D.C. Cir. 2002).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    CAA section 172(c)(2) provides that state implementation plan (SIP) 
provisions in nonattainment areas must require ``reasonable further 
progress.'' The term ``reasonable further progress'' is defined in 
section 171(1) as ``such annual incremental reductions in emissions of 
the relevant air pollutant as are required by this part or may 
reasonably be required by the Administrator for the purpose of ensuring 
attainment of the applicable NAAQS by the applicable date.'' Thus, by 
definition, the ``reasonable further progress'' provision requires only 
such reductions in emissions as are necessary to attain the NAAQS. If 
an area has attained the NAAQS, the purpose of the RFP requirement has 
been fulfilled, and since the area has already attained, showing that 
the State will make RFP towards attainment ``[has] no meaning at that 
point.'' General Preamble, 57 FR 13498, 13564 (April 16, 1992).
    CAA section 172(c)(9) provides that SIPs in nonattainment areas 
``shall provide for the implementation of specific measures to be 
undertaken if the area fails to make reasonable further progress, or to 
attain the [NAAQS] by the attainment date applicable under this part. 
Such measures shall be included in the plan revision as contingency 
measures to take effect in any such case without further action by the 
State or [EPA].'' This contingency measure requirement is inextricably 
tied to the reasonable further progress and attainment demonstration 
requirements. Contingency measures are implemented if reasonable 
further progress targets are not achieved, or if attainment is not 
realized by the attainment date. Where an area has already achieved 
attainment by the attainment date, it has no need to rely on 
contingency measures to come into attainment or to make further 
progress to attainment. As EPA stated in the General Preamble: ``The 
section 172(c)(9) requirements for contingency measures are directed at 
ensuring RFP and attainment by the applicable date.'' See 57 FR 13564. 
Thus these requirements no longer apply when an area has attained the 
standard.
    It is important to note that should an area attain the lead 
standards based on 3 years of data, its obligation to submit an 
attainment demonstration and related planning submissions is suspended 
only for so long as the area continues to attain the standard. If EPA 
subsequently determines, after notice-and-comment rulemaking, that the 
Area has violated the 2008 lead NAAQS, the requirements for the State 
to submit a SIP to meet the previously suspended requirements would be 
reinstated. It is likewise important to note that the area remains 
designated nonattainment pending a further redesignation action.

IV. Does the Bristol area meet the 2008 lead NAAQS?

A. Criteria

    Today's proposed rulemaking assesses whether Bristol Area has 
attained the 2008 Lead NAAQS, based on the most recent 3 years of 
quality-assured data. The Bristol Area comprises the portion of 
Sullivan County bounded by a 1.25 kilometer radius surrounding the UTM 
coordinates 4042923 meters E, 386267 meters N, Zone 17, which surrounds 
the Exide Technologies Facility.
    Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR 50.16, the 2008 primary and 
secondary lead standards are met when the maximum arithmetic 3-month 
mean concentration for a 3-year period, as determined in accordance 
with 40 CFR part 50, Appendix R, is less than or equal to 0.15 
[micro]g/m\3\ at all relevant monitoring sites in the subject area.

B. Bristol Area Air Quality

    EPA has reviewed the ambient air monitoring data for the Bristol 
Area in

[[Page 35655]]

accordance with the provisions of 40 CFR part 50, Appendix R. All data 
considered are complete, quality-assured, certified, and recorded in 
EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) database. This review addresses air 
quality data collected in 3-year period of 2009-2011 which are the most 
recent quality-assured data available.
    40 CFR part 58, Appendix D, Section 4.5, states that ``At a 
minimum, there must be one source-oriented State and Local Air 
Monitoring Station site located to measure the maximum Pb [lead] 
concentration in ambient air resulting from each non-airport Pb source 
which emits 0.50 or more tons per year * * *.'' The Exide Technologies 
facility in Bristol is responsible for operating the monitors that meet 
this requirement. EPA's review shows that Exide has been exceeding the 
minimum monitoring requirement of one monitor, and is currently 
operating three Federal reference method (FRM) source-oriented monitors 
at the facility, which meet the quality assurance requirements of 40 
CFR part 58, Appendix A. In addition, the State of Tennessee is also 
operating one additional source-oriented FRM monitor (AQS ID 47-163-
3004, identified in Table 1) at the Exide facility. The State's monitor 
originally operated from January 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009 (AQS 
ID 47-163-4002). Beginning January 1, 2010, Tennessee's monitor was 
relocated 0.3 miles to its current location, approximately 10 feet from 
Exide's design value monitor (47-163-3001), which is an area of 
expected maximum concentration at the site.
    Table 1 shows the 2009-2011 design values at the Bristol Area 
monitors (the metrics calculated in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, 
Appendix R, for determining compliance with the NAAQS) for the 2008 
lead NAAQS. It also shows the maximum 3-month rolling average for each 
individual year.

                              Table 1--Design Value for Monitors in the Bristol Nonattainment Area for the 2008 Lead NAAQS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  2009 Max 3-month  2010 Max 3-month  2011 Max 3-month  2009-2011 design
                           Location                                AQS site ID       rolling avg       rolling avg       rolling avg    value  ([micro]g/
                                                                                   ([micro]g/m\3\)   ([micro]g/m\3\)   ([micro]g/m\3\)        m\3\)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
364 Exide Drive...............................................   \5\ 47-163-3001              0.09              0.08              0.06              0.09
                                                                     47-163-3002              0.06              0.04              0.04              0.06
                                                                     47-163-3003              0.06              0.04              0.05              0.06
                                                                     47-163-3004  ................              0.05              0.08  ................
                                                                     47-163-4002              0.04  ................  ................  ................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's review of these data indicates that the Bristol Area has 
attained and continues to attain the 2008 Lead NAAQS, with a design 
value of 0.09 [micro]g/m\3\ for the period of 2009-2011. EPA is 
soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this document. 
These comments will be considered before taking final action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ According to 40 CFR 58.12(b) ``For Pb manual methods, at 
least one 24-hour sample must be collected every 6 days except 
during periods or seasons exempted by the Regional Administrator.'' 
All three Exide monitors met and exceeded this requirement, and 
collected a sample every three days. EPA also publishes an annual 
recommended national sampling calendar, which contains suggested 
days of the week for sampling. While this schedule is recommended, 
it is not a CFR requirement. From March 30, 2011-November 23, 2011, 
the Exide facility's monitors inadvertently operated on a schedule 
that deviated from the recommended national schedule by one day of 
the week. However, since the monitors still collected a sample every 
six days, the data collection requirements were met by all three 
Exide monitors for the Area. EPA has thus counted the samples 
collected using the alternate sampling schedule as creditable 
samples and calculated valid design values supporting a clean data 
determination for the Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. What is the effect of these actions?

    EPA is proposing to determine that the Bristol Area has attained 
the 2008 lead NAAQS, based on complete, quality-assured and certified 
data for 2009-2011. Preliminary data available for 2012 indicates that 
the area continues to be in attainment. EPA further proposes that, if 
its proposed determination of attainment is made final, the 
requirements for the Bristol Area to submit an attainment demonstration 
and associated RACM, a RFP plan, contingency measures, and any other 
planning SIPs related to attainment of the 2008 lead NAAQS would be 
suspended for so long as the Area continues to attain the 2008 lead 
NAAQS. EPA's proposal is consistent and in keeping with its long-held 
interpretation of CAA requirements, as well as with EPA's regulations 
for similar determinations for ozone (see 40 CFR 51.918) and fine 
particulate matter (see 40 CFR 51.1004(c)). As described below, any 
such determination would not be equivalent to the redesignation of the 
Area to attainment for the 2008 Lead NAAQS.
    Finalizing this proposed action would not constitute a 
redesignation of the Area to attainment of the 2008 Lead NAAQS under 
section 107(d)(3) of the CAA. Further, finalizing this proposed action 
does not involve approving a maintenance plan for the Area as required 
under section 175A of the CAA, nor would it find that the Area has met 
all other requirements for redesignation. Even if EPA finalizes the 
proposed action, the Bristol Area would remain designated nonattainment 
for the 2008 Lead NAAQS until such time as EPA determines that the Area 
meets the CAA requirements for redesignation to attainment and takes 
action to redesignate the Area.
    If the Bristol Area continues to monitor attainment of the 2008 
lead NAAQS, EPA proposes that the requirements for the Bristol Area to 
submit an attainment demonstration and associated RACM, a RFP plan, 
contingency measures, and any other planning SIPs related to attainment 
of the annual PM2.5 NAAQS will remain suspended. If this 
proposed rulemaking is finalized and EPA subsequently determines, after 
notice-and-comment rulemaking in the Federal Register, that the Area 
has violated the 2008 Lead NAAQS, the basis for the suspension of these 
attainment planning requirements would no longer exist for the Bristol 
Area, and the Area would thereafter have to address such requirements.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
proposed 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 proposes to make a determination based on air quality data and 
to suspend certain Federal requirements. Accordingly, the Administrator 
certifies that this rule will not have a significant economic

[[Page 35656]]

impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.). Because this rule proposes to 
make a determination based on air quality data and to suspend certain 
Federal requirements, 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 proposed 
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 proposed 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), because it 
only proposes to make a determination based on air quality data and 
suspend certain Federal requirements, and does not alter the 
relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities 
established in the CAA. This proposed 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 proposes to determine that air quality in the affected area is 
meeting Federal standards. 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 because it would be inconsistent with applicable law 
for EPA, when determining the attainment status of an area, to use 
voluntary consensus standards in place of promulgated air quality 
standards and monitoring procedures that otherwise satisfy the 
provisions of the CAA. This proposed 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.). Under Executive Order 
12898, EPA finds that this rule involves a proposed determination of 
attainment based on air quality data and will not have 
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental 
effects on any communities in the area, including minority and low-
income.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Lead, Reporting 
and Recordkeeping requirements.

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

    Dated: June 5, 2012.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2012-14566 Filed 6-13-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P