Document ID: EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0583-0012
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Air Quality State Implementation Plans; Approvals and Promulgations: Georgia; Redesignation of the Atlanta, Georgia 2008 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area to Attainment
Posted Date: 2017-06-02T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 105 (Friday, June 2, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 25523-25529]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-10934]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0583; FRL-9962-27-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; Air Plan Approval and Air Quality Designation; 
GA; Redesignation of the Atlanta, Georgia 2008 8-Hour Ozone 
Nonattainment Area to Attainment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: On July 18, 2016, the State of Georgia, through the Georgia 
Environmental Protection Division (GA EPD) of the Department of Natural 
Resources, submitted a request for the Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA) to redesignate the Atlanta, Georgia 2008 8-hour ozone 
nonattainment area (hereinafter referred to as the ``Atlanta Area'' or 
``Area'') to attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air 
Quality Standards (NAAQS) and to approve a State Implementation Plan 
(SIP) revision containing a maintenance plan for the Area. EPA is 
approving the State's maintenance plan, including the motor vehicle 
emission budgets (MVEBs) for nitrogen oxides (NOX) and 
volatile organic compounds (VOC) for the years 2014 and 2030 for the 
Area, and redesignating the Area to attainment for the 2008 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS. Additionally, EPA finds the 2014 and 2030 MVEBs for the 
Atlanta Area adequate for the purposes of transportation conformity.

DATES: This rule will be effective June 2, 2017.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket 
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0583. All documents in the docket 
are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the 
index, some information may not be publicly available, i.e., 
Confidential Business Information 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 through www.regulations.gov or in hard 
copy at the Air Regulatory Management Section, Air Planning and 
Implementation 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: Jane Spann, Air Regulatory Management 
Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Pesticides and Toxics 
Management Division, Region 4, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 61 
Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. Ms. Spann can be 
reached by phone at (404) 562-9029 or via electronic mail at 
spann.jane@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background for Final Actions

    Effective July 20, 2012, EPA designated areas as unclassifiable/
attainment or nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS that was 
promulgated on March 27, 2008. See 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012). The 
Atlanta Area was designated as nonattainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS and classified as a marginal nonattainment area.\1\ On July 14, 
2016, EPA issued a determination that the Area had attained the 2008 8-
hour ozone NAAQS (81 FR 45419). On July 18, 2016, Georgia requested 
that EPA redesignate the Atlanta Area to attainment for the 2008 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS and submitted a SIP revision containing the State's plan 
for maintaining attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone standard in the 
Area, including 2014 and 2030 MVEBs for NOX and VOC for the 
Atlanta Area. In a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) published on 
December 23, 2016 (81 FR 94283), EPA proposed to approve the 
maintenance plan, including the 2014 and 2030 MVEBs for NOX 
and VOC, and incorporate the plan into the Georgia SIP and to 
redesignate the Area to attainment for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. In 
that notice, EPA also notified the public of the status of the Agency's 
adequacy determination for the NOX and VOC MVEBs for the 
Atlanta Area. The details of Georgia's submittal and the rationale for 
EPA's actions are further explained in the NPRM.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The Atlanta Area consists of Bartow, Cherokee, Clayton, 
Cobb, Coweta, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, 
Henry, Newton, Paulding and Rockdale Counties in Georgia.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Response to Comments

    EPA received one set of comments on its December 23, 2016, proposed 
rulemaking actions. Specifically, EPA received adverse comments from 
the Sierra Club (``Commenter''). These

[[Page 25524]]

comments are provided in the docket for this final action. See Docket 
number EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0583. A summary of the adverse comments and 
EPA's responses are provided below.
    Comment 1: The Commenter contends that EPA may not approve 
Georgia's request to redesignate the Atlanta Area to attainment 
because, according to the Commenter, the Atlanta Area failed to attain 
the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Commenter believes that the Area 
failed to attain this NAAQS ``by law'' because the Cobb County ozone 
monitor did not meet the 75 percent data completeness requirement for 
2014 or the 90 percent data completeness requirement for the 2013-2015 
period.
    Response 1: EPA disagrees with the Commenter that the Area has not 
attained the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA issued a final determination 
of attainment on July 14, 2016, based on the same 2013-2015 air quality 
data it is using as the basis of this redesignation action. See 81 FR 
45419. EPA took notice and comment on its determination of attainment 
and the Commenter could have raised its concern to the Agency regarding 
data from the Kennesaw National Guard monitor (also known as the Cobb 
County monitor) at that time, but failed to do so. In any case, EPA 
does not find reason to alter its conclusion that the Area has attained 
the 2008 ozone NAAQS based on concerns raised in the comment, and the 
most recent available data and information continues to support this 
finding. With regard to the Commenter's concern regarding the 2014 
ozone season data from the Kennesaw National Guard monitor, EPA's 
technical analysis, available in a technical support document located 
in the docket for this rulemaking, demonstrates that the 2013-2015 
design value would not have violated the standard even assuming the 
most conservative estimates for the missing data from that monitor.
    As described in greater detail in the technical support document, 
in EPA's technical judgment, the Area has attained the 2008 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS. In making its determination, EPA evaluated all valid 
certified monitoring data collected during 2013-2015 by monitors in or 
near the nonattainment area.\2\ EPA also conducted the additional 
technical analysis described in the technical support document for the 
Kennesaw National Guard monitor, which did not collect complete data 
during 2014. The results of this technical analysis indicate that even 
under the most conservative estimates, it is very unlikely that the 
monitor would have violated the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 75 ppb.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ EPA retrieved data for the monitors in the Atlanta Area and 
the Georgia Station CASTNET monitoring site in Pike County near the 
Atlanta Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Following publication of the proposed redesignation, Georgia 
certified its 2016 data for the Atlanta Area which shows that the Area 
continues to attain the NAAQS with a 2014-2016 design value of 75 
ppb.\3\ Incomplete data for the Kennesaw National Guard monitor in 2014 
does not affect this conclusion because, as discussed above, EPA 
conducted an analysis and has concluded that it is very unlikely that 
the monitor would have violated the NAAQS if it had collected completed 
data.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The air quality data is located at https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data.
    \4\ The fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average value for 
2016 at the Kennesaw National Guard monitor is 70 ppb.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment 2: The Commenter argues that the interstate transport 
provision at CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) is an applicable 
requirement for the purposes of redesignation. Therefore, the Commenter 
does not believe that EPA can redesignate a nonattainment area to 
attainment unless the state has submitted, and EPA has approved, a SIP 
revision that contains adequate provisions prohibiting any source 
located in the state from emitting any air pollutant in amounts which 
will contribute significantly to nonattainment in, or interfere with 
maintenance by, any other state with respect to any NAAQS. Because 
Georgia did not submit a SIP revision satisfying the good neighbor 
provision for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the Commenter contends that 
Georgia has not met all applicable requirements for redesignation of 
the Area under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) (requiring the State to have 
met all applicable requirements under section 110 and Part D) and 
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) (requiring the State to have a fully approved 
applicable SIP under section 110(k)).
    Response 2: As discussed in the NPRM and in numerous other 
redesignation actions, EPA has long interpreted the section 
110(a)(2)(D) interstate transport requirements as not applicable for 
the purposes of redesignation. See, e.g., 81 FR 94283 (December 23, 
2016), 78 FR 43096 (July 19, 2013), 76 FR 79579 (December 22, 2011), 74 
FR 53198 (October 16, 2009), 72 FR 56312 (October 3, 2007). The Agency 
has consistently distinguished the section 110 and part D requirements 
that apply regardless of an area's attainment designation--such as 
110(a)(2)(D) interstate transport requirements, 176(c) conformity 
requirements, section 184 ozone transport region measures, and section 
211(m) oxygenated fuels requirements--from those requirements in 
section 110 and part D that are linked to the nonattainment designation 
of an area and thus no longer need be complied with upon redesignation 
to attainment status. If a requirement applies to an area regardless of 
whether its designation is nonattainment, maintenance, or attainment, 
and thus other parts of the CAA will continue to obligate the area to 
meet the requirement after redesignation, EPA has interpreted the 
requirement as not ``applicable'' for purposes of section 
107(d)(3)(E)(ii) or (v). See, e.g., 66 FR 53094 (October 19, 2001), 65 
FR 37879 (June 19, 2000), 62 FR 24826 (May 7, 1997), 61 FR 53174 
(October 10, 1996), 61 FR 20458 (May 7, 1996), 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 
1995). Courts have upheld EPA's authority to interpret what constitutes 
an ``applicable'' requirement under section 107(d)(3)(E), and have 
deferred to EPA's interpretation that requirements that continue to 
apply after a redesignation are not ``applicable'' for purposes of 
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v). See Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 
(7th Cir. 2004); Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001).
    We note that EPA has acted consistently with this interpretation by 
issuing a number of actions outside the context of area redesignations 
to address CAA 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)'s transport provision. On October 26, 
2016, EPA issued a final rulemaking (CSAPR Update) updating the 
regional NOx ozone season trading program established under the 
original 2011 Cross-State Air Pollution Rule. See 81 FR 74504. As 
described in more detail in the CSAPR Update, EPA conducted air quality 
modeling and concluded that Georgia did not significantly contribute to 
nonattainment or interfere with maintenance of the 2008 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS in other states. Therefore, even though, as the Commenter points 
out, EPA did issue a finding of failure to submit a 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) 
transport SIP to Georgia, the Agency later determined that the State 
had no substantive obligation to reduce its emissions to meet its 
transport obligations for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.
    Comment 3: The Commenter claims that neither Georgia nor EPA have 
sufficiently shown that the improvement in air quality is due to 
permanent and enforceable emissions reductions rather than to temporary

[[Page 25525]]

fluctuations in weather or the economy, from decreased electricity 
production in the Area, or from impermanent and unenforceable measures. 
The Commenter believes that EPA did nothing more than cite to and 
summarize certain applicable pollutant control regulations and that EPA 
must estimate the percent reduction achieved from each of the cited 
measures ``in order to clearly show that the air quality improvements 
are indeed the result of implemented permanent and enforceable 
controls.'' The Commenter also states that the Utility Mercury Air 
Toxics Standards (MATS), listed in the section of the NPRM discussing 
permanent and enforceable measures, cannot have improved air quality 
during the relevant time period and that MATS does not have any 
relevance for ozone.
    Response 3: EPA does not agree with the Commenter that the Agency 
has not properly determined that the Area's attainment is due to 
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions, as required by CAA 
section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii). EPA's approach in this action is consistent 
with its long-standing interpretation that to satisfy that provision, 
as set forth in the Calcagni Memorandum cited by the Commenter, EPA 
must show that the improvement in air quality necessary for an area to 
attain the relevant NAAQS is reasonably attributable to permanent and 
enforceable reductions in emissions.\5\ As recently affirmed by the 
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, EPA's approach to 
demonstrating that section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) has been met is a 
reasonable and appropriate method of meeting the CAA's requirements. 
See Sierra Club v. EPA, 774 F.3d 383 (7th Cir. 2014). As noted by the 
court, it is not necessary for EPA to ``prove causation to an absolute 
certainty,'' and the Agency is entitled to deference when using its 
``experience, expertise, and professional judgment'' in determining 
whether the improvement in air quality is reasonably attributable to 
permanent and enforceable measures. See Sierra Club, 774 F.3d at 395-96 
(agreeing with EPA that its approach sufficed, and that an ``elaborate 
analytical exercise is not required by the CAA''). In this case, the 
Commenter claims that EPA's demonstration is inadequate and charges 
that the Agency must estimate the percent reduction achieved from each 
of the permanent and enforceable measures in order for the Agency to 
redesignate an area. In fact, for the measures that were primarily 
responsible for the improvement in ozone concentrations in the Area, 
EPA did estimate the percentage reduction in emissions. The majority of 
ozone precursor emissions in the Area are generated by mobile sources, 
and the vast majority of emission reductions in the Area are similarly 
associated with the permanent and enforceable mobile source measures 
identified in the NPRM.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 
Management Division, to EPA regional air directors re: Procedures 
for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment 
(September 4, 1992), p.4.
    \6\ In 2011, mobile sources accounted for approximately 84 
percent of NOX emissions and 53 percent of VOC emissions 
in the Area. See 80 FR 48036 (August 11, 2015). In 2014, mobile 
sources accounted for approximately 87 percent of NOX 
emissions and 51 percent of VOC emissions. See 81 FR 94283. The 
comparison of the 2011 and 2014 emissions inventories in Table 2, 
below, shows that mobile source NOX emissions decreased 
by approximately 60 tons per summer day (tpsd) (equating to 72 
percent of the total NOX emissions reductions) and mobile 
source VOC emissions decreased by approximately 34 tpsd (equating to 
68 percent of the total VOC emissions reductions).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Consistent with the Calcagni Memorandum, Georgia and EPA also took 
steps in the analysis, as outlined in the NPRM, to ensure that the 
improvement in air quality was not due to temporary weather conditions. 
Georgia provided and EPA evaluated ozone season temperature and 
precipitation data for the Area from 1930 through 2015. See 81 FR 
94288. This data shows that the average temperature and precipitation 
in 2013 fluctuates around the average meteorological conditions; the 
years 2014 and 2015 were hotter than the 1930-2000 average temperature; 
and precipitation in 2014 was less than the 1930-2000 average. 
Therefore, EPA proposed to determine that the improvement in ozone air 
quality was not the result of unusually favorable weather conditions. 
The Commenter did not provide any climatological data to refute this 
proposed determination. Although the Commenter claims that EPA and the 
State must also demonstrate that the improvement in air quality was not 
due to the economy or decreased electricity production, EPA does not 
have any information indicating that the improvement was due to these 
factors and the Commenter has not provided any such information.
    Consistent with EPA's long-standing practice and policy, a 
comparison of nonattainment period emissions with attainment period 
emissions is relevant in demonstrating permanent and enforceable 
emissions reductions. EPA has evaluated the ozone precursor emissions 
data in the Area and found that there were significant reductions in 
these emissions in multiple source categories from 2011 (a 
nonattainment year) to 2014 (an attainment year). During this time 
period, the emissions data show that non-road NOX and VOC 
emissions decreased, point source NOX emissions decreased, 
and mobile NOX and VOC emissions decreased. During this time 
period, mobile source emissions provided the greatest reductions, with 
NOX emissions decreasing by approximately 60 tons per summer 
day (tpsd) (equating to 72 percent of the total NOX 
emissions reductions) and mobile source VOC emissions decreased by 
approximately 34 tpsd (equating to 68 percent of the total VOC 
emissions reductions). It is not necessary for every change in 
emissions between the nonattainment year and the attainment year to be 
permanent and enforceable. Rather, as discussed above, the CAA requires 
that improvement in air quality necessary for an area to attain the 
relevant NAAQS must be reasonably attributable to permanent and 
enforceable emission reductions in emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ For 2011, Georgia also reported 3.45 tpsd of biogenic 
emissions not included in this total; for 2014, the area source 
emissions total includes 0.01 tons per summer day of wild and 
prescribed fires.

                Table 1--NOX Emissions for the Atlanta 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment Area
                                            [Tons per summer day] \7\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Year                 Point source     Area source       On-road        Non-road          Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011............................           54.63            4.63          214.98           91.92          366.16
2014............................           31.36            4.88          170.15           76.69          283.08
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 25526]]

                Table 2--VOC Emissions for the Atlanta 2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Nonattainment Area
                                            [Tons per summer day] \8\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Year                 Point source     Area source       On-road        Non-road          Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011............................           10.36          137.06          108.62           60.56          316.60
2014............................           11.24          119.88           81.76           53.38          266.26
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The State calculated the on-road and non-road mobile source 
emissions summarized in Tables 2 and 3 using EPA-approved models and 
procedures that account for fleet turnover, increased population, and 
the federal mobile source measures identified as permanent and 
enforceable measures in the NPRM such as the Tier 2 vehicle and fuel 
standards, the large non-road diesel engines rule,\9\ heavy-duty 
gasoline and diesel highway vehicle standards,\10\ medium and heavy 
duty vehicle fuel consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) standards,\11\ 
non-road spark-ignition engines and recreational engines standards,\12\ 
and the national program for GHG emissions and fuel economy 
standards.13 14 These mobile source measures have resulted 
in, and continue to result in, large reductions in NOX 
emissions over time due to fleet turnover (i.e., the replacement of 
older vehicles that predate the standards with newer vehicles that meet 
the standards). For example, implementation of the Tier 2 standards 
began in 2004, and as newer, cleaner cars enter the national fleet, 
these standards continue to significantly reduce NOX 
emissions. As discussed in the NPRM, EPA expects that these standards 
will reduce NOX emissions from vehicles by approximately 74 
percent by 2030, translating to nearly 3 million tons annually by 
2030.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ For 2011, Georgia also reported 914.88 tpsd of biogenic 
emissions that are not included in this total; for 2014, the area 
source emissions total includes 0.02 tpsd of wild and prescribed 
fires.
    \9\ EPA estimated that compliance with this rule will cut 
NOX emissions from non-road diesel engines by up to 90 
percent nationwide.
    \10\ EPA projects a 2.6 million ton reduction in NOX 
emissions by 2030 when the heavy-duty vehicle fleet is completely 
replaced with newer heavy-duty vehicles that comply with these 
emission standards. 66 FR 5002, 5012 (January 18, 2001).
    \11\ When fully implemented in 2018, this rule is expected to 
reduce NOX emissions from the covered vehicles by 20 
percent.
    \12\ When fully implemented, the standards will result in an 80 
percent reduction in NOX by 2020.
    \13\ Georgia used EPA's MOVES2010b and MOVES2014a model to 
calculate on-road emissions factors and used the NEI2011 and 
MOVES2014a for non-road emissions.
    \14\ Georgia used the interagency consultation process required 
by 40 CFR part 93 (known as the Transportation Conformity Rule) 
which requires EPA, the United States Department of Transportation, 
metropolitan planning organizations, state departments of 
transportation, and State and local air quality agencies to work 
together to develop applicable implementation plans. The on-road 
emissions were generated by an aggregate of the vehicle activity 
(generated from the travel demand model) on individual roadways 
multiplied by the appropriate emissions factor from MOVES2014. The 
assumptions which are included in the travel demand model, such as 
population, were reviewed through the interagency consultation 
process.
    \15\ EPA, Regulatory Announcement, EPA420-F-99-051 (December 
1999), available at: https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/regulations-greenhouse-gas-emissions-passenger-cars-and.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Regarding MATS, EPA acknowledges that it inadvertently included 
this rule as a permanent and enforceable measure. As the Commenter 
correctly notes, MATS did not result in permanent and enforceable 
emissions reductions in the Area during the relevant time period 
because the State extended the compliance date for the relevant sources 
in the Area to April 2016.
    The SIP-approved state measures resulting in permanent and 
enforceable emission reductions include Georgia Rule 391-3-
1-.02(2)(yy)--Emissions of Nitrogen Oxides, Georgia Rule 391-3-
1-.02(2)(jjj)--NOX from EGUs, Georgia Rule 391-3-
1-.02(2)(lll)--NOX from Fuel Burning Equipment, Georgia Rule 
391-3-1-.02(2)(nnn)--NOX from Stationary Gas Turbines, 
Georgia Rule 391-3-1-.02(2)(rrr)--NOX from Small Fuel 
Burning Equipment, and Georgia Rule Chapter 391-3-20--Enhanced 
Inspection and Maintenance. The federal measures resulting in permanent 
and enforceable emission reductions include the Clean Air Interstate 
Rule (CAIR)/Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR), Tier 2 vehicle and 
fuel standards, large non-road diesel engines rule, medium and heavy-
duty vehicle fuel consumption and GHG standards, heavy-duty gasoline 
and diesel highway vehicle standards, nonroad spark-ignition engines 
and recreational engines standards, national program for GHG emissions 
and fuel economy standards, and Boiler and Reciprocating Internal 
Combustion Engine (RICE) National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air 
Pollutants (NESHAP).
    The inadvertent inclusion of the MATS Rule in the NPRM does not 
affect EPA's conclusion that the improvement in ozone air quality is 
reasonably attributable to the remaining measures identified in the 
NPRM. Although MATS did not result in permanent and enforceable 
reductions until April 2016, it is expected to result in further 
reductions in NOx emissions during the maintenance period.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ See Regulatory Impact Analysis for Final Mercury and Air 
Toxics Standards, EPA-452/R-11-011/December 2011. Available at 
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-11/documents/matsriafinal.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Comment 4: The Commenter asserts that Georgia's maintenance plan is 
inadequate to ensure maintenance of the 2008 8-hour ozone standard in 
the Area over the next ten years. The specific arguments offered by the 
Commenter in support of its assertion are summarized in Comments 4(a) 
through 4(c), below.
    Comment 4a: The Commenter states that neither Georgia nor EPA can 
be sure that the attainment inventory for 2014, the attainment year 
used by the State to demonstrate maintenance throughout the first 10-
year maintenance period, is sufficient to attain the standard because 
``2014 is the year that the ozone season monitoring data for the Cobb 
County monitor failed to meet either of the statutory completeness 
requirements for an attainment designation.''
    Response 4a: As discussed above in response to Comment 1, EPA 
determined that the Area is attaining the standard and has conducted 
technical analyses to support this determination. For NAAQS based on a 
three-year averaging period, EPA allows states to develop attainment 
emissions inventories in their section 175A maintenance plans using any 
of the three years on which an attainment determination is based. See, 
e.g., 80 FR 54577 (July 30, 2015), 79 FR 16734 (March 26, 2014), 78 FR 
72040 (December 2, 2013), 78 FR 38648 (June 27, 2013). This approach is 
consistent with the guidance provided to states in preparing attainment 
inventories for 110(a)(1) maintenance plans for the 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS. See Memorandum from Lydia Wegman, Director, Air Quality 
Strategies and Standards Division, to Air Division Directors, re: 
Maintenance Plan Guidance Document for Certain 8-hour Ozone Areas under 
Section 110(a)(1) of

[[Page 25527]]

Clean Air Act (May 20, 2005), p. 4. Therefore, it is appropriate to use 
2014 as the attainment year in the maintenance demonstration for the 
Atlanta Area. Also, the Commenter has not raised any issues regarding 
the accuracy of the emissions inventory that was developed for 2014.
    Comment 4b: The Commenter claims that the implementation schedules 
in the maintenance plan for the Tier I and Tier II contingency 
measures, allowing for up to 24 months for implementation, are 
``unacceptably long and fail to satisfy the prompt response timing 
required by CAA Section 175A'' to correct ``potential monitored 
violations.'' The Commenter believes that Georgia should commit to 
selecting and implementing Tier I and Tier II contingency measures 
within 12 months of a trigger. The Commenter also states that ``[t]his 
issue is compounded by the fact that Georgia's most recent ozone 
monitoring data from 2016 demonstrate that a number of the Atlanta Area 
monitors continues to record annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour 
average ozone concentrations above the NAAQS.''
    Response 4b: EPA disagrees with the Commenter's contention that the 
maintenance plan's implementation schedules for contingency measures 
fail to satisfy the ``prompt response'' requirement in CAA section 
175A(d). This section of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan 
include such contingency provisions as the Administrator deems 
necessary to assure that the state will promptly correct a violation of 
the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation of an area. Thus, Congress 
gave EPA discretion to evaluate and determine the contingency measures 
that EPA ``deems necessary'' to assure that the state will promptly 
correct any subsequent violation.
    Section 175A does not establish any deadlines for implementation of 
contingency measures after redesignation to attainment. It also 
provides far more latitude than does section 172(c)(9), which applies 
to a different set of contingency measures applicable to nonattainment 
areas. Section 172(c)(9) contingency measures must ``take effect . . . 
without further action by the State or [EPA].'' By contrast, section 
175A(d) allows EPA to take into account the need of a state to assess, 
adopt, and implement contingency measures if and when a violation 
occurs after an area's redesignation to attainment. As noted by the 
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit in Greenbaum v. EPA, 370 
F.3d 527, 540 (6th Cir. 2004), EPA ``has been granted broad discretion 
by Congress in determining what is `necessary to assure' prompt 
correction'' under section 175A, and ``no pre-determined schedule for 
adoption of the measures is necessary in each specific case.'' In 
making this determination, EPA accounts for the time that is required 
for states to analyze data and address the causes and appropriate means 
of remedying a violation. EPA also considers the time required to adopt 
and implement appropriate measures in assessing what ``promptly'' means 
in this context.
    In the case of the Atlanta Area, EPA believes that the contingency 
measures set forth in the submittal, combined with the State's 
commitment to implement contingency measures as expeditiously as 
practicable but no later than 24 months of a trigger, provide assurance 
that the State will promptly correct a future violation. Given the 
uncertainty regarding the nature of the contingency measures required 
to address a violation, the State may need up to 24 months to enact new 
statutes; develop new or modified regulations and complete notice and 
comment rulemaking; or take actions authorized by current state law 
that require the purchase and installation of equipment (e.g., diesel 
retrofits) or the development and implementation of new programs. In 
addition, EPA has previously approved implementation of contingency 
measures within 24 months of a violation to comply with the 
requirements of section 175A in several instances. See, e.g., 81 FR 
76891 (November 4, 2016), 80 FR 61775 (October 14, 2015), 79 FR 67120 
(November 12, 2014), 78 FR 44494 (July 24, 2013), 77 FR 34819 (June 12, 
2012), 76 FR 59512 (Sept. 27, 2011), 75 FR 2091 (January 14, 2010). EPA 
also notes that the Commenter did not provide any rationale for 
concluding that a 12-month implementation period is necessary to 
satisfy section 175A and that the Tier I response is not subject to 
section 175A(d) because it is triggered before any violation has 
occurred.
    The Commenter's statement that ``this issue is compounded by'' 
fourth-highest daily maximum 2016 ozone concentrations ``above the 
NAAQS'' is unclear. In accordance with 40 CFR part 50, appendix I, the 
determination as to whether the Area meets the NAAQS is based on the 
three-year average of the annual fourth-highest readings at a monitor, 
not on a monitor's fourth-highest ozone value in a single year. No 
monitored value in a single year can itself be a violation. The Area 
has attained the NAAQS, as discussed in the response to Comment 1, and 
met the other criteria necessary for redesignation. Once the 
redesignation is effective, the State will follow its maintenance plan 
and implement contingency measures pursuant to that plan. If Georgia 
observes a fourth highest value of 0.076 ppm or greater at a single 
monitor for which the previous ozone season had a fourth highest value 
of 0.076 ppm or greater, a Tier 1 trigger will be activated and the 
State will take action consistent with the Tier I procedure described 
in the maintenance plan.
    Comment 4c: The Commenter believes that the maintenance plan is 
``likely inadequate'' to maintain the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS because, 
according to the Commenter, the assumptions underlying Georgia's 
maintenance determination ``likely underestimate the level of ozone 
reductions actually required to maintain the standard in light of 
increasingly warming temperatures to come.''
    Response 4c: EPA does not agree that the maintenance plan is 
inadequate because it does not specifically consider the impacts of 
climate change on future ozone concentrations. EPA believes that the 
broad range of potential future climate outcomes and variability of 
projected response to these outcomes limits EPA's ability to develop 
specific actionable SIP policies for any specific location. 
Additionally, EPA generally believes that the natural variability in 
meteorological patterns will have a larger influence on ozone 
concentrations than climate influences over the relatively short-term 
SIP maintenance period. Thus, EPA believes it is appropriate to rely 
upon the existing technical guidance and applicable CAA provisions to 
ensure that ozone maintenance areas do not violate the NAAQS.

III. Final Action

    EPA is taking two separate, but related, final actions. First, EPA 
is approving the maintenance plan for the Atlanta Area, including the 
NOX and VOC MVEBs for 2014 and 2030, and incorporating it 
into the Georgia SIP. The maintenance plan demonstrates that the Area 
will continue to maintain the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and the MVEBs 
meet all of the adequacy criteria contained in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and 
(5).
    Second, EPA is approving Georgia's redesignation request for the 
2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the Atlanta Area. Approval of the 
redesignation request changes the official designation of Bartow 
County, Cherokee County, Clayton County, Cobb County, Coweta County, 
DeKalb County, Douglas County, Fayette County, Forsyth

[[Page 25528]]

County, Fulton County, Gwinnett County, Henry County, Newton County, 
Paulding County, and Rockdale County in the Atlanta Area for the 2008 
8-hour ozone NAAQS from nonattainment to attainment, as found at 40 CFR 
part 81.
    EPA is also notifying the public that EPA finds the newly-
established NOX and VOC MVEBs for the Atlanta Area adequate 
for the purpose of transportation conformity. Within 24 months from 
this final rule, the transportation partners will need to demonstrate 
conformity to the new NOX and VOC MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR 
93.104(e).
    EPA has determined that these actions are effective immediately 
upon publication under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1) and (d)(3). 
The purpose of the 30-day waiting period prescribed in section 553(d) 
is to give affected parties a reasonable time to adjust their behavior 
and prepare before the final rule takes effect. Section 553(d)(1) 
allows an effective date less than 30 days after publication if a 
substantive rule ``relieves a restriction.'' These actions qualify for 
the exception under section 553(d)(1) because they relieve the State of 
various requirements for the Area. Furthermore, section 553(d)(3) 
allows an effective date less than 30 days after publication ``as 
otherwise provided by the agency for good cause found and published 
with the rule.'' EPA finds good cause to make these actions effective 
immediately pursuant to section 553(d)(3) because they do not create 
any new regulatory requirements such that affected parties would need 
time to prepare before the actions take effect.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the 
accompanying approval of a maintenance plan under section 107(d)(3)(E) 
are actions that affect the status of a geographical area and do not 
impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources beyond those 
imposed by state law. A redesignation to attainment does not in and of 
itself create any new requirements, but rather results in the 
applicability of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have 
been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is 
required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions 
of the Act and applicable federal regulations. See 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, these actions merely approve state law as meeting federal 
requirements and do not impose additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. For this reason, these actions:
     Are not significant regulatory actions 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);
     Do not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Are 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.);
     Do 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);
     Do not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Are not economically significant regulatory actions based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Are not significant regulatory actions subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Are 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
     Will not have disproportionate human health or 
environmental effects under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 
16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to 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 rule does 
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    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).
    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 August 1, 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. 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, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control.

    Dated: April 27, 2017.
V. Anne Heard,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

    40 CFR parts 52 and 81 are amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

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

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

Subpart L--Georgia

0
2. In Sec.  52.570, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding the 
entry ``2008 8-hour ozone Maintenance Plan for the Atlanta Area'' at 
the end of the table to read as follows:

Sec.  52.570  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

[[Page 25529]]

                                 EPA-Approved Georgia Non-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            State
                                       Applicable         submittal
   Name of  nonregulatory  SIP       geographic or          date/      EPA approval  date       Explanation
            provision             nonattainment  area     effective
                                                            date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
2008 8-hour ozone Maintenance     Bartow, Cherokee,         7/18/2016  6/2/2017, [insert
 Plan for the Atlanta Area.        Clayton, Cobb,                       Federal Register
                                   Coweta, DeKalb,                      citation].
                                   Douglas, Fayette,
                                   Forsyth, Fulton,
                                   Gwinnett, Henry,
                                   Newton, Paulding
                                   and Rockdale
                                   Counties.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 81--DESIGNATION OF AREAS FOR AIR QUALITY PLANNING PURPOSES

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

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

0
4. In Sec.  81.311, the table entitled ``Georgia--2008 8-Hour Ozone 
NAAQS (Primary and secondary)'' is amended by revising the entry for 
``Atlanta, GA: \2\'' to read as follows:

Sec.  81.311   Georgia.

* * * * *

                                        Georgia--2008 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
                                             [Primary and secondary]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Designation                           Classification
         Designated area         -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Date \1\              Type              Date \1\              Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Atlanta, GA: \2\................        6/2/2017  Attainment............
    Bartow County...............  ..............  Attainment............
    Cherokee County.............  ..............  Attainment............
    Clayton County..............  ..............  Attainment............
    Cobb County.................  ..............  Attainment............
    Coweta County...............  ..............  Attainment............
    DeKalb County...............  ..............  Attainment............
    Douglas County..............  ..............  Attainment............
    Fayette County..............  ..............  Attainment............
    Forsyth County..............  ..............  Attainment............
    Fulton County...............  ..............  Attainment............
    Gwinnett County.............  ..............  Attainment............
    Henry County................  ..............  Attainment............
    Newton County...............  ..............  Attainment............
    Paulding County.............  ..............  Attainment............
    Rockdale County.............  ..............  Attainment............
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This date is July 20, 2012, unless otherwise noted.
\2\ Excludes Indian country located in each area, unless otherwise noted.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2017-10934 Filed 6-1-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P