[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 147 (Monday, August 1, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 50428-50430]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-18011]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2015-0521; FRL-9949-92-Region 4]


Air Plan Approval; Kentucky; Revisions to Louisville Definitions 
and Ambient Air Quality Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: On March 22, 2011, and May 3, 2012, the Commonwealth of 
Kentucky, through the Kentucky Division for Air Quality (KDAQ), 
submitted revisions to the Kentucky State Implementation Plan (SIP) on 
behalf of the Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control District 
(District). At this time, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is 
proposing to approve several portions of the submissions that modify 
the District's air quality regulations as incorporated into the SIP. 
The revisions to the regulatory portion of the SIP that EPA is 
proposing to approve pertain to changes to the District's air quality 
standards for lead (Pb), particulate matter (both PM2.5 and 
PM10), ozone (O3), nitrogen dioxide 
(NO2), and sulfur dioxide (SO2) to reflect the 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), definitional changes, 
and regulatory consolidation. EPA is proposing to approve these 
portions of the SIP revisions because the Commonwealth has demonstrated 
that these changes are consistent with the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). 
EPA will act on the other portions of KDAQ's March 22, 2011, and May 3, 
2012, submittals in a separate action.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before August 31, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2015-0521 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online 
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot 
be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment 
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any 
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) 
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a 
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment 
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will 
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of 
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment 
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general 
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Wong, 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. The telephone number is (404) 562-8726. Mr. Wong can be 
reached via electronic mail at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    Sections 108 and 109 of the CAA govern the establishment, review, 
and revision, as appropriate, of the NAAQS to protect public health and 
welfare. The CAA requires periodic review of the air quality criteria--
the science upon which the standards are based--and the standards 
themselves. EPA's regulatory provisions that govern the NAAQS are found 
at 40 CFR 50--National Primary and Secondary Ambient Air Quality 
Standards. In this rulemaking, EPA is proposing to approve portions of 
the revisions to the Jefferson County air quality regulations \1\ in 
the Kentucky SIP, submitted by the Commonwealth on March 22, 2011, and 
May 3, 2012. The March 22, 2011, submission revises Jefferson County 
Regulation 1.02--Definitions and consolidates Regulations 3.02--
Applicability of Ambient Air Quality Standards; 3.03--Definitions; 
3.04--Ambient Air Quality Standards; and 3.05--Methods of Measurement 
into Regulation 3.01--Ambient Air Quality Standards (currently entitled 
Purpose of Standards and Expression of Non-Degradation Intention in the 
SIP) by removing Regulations 3.02 through 3.05 and expanding and 
retitling Regulation 3.01. This submission also seeks to revise 
Regulation 1.06--Source Self-Monitoring and Reporting and Regulation 
1.07--Emissions During

[[Page 50429]]

Startups, Shutdowns, Malfunctions and Emergencies. EPA is not taking 
action on the proposed changes to Regulation 1.06 at this time. EPA 
approved the revision to Regulation 1.07 on June 10, 2014. See 79 FR 
33101. The May 3, 2012, submission builds on the revisions to 
Regulation 3.01 proposed in the March 22, 2011, submission by updating 
the Jefferson County air quality standards for Pb, PM2.5, 
PM10, O3, NO2, and SO2 to 
reflect the NAAQS, reordering the sections within the regulation, and 
making several textual modifications. The May 3, 2012, submission also 
seeks to remove the Ford Motor Company NOX Reasonably 
Available Control Technology (RACT) permit from the SIP and replace it 
with a Title V permit; EPA is not taking action on the proposed permit 
substitution at this time. The 2011 and 2012 SIP submittals can be 
found in the Docket for this proposed rulemaking at www.regulations.gov 
and are summarized below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ In 2003, the City of Louisville and Jefferson County 
governments merged and the ``Jefferson County Air Pollution Control 
District'' was renamed the ``Louisville Metro Air Pollution Control 
District.'' However, each of the regulations in the Jefferson County 
portion of the Kentucky SIP still has the subheading ``Air Pollution 
Control District of Jefferson County.'' Thus, to be consistent with 
the terminology used in the SIP, EPA refers throughout this notice 
to regulations contained in Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky 
SIP as the ``Jefferson County'' regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. EPA's Analysis of Kentucky's SIP Revisions

a. Definitions and Regulatory Consolidation--March 22, 2011, Submittal

    The March 22, 2011, SIP submission revises Regulation 1.02 by 
adding, removing, and modifying definitions and consolidates 
Regulations 3.02, 3.03, 3.04, and 3.05 into Regulation 3.01 by removing 
Regulations 3.02 through 3.05 and expanding Regulation 3.01.
    EPA is proposing to approve all of the changes to Regulation 1.02 
\2\ except for the addition of definitions for the terms ``acute 
noncancer effect,'' ``cancer,'' ``carcinogen,'' and ``chronic noncancer 
effect,'' because EPA approves only definitions that relate to the 
attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. The remainder of the changes 
to Regulation 1.02 consist of updates to the definitions to make them 
consistent with definitions used by EPA; removal of definitions that 
are no longer used in the District's regulations; clarification of the 
definitions of ``ambient air,'' ``emission standard,'' and 
``malfunction''; and addition of definitions for ``bypass,'' ``excess 
emissions,'' ``preventable upset condition,'' ``toxic air 
contaminant,'' ``upset condition,'' and ``welfare.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Among the changes to Regulation 1.02 which EPA is proposing 
to approve are changes that the District adopted in 2001 and 2005. 
The District refers to the version of Regulation 1.02 which it 
adopted in 2001 as ``Version 10.'' The District refers to the 
version of Regulation 1.02 which it adopted in 2005 as ``Version 
11.'' If EPA's proposed approval of changes to Regulation 1.02 is 
finalized, the text of the regulation in the SIP will reflect 
Version 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Specifically, an additional sentence has been added to the 
definition of ``ambient air'' to reflect computer dispersion modeling 
guidance provided by EPA regarding public access to private property 
that is not under the control of the stationary source from which 
emissions under study originate. The definition of ``emission 
standard'' was modified to provide examples of what makes an emission 
standard legally enforceable (namely, federal, state, or local law or 
regulation, District permit, or Board Order) and to recognize that an 
opacity limit is an emission standard. The definition of 
``malfunction'' has been revised to add the qualification that the 
equipment failure causes, or is likely to cause, emissions that exceed 
an applicable emission standard. Definitions have been added for the 
terms ``bypass,'' ``preventable upset condition,'' and ``upset 
condition,'' which are used in Regulation 1.07, a part of the 
federally-approved SIP. The definition of ``excess emissions'' was 
added to provide clarity as to the requirements in 401 KAR 63:020. The 
definition of ``welfare,'' taken from section 302(h) of the CAA, has 
been added to clarify which types of harmful effects from the emissions 
of toxic air contaminants are prohibited. The definition of ``toxic air 
contaminant'' has been added to differentiate between the specific 
``hazardous air pollutant'' (HAP) list pursuant to section 112 of the 
Clean Air Act and the specific ``toxic air pollutant'' lists pursuant 
to Kentucky regulations 401 KAR 63:021 (11-11-86) and 401 KAR 63:022 
(11-11-86). The District has also exempted from the definition of 
``volatile organic compound'' five additional organic compounds that 
the EPA, on November 29, 2004, exempted from its corresponding 
definition at 40 CFR 51.100(s). See 69 FR 69290, 69 FR 69298. Minor 
clarifications were also made to the definitions of ``new affected 
facility'' and ``process.'' Several other definitions were modified for 
clarity or for consistency with EPA definitions or were simply 
renumbered.
    EPA is also proposing to approve the changes to Regulation 3.01 (to 
the extent that they are not superseded by changes in the May 3, 2012, 
submittal) \3\ and the removal of Regulations 3.02 through 3.05. 
Regulations 3.02 through 3.05 were incorporated into Regulation 3.01.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ The District refers to the revised version of Regulation 
3.01 in its March 22, 2011, submittal as ``Version 4'' and the 
revised version of Regulation 3.01 in its May 3, 2012, submittal as 
``Version 5.'' If EPA's proposed approval of changes to Regulation 
3.01 is finalized, the text of the regulation in the SIP will 
reflect Version 5.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA believes that these proposed changes to the regulatory portion 
of the SIP are consistent with section 110 of the CAA and meet the 
regulatory requirements pertaining to SIPs. Pursuant to CAA section 
110(l), the Administrator shall not approve a revision of a plan if the 
revision would interfere with any applicable requirement concerning 
attainment and reasonable further progress (as defined in CAA section 
171), or any other applicable requirement of the Act. With respect to 
the District's addition of exemptions from the definition of ``volatile 
organic compound,'' the change is approvable under section 110(l) 
because it reflects changes to federal regulations based on findings 
that the exempted compounds are negligibly reactive.
    EPA is not taking action on the changes to Regulations 1.06 
identified in the March 22, 2011, SIP submission.

b. Updated NAAQS--May 3, 2012, Submittal

    The May 3, 2012, submission builds on the revisions to Regulation 
3.01 proposed in the March 22, 2011, submission by updating the 
District's ambient air quality standards to reflect the NAAQS for Pb, 
PM2.5, PM10, O3, NO2, and 
SO2, reordering the sections within the regulation, and 
making several textual modifications. The updates to the air quality 
standards are discussed in further detail below.
i. Pb
    On November 12, 2008, EPA promulgated a new 1-hour primary and 
secondary NAAQS for Pb at a level of 0.15 micrograms per cubic meter 
([mu]g/m\3\), based on a rolling 3-month average. See 73 FR 66964. 
Accordingly, in the May 3, 2012, SIP submission, Jefferson County 
revised Regulation 3.01 to update its air quality standards for Pb to 
be consistent with the NAAQS promulgated by EPA in 2008.
ii. Particulate Matter
    On October 17, 2006, EPA revised the 24-hour primary and secondary 
PM2.5 NAAQS to 35 [mu]g/m\3\, based on the 98th percentile 
of 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations averaged over three years, 
and revoked the annual PM10 NAAQS. See 71 FR 61144. 
Accordingly, in the May 3, 2012, SIP submission, Jefferson County 
revised Regulation 3.01 to update its primary air quality standard for 
particulate matter to be

[[Page 50430]]

consistent with the NAAQS promulgated by EPA in 2006.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ On January 15, 2013, EPA revised the primary annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS to 12 [mu]g/m\3\, based on annual mean 
PM2.5 concentrations averaged over three years. See 78 FR 
3086. Since Jefferson County's May 3, 2012, submission preceded 
EPA's promulgation of the new annual standard, an update reflecting 
the new NAAQS was not included as part of SIP revision.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

iii. O3
    On July 18, 1997, EPA revoked the 1-hour primary NAAQS for 
O3. See 62 FR 38856. On March 27, 2008, EPA promulgated a 
new 8-hour primary and secondary NAAQS for O3 at a level of 
0.075 parts per million (ppm), based on an annual fourth-highest daily 
maximum 8-hr concentration averaged over three years. See 73 FR 16483. 
Accordingly, in the May 3, 2012, SIP submission, Jefferson County 
revised Regulation 3.01 to update its air quality standards for 
O3 to be consistent with the NAAQS promulgated by EPA in 
2008.
iv. NO2
    On February 9, 2010, EPA promulgated a new 1-hour primary NAAQS for 
NO2 at a level of 100 parts per billion (ppb), based on a 3-
year average of the 98th percentile of the yearly distribution of 1-
hour daily maximum concentrations. See 75 FR 6474. Accordingly, in the 
May 3, 2012, SIP submission, Jefferson County revised Regulation 3.01 
to update its primary air quality standard for NO2 to be 
consistent with the NAAQS promulgated by EPA in 2010.
v. SO2
    On June 22, 2010, EPA promulgated a revised primary SO2 
NAAQS to an hourly standard of 75 ppb, based on a 3-year average of the 
annual 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations, and 
revoked the 24-hour SO2 NAAQS. See 75 FR 35520. Accordingly, 
in the May 3, 2012, SIP submission, Jefferson County revised Regulation 
3.01 to update its primary air quality standards for SO2 to 
be consistent with the NAAQS promulgated by EPA in 2010.
    EPA has reviewed the revisions to Regulation 3.01 in the May 3, 
2012, SIP submission, including the NAAQS updates for Pb, particulate 
matter, O3, NO2, and SO2, and has made 
the preliminary determination that these changes are consistent with 
the CAA.

III. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule 
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance 
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by 
reference Jefferson County Regulation 1.02--Definitions (except for the 
definitions of ``Acute noncancer effect,'' ``Cancer,'' ``Carcinogen,'' 
and ``Chronic noncancer effect'') and Regulation 3.01--Ambient Air 
Quality Standards. EPA has made, and will continue to make, these 
documents generally available electronically through 
www.regulations.gov and/or in hard copy at the Region 4 office (see the 
ADDRESSES section of this preamble for more information).

IV. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the portions of the Commonwealth of 
Kentucky's March 22, 2011, and May 3, 2012, SIP revisions identified in 
section II, above, because they are consistent with the CAA.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, 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, this 
action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review 
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58 
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 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).
    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.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Sulfur 
dioxide, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Dated: July 20, 2016.
Heather McTeer Toney,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2016-18011 Filed 7-29-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P