[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 103 (Wednesday, May 31, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 24864-24871]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-10928]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R05-OAR-2016-0044; FRL-9962-72-Region 5]


Air Plan Approval; Michigan; Redesignation of the Belding Area in 
Ionia County to Attainment of the 2008 Lead Standard

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving the 
State of Michigan's request to revise the designation of (redesignate) 
the Belding nonattainment area (Belding) to attainment of the 2008 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS or standard) for lead. 
EPA is also approving the maintenance plan and related elements of the 
redesignation. EPA is approving reasonably available control measure 
(RACM)/reasonably available control technology (RACT) measures and a 
comprehensive emissions inventory as meeting the Clean Air Act (CAA) 
requirements. EPA is taking these actions in accordance with the CAA 
and EPA's implementation regulations regarding the 2008 lead NAAQS.

DATES: This direct final rule is effective July 31, 2017, unless EPA 
receives adverse comments by June 30, 2017. If adverse comments are 
received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule 
in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not 
take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2016-0044 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to 
[email protected]. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, 
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, 
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either 
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its 
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you 
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia 
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written 
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and 
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will 
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of 
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person 
identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full 
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia 
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please 
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Rau, Environmental Engineer, 
Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental 
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 
Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6524, [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information 
section is arranged as follows:

I. Why is EPA concerned about lead?
II. What is the background for these actions?
III. What are the criteria for redesignation to attainment?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of Michigan's request?
V. What action is EPA taking?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Why is EPA concerned about lead?

    Lead (Pb) is a metal found naturally in the environment and present 
in some manufactured products. However, Pb has serious public health 
effects and depending on the level of exposure can adversely affect the 
nervous system,

[[Page 24865]]

kidney function, immune system, reproductive and developmental systems 
and the cardiovascular system. Infants and young children are 
especially sensitive to even low levels of Pb, which may contribute to 
behavioral problems, learning deficits and lowered intelligence 
quotient. The major sources of Pb for air emissions have historically 
been from fuels used in on-road motor vehicles (such as cars and 
trucks) and industrial sources. As a result of EPA's regulatory efforts 
to remove Pb from on-road motor vehicle gasoline, emissions of Pb from 
the transportation sector dramatically declined by 95 percent between 
1980 and 1999, and levels of Pb in the air decreased by 94 percent 
between 1980 and 1999.

II. What is the background for these actions?

    On November 12, 2008 (73 FR 66964), EPA established the 2008 
primary and secondary Pb 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. 40 CFR 50.16.
    On November 22, 2010 (75 FR 71033), EPA completed its initial air 
quality designations and classifications for the 2008 Pb NAAQS based 
upon air quality monitoring data for calendar years 2007-2009. The 
designations became effective on December 31, 2010. In Michigan, EPA 
designated a portion of Ionia County, specifically a portion of the 
city of Belding, as nonattainment for the 2008 Pb NAAQS. 40 CFR 81.336.
    On January 12, 2016, Michigan requested EPA to designate the 
Belding portion of Ionia County as attainment of the Pb NAAQS. Michigan 
documented its request meets the redesignation criteria of CAA section 
107.
    Michigan found that the Mueller Industries, Inc. (Mueller) facility 
in Belding, Michigan, is the sole source of Pb emissions in the area. 
Mueller's Belding facility produces brass rods used to produce plumbing 
fittings and fixtures and other products.

III. What are the criteria for redesignation to attainment?

    The requirements for redesignating an area from nonattainment to 
attainment are found in CAA section 107 (d)(3)(E). There are five 
criteria for redesignating an area. First, the Administrator must 
determine that the entire area has attained the applicable NAAQS based 
on current air quality data. Second, the Administrator has fully 
approved the applicable SIP for the area under CAA section 110(k). The 
third criterion is for the Administrator to determine that the air 
quality improvement is the result of permanent and enforceable emission 
reductions. Fourth, the Administrator has fully approved a maintenance 
plan meeting the CAA section 175A requirements. The fifth criterion is 
that the state has met all the redesignation requirements of CAA 
section 110 and part D.

IV. What is EPA's analysis of Michigan's request?

A. Attainment Determination and Redesignation

1. The Area Has Attained the 2008 Pb NAAQS (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(i))
    On July 24, 2015, EPA determined that the Belding, Michigan 
nonattainment area has attained the 2008 Pb NAAQS. 80 FR 43956. EPA 
made its clean data determination based upon complete, quality-assured 
and certified ambient air monitoring data for the 2012-2014 period. The 
Belding area attained the 2008 Pb NAAQS, with a design value of 0.06 
[micro]g/m\3\ for 2012-2014.
    EPA has reviewed the current monitoring data for Ionia County, 
Michigan. The 2013-2015 design values are 0.06 [micro]g/m\3\ for 
monitor 26-067-0002, 545 Reed Street in Belding, and 0.05 [micro]g/m\3\ 
for monitor 26-067-0003, 509 Merrick Street in Belding. The highest 
monitored value was 0.06 [micro]g/m\3\ for monitor 26-067-0002 in 2013. 
Current monitoring data indicate that the Belding area continues to 
attain the 2008 Pb NAAQS.
2. The Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and 
Part D and Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) (Section 
107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v))
    EPA determines that Michigan has met all currently applicable SIP 
requirements for purposes of redesignation for the Belding area under 
section 110 of the CAA (general SIP requirements). In addition, with 
the exceptions of the RACM/RACT requirements under section 172(c)(1) 
and the emissions inventory under section 172(c)(3), all applicable 
requirements of the Michigan SIP for purposes of redesignation have 
either been approved or have been suspended, by either a clean data 
determination or determination of attainment. EPA is also approving 
Michigan's 2013 emissions inventory as meeting the section 172(c)(3) 
comprehensive emissions inventory requirement as well as approving the 
RACM provisions as meeting the section 172(c)(1) requirement. Thus, we 
are determining that the Michigan submission meets all SIP requirements 
currently applicable for purposes of redesignation under part D of 
title I of the CAA, in accordance with sections 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and 
107(d)(3)(E)(v).
    In making these determinations, EPA has ascertained which SIP 
requirements are applicable for purposes of redesignation, and 
concluded that the Michigan SIP includes measures meeting those 
requirements and that they are fully approved under section 110(k) of 
the CAA.
a. Michigan Has Met All Applicable Requirements for Purposes of 
Redesignation of the Belding Area Under Section 110 and Part D of the 
CAA
i. Section 110 General SIP Requirements
    Section 110(a) of title I of the CAA contains the general 
requirements for a SIP. Section 110(a)(2) provides that the 
implementation plan submitted by a state must have been adopted by the 
state after reasonable public notice and hearing, and, among other 
things, must: (1) Include enforceable emission limitations and other 
control measures, means or techniques necessary to meet the 
requirements of the CAA; (2) provide for establishment and operation of 
appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to 
monitor ambient air quality; (3) provide for implementation of a source 
permit program to regulate the modification and construction of any 
stationary source within the areas covered by the plan; (4) include 
provisions for the implementation of part C, Prevention of Significant 
Deterioration (PSD) and part D, New Source Review (NSR) permit 
programs; (5) include criteria for stationary source emission control 
measures, monitoring, and reporting; (6) include provisions for air 
quality modeling; and (7) provide for public and local agency 
participation in planning and emission control rule development. 
Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA requires that SIPs contain measures to 
prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air 
quality problems in another state.
    EPA interprets the ``applicable'' requirements for an area's 
redesignation to be those requirements linked with a particular area's 
nonattainment designation. Therefore, EPA believes that the section 110 
elements described above that are not connected with nonattainment plan 
submissions and not linked with an area's attainment status, such as 
the ``infrastructure SIP'' elements of section 110(a)(2), are not 
applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. A state remains 
subject to

[[Page 24866]]

these requirements after an area is redesignated to attainment, and 
thus EPA does not interpret such requirements to be relevant applicable 
requirements to evaluate in a redesignation. For example, the 
requirement to submit state plans addressing interstate transport 
obligations under section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) continue to apply to a 
state regardless of the designation of any one particular area in the 
state, and thus are not applicable requirements to be evaluated in the 
redesignation context.
    EPA has applied this interpretation consistently in many 
redesignations for decades. See e.g., 81 FR 44210 (July 7, 2016) (final 
redesignation for the Sullivan County, Tennessee area); 79 FR 43655 
(July 28, 2014) (final redesignation for Bellefontaine, Ohio Pb 
nonattainment area); 61 FR 53174-53176 (October 10, 1996) and 62 FR 
24826 (May 7, 1997) (proposed and final redesignation for Reading, 
Pennsylvania ozone nonattainment area); 61 FR 20458 (May 7, 1996) 
(final redesignation for Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio ozone 
nonattainment area); and 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995) (final 
redesignation of Tampa, Florida ozone nonattainment area). See also 65 
FR 37879, 37890 (June 19, 2000) (discussing this issue in final 
redesignation of Cincinnati, Ohio 1-hour ozone nonattainment area); 66 
FR 50399 (October 19, 2001) (final redesignation of Pittsburgh, 
Pennsylvania 1-hour ozone nonattainment area).
    EPA has reviewed the Michigan SIP and has determined that it meets 
the general SIP requirements under section 110 of the CAA to the extent 
the requirements are applicable for purposes of redesignation. EPA has 
previously approved provisions of Michigan's SIP addressing section 110 
requirements, including provisions addressing Pb, at 40 CFR 52.1170.
    On April 3, 2012, and supplemented on August 9, 2013, and September 
19, 2013, Michigan submitted its infrastructure SIP elements for the 
2008 Pb NAAQS as required by CAA section 110(a)(2). EPA approved 
Michigan's infrastructure SIP requirements for the 2008 Pb NAAQS on 
July 16, 2014. 79 FR 41439. The requirements of section 110(a)(2) are 
statewide requirements that are not linked to the Pb nonattainment 
status of the Belding area or Michigan's redesignation request.
ii. Part D Requirements
    EPA determined that upon approval of the base year emissions 
inventories and RACM provisions discussed in this rulemaking, the 
Michigan SIP will meet the applicable SIP requirements for the Belding 
area applicable for purposes of redesignation under part D of the CAA. 
Subpart 1 of part D sets forth the basic nonattainment requirements 
applicable to all nonattainment areas.
(1) Section 172 Requirements
    Section 172(c) sets out general nonattainment plan requirements. A 
thorough discussion of these requirements can be found in the General 
Preamble for Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992) 
(``General Preamble''). EPA's longstanding interpretation of the 
nonattainment planning requirements of section 172 is that once an area 
is attaining the NAAQS, those requirements are not ``applicable'' for 
purposes of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and therefore need not be 
approved into the SIP before EPA can redesignate the area. In the 
General Preamble, EPA set forth its interpretation of applicable 
requirements for purposes of evaluating redesignation requests when an 
area is attaining a standard. 57 FR 13564. EPA noted that the 
requirements for reasonable further progress (RFP) and other measures 
designed to provide for an area's attainment do not apply in evaluating 
redesignation requests because those nonattainment planning 
requirements ``have no meaning'' for an area that has already attained 
the standard. Id. This interpretation was also set forth in the 
Calcagni Memorandum.
    EPA's understanding of section 172 also forms the basis of its 
Clean Data Policy. Under the Clean Data Policy, EPA promulgates a 
determination of attainment, published in the Federal Register and 
subject to notice-and-comment rulemaking, and this determination 
formally suspends a state's obligation to submit most of the attainment 
planning requirements that would otherwise apply, including an 
attainment demonstration and planning SIPs to provide for RFP, RACM, 
and contingency measures under section 172(c)(9). The Clean Data Policy 
has been codified in regulations regarding the implementation of the 
ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS. 70 FR 71612 (November 29, 2005) and 
72 FR 20586 (April 25, 2007). The Clean Data Policy has also been 
specifically applied in a number of Pb nonattainment areas where EPA 
has determined that the area is attaining the Pb NAAQS. 79 FR 46212 
(August 7, 2014) (proposed determination of attainment of Lyons, 
Pennsylvania Pb nonattainment area); 80 FR 51127 (determination of 
attainment of Eagan, Minnesota Pb nonattainment area). EPA finalized a 
Clean Data Determination under this policy for the Belding Pb 
nonattainment area on July 24, 2015. 80 FR 43956.
    EPA's long-standing interpretation regarding the applicability of 
section 172(c)'s attainment planning requirements for an area that is 
attaining a NAAQS applies in this redesignation of the Belding Pb 
nonattainment area as well, except for the applicability of the 
requirement to implement all reasonably available control measures 
under section 172(c)(1). On July 14, 2015, the United States Court of 
Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (6th Circuit) ruled that to meet the 
requirement of section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii), states are required to submit 
plans addressing RACM/RACT under section 172(c)(1) and EPA is required 
to approve those plans prior to redesignating the area, regardless of 
whether the area is attaining the standard. Sierra Club v. EPA, 793 
F.3d 656 (6th Cir. 2015). As Michigan is within the jurisdiction of the 
6th Circuit, EPA is acting in accordance with the Sierra Club decision 
by approving RACM provisions in parallel with this redesignation 
action.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Although the approach being implemented here is inconsistent 
with the Agency's longstanding national policy, such deviation is 
required in order to act in accordance with a Circuit Court 
decision. Consistent with 40 CFR 56.5(b), the Region does not need 
to seek concurrence from EPA Headquarters for such deviation in 
these circumstances. 81 FR 51102 (August 3, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 172(c)(1) requires the plans for all nonattainment areas to 
provide for the implementation of all RACM as expeditiously as 
practicable and to provide for attainment of the primary NAAQS. Under 
this requirement, a state must consider all available control measures, 
including reductions that area available from adopting RACT on existing 
sources, for a nonattainment area and adopt and implement such measures 
as are reasonably available in the area as components of the area's 
attainment demonstration. EPA is today approving Michigan's RACM 
submission. Therefore, Michigan has met its requirements under CAA 
sections 172(c)(1) and 107(d)(3)(E)(v).
    The remaining section 172(c) ``attainment planning'' requirements 
are not applicable for purposes of evaluating Michigan's redesignation 
request. Specifically, the RFP requirement under section 172(c)(2), 
which is defined as progress that must be made toward attainment, the 
requirement to submit section 172(c)(9) contingency measures, which are 
measures to be taken if the area fails to make reasonable further 
progress to attainment, and section 172(c)(6)'s requirement that the 
SIP contain control

[[Page 24867]]

measures necessary to provide for attainment of the standard, are not 
applicable requirements that Michigan must meet here because the 
Belding area has monitored attainment of the 2008 Pb NAAQS. As noted, 
EPA issued a determination of attainment (or clean data determination) 
for the Belding area in July 2015, which formally suspended the 
obligation to submit any of the attainment planning SIPs. 80 FR 43956 
(July 24, 2015).
    Section 172(c)(3) requires submission and approval of a 
comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions. 
Michigan submitted 2009, 2011, and 2013 emission inventories along with 
its redesignation request. The 2013 inventory can be used as the most 
accurate and current inventory. As discussed in section III.B., EPA is 
approving the 2013 base year inventory as meeting the section 172(c)(3) 
emissions inventory requirement for the Belding area.
    Section 172(c)(4) requires the identification and quantification of 
allowable emissions for major new and modified stationary sources in an 
area, and section 172(c)(5) requires source permits for the 
construction and operation of new and modified major stationary sources 
anywhere in the nonattainment area. EPA approved Michigan's current NSR 
program on December 16, 2013. 78 FR 76064. In addition, the state's 
maintenance plan does not rely nonattainment NSR, therefore having a 
fully approved NSR program is not an applicable requirement, but that, 
nonetheless, EPA has approved the state's program.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ A detailed rationale for this view is described in a 
memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and 
Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled, ``Part D New Source 
Review Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to 
Attainment.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 172(c)(6) requires the SIP to contain control measures 
necessary to provide for attainment of the standard. No additional 
measures are needed to provide for attainment because attainment has 
been reached.
    Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to meet the applicable 
provisions of section 110(a)(2). EPA finds that the Michigan SIP meets 
the section 110(a)(2) applicable requirements for purposes of 
redesignation.
(2) Section 176 Conformity Requirements
    CAA section 176(c) requires states to establish criteria and 
procedures to ensure that Federally-supported or funded activities, 
including highway and transit projects, conform to the air quality 
planning goals in the applicable SIPs. The requirement to determine 
conformity applies to transportation plans, programs and projects 
developed, funded or approved under title 23 of the U.S. Code and the 
Federal Transit Act (transportation conformity) as well as to all other 
Federally-supported or funded projects (general conformity). 
Considering the elimination of Pb additives in gasoline, transportation 
conformity does not apply to the Pb NAAQS. 73 FR 66964, 67043 n.120. 
EPA approved Michigan's general conformity SIP on December 18, 1996. 61 
FR 66607.
b. Michigan Has a Fully Approved Applicable SIP Under Section 110(k) of 
the CAA
    Upon final approval of Michigan's comprehensive 2013 emissions 
inventories and approval of RACM for the Belding Pb area, EPA will have 
fully approved the Michigan SIP for the Belding area under section 
110(k) of the CAA for all requirements applicable for purposes of 
redesignation, in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). EPA may 
rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a redesignation request (See 
page 3 of the September 4, 1992, Processing Requests to Redesignate 
Areas to Attainment: Policy Memorandum (Calcagni memorandum)); 
Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 
989-990 (6th Cir. 1998); Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001)). 
EPA also relies on measures approved in conjunction with a 
redesignation action. See 68 FR 25413 (May 12, 2003) (approving I/M 
program for St. Louis) and 68 FR 25413, 25426 (May 12, 2003). Michigan 
has adopted and submitted, and EPA has fully approved, required SIP 
provisions addressing the 2008 Pb standards. Of the CAA requirements 
applicable to this redesignation request, only two remain--the 
emissions inventory requirement of section 172(c)(3) and the RACM 
requirement of section 172(c)(1).
    EPA is approving the submitted Mueller emission controls as RACM/
RACT and Michigan's 2013 emissions inventories for the Belding area as 
meeting the requirement of CAA section 172(c)(3). There are no SIP 
provisions are currently disapproved, conditionally approved, or 
partially approved in the Belding, Michigan area under section 110(k) 
in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii).
3. The Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to Permanent and Enforceable 
Reductions in Emissions Resulting From Implementation of the SIPs and 
Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control Regulations and Other 
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii))
    To support the revision of an area's designation from nonattainment 
to attainment, CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) requires EPA to determine 
that the air quality improvement in the area is due to permanent and 
enforceable reductions in emissions. The permanent and enforceable 
emission reductions result from the implementation of the SIP and 
applicable Federal air pollution control regulations and other 
permanent and enforceable emission reductions.
    Michigan identified Mueller as the lone source of Pb emissions near 
the nonattainment area. Mueller produces brass rods that are used in 
making plumbing fixtures and fittings among other products at its 
facility in Belding, Michigan. Mueller implemented various control 
measures on its west chip and east chip dryers that result in decreased 
emissions. In 2010, it stopped operating its uncontrolled east chip 
dryer and installed controls on its west chip dryer. A permanent and 
enforceable Permit to Install number 16-11 (PTI 16-11) was issued on 
October 20, 2011, and revised on March 15, 2012, which limits Pb 
emissions and requires certain controls for the east and west chip 
dryers. PTI 16-11 requires each chip dryer to operate a cyclone, a 
thermal oxidizer, a wet scrubber, and a demister to control emissions. 
Operation of the east chip dryer is allowed once the required controls 
are installed. The west chip dryer stack height was increased to 122 
feet in January 2012. The east chip dryer stack height is also required 
to be 122 feet. Increasing the stack height creates more dispersion of 
the exhaust, which can reduce the maximum concentration. The controls 
and emission limits in PTI 16-11 are permanent and enforceable. 
Michigan analyzed the control measures added in PTI 16-11 and found 
that these measures brought the Belding area into attainment of the 
2008 Pb NAAQS. The monitoring data in the Belding area, as detailed in 
III.A.1, show the area has met and continues to meet the 2008 Pb NAAQS.
    In addition, the Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act (Section 
1417 of the Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. 300g-6) prohibits the 
use of Pb in plumbing fittings or fixtures. Effective January 4, 2014, 
plumbing fittings and fixtures must go from a weighted average of 8.0 
percent Pb to 0.25 percent

[[Page 24868]]

Pb. This reduction requires Mueller to reduce the amount of Pb used in 
its brass rod production, which is expected to continue the decrease in 
its Pb emissions.
4. Michigan Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 
175A of the CAA (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv))
    In conjunction with its request to designate the Belding 
nonattainment area to attainment, Michigan requested a SIP revision to 
provide for maintenance of the 2008 Pb NAAQS in the area through 2025.
a. What is required in a maintenance plan?
    The required elements of a maintenance plan for areas seeking 
redesignation from nonattainment to attainment are contained in section 
175A of the CAA. Under section 175A, the plan must demonstrate 
continued attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years 
after EPA approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after 
redesignation, the state must submit a revised maintenance plan which 
demonstrates that attainment will continue to be maintained for the 
subsequent 10 years.
    To address the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the 
maintenance plan must contain contingency measures with a schedule for 
implementation as EPA deems necessary to assure prompt correction of 
any future Pb violations.
    The September 4, 1992, Calcagni memorandum provides additional 
guidance on the content of a maintenance plan. The memorandum states 
that a maintenance plan should address the following items: The 
attainment emissions inventory, a maintenance demonstration showing 
maintenance for the 10 years of the maintenance period, a commitment to 
maintain the existing monitoring network, factors and procedures to be 
used for verification of continued attainment of the NAAQS, and a 
contingency plan to prevent or correct future violations of the NAAQS.
    Michigan's maintenance plan shows that the Belding area's emissions 
will remain below the attainment year levels through 2025.
b. Attainment Inventory
    Michigan provided Pb emissions inventories for the nonattainment 
years (2009 and 2011), attainment year (2013), and future year (2025). 
The Pb emissions for Mueller's Belding, Michigan facility are listed in 
Table 1.

                                         Table 1--Mueller Lead Emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2009...................................  2,277.73 pounds...........  nonattainment year.
2011...................................  1,402.93 pounds...........  nonattainment year.
2013...................................  1,153.15 pounds...........  attainment year.
2025...................................  864 pounds................  future year.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Michigan identified Mueller as the lone source of Pb emissions in 
the vicinity of the Belding nonattainment area. Thus, the emissions 
inventories provided are adequate for the Belding area.
c. Demonstration of Maintenance
    Michigan included a section 175(A) maintenance plan in its 
submission. Section 175A requires a state seeking redesignation to 
attainment to submit a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of 
the NAAQS in the area ``for at least 10 years after the 
redesignation''. EPA has interpreted this as a showing of maintenance 
``for a period of ten years following redesignation''. Calcagni 
memorandum at 9. Where the emissions inventory method of showing 
maintenance is used, its purpose is to show that emissions during the 
maintenance period will not increase over the attainment year 
inventory. Calcagni memorandum at 9-10.
    A maintenance demonstration need not be based on modeling. See Wall 
v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F. 3d 537 
(7th Cir. 2004). See also 66 FR 53094, 53099-53100 (October 19, 2001), 
68 FR 25413, 25430-25432 (May 12, 2003). Michigan has provided both an 
emissions inventory as well as air dispersion modeling of the emission 
limits established in PTI 16-11 to demonstrate that the area should 
maintain the standard into the future. A summary of the air dispersion 
modeling for Mueller was included in Michigan's submissions. The 
modeling evaluated the Consent Order 9-2011 and PTI 16-11 revisions. 
Michigan used the American Meteorology Society/Environmental Protection 
Agency Regulatory Model version 11103. That analysis yielded a maximum 
impact of 0.13 [micro]g/m\3\, which is below the 2008 Pb NAAQS of 0.15 
[micro]g/m\3\. This modeling analysis is valid for the Belding 
redesignation as the Mueller control revisions are responsible for the 
emission reductions that brought the area into attainment. Michigan 
also provided an emissions inventory for an attainment year, 2013, and 
for a future year, 2025. See Table 1. Michigan is projecting a 25 
percent decrease below attainment year emissions Pb emissions from the 
source due to the reduction in Pb usage in brass manufacturing. Under 
the Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act, plumbing fittings and 
fixtures must go from a weighted average of 8.0 percent Pb to 0.25 
percent Pb, driving the expected Pb decreases from Mueller.
    Michigan's maintenance plan submission shows that the Belding 
area's Pb emissions will remain below the attainment year inventories 
through 2025. The reductions in Pb emissions in Belding result from the 
permeant and enforceable control measures for Mueller, the lone Pb 
source in the area. Monitoring data show the Belding area ambient Pb 
concentrations declined following the Mueller emission reductions. It 
is reasonable to expect the emissions to remain at the reduced levels 
because of the control measures implemented. Thus, it is reasonable to 
expect the Belding area will continue to attain the 2008 Pb NAAQS 
through 2027.
    EPA believes that Michigan's submission demonstrates that the area 
will continue to maintain the 2008 Pb NAAQS at least through 2027. This 
is because the 2027 emissions should remain at the same level as 
projected for 2025 due to the permanent and enforceable limits in PTI 
16-11 along with additional reductions from other rules. In addition, 
the air dispersion modeling indicates that with the PTI 16-11 controls 
the Belding area ambient Pb concentration will be below the 2008 Pb 
NAAQS. Thus, EPA is approving the redesignation request and maintenance 
plans based on a showing, in accordance with section 175A, that the 
Michigan's maintenance plan provides for maintenance for at least 10 
years after redesignation.
d. Monitoring Network
    Michigan will monitor ambient Pb levels during the 10 year 
maintenance period in the Belding area to confirm continued maintenance 
of the 2008 Pb

[[Page 24869]]

NAAQS. EPA determines that the Belding, Michigan area Pb monitoring 
network is adequate to confirm maintenance. Michigan commits to 
continue to operate an adequate monitoring network.
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
    Michigan will also continue to enter its air monitoring data into 
the Air Quality System in accordance with Federal guidelines. It will 
also submit periodic emissions inventories to EPA as required by the 
Federal Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule to verify continued 
attainment. 67 FR 39602, June 10, 2002. Both actions will help to 
verify continued attainment in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.
f. Contingency Plan
    The contingency plan provisions are designed to promptly correct or 
prevent a violation of the NAAQS that might occur after redesignation 
of an area to attainment. CAA section 175A requires that the 
maintenance plan include such contingency measures. The maintenance 
plan should identify the contingency measures to be adopted, a schedule 
and procedure for adoption and implementation of the contingency 
measures, and a time limit for action by the state. The state should 
also identify specific indicators to be used to determine when the 
contingency measures need to be adopted and implemented. The 
maintenance plan must include a requirement that the state will 
implement all pollution control measures that were contained in the SIP 
before redesignation of the area to attainment. Section 175A(d) of the 
CAA.
    Michigan commits to implement one or more contingency measures 
should the 2008 Pb NAAQS be violated during the maintenance period. The 
contingency measures are:
    i. Increase inspection frequency of Mueller to twice per year, 
beginning three months after a quality-assured violation of the NAAQS 
at a Belding, Michigan air monitoring site. The increased inspection 
frequency will remain in place until the quality-assured Pb ambient air 
monitored levels show NAAQS compliance on a 3-year rolling average.
    ii. Require Mueller to submit an enhanced preventative maintenance/
malfunction abatement plan within six months after a quality-assured 
violation of the NAAQS at a Belding, Michigan air monitoring site.
    iii. Require Mueller to reassess control strategies that further 
limit Pb emissions within one year of a quality-assured violation of 
the NAAQS at a Belding, Michigan air monitoring site.
    Michigan will also consider any other potential contingency 
measures at the time of the selection.
    EPA finds that Michigan's maintenance plan adequately addresses the 
five basic components of a maintenance plan: attainment inventory, 
maintenance demonstration, monitoring network, verification of 
continued attainment, and a contingency plan.
    As required by section 175A(b) of the CAA, Michigan commits to 
submit to the EPA an updated Pb maintenance plan eight years after 
redesignation of the Belding area to cover an additional 10 year period 
beyond the initial 10 year maintenance period.
    EPA is approving Michigan's 2008 Pb maintenance plan for the 
Belding area as meeting the requirements of CAA section 175A.

B. Comprehensive Emissions Inventory

    Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires areas to submit a 
comprehensive, accurate, and current emissions inventory. Michigan 
provided such an inventory in its submission.
    Michigan identified Mueller as the lone source of Pb emissions in 
the vicinity of the Belding nonattainment area. Thus, it provided the 
emissions for Mueller that represent the emissions of the Belding area. 
In 2013, Pb emissions were 1,153.15 pounds. See Table 1.
    EPA approves the Pb emissions inventories submitted by Michigan in 
January 2016 as fully meeting the comprehensive inventory requirement 
of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA for the Belding area for the 2008 Pb 
NAAQS.

C. RACM Requirements

    Based on the 6th Circuit decision, CAA Section 172(c)(1) requires 
areas to have approved RACM/RACT provisions to be redesignated. PTI 16-
11 added legally enforceable emission controls on Mueller considered to 
be RACT for Pb. PTI 16-11 requires each Mueller chip dryer to operate a 
cyclone, a thermal oxidizer, a wet scrubber, and a demister to control 
emissions. The west chip dryer stack height was increased to 122 feet 
in January 2012. The east chip dryer stack height is also required to 
be 122 feet. EPA is approving the emission controls as required by PTI 
16-11 as satisfying the RACT requirement of Section 172(c)(1).

V. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA has determined that the Belding area is attaining the 2008 Pb 
NAAQS and that the area has met the requirements for redesignation 
under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is thus approving the 
requests from Michigan to change the legal designation of the Belding 
area from nonattainment to attainment for the 2008 Pb standard. EPA is 
approving Michigan's maintenance plan for the Belding area as a 
revision to the Michigan SIP because the plan meets the requirements of 
section 175A of the CAA. EPA is approving the emission controls in PTI 
16-11 as required by Consent Order 9-2011 as meeting the RACM/RACT 
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(1). EPA is approving the 2013 
emissions inventory as meeting the comprehensive emissions inventory 
requirements of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. EPA is taking these 
actions in accordance with the CAA and EPA's implementation regulations 
regarding the 2008 Pb NAAQS.
    We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we 
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse 
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal 
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will 
serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse 
written comments are filed. This rule will be effective July 31, 2017 
without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written 
comments by June 30, 2017. If we receive such comments, we will 
withdraw this action before the effective date by publishing a 
subsequent document that will withdraw the final action. All public 
comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule 
based on the proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment 
period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do 
so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an 
amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may 
be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those 
provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. 
If we do not receive any comments, this action will be effective July 
31, 2017.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable 
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
action merely approves state law as meeting

[[Page 24870]]

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 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, 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 and will not impose 
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control.

    Dated: May 4, 2017.
Robert A. Kaplan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

    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.


0
2. In Sec.  52.1170 the table in paragraph (e) is amended:
0
a. Under ``Emissions Inventories'' by adding an entry for ``2008 lead 
(Pb) 2013 base year'' after the entry for ``1997 annual 
PM2.5 2005 base year;'' and
0
 b. Under ``Maintenance Plans'' by adding an entry for ``2008 lead 
(Pb)'' after the entry for ``2006 24-Hour PM2.5.''
    The additions read as follows:


Sec.  52.1170  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                       EPA-Approved Michigan Nonregulatory And Quasi-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Applicable
    Name of nonregulatory SIP         geographic or          State       EPA approval date         Comments
            provision               nonattainment area  submittal date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  * * * * * * *
                                              Emissions Inventories
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
2008 lead (Pb) 2013 base year....  Belding area (Ionia       1/12/2016  5/31/2017, [insert   ...................
                                    County, part).                       Federal Register
                                                                         citation].
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  * * * * * * *
                                                Maintenance Plans
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
2008 lead (Pb)...................  Belding area (Ionia       1/12/2016  5/31/2017, [insert   ...................
                                    County, part).                       Federal Register
                                                                         citation].
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
3. Section 52.1188 is amended by adding paragraphs (b) and (c) to read 
as follows:


Sec.  52.1188  Control strategy: Lead (Pb).

* * * * *
    (b) Michigan's 2013 lead emissions inventory for the Belding area 
as submitted on January 12, 2016, satisfying the emission inventory 
requirements of section 172(c)(3) of the Clean Air Act for the Belding 
area.
    (c) Approval. The 2008 lead maintenance plan for the Belding, 
Michigan nonattainment area has been approved as submitted on January 
12, 2016.

[[Page 24871]]

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

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

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


0
5. Section 81.323 is amended by revising the entry for Belding, MI in 
the table entitled ``Michigan--2008 Lead NAAQS'' to read as follows:


Sec.  81.323  Michigan.

* * * * *

                        Michigan--2008 Lead NAAQS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Designation for the 2008 NAAQS \a\
         Designated area          --------------------------------------
                                      Date \1\              Type
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Belding, MI:
    Ionia County (part)..........       5/31/2017  Attainment.
        The area bounded by the
         following coordinates:
         Southeast corner by
         latitude 43.0956705 N
         and longitude 85.2130771
         W; southwest corner
         (intersection of S.
         Broas St. and W.
         Washington St.) by
         latitude 43.0960358 N
         and longitude 85.2324027
         W; northeast corner by
         latitude 43.1074942 N
         and longitude 85.2132313
         W; western boundary 1
         (intersection of W.
         Ellis St. and the
         vertical extension of S.
         Broas St.) by latitude
         43.1033277 N and
         longitude 85.2322553 W;
         western boundary 2
         (intersection of W.
         Ellis St. and N. Bridge
         St.) by latitude
         43.1033911 N and
         longitude 85.2278464 W;
         western boundary 3
         (intersection of N.
         Bridge St. and Earle
         St.) by latitude
         43.1074479 N and
         longitude 85.2279722 W.
 
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as
  otherwise specified.
\1\ December 31, 2011 unless otherwise noted.

[FR Doc. 2017-10928 Filed 5-30-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P