[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 103 (Tuesday, June 1, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29219-29222]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-11395]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2021-0249; FRL-10022-26-Region 9]
Rescission of Clean Data Determination and Call for Attainment
Plan Revision for the Yuma, AZ 1987 PM10 Moderate Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
rescind its previously issued clean data determination for the Yuma,
Arizona ``Moderate'' nonattainment area for the 1987 24-hour national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers
(PM10) because recent complete, quality-assured monitoring
data show that the area has subsequently violated this NAAQS. We are
also proposing to find that the Arizona State Implementation Plan (SIP)
is substantially inadequate to attain or maintain the PM10
standard and to call for Arizona to revise the SIP to address this
inadequacy.
DATES: Any comments must arrive by July 1, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
OAR-2021-0249 at http://www.regulations.gov. 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, the EPA may publish
any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically
any information you consider to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information 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. The EPA
will generally not consider comments or comment contents located
outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other
file sharing system). For additional submission methods, 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 https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets. If you need assistance in a language other than English or if
you are a person with disabilities who needs a reasonable accommodation
at no cost to you, please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John J. Kelly, Air Planning Office
(AIR-2), EPA Region IX, (415) 947-4151, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we'', ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. The 1987 PM10 NAAQS
B. Designation and Classification of the Yuma PM10
Nonattainment Area
C. The Clean Data Policy and the 2006 Clean Data Determination
II. Current Monitoring Data
III. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
A. The 1987 PM10 NAAQS
The EPA sets NAAQS for certain ambient air pollutants at levels
required to protect human health and the environment. The primary NAAQS
represent ambient air quality standards the attainment and maintenance
of which the EPA has determined are requisite to protect public health,
including an adequate margin of safety. The secondary NAAQS represent
ambient air quality standards the attainment and maintenance of which
the EPA has determined are requisite to protect public welfare from any
known or anticipated adverse effects associated with the presence of
such air pollutant in the ambient air. PM10 is one of these
ambient air pollutants for which the EPA has established NAAQS. On July
1, 1987, the EPA promulgated two primary standards for PM10:
A 24-hour standard of 150 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\) and
an annual PM10 standard of 50 [mu]g/m\3\. The EPA also
promulgated secondary PM10 standards that were identical to
the primary standards.\1\ Effective December 18, 2006, the EPA revoked
the annual PM10 NAAQS but retained the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS.\2\ Because they are identical, we refer to the
primary and secondary 24-hour standards using the single term, NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 52 FR 24634 (July 1, 1987).
\2\ 71 FR 61144 (October 17, 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 24-hour PM10 NAAQS is attained when the expected
number of exceedances, averaged over a three-year period, is less than
or equal to one. The expected number of exceedances averaged over a
three-year period at any given monitor is known as the PM10
design value for that site. The PM10 design value for the
nonattainment area is the highest design value from a monitor within
that area. The methodologies for calculating expected exceedances for
the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS are found in 40 CFR part 50, appendix
K, Section 2.1(a).
B. Designation and Classification of the Yuma PM10 Nonattainment Area
Upon enactment of the 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act (CAA or
``Act''), the Act itself designated specific areas as nonattainment by
operation of law, and classified these areas as Moderate.\3\ These
areas included all former Group I PM10 planning areas
identified in Federal Register documents published on August 7,
1987,\4\ and October 31, 1990,\5\ and any other areas violating the
1987 PM10 NAAQS prior to January 1, 1989. The EPA published
a Federal Register document announcing the areas designated
nonattainment for PM10 upon enactment of the 1990 CAA
Amendments, known as ``initial'' PM10 nonattainment areas,
on March 15, 1991.\6\ The EPA published a subsequent Federal Register
document correcting some of these areas on August 8, 1991.\7\ These
nonattainment designations and Moderate area classifications were
codified in 40 CFR part 81 on November 6, 1991.\8\ The EPA designated
as ``unclassifiable'' all other areas in the Nation not designated
nonattainment
[[Page 29220]]
upon enactment of the 1990 CAA Amendments.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ 42 U.S.C. 7407(d)(4)(B), 7513(a).
\4\ 52 FR 29383.
\5\ 55 FR 45799.
\6\ 56 FR 11101.
\7\ 56 FR 37654.
\8\ 56 FR 56694.
\9\ See CAA section 107(d)(4)(B)(iii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Yuma PM10 nonattainment area (``Yuma NAA'') was one
of the areas specified by Congress and designated by the 1990 CAA
Amendments. Specifically, the Yuma NAA was designated nonattainment by
section 107(d)(4)(B)(i) of the Act and classified as Moderate because
it had been previously categorized as a Group I area.\10\ The EPA
announced the Yuma NAA designation, as required by section 107(d)(2) of
the Act, on March 15, 1991.\11\ In accordance with CAA section
189(a)(2), Arizona was required to submit a SIP revision meeting
applicable nonattainment plan requirements by November 15, 1991,
demonstrating attainment of the 1987 p.m.10 NAAQS in the
Yuma NAA by December 31, 1994.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 52 FR 29383 (August 7, 1987).
\11\ 56 FR 11101.
\12\ Arizona submitted a Moderate area plan for the Yuma NAA on
November 14, 1991. The EPA found this plan to be incomplete on May
14, 1992. Arizona submitted a revised plan for the Yuma NAA on July
12, 1994, but withdrew this plan in 2006, following the EPA's
issuance of a clean data determination for the Yuma NAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. The Clean Data Policy and the 2006 Clean Data Determination
In nonattainment areas where monitored data demonstrate that the
NAAQS has been attained, the EPA interprets certain requirements of the
Act as no longer being applicable for so long as air quality continues
to meet the NAAQS in the area. This interpretation is known as the
``clean data policy,'' and EPA findings issued under this policy are
known as ``clean data determinations.'' On March 14, 2006, the EPA
issued a clean data determination for the Yuma NAA for the 1987 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS, based on complete, quality-assured and certified
PM10 monitoring data for 2002-2004.\13\ Because the data
from 2002-2004 were complete and showed no exceedances of the relevant
NAAQS, and because preliminary data for 2005 also indicated no such
exceedances, the EPA concluded that the Yuma NAA was in attainment for
the 1987 24-hour PM10 NAAQS.\14\ Based on this finding, the
EPA determined that certain nonattainment plan requirements in the Yuma
NAA were not applicable for so long as the Yuma NAA continued to
monitor attainment of the 1987 24-hour PM10 and annual
NAAQS.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 71 FR 13021 (March 14, 2006).
\14\ The clean data determination also applied to the annual
PM10 NAAQS, but that NAAQS was revoked later that year.
See 71 FR 61144 (October 17, 2006).
\15\ In the same Federal Register document, the EPA also
determined pursuant to CAA sections 179(c)(1) and 188(b)(2) that the
Yuma NAA had attained the NAAQS by the Moderate area attainment date
of December 31, 1994. Because that determination was tied to that
specific attainment date, it would not be affected by the rescission
of the clean data determination proposed in this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Current Monitoring Data
In accordance with 40 CFR part 50, appendices J and K, a finding of
whether an area has attained or is currently attaining the 1987 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS must generally be based upon certified, complete,
quality-assured data gathered at monitoring sites in the nonattainment
area and entered into the EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) database. For
the 1987 24-hour PM10 NAAQS, appendix K provides that all
data produced by state and local air monitoring sites (SLAMS) and other
sites submitted to the EPA in accordance with the part 58 requirements
be used for evaluating attainment.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ 40 CFR part 50, appendix K, section 2.3(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to assess whether an area is currently attaining the
NAAQS, the PM10 ambient air quality monitoring data
collected by the state within the area for the three-year period must
meet data completeness criteria, or otherwise unambiguously establish
nonattainment according to 40 CFR part 50, appendix K, section 2.3. The
ambient air quality monitoring data completeness requirements are met
when quarterly data capture rates for all four quarters in a calendar
year over a three-year period are at least 75 percent. For purposes of
this proposal, we reviewed the data for the 2017-2019 period for
completeness and determined that the PM10 data met the
completeness criterion for all 12 quarters at the Yuma Supersite
PM10 monitoring site in the Yuma NAA.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ EPA, AQS ``Design Value Report,'' dated March 31, 2021.
This report is included in the docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) is the
governmental agency with the authority and responsibilities under the
State's laws for collecting ambient air quality data for the Yuma NAA.
ADEQ submits annual monitoring network plans to the EPA.\18\ These
plans discuss the status of the ambient air monitoring network, as
required under 40 CFR part 58. The EPA reviews these annual network
plans for compliance with the applicable reporting requirements in 40
CFR 58.10. With respect to PM10, the EPA has found that the
2018-2020 annual network plans submitted by ADEQ, which reflect the
network during the 2017-2019 design value period, met the applicable
requirements under 40 CFR part 58.\19\ Furthermore, we concluded from
our 2018 technical systems audit of ADEQ's ambient air quality
monitoring program that the ambient air monitoring network currently
meets or exceeds the requirements for the minimum number of monitoring
sites designated as SLAMS for PM10 in the Yuma NAA.\20\ ADEQ
certifies annually that the data it submits to AQS are quality-assured
and has done so for each year relevant to our proposed action, 2017-
2019.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See, e.g., ``State of Arizona Air Monitoring Network Plan
for the Year 2020.'' Copies of Arizona's Annual Network Plans for
2018-2020 are included in the docket.
\19\ See, e.g., letter dated November 8, 2019, from Gwen
Yoshimura, Manager, EPA Region IX, Air Quality Analysis Office, to
Daniel Czecholinksi, Acting Director, Air Quality Division, ADEQ.
Copies of EPA letters responding to Arizona's Annual Network Plans
for 2018-2020 are included in the docket.
\20\ Letter dated April 25, 2019, from Elizabeth Adams,
Director, EPA Region 9 Air Division to Timothy Franquist, Director,
Air Quality Division, ADEQ, enclosure titled ``Technical Systems
Audit of the Ambient Air Monitoring Program: Arizona Department of
Environmental Quality, April 2-April 6, 2018,'' Network Requirements
section, 8.
\21\ See, e.g., letter dated April 13, 2020, from Daniel
Czecholinksi, Director, Air Quality Division, ADEQ, to Gwen
Yoshimura, Manager, EPA Region IX, Air Quality Analysis Office.
Copies of ADEQ certifications and their respective transmittal
letters for years 2017-2019 are included in the docket.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1 provides the 2019 p.m.10 design value for the
Yuma Supersite, the sole regulatory monitoring site measuring ambient
PM10 within the Yuma NAA, expressed as a single value
representing the average expected annual exceedances over the three-
year period, 2017-2019. The PM10 data show that the design
value is greater than 1.0 estimated annual average exceedances of the
1987 24-hour PM10 NAAQS. Consequently, the EPA proposes to
determine, based upon three years of complete, quality-assured and
certified data from 2017-2019, that the Yuma NAA is no longer attaining
the 1987 24-hour PM10 NAAQS.
Table 1--2017-2019 Design Value for the 1987 24-Hour PM10 NAAQS for the
Yuma NAA
------------------------------------------------------------------------
AQS
Monitoring site identification Design
No. value
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yuma Supersite........................... 04-027-8011 5.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: EPA, AQS ``Design Value Report,'' dated March 31, 2021, 15.
We have also reviewed preliminary 2020 data, which indicate that
the Yuma NAA had a 2018-2020 design value of 5.4.\22\ This preliminary
design value
[[Page 29221]]
also does not show attainment of the 1987 24-hour PM10 NAAQS
and is therefore consistent with the proposed determination. We also
reviewed preliminary data from the Yuma Supersite monitor for 2021,
which is not a full year of data.\23\ As of March 31, 2021, there were
no exceedances in 2021. We note, however, that even with no exceedances
in 2021, given the number of expected exceedances in the certified year
2019, plus those in the preliminary year 2020, the 2021 three-year
preliminary design value violates the NAAQS and is therefore also
consistent with our proposed determination.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ EPA, AQS ``Design Value Report,'' dated March 3, 2021.
\23\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. Proposed Action and Request for Public Comment
Based on our proposed determination that the Yuma NAA is no longer
attaining the 1987 24-hour PM10 NAAQS, we propose to rescind
the clean data determination for the Yuma NAA and reinstate the
requirements that were suspended under that determination. We
anticipate that Arizona's submission of a new, approvable Moderate
nonattainment plan in response to the ``SIP call'' discussed below
would satisfy these obligations.
In addition, we propose to find, pursuant to CAA section 110(k)(5),
that the Arizona SIP is substantially inadequate to attain or maintain
the 1987 24-hour PM10 NAAQS in the Yuma NAA. This proposed
finding is based both on the most recent monitoring data discussed in
section II of this document, as well as longer-term air quality trends
in the Yuma NAA. In particular, we note that the Yuma NAA has had a
violating design value for the 1987 24-hour PM10 NAAQSs
every year since issuance of the clean data determination in 2006.\24\
Collectively, these recent and longer term monitoring data indicate
that the current Arizona SIP is substantially inadequate to attain or
maintain the 1987 24-hour PM10 NAAQS in the Yuma NAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to address this inadequacy, we propose to issue a SIP call
under CAA section 110(k)(5), requiring the State to submit a SIP
revision establishing that the Yuma NAA meets the applicable
nonattainment plan requirements of the CAA for Moderate PM10
NAAs.\25\ These requirements include: (i) An approved permit program
for construction of new and modified major stationary sources; \26\
(ii) a demonstration that the plan provides for attainment by no later
than the applicable Moderate area attainment date or a demonstration
that attainment by that date is impracticable; \27\ (iii) provisions
for the implementation of reasonably available control measures (RACM)
and reasonably available control technology (RACT); \28\ (iv)
quantitative milestones that will be used to evaluate compliance with
the requirement to demonstrate reasonable further progress (RFP); \29\
(v) evaluation and regulation of PM10 precursors; \30\ (vi)
a description of the expected annual incremental reductions in
emissions that will demonstrate RFP; \31\ (vii) emissions inventories,
as necessary; \32\ (viii) other control measures besides RACM and RACT
as may be needed for attainment; \33\ (ix) contingency measures,\34\
and (x) a motor vehicle emissions budget for the purpose of determining
the conformity of transportation programs and plans developed by state
transportation agencies.\35\ The EPA's longstanding guidance on these
statutory requirements is embodied in the ``The General Preamble for
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments.'' \36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See CAA section 110(k)(5) (``Any finding under this
paragraph shall, to the extent the Administrator deems appropriate,
subject the State to the requirements of this chapter to which the
State was subject when it developed and submitted the plan for which
such finding was made . . .'').
\26\ CAA section 189(a)(1)(A).
\27\ CAA section 189(a)(1)(B).
\28\ CAA section 189(a)(1)(C).
\29\ CAA section 189(c).
\30\ CAA section 189(e).
\31\ CAA section 172(c)(2).
\32\ CAA section 172(c)(3).
\33\ CAA section 172(c)(6).
\34\ CAA section 172(c)(9).
\35\ 40 CFR 93.102(b)(1). Effective June 27, 2007 (see 72 FR
32295, June 12, 2007), the EPA found adequate for transportation
conformity purposes the motor vehicle emissions budgets in the Yuma
PM10 Maintenance Plan (August 2006). However, if we take
final action to withdraw the clean data determination and issue a
SIP call, we expect also to reverse our previous finding to a
finding of inadequacy pursuant to 40 CFR 93.118(f)(1)(vi). Our
inadequacy finding for the motor vehicle emissions budget would
require transportation agencies to determine conformity using
interim emission tests pursuant to 40 CFR 93.119, instead of the
current practice of using the past maintenance plan motor vehicle
emissions budgets as part of a budgets test.
\36\ 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We propose to require Arizona to submit this Moderate nonattainment
plan SIP submission within 18 months of finalizing the SIP call, which
is the maximum time permitted under CAA 110(k)(5). This is longer than
the original Moderate nonattainment plan submittal deadline of one year
from the date of the 1990 CAA Amendments under CAA 189(a)(2)(A), but is
in line with the deadline specified in CAA 189(a)(2)(B) for other PM
nonattainment areas.\37\ Similarly, because the original maximum
attainment date for this area was December 31, 1994 (approximately four
years from the original designation),\38\ we propose, pursuant to CAA
110(k)(5), that the new attainment date shall be as expeditious as
practicable, but no later than December 31, 2025.\39\ In line with this
proposed attainment date, we propose to require implementation of RACM/
RACT by no later than January 1, 2025.\40\ Lastly, in the event we
finalize the above proposals, we propose to reverse our previous budget
adequacy finding to a finding of inadequacy pursuant to 40 CFR
93.118(f)(1)(vi).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ CAA section 189(a)(2).
\38\ CAA section 188(c)(1).
\39\ CAA section 110(k)(5), ``the Administrator may adjust any
dates applicable under such requirements as appropriate (except that
the Administrator may not adjust any attainment date prescribed
under part D of this subchapter, unless such date has elapsed).''
\40\ Given that exceedances of the 1987 24-hour PM10
NAAQS in the Yuma NAA are often associated with high wind that could
potentially qualify for treatment as ``natural events'' under the
EPA's Exceptional Events Rule, we recommend RACM/RACT be fully
implemented as early as January 1, 2023, so that anthropogenic
sources would be reasonably controlled during the three-year period
preceding the proposed attainment date. See, e.g., 40 CFR
50.14(b)(5)(ii) (``The Administrator will consider high wind dust
events to be natural events in cases where windblown dust is
entirely from natural undisturbed lands in the area or where all
anthropogenic sources are reasonably controlled . . .'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in
this document. We will accept comments from the public on this proposal
until the date listed in the DATES section above. We will consider
these comments before taking final action.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
This action proposes a determination that the Yuma NAA is no longer
attaining the 1987 PM10 NAAQS, based on the EPA's review of
air quality data, and a SIP call under section 110(k)(5) of the CAA.
Upon a finding that a SIP is deficient, section 110(k)(5) of the CAA
directs the Agency to require the state to correct the deficiency.
Therefore, this action does not impose additional requirements beyond
those required by the CAA itself. 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
[[Page 29222]]
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 the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with
practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive
Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this proposed action does not have Tribal implications
as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP obligations discussed herein do not apply to Indian
Tribes and thus this proposed action will not impose substantial direct
costs on Tribal governments or preempt Tribal law. Nonetheless, the EPA
intends to notify the Cocopah and Fort Yuma (Quechan) tribes, which
have lands within the Yuma NAA.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate Matter, Pollution.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: May 24, 2021.
Deborah Jordan,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. 2021-11395 Filed 5-28-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P