Air Plan Approval; TN; Removal of Vehicle I/M Program; Middle Tennessee Area and Hamilton County |
|---|
|
John Blevins
Environmental Protection Agency
22 April 2021
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 76 (Thursday, April 22, 2021)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 21248-21254]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-08320]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R04-OAR-2019-0618 and EPA-R04-OAR-2019-0619; FRL-10022-87-Region
4]
Air Plan Approval; TN; Removal of Vehicle I/M Program; Middle
Tennessee Area and Hamilton County
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Through this supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking
(``supplemental proposal'' or ``SNPRM''), the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is seeking public comment on the Agency's additional and
clarified technical rationale related to the proposed approval of
Tennessee's February 26, 2020, state implementation plan (SIP)
revisions requesting the removal of Tennessee's motor vehicle
inspection and maintenance (I/M) program requirements for Davidson,
Sumner, Rutherford, Williamson, and Wilson Counties in Tennessee (also
known as the Middle Tennessee Area) and Hamilton County (also known as
the Chattanooga Area), from the federally-approved SIP. Specifically,
EPA proposes to affirm that the Hamilton County and Middle Tennessee
areas would continue to attain and maintain the national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS or standards) after removal of the I/M
program, and to rely on an emissions inventory comparison to inform its
determination that both areas would continue to attain and maintain the
ozone and carbon monoxide (CO) NAAQS. EPA is further proposing to
conclude that the removal of the I/M program will not interfere with
other states' ability to attain and maintain the 2008 ozone NAAQS under
the good neighbor provision of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and
providing additional information related to that conclusion. EPA is now
taking comment on the use of this comparison and additional information
in this supplemental proposal.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before May 24, 2021.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2019-0618 (Middle Tennessee Area) or EPA-R04-OAR-2019-0619
(Hamilton County), at 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 dockets. 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 www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Air Planning
and Implementation Branch, Air and Radiation Division, Region 4, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 61 Forsyth Street SW, Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. The telephone number is (404) 562-9040. Ms. Benjamin can
also be reached via electronic mail at benjamin.lynorae@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 21249]]
I. Background for This Supplemental Proposal
EPA published notices of proposed rulemaking (NPRMs) on June 8,
2020, and June 11, 2020, responding to Tennessee's February 26, 2020,
SIP revision requests \1\ that EPA approve removal of the I/M program
\2\ from the Tennessee SIP for Hamilton County and the Middle Tennessee
Area, respectively. Notably, Tennessee requested that the Tennessee Air
Pollution Control Regulations (TAPCR) 1200-03-29 and Davidson County's
Regulation 8 be removed from the Tennessee SIP.\3\ See 85 FR 35037 and
85 FR 35607 for additional background. The June 8, 2020, and June 11,
2020, NPRMs (hereinafter referred to as the June 2020 NPRMs) were based
on EPA's proposed findings that the removal of the I/M program from the
Tennessee SIP for the Middle Tennessee Area and for Hamilton County
satisfies section 110(l) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) (i.e., will not
interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment of any
NAAQS and reasonable further progress, or any applicable requirements
of the CAA). Comments closed on the NPRMs on July 8, 2020, and July 13,
2020, respectively.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ EPA officially received Tennessee's I/M SIP revisions on
February 27, 2020.
\2\ Tennessee requested that EPA remove the requirements for the
Middle Tennessee Area and Hamilton County to implement an I/M
program as part of the Early Action Compact (EAC) that was approved
by EPA into the non-regulatory portion of the Tennessee SIP on
August 26, 2005. See 70 FR 50199. With respect to the Middle
Tennessee Area, the I/M program was identified in the EAC as an
existing control strategy in the SIP.
\3\ Tenn. Code Ann. Sec. 68-201-119(c) allows Tennessee
counties to retain local I/M programs under certain conditions. As
Tennessee is requesting removal of the I/M program from the SIP,
EPA's analysis in this supplemental proposal assumes that no I/M
program will be implemented in the Middle Tennessee Area and
Hamilton County. However, this proposed action does not preclude
local I/M programs from being retained at a local level outside of
the SIP.
\4\ On January 19, 2021, former EPA Region 4 Administrator Mary
Walker signed a document, which EPA posted to its website at https://www.epa.gov/sips-tn/epa-approval-tennessees-requests-remove-inspection-and-maintenance-im-program-tennessee. EPA noted in that
posting ``Notwithstanding the fact that the EPA is posting a pre-
publication version, the final rule will not be promulgated until
published in the Federal Register.'' EPA will not publish that
document in the Federal Register; therefore, it will not result in a
final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. CAA Section 110(l) Analysis
EPA is clarifying that although Tennessee included photochemical
modeling sensitivity analyses to provide additional weight of evidence
in its February 26, 2020, SIP revisions, and EPA described those
analyses in the June 2020 NPRMs, the photochemical modeling sensitivity
analyses were not required and were not intended as the basis for EPA's
proposed determinations that removal of the I/M program from Hamilton
County and the Middle Tennessee Area would not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS or any other applicable CAA
requirements. EPA's proposed finding that these removals satisfy CAA
section 110(l) is based on the technical analyses presented below,
which are consistent with and provide additional support for the
proposed conclusions set forth in the June 2020 NPRMs.
EPA's CAA section 110(l) non-interference demonstration supporting
its proposed approval of Tennessee's SIP revisions seeking removal of
the I/M program in Hamilton County and the Middle Tennessee Area
focuses on ozone (through its precursors nitrogen oxides
(NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOC)) and CO, the
criteria pollutants addressed by I/M programs.\5\ I/M programs are not
designed to address lead and sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions,
and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) is captured generally through
consideration of NOX impacts. While EPA considers
NOX, VOCs, ammonia, and SO2 as precursors for
particulate matter (PM), PM formation in Tennessee is dominated by
emissions of SO2, reacting in the atmosphere to form
sulfates, and not by emissions of NOX, VOCs, or ammonia.
However, NOX and VOC increases are considered through the
analysis for ozone. Although Tennessee is NOX-limited \6\
for ozone formation, EPA also evaluated VOC emissions to be
environmentally conservative.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The total suite of CAA criteria pollutants are ozone
(through the precursors NOX and VOCs), CO, PM (and its
precursors--NOX, VOCs, ammonia, and SO2),
lead, SO2, and NO2.
\6\ The term ``NOX limited'' means that changes in
anthropogenic VOC emissions have little effect on ozone formation.
Control of NOX and VOC are generally considered the most
important components of an ozone control strategy, and
NOX and VOC make up the largest controllable contribution
to ambient ozone formation. However, Tennessee has shown a greater
sensitivity of ground-level ozone to NOX controls rather
than VOC controls. This is due to high biogenic VOC emissions
compared to anthropogenic VOC emissions in Tennessee. Therefore,
implemented control measures have focused on the control of
NOX emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA is using an emissions inventory comparison to inform its
determination of whether Hamilton County and the Middle Tennessee Area
would continue to attain and maintain the ozone and CO NAAQS after
removal of the I/M program. Tennessee chose 2022 as the future year for
the State's non-interference demonstrations.\7\ Tennessee's non-
interference demonstration utilized EPA's Motor Vehicle Emission
Simulator (MOVES) modeling system, specifically MOVES2014b, to estimate
ozone precursor emissions for mobile sources--both on-road and non-
road.\8\ In general, an emissions comparison approach is a reasonable
and valid approach to determining whether an area removing an I/M
program can maintain the NAAQS and is very similar to the maintenance
demonstrations that support the redesignations of areas from
nonattainment to attainment and 10-year maintenance plans that are
required for redesignated areas. EPA is comparing future year emissions
(following the removal of the I/M program) to emissions in a base year
with an attaining design value.\9\ If the total future year emissions
for the relevant pollutant(s)/precursor(s) are less than the total base
year emissions, EPA considers that to be a sufficient and reasonable
demonstration that the area will maintain the NAAQS where the base year
emissions are at a level sufficient to achieve the NAAQS. EPA is
proposing to conclude that these analyses, as described below, provide
further support for the conclusions set forth in the June 2020 NPRMs.
CAA section 110(l) demonstrations are case-specific and, in the case of
the Tennessee I/M SIP revisions, modeling
[[Page 21250]]
is not required to demonstrate non-interference.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ EPA notes that Tennessee did an analysis of emissions
between 2022 and 2030 without I/M to determine the potential impact
of on mobile emissions. Tennessee's analysis shows that in the
Middle Tennessee Area emissions decrease by 35 percent for
NOX, 24 percent for VOC, and 30 percent for CO; and that
in Hamilton County emissions decrease by 45 percent for
NOX, 33 percent for VOC, and 40 percent for CO. This
analysis is provided in the dockets for this proposed rulemaking as
weight of evidence.
\8\ EPA reviewed the MOVES2014b modeling that was submitted by
Tennessee to support the non-interference demonstration and
concluded that the State used appropriate assumptions for the model
and performed the modeling in accordance with EPA's MOVES Technical
Guidance. See EPA's July 2014 ``Policy Guidance on the Use of
MOVES2014 for State Implementation Plan Development, Transportation
Conformity, and Other Purposes,'' available at https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P100K4EB.pdf. MOVES2014b was the
latest version available at the time of Tennessee's SIP revision.
See EPA's November 2020 ``Policy Guidance on the Use of MOVES3 for
State Implementation Plan Development, Transportation Conformity,
General Conformity, and Other Purposes (EPA-420-B-20-044),''
available at https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2020-11/documents/420b20044_0.pdf (noting that ``[s]tates should use the
latest version of MOVES that is available at the time that a SIP is
developed.'').
\9\ Design values are how EPA measures compliance with the
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Middle Tennessee Area
The Middle Tennessee Area is currently in attainment with all
NAAQS.\10\ As presented in Table 1, past design values (i.e., prior to
October 1, 2015) have demonstrated attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS (i.e., the applicable NAAQS at that time), and recent design
values have demonstrated attainment of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS in
the Middle Tennessee Area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ As mentioned in the June 8, 2020, NPRM, the current design
values in the Middle Tennessee Area for PM, NO2, lead and
SO2 are attaining the NAAQS. In fact, the Middle
Tennessee Area has never been designated nonattainment for PM,
NO2, lead, or SO2. The increases in
NOX and VOC emissions without the I/M program in 2022 in
comparison to with the I/M program in 2022 are not expected to cause
a concern for PM, NO2, lead and SO2 compliance
in the Middle Tennessee Area. As discussed more in this notice, no
reductions or emissions benefits are attributable to the I/M program
for PM, lead, and SO2 in the Middle Tennessee Area, and
the total emissions increases in NOX (of which
NO2 is a component) in 2022 without the program is less
than the total emissions in 2014.
Table 1--Middle Tennessee Area Ozone Monitor Design Values ***
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ozone design value, parts per billion (ppb)
Site name -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012-2014 2013-2015 2014-2016 2015-2017 2016-2018 2017-2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trinity Lane, Davidson County..... (*) (*) 66 ** 65 66 65
Percy Priest, Davidson County..... 70 65 67 64 67 65
Rockland Recreation Area, Sumner 72 67 67 66 66 66
County...........................
Fairview Middle School, Williamson 66 62 61 60 60 60
County...........................
Cedars of Lebanon State Park, 67 62 64 63 (*) (*)
Wilson County....................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* No valid design value due to incomplete data. The Cedars of Lebanon site had incomplete data in 2018 because
there was an issue following the installation of a new monitoring shelter, and TDEC invalidated data collected
before the issue was corrected. The East Health/Trinity Lane site had incomplete data in 2013.
** In the June 11, 2020, NPRM (85 FR 35607), EPA inadvertently stated that the 2015-2017 design value was 66
ppb. The correct value is 65 ppb.
*** The Middle Tennessee Area was in attainment with the most stringent ozone NAAQS effective during the time
period of the design value. 2012-2014 and 2013-2015 design values were attaining the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS
of 0.075 parts per million (ppm). EPA notes that the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.070 ppm was not in effect
until October 1, 2015, and all design values after this date attained the 2015 8-hour ozone standard.
Also, design values for Tennessee for the 1-hour (see Table 2) and
8-hour (see Table 3) CO NAAQS in 2019 were 1.8 ppm and 1.6 ppm,
respectively, which are less than 20 percent of the CO NAAQS for both
the 1-hour and 8-hour standards.
Table 2--Middle Tennessee Area CO Monitor 1-Hour Design Values
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CO 1-hr design value, ppm **
Site name ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama Ave. Station, Shelby County.......................... 2.4 2.4 1.9 1.9 1.4 (*) (*)
Great Smoky Mountains NP--Look Rock, Blount County........... (*) (*) 0.3 2.2 2.2 0.3 1.2
Memphis NCORE site, Shelby County............................ 1.3 1.3 1.6 1.6 1.0 1.0 1.0
Broadway, Davidson County.................................... 1.9 1.6 (*) (*) (*) (*) (*)
Near Road, Davidson County................................... (*) (*) 1.7 1.7 1.9 1.9 1.8
Near Road Site at Southwest Tennessee Community College, (*) (*) 4.5 4.5 1.2 1.6 1.6
Shelby County...............................................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Data are not available for all monitors and years due to CO monitor startups and shutdowns during this time period.
** The level of the 1971 1-hour NAAQS for CO is 35 ppm not to be exceeded more than once per year. The design value is evaluated over a 2-year period.
Specifically, the design value is the higher of each year's annual second maximum, non-overlapping 1-hour average. Only valid design values are shown.
Table 3--Middle Tennessee Area CO Monitor 8-Hour Design Values
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CO 8-hr design value, ppm **
Site name ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama Ave. Station, Shelby County.......................... 1.9 1.9 1.5 1.5 1.2 (*) (*)
Great Smoky Mountains NP--Look Rock, Blount County........... (*) 0.2 0.3 1.2 1.2 0.3 0.6
Memphis NCORE site, Shelby County............................ 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.9 0.9
Broadway, Davidson County.................................... 1.5 1.2 (*) (*) (*) (*) (*)
Near Road, Davidson County................................... (*) 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.6
Near Road Site at Southwest Tennessee Community College, (*) 0.6 2.0 2.0 0.7 0.9 0.9
Shelby County...............................................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Data are not available for all monitors and years due to CO monitor startups and shutdowns during this time period.
[[Page 21251]]
** The level of the 1971 8-hour NAAQS for CO is 9 ppm not to be exceeded more than once per year. The design value is evaluated over a two-year period.
Specifically, the design value is the higher of each year's annual second maximum, non-overlapping 8-hour average. Only valid design values are shown.
Monitoring data for 2020 are not yet certified, but preliminary
data remain consistent with attainment of the ozone and CO NAAQS.
To support a demonstration of non-interference for the Middle
Tennessee Area, EPA is using 2014 as an attainment base year \11\ and
comparing the total emissions of NOX, VOC, and CO to the
total emissions of these pollutants in 2022, the first full year in
which the I/M program in the Middle Tennessee Area is expected to no
longer exist. EPA chose 2014 because the 2014 point, non-road, and non-
point data provided in Tennessee's February 26, 2020, submissions were
the most current data available to the State at the time of the
development of these SIP revisions. The mobile emissions were generated
utilizing MOVES2014b, the applicable mobile emissions model at the time
of the development of the SIP revision. For consistent comparisons, EPA
obtained the 2014 mobile emissions submitted by Tennessee from EPA's
Emissions Inventory System (EIS). Table 4 provides a summary for the
Middle Tennessee Area of the total emissions for NOX, VOC,
and CO in 2014; total emissions for NOX, VOC, and CO in 2022
with the I/M program; and total emissions for NOX, VOC, and
CO in 2022 without the I/M program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ As shown in Table 1 above, 2014 is included as one of the
years associated with attaining design values for the 2008 8-hour
ozone NAAQS (the applicable NAAQS in 2014). Although the 2014 4th
highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone concentration is 71 ppb (i.e.,
higher than the level of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS) at the Percy
Priest Dam monitor, EPA believes that 2014 is an acceptable base
year given the magnitude of the NOX and VOC emissions
reductions from 2014 to 2022 and the fact that the 2014 4th max was
only one ppb higher than the level of the 2015 8-hour ozone
standard. https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data. EPA also
notes that the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS was not in effect until
October 1, 2015.
Table 4--Middle Tennessee Area Emissions (Tons per Year (tpy))
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014 Emissions 2022 Projected emissions with I/M 2022 Projected emissions without
------------------------------------------------------------------------ I/M
Sector -----------------------------------
NOX VOC CO NOX VOC CO NOX VOC CO
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onroad...................................... 27,499 12,497 135,844 11,309 4,780 71,816 11,788 5,373 82,184
Point....................................... 8,040 3,803 2,568 4,455 3,867 2,696 4,455 3,867 2,696
Nonroad..................................... 8,339 5,638 56,497 5,413 3,451 49,105 5,413 3,451 49,105
Non-Point................................... 3,702 19,716 41,375 3,504 22,690 45,833 3,504 22,690 45,833
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................... 47,580 41,654 236,284 24,681 34,788 169,450 25,160 35,382 179,818
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent reduction from 2014 emissions: 47.1% 15.1% 23.9%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated in EPA's June 11, 2020, NPRM, for 2022, the removal of
the I/M program accounts for a small increase in NOX and VOC
on-road emissions. The difference in NOX emissions in 2022,
with and without the I/M program, is 479 tpy for NOX and 594
tpy for VOC. However, the total NOX emissions in 2022
without the I/M program are 22,420 tpy less than the total
NOX emissions in 2014, and total VOC emissions in 2022
without the I/M program are 6,272 tpy less than the total VOC emissions
in 2014. For CO, the difference in emissions in 2022, with and without
the I/M program, is 10,368 tpy. However, the total CO emissions without
the I/M program are 56,466 tpy less than the total CO emissions in
2014. Even without the I/M program in 2022, emissions of
NOX, VOC, and CO are projected to decrease by 47.1 percent,
15.1 percent, and 23.9 percent, respectively, from 2014 levels.
Because 2022 total emissions without the I/M program are projected
to be less than the total 2014 emissions, EPA proposes to conclude that
removal of the I/M program in the Middle Tennessee Area will not
interfere with attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS or any other
applicable CAA requirements. Additionally, as shown in Table 1, the
highest ozone design value associated with 2014 is 6 ppb above the most
recently available ozone design value for 2017-2019, thereby providing
an additional buffer, and the 2017-2019 ozone design value is at least
4 ppb below the level of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 70 ppb. EPA is
proposing to conclude that it is reasonable to expect emissions that
are 22,420 tpy less than 2014 NOX emissions and 6,272 tpy
less than 2014 VOC emissions would not cause ozone levels to exceed the
current 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Also, EPA is proposing to conclude
that it is reasonable to expect that emissions that are 56,466 tpy less
than 2014 CO emissions would not cause CO levels to exceed either the
1-hour or 8-hour CO NAAQS.
B. Hamilton County
Hamilton County is currently in attainment with all NAAQS.\12\ As
presented in Table 5, past design values (i.e., prior to October 1,
2015) have demonstrated attainment of the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS
(i.e., the applicable NAAQS at that time), and recent design values
have demonstrated attainment of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS in Hamilton
County.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ As mentioned in the June 8, 2020, NPRM, the current design
values in Hamilton County for PM, NO2, lead, and
SO2 are attaining the NAAQS. In fact, Hamilton County has
never been designated nonattainment for NO2, lead, or
SO2. Hamilton County was previously designated
nonattainment for the 1997 p.m. NAAQS but has since attained that
NAAQS and is still in compliance. The increases in NOX
and VOC emissions without the I/M program in 2022 in comparison to
with the I/M program in 2022 are not expected to cause a concern for
PM, NO2, lead and SO2 compliance in Hamilton
County. As discussed more in this notice, no reductions or emissions
benefits are attributable to the I/M program for PM, lead, and
SO2 in Hamilton County, and the total emissions increases
in NOX (of which NO2 is a component) in 2022
without the program is less than the total emissions in 2014.
[[Page 21252]]
Table 5--Hamilton County Ozone Monitor Design Values
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ozone design value, ppb *
Site name -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012-2014 2013-2015 2014-2016 2015-2017 2016-2018 2017-2019
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eastside Utility.................. 69 66 68 67 66 64
Soddy Daisy....................... 67 64 65 65 64 64
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Hamilton County was in attainment with the most stringent ozone NAAQS effective during the time period of the
design value. 2012-2014 and 2013-2015 design values were attaining the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.075 ppm.
EPA notes that the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.070 ppm was not in effect until October 1, 2015, and all
design values after this date attained the 2015 standard.
The Chattanooga Metropolitan Statistical Area (of which Hamilton
County is a part) is not required to operate a CO monitor, and there is
no historical CO monitoring data in Hamilton County. The highest CO
design values in Tennessee during 2018-2019 for the 1-hour and 8-hour
CO NAAQS were both measured at the Nashville Near Road site, and were
1.6 ppm (see Table 2 above) and 1.8 ppm (see Table 3 above),
respectively, which are less than 20 percent of the CO NAAQS for both
the 1-hour and 8-hour standards.
To support a demonstration of non-interference for Hamilton County,
EPA is using 2014 as an attainment base year \13\ and comparing the
total emissions of NOX, VOC, and CO to the total emissions
of these pollutants in 2022, the first full year in which the I/M
program in Hamilton County is expected to no longer exist. EPA chose
2014 because the 2014 point, non-road, and non-point data provided in
Tennessee's February 26, 2020, submissions, were the most current data
available to the State at the time of the development of these SIP
revisions. The mobile emissions were generated utilizing MOVES2014b,
the applicable mobile emissions model at the time of the development of
the SIP revision. For consistent comparisons, EPA obtained the 2014
mobile emissions submitted by Tennessee from EPA's EIS. Table 6
provides a summary for Hamilton County of the total emissions for
NOX, VOC, and CO in 2014; total emissions for
NOX, VOC, and CO in 2022 with the I/M program; and total
emissions for NOX, VOC, and CO in 2022 without the I/M
program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ As shown in Table 5 above, 2014 is one of the years
associated with attaining design values for the 2008 8-hour ozone
NAAQS of 0.075 ppm. The 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS was the applicable
NAAQS for the 2015 ozone season. EPA notes that the 2015 8-hour
ozone NAAQS of 0.070 ppm was not in effect until October 1, 2015.
Table 6--Hamilton County Area Emissions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014 Emissions 2022 Projected emissions with I/M 2022 Projected emissions without
------------------------------------------------------------------------ I/M
Sector -----------------------------------
NOX VOC CO NOX VOC CO NOX VOC CO
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Onroad...................................... 6,659 3,173 35,539 4,613 2,127 23,875 4,712 2,273 26,854
Point....................................... 1,024 664 458 1,314 825 566 1,314 825 566
Nonroad..................................... 3,252 1,587 13,594 2,220 935 11,600 2,220 935 11,600
Non-Point................................... 2,037 5,212 7,038 1,220 5,744 7,007 1,220 5,777 7,007
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................... 12,972 10,636 56,629 9,367 9,632 43,049 9,467 9,778 46,028
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percent reduction from 2014 emissions: 27.0% 8.1% 18.7%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As stated in the June 8, 2020, NPRM, for 2022, the removal of the
I/M program accounts for a small increase in NOX and VOC on-
road emissions. The difference in emissions in 2022, with and without
the I/M program, is 100 tpy for NOX and 146 tpy for VOC.
However, the total NOX emissions in 2022 without the I/M
program are 3,505 tpy less than the total NOX emissions in
2014, and the total VOC emissions in 2022 without the I/M program are
858 tpy less than the total VOC emissions in 2014. For CO, the
difference in emissions in 2022 with and without the I/M program is
2,979 tpy. However, the total CO emissions without the I/M program are
10,061 tpy less than the total CO emissions in 2014. Even without the
I/M program in 2022, emissions of NOX, VOC, and CO are
expected to decrease by 27.0 percent, 8.1 percent and 18.7 percent,
respectively from 2014 levels.
Because 2022 total emissions without the I/M program are less than
total 2014 base year emissions, EPA proposes to conclude that removal
of the I/M program in Hamilton County will not interfere with
attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS or any other applicable
requirement of the CAA. Additionally, as shown in Table 5, the highest
ozone design value associated with 2014 is 5 ppb above the most
recently available ozone design value for 2017-2019, thereby providing
an additional buffer, and the 2017-2019 ozone design value is 6 ppb
below the level of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 70 ppb. EPA is
proposing to conclude that it is reasonable to expect emissions that
are 3,505 tpy less than 2014 NOX emissions and 858 tpy less
than 2014 VOC emissions would not cause ozone levels to exceed the
current 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Also, EPA is proposing to conclude
that it is reasonable to expect that emissions that are 10,061 tpy less
than 2014 CO emissions would not cause CO levels to exceed either the
1-hour or 8-hour CO NAAQS.
C. Interstate Ozone Transport
EPA proposes to conclude that the changes that would be approved by
EPA in this action do not interfere with other states' ability to
attain and maintain the 2008 ozone NAAQS under the good neighbor
provision, CAA section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I). EPA has previously found
that the 2016 Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) Update fully
resolved Tennessee's good neighbor (or
[[Page 21253]]
``transport'') obligations for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The CSAPR Update
addresses NOX pollution transported to other states that
significantly contributes to nonattainment or interferes with
maintenance of the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\14\ Among other things, the CSAPR
Update requires reductions of NOX from power plants during
the annual ozone season from May 1 to September 30 in 22 states,
including Tennessee. Although for most covered states, EPA found the
CSAPR Update may only partially address the covered states' good
neighbor obligations, EPA found the rule fully addresses Tennessee's
good neighbor obligation for this NAAQS. See 81 FR 74504, 74540. That
conclusion was based on an assessment of air quality in the eastern
U.S. with implementation of the CSAPR Update, and it accounted for
emissions from all source sectors, including mobile sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ The CSAPR Update is a rule that followed the original CSAPR
rulemaking in 2011. CSAPR requires certain states in the eastern
half of the U.S. to improve air quality by reducing power plant
emissions of NOX and SO2 that cross state
lines and contribute to smog and soot pollution in downwind states.
On September 7, 2016, EPA revised the CSAPR ozone season
NOX program by finalizing an update to CSAPR for the 2008
ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards, known as the CSAPR
Update. The CSAPR Update ozone season NOX program was
designed to largely replace the original CSAPR ozone season
NOX program starting on May 1, 2017, and further reduce
summertime NOX emissions from power plants in the eastern
U.S.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The CSAPR Update was reviewed and generally upheld in Wisconsin v.
EPA, 983 F.3d 303 (D.C. Cir. 2019). The D.C. Circuit remanded the rule
without vacatur because, for states other than Tennessee, the rule did
not provide a full remedy by the next relevant attainment date under
CAA section 181. Thus, the CSAPR Update remains in effect. EPA notes
that the aspects of the CSAPR Update affecting Tennessee were not
challenged in the litigation over the rule and are not affected by the
remand of the rule in Wisconsin.
EPA believes the projected increase in mobile source emissions from
removal of Tennessee's I/M program does not affect EPA's prior finding
in the CSAPR Update that the state of Tennessee has no further
interstate transport obligations for the 2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. As
discussed in the sections above, in this supplemental notice, EPA has
analyzed the impacts of removing the I/M program in the Middle
Tennessee Area and Hamilton County and proposes to find that the
largest projected increase in mobile source emissions in these areas
would result in a combined projected increase of 579 tons in 2022, or a
2 percent increase in total anthropogenic NOX emissions in
these areas.\15\ Therefore, the net change in total anthropogenic
emissions across the entire state of Tennessee would be much less than
the projected 2 percent increase in NOX emissions for these
areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ In 2022, emissions of VOC are projected to increase by 740
tons, or a 1.7 percent increase in total anthropogenic VOC
emissions. In the context of interstate ozone transport, EPA focuses
on NOX as the key ozone precursor pollutant.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 30, 2020, in the notice of proposed rulemaking for the
Revised CSAPR Update, which addresses the Wisconsin remand, EPA
released and accepted public comment on updated 2023 modeling that used
a 2016 emissions platform developed under the EPA/Multi-Jurisdictional
Organization (MJO)/state collaborative project.\16\ In this modeling,
EPA found that the highest contribution in 2023 from the entire state
of Tennessee to any downwind receptor identified as having a
nonattainment or maintenance problem for the 2008 ozone standard is
projected to be 0.32 ppb. This amount of contribution is well below the
1 percent of the NAAQS threshold used in EPA's good neighbor framework
for determining whether an upwind state contributes to a nonattainment
or maintenance receptor under the 2008 ozone NAAQS (i.e., 0.75
ppb).\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See 85 FR 68964, 68981. The results of this modeling are
included in a spreadsheet in the docket for this action. The
underlying modeling files are available for public review in the
docket for the Revised CSAPR Update (EPA-HQ-OAR-2020-0272).
\17\ On March 15, 2022, Administrator Michael S. Regan signed
the final Revised CSAPR Update. The final action relies on the same
modeling conducted for the proposed rulemaking and described here.
See https://www.epa.gov/csapr/revised-cross-state-air-pollution-rule-update.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The small amount of projected increase in NOX emissions
in Tennessee as a result of this action, combined with the fact that
the highest modeled contributions from this state are well below the 1
percent threshold, support the conclusion that the projected increase
in mobile source emissions does not affect EPA's prior decision that
Tennessee has no remaining interstate transport obligations under the
2008 ozone NAAQS.
This supplemental proposed action does not make any finding
regarding Tennessee's interstate transport obligations for the 2015 8-
hour ozone NAAQS. EPA has not yet taken final action on Tennessee's
good neighbor SIP submission for the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
III. Incorporation by Reference
In this document, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
amended regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. EPA
is proposing to remove Chapter 1200-3-29--``Light Duty Vehicle
Inspection and Maintenance'' located in Table 1--EPA Approved Tennessee
Regulations, and Regulation No. 8--``Regulation of Emissions from
Light-Duty Motor Vehicles through Mandatory Vehicle Inspection and
Maintenance Program,'' located in Table 5--EPA Approved Nashville-
Davidson County, Regulations from the Tennessee SIP, which is
incorporated by reference in accordance with the requirements of 1 CFR
51.5. EPA has made and will continue to make the SIP generally
available through www.regulations.gov and at the EPA Region 4 Office
(please contact the person identified in the ``For Further Information
Contact'' section of this preamble for more information).
IV. Supplemental Proposed Actions
In its June 2020 NPRMs, EPA originally proposed to approve
Tennessee's February 26, 2020, SIP revisions to remove the I/M programs
for Hamilton County and the Middle Tennessee Area from Tennessee's SIP.
EPA continues to propose to find that the removal of the I/M program
requirements for Hamilton County and Middle Tennessee are consistent
with CAA section 110(l). Additionally, EPA continues to propose to
approve the removal of the I/M requirements for Hamilton County and the
Middle Tennessee Area from the Tennessee SIP. However, through this
SNPRM, EPA is proposing to rely on an additional and clarified
technical rationale related to the proposed approval of Tennessee's
February 26, 2020 SIP revisions. Specifically, EPA proposes to rely on
an emissions inventory comparison to inform its determination of
whether Hamilton County and the Middle Tennessee Area would continue to
attain and maintain the ozone and CO NAAQS and further affirms that
both areas would continue to attain and maintain the other NAAQS after
removal of the I/M program. EPA is further proposing to conclude that
the proposed removal of the I/M program will not interfere with other
states' ability to attain and maintain the 2008 ozone NAAQS under the
good neighbor provision and providing information related to that
conclusion. EPA is requesting comment on the use of additional and
clarified technical analysis in this supplemental proposal.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve SIP
submissions
[[Page 21254]]
that comply 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. These actions merely propose to
approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and do not impose
additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. For that
reason, these proposed actions:
Are not significant regulatory actions subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
Do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Are certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Do not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Are not economically significant regulatory actions based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Are not significant regulatory actions subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Are not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
Do 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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: April 13, 2021.
John Blevins,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2021-08320 Filed 4-21-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P