[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 169 (Tuesday, September 2, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52089-52092]
[FR Doc No: 2014-20696]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-72914; File No. SR-NSX-2014-16]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; National Stock Exchange, Inc.;
Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change To
Amend Rule 15.5 To Provide Additional Clarity and Precision, Correct
Certain Citations, and Align the Rule With the Rules of Other Exchanges
With Respect to the Original and Continued Listing Standards for
Issuers' Compensation Committees

August 26, 2014.
    Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(the ``Exchange Act'' or ``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\
notice is hereby given that on August 12, 2014, National Stock
Exchange, Inc. (``NSX[supreg]'' or the ``Exchange'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') the proposed rule
change, as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have
been prepared by the Exchange. The Commission is publishing this notice
to solicit comment on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of the
Substance of the Proposed Rule Change

    The Exchange is proposing to amend Rule 15.5 to conform with the
provisions of Section 957 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (the ``Dodd-Frank Act''),\3\ Section
10C of the Exchange Act,\4\ and Rule 10C-1 promulgated pursuant
thereto.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1900 (2010).
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78j-3.
    \5\ 17 CFR 229.407 and 17 CFR 240.10C-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The text of the proposed rule change is available on the Exchange's
Web site at http://www.nsx.com, at the principal office of the
Exchange, and at the Commission's Public Reference Room.

II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

    In its filing with the Commission, the Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. The Exchange has prepared summaries, set forth in
sections A, B, and C below, of the most significant parts of such
statements.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ The Exchange notes that, as of the close of business on May
30, 2014, it ceased trading operations on its trading system. See
Exchange Act Release No. 72107 (May 6, 2014), 79 FR 27017 (May 12,
2014) (SR-NSX-2014-14). The Exchange continues to be registered as a
national securities exchange under Section 6 of the Exchange Act,
and continues to retain its status as a self-regulatory
organization. Prior to NSX ceasing trading operations, there were no
NSX-listed securities and all securities traded on NSX on the basis
of Unlisted Trading Privileges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change

1. Purpose
    The Exchange is proposing to amend Chapter XV, ``Listed Securities
and Other Exchange Products,'' and specifically Rule 15.5, entitled
``Other Listing Standards'' to conform with Section 10C of the Exchange
Act, as added by Section 952 of the Dodd-Frank Act. Section 10C
requires the Commission to direct national securities exchanges and
national securities associations to prohibit, with certain exceptions,
the listing of any equity security of an issuer that does not comply
with the Compensation Committee and compensation adviser requirements
of Section 10C.\7\ Specifically, Section 10C(a)(1) of the Act requires
the Commission to adopt rules directing exchanges to prohibit the
listing of any equity security of an issuer, with certain exceptions,
that does not comply with the requirements of Section 10C with respect
to Compensation Committees and compensation adviser requirements.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ See Exchange Act Sections 10C(a) and (f).
    \8\ Five categories of issuers are excluded from this
requirement: Controlled companies, limited partnerships, companies
in bankruptcy proceedings, open-end management investment companies
registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the
``Investment Company Act''), and foreign private issuers that
disclose in their annual reports the reasons why they do not have an
independent compensation committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange adopted rules to align with the requirements of
Section 10C of the Act and Rule 10C-1 thereunder in October 2012.\9\
The proposed amendments in the instant filing operate to provide
further clarity and precision and correct certain citations, and align
with the rules of other exchanges, with respect to the provisions of
Rule 15.5(d)(5) that govern a listed issuer's Compensation Committee.
The rule proposal also adds new text to the

Interpretations and Policies of Rule 15.5(d)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See Exchange Act Release No. 68039 (October 11, 2012), 77 FR
63914 (October 17, 2012) (SR-NSX-2012-15).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Listed Company Corporate Governance Requirements
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 15.5(d)(5)(a) to clarify the
Listed Company Corporate Governance Requirements for purposes of
determining the independence of a member of the Compensation Committee.
Specifically, the proposed amendment adds text stating that, in
addition to determining whether the director meets the independence
requirements of Rule 15.5(d)(2)(a) and (b),\10\ the listed company must
consider those factors contained in Rule 15.5(d)(5)(a)(i) and (ii).\11\
The Exchange submits that this amendment will reinforce the elements
that must inform a listed company's determination of the independence
of a member of the Compensation Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ Paragraph (d)(2)(a) provides that no director may qualify
as ``independent'' unless the board of directors affirmatively
determines that the director has no material relationship with the
listed company (either directly or as a partner, shareholder, or
officer of an organization that has a relationship with the company)
and that companies must disclose these determinations. Paragraph
(d)(2)(b) lists five additional bright line tests that a director
must meet to be considered independent, including that a director
who is an employee of the company, or whose immediate family member
is an executive officer of the company, is not independent until
three years after the end of such employment relationship.
    \11\ Paragraph (d)(5)(a) requires that, when determining the
independence of directors the listed company must consider (i) the
source of compensation of the director, including any consulting,
advisory or other compensatory fee paid by the listed company to the
director; and (ii) whether the director is affiliated with the
listed company, a subsidiary of the listed company, or an affiliate
of a subsidiary of the listed company.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Written Charter of the Compensation Committee
    The amendments proposed by the Exchange to Rule 15.5(d)(5)(b)(i)
with regard to the requirements for the written charter of the
Compensation Committee are also primarily intended to conform the text
of the rule with the provisions of Section 10C of the Act. First, the
Exchange proposes in the introductory text of Paragraph (d)(5)(b)(i) to
amplify the general requirements for the written charter by stating
that the charter must address the Compensation Committee's purpose,
responsibilities and authority, which at minimum must be to have direct
responsibility and authority to engage in the tasks described in Rule
15.5(d)(5)(b)(i)(A) through (F). The proposed amendment will better
define the scope of the Compensation Committee's authority to engage in
the tasks described in the rule.
    The Exchange is next proposing amendments to Rule
15.5(d)(5)(b)(i)(A) through (F) to remove the word ``independent''
contained in the pre-amendment rule text in reference to legal counsel.
The proposed changes to paragraph (b)(i)(A) through (F) recognize that,
while Section 10C(d)(1) of the Act provides that the Compensation
Committees of listed issuers shall have the express authority to hire
``independent legal counsel,'' it does not require that they do so, nor
does it preclude a Compensation Committee from retaining non-
independent legal counsel or obtaining advice from in-house counsel or
outside counsel retained by the issuer or management. The proposed
deletion will operate to remove any ambiguity in that regard.
    Consistent with Section 10C of the Act, the proposed change to the
rule text will enhance the pre-amendment requirements for the written
charter of the Compensation Committee by expressly stating that the
Compensation Committee, at a minimum, has the authority to retain or
obtain the advice of compensation consultants, legal counsel and other
compensation advisers as determined in the sole discretion of the
Compensation Committee and to appoint, compensate and oversee the work
of any such compensation consultants, legal counsel or other adviser.
The amended rule text will also list the factors that the Compensation
Committee must use in selecting a compensation consultant, legal
counsel or other adviser.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\ See proposed Rule 15.5(d)(5)(b)(i)(D).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Compensation Committee Funding
    The Exchange proposes to amend Rule 15.5(d)(5)(c) regarding the
funding that a listed company must provide for the Compensation
Committee to discharge its functions. As amended, subparagraph (5)(c)
will provide that listed companies must provide for appropriate
funding, as determined by the Compensation Committee, for payment of
reasonable compensation to a compensation consultant, legal counsel or
any other adviser retained by the Compensation Committee. As amended,
the text of such subparagraph will delete the word ``independent'' with
reference to legal counsel, a change which mirrors the similar change
to the requirement for the written charter of the Compensation
Committee, and specifies that the funding must be sufficient to pay
reasonable compensation to any other adviser `` . . . retained by the
Compensation Committee.''
    The Exchange submits that the proposed change will align
subparagraph (5)(c) with Section 10C of the Act and Rule 10C-1(b)(3)
pursuant thereto \13\ with regard to listing standards that must be
adopted by exchanges regarding requirements for compensation committees
and any compensation consultant, legal counsel or other adviser used by
such committees.\14\ The proposed amendments are intended to enhance
the clarity and precision of the Rule by providing that a listed issuer
must provide for appropriate funding for reasonable compensation for
compensation consultants, legal counsel, or any other adviser retained
by the Compensation Committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \13\ 17 CFR 240.10C-1(b)(3).
    \14\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Requirements for a Smaller Reporting Company
    The Exchange is further proposing clarifying amendments to Rule
15.5(d)(5)(e) with respect to the requirements for a Smaller Reporting
Company as defined in Rule 12b-2 under the Act.\15\ Specifically, the
amendments provide that a Smaller Reporting Company with a public float
of $75 million or more as of the last business day of its second fiscal
quarter will cease to be a Smaller Reporting Company as of the
beginning of the fiscal year following the Smaller Reporting Company
Determination Date. In that instance, the company shall be required to
comply with Rule 15.5(d)(5)(b)(i)(F) with respect to the criteria for
selecting a compensation consultant, legal counsel, or other adviser to
the Compensation Committee, as of six months from the date it ceases to
be a Smaller Reporting Company.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ 17 CFR 240.12b-2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Additionally, the amended rule specifies that the company must: (i)
Provide for one member of its Compensation Committee meeting the
independence standard of Rule15.5(d)(5)(a)(i)-(ii) within six months of
the date that it ceases to be a Smaller Reporting Company; (ii) provide
for a majority of directors on its Compensation Committee meeting those
requirements within nine months of that date; and (iii) provide that a
Compensation Committee comprised solely of members that meet those
requirements is in place within twelve months of that date.
    These amendments are intended to provide a degree of flexibility to
companies that cease to be Smaller Reporting Companies to fully
implement the provisions of Rule

15.5(d) on a workable basis, giving due regard to the steps necessary
for a company to fully implement the provisions of the Rule.
Revised Interpretations and Policies of Rule 15.5(d)(5): Compensation
Committee Assessment of Adviser Independence and Adoption of Adviser's
Recommendations
    The Exchange is also proposing amendments to the Interpretations
and Policies of Rule 15.5(a)(1)(d) that will serve to: (i) Provide
additional clarity as to the responsibility of a listed issuer's
Compensation Committee to conduct an independence assessment before
retaining or obtaining the advice of a compensation consultant, legal
counsel, or any other adviser; and (ii) provide guidance as to the
implementation of a consultant's or adviser's recommendations and the
exercise of the Compensation Committee's judgment in that regard.
    First, the revised text of the Interpretations and Policies
reinforces that the Compensation Committee is required to conduct the
independence assessment outlined in Rule 15.5(5)(b)(i)(F) \16\ with
respect to any compensation consultant, legal counsel or other adviser,
other than in-house legal counsel and any other in-house adviser whose
role is limited to certain identified activities, for which no
disclosure would be required under Item 407(e)(3)(iii) of Regulation S-
K.\17\ Such activities are consulting on any broad-based plan that does
not discriminate in scope, terms or operation, in favor of executive
officers or directors of the listed company, and that is available
generally to all salaried employees; or providing information that
either is not customized for a particular company or that is customized
based on parameters that are not developed by the compensation
consultant, and about which the compensation consultant does not
provide advice. The revised text in the Interpretations and Policies
incorporates in the Exchange's guidance to issuers the amendments to
Item 407 that were adopted by the Commission along with Section 10C of
the Act.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\ Under Rule 15.5(b)(i)(F)(1)-(6), the independence
determination must take into account the following required factors:
Other services provided to the issuer by the person that employs the
compensation consultant, legal counsel or adviser; the amount of
fees received by the adviser's employer from the issuer, as
expressed by a percentage of total revenue of that employer; the
conflicts of interests policies and procedures of the adviser's
employer; any business or personal relationship between the
compensation consultant, legal counsel or adviser with a member of
the Compensation Committee; any stock of the issuer owned by the
compensation consultant, legal counsel or adviser; and any business
or personal relationship between the compensation consultant, legal
counsel or adviser and any executive officers of the issuer.
    \17\ 17 CFR 229.407.
    \18\ 17 CFR 229.407(e)(iv).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In addition, the revised Interpretations and Policies makes clear
that Rule 15.5(d)(5) does not, in fact, require that a compensation
consultant, legal counsel or other compensation adviser be independent,
but only that the Compensation Committee consider the enumerated
independence factors before selecting or receiving advice from a
compensation adviser. The Compensation Committee may select or receive
advice from any compensation adviser they prefer including ones that
are not independent, after considering the six independence factors
outlined in Rule 15.5(d)(5)(b)(i)(F)(1)-(6).
    Finally, the Exchange proposes to include a new provision that
nothing in Rule 15.5(d)(5)(b) shall be construed to require the
Compensation Committee to implement or act consistently with the advice
or recommendations of the compensation consultant, legal counsel or
other adviser to the Compensation Committee; or to affect the ability
or obligation of the Compensation Committee to exercise its own
judgment in fulfillment of the duties of the Compensation Committee.
The proposed new text tracks the provisions of Rule 10C-1.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\ See CFR 240.10C-1(b)(2)(iii)(A) and (B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Statutory Basis
    The Exchange believes the proposed rule amendments are consistent
with the Exchange Act and the rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to national securities exchanges. Specifically, the Exchange
believes that the proposed amendments are consistent with Section 6 of
the Exchange Act \20\ in general, and Section 6(b)(5) in particular.
Section 6(b)(5) requires that the rules of an exchange be designed to,
among other things, promote just and equitable principles of trade, to
remove impediments to and perfect the mechanism of a free and open
market and a national market system and, in general, to protect
investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\ 15 U.S.C. Sec.  78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Exchange submits that the proposed amendments are consistent
with Section 6(b)(5) in that they are designed to protect investors and
the public interest by providing additional clarity and precision and
correct citations with regard to the Exchange's requirements for
Compensation Committees under the listed issuer corporate governance
requirements. The proposed revisions will also align the Exchange's
rules with the rules of other national securities exchanges, The
Exchange further believes that the proposed rule changes will further
the implementation of the requirements of Section 10C of the Act and
Rule 10C-1 pursuant thereto and are therefore consistent with the
Exchange Act.

B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition

    The Exchange does not believe that the proposed rule change will
impose any burden on competition that is not necessary or appropriate
in furtherance of the purposes of the Act. The Exchange submits that
these changes will have no competitive impact, in that they are
intended to better align the Exchange's corporate governance rules for
listed companies with the statutory requirements. Similar rules have
been enacted by other national securities exchanges with rules
governing the initial or continued listing of the equity securities of
listed companies and the proposed changes work to align Exchange Rule
15.5(d)(5) with the rules of other exchanges.

C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants, or Others

    The Exchange has not solicited, and does not intend to solicit,
written comments on the proposed rule change.

III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action

    Because the foregoing proposed rule change does not:
    A. Significantly affect the protection of investors or the public
interest;
    B. impose any significant burden on competition; and
    C. become operative for 30 days from the date on which it was
filed, or such shorter time as the Commission may designate, it has
become effective pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A) \21\ of the Exchange
Act and Rule 19b-4(f)(6) thereunder.\22\ At any time within 60 days of
the filing of such proposed rule change, the Commission summarily may
temporarily suspend such rule change if it appears to the Commission
that such

action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, for the
protection of investors, or otherwise in furtherance of the purposes of
the Act. If the Commission takes such action, the Commission will
institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule change
should be approved or disapproved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \21\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
    \22\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(f)(6). In addition, Rule 19b-4(f)(6)(iii)
requires the Exchange to give the Commission written notice of the
Exchange's intent to file the proposed rule change, along with a
brief description of the text of the proposed rule change, at least
five business days prior to the date of the filing of the proposed
rule change, or such other time as designated by the Commission.
This requirement has been met.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. Solicitation of Comments

    Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:

Electronic Comments

     Use the Commission's Internet comment form (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
     Send an email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Please include
File Number SR-NSX-2014-16 on the subject line.

Paper Comments

     Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.

All submissions should refer to File Number SR-NSX-2014-16. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (http://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filing also will be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of the Exchange. All
comments received will be posted without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You should
submit only information that you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File Number SR-NSX-2014-16, and should be
submitted on or before September 23, 2014.

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kevin M. O'Neill,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-20696 Filed 8-29-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 55 (Thursday, March 21, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 10461-10469]
[FR Doc No: 2019-05285]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R05-OAR-2018-0842; FRL-9991-11-Region 5]

Air Plan Approval; Illinois; Redesignation of the Illinois
Portion of the St. Louis Area to Attainment of the 1997 Annual Standard
for Fine Particulate Matter

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: On December 6, 2018, the Illinois Environmental Protection
Agency (Illinois) submitted a request for the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) to redesignate the Illinois portion of the St. Louis, MO-
IL nonattainment area (hereafter, ``St. Louis area'') to attainment for
the 1997 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) annual national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS or standard). The Illinois portion
of the St. Louis area includes Madison, Monroe, and St. Clair counties,
and Baldwin Township in Randolph County. EPA is taking this action
because it has determined that the St. Louis area is attaining the
annual 1997 PM2.5 standard based on the most recent three
years of certified air quality data. EPA is also proposing to approve a
revision to the Illinois state implementation plan (SIP) for
maintaining the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS through 2030.
Illinois' maintenance plan submission includes an updated emission
inventory, which includes emission inventories for PM2.5,
NOX, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and ammonia. The
maintenance plan submission also includes motor vehicle emission
budgets (MVEBs) for the mobile source contribution of PM2.5
and nitrogen oxides (NOX) to the St. Louis PM2.5
area for transportation conformity purposes. EPA is proposing to
approve and update both the emissions inventory and MVEBs. EPA is
proposing to take these actions in accordance with the Clean Air Act
(CAA) and EPA's SIP rules regarding the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before April 22, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2018-0842 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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: Michelle Becker, Life Scientist,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

I. What actions are EPA taking?
II. What is the background for these actions?
III. What are the criteria for redesignation to attainment?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of the state's request?
    1. Attainment Determination (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)).
    2. Section 110 and Part D Requirements, and Approval SIP under
Section 110(k) (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v)).
    3. Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions (Section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii)).
    4. Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 175A of the CAA (Section
107(d)(3)(E)(iv)).
    5. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget (MVEBs) for PM2.5
and NOX, and Safety Margin for the St. Louis Area.
    6. Comprehensive Emissions Inventory for the St. Louis Area
V. What are the effects of EPA's actions?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.

I. What actions are EPA taking?

    EPA is proposing to take several actions related to the
redesignation of the St. Louis area to attainment of the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is proposing to determine that the St.
Louis area has attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS based on
quality-assured, certified 2015-2017 air quality data. EPA is proposing
to grant the request to redesignate the St. Louis area to attainment of
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
    EPA proposes to find that Illinois' PM2.5 maintenance
plan meets the requirements of section 175A of the CAA and is proposing
to approve Illinois' PM2.5 maintenance plan for the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the St. Louis area as a revision to
the Illinois SIP. The PM2.5 maintenance plan provides for
the maintenance of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the St.
Louis area through 2030.
    EPA is also proposing to approve Illinois' 2008 and 2030 MVEBs for
the St. Louis area.
    Finally, EPA is proposing to approve Illinois' 2008 primary
PM2.5, NOX, sulfur dioxide (SO2), VOC,
and ammonia (NH3) emission inventories for the St. Louis
area as satisfying the requirement of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA for
a current, accurate, and comprehensive emission inventory.

II. What is the background for these actions?

    On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated the first primary annual
PM2.5 NAAQS to provide increased protection of public health
from fine particle pollution (62 FR 38652). In that action, EPA
promulgated an annual standard at a level of 15 micrograms per cubic
meter ([micro]g/m\3\) of ambient air, based on a three-year average of
the annual mean PM2.5 concentrations at each monitoring
site. On January 5, 2005, EPA published air quality area designations
for the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard based on air quality data
for calendar years 2001-2003 (70 FR 944). In that rulemaking, EPA
designated the St. Louis area, which includes Madison, Monroe, and St.
Clair counties, and Baldwin Township in Randolph county in Illinois, as
nonattainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard.

III. What are the criteria for redesignation to attainment?

    The CAA sets forth criteria for redesignating a nonattainment area
to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA allows for
redesignation provided that: (1) The Administrator determines that the
area has attained the applicable NAAQS based on current air quality
data; (2) the Administrator has fully approved an applicable SIP for
the area under section 110(k) of the CAA; (3) the Administrator
determines that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and
enforceable emission reductions resulting from implementation of the
applicable SIP, Federal air pollution control regulations, and other
permanent and enforceable emission reductions; (4) the Administrator
has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area as meeting the
requirements of section 175A of the CAA; and (5) the state containing
the area has met all requirements applicable to the area for purposes
of redesignation under section 110 and part D of subchapter I of the
CAA.

IV. What is EPA's analysis of the state's request?

    EPA is proposing to redesignate the St. Louis area to attainment of
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and to approve updates to the
Illinois maintenance plan including MVEBs and emissions inventory for
the area. The rationale for these proposed actions follows.

1. Attainment Determination (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(i))

    To redesignate an area from nonattainment to attainment, the CAA
requires EPA to determine that the area has attained the applicable
NAAQS (CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). For PM2.5, an area is
attaining the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS if it meets the
standard, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.13 and part 50,
appendix N, based on three complete, consecutive calendar years of
quality-assured air quality monitoring data. To attain the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS, the 3-year average of the annual arithmetic
mean concentration, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR part 50,
appendix N, must be less than or equal to 15.0 [micro]g/m\3\ at all
relevant monitoring sites in the subject area over a 3-year period. The
relevant data must be collected and quality-assured in accordance with
40 CFR part 58 and recorded in the EPA Air Quality System (AQS)
database. The monitors generally should have remained at the same
location for the duration of the monitoring period required for
demonstrating attainment.
    EPA reviewed the certified, quality-assured/quality-controlled
PM2.5 monitoring data from the St. Louis area for the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS from 2015-2017 and determined that the
design value for the area is less than the standard of 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\
for that period. The PM2.5 design values for monitors with
complete data are summarized in Table 1:

                         Table 1--Monitoring Data for the St. Louis Area for 2015-2017 1997 Annual PM2.5 Standard ([mu]g/m \3\)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Year                           Average
                   State                             City/county               Site      ---------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                2015            2016            2017          2015-2017
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Illinois..................................  Madison.....................           Alton             9.0             8.8             8.7             8.8
Illinois..................................  Madison.....................      Wood River             9.1             8.7             8.3             8.7
Illinois..................................  Madison.....................    Granite City            10.4             9.1             9.6             9.7
Illinois..................................  Randolph....................         Houston             7.9             8.0            9.6*             8.5
Illinois..................................  St. Claire..................  East St. Louis            10.7            10.0             8.8             9.8
Missouri..................................  St. Louis City..............    Blair Street            10.4             8.5             7.9             8.9
Missouri..................................  St. Louis City..............  South Broadway            11.1             8.1             7.8             9.0
Missouri..................................  St. Louis City..............     Forest Park             9.2             8.7             8.3             8.7
Missouri..................................  St. Louis County............           Ladue            10.3             8.7             9.4             9.5
Missouri..................................  Jefferson...................     Arnold West            11.6             8.3             8.2             9.3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* data completeness requirements met by substituting data from a secondary monitor resulting in a valid design value (83 FR 66631).

    Pursuant to section 179(c) of the CAA, EPA is proposing to
determine that the St. Louis area is attaining the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. This proposed determination is based upon
complete, quality-assured, and certified ambient

air monitoring data for the 2015-2017 monitoring period that show the
area has monitored attainment of 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

2. Section 110 and Part D Requirements, and Approval SIP under Section
110(k) (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v))

    EPA is proposing to find that Illinois has met all currently
applicable SIP requirements for purposes of redesignation for the St.
Louis area under section 110 of the CAA (general SIP requirements), and
the planning requirements in part D of subchapter I of the CAA (part
D). We are proposing to find that all applicable requirements of the
Illinois SIP, for purposes of redesignation, have been implemented, in
accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and 107(d)(3)(E)(v) of the
CAA. As discussed below, in this section, EPA is proposing to approve
Illinois' 2008 emissions inventory as meeting the section 172(C)(3)
requirement for a comprehensive emissions inventory.
    In making these proposed determinations, we have ascertained which
SIP requirements are applicable for purposes of redesignation, have
concluded that there are SIP measures meeting these requirements, and
that they are approved or will be approved by the time of final
rulemaking on the State's PM2.5 redesignation request.
a. Illinois has met all Applicable Requirements for Purposes of
Redesignation of the St. Louis 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 include enforceable emission limitations and other control
measures, means or techniques necessary to meet the requirements of the
CAA; provide for establishment and operation of appropriate devices,
methods, systems, and procedures necessary to monitor ambient air
quality; 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; include provisions for the
implementation of part C, Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
and part D, New Source Review (NSR) permit programs; include criteria
for stationary source emission control measures, monitoring, and
reporting; include provisions for air quality modeling; and 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 that area's
nonattainment designation. Therefore, we believe 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 the redesignation. A state
remains subject to 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 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 lead
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); and
66 FR 50399 (October 19, 2001) (final redesignation of Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania 1-hour ozone nonattainment area).
    We have reviewed the Illinois SIP and determined that it meets the
general SIP requirements under section 110 of the CAA to the extent
they are applicable for purposes of redesignation. EPA has previously
approved provisions of Illinois' SIP addressing section 110
requirements at 40 CFR 52.720.
ii. Part D Requirements
    EPA has determined that, upon approval of the base year emissions
inventories discussed in section IV.6 of this rulemaking, the Illinois
SIP will meet the SIP requirements for the St. Louis area applicable
for purposes of redesignation under part D of the CAA. Subpart 1 of
part D, found in sections 172-176 of the CAA, sets forth the basic
nonattainment requirements applicable to all nonattainment areas.
Subpart 4 of part D, found in section 189 of the CAA, sets forth
nonattainment requirements applicable for particulate matter
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. See 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.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ September 4, 1992 Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director,
Air Quality Management Division (EPA), entitled, ``Procedures for
Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 St. Louis area
1997 annual PM2.5 nonattainment area as well.
    As noted above, the remaining section 172(c) ``attainment
planning'' requirements are not applicable for purposes of evaluating
the state's redesignation request. Specifically, these are the
reasonably available

control measures (RACM) requirement under section 172(c)(1), which
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; 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 the section
172(c)(6) requirement that the SIP contain control measures necessary
to provide for attainment of the standard. These requirements are not
applicable in evaluating Illinois' redesignation request because the
St. Louis area has monitored attainment of the 1997 annual standard
prior to the required attainment date of April 5, 2010, as promulgated
in the Clean Data Determination published July 27, 2012 (77 FR 38183).
    Section 172(c)(3) requires submission and approval of a
comprehensive, accurate and current inventory of actual emissions.
Illinois submitted a 2008 base year emissions inventory as part of
their PM2.5 attainment demonstration on December 6, 2018 and
requested that the 2008 inventories be used as the most accurate and
current inventory. As discussed below in section IV.6, EPA is proposing
to approve Illinois' 2008 emissions inventory as meeting the section
172(c)(3) emission inventory requirement for the St. Louis 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) and 189(a)(1)(A) requires source permits
for the construction and operation of new and modified major stationary
sources anywhere in the nonattainment area. EPA approved the current
Illinois NSR program for PM2.5 on May 13, 2003 (68 FR
25504). In addition, the state's maintenance plan does not rely on
nonattainment NSR, therefore having a fully approved NSR program is not
an applicable requirement; nonetheless, we have 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)(7) requires the SIP to meet the applicable
provisions of section 110(a)(2). As noted above, we find that the
Illinois SIP meets the section 110(a)(2) applicable requirements for
purposes of redesignation.
(2) Section 176 Conformity Requirements
    Section 176(c) of the CAA requires states to establish criteria and
procedures to ensure that Federally-supported or funded activities,
including highway 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). State transportation
conformity regulations must be consistent with Federal conformity
regulations relating to consultation, enforcement, and enforceability,
which EPA promulgated pursuant to CAA requirements.
    EPA approved Illinois' transportation conformity SIPs on December
23, 1997 (62 FR 67000). In April 2010, EPA promulgated changes to 40
CFR 51.851, eliminating the requirement for states to maintain a
general conformity SIP. EPA confirms that Illinois has met the
applicable conformity requirements under section 176.
b. Illinois Has a Fully Approved Applicable SIP Under Section 110(k) of
the CAA
    Upon final approval of Illinois' comprehensive 2008 emissions
inventories, EPA will have fully approved the Illinois SIP for the St.
Louis area under section 110(k) of the CAA for all requirements
applicable for purposes of redesignation. EPA may rely on prior SIP
approvals in approving a redesignation request (See page 3 of the
Calcagni memorandum; Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v.
Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989-90 (6th Cir. 1998); Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d
426 (6th Cir. 2001)) plus any additional measures it may approve in
conjunction with a redesignation action. See 68 FR 25413, 25426 (May
12, 2003). Since the passage of the CAA of 1970, Illinois has adopted
and submitted, and EPA has fully approved, provisions addressing
various required SIP elements under particulate matter standards. In
this action, EPA is proposing to approve Illinois' 2008 comprehensive
emissions inventories for the St. Louis area as meeting the requirement
of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. No St. Louis area SIP provisions are
currently disapproved, conditionally approved, or partially approved.
Therefore, EPA has fully approved the applicable requirements for the
St. Louis area under section 110(k) in accordance with section
107(d)(3)(E)(ii).

3. Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions (Section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii))

    EPA finds that Illinois has demonstrated that the observed air
quality improvement in the St. Louis area is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions from Federal measures. In making this
demonstration, Illinois has calculated the change in emissions between
2002, one of the years the St. Louis area was monitoring nonattainment,
and 2008, one of the years the St. Louis area monitored attainment. The
reduction in emissions and the corresponding improvement in air quality
over this period can be attributed to several regulatory control
measures that the St. Louis and contributing areas have implemented in
recent years.
a. Permanent and Enforceable Controls Implemented
    The following is a discussion of permanent and enforceable measures
that have been implemented in the area:
i. Federal Emission Control Measures
    Reductions in directly emitted fine particles and fine particle
precursor emissions have occurred statewide and in upwind areas because
of Federal emission control measures, with additional emission
reductions expected to occur in the future. Federal emission control
measures include the following:
    Tier 2 Emission Standards for Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur
Standards. These emission control requirements result in lower
NOX and SO2 emissions from new cars and light
duty trucks, including sport utility vehicles. The Federal rules were
phased in between 2004 and 2009. EPA has estimated that, by the end of
the phase-in period, new vehicles will emit less NOX with
the following percentage decreases: Passenger cars (light duty
vehicles)--77%; light duty trucks, minivans and sports utility
vehicles--86%; and, larger sports utility vehicles, vans and heavier
trucks--69% to 95%. EPA expects fleet-wide average emissions to decline
by similar percentages as new vehicles replace older vehicles. The Tier
2 standards also reduced the sulfur content of gasoline to 30 parts per
million (ppm) beginning in January 2006, reducing both directly emitted
sulfates and the precursor SO2.
    Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Rule. EPA issued this rule in July 2000.
This rule includes standards limiting the sulfur content of diesel
fuel, which went into

effect in 2004. A second phase took effect in 2007 which reduced fine
particle emissions from heavy-duty highway engines and further reduced
the highway diesel fuel sulfur content to 15 ppm. The total program is
estimated to achieve a 90% reduction in direct PM2.5
emissions and a 95% reduction in NOX emissions for these new
engines using low sulfur diesel, compared to existing engines using
higher sulfur content diesel. The reduction in fuel sulfur content also
yielded an immediate reduction in sulfate particle emissions from all
diesel vehicles.
    Nonroad Diesel Rule. In May 2004, EPA promulgated a rule for large
nonroad diesel engines, such as those used in construction, agriculture
and mining equipment, that was phased in between 2008 and 2014. The
rule also reduces the sulfur content in nonroad diesel fuel by over
99%. Prior to 2006, nonroad diesel fuel averaged approximately 3,400
ppm sulfur. This rule limited nonroad diesel sulfur content to 500 ppm
by 2006, with a further reduction to 15 ppm by 2010. The combined
engine and fuel rules will reduce NOX and PM2.5
emissions from large nonroad diesel engines by over 90%, compared to
current nonroad engines using higher sulfur content diesel. It is
estimated that compliance with this rule will cut NOX
emissions from nonroad diesel engines by up to 90%. This rule achieved
some emission reductions by 2008 and was fully implemented by 2010. The
reduction in fuel sulfur content also yielded an immediate reduction in
sulfate particle emissions from all diesel vehicles.
    Nonroad Large Spark-Ignition Engine and Recreational Engine
Standards. In November 2002, EPA promulgated emission standards for
groups of previously unregulated nonroad engines. These engines include
large spark-ignition engines such as those used in forklifts and
airport ground-service equipment; recreational vehicles using spark-
ignition engines such as off-highway motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles
and snowmobiles; and recreational marine diesel engines. Emission
standards from large spark-ignition engines were implemented in two
tiers, with Tier 1 starting in 2004 and Tier 2 in 2007. Recreational
vehicle emission standards were phased in from 2006 through 2012.
Marine diesel engine standards were phased in from 2006 through 2009.
With full implementation of the entire nonroad spark-ignition engine
and recreational engine standards, an 80% reduction in NOX
is expected by 2020. Most of these emission reductions occurred by the
2015-2017 period used to demonstrate attainment, but additional
emission reductions will occur during the maintenance period.
ii. Control Measures in Contributing Areas
    NOX SIP Call. On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA
issued a NOX SIP Call requiring the District of Columbia and
22 states (including Illinois and Missouri) to reduce emissions of
NOX. Affected states were required to comply with Phase I of
the SIP Call beginning in 2004, and Phase II beginning in 2007.
Emission reductions resulting from regulations developed in response to
the NOX SIP Call are permanent and enforceable.
    Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). On March 10, 2004, EPA
promulgated the CAIR. The CAIR required Electric Generating Units
(EGUs) in 28 eastern states and the District of Columbia to
significantly reduce emissions of NOX and SO2. On
July 6, 2011, EPA finalized Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) as a
replacement for CAIR. CSAPR became effective on January 1, 2015, for
SO2 and annual NOX, and May 1, 2015, for ozone
season NOX. EPA estimated CSAPR will reduce EGU
SO2 emissions by 73% and NOX emissions by 54%
from 2005 levels in the CSAPR region, which includes Illinois.
    On September 7, 2016, EPA promulgated an update to CSAPR that will
bring even greater reductions in NOX emissions. EPA
estimated that the CSAPR update and other changes already underway in
the power sector will cut ozone season NOX emissions from
power plants in the eastern United States by 20%, resulting in a
reduction of 80,000 tons in 2017 compared to 2015 levels.
iii. Consent Decrees
    Air quality in the Illinois portion of the nonattainment area has
benefited from implementation of state point source NOX
controls and other emission controls targeting PM2.5
precursors. Federally-initiated litigation resulting in emission-
reducing consent decrees with local industry include the ConocoPhillips
Global Refinery Settlement (filed January 27, 2005, U.S. District Court
for the Southern District in Texas), which provided for installation
(no later than December 31, 2009) of low-NOX burners and
ultra-low NOX burners on combustion units at its
``Distilling West'' operations (Roxana, IL, refinery), as well as
reductions of SO2, particulate matter, and NOX
from process operations. A settlement reached with Dynegy Midwest
Generation (USA v. IL Power Co., et al. 3:99-cv-833 Consent Decree,
March 2005, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois)
included the requirements to ``commence operation of the SCRs
[selective catalytic reduction systems] installed at Baldwin Unit 1,
Unit 2 . . . so as to achieve and maintain a 30-day rolling average
emission rate from each such unit of not greater than 0.100 lb/mmBtu
NOX'' and ``maintain a 30-day rolling average emission rate
of not greater than 0.120 lb/mmBtu NOX at Baldwin Unit 3.''
Within this same timeframe, the National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Integrated Iron and Steel
Manufacturing Facilities was amended on July 13, 2006, affecting
emission limits from the blast furnaces and Basic Oxygen Furnace shop
at the U.S. Steel facility in Granite City, Illinois. The control
measures and emission reductions resulting from this federal rulemaking
and consent agreements continue to be permanent and enforceable.
    The emissions reductions resulting from these control measures are
in Table 2.

                Table 2--2002 and 2008 Emissions Totals for the St. Louis 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
                                                   [Tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Pollutant                                2002               2008            Difference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5..................................................          10,950.60           8,136.98          -2,813.62
NOX....................................................          61,860.58          44,722.08         -17,138.50
SO2....................................................          55,940.09          50,557.33          -5,382.76
VOC....................................................          40,697.69          21,753.04         -18,944.65
NH3....................................................           4,418.65           3,873.19            -545.46
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 175A of the CAA (Section
107(d)(3)(E)(iv))

    In conjunction with the request to redesignate the St. Louis
nonattainment area to attainment status, Illinois has submitted a SIP
revision to provide for maintenance of the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS in the area through 2030.
a. What is required in a maintenance plan?
    Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the required elements of a
maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to
attainment. Under section 175A, the plan must demonstrate continued
attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least ten 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 ten
years following the initial ten year maintenance period. 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
PM2.5 NAAQS violations.
    The 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 ten 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.
    As discussed in detail in the section below, the state's
maintenance plan submission expressly documents that the area's
emissions inventory and modeling show that the area will remain below
the attainment year inventories through 2030, more than ten years after
redesignation.
b. Attainment Inventory
    Illinois developed an emissions inventory for annual
PM2.5 emissions for 2008, one of the years in the period
during which the St. Louis area monitored attainment of the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. The attainment levels of emissions are
summarized in Tables 3 through 7, along with future maintenance
projections.
c. Demonstration of Maintenance
    As discussed above, EPA has determined that the St. Louis area
attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS based on monitoring
data for the 3-year period from 2007-2009 and based on 2015-2017
monitoring data continues to attain the standard. In its maintenance
plan, Illinois selected 2008 as the attainment emission inventory year.
The attainment inventory identifies the level of emissions in the St.
Louis area that is sufficient to attain the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. Illinois began development of the attainment
inventory by first generating a baseline emissions inventory for the
St. Louis area. The year 2008 was chosen as the base year for
developing a comprehensive emissions inventory for direct
PM2.5, NOX, SO2, VOC, and
NH3. The projected inventory included with the maintenance
plan estimates emissions forward to 2025 and 2030, which satisfies the
ten year interval required in section 175A of the CAA.
    The emissions inventories address four major types of sources:
Point, area, onroad mobile, and nonroad mobile. The future year
emissions inventories have been estimated using projected rates of
growth in population, traffic, economic activity, expected control
programs, and other parameters. Nonroad mobile emissions estimates were
based on EPA's nonroad mobile model, with the exception of the railroad
locomotives, commercial marine, and aircraft. Onroad mobile source
emissions were calculated using EPA's MOVES2014a onroad mobile emission
model. The 2008 PM2.5, NOX, SO2, VOC,
and NH3 emissions for St. Louis area, as well as the
emissions for other years, were developed consistent with EPA guidance.
    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, p. 9. Where the
emissions inventory method of showing maintenance is used, the purpose
is to show that emissions during the maintenance period will not
increase over the attainment year inventory. Id. at pp. 9-10.
    As discussed in detail below, Illinois' maintenance plan submission
expressly documents that the St. Louis area's overall emissions
inventories will remain well below the attainment year inventories
through 2030. In addition, for the reasons set forth below, EPA
believes that the St. Louis area will continue to maintain the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS through 2030. Thus, if EPA finalizes its
proposed approval of the redesignation request and maintenance plan,
the approval will be based upon this showing, in accordance with
section 175A, and EPA's analysis described herein, that the Illinois
maintenance plan provides for maintenance for at least 10 years after
redesignation.
    The maintenance plan for the St. Louis 1997 annual PM2.5
area includes a maintenance demonstration that:
    (i) Shows compliance with and maintenance of the annual
PM2.5 standard by providing information to support the
demonstration that current and future emissions of PM2.5 and
NOX, as well as other precursors, remain at or below 2008
emissions levels.
    (ii) Uses 2008 as the attainment year and includes future emission
inventory projections for 2025 and 2030.
    (iii) Identifies an ``out year'' at least ten years after EPA
review and potential approval of the maintenance plan. Per 40 CFR part
93, PM2.5, and NOX MVEBs were established for the
last year (2030) of the maintenance plan.
    (iv) Provides, as shown in Tables 3 through 7 below, the estimated
and projected emissions inventories, in tons per year, covering only
the Illinois portion of the St. Louis, MO-IL area, for
PM2.5, NOX, SO2, VOC, and
NH3.

                               Table 3--St. Louis Area PM2.5 Emission Inventories
                                                   [Tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Sector                           2008 Attainment    2030 Maintenance      Difference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point..................................................           2,438.05           2,350.90             -87.15
Area...................................................           4,749.40           4,656.69             -92.71
Onroad.................................................             524.49             104.24            -420.25

Offroad................................................             425.04             304.41            -120.63
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
    Total..............................................           8,136.98           7,416.24            -720.74
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                Table 4--2002 and 2008 Emissions Totals for the St. Louis 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
                                                   [Tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Sector                           2008 Attainment    2030 Maintenance      Difference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point..................................................          16,608.41          14,519.27          -2,089.14
Area...................................................           1,638.36           1,766.40             128.04
Onroad.................................................          17,965.82           2,984.38         -14,981.44
Offroad................................................           8,509.49           9,222.09             712.60
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
    Total..............................................          44,722.08          28,492.14         -16,229.94
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                Table 5--St. Louis Area SO2 Emission Inventories
                                                   [Tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Sector                           2008 Attainment    2030 Maintenance      Difference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point..................................................          49,895.15          47,652.59          -2,242.56
Area...................................................             246.64             275.09              28.45
Onroad.................................................              60.26              51.76              -8.50
Offroad................................................             355.25             432.68              77.43
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
    Total..............................................          50,577.33          48,412.12          -2,165.21
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                Table 6--St. Louis Area VOC Emission Inventories
                                                   [Tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                         Sector                           2008 Attainment    2030 Maintenance      Difference
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point..................................................           4,270.41           6,071.31           1,800.90
Area...................................................           7,796.35           9,676.73           1,880.38
Onroad.................................................           6,741.77           1,402.96          -5,338.81
Offroad................................................           2,994.51           1,605.73          -1,388.78
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
    Total..............................................          21,753.04          18,756.74          -2,996.30
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                Table 7--St. Louis Area NH3 Emission Inventories
                                                   [Tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Difference 2008-
                         Sector                           2008 Attainment    2030 Maintenance         2030
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point..................................................             208.31             270.38              62.07
Area...................................................           3,354.13           3,381.35              27.22
Onroad.................................................             304.71             187.59            -117.12
Offroad................................................               6.04               8.94                2.9
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
    Total..............................................           3,873.19           3,848.27             -24.92
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As discussed in the section below, the state's maintenance plan
submission expressly documents that the area's emission levels will
remain below the attainment year emission levels through 2030.
d. Monitoring Network
    Illinois and Missouri each currently operate five monitors for
purposes of determining attainment with the annual PM2.5
standard for the St. Louis area. EPA has determined that the monitors
maintained by both Illinois and Missouri constitute an adequate
monitoring network.
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
    Illinois remains obligated to continue to quality-assure monitoring
data and enter all data into the AQS in accordance with Federal
guidelines in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. Illinois will use these
data, supplemented with additional information as necessary, to assure
that the area continues to attain the standard. Illinois will also
continue to develop and submit periodic emission inventories as
required by the Federal Consolidated Emissions

Reporting Rule (67 FR 39602, June 10, 2002) to track future levels of
emissions. These 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. Section 175A of the CAA requires that a
maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems
necessary to assure that the state will promptly correct a violation of
the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. 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. See section 175A(d) of
the CAA.
    The Illinois contingency plan defines Level I and Level II
contingency measure triggers. The Level I triggers are activated when
the PM2.5 average of the weighted annual mean of 15.0
[micro]g/m\3\ or greater occurs in a single calendar year within the
maintenance area or the total maintenance area emissions increase 5% or
more above the 2008 inventory. A Level I trigger response will consist
of a study, to be completed within nine months, to determine whether
the PM2.5 value indicates a trend toward higher
PM2.5 values or whether emissions appear to be increasing.
The Level II trigger will be prompted whenever a violation of the
standard (three-year average of the weighted annual means of greater
than 15.0 [micro]g/m\3\). If the Level II trigger occurs, Illinois will
conduct an analysis to determine control measures to address the
violation within six months. Level II trigger measures that can be
implemented in a short time will be selected to be in place within 18
months from the close of the calendar year that prompted the action
level. Illinois will also consider the timing of an action level
trigger and determine if additional, significant new regulations not
currently included as part of the maintenance provisions will be
implemented in a timely manner and will constitute our response.
    Because it is not possible to determine what control measures will
be appropriate at an unspecified time in the future, Illinois provides
that additional facility-specific controls requiring reductions in
NOX, PM2.5, SO2 and/or VOC emissions
and broader geographic applicability of existing measures are options
for implementation.
    As required by section 175A(b) of the CAA, Illinois commits to
submit to EPA an updated PM2.5 maintenance plan eight years
after redesignation of the St. Louis area to cover an additional ten
year period beyond the initial ten year maintenance period.
    For the reasons set forth above, EPA is proposing to approve
Illinois' 1997 annual PM2.5 maintenance plan for the St.
Louis area as meeting the requirements of CAA section 175A.
    Illinois further commits to conduct ongoing review of its data, and
if monitored concentrations or emissions are trending upward, Illinois
commits to take appropriate steps to avoid a violation if possible.
Illinois commits to continue implementing SIP requirements upon and
after redesignation.
    EPA finds that Illinois' contingency measures, as well as the
commitment to continue implementing any SIP requirements, satisfy the
pertinent requirements of section 175A.

5. Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget (MVEBs) for PM2.5 and
NOX, and Safety Margin for the St. Louis Area

    The maintenance plan submitted by Illinois for the St. Louis area
contains new primary PM2.5, NOX, and VOC MVEBs
for the area for the years 2008 and 2030. MVEBs are the projected
levels of controlled emissions from the transportation sector (mobile
sources) that are estimated in the SIP to provide for maintenance of
the ozone standard. The MVEBs were calculated using MOVES2014a. Table 8
details Illinois' 2008 and 2030 MVEBs for the St. Louis area.

   Table 8--MVEBs for the St. Louis 1997 Annual PM2.5 Maintenance Plan
                               [tons/year]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Pollutant                    2008 MVEB       2030 MVEB
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5...................................          524.49          208.29
NOX.....................................       17,965.82        5,980.67
VOC.....................................        6,741.77        2,470.72
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Illinois included ``safety margins'' as provided for in 40 CFR
93.124(a). A ``safety margin'', as defined in the transportation
conformity rule (40 CFR part 93, subpart A), is the amount by which the
total projected emissions from all sources of a given pollutant are
less than the total emissions that would satisfy the applicable
requirement for reasonable further progress, attainment, or
maintenance. The attainment level of PM2.5, NOX,
and VOC emissions for the St. Louis area is shown in tables 3, 4, and
6. Table 9 shows the remaining safety margin for the St. Louis area
following the allocation to the PM2.5, NOX, and
VOC MVEBs.

                  Table 9--2030 Safety Margin for St. Louis 2012 annual PM2.5 Maintenance Plan
                                                   [tons/year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                              Safety margin
                       Pollutant                            2030 Safety     allocated to 2030    Safety margin
                                                               margin              MVEB            remaining
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5..................................................             720.74             104.05             616.69
NOX....................................................          16,299.94           2,996.29          13,233.65
VOC....................................................            2,996.3           1,067.76           1,928.54
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The 2008 actual and 2030 projected emissions, even with this
allocation, will be below the 2008 attainment year emissions for
PM2.5, NOX, and VOC. For this reason, EPA finds
that the allocation of the safety margin to the MVEBs for the St. Louis
area meet the requirements of the transportation conformity regulations
at 40 CFR part 93,and are approvable. Once allocated to mobile sources,
these portions of the safety margins will not be available for use by
other sources.

6. Comprehensive Emissions Inventory for the St. Louis Area

    As discussed above, section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires areas to
submit a comprehensive emissions inventory including direct PM and all
four precursors (SO2, NOX, VOCs, and ammonia).
Actual emissions contained in the submittal cover the general source
categories of point sources, area sources, onroad mobile sources, and
nonroad mobile sources for the base attainment year of 2008.
    For this reason, EPA proposes to approve the emissions inventory as
complete and accurate, and meets the requirement of CAA section
172(c)(3).

V. What are the effects of EPA's actions?

    EPA is proposing to change the official designation of the St.
Louis area for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, found at 40 CFR
part 81, from nonattainment to attainment. EPA is proposing to
determine that the St. Louis area has attained the 1997 annual
PM2.5 standard, based on the most recent three years of
certified air quality data. This action also proposes to approve the
maintenance plan for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS as
revisions to the Illinois SIP for the St. Louis area. Also, the EPA
proposes to approve the 2008 emissions inventory for the St. Louis area
as well as the 2008 and 2030 MVEBs for the St. Louis area. These MVEBs
will be used in future transportation conformity analyses for the area.
    In addition, if finalized, according to the Fine Particulate Matter
National Ambient Air Quality Standards: State Implementation Plan
Requirements (81 FR 58009, August 24, 2016), ``for an area that is
redesignated to attainment after the effective date of this final rule,
the 1997 primary annual PM2.5 NAAQS will be revoked in such
an area on the effective date of its redesignation to attainment for
that NAAQS. After revocation of the 1997 primary annual
PM2.5 NAAQS in a given area, the designation for that
standard is no longer in effect.''

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the
accompanying approval of the maintenance plan under CAA section
107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the status of a geographical area
and do not impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources
beyond those required by state law. A redesignation to attainment does
not in and of itself impose any new requirements, but rather results in
the application of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that
have been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions
of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 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 Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For these reasons, these actions:
     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);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
     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, Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate
matter, Sulfur oxides.

40 CFR Part 81

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.

    Dated: March 11, 2019.
Cheryl L. Newton,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2019-05285 Filed 3-20-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P