[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 11 (Friday, January 16, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 2414]
[FR Doc No: 2015-00633]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[ER-FRL-9019-1]

Environmental Impact Statements; Notice of Availability

    Responsible Agency: Office of Federal Activities, General
Information<PHONE_NUMBER> or http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/.

Weekly receipt of Environmental Impact Statements
Filed 01/05/2015 Through 01/09/2015
Pursuant to 40 CFR 1506.9.

Notice

    Section 309(a) of the Clean Air Act requires that EPA make public
its comments on EISs issued by other Federal agencies. EPA's comment
letters on EISs are available at: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/nepa/eisdata.html.

EIS No. 20150001, Final Supplement, NMFS, FL, Amendment 16 to the
Fishery Management Plan for the Shrimp Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico,
U.S. Waters, Review Period Ends: 02/17/2015, Contact: Susan Gerhart
727-824-5305.
EIS No. 20150002, Final EIS, NPS, TX, Lake Meredith National Recreation
Area Off-Road Vehicle Management Plan, Review Period Ends: 02/17/2015,
Contact: Robert Maguire<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20150003, Draft EIS, BLM, WY, Sheep Mountain Uranium Project,
Comment Period Ends: 03/02/2015, Contact: Chris Krassin<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20150004, Draft EIS, FDA, 00, Proposed Rule: Standards for
Growing, Harvesting, Packing, and Holding of Produce for Human
Consumption, Comment Period Ends: 03/13/2015, Contact: Annette McCarthy
240-402-1057.
EIS No. 20150005, Draft EIS, USFS, CO, Chimney Rock National Monument
Management Plan, Comment Period Ends: 03/02/2015, Contact: Sara Brinton
970-264-1532.
EIS No. 20150006, Draft EIS, BR, WA, Kachess Drought Relief Pumping
Plant and Keechelus Reservoir-to-Kachess Reservoir Conveyance, Comment
Period Ends: 03/10/2015, Contact: Candace McKinley<PHONE_NUMBER>~ext.
603.
EIS No. 20150007, Draft EIS, BLM, CO, Bull Mountain Unit Master
Development Plan, Comment Period Ends: 03/02/2015, Contact: Gina Jones
970-240-5300.
EIS No. 20150008, Final EIS, NMFS, WA, Harvest Specifications and
Management Measures for 2015-2016 and Biennial Periods Thereafter,
Review Period Ends: 02/17/2015, Contact: Becky Renko<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20150009, Draft EIS, DOE, 00, PROGRAMMATIC--Engineered High
Energy Crop Programs, Comment Period Ends: 03/17/2015, Contact:
Jonathan Burbaum<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20150010, Draft EIS, USFS, UT, Monroe Mountain Aspen Ecosystems
Restoration Project, Comment Period Ends: 03/02/2015, Contact: Jason
Kling<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20150011, Draft EIS, BR, CA, North Valley Regional Recycled
Water Program, Comment Period Ends: 03/03/2015, Contact: Benjamin
Lawrence<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20150012, Draft EIS, USA, KY, PROGRAMMATIC--Training Mission
and Mission Support Activities at Fort Campbell, Comment Period Ends:
03/02/2015, Contact: Gene Zirkle<PHONE_NUMBER> .
EIS No. 20150013, Final EIS, WAPA, NE., Interconnection of the Grande
Prairie Wind Farm, Review Period Ends: 02/17/2015, Contact: Rod
O'Sullivan<PHONE_NUMBER>.
EIS No. 20150014, Draft EIS, USFS, CO, Breckenridge Ski Resort, Multi-
Season Recreation Projects, Comment Period Ends: 03/02/2015, Contact:
Roger Poirier<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Amended Notices

EIS No. 20140300, Draft EIS, BLM, NV, Las Vegas and Pahrump Field
Offices Draft Resource Management Plan, Comment Period Ends: 02/06/
2015, Contact: Lee Kirk<PHONE_NUMBER>. Revision to FR Notice Published
10/10/2014; Extending Comment Period from 01/07/2015 to 02/06/2015.
EIS No. 20140333, Draft EIS, BR, CA, Central Valley Project Municipal
and Industrial Water Shortage Policy, Comment Period Ends: 03/13/2015,
Contact: Tim Rust<PHONE_NUMBER>. Revision to FR Notice Published 11/28/
2014; Extending Comment Period from 01/12/2015 to 03/13/2015.

    Dated: January 13, 2015.
Cliff Rader,
Director, NEPA Compliance Division, Office of Federal Activities.
[FR Doc. 2015-00633 Filed 1-15-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


UPS EXPRESS September 10, 2004 Mr. James I. Palmer, Jr. Regional Administrator US EPA, Region IV Atlanta Federal Center 61 Forsyth Street, SW Atlanta, GA 30303 RE: Tennessee's response to EPA's recommended PM2.5 nonattainment designations Dear Mr. Palmer:

Tennessee offers the following comments regarding the PM2.5 nonattainment designations recommended by the Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA) as outlined in EPA's June 29, 2004 letter.

McMinn and Roane Counties:

EPA has proposed the inclusion of McMinn and Roane Counties as PM2.5 nonattainment areas primarily because of a large source in each county despite the fact that these two counties are not in a metropolitan statistical area ( MSA). Apparently, the sources of concern are Bowater Newsprint and the TVA Kingston Steam Plant. The EPA June 29, 2004 letter declares that meteorology or geography/ topography are not factors in the EPA rationale for including the counties.

Tennessee avers that the naming of these rural counties as nonattainment based upon a large source in that county is patently unfair to the citizens of that county. The monitors currently measure PM2.5 attainment, so it has to be an argument of contribution. Tennessee agrees that in general, the larger sources do have a potential to be contributors to the formation of PM2.5, but there has been no plausible demonstration to show that these sources actually impact either the Chattanooga or Knoxville MSAs where air monitoring measures PM2.5 nonattainment.

Therefore, with respect to McMinn and Roane counties, Tennessee declares the following:   Neither county should be listed as significantly contributing to the nonattainment of another county.   If a source( s) in a county outside of an MSA is to be listed as significantly contributing to the nonattainment of another county, it should be listed only after modeling confirms that.   Ultimately, a state implementation plan to ensure that all of Tennessee will attain the PM2.5 standard will be required.   In preparing the PM2.5 State Implementation Plan, Tennessee commits to model the two sources to ascertain their impact upon the Knoxville and Chattanooga MSAs and to the extent necessary, require sufficient control on the facilities to attain the standard.   EPA extends the invitation to discuss a partial county designation to capture these sources of concern as long as the ultimate nonattainment boundary in that county captures the source and is contiguous to an MSA nonattainment area. Tennessee rejects this offer, as it has no scientific or technical merit. The counties measure attainment, so it is not an argument over how large an area a nonattaining monitor should represent. This argument concerns contribution from point, rather than area sources. If a boundary is to be drawn, it must be point limited without a peninsula connecting it to a nonattaining MSA.   Upon designation of nonattainment, existing sources are expected to meet a RACT level of control for the pollutants causing nonattainment. In the case of the TVA Kingston Plant, oxides of nitrogen control in the form of Low NOx burners and Selective Catalytic Reduction units is underway. Lower sulfur fuels are being used in the interim and ultimately scrubbers will be installed. Details of the control efficiencies and timeline for implementation are enclosed as attachments to this letter. Since the facility of concern will have controls for SOx and NOx that far exceed the requirements of RACT, it seems useless to name a county or a well controlled facility as being nonattainment contributing without a specific modeling study done at the controlled level making a demonstration of attribution.   The " urban excess" evaluations conducted by EPA and proposed as a method for " L factor" ranking of the counties within an area ( MSA), according to their relative emissions of direct and indirect PM2.5 related air contaminants, also provides a method to evaluate potential reductions needed. An evaluation of the urban excess data for Knoxville, Tennessee area reveals that approximately 3 ug/ m3 total urban excess is present. This can be apportioned based on the emission inventory. The approximate amount of reduction needed, based on the urban excess calculations is equal to about 2% of the inventory. This is the projected amount needed to reduce the PM2.5 levels below the 15.0 ug/ m3 threshold for the Knoxville area. When the entire emission reduction amounts are actually realized, the PM2.5 monitored levels could be reduced to approximately 14.0 ug/ m3 ( assuming a reduction equal to the total urban excess amount).   The existing reductions proposed as part of the NOx SIP call and the NOx RACT requirements along with the other federal program reductions planned and the TVA NOx reductions already underway, should produce reductions that will achieve these goals.   It is unreasonable to include the Roane and McMinn county areas that are monitoring attainment for the PM2.5 standard, when it is highly likely that the emission reductions described above will alone be significant enough to bring the Knoxville area into attainment. The implementation of the federal programs and the NOx SIP/ RACT requirements will also bring about similar reductions for the sources in those counties as well. These reductions will also have a positive impact if the areas are considered to be contributing to PM2.5 nonattainment in the Knoxville region.

Chattanooga MSA:

Tennessee does not object to the naming of Hamilton County, as it is consistent with our most recent recommendation and the fact that it is measuring nonattainment of the PM2.5 standard. Tennessee does object to the naming of Marion County as there are essentially no point source emissions and most of the county's emission inventory is mobile source emissions from through commuters ( heavy duty trucks) along Interstate 24. Because of federal preemptions on fuels and the fact that these trucks are not stationed in Marion County, there is nothing that the county or the state can do but wait on the federal fuels and diesel rules to take effect. It makes no sense to place a county in economic growth jeopardy by declaring them to be nonattainment contributing when the facts so clearly justify otherwise.

There have been numerous meetings since June with local city & county representatives, Metropolitan Planning Organizations, Economic and Community Development, environmental groups, industry and the public. This has also provided an opportunity for additional discussions regarding the potential PM2.5 nonattainment areas. Control measures that are being implemented to address ozone nonattainment will also have positive impacts in mitigation of PM2.5 nonattainment. Tennessee is also planning to implement, in a number of areas, including Knoxville and Chattanooga, PM2.5 forecasting or Air Quality forecasts ( in areas with existing Ozone forecasting programs). The opportunity to educate the public and encourage business participation and involvement in reducing PM2.5 emissions and precursors will also provide a positive benefit toward achieving and maintaining PM2.5 attainment.

Knoxville MSA:

Tennessee does not object to the naming of Knox County, as it is consistent with our most recent recommendation and the fact that it is measuring nonattainment of the PM2.5 standard. The additional consideration of the " L" factor analysis proposed by EPA as a method to rank the emission component of the 9 factors to be considered in including or excluding counties in a given area as contributing to nonattainment, identifies several counties other than Knox as significantly contributing to nonattainment in the Knox County area. Tennessee agrees that Anderson and Loudon counties have a significant " L factor" score. However, the " urban excess" contributions should be further discussed. Blount County has an attaining PM2.5 monitor and relatively lower emissions than either Knox, Anderson or Loudon counties. In fact the reported NOx emissions are the lowest in the MSA except for Sevier County. Carbon and nitrates are identified as significant in the EPA calculated " urban excess" for the Knoxville region. The fact that nitrates are a significant component of the " urban excess" with Blount County demonstrating monitored attainment for PM2.5 does not support naming Blount county nonattainment. Tennessee agrees that there are other components of the " 9" factors that are identified as significant for Blount County in the EPA analysis. However, attainment of the standard is the true test for significant contribution. Again, Blount County has measured attainment with the PM 2.5 standard and should be given due credit for this.

The following control measures are being considered: more stringent controls for open burning, a NOx RACT rule for portions of West Tennessee and for the Tennessee Valley connecting Chattanooga and Knoxville. Statewide anti tampering rules for vehicles have been adopted by the State Air Pollution Control Board in addition to a vehicle emission testing program in Hamilton County.

Tennessee recommends that Marion, Anderson, Blount, Loudon, McMinn, Roane and Sevier be classified attainment and if that is not possible, they should be designated as unclassifiable.

Tennessee commits to examine its counties in accordance with PM2.5 SIP requirements and further commits to prepare a SIP for the attainment of the Federal PM2.5 standards in accordance with Federal guidance and regulations. Sources will be analyzed and if additional controls are needed, they will be imposed in order to achieve the PM2.5 standards within the Federally established compliance deadlines.

I urge you to take our comments into consideration when making the final designations for PM2.5 nonattainment. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me at 615 532 0554.

Sincerely,

Barry R Stephens, P. E. Director Division of Air Pollution Control Attachments cc: EPA, Region IV  Kay T. Prince, Anne Marie Hoffman & Dick Schutt, Tennessee Air Pollution Control Board Members Tennessee Local Air Pollution Control Program Directors


DATE: 6/ 07/ 05 MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: Note to the docket related to a replacement document for Region I's Response to Comments Document for docket no. OAR 2003 0061 FROM: Larry D. Wallace, Air Quality Strategies and Standards Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards TO: Margaret Reidy, ASRC Contractor for U. S. EPA Office of Air Docket Per an e mail note from Geoffrey Wilcox, of the Office of General Counsel ( OGC), I request that several documents be added to the PM Designations Docket " OAR 2003 0061". The documents to be included in the docket were inadvertantly left out during the process of finalizing the Federal Register related to the designations action. These documentys were, however, addressed and replied to in the Response to Comments Document related to the action from Region V and was included in the docket. In the interest of full and fair disclosure, we request that the documents be placed in the docket and that this note be added to the docket along with the aforementioned documents so that the public may be advised as to the reason for their inclusion in the docket at this time.

.