Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 156 / Tuesday, August 17, 2021 / Rules and Regulations demonstrate non-interference under these circumstances.
In the April 2021 SNPRM, EPA
clarified that although Tennessee included photochemical modeling sensitivity analyses to provide additional weight of evidence in its February 26, 2020, SIP revisions, and EPA described those analyses in the June 2020 NPRMs, the photochemical modeling sensitivity analyses were not required and were not intended as the bases for EPAs proposed determinations that removal of the I/M
program from Hamilton County and the Middle Tennessee Area would not interfere with attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS or any other applicable CAA requirements. EPAs conclusion that these removals satisfy CAA section 110l is based on the technical analyses summarized above and provided in greater detail in EPAs April 2021 SNPRM. See 86 FR 21248.

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES

IV. Responses to Comments EPA received numerous comments on the June 2020 NPRMs and the April 2021 SNPRM.10 Two state representatives expressed objection to removal of the I/M program while several state representatives expressed strong support for removal of the I/M
program and urged EPA to take quick action. For this response to comments, the comments have been grouped into the following categories: 1 Air quality improvements/impacts; 2 noninterference demonstration; and 3
comments outside the scope of this rulemaking. EPAs responses to comments are provided below.
A. Responses to Comments Related to Air Quality Improvements/Impacts EPA received numerous comments related to air quality and the potential impact of removing the I/M program on human health and the environment.
EPAs evaluation of these comments and responses is provided below.
Comment A1: Several commenters raise concerns regarding how the removal of the carbon emissions testing program will affect the health and wellbeing of the general population of Tennessee as well as vulnerable populations, elderly, and children.
Many of these commenters are particularly concerned about those suffering from asthma or allergies. Some commenters state that vehicle emissions could cause shortness of breath, wheezing, coughing, pulmonary 10 Comments are available on regulations.gov in dockets for EPAR04OAR20190619 Hamilton County and EPAR04OAR20190618 Middle Tennessee Area. A majority of the comments were received on the June 2020 NPRMs.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:18 Aug 16, 2021

Jkt 253001

inflammation, and lung disease. Other commenters identify vulnerable populations, such as those with cardiovascular diseases, diabetes, or COVID19, who could be particularly affected by vehicle emissions.
Response A1: Hamilton County and the Middle Tennessee Area are in compliance with all of EPAs NAAQS.
EPA has established NAAQS for six of the most common air pollutantsCO, ozone, PM, NO2, lead, and SO2known as criteria pollutants. Primary NAAQS are set to protect public health with an adequate margin of safety, including the health of at-risk groups; 11
and secondary NAAQS are set to protect the public welfare, which includes effects on trees, plants, crops, and ecosystems. See CAA sections 108 and 109. Thus, EPA evaluates air quality criteria and impacts to public health and welfare as part of the comprehensive standard setting process.
EPAs final rule revising each of the NAAQS includes a thorough explanation of human exposure and health risk assessments conducted in support of the Agencys review of evidence of exposures on human health effects, as well as detailed rationales for EPAs decisions on the relevant standards. See, e.g., 80 FR 65291
October 26, 2015 containing an analysis of the most recent ozone NAAQS.
As discussed in the April 2021
SNPRM, EPA conducted a technical analysis to comply with CAA section 110l, which determined the impacts of removal of the I/M program in Hamilton County and the Middle Tennessee Area.
EPAs technical analysis concludes that after removal of the I/M program, Hamilton County and the Middle Tennessee Area will continue to comply with all NAAQS, including the most stringent NAAQS. As discussed above, since the NAAQS are set to protect the public health and welfare and EPAs technical analysis shows that the areas will continue to comply with all of the NAAQS, public health and welfare will continue to be protected once the I/M
program is removed from the Tennessee SIP.
Comment A2: Several commenters express concern that removing the I/M
program would harm the natural 11 For example, the rulemaking associated with the establishment of the 2015 8-hour ozone NAAQS
states that the action provides increased protection for children, older adults, and people with asthma or other lung diseases, and other at-risk populations against an array of adverse health effects that include reduced lung function, increased respiratory symptoms and pulmonary inflammation; effects that contribute to emergency department visits or hospital admissions; and mortality. See, e.g., 80 FR 65292 October 26, 2015.

PO 00000

Frm 00019

Fmt 4700

Sfmt 4700

45873

ecology and wildlife of Tennessee.
Another commenter wrote that removing the I/M program could negatively affect food production. Both types of comments imply that removing the I/M program would worsen air quality, resulting in problems for the surrounding natural environment.
Response A2: As mentioned in Response A1, EPA has established primary and secondary NAAQS to protect human health and the environment. Each NAAQS, with the exception of CO, has both a primary and secondary NAAQS.12 In some cases, the primary and secondary NAAQS are set at the same level. Secondary NAAQS
provide public welfare protection, including protection against decreased visibility and damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings.
Hamilton County and the Middle Tennessee Area are in compliance with all secondary NAAQS. For reasons explained in EPAs June 2020 NPRMs and April 2021 SNPRM, EPA disagrees that removing the I/M program from the Tennessee SIP will cause Hamilton County or the Middle Tennessee Area to violate any NAAQS. Tennessees technical demonstrations support EPAs conclusion that the removal of the I/M
program for both Hamilton County and the Middle Tennessee Area will not interfere with attainment or maintenance of the NAAQS or any other applicable requirements of the CAA.
Further information concerning EPAs evaluation of Tennessees technical demonstrations can be found in Response B1. The commenters do not provide any technical information to support their position or indicate that interference with maintenance of the secondary NAAQS would result upon removal of the I/M program in the Middle Tennessee Area or Hamilton County. EPA has determined that upon removal of the I/M program, Hamilton County and the Middle Tennessee Area will continue to be in compliance with all secondary NAAQS, which are set to address the types of welfare concerns raised by the commenters.
Comment A3: A commenter asserts that air quality is getting worse in the Middle Tennessee Area and showing a flat trend in ozone design values in the Hamilton County region. With respect to the Middle Tennessee Area, a commenter claims that while current ozone NAAQS-related design values are below the standard, recent observations in air quality in the Area have shown an upward trend in highest ozone concentrations, indicating the reversal 12 See https www.epa.gov/criteria-airpollutants/naaqs-table.

E:FRFM17AUR1.SGM

17AUR1