Home/Federal/Federal Register/2026-11843

Proposed Rule2026-11843

Ozone Reclassification State Implementation Plan Rule

Primary source

Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.

Published

June 12, 2026

Issuing agencies

Environmental Protection Agency

Abstract

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is reconsidering certain aspects of the January 2025 final rule entitled State Implementation Plan Submittal Deadlines and Implementation Requirements for Reclassified Nonattainment Areas Under the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards ("January 2025 final rule"). Among other things, the January 2025 final rule codified a policy that certain State Implementation Plan (SIP) requirements for a prior classification remain due upon an area's reclassification to a higher classification. In this proposed action, the EPA is proposing a new interpretation that, upon reclassification, an area is subject only to those requirements in Clean Air Act (CAA) section 182 that are specific to that area's current classification. If finalized, this proposed rule would apply nationwide to all past and future reclassifications associated with the 2008, 2015, and any future ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The EPA is not reconsidering or reopening any other aspect of the January 2025 final rule in this rulemaking and is not addressing the scope of applicable requirements for NAAQS other than the ozone NAAQS.

Full Text

<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 91 Issue 113 (Friday, June 12, 2026)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 91, Number 113 (Friday, June 12, 2026)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 35639-35649]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2026-11843]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 51

[EPA-HQ-OAR-2025-0201; FRL-11817.1-01-OAR]
RIN 2060-AW81

Ozone Reclassification State Implementation Plan Rule

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is
reconsidering certain aspects of the January 2025 final rule entitled
State Implementation Plan Submittal Deadlines and Implementation
Requirements for Reclassified Nonattainment Areas Under the Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (``January 2025 final rule'').
Among other things, the January 2025 final rule codified a policy that
certain State Implementation Plan (SIP) requirements for a prior
classification remain due upon an area's reclassification to a higher
classification. In this proposed action, the EPA is proposing a new
interpretation that, upon reclassification, an area is subject only to
those requirements in Clean Air Act (CAA) section 182 that are specific
to that area's current classification. If finalized, this proposed rule
would apply nationwide to all past and future reclassifications
associated with the 2008, 2015, and any future ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). The EPA is not reconsidering or
reopening any other aspect of the January 2025 final rule in this
rulemaking and is not addressing the scope of applicable requirements
for NAAQS other than the ozone NAAQS.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 13, 2026.
Public hearing: If anyone contacts us requesting a public hearing
on or before June 17, 2026, the EPA will hold a virtual public hearing
on June 29, 2026. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for information on
requesting and registering for a public hearing.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-
OAR-2025-0201, by any of the following methods:
<bullet> Federal eRulemaking Portal: <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>
(our preferred method). Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments. You can also find a plain language summary of the rule on the
Federal eRulemaking Portal.
<bullet> Email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#66074b0708024b144b0209050d03122603160748010910">[email&#160;protected]</a>. Include Docket ID No. EPA-
HQ-OAR-2025-0201 in the subject line of the message.
<bullet> Fax: (202) 566-9744.
<bullet> Mail: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA Docket
Center, Office of Air and Radiation Docket, Mail Code 28221T, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20460.
<bullet> Hand Delivery or Courier (by scheduled appointment only):
EPA Docket Center, WJC West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20004. The Docket Center's hours of
operations are 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday (except
Federal holidays).
Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket ID
No. for this rulemaking. Comments received may be posted without change
to <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, including any personal information
provided. For detailed instructions on sending comments and additional
information on the rulemaking process, see the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document. For information on EPA Docket
Center services, please visit us online at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/dockets">https://www.epa.gov/dockets</a>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information about this proposed
rule, contact Stephen Senter, U.S. EPA, Office of State Air
Partnerships, Air Quality Planning Division, C531-H Research Triangle
Park, NC 27709; telephone number: (919) 541-3042; email address:
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6516000b1100174b161100150d000b250015044b020a13">[email&#160;protected]</a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Participation in virtual public hearing. To request a virtual
public hearing, contact the public hearing team at (919) 541-9782 or by
email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#bff0ecfeefcfcaddd3d6dcd7dadecdd6d1d8ffdacfde91d8d0c9">[email&#160;protected]</a>. If requested, the hearing will be
held via virtual platform on June 29, 2026. The hearing will convene at
10 a.m. Eastern Time (ET) and will conclude at 4 p.m. ET; additional
hearing hours may be added at the discretion of the EPA. The EPA may
close a session 15 minutes after the last pre-registered speaker has
testified if there are no additional speakers. The EPA will announce
further details at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone-pollution/ozone-implementation-regulatory-actions">https://www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone-pollution/ozone-implementation-regulatory-actions</a>.
If a public hearing is requested, the EPA will begin pre-
registering speakers for the hearing no later than one business day
after a request has been received. To register to speak at the virtual
hearing, please use the online registration form available at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone-pollution/ozone-implementation-regulatory-actions">https://www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone-pollution/ozone-implementation-regulatory-actions</a> or contact the public hearing team at (919) 541-9782
or by email at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e0afb3a1b09095828c898388858192898e87a0859081ce878f96">[email&#160;protected]</a>. The last day to pre-register
to speak at the hearing will be June 24, 2026. Prior to the hearing,
the EPA will post a general agenda that will list pre-registered
speakers in approximate order at: <a href="https://www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone-pollution/ozone-implementation-regulatory-actions">https://www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone-pollution/ozone-implementation-regulatory-actions</a>.
The EPA will make every effort to follow the schedule as closely as
possible on the day of the hearing; however, please plan for the
hearings to run either ahead of schedule or behind schedule.
Each commenter will have approximately four minutes to provide oral
testimony. The EPA recommends submitting the text of your oral
testimony as written comments to the rulemaking docket.
During the hearing, the EPA may ask clarifying questions but will
not respond to comments made during oral testimonies. Written
statements and supporting information submitted during the comment
period will be considered with the same weight as oral testimony and
supporting information presented at the public hearing.
Please note that any updates made to any aspect of the hearing will
be posted online at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone-pollution/ozone-implementation-regulatory-actions">https://www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone-pollution/ozone-implementation-regulatory-actions</a>. While the EPA expects the
hearing to be conducted as set forth earlier, please monitor our
website to determine if there are any updates. The EPA reserves the
right to delay the date of the public hearing for any reason including
scheduling conflicts. If this occurs, the

[[Page 35640]]

comment period will be extended by the delayed number of days. The EPA
does not intend to publish a document in the Federal Register
announcing updates. All updates and announcements will be communicated
on the web page listed above.
If you require the services of a translator or special
accommodations, please pre-register for the hearing with the public
hearing team and describe your needs by June 19, 2026. The EPA may not
be able to arrange accommodations without advanced notice.
Docket. The EPA has established a docket for this action under
Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2025-0201. All documents in the docket are
listed in <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. Although listed, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information the disclosure of which is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the internet and will be publicly available
as PDF versions that can only be accessed on the EPA computers in the
docket office reading room. Certain databases and physical items cannot
be downloaded from the docket but may be requested by contacting the
docket office at (202) 566-1744. With the exception of such material,
publicly available docket materials and a plain language summary of the
proposed rulemaking are available electronically at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>.
Instructions. Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-
2025-0201. The EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, including any personal
information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed
to be CBI or other information the disclosure of which is restricted by
statute. Do not submit electronically to <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>
any information that you consider to be CBI or other information the
disclosure of which is restricted by statute. This type of information
should be submitted as discussed below.
The EPA may publish any comment received to the Agency's public
docket. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied
by a written comment. The written comment is considered the official
comment and should include discussion of all points you wish to make.
The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment contents
located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the Web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please
visit <a href="https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets">https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets</a>.
The <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a> website allows you to submit your
comment anonymously, which means the EPA will not know your identity or
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an email comment directly to the EPA without going through
<a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>, your email address will be automatically
captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the
public docket and made available on the internet. If you submit an
electronic comment, the EPA recommends that you include your name and
other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
digital storage media you submit. If the EPA cannot read your comment
due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification,
the Agency may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files
should not include special characters or any form of encryption and
should be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information
about the EPA's public docket, visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at
<a href="https://www.epa.gov/dockets">https://www.epa.gov/dockets</a>.
Submitting CBI. Do not submit information containing CBI to the EPA
through <a href="https://www.regulations.gov">https://www.regulations.gov</a>. Clearly mark the part or all of
the information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information on any
digital storage media that you mail to the EPA, note the docket ID,
mark the outside of the digital storage media as CBI, and identify
electronically within the digital storage media the specific
information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one complete version
of the comments that includes information claimed as CBI, you must
submit a copy of the comments that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI directly to the public docket through the procedures
outlined in Instructions above. If you submit any digital storage media
that does not contain CBI, mark the outside of the digital storage
media clearly that it does not contain CBI and note the docket ID.
Information not marked as CBI will be included in the public docket and
the EPA's electronic public docket without prior notice. Information
marked as CBI will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 2.
Our preferred method to receive CBI is electronic transmission
using email attachments, File Transfer Protocol (FTP), or other online
file sharing services (e.g., Dropbox, OneDrive, Google Drive).
Electronic submissions must be transmitted directly to the Office of
State Air Partnerships (OSAP) CBI Office at the email address
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#771804160714151e3712071659101801">[email&#160;protected]</a> and, as described above, should include clear CBI
markings and note the docket ID. If assistance is needed with
submitting large electronic files that exceed the file size limit for
email attachments, and if you do not have your own file sharing
service, please email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#355a46544556575c755045541b525a43">[email&#160;protected]</a> to request a file transfer link.
If sending CBI information through the postal service, please send it
to the following address: U.S. EPA, Attn: OSAP Document Control
Officer, 4930 Old Page Rd. C404-02, Durham, NC 27703, Attention Docket
ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2025-0201. The mailed CBI material should be double
wrapped and clearly marked. Any CBI markings should not show through
the outer envelope.
Preamble acronyms and abbreviations. Throughout this preamble the
use of ``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our'' is intended to refer to the EPA. We
use multiple acronyms and terms in this preamble. While this list may
not be exhaustive, to ease the reading of this preamble and for
reference purposes, the EPA defines the following terms and acronyms
here:

CAA Clean Air Act
CBI Confidential Business Information
CFR Code of Federal Register
CTG Control Technique Guideline
DAAD Determination of Attainment by the Attainment Date
DV Design Value
FIP Federal Implementation Plan
FTP File Transfer Protocol
I/M Inspection and Maintenance
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NNSR Nonattainment New Source Review
NSR New Source Review
NO<INF>X</INF> Nitrogen Oxides
NTTAA National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
OSAP Office of State Air Partnerships
PBI Proprietary Business Information
PRA Paperwork Reduction Act
RACM Reasonably Available Control Measures
RACT Reasonably Available Control Technology
RFA Regulatory Flexibility Act
RFP Reasonable Further Progress
ROP Rate of Progress
SIP State Implementation Plan
TAR Tribal Authority Rule
TIP Tribal Implementation Plan
TPY Tons Per Year
UMRA Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

[[Page 35641]]

VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled
VOC Volatile Organic Compounds

Table of Contents

I. Overview and Basis of Proposal
A. Overview of Proposal
B. What is the background for the proposed actions?
C. What is the statutory authority for the proposed actions?
II. What is the EPA proposing and what is the rationale?
A. Summary of the Policy Codified in the January 2025 Final Rule
and the Underlying Rationale
B. Summary of New Proposed Approach and Underlying Rationale
C. Proposed Status of Requirements for Each Classification Level
1. Marginal Area Requirements
2. Moderate Area Requirements
3. Serious Area Requirements
4. Severe Area Requirements
5. Extreme Area Requirements
D. Implementation Impacts
III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and
Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
B. Executive Order 14192: Unleashing Prosperity Through
Deregulation
C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism
G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments
H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From
Environmental Health and Safety Risks
I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
J. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act (NTTAA)

I. Overview and Basis of Proposal

A. Overview of Proposal

In the January 2025 final rule, the EPA codified a policy--referred
to herein as the ``leftover SIP elements policy''--providing that, upon
reclassification, certain elements of a SIP associated with an area's
prior classification are no longer applicable requirements, while other
SIP elements remain applicable requirements.\1\ This policy meant that
States must continue to comply with certain statutory requirements that
apply to an area's prior classification even after the area has been
reclassified to a new, higher, classification subject to a different,
and generally more restrictive, set of requirements. The EPA based this
policy primarily on its interpretation at the time of CAA section
182,\2\ which prescribes escalating requirements for nonattainment
areas designated Marginal, Moderate, Serious, Severe, and Extreme and
includes additional provisions with respect to compliance milestones
and reclassification.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ 90 FR 5651, 5665 (January 17, 2025); see 40 CFR 51.1403.
\2\ 42 U.S.C. 7511a.
\3\ In this preamble, the EPA is using the phrase ``applicable
requirement'' to denote whether a State is legally required to
submit certain SIP revisions, or not. If the requirement is
applicable, the State does have a legal requirement to submit the
SIP revision associated with that requirement. If the requirement is
not applicable, the State is not legally required to submit that SIP
revision. The phrase ``applicable requirement'' appears in certain
CAA provisions that are not relevant to this proposal. The EPA is
not interpreting the statutory phrase ``applicable requirement'' in
this proposal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The EPA is reconsidering the leftover SIP elements policy to ensure
consistency with the best reading of the statute, including the text
and structure of CAA section 182 and the function of the statute's
provisions for ozone NAAQS implementation as a whole. In this proposed
action, the EPA is proposing to revise the Agency's regulations at 40
CFR 51.1403 to provide that, upon reclassification, the area's new
(current) classification level governs which SIP requirements are
applicable to that area. The EPA is not reconsidering or proposing any
changes to any other regulatory provision addressed in the January 2025
final rule at this time.
As explained further in section II.C of this preamble, reclassified
areas would be required to submit SIP elements specific to the
applicable classification level, as though that area had originally
been classified at that classification level--referred to herein as the
``reclassified area SIPs policy.'' If a required SIP element for an
area's new classification level was already satisfied for that NAAQS
when the area was at a lower classification, the requirement would be
considered fulfilled and would not be triggered anew upon
reclassification. The EPA believes that this interpretation better
reflects the text and structure of CAA section 182 and related
provisions, under which each nonattainment area can only be subject to
a single classification at a time. The area's current classification
level defines a State's requirements for that area under CAA section
182, which provides for requirements applicable to that classification
and specifies when the requirements for that classification level
incorporate certain requirements for a prior classification.\4\ Just as
an area can only be subject to a single classification at a given time,
an area can similarly only be subject to the requirements associated
with a single classification at a given time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\4\ See, e.g., 42 U.S.C. 7511a(b) (providing that upon
reclassification from Marginal to Moderate, States must ``make the
submissions described under subsection (a) of this section (relating
to Marginal Areas) and shall also submit the revisions to the
applicable implementation plan described under this subsection.''),
7511a(c) (similar for reclassification from Moderate to Serious),
7511a(d) (similar for reclassification from Serious to Severe); see
also id. 7511a(i) (providing that when ``an ozone nonattainment
area'' is ``reclassified'' for failure to attain by operation of
law, the State ``shall meet such requirements of subsections (b)
through (d) of this section as may be applicable to the area as
reclassified'' (emphasis added)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Upon the effective date of reclassification, the area would be
subject to the requirements for that new classification only. For
example, for an area that is reclassified from Moderate to Serious, the
State is required to submit only Serious area requirements because the
area is now Serious, and a single nonattainment area can be subject to
only one nonattainment classification at any point in time for the same
ozone NAAQS. However, per the instruction in CAA section 182(c), States
with Serious nonattainment areas are required to make the SIP
submissions described under CAA section 182(a) and (b) in addition to
the other submissions described under CAA section 182(c). The newly
classified Serious area does not escape the Moderate area requirements.
The State must submit the Serious area SIP elements, which necessarily
include all of the Moderate area SIP elements, on the timeline that
accords with the new Serious area classification. The statute is clear
that higher classifications are allotted more time to attain the NAAQS
\5\ and therefore are afforded more time to develop and implement some
plans and controls to reduce emissions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\5\ 42 U.S.C. 7511(a)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is the EPA's intent that this rule, if finalized, would apply
with respect to all past and future ozone nonattainment areas
reclassified by operation of law from (1) Marginal to Moderate, (2)
Moderate to Serious, and (3) Serious to Severe, and also to any
voluntary reclassification request granted by the EPA traversing any of
these classifications, including voluntary reclassifications to
Extreme.\6\ Put another way, if finalized, this proposed rule would
apply to the EPA's past reclassification actions such that it would
relieve States subject to those actions from the SIP submission
obligations associated with the lower classification (the
classification that pre-dated the reclassification). If, for example,
the EPA had issued a finding of failure to submit for the lower
classification SIP submittals, the

[[Page 35642]]

finalization of this action as proposed would render such a finding
obsolete because those SIP submittals would no longer be due to the
Agency. Moreover, because this interpretation is specific to the ozone
provisions of CAA section 182, it would apply to nonattainment areas
for any future ozone NAAQS and all current ozone NAAQS (i.e., the 2008
and 2015 standards) and not to nonattainment areas for any other NAAQS
not addressed in CAA section 182. While the EPA is soliciting comments
on all aspects of the proposed changes, the Agency is specifically
seeking comments on the concept that this proposed rulemaking, if
finalized, would apply to reclassification actions that occurred in the
past.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\6\ See e.g., 81 FR 26697 (May 4, 2016), 84 FR 44238 (August 23,
2019), 87 FR 60926 (October 7, 2022), 87 FR 60897 (October 7, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Under CAA section 301(d) and the Tribal Authority Rule (TAR),
Tribes may, but are not required to, submit implementation plans to the
EPA for approval.\7\ Accordingly, for Tribal nonattainment areas, a
Tribe is not required to submit any Tribal Implementation Plan (TIP)
revisions applicable to nonattainment areas pursuant to CAA section
182. Tribes that are part of multi-jurisdictional nonattainment areas
are also not required to submit TIP revisions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\7\ 42 U.S.C. 7601(d); 40 CFR part 49; see generally 63 FR 7254
(February 12, 1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. What is the background for the proposed actions?

On March 27, 2008, the EPA issued a final rule to revise the NAAQS
for ozone to establish a more stringent 8-hour standard (``2008 ozone
NAAQS'').\8\ In that rule, the EPA promulgated identical primary and
secondary ozone standards that specified an 8-hour ozone level of 0.075
ppm. Specifically, the standards require that the 3-year average of the
annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration
may not exceed 0.075 ppm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\8\ 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Effective July 20, 2012, the EPA designated 45 areas throughout the
country as nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.\9\ In a separate
rule, the EPA assigned classification thresholds and attainment dates
based on the severity of an area's ozone levels, determined by the
area's design value (DV).\10\ That separate rule also established the
attainment dates for Marginal, Moderate, Serious, Severe, and Extreme
nonattainment areas as 3 years, 6 years, 9 years, 15 years, and 20
years, respectively, from the effective date of the final
designations.\11\ Therefore, the attainment dates for each initial
nonattainment area classification for the 2008 ozone NAAQS are as
follows: July 20, 2015, for Marginal areas; July 20, 2018, for Moderate
areas; July 20, 2021, for Serious areas; July 20, 2027, for Severe
areas; and July 20, 2032, for Extreme areas. On March 6, 2015, the EPA
also promulgated a rule interpreting the CAA's ozone nonattainment area
implementation requirements for the 2008 ozone NAAQS (``2008
implementation rulemaking'').\12\ The 2008 implementation rule
articulated the CAA's substantive requirements for ozone nonattainment
areas for each classification level and established deadlines for the
submission of SIP revisions to address those requirements that were
triggered by the areas' initial nonattainment designations.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\9\ 77 FR 30088 (May 21, 2012).
\10\ 77 FR 30160 (May 21, 2012). Design values are the metrics
that are compared to the NAAQS levels to determine a nonattainment
area's classification at the time of initial designations and
compliance with the NAAQS. See 40 CFR part 50, appendix P.
\11\ 77 FR 30160 at 30171 (May 21, 2012).
\12\ 80 FR 12264 (March 6, 2015).
\13\ Id.; 40 CFR 51.1100 through 1119.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

On October 26, 2015, the EPA issued a final rule that revised the
NAAQS for ozone to establish a more stringent 8-hour standard (``2015
ozone NAAQS'').\14\ In that rule, the EPA promulgated identical primary
and secondary ozone standards that specified an 8-hour ozone level of
0.070 ppm. Specifically, the standards require that the 3-year average
of the annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentration may not exceed 0.070 ppm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\14\ 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Effective August 3, 2018, the EPA designated 51 areas throughout
the country as nonattainment for the 2015 ozone NAAQS.\15\ In a
separate rule, the EPA assigned classification thresholds and
attainment dates based on the severity of an area's ozone levels,
determined by the area's DV.\16\ That separate rule also established
the attainment date for Marginal, Moderate, Serious, Severe, and
Extreme nonattainment areas as 3 years, 6 years, 9 years, 15 years, and
20 years, respectively, from the effective date of the final
designations.\17\ Therefore, the attainment dates for each initial
nonattainment area classification for most of the 2015 ozone NAAQS
nonattainment areas are as follows: August 3, 2021, for Marginal areas;
August 3, 2024, for Moderate areas; August 3, 2027, for Serious areas;
August 3, 2033, for Severe areas; and August 3, 2038, for Extreme
areas. On December 6, 2018, the EPA also promulgated a rule
interpreting the CAA's ozone nonattainment area implementation
requirements for the 2015 ozone NAAQS (''2015 implementation
rulemaking'').\18\ The 2015 implementation rulemaking articulated the
CAA's substantive requirements for ozone nonattainment areas for each
classification level and established deadlines for the submission of
SIP revisions to address those requirements that were triggered by the
areas' initial nonattainment designations.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\15\ 83 FR 25776 (June 4, 2018).
\16\ 83 FR 10376 (March 9, 2018).
\17\ Id. at 10380.
\18\ 83 FR 62998 (December 6, 2018).
\19\ Id.; 40 CFR 51.1300 through 1319.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

On October 4, 2024, the EPA proposed a rulemaking that, among other
things, included a policy that certain prior classification SIP
requirements remain due upon an area's reclassification to a higher
classification.\20\ On January 17, 2025, the EPA finalized the January
2025 final rule.\21\ In addition to the leftover SIP elements policy,
the January 2025 final rule established universal default deadlines for
submitting SIP revisions and for implementation of relevant control
requirements that apply for reclassified Moderate, Serious, and Severe
nonattainment areas. The default deadlines apply when an area fails to
attain the standard by the applicable attainment date or if the EPA
grants a voluntary reclassification request. The January 2025 final
rule includes different default SIP submission deadlines for different
SIP elements that can be adjusted, if necessary and appropriate,
through separate notice-and-comment actions. In this proposed action,
the EPA is reconsidering the leftover SIP elements policy and proposing
changes to the January 2025 final rule solely with respect to this
issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\20\ 89 FR 80833 (October 4, 2024).
\21\ 90 FR 5651 (January 17, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. What is the statutory authority for the proposed actions?

The statutory authority for the actions proposed in this rule is
provided by the CAA, as amended.\22\ Relevant portions of the CAA
include, but are not limited to, CAA sections 172, 181, and 182 (42
U.S.C. 7502, 7511, and 7511a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\22\ 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CAA section 181(a)(1) requires each area designated as
nonattainment for a revised ozone NAAQS to be classified at the time of
designation. Each area's classification is based on the level of ozone
pollution in the area, which is determined based on the area's

[[Page 35643]]

monitored DV.\23\ CAA section 172 governs nonattainment area plan
provisions in general, and CAA section 182 provides the specific
attainment planning and additional requirements that apply to each
ozone nonattainment area based on its classification. CAA sections 172
and 182 also establish the timeframes by which air agencies must submit
and implement SIP revisions to satisfy the applicable attainment
planning elements. Such plans ``shall provide for attainment of the
NAAQS,'' \24\ and that the ``primary standard attainment date for ozone
shall be as expeditiously as practicable'' but not later than a maximum
attainment date.\25\ CAA section 182(i) lists the State planning
requirements and SIP submission deadlines for reclassified areas.
Specifically, CAA section 182(i) provides that areas that are
reclassified by operation of law for failure to attain by the
attainment date ``shall meet such requirements of subsections (b)
through (d) of this section as may be applicable to the area as
reclassified.'' \26\ Subsections (b) through (d) of CAA section 182
cover the required SIP revisions for the Moderate (section 182(b)),
Serious (section 182(c)), and Severe (section 182(d)) classification
levels. Each subsection requires the relevant State to ``make the
submissions'' set out in the prior subsection (i.e., for the lower
classification) in addition to the submissions required in the
applicable subsection (i.e., for the new, higher classification),
unless explicitly stated otherwise.\27\ The SIP revisions, control
measures, and timing of such submissions and controls are intended to,
among other things, ensure that areas will attain the NAAQS as
expeditiously as practicable, but no later than the applicable
attainment date.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\23\ 42 U.S.C. 7511(a)(1).
\24\ 42 U.S.C. 7502(c)(1).
\25\ 42 U.S.C. 7511(a)(1).
\26\ 42 U.S.C. 7511a(i).
\27\ See, e.g., 42 U.S.C. 7511a(b) (requiring Moderate areas to
make submissions relating to Marginal areas in addition to the
revisions for the Moderate classification).
\28\ 42 U.S.C. 7502(c)(1); see also 42 U.S.C. 7511a.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unless provided otherwise by statute, an agency may revise or
rescind prior actions so long as it acknowledges the change in
position, provides a reasonable explanation for the new position, and
considers legitimate reliance interests in the prior position.\29\ The
EPA proposes that nothing in the language of the statute prohibits or
conditions the Agency's general authority to rescind prior actions, and
specifically nothing limits the Agency's authority to reconsider and
revise the leftover SIP elements policy from the January 2025 final
rule. Within this preamble, the EPA acknowledges the change in position
(the change in statutory interpretation for CAA section 182). The EPA
provides a reasonable explanation for the new position (that it is the
best reading of the CAA). Lastly, the EPA considered legitimate
reliance interests which are minimal, if any, due to the effect of the
proposed revisions being to relieve States of SIP submissions that are
currently required. Since the nature of the proposed revisions are
deregulatory (require less of States compared to the status quo),
reliance interests do not weigh heavily. The EPA believes this to be
true for States that contain ozone nonattainment areas because this
action would relieve the State of SIP submittal obligations that were
previously imposed on the States. If a State still wishes to provide
those SIP submissions to the EPA, the State is free to do so, and the
revisions proposed in this rulemaking would not impede the State's
ability in any way. So, if a State were relying on making such SIP
submissions for some reason, the State is still free to make those
submissions if this rulemaking is finalized. Further, the EPA is not
aware of situations in which members of the public would have made
decisions in reliance on the leftover SIP elements policy from the
January 2025 final rule. That policy did not have a direct impact on
the public. The EPA is specifically soliciting comments on whether any
reliance interest exists that the Agency did not consider here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\29\ See FDA v. Wages & White Lion Invs., L.L.C., 604 U.S. 542
(2025); FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U.S. 502 (2009);
Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 463
U.S. 29 (1983); Clean Air Council v. Pruitt, 862 F.3d 1, 8 (D.C.
Cir. 2017) (``Agencies obviously have broad discretion to reconsider
a regulation at any time.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. What is the EPA proposing and what is the rationale?

A. Summary of the Policy Codified in the January 2025 Final Rule and
the Underlying Rationale

The January 2025 final rule codified a policy that, upon
reclassification, certain SIP elements associated with the area's prior
classification are no longer considered applicable requirements, while
other SIP elements from the prior classification are still considered
applicable. Specifically, the policy provided that, following
reclassification, the following SIP requirements related to the prior
classification level for an ozone nonattainment area no longer apply:
(1) a demonstration of attainment by the prior attainment date; (2) a
reasonably available control measures (RACM) analysis tied to the prior
attainment date; and (3) for areas that are voluntarily reclassified
before the lower classification's attainment date, contingency measures
specifically related to the area's failure to attain by the prior
attainment date.
Under the leftover SIP elements policy, all other SIP elements
associated with the area's prior classification are still applicable
after reclassification to a higher classification. For example, a State
required to submit a SIP revision addressing Moderate area Reasonably
Available Control Technology (RACT) under CAA section 182(b)(2) by
January 1, 2023, that had yet to fulfill that submission requirement
would still be required to submit that Moderate RACT SIP by the January
1, 2023, deadline, even after the area was reclassified to Serious at a
date later than January 1, 2023. If the EPA issued a finding that the
State had failed to submit that Moderate RACT SIP revision by that
deadline, that finding would continue to have legal effect and
consequences even after the area was reclassified to Serious. To be
specific, the legal consequences stemming from such a finding would be
the imposition of sanctions in the area and a requirement for the EPA
to promulgate a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP). In this scenario,
under the EPA's previous policy, reclassification would not terminate
either of the legal consequences clocks stemming from the finding.
This policy relied on two underlying rationales that the EPA now
proposes can no longer be sustained. First, the EPA asserted that
interpreting the statute to carry forward certain obligations from a
prior classification level is ``supported by and consistent with the
relevant statutory provisions and is the best interpretation of
relevant CAA provisions.'' \30\ In the preamble to the January 2025
final rule, the EPA asserted that tiered ozone nonattainment area
requirements in CAA section 182 are cumulative and that
reclassification does not mean that certain requirements tied to a
lower classification are no longer applicable.\31\ Second,
notwithstanding the EPA's position at the time that requirements are
cumulative, the Agency specified exceptions for certain elements of the
lower classification that cannot logically be fulfilled after the
attainment date for the lower classification no longer applies.\32\ To
support this conclusion, the EPA relied on the principle that
requirements that would produce an

[[Page 35644]]

absurd result need not be given legal effect, that certain SIP elements
were ``as a matter of logic, impossible to fulfill'' after the
attainment date has passed, and that ``[t]o give sensible construction
to the terms of the CAA,'' the EPA must ``avoid an absurd result.''
\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\30\ 90 FR 5666 (January 17, 2025).
\31\ Id. at 5667.
\32\ Id. at 5668.
\33\ Id. at 5666.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Summary of New Proposed Approach and Underlying Rationale

In this proposed action, the EPA is proposing to revise the
regulations codified in the January 2025 final rule that reflect the
leftover SIP elements policy. Upon further consideration, the EPA has
determined that the Agency's prior interpretation of CAA section 182 as
imposing cumulative obligations that continue to apply upon
reclassification of a nonattainment area to a higher classification is
not the best reading of the statute and is therefore impermissible.\34\
The text and structure of the statute make plain that areas can only be
subject to one classification at a time for an ozone NAAQS, which is
the area's current classification. Because an area can only be subject
to a single classification for an ozone NAAQS at any given time, the
EPA proposes that an area can only be subject to the SIP submittal and
implementation requirements associated with its current classification.
Under this interpretation, no absurd result is produced, and there is
no need to exempt certain requirements that cannot logically carry
forward because the statute's most natural reading does not carry any
requirements forward except as expressly stated, thereby solving the
absurdity of certain carry-forward obligations being impossible to
carry out upon reclassification. Therefore, for the reasons stated in
this section, the EPA is proposing that the SIP submittal obligations
in CAA section 182 attached to a prior classification are not intended
to accumulate upon reclassification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\34\ Loper Bright Enters. v. Raimondo, 603 U.S. 369 (2024)
(requiring Agency statutory interpretations to be based on the best
interpretation, or best reading, of the statute).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the January 2025 final rule, the EPA used the term
``cumulative'' in this context to mean that all SIP submittal
obligations accumulate over time irrespective of the area's current
classification. The EPA's position was that an area is still directly
governed by the obligations associated with a lower classification
after reclassification such that the State must still submit all SIP
elements for the lower classification on the schedules that were
established while the area was governed by that lower classification,
even after the area is no longer subject to that classification. The
EPA is now proposing that the best reading of CAA section 182 is that,
upon reclassification, an area's only ozone SIP planning obligations
are those associated with the area's current classification and are to
be submitted and implemented on the schedule applicable to the current
classification. The EPA is proposing that a reclassified area would
only be subject to one set of SIP submittal obligations in CAA section
182, not two, three, or more, as the leftover SIP policy requires in
certain instances.
Under the structure and language of CAA section 182, a State with a
Moderate area must meet all requirements under CAA section 182(a) and
(b), a State with a Serious area must meet all requirements under CAA
section 182(b) and (c), a State with a Severe area must meet all
requirements under CAA section 182(c) and (d), and a State with an
Extreme area must meet all requirements under CAA section 182(d) and
(e). Therefore, if this proposal is finalized, as an area is
reclassified, the State would not be relieved of any substantive
obligations upon reclassification because the substantive SIP submittal
obligations of the lower classification are also required under the
area's current classification. The State would be required to fulfill
its obligations for the nonattainment area in accordance with the
area's current legal status as opposed to its former legal status,
which was extinguished upon reclassification and no longer applies.
If a State has already satisfied a required SIP element for an
area's new classification level for that NAAQS at a time when the area
was at a lower classification, the EPA is proposing that the
requirement would be considered fulfilled and would not be triggered
anew upon reclassification. For instance, under CAA section 182(a)(1),
States with Marginal areas are required to submit a baseline emissions
inventory. Upon reclassification, Moderate area SIPs are to meet the
requirements under CAA section 182 (a) and (b). However, the EPA is
proposing that a State with an area reclassified from Marginal to
Moderate would not need to resubmit a baseline emissions inventory if
the State already submitted that requirement when the area was
classified as Marginal.
In the proposal for the January 2025 final rule, the EPA asserted
that the statute does not specify what happens to the lower
classification requirements that were applicable to the area upon
reclassification.\35\ On this basis, the EPA purported to fill an
alleged gap with the leftover SIP elements policy. However, CAA section
182(i) is clear: ``Each State containing an ozone nonattainment area
reclassified under [181(b)(2)] of this title shall meet the applicable
requirements of subsections (b) through (d) of this section as may be
applicable to the area as reclassified.'' \36\ CAA section 181(b)(2)
specifies that areas that are determined to have failed to attain by
their applicable attainment date ``shall be reclassified by operation
of law in accordance with table 1 of subsection (a) of this section to
the higher of'' either the next higher classification ``or'' the
classification representative of the area's current DV.\37\ CAA section
181(b)(3), for voluntary reclassification, includes a similar cross
reference to Table 1 of subsection (a) and states that the EPA would
reclassify to ``a higher classification.'' \38\ Table 1, which is
within CAA section 181(a)(1), specifies the available classification
levels. That same provision makes clear that at initial designation,
each ozone nonattainment area shall be classified ``as a Marginal Area,
a Moderate Area, a Serious Area, a Severe Area, or an Extreme Area.''
\39\ The term ``or'' clearly indicates that a nonattainment area can
only be subject to one classification at a time. The cited language
also states that areas be given ``a'' classification level, indicating
that the classification level is singular at any given time. As such,
``the applicable requirements'' referenced in CAA section 182(i) can
only be those associated with one nonattainment classification: the
reclassification status that is applicable after the reclassification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\35\ 89 FR 80843 (October 4, 2024) (``In contrast, the CAA does
not specify what then happens to the requirements that were
applicable to the area as it was formerly classified.''); see also
90 FR 5665 (January 17, 2025) (finalizing this approach as proposed
and responding to comments).
\36\ 42 U.S.C. 7511a(i).
\37\ 42 U.S.C. 7511(b)(2).
\38\ 42 U.S.C. 7511(b)(3).
\39\ 42 U.S.C. 7511(a)(1) (emphases added).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Upon reconsideration, the EPA now believes that the previously
identified gap is not a gap at all, but a logical consequence of what
the text and structure of CAA section 182 provide with respect to the
effect of reclassification. There is no ambiguity in the statute to
resolve through a policy decision regarding which elements of the prior
classification continue to apply and which do not. The EPA therefore
proposes to depart from the rationale stated in support of the January
2025 final rule and to modify the regulations to align with the plain

[[Page 35645]]

language and best reading of the CAA. Congress intended, for example,
for a Serious area to meet a set of requirements inclusive of the
requirements of CAA section 182(a) and (b), but as part of the Serious
area plan, not as part of a retroactive plan untethered to the area's
new attainment date and current, more stringent classification. Nothing
in the language of the statute suggests that the requirements in each
subsection of CAA section 182 accumulate upon reclassification.
This interpretation has the added benefit of resolving the
absurdity the EPA identified in the January 2025 final rule with
respect to carry-forward requirements that would be impossible to
implement at the higher classification level. The EPA stands by the
Agency's prior identification of that problem, but now proposes that
such impossibilities support interpreting the statute to require only
those SIP elements that apply to an area's current classification. In
other words, in the January 2025 final rule, the EPA identified a real
problem but reached the wrong conclusion. The text of the statute does
not itself differentiate between requirements for a prior
classification that are practicable or impracticable. Rather than
interpreting the statute to leave such problems for resolution through
rulemaking, the Agency now proposes that the best reading is the one
that gives effect to all provisions without the need for further
clarification. The interpretation set out in this preamble does so by
concluding that the applicable SIP requirements are those set out in
the relevant subsection addressing the area's current classification.
To be clear, the regulatory modifications proposed in this action
would not relieve a State of substantive planning obligations upon
reclassification. Rather, upon reclassification, States would remain
obligated to develop, submit, and implement SIP elements in accordance
with the subsection of CAA section 182 that applies to the area's now-
current nonattainment classification. States would remain obligated to
address the substance of the requirements associated with lower
classifications to the extent specified in the subsection of CAA
section 182 that governs the area's current classification level and in
accordance with the timing requirements applicable to the area's
current classification.\40\ But those requirements and associated
timelines flow from the State's current planning requirements as a
result of the area's current classification and do not flow from
earlier obligations associated with a classification that no longer
applies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\40\ See 40 CFR 51.1402 for the EPA's approach to SIP submission
deadlines and implementation deadlines. The EPA is including
citation to 40 CFR 51.1402 for informational purposes only and is
not proposing to reopen this regulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

One outcome of reclassification is an acknowledgement that a State
needs additional time to implement more stringent requirements and
controls in order for an area to attain. As such, the CAA provides
States with additional time to focus on the full suite of more
stringent applicable requirements and deadlines. The plain language of
CAA section 182(i) unequivocally states that the applicable
requirements for reclassified areas are those applicable to the area as
reclassified. Congress' intent is clear, and the EPA does not need to,
and cannot, ``gap fill'' where gaps do not exist. Further, when this
provision is read in conjunction with the introductory language in
subsections (b), (c), (d), and (e) laying out the additive nature of
CAA section 182's structure, the best reading of the CAA in the
approach proposed here.
The EPA's proposed change provides a consistent and uniform
regulatory landscape for all States, upon reclassification, to develop
and implement effective plans on a single, harmonized schedule. If a
State with an area that is reclassified has not met all applicable
requirements associated with a prior lower classification, the State
must submit those SIP elements on the timeline specific to the area's
current classification. This aligns with how Congress designed the
process for an initially designated Severe area, for example. Such an
area is not required to submit four distinct plans (a Marginal,
Moderate, Serious, and Severe plan). An initially designated Severe
area is required to submit only one plan: a Severe area plan that is
inclusive of all of the requirements listed under CAA section 182(a)
through (d). For an area reclassified as Severe, the requirements of
CAA section 182(a)-(c) certainly continue upon reclassification, but
strictly in the sense that they are now subsumed into the area's Severe
area plan. Requirements associated with a prior classification cannot
continue to apply in the same manner in which they were originally
designed once that prior classification has been extinguished by
reclassification.
Under this proposed approach, which is based on the best reading of
the CAA, States would no longer be required to submit requirements for
a classification that has been extinguished upon reclassification, and
there is no need to exempt certain lower classification SIP elements
inherently tied to a date in the past to avoid absurd results. Since
the EPA is now proposing that no SIP requirements from the prior
classification are ``leftover,'' there is no need for any such
exemptions. As noted above, the EPA continues to believe that certain
lower classification SIP elements cannot logically carry over to a
higher classification, but is now proposing to reach a different
conclusion based on that observation.
The reclassified area SIPs policy enables States to focus their
planning efforts and resources on attaining by their current
classification's attainment date. The EPA believes that the approach
proposed here has the added benefit of focusing States' efforts on the
requirements applicable to an area's current classification status,
thereby reducing the burdens involved in implementing requirements from
multiple classification levels on multiple timelines (and, for some
areas, for multiple versions of the ozone NAAQS). The EPA further
believes that the approach proposed here has the added benefit of
eliminating differential treatment among areas that reached the same
classification level through different pathways.

C. Proposed Status of Requirements for Each Classification Level

1. Marginal Area Requirements
``Marginal'' is the lowest ozone nonattainment area classification
and is not a classification that can be assigned as a result of a
reclassification action. CAA section 182(a) specifies the applicable
requirements for nonattainment areas designated as Marginal. The CAA
requires a SIP submission for a Marginal area containing a baseline
emissions inventory, emissions statements, and periodic emissions
inventory updates to be submitted to the EPA no later than two years
after the effective date of designation, and a NNSR program to be
submitted to the Agency no later than three years after the effective
date of designation.\41\ Each ozone nonattainment area must achieve the
NAAQS by its respective attainment date, which corresponds to its
classification.\42\ The EPA is required to issue determinations of
attainment by the attainment date within six months of the attainment
date. If an area is determined to have failed to attain by its
respective attainment date, it is

[[Page 35646]]

reclassified by operation of law to the next higher classification.\43\
If the EPA finds that a Marginal nonattainment area fails to attain by
the attainment date, the area is reclassified by operation of law to
Moderate. A State with a Marginal nonattainment area may also request a
voluntary reclassification for that area to Moderate or higher
classification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\41\ 40 CFR 51.1314 and 1315.
\42\ See CAA section 181 (establishing attainment dates from
previous ozone NAAQS).
\43\ CAA section 181(b)(2)(A).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Moderate Area Requirements
Upon reclassification from Marginal to Moderate, a nonattainment
area is subject to the requirements under CAA section 182(b).
Requirements from CAA section 182(a) must be included in the SIP
submission for Moderate areas pursuant to CAA section 182(b).
Specifically, NNSR, baseline emissions inventories, emissions
statements, and periodic emissions inventory updates are all
requirements pursuant to CAA section 182(b). A State with a
reclassified area is required to submit a plan that meets all these
requirements in accordance with the deadlines applicable to the
reclassification status.
SIP submissions for a Moderate area must contain, in addition to
the elements listed in CAA section 182(a), the requirements listed
under CAA sections 182(b) and 172(c) and 40 CFR part 58. Specifically,
the CAA requires the SIP submission for a Moderate area to contain the
following SIP elements detailed in CAA section 182(b): RACT for major
stationary sources (greater than 100 tons per year (tpy)) of nitrogen
oxides (NO<INF>X</INF>) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and
categories of sources covered by control technique guidelines (CTG), a
15 percent reasonable further process (RFP) plan over six years, and a
basic vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M) program; the following
SIP elements detailed in CAA section 172(c): a modeled attainment
demonstration and contingency measures for failure to attain or achieve
RFP; and the following SIP elements detailed in 40 CFR part 58: an
enhanced monitoring plan. If any requirement of CAA section 182(a) had
previously been satisfied while the area was Marginal for the ozone
NAAQS in question, the EPA is proposing that the requirement is deemed
satisfied and a SIP revision need not be made by the State for that
element again. If the State did not make a required SIP submission
under CAA section 182(a) while an area was Marginal, that SIP
submission is still due to the EPA after reclassification of the area
to Moderate. However, the SIP element is now part of the area's
Moderate area plan and therefore is due to the EPA in accordance with
the deadline applicable to reclassified Moderate areas.
If a State had yet to submit a Marginal area requirement upon
reclassification to Moderate or higher classification, the EPA is
proposing that it would no longer be required to submit that Marginal
area requirement in the context of a Marginal area plan. If the EPA
issued a finding of failure to submit a complete SIP for any Marginal
SIP elements, the Agency is proposing that the finding would be moot as
the Marginal elements would no longer be required SIP elements upon
reclassification. After the reclassification, the area is no longer
Marginal, and the EPA is proposing that there is no obligation to
submit a SIP revision to meet requirements for the now extinguished
classification. If the EPA disapproved a Marginal area requirement,
upon reclassification to Moderate or higher classification the Agency
anticipates not needing to rescind or withdraw that disapproval, but
associated sanctions clocks would be stopped pursuant to 40 CFR 52.31.
The EPA is proposing that the Agency would not be obligated to
promulgate a FIP because the element would no longer be considered a
required SIP element as triggered by a Marginal classification. A
revised SIP submission addressing that element would be evaluated anew
by the EPA as part of the Moderate or higher classification plan.
Unless the EPA specifies otherwise in the Agency's determination of
attainment by the attainment date (DAAD) action, the applicable
submittal and implementation deadlines for the Moderate area plan
remain the default deadlines established at 40 CFR 51.1402. The EPA is
not proposing to change these default deadlines in this rulemaking.
3. Serious Area Requirements
Upon reclassification from Moderate to Serious, a nonattainment
area is subject to the requirements under CAA section 182(c).
Requirements from CAA section 182(a) and (b) must be included in the
SIP submission for Serious areas pursuant to CAA section 182(c).
Specifically, NNSR, baseline emissions inventories, emissions
statements, periodic emissions inventory updates, RACT for major
stationary sources (greater than 100 tpy) of NO<INF>X</INF> and VOCs
and categories of sources covered by a CTG, the 15 percent RFP plan,
the modeled attainment demonstration, contingency measures for failure
to attain or achieve RFP, and the 40 CFR part 58 enhanced monitoring
plan are all requirements pursuant to CAA section 182(c).\44\ The State
with a reclassified area is required to submit a plan that meets all
these requirements in accordance with the deadlines applicable to the
reclassification status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\44\ Basic I/M is not required to be implemented in Serious and
above ozone nonattainment areas. Enhanced I/M is the requirement for
Serious and above classifications pursuant to 40 CFR 51.350(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The CAA requires the SIP submission for a Serious area to contain,
in addition to the elements listed in CAA section 182(a) and (b), the
requirements listed under CAA section 182(c). Specifically, the CAA
requires the SIP submission for a Serious area to contain the following
SIP elements detailed in CAA section 182(c): an enhanced monitoring
plan, a modeled attainment demonstration, an RFP demonstration that
complies with the EPA's 40 CFR part 51 regulations, an enhanced vehicle
I/M program, a clean fuel fleets program, NSR requirements for existing
source modifications, contingency measures for failure to attain or
achieve RFP, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) reporting, and RACT for major
stationary sources (greater than 50 tpy) of NO<INF>X</INF> and VOCs. If
any requirement of CAA section 182(a), (b), or 40 CFR part 58 had
previously been satisfied while the area was Marginal or Moderate for
the ozone NAAQS in question, the EPA is proposing that that requirement
is deemed satisfied and a SIP revision need not be made by the State
for that element again.\45\ If the State did not make a required SIP
submission under CAA section 182(a) while the area was Marginal or
under CAA section 182(a) and (b) while the area was Moderate, that SIP
submission is still due to the EPA after reclassification to Serious.
However, the SIP element is now part of the area's Serious area plan
and is therefore due to the EPA in accordance with the deadline
applicable to reclassified Serious areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\45\ If the CAA section 182(b) major stationary source RACT
requirements have previously been satisfied for the ozone NAAQS in
question, the CAA section 182(c) RACT requirement can be satisfied
by addressing sources with a potential to emit (PTE) of 50 tpy and
greater but less than 100 tpy of VOC or NO<INF>X</INF>. See the
change in definition of the term ``major stationary source'' in CAA
section 182(c). Similarly, if RACT for sources covered by CTGs has
previously been satisfied for the ozone NAAQS in question, areas
reclassified to Serious do not need to resubmit CTG RACT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

If a State had yet to submit a Moderate area requirement upon
reclassification to Serious or higher classification, the EPA is
proposing that it would no longer be required to submit that Moderate
area element in the context of a Moderate area plan. If the EPA issued
a finding of failure to submit a complete SIP for any Moderate
elements, the

[[Page 35647]]

Agency is proposing that the finding would be moot as the elements
would no longer be required SIP elements upon reclassification. After
the reclassification, the area is no longer Moderate, and the EPA is
proposing that there is no obligation to submit for the now
extinguished classification. If the EPA disapproved a Moderate area
requirement, upon reclassification to Serious or higher classification
the Agency anticipates not needing to rescind or withdraw that
disapproval, but associated sanctions clocks would be stopped pursuant
to 40 CFR 52.31. The EPA is proposing that the Agency would not be
obligated to promulgate a FIP because the element would no longer be
considered a required SIP element as triggered by a Moderate
classification. A revised SIP submission addressing that element would
be evaluated anew by the EPA as part of the Serious or higher
classification plan.
Unless the EPA specifies otherwise in the Agency's DAAD action, the
applicable SIP submittal and implementation deadlines for the Serious
area plan remain the default deadlines established at 40 CFR 51.1402.
The EPA is not proposing to change or reopen the default deadlines in
this rulemaking.
4. Severe Area Requirements
Upon reclassification from Serious to Severe, a nonattainment area
is subject to the requirements under CAA section 182(d). Requirements
from CAA section 182(a) through (c) must be included in the SIP
submission for Severe areas pursuant to CAA section 182(d).
Specifically, NNSR, baseline emissions inventories, emissions
statements, periodic emissions inventory updates, RACT for major
stationary sources (greater than 50 tpy) of NO<INF>X</INF> and VOCs and
categories covered by a CTG, an enhanced monitoring plan, a modeled
attainment demonstration, an RFP demonstration that complies with the
EPA's 40 CFR part 51 regulations, an enhanced vehicle I/M program, a
clean fuel fleets program, NSR requirements for existing source
modifications, contingency measures for failure to attain or achieve
RFP, and VMT reporting are all requirements pursuant to CAA section
182(d). The State with a reclassified area is required to submit a plan
that meets all these requirements in accordance with the deadlines
applicable to the reclassification status.
The CAA requires the SIP submission for a Severe area to contain,
in addition to the elements listed in CAA section 182(a) through (c),
the requirements listed under CAA section 182(d). Specifically, the CAA
requires the SIP submission for a Severe area to contain the following
SIP elements detailed in CAA section 182(d): a CAA section 185 penalty
fee program for major stationary sources, a VMT growth demonstration,
and RACT for major stationary sources (greater than 25 tpy) of
NO<INF>X</INF> and VOCs. If any requirement of CAA section 182(a)-(c)
had previously been satisfied while the area was Marginal, Moderate, or
Serious for the ozone NAAQS in question, the EPA is proposing that the
requirement is deemed to have been satisfied and a SIP revision need
not be made by the State for that element again.\46\ If the State did
not make a required SIP submission under CAA section 182(a) through (c)
while the area was Marginal, Moderate, or Serious, that SIP submission
(or SIP element) is still due to the EPA after reclassification to
Severe. However, the SIP element is now part of the area's required
Severe area plan and is therefore due to the EPA in accordance with the
deadline applicable to reclassified Severe areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\46\ If the CAA section 182(c) major stationary source RACT
requirements have previously been satisfied for the ozone NAAQS in
question, the CAA section 182(d) RACT requirement can be satisfied
by addressing sources with a PTE of 25 tpy and greater but less than
50 tpy of VOC or NO<INF>X</INF>. See the change in definition of the
term ``major stationary source'' in CAA section 182(d). Similarly,
if RACT for sources covered by CTGs has previously been satisfied
for the ozone NAAQS in question, areas reclassified to Serious do
not need to resubmit CTG RACT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

If a State had yet to submit a Serious area requirement upon
reclassification to Severe or higher classification, the EPA is
proposing that it would no longer be required to submit that Serious
area requirement in the context of the Serious area plan. If the EPA
issued a finding of failure to submit a complete SIP for any Serious
elements, the Agency is proposing that the finding would be moot as the
Serious area elements would no longer be required SIP elements upon
reclassification. After the reclassification, the area is no longer
Serious, and there is no obligation to submit for the now extinguished
classification. If the EPA disapproved a Serious area requirement, upon
reclassification to Severe or higher classification the Agency
anticipates not needing to rescind or withdraw that disapproval, but
associated sanctions clocks would be stopped pursuant to 40 CFR 52.31.
Further, the EPA is proposing that the Agency would not be obligated to
promulgate a FIP because the element would no longer be considered a
required SIP element as triggered by a Serious classification. A
revised SIP submission addressing that element would be evaluated anew
by the EPA as part of the Severe or higher classification plan.
Unless the EPA specifies otherwise in the Agency's DAAD action, the
applicable submittal and implementation deadlines for the Severe area
plan remain the default deadlines established at 40 CFR 51.1402. The
EPA is not proposing to change or reopen the default deadlines in this
rulemaking.
5. Extreme Area Requirements
If a State requests a voluntary reclassification of a nonattainment
area to Extreme under CAA section 181(b)(3), the nonattainment area is
subject to the requirements under CAA section 182(e). Requirements from
CAA section 182(a) through (d) must be included in the SIP submission
for Extreme areas pursuant to CAA section 182(e). Specifically, NNSR,
baseline emissions inventories, emissions statements, periodic
emissions inventory updates, RACT for major stationary sources (greater
than 25 tpy) of NO<INF>X</INF> and VOCs and categories covered by a
CTG, an enhanced monitoring plan, a modeled attainment demonstration,
an RFP demonstration that complies with the EPA's 40 CFR part 51
regulations, an enhanced vehicle I/M program, a clean fuel fleets
program, NSR requirements for existing source modifications,
contingency measures for failure to attain or achieve RFP, VMT
reporting, a CAA section 185 penalty fee program for major stationary
sources, and a VMT growth demonstration are all requirements pursuant
to CAA section 182(e). The State with a reclassified area is required
to submit a plan that meets all these requirements in accordance with
the deadlines applicable to the reclassification status.
The CAA requires the SIP submission for an Extreme area to contain,
in addition to the elements listed in CAA section 182(a) through (d),
the requirements listed under CAA section 182(e). Specifically, the CAA
requires the SIP submission for an Extreme area to contain the
following SIP elements detailed in CAA section 182(e): clean fuels
requirements for boilers, traffic congestion controls, and RACT for
major stationary sources (greater than 10 tpy) of NO<INF>X</INF> and
VOCs. If any requirement of CAA section 182(a) through (d) had
previously been satisfied while the area was Marginal, Moderate,
Serious, or Severe for the ozone NAAQS in question, the EPA is
proposing that the requirement is deemed satisfied and a SIP revision
need not be made by the State for that

[[Page 35648]]

element again.\47\ If the State did not make a required SIP submission
under CAA section 182(a) through (d) while the area was Marginal,
Moderate, Serious, or Severe, that SIP submission (or SIP element) is
still due to the EPA after reclassification to Extreme. However, the
SIP element is now part of the area's Extreme area plan and is
therefore due to the EPA in accordance with the deadline applicable to
reclassified Extreme areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\47\ If the CAA section 182(d) major stationary source RACT
requirements have previously been satisfied for the ozone NAAQS in
question, the CAA section 182(e) RACT requirement can be satisfied
by addressing sources with a PTE of 10 tpy and greater but less than
25 tpy of VOC or NO<INF>X</INF>. See the change in definition of the
term ``major stationary source'' in CAA section 182(e). Similarly,
if RACT for sources covered by CTGs has previously been satisfied
for the ozone NAAQS in question, areas reclassified to Serious do
not need to resubmit CTG RACT.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

If a State had yet to submit a Severe area requirement upon
reclassification to Extreme, the EPA is proposing that it would no
longer be required to submit that Severe area requirement in the
context of a Severe area plan. If the EPA issued a finding of failure
to submit a complete SIP for any Severe elements, the Agency is
proposing that the finding would be moot as the Severe area elements
would no longer be required SIP elements upon reclassification. After
the reclassification, the area is no longer Severe, and the EPA is
proposing that there is no obligation to submit for the now
extinguished classification. If the EPA disapproved a Severe area
requirement, upon reclassification to Extreme the Agency anticipates
not needing to rescind or withdraw that disapproval, but associated
sanctions clocks would be stopped pursuant to 40 CFR 52.31. Further,
the EPA is proposing that the Agency would not be obligated to
promulgate a FIP because the element would no longer be considered a
required SIP element as triggered by the Severe classification. A
revised SIP submission addressing that element would be evaluated anew
by the EPA as part of the Extreme classification plan.
Unless the EPA specifies otherwise in the Agency's voluntary
reclassification of an area to Extreme, the applicable submittal and
implementation deadlines for the Extreme area plan remain the default
deadlines established at 40 CFR 51.1402. The EPA is not proposing to
change or reopen the default deadlines in this rulemaking.

D. Implementation Impacts

While the EPA is soliciting public comment on the reclassified area
SIPs policy proposed in this rulemaking, the Agency is also soliciting
comment on implementation impacts related to this proposed rulemaking.
For example, the proposed rule, if finalized, would affect States that
contain 2015 ozone NAAQS nonattainment areas that were reclassified
from Moderate to Serious in 2024 and 2025.
States with ozone nonattainment areas designated Moderate under the
2015 ozone standard were required to submit Moderate ozone planning SIP
elements in accordance with CAA section 182(b) by January 1, 2023.\48\
Effective November 17, 2023, the EPA issued a finding that 11 States
had failed to submit complete Moderate area SIP requirements by the
January 1, 2023, due date (``October 2023 FFS'').\49\ The October 2023
FFS initiated sanctions clocks and a deadline for the EPA to promulgate
a FIP for those SIP requirements. The sanctions clocks could be
terminated by an EPA determination that a State submitted a complete
SIP. The FIP obligation could be obviated by a final Agency action
approving the requisite SIP elements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\48\ 87 FR 60897 (October 7, 2022).
\49\ 88 FR 71757 (October 18, 2023).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In late 2024 into 2025, EPA Regions issued actions under CAA
section 181(b)(2), including determinations of attainment by the 2015
ozone Moderate area attainment date and findings of failure to attain
in region-specific actions. Eighteen 2015 ozone Moderate nonattainment
areas in a total of 15 States were reclassified by operation of law
from Moderate to Serious as a result of these findings.\50\ In
accordance with 40 CFR 51.1402, which the EPA is not proposing to
revise or reopen here, States with reclassified Serious areas were
required to submit Serious area SIPs by January 1, 2026.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\50\ E.g., 89 FR 101901 (December 17, 2024) and 89 FR 103657
(December 19, 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Under the leftover SIPs policy as codified in the January 2025
final rule, States with nonattainment areas that were once classified
as Moderate but have since been reclassified as Serious still remain
obligated to submit their Moderate area SIP revisions if they have not
done so (except for RACM and the Moderate area attainment demonstration
in accordance with 40 CFR 51.1403(a)(2)). Furthermore, the EPA's
October 2023 FFS for those Moderate area SIP revisions remains in
effect even after the relevant areas were reclassified to Serious.
Under the approach proposed in this rulemaking, if a State with an
area that has been reclassified from Moderate to Serious has not
submitted a Moderate area requirement, the EPA is proposing that the
State would no longer be required to do so in the context of a Moderate
area plan. If this rule is finalized as proposed, the October 2023 FFS
for the Moderate area SIP submissions would be moot since the Moderate
elements would no longer be required SIP elements upon reclassification
to Serious. After the reclassification, the area is no longer Moderate,
and the EPA is proposing that there is no obligation to submit for the
now extinguished classification.\51\ Further, if this proposed rule is
finalized, the EPA would not be obligated to promulgate a FIP as a
result of the October 2023 FFS because the elements would no longer be
considered required SIP elements. A revised SIP submission addressing
all relevant elements would be evaluated anew by the EPA as part of the
Serious or higher classification plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\51\ Note that the sanctions clocks associated with the October
2023 FFS have already been terminated by completeness determinations
for all 11 States implicated by that finding. See <a href="https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-implementation-plans/status-active-sanctions-clocks-under-clean-air-act">https://www.epa.gov/air-quality-implementation-plans/status-active-sanctions-clocks-under-clean-air-act</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

In addition to the reclassified area SIPs policy, the EPA is
soliciting public comment on the implementation impacts of this rule
that may be informative for the Agency. For a complete survey of 2008
and 2015 ozone nonattainment areas that may be impacted by this rule,
the EPA recommends that commenters reference 40 CFR part 81 and the
``Required State Implementation Plan Elements Dashboard.'' \52\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\52\ <a href="https://awsedap.epa.gov/public/extensions/specs-element-dashboard/index.html">https://awsedap.epa.gov/public/extensions/specs-element-dashboard/index.html</a>.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Additional information about these statutes and Executive Orders
can be found at <a href="https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders">https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/laws-and-executive-orders</a>.

A. Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review and Executive
Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

This proposed action is a significant regulatory action that was
submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review. Any
changes made in response to Executive Order 12866 review have been
documented in the docket.

B. Executive Order 14192: Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation

This proposed action is expected to be an Executive Order 14192
deregulatory action. This proposed rule is expected to provide burden
reduction by

[[Page 35649]]

codifying a policy that, following reclassification, a State is only
required to submit SIP revisions addressing requirements associated
with its current classification.

C. Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)

This proposed rule does not impose any new information collection
burden under the PRA not already approved by OMB. This proposed action
codifies the EPA's interpretation that, following reclassification, a
State is no longer required to submit SIP revisions addressing certain
requirements related to the prior classification level for an ozone
nonattainment area. OMB has previously approved the EPA's information
collection activities contained in the existing regulations and has
assigned OMB control number 2060-0695.

D. Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)

I certify that this action will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the RFA. This
action will not impose any requirements on small entities but rather
will relieve States of duplicative NAAQS planning requirements.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)

This proposed action does not contain an unfunded mandate as
described in UMRA, 2 U.S.C. 1531-1538, and does not significantly or
uniquely affect small governments. The action implements mandate(s)
specifically and explicitly set forth in CAA section 182 without the
exercise of any policy discretion by the EPA.

F. Executive Order 13132: Federalism

This action does not have federalism implications. It will not have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

G. Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian
Tribal Governments

This action does not have Tribal implications as specified in
Executive Order 13175. This action will not impose substantial direct
costs upon the Tribes or preempt tribal law. The CAA requires SIP
revisions for all nonattainment areas that are reclassified from a
lower classification to a higher classification. For nonattainment
areas that include portions of Indian reservation lands, the plan
requirements that apply to States upon reclassification do not directly
apply to Tribes. Thus, Executive Order 13175 does not apply to this
action.

H. Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental
Health and Safety Risks

The EPA interprets Executive Order 13045 as applying only to those
regulatory actions that concern environmental health or safety risks
that the Agency has reason to believe may disproportionately affect
children, per the definition of ``covered regulatory action'' in
section 2-202 of the Executive Order. Therefore, this action is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 because it does not concern an
environmental health risk or safety risk. Since this action does not
concern human health, the EPA's policy on Children's Health also does
not apply.

I. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

This action is not a ``significant energy action'' because it is
not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy. This action codifies the EPA's
interpretation that, following reclassification, a State is no longer
required to submit SIP revisions addressing certain requirements
related to the prior classification level for an ozone nonattainment
area.

J. National Technology Transfer Advancement Act (NTTAA)

This rulemaking does not involve technical standards.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 51

Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Air pollution control, Designations and classifications, Incorporation
by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, and Volatile organic
compounds.

Lee Zeldin,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2026-11843 Filed 6-11-26; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>

View on FederalRegister.gov →Plain-text source

Indexed from Federal Register on June 12, 2026.

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.