Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Maine; Nitrogen Oxides Exemption Request for Northern Maine, 49526-49530 [05-16814]
Download as PDF
49526
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through RME or
regulations.gov, your e-mail 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, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the RME
index at https://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in RME or
in hard copy at the Regulatory
Development Section, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30,
excluding federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michele Notarianni, Air Planning
Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics
Management Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW.,
Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Phone:
(404) 562–9031. E-mail:
notarianni.michele@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For
additional information, see the direct
final rule which is published in the
Rules section of this Federal Register.
VerDate jul<14>2003
12:45 Aug 23, 2005
Jkt 205001
Dated: August 12, 2005.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 05–16803 Filed 8–23–05; 8:45 am]
Dated: August 2, 2005.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 05–16811 Filed 8–23–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR PART 52
40 CFR Part 52
[R05–OAR–2005–OH–0002; FRL–7958–4]
Approval and Disapproval of Ohio
Implementation Plan for Particulate
Matter
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of the
public comment period.
SUMMARY: EPA is reopening the
comment period for a proposed rule
published June 27, 2005 (70 FR 36901).
On June 27, 2005, EPA proposed to
disapprove revisions to Ohio rules that
provide for use of continuous opacity
monitoring data but allow more
exceedances of the general opacity limit
in cases where the owner of an eligible
large coal fired boiler opts to use these
data for determining compliance. EPA
also proposed to approve other elements
of Ohio’s rule submittal that clarified
Ohio’s rules. In response to requests
from the Ohio Environmental Protection
Agency and from the law firm of
Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick, EPA is
reopening the comment period through
August 24, 2005. All comments received
on or before August 24, 2005 will be
entered into the public record and
considered by EPA before taking final
action on the proposed rule.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before August 24, 2005.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments,
identified by Regional Material in
EDocket (RME) ID No. R05–OAR–2005–
OH–0002, to: John Mooney, Chief,
Criteria Pollutant Section, (AR–18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604. Phone: (312) 886–4447.
E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov.
Additional instructions to comment can
be found in the notice of proposed
rulemaking published June 27, 2005 (70
FR 36901).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
Summerhays, Criteria Pollutant Section
(AR–18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604,
Telephone Number: (312) 353–4761, Email Address:
summerhays.john@epa.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
[R01–OAR–2005–ME–0007; A–1–FRL–7959–
4]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Maine;
Nitrogen Oxides Exemption Request
for Northern Maine
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to
approve an exemption request from the
requirements contained in Section
182(f) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act)
for Northern Maine (specifically,
Oxford, Franklin, Somerset, Piscataquis,
Penobscot, Washington, Aroostook, and
portions of Hancock and Waldo
Counties). This area, along with the rest
of the State of Maine, are part of the
Ozone Transport Region (OTR) as
provided for in section 184(a) of the Act.
Section 182(f) in combination with
section 184 (relating to ozone transport
regions) of the Act requires States in the
OTR, such as Maine, to adopt
reasonably available control technology
(RACT) rules for major stationary
sources of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and to
provide for nonattainment area new
source review (NSR) for new sources
and modifications that are major for
NOX. This exemption request, submitted
by the State of Maine on March 24, 2005
with supplemental submittals dated
April 19, 2005 and June 28, 2005, is
based on a demonstration that NOX
emissions in the exemption area are not
impacting Maine’s nonattainment areas
or other nonattainment areas in the OTR
during times when elevated ozone
levels are monitored in those areas. As
such, additional reductions in NOX
emissions from this area beyond what
the State regulations already provide for
are not necessary for future attainment
in any of Maine’s ozone nonattainment
areas or other ozone nonattainment
areas in the OTR. Thus, as provided for
in section 182(f)(2), additional NOX
reductions in these areas would
constitute excess reductions that can be
waived under the Act. This action is
being taken under the CAA.
E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM
24AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before September 23,
2005.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Regional Material in
EDocket (RME) ID Number R01–OAR–
2005–ME–0007 by one of the following
methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Agency Web site: https://
docket.epa.gov/rmepub/ Regional
Material in EDocket (RME), EPA’s
electronic public docket and comment
system, is EPA’s preferred method for
receiving comments. Once in the
system, select ‘‘quick search,’’ then key
in the appropriate RME Docket
identification number. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
3. E-mail: conroy.dave@epa.gov.
4. Fax: (617) 918–01661.
5. Mail: ‘‘RME ID Number R01–OAR–
2004–ME–0007’’, David Conroy, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, One
Congress Street, Suite 1100 (mail code
CAQ), Boston, MA 02114–2023.
6. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver
your comments to: David Conroy, Chief,
Air Programs Branch, Office of
Ecosystem Protection, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, One
Congress Street, 11th floor, (CAQ),
Boston, MA 02114–2023. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office’s normal hours of
operation. The Regional Office’s official
hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding Federal
holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Regional Material in EDocket (RME) ID
Number R01–OAR–2004–ME–0007.
EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit through Regional
Material in EDocket (RME),
regulations.gov, or e-mail, information
that you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected. The EPA RME Web site and
the Federal regulations.gov Web site are
‘‘anonymous access’’ systems, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
VerDate jul<14>2003
12:45 Aug 23, 2005
Jkt 205001
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through RME or
regulations.gov, your e-mail 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, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
Regional Material in EDocket (RME)
index at https://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., CBI or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in RME or
in hard copy at Office of Ecosystem
Protection, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, One Congress Street,
Suite 1100, Boston, MA. EPA requests
that if at all possible, you contact the
contact listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30
excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard P. Burkhart, Air Quality
Planning, Office of Ecosystem
Protection, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, One Congress Street,
11th floor, (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114–
2023. Phone: 617–918–1664, Fax: (617)
918–0664, E-mail:
burkhart.richard@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. How Can I Get Copies of This
Document and Other Related
Information?
In addition to the publicly available
docket materials available for inspection
electronically in Regional Material in
EDocket, and the hard copy available at
the Regional Office, which are identified
in the ADDRESSES section above, copies
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
49527
of the state submittal and EPA’s
technical support document are also
available for public inspection during
normal business hours, by appointment
at The Bureau of Air Quality Control,
Department of Environmental
Protection, First Floor of the Tyson
Building, Augusta Mental Health
Institute Complex, Augusta, ME 04333–
0017.
B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare
My Comments for EPA?
You may find the following
suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
1. Explain your views as clearly as
possible.
2. Describe any assumptions that you
used.
3. Provide any technical information
and/or data you used that support your
views.
4. If you estimate potential burden or
costs, explain how you arrived at your
estimate.
5. Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns.
6. Offer alternatives.
7. Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA,
identify the appropriate regional file/
rulemaking identification number in the
subject line on the first page of your
response. It would also be helpful if you
provided the name, date, and Federal
Register citation related to your
comments.
II. Rulemaking Information
The following outline is provided to
aid in locating information in this
document.
A. Background and Purpose.
B. Clean Air Act Requirements
C. Scope of Exemptions
1. Inspection and Maintenance (I/M)
Program
2. Conformity
D. Criteria for Evaluation of Section 182(f)
Exemption Requests
E. Summary of State Request
F. Technical Justification for the Request
A. Background and Purpose
On March 24, 2005, Maine
Department of Environmental Protection
(DEP) submitted an exemption request
from the requirements for NOX control
contained in Section 182(f) of the Clean
Air Act (CAA or Act) for the Northern
Maine area (specifically, Oxford,
Franklin, Somerset, Piscataquis,
Penobscot, Washington, Aroostook, and
portions of Hancock and Waldo
Counties). On April 19, 2005 and June
28, 2005, Maine DEP submitted
additional analyses to EPA justifying its
E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM
24AUP1
49528
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules
waiver request, which EPA is using as
a basis for this proposal. All submittals
are available in the docket.
The area for which Maine is
requesting a waiver, along with the rest
of the State of Maine, are part of the
Ozone Transport Region as provided for
in section 184(a) of the Act. In addition,
the waiver area is designated
unclassifiable/attainment for the 8-hour
ozone standard. Section 182(f) in
combination with section 184 (relating
to ozone transport regions) of the Act
requires States in the OTR, such as
Maine, to adopt reasonably available
control technology (RACT) rules for
major stationary sources of nitrogen
oxides and to provide for nonattainment
area new source review for new sources
and modifications that are major for
NOX. This exemption request, is based
on a demonstration that NOX emissions
in this area are not impacting Maine’s
ozone nonattainment areas or any other
ozone nonattainment area in the OTR
during times when elevated ozone
levels are monitored in those areas. As
such, additional reductions in NOX
emissions from this area beyond what
the State regulations already provide for
are not necessary for future attainment
in any of Maine’s ozone nonattainment
areas or other ozone nonattainment area
in the OTR. Thus, as provided for in
section 182(f)(2), additional NOX
reductions in these areas would
constitute excess reductions that can be
waived under the Act. A Technical
Support Document (TSD) has been
prepared for this action. The TSD is
available in the docket.
B. Clean Air Act Requirements
The air quality planning requirements
for the reduction of NOX emissions are
set out in section 182(f) of the Act.
Section 182(f) of the Act requires states
with areas designated and classified as
moderate nonattainment and above for
ozone, or in ozone transport regions, to
impose the same control requirements
for major stationary sources of NOX as
apply to major stationary sources of
volatile organic compounds (VOC).
These requirements include the
adoption of RACT rules for major
stationary sources and nonattainment
area NSR for major new sources and
major modifications. Section 182(f)
provides further that these requirements
do not apply for nonattainment areas
inside an ozone transport region if EPA
determines that reductions of NOX from
such areas would not contribute to net
ozone benefits in the OTR. In addition,
implementation of NOX controls may be
limited if EPA determines it is necessary
to avoid achieving excess reductions.
Also, NOX-related general conformity
VerDate jul<14>2003
12:45 Aug 23, 2005
Jkt 205001
provisions do not apply in an area that
is granted a section 182(f) exemption.
The area for which Maine is requesting
a NOX waiver is designated
unclassifiable/attainment for the 8-hour
ozone standard and does not have any
8-hour ozone conformity requirements.
The area for which Maine DEP has
requested a waiver includes the
following counties: Oxford, Franklin,
Somerset, Piscataquis, Penobscot,
Washington, and Aroostook. Also
included in the area requested for a
waiver are the portions of Waldo and
Hancock Counties that are designated
unclassifiable/attainment for the 8-hour
ozone standard. In Waldo County, this
includes the following towns: Belfast,
Belmont, Brooks, Burnham, Frankfort,
Freedom, Jackson, Knox, Liberty,
Lincolnville, Monroe, Montville,
Morrill, Northport, Palermo, Prospect,
Searsmont, Searsport, Stockton Springs,
Swanville, Thorndike, Troy, Unity,
Waldo, and Winterport. In Hancock
County, this includes the following
towns and townships: Amherst, Aurora,
Bucksport, Castine, Dedham, Eastbrook,
Ellsworth, Franklin, Great Pond,
Mariaville, Orland, Osborn, Otis,
Penobscot, Verona, Waltham, Oqiton
Township (T4 ND), T3 ND, T39 MD,
T40 MD, T41 MD, T32 MD, T34 MD,
T35 MD, T28 MD, T22 MD, T16 MD, T8
SD, T9 SD, T10 SD, and T7 SD.
As stated above, each of the counties
or partial counties for which Maine DEP
is seeking an exemption is within the
OTR. For attainment areas within the
OTR, the application of NOX
requirements under the CAA may be
limited if it is shown that additional
NOX reductions are excess to the
attainment needs throughout the region.
EPA believes, in the case of these areas
in Maine at the northern extremity of
the OTR, that NOX requirements can be
waived because the Maine DEP has
submitted an acceptable demonstration
that additional reductions beyond what
the state regulations already provide for
are not necessary for the nonattainment
areas in the state to attain, because
emissions from this area are not
contributing to the ozone nonattainment
problem in any other nonattainment
area in the OTR, and because reductions
in this area are not necessary for
purposes of showing future attainment
anywhere in the OTR. Maine DEP has
made this showing through air modeling
trajectory analyses, NOX emission
analysis, and meteorological analyses.
Most of this same geographic area in
Maine received approval by EPA of a
similar NOX waiver request under the 1hour ozone standard on December 26,
1995 (60 FR 66748). At this time, the 1hour NOX waiver remains as approved
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
in 1995. The implementation policy for
the 8-hour ozone standard (69 FR
23951) requires areas to request a
separate waiver under the 8-hour ozone
standard. This is the only area in the
OTR that received a NOX waiver under
the 1-hour ozone standard, and is the
first area in the OTR to request a NOX
waiver under the 8-hour ozone
standard.
C. Scope of Exemptions
If the EPA Administrator determines,
under section 182(f) of the Act, that
additional reductions of NOX are excess,
the area at issue shall automatically (i.e.,
a State would not need to submit an
exemption request for each requirement)
be exempt from the following
requirements (as applicable): Inspection
and Maintenance program NOX
requirements, the NOX-related general
conformity provisions, the NOX-related
transportation conformity provisions in
40 CFR part 93, NOX RACT, and
nonattainment area NSR for new
sources and modifications that are major
for NOX.
1. Inspection and Maintenance (I/M)
Program
I/M is not required in any portion of
Northern Maine, therefore, EPA’s action
on this request has no impact on I/M
requirements.
2. Conformity
The transportation conformity rule
requires emissions analysis of motor
vehicle NOX emissions for ozone
nonattainment and maintenance areas
in order to determine the conformity of
transportation plans and programs to
state implementation plan requirements.
The waiver area is currently designated
unclassifiable/attainment for the 8-hour
standard, and does not need to do
transportation conformity. General
conformity is also not required in this
area. Because conformity is not required
in this area, EPA’s action on this request
has no impact on any conformity
requirements.
D. Criteria for Evaluation of Section
182(f) Exemption Requests
The criteria established for the
evaluation of an exemption request from
the section 182(f) requirements are set
forth in a memorandum from Stephen
D. Page, Director, OAQPS, dated January
14, 2005, and titled: ‘‘Guidance On
Limiting Nitrogen Oxides Requirements
Related To 8-Hour Ozone
Implementation.’’
E. Summary of State Request
On March 24, 2005, the Maine DEP
submitted an exemption request from
E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM
24AUP1
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules
the requirements contained in section
182(f) of the CAA for Northern Maine.
In all, EPA received three submittals
from Maine. The initial request dated
March 24, 2005, and a first supplement
dated April 19, 2005, and a second
supplement dated June 28, 2005.
This exemption request is based on a
demonstration that NOX emissions in
this multi-county area are not impacting
Maine’s two 8-hour ozone
nonattainment areas or other 8-hour
ozone nonattainment areas in the OTR
during times when elevated 8-hour
ozone levels are monitored in those
areas. As such, additional reductions in
NOX emissions from these counties (i.e.,
NOX reductions beyond what the state
regulations provide for) are not
necessary for the two nonattainment
areas in the State to attain and are also
not necessary for 8-hour ozone
attainment purposes anywhere in the
OTR. Under these circumstances, as
section 182(f)(2) provides, such
additional reductions may be waived as
excess reductions.
F. Technical Justification for the
Request
Maine submitted a detailed technical
analysis showing that NOX emissions
from the proposed NOX waiver area do
not impact either of the two 8-hour
nonattainment areas in Maine or any
other 8-hour ozone nonattainment in the
OTR. The request relies on several
different techniques to prove Maine’s
case, with the primary technique being
back trajectories using the HYSPLIT
trajectory model.
Maine DEP created back trajectories
for each day that experienced an 8-hour
ozone exceedance in either of Maine’s
nonattainment areas during 1998
through 2004 time period. When 8-hour
exceedances for a given day were
recorded in either of Maine’s 8-hour
nonattainment areas, back trajectories
were run from locations in each of the
nonattainment areas. For each ozone
exceedance that was analyzed, back
trajectories were run for each hour that
recorded ozone in excess of 0.08 parts
per million, and run for multiple
heights in the atmosphere. In all, Maine
DEP ran over 1000 back trajectories for
61 separate exceedance days during
1998 to 2004.
Maine then analyzed each of these
back trajectories to see if there was
potential impact from the NOX waiver
area. These trajectory analyses show
convincingly that the source region for
Maine’s 8-hour ozone exceedances are
to the south and west of southern
Maine. The trajectories also show
convincingly that the proposed NOX
waiver area does not contribute to
VerDate jul<14>2003
12:45 Aug 23, 2005
Jkt 205001
Maine’s 8-hour ozone nonattainment
problems. This is identical to the
conclusion that was reached for 1-hour
ozone exceedances in southern Maine
for the 1-hour NOX waiver approved by
EPA in 1995.
In addition, Maine provided NOX
emission inventory data for the entire
OTR and additional meteorological
analyses to add further evidence that the
proposed NOX waiver area does not
contribute to ozone nonattainment in
the two nonattainment areas of Maine or
anywhere in the OTR. Whenever there
are 8-hour ozone exceedances in New
Hampshire or Massachusetts, the two
states nearest to Maine, the winds are
not from Maine. Therefore, Maine does
not contribute to ozone nonattainment
in Massachusetts, nor New Hampshire,
the only two states in the OTR, outside
Maine, where it is reasonable to expect
that Maine’s emissions might
potentially contribute to ozone
nonattainment. Moreover, EPA has
performed extensive air quality
modeling throughout the Northeast over
the past several years in support of its
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), and
the ozone modeling domain used for the
CAIR rule covers much of northern
Maine. In the CAIR rulemaking, EPA
did not find that Maine was
significantly contributing to future
ozone nonattainment anywhere in the
CAIR domain, which includes the rest
of the OTR plus most of the eastern half
of the United State. Thus, the State of
Maine was not included in the CAIR
rule. EPA’s CAIR modeling plus the data
provided in Maine’s submittals support
this proposed approval of Maine’s NOX
waiver request.
EPA’s review of this request indicates
that a NOX waiver is justified for
Northern Maine. A TSD has been
prepared on this action and contains a
detailed analysis of Maine’s request.
EPA is proposing to approve the
exemption request for the Northern
Maine area from the Section 182(f) NOX
requirements. EPA is soliciting public
comments on the issues discussed in
this notice or on other relevant matters.
These comments will be considered
before taking final action. Interested
parties may participate in the Federal
rulemaking procedure by submitting
written comments to the EPA New
England Regional Office listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this notice.
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the
exemption request for the Northern and
Western Maine area from the section
182(f) NOX requirements based upon the
evidence provided by the State and the
State’s compliance with the
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
49529
requirements outlined in the applicable
EPA guidance. This action proposes to
exempt Oxford, Franklin, Somerset,
Piscataquis, Penobscot, Washington,
Aroostook, and portions of Hancock and
Waldo counties from the requirements
of nonattainment area NSR for new
sources and modifications that are major
for NOX, and NOX RACT on existing
sources. If EPA determines based on
future air quality analyses that NOX
controls in this area are necessary for
ozone attainment purposes, rulemaking
may be initiated which may mean that
this NOX exemption no longer applies.
EPA is soliciting public comments on
the issues discussed in this proposal or
on other relevant matters. These
comments will be considered before
EPA takes final action. Interested parties
may participate in the federal
rulemaking procedure by submitting
written comments to the EPA New
England Regional Office listed in the
ADDRESSES section of this action, or by
submitting comments electronically, by
mail, or through hand delivery/courier
following the directions in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, I. General
Information section of this action.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this action is
not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and
therefore is not subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget. For
this reason, this action is also not
subject to Executive Order 13211,
‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). The proposed exemption does
not create any new requirements, but
allows suspension of the indicated
requirements for the life of the
exemption. Accordingly, the
Administrator certifies that this rule
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this
rule suspends certain requirements, it
does not contain any unfunded mandate
or significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, as described in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104–4).
This rule also does not have tribal
implications because it will not have a
substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
as specified by Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM
24AUP1
49530
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 163 / Wednesday, August 24, 2005 / Proposed Rules
action also does not have federalism
implications because it does 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, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999), because it merely
approves a state request to waive certain
requirements, and does not alter the
relationship or the distribution of power
and responsibilities established in the
Clean Air Act. This rule also is not
subject to Executive Order 13045
‘‘Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997),
because it is not economically
significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s
role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the
absence of a prior existing requirement
for the State to use voluntary consensus
standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove this submission for failure
to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for
EPA, when it reviews a waiver request
to require VCS in a submission that
otherwise satisfies the provisions of the
Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of
section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not
apply. This rule does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: August 15, 2005.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 05–16814 Filed 8–23–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate jul<14>2003
12:45 Aug 23, 2005
Jkt 205001
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 63
[OAR–2002–0057; FRL–7959–3]
RIN 2060–AM25
National Emission Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants: Hydrochloric
Acid Production
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule; amendments.
SUMMARY: On April 17, 2003, we
published the national emission
standards for hazardous air pollutants
(NESHAP) for hydrochloric acid (HCl)
production facilities, including HCl
production at fume silica facilities (HCl
Production NESHAP) (68 FR 19076). We
are proposing to amend the existing rule
by clarifying certain applicability
provisions, emission standards, and
testing, maintenance, and reporting
requirements. The proposed
amendments would also correct several
omissions and typographical errors in
the final rule. We are proposing the
amendments to facilitate compliance
and improve understanding of the final
rule requirements.
DATES: Comments. Comments must be
received on or before October 24, 2005.
Public Hearing. If anyone contacts the
EPA requesting to speak at a public
hearing by September 13, 2005, a public
hearing will be held on September 23,
2005.
ADDRESSES: Comments. Submit your
comments, identified by Docket ID No.
OAR–2002–0057 (formerly Docket ID
No. A–99–41), by one of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
• Agency Web site: https://
www.epa.gov/edocket. EDOCKET, EPA’s
electronic public docket and comment
system, is EPA’s preferred method for
receiving comments. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
• E-mail: a-and-r-docket@epa.gov.
• Fax: (202) 566–1741.
• Mail: Air Docket, EPA Docket
Center, U.S. EPA West, Mailcode 6102T,
Room B–108, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460.
Please include a total of two copies.
• Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center,
Room B–108, U.S. EPA West, 1301
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington,
DC 20004. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Docket’s normal
hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Instructions. Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. OAR–2002–0057. EPA’s
policy is that all comments received
will be included in the public docket
without change and may be made
available online at https://www.epa.gov/
edocket, including any personal
information provided, unless the
comment includes information claimed
to be Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do
not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through EDOCKET,
regulations.gov, or e-mail. The EPA
EDOCKET and the Federal
regulations.gov websites are
‘‘anonymous access’’ systems, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through
EDOCKET or regulations.gov, 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, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact
information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit
EDOCKET on-line or see the Federal
Register of May 31, 2002 (67 FR 38102).
For additional instructions on
submitting comments, see the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
Docket. EPA has established an
official public docket for this action
including both Docket ID No. OAR–
2002–0057 and legacy Docket ID No. A–
99–41. The official public docket
consists of the information related to
this action. Not all items are listed
under both docket numbers, so
interested parties should inspect both
docket numbers to ensure that they have
received all materials relevant to the
proposed amendments. Although listed
in the index, some information is not
publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy
E:\FR\FM\24AUP1.SGM
24AUP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 163 (Wednesday, August 24, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 49526-49530]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-16814]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[R01-OAR-2005-ME-0007; A-1-FRL-7959-4]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Maine; Nitrogen Oxides Exemption Request for Northern Maine
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing to approve an exemption request from the
requirements contained in Section 182(f) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or
Act) for Northern Maine (specifically, Oxford, Franklin, Somerset,
Piscataquis, Penobscot, Washington, Aroostook, and portions of Hancock
and Waldo Counties). This area, along with the rest of the State of
Maine, are part of the Ozone Transport Region (OTR) as provided for in
section 184(a) of the Act. Section 182(f) in combination with section
184 (relating to ozone transport regions) of the Act requires States in
the OTR, such as Maine, to adopt reasonably available control
technology (RACT) rules for major stationary sources of nitrogen oxides
(NOX) and to provide for nonattainment area new source
review (NSR) for new sources and modifications that are major for
NOX. This exemption request, submitted by the State of Maine
on March 24, 2005 with supplemental submittals dated April 19, 2005 and
June 28, 2005, is based on a demonstration that NOX
emissions in the exemption area are not impacting Maine's nonattainment
areas or other nonattainment areas in the OTR during times when
elevated ozone levels are monitored in those areas. As such, additional
reductions in NOX emissions from this area beyond what the
State regulations already provide for are not necessary for future
attainment in any of Maine's ozone nonattainment areas or other ozone
nonattainment areas in the OTR. Thus, as provided for in section
182(f)(2), additional NOX reductions in these areas would
constitute excess reductions that can be waived under the Act. This
action is being taken under the CAA.
[[Page 49527]]
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before September 23,
2005.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Regional Material in
EDocket (RME) ID Number R01-OAR-2005-ME-0007 by one of the following
methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
2. Agency Web site: https://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/ Regional Material
in EDocket (RME), EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, is
EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. Once in the system,
select ``quick search,'' then key in the appropriate RME Docket
identification number. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
3. E-mail: conroy.dave@epa.gov.
4. Fax: (617) 918-01661.
5. Mail: ``RME ID Number R01-OAR-2004-ME-0007'', David Conroy, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One
Congress Street, Suite 1100 (mail code CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023.
6. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: David
Conroy, Chief, Air Programs Branch, Office of Ecosystem Protection,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office,
One Congress Street, 11th floor, (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours
of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Regional Material in EDocket
(RME) ID Number R01-OAR-2004-ME-0007. EPA's policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public docket without change and may
be made available online at https://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, including
any personal information provided, unless the comment includes
information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not
submit through Regional Material in EDocket (RME), regulations.gov, or
e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected.
The EPA RME Web site and the Federal regulations.gov Web site are
``anonymous access'' systems, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through RME or regulations.gov, your e-mail 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, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
Regional Material in EDocket (RME) index at https://docket.epa.gov/
rmepub/. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly
available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in RME or in hard copy at Office of
Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New
England Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA.
EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the contact listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your
inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday
through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard P. Burkhart, Air Quality
Planning, Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One Congress Street, 11th
floor, (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023. Phone: 617-918-1664, Fax: (617)
918-0664, E-mail: burkhart.richard@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. How Can I Get Copies of This Document and Other Related Information?
In addition to the publicly available docket materials available
for inspection electronically in Regional Material in EDocket, and the
hard copy available at the Regional Office, which are identified in the
ADDRESSES section above, copies of the state submittal and EPA's
technical support document are also available for public inspection
during normal business hours, by appointment at The Bureau of Air
Quality Control, Department of Environmental Protection, First Floor of
the Tyson Building, Augusta Mental Health Institute Complex, Augusta,
ME 04333-0017.
B. What Should I Consider as I Prepare My Comments for EPA?
You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
1. Explain your views as clearly as possible.
2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
3. Provide any technical information and/or data you used that
support your views.
4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at your estimate.
5. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns.
6. Offer alternatives.
7. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.
8. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, identify the appropriate
regional file/rulemaking identification number in the subject line on
the first page of your response. It would also be helpful if you
provided the name, date, and Federal Register citation related to your
comments.
II. Rulemaking Information
The following outline is provided to aid in locating information in
this document.
A. Background and Purpose.
B. Clean Air Act Requirements
C. Scope of Exemptions
1. Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Program
2. Conformity
D. Criteria for Evaluation of Section 182(f) Exemption Requests
E. Summary of State Request
F. Technical Justification for the Request
A. Background and Purpose
On March 24, 2005, Maine Department of Environmental Protection
(DEP) submitted an exemption request from the requirements for
NOX control contained in Section 182(f) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA or Act) for the Northern Maine area (specifically, Oxford,
Franklin, Somerset, Piscataquis, Penobscot, Washington, Aroostook, and
portions of Hancock and Waldo Counties). On April 19, 2005 and June 28,
2005, Maine DEP submitted additional analyses to EPA justifying its
[[Page 49528]]
waiver request, which EPA is using as a basis for this proposal. All
submittals are available in the docket.
The area for which Maine is requesting a waiver, along with the
rest of the State of Maine, are part of the Ozone Transport Region as
provided for in section 184(a) of the Act. In addition, the waiver area
is designated unclassifiable/attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard.
Section 182(f) in combination with section 184 (relating to ozone
transport regions) of the Act requires States in the OTR, such as
Maine, to adopt reasonably available control technology (RACT) rules
for major stationary sources of nitrogen oxides and to provide for
nonattainment area new source review for new sources and modifications
that are major for NOX. This exemption request, is based on
a demonstration that NOX emissions in this area are not
impacting Maine's ozone nonattainment areas or any other ozone
nonattainment area in the OTR during times when elevated ozone levels
are monitored in those areas. As such, additional reductions in
NOX emissions from this area beyond what the State
regulations already provide for are not necessary for future attainment
in any of Maine's ozone nonattainment areas or other ozone
nonattainment area in the OTR. Thus, as provided for in section
182(f)(2), additional NOX reductions in these areas would
constitute excess reductions that can be waived under the Act. A
Technical Support Document (TSD) has been prepared for this action. The
TSD is available in the docket.
B. Clean Air Act Requirements
The air quality planning requirements for the reduction of
NOX emissions are set out in section 182(f) of the Act.
Section 182(f) of the Act requires states with areas designated and
classified as moderate nonattainment and above for ozone, or in ozone
transport regions, to impose the same control requirements for major
stationary sources of NOX as apply to major stationary
sources of volatile organic compounds (VOC). These requirements include
the adoption of RACT rules for major stationary sources and
nonattainment area NSR for major new sources and major modifications.
Section 182(f) provides further that these requirements do not apply
for nonattainment areas inside an ozone transport region if EPA
determines that reductions of NOX from such areas would not
contribute to net ozone benefits in the OTR. In addition,
implementation of NOX controls may be limited if EPA
determines it is necessary to avoid achieving excess reductions. Also,
NOX-related general conformity provisions do not apply in an
area that is granted a section 182(f) exemption. The area for which
Maine is requesting a NOX waiver is designated
unclassifiable/attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard and does not
have any 8-hour ozone conformity requirements.
The area for which Maine DEP has requested a waiver includes the
following counties: Oxford, Franklin, Somerset, Piscataquis, Penobscot,
Washington, and Aroostook. Also included in the area requested for a
waiver are the portions of Waldo and Hancock Counties that are
designated unclassifiable/attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. In
Waldo County, this includes the following towns: Belfast, Belmont,
Brooks, Burnham, Frankfort, Freedom, Jackson, Knox, Liberty,
Lincolnville, Monroe, Montville, Morrill, Northport, Palermo, Prospect,
Searsmont, Searsport, Stockton Springs, Swanville, Thorndike, Troy,
Unity, Waldo, and Winterport. In Hancock County, this includes the
following towns and townships: Amherst, Aurora, Bucksport, Castine,
Dedham, Eastbrook, Ellsworth, Franklin, Great Pond, Mariaville, Orland,
Osborn, Otis, Penobscot, Verona, Waltham, Oqiton Township (T4 ND), T3
ND, T39 MD, T40 MD, T41 MD, T32 MD, T34 MD, T35 MD, T28 MD, T22 MD, T16
MD, T8 SD, T9 SD, T10 SD, and T7 SD.
As stated above, each of the counties or partial counties for which
Maine DEP is seeking an exemption is within the OTR. For attainment
areas within the OTR, the application of NOX requirements
under the CAA may be limited if it is shown that additional
NOX reductions are excess to the attainment needs throughout
the region. EPA believes, in the case of these areas in Maine at the
northern extremity of the OTR, that NOX requirements can be
waived because the Maine DEP has submitted an acceptable demonstration
that additional reductions beyond what the state regulations already
provide for are not necessary for the nonattainment areas in the state
to attain, because emissions from this area are not contributing to the
ozone nonattainment problem in any other nonattainment area in the OTR,
and because reductions in this area are not necessary for purposes of
showing future attainment anywhere in the OTR. Maine DEP has made this
showing through air modeling trajectory analyses, NOX
emission analysis, and meteorological analyses. Most of this same
geographic area in Maine received approval by EPA of a similar
NOX waiver request under the 1-hour ozone standard on
December 26, 1995 (60 FR 66748). At this time, the 1-hour
NOX waiver remains as approved in 1995. The implementation
policy for the 8-hour ozone standard (69 FR 23951) requires areas to
request a separate waiver under the 8-hour ozone standard. This is the
only area in the OTR that received a NOX waiver under the 1-
hour ozone standard, and is the first area in the OTR to request a
NOX waiver under the 8-hour ozone standard.
C. Scope of Exemptions
If the EPA Administrator determines, under section 182(f) of the
Act, that additional reductions of NOX are excess, the area
at issue shall automatically (i.e., a State would not need to submit an
exemption request for each requirement) be exempt from the following
requirements (as applicable): Inspection and Maintenance program
NOX requirements, the NOX-related general
conformity provisions, the NOX-related transportation
conformity provisions in 40 CFR part 93, NOX RACT, and
nonattainment area NSR for new sources and modifications that are major
for NOX.
1. Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Program
I/M is not required in any portion of Northern Maine, therefore,
EPA's action on this request has no impact on I/M requirements.
2. Conformity
The transportation conformity rule requires emissions analysis of
motor vehicle NOX emissions for ozone nonattainment and
maintenance areas in order to determine the conformity of
transportation plans and programs to state implementation plan
requirements. The waiver area is currently designated unclassifiable/
attainment for the 8-hour standard, and does not need to do
transportation conformity. General conformity is also not required in
this area. Because conformity is not required in this area, EPA's
action on this request has no impact on any conformity requirements.
D. Criteria for Evaluation of Section 182(f) Exemption Requests
The criteria established for the evaluation of an exemption request
from the section 182(f) requirements are set forth in a memorandum from
Stephen D. Page, Director, OAQPS, dated January 14, 2005, and titled:
``Guidance On Limiting Nitrogen Oxides Requirements Related To 8-Hour
Ozone Implementation.''
E. Summary of State Request
On March 24, 2005, the Maine DEP submitted an exemption request
from
[[Page 49529]]
the requirements contained in section 182(f) of the CAA for Northern
Maine. In all, EPA received three submittals from Maine. The initial
request dated March 24, 2005, and a first supplement dated April 19,
2005, and a second supplement dated June 28, 2005.
This exemption request is based on a demonstration that
NOX emissions in this multi-county area are not impacting
Maine's two 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas or other 8-hour ozone
nonattainment areas in the OTR during times when elevated 8-hour ozone
levels are monitored in those areas. As such, additional reductions in
NOX emissions from these counties (i.e., NOX
reductions beyond what the state regulations provide for) are not
necessary for the two nonattainment areas in the State to attain and
are also not necessary for 8-hour ozone attainment purposes anywhere in
the OTR. Under these circumstances, as section 182(f)(2) provides, such
additional reductions may be waived as excess reductions.
F. Technical Justification for the Request
Maine submitted a detailed technical analysis showing that
NOX emissions from the proposed NOX waiver area
do not impact either of the two 8-hour nonattainment areas in Maine or
any other 8-hour ozone nonattainment in the OTR. The request relies on
several different techniques to prove Maine's case, with the primary
technique being back trajectories using the HYSPLIT trajectory model.
Maine DEP created back trajectories for each day that experienced
an 8-hour ozone exceedance in either of Maine's nonattainment areas
during 1998 through 2004 time period. When 8-hour exceedances for a
given day were recorded in either of Maine's 8-hour nonattainment
areas, back trajectories were run from locations in each of the
nonattainment areas. For each ozone exceedance that was analyzed, back
trajectories were run for each hour that recorded ozone in excess of
0.08 parts per million, and run for multiple heights in the atmosphere.
In all, Maine DEP ran over 1000 back trajectories for 61 separate
exceedance days during 1998 to 2004.
Maine then analyzed each of these back trajectories to see if there
was potential impact from the NOX waiver area. These
trajectory analyses show convincingly that the source region for
Maine's 8-hour ozone exceedances are to the south and west of southern
Maine. The trajectories also show convincingly that the proposed
NOX waiver area does not contribute to Maine's 8-hour ozone
nonattainment problems. This is identical to the conclusion that was
reached for 1-hour ozone exceedances in southern Maine for the 1-hour
NOX waiver approved by EPA in 1995.
In addition, Maine provided NOX emission inventory data
for the entire OTR and additional meteorological analyses to add
further evidence that the proposed NOX waiver area does not
contribute to ozone nonattainment in the two nonattainment areas of
Maine or anywhere in the OTR. Whenever there are 8-hour ozone
exceedances in New Hampshire or Massachusetts, the two states nearest
to Maine, the winds are not from Maine. Therefore, Maine does not
contribute to ozone nonattainment in Massachusetts, nor New Hampshire,
the only two states in the OTR, outside Maine, where it is reasonable
to expect that Maine's emissions might potentially contribute to ozone
nonattainment. Moreover, EPA has performed extensive air quality
modeling throughout the Northeast over the past several years in
support of its Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), and the ozone modeling
domain used for the CAIR rule covers much of northern Maine. In the
CAIR rulemaking, EPA did not find that Maine was significantly
contributing to future ozone nonattainment anywhere in the CAIR domain,
which includes the rest of the OTR plus most of the eastern half of the
United State. Thus, the State of Maine was not included in the CAIR
rule. EPA's CAIR modeling plus the data provided in Maine's submittals
support this proposed approval of Maine's NOX waiver
request.
EPA's review of this request indicates that a NOX waiver
is justified for Northern Maine. A TSD has been prepared on this action
and contains a detailed analysis of Maine's request. EPA is proposing
to approve the exemption request for the Northern Maine area from the
Section 182(f) NOX requirements. EPA is soliciting public
comments on the issues discussed in this notice or on other relevant
matters. These comments will be considered before taking final action.
Interested parties may participate in the Federal rulemaking procedure
by submitting written comments to the EPA New England Regional Office
listed in the ADDRESSES section of this notice.
III. Proposed Action
EPA is proposing to approve the exemption request for the Northern
and Western Maine area from the section 182(f) NOX
requirements based upon the evidence provided by the State and the
State's compliance with the requirements outlined in the applicable EPA
guidance. This action proposes to exempt Oxford, Franklin, Somerset,
Piscataquis, Penobscot, Washington, Aroostook, and portions of Hancock
and Waldo counties from the requirements of nonattainment area NSR for
new sources and modifications that are major for NOX, and
NOX RACT on existing sources. If EPA determines based on
future air quality analyses that NOX controls in this area
are necessary for ozone attainment purposes, rulemaking may be
initiated which may mean that this NOX exemption no longer
applies.
EPA is soliciting public comments on the issues discussed in this
proposal or on other relevant matters. These comments will be
considered before EPA takes final action. Interested parties may
participate in the federal rulemaking procedure by submitting written
comments to the EPA New England Regional Office listed in the ADDRESSES
section of this action, or by submitting comments electronically, by
mail, or through hand delivery/courier following the directions in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, I. General Information section of this
action.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). The
proposed exemption does not create any new requirements, but allows
suspension of the indicated requirements for the life of the exemption.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule suspends certain requirements, it does not contain any
unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments,
as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-
4).
This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
[[Page 49530]]
action also does not have federalism implications because it does 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,
as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999),
because it merely approves a state request to waive certain
requirements, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution
of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act. This
rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
State to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove this submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a waiver
request to require VCS in a submission that otherwise satisfies the
provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an
information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: August 15, 2005.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. 05-16814 Filed 8-23-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P