Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; West Virginia; Redesignation of the Charleston Ozone Nonattainment Area to Attainment and Approval of the Area's Maintenance Plan, 26299-26310 [E6-6754]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS
III. Proposed Action
EPA is approving the revisions to the
Pennsylvania SIP submitted by PADEP
on February 4, 2003 and November 21,
2005 to establish and require VOC and
NOX RACT for seven individual sources
pursuant to the Commonwealth’s SIPapproved generic RACT regulations.
EPA is soliciting public comments on
this proposed rule to approve these
source-specific RACT determinations
established and imposed by PADEP in
accordance with the criteria set forth in
its SIP-approved generic RACT
regulations applicable to these sources.
These comments will be considered
before taking final action.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed
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)). This action merely proposes
to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional
requirements beyond those imposed by
state law. Accordingly, the
Administrator certifies that this
proposed 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 proposes to
approve pre-existing requirements
under state law and does not impose
any additional enforceable duty beyond
that required by state law, 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 proposed rule also
does 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), nor will
it 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
proposes to approve a state rule
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:42 May 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
implementing a Federal standard, and
does not alter the relationship or the
distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. This proposed rule also is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 (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 a SIP submission for
failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for
EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,
to use VCS in place of a SIP 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. As required by
section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61
FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing
this proposed rule, EPA has taken the
necessary steps to eliminate drafting
errors and ambiguity, minimize
potential litigation, and provide a clear
legal standard for affected conduct. EPA
has complied with Executive Order
12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by
examining the takings implications of
the rule in accordance with the
‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental
Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk
and Avoidance of Unanticipated
Takings’’ issued under the executive
order.
This proposed rule to approve seven
source-specific RACT determinations
established and imposed by the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
pursuant to its SIP-approved generic
RACT regulations 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, Nitrogen dioxide,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: April 24, 2006.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. E6–6771 Filed 5–3–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
26299
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R03–OAR–2005–0548; FRL–8165–4]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; West
Virginia; Redesignation of the
Charleston Ozone Nonattainment Area
to Attainment and Approval of the
Area’s Maintenance Plan
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
a redesignation request and a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the State of West Virginia.
The West Virginia Department of
Environmental Protection (WVDEP) is
requesting that the Charleston area be
redesignated as attainment for the 8hour ozone national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS). In conjunction with
its redesignation request, the WVDEP
submitted a SIP revision consisting of a
maintenance plan for the Charleston
area that provides for continued
attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
for the next 12 years. EPA is proposing
to make a determination that the
Charleston area has attained the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS based upon three years
of complete, quality-assured ambient air
quality ozone monitoring data for 2002–
2004. EPA’s proposed approval of the 8hour ozone redesignation request is
based on its determination that the
Charleston area has met the criteria for
redesignation to attainment specified in
the Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA is
providing information on the status of
its adequacy determination for the
motor vehicle emission budgets
(MVEBs) that are identified in the
maintenance plan for the Charleston
area for purposes of transportation
conformity, and is also proposing to
approve those MVEBs. EPA is proposing
approval of the redesignation request
and of the maintenance plan revision to
the West Virginia SIP in accordance
with the requirements of the CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before June 5, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R03–OAR–2005–0548 by one of the
following methods:
A. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
B. E-mail: morris.makeba@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2005–0548,
Makeba Morris, Chief, Air Quality
Planning Branch.
E:\FR\FM\04MYP1.SGM
04MYP1
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS
26300
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
D. Mailcode 3AP21, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
E. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2005–
0548. 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, https://
www.regulations.gov, 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 www.regulations.gov
or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web
site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
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 www.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.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. 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 https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy
during normal business hours at the Air
Protection Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650
Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:42 May 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
19103. Copies of the State submittal are
available at the West Virginia
Department of Environmental
Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601
57th Street SE., Charleston, WV 25304.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amy Caprio, (215) 814–2156, or by email at caprio.amy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we’’, ‘‘us’’, or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA.
Table of Contents
I. What Actions Are EPA Proposing To Take?
II. What Is the Background for These
Proposed Actions?
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation
to Attainment?
IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?
V. What Would be the Effect of These
Actions?
VI. What Is EPA’s Analysis of the State’s
Request?
VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions
Budgets Established and Identified in the
Maintenance Plan for the Charleston
Area Adequate and Approvable?
VIII. Proposed Action
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Actions Are EPA Proposing To
Take?
On November 30, 2005, WVDEP
formally submitted a request to
redesignate the Charleston area from
nonattainment to attainment of the 8hour NAAQS for ozone. On November
30, 2005, West Virginia submitted a
maintenance plan for the Charleston
area as a SIP revision, to ensure
continued attainment over the next 12
years. The Charleston area is composed
of Kanawha and Putnam Counties. It is
currently designated as a basic 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area. EPA is
proposing to determine that the
Charleston area has attained the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS and that it has met the
requirements for redesignation pursuant
to section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA
is, therefore, proposing to approve the
redesignation request to change the
designation of the Charleston area from
nonattainment to attainment for the 8hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also
proposing to approve the maintenance
plan SIP revision for the area, such
approval being one of the CAA
requirements for approval of a
redesignation request. The maintenance
plan is designed to ensure continued
attainment in the Charleston area for the
next 12 years. Additionally, EPA is
announcing its action on the adequacy
process for the MVEBs identified in the
maintenance plan, and proposing to
approve the MVEBs identified for
volatile organic compounds (VOC) and
nitrogen oxides (NOX) for the Charleston
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
area for transportation conformity
purposes. Concurrently, the State is
requesting that EPA approve the
maintenance plan as meeting the
requirements of CAA 175(A)(b) with
respect to the 1-hour ozone maintenance
plan update.
II. What Is the Background for These
Proposed Actions?
A. General
Ground-level ozone is not emitted
directly by sources. Rather, emissions of
NOX and VOC react in the presence of
sunlight to form ground-level ozone.
The air pollutants NOX and VOC are
referred to as precursors of ozone. The
CAA establishes a process for air quality
management through the attainment and
maintenance of the NAAQS.
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a
revised 8-hour ozone standard of 0.08
parts per million (ppm). This new
standard is more stringent than the
previous 1-hour ozone standard. EPA
designated, as nonattainment, any area
violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
based on the air quality data for the
three years of 2001–2003. These were
the most recent three years of data at the
time EPA designated 8-hour areas. The
Charleston area was designated as basic
8-hour ozone nonattainment status in a
Federal Register notice signed on April
25, 2004 and published on April 30,
2004 (69 FR 23857). On June 15, 2005
(69 FR at 23396), the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS was revoked in the Charleston
area (as well as most other areas of the
country). See 40 CFR 50.9(b); 69 FR at
23396, April 30, 2004; and see 70 FR
44470, August 3, 2005.
The CAA, Title I, Part D, contains two
sets of provisions—subpart 1 and
subpart 2—that address planning and
control requirements for nonattainment
areas. Subpart 1 (which EPA refers to as
‘‘basic’’ nonattainment) contains
general, less prescriptive requirements
for nonattainment areas for any
pollutant—including ozone—governed
by an NAAQS. Subpart 2 (which EPA
refers to as ‘‘classified’’ nonattainment)
provides more specific requirements for
ozone nonattainment areas. Some
8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are
subject only to the provisions of subpart
1. Other areas are also subject to the
provisions of subpart 2. Under EPA’s
8-hour ozone implementation rule,
signed on April 15, 2004, an area was
classified under subpart 2 based on its
8-hour ozone design value (i.e., the 3year average annual fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentration), if it had a 1-hour design
value at or above 0.121 ppm (the lowest
1-hour design value in the CAA for
E:\FR\FM\04MYP1.SGM
04MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
subpart 2 requirements). All other areas
are covered under subpart 1, based upon
their 8-hour design values. In 2004, the
Charleston area was designated a basic
8-hour ozone nonattainment area based
upon air quality monitoring data from
2001–2003, and is subject to the
requirements of subpart 1.
Under 40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour
ozone standard is attained when the
3-year average of the annual fourthhighest daily maximum 8-hour average
ambient air quality ozone concentration
is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm (i.e.,
0.084 ppm when rounding is
considered). See 69 FR 23857, (April 30,
2004) for further information. Ambient
air quality monitoring data for the 3year period must meet data
completeness requirements. The data
completeness requirements are met
when the average percent of days with
valid ambient monitoring data is greater
than 90 percent, and no single year has
less than 75 percent data completeness
as determined in Appendix I of 40 CFR
part 50. The ozone monitoring data from
the 3-year period of 2002–2004
indicates that the Charleston area has a
design value of 0.081 ppm. Therefore,
the ambient ozone data for the
Charleston area indicates no violations
of the 8-hour ozone standard.
Monitoring data for 2005 indicates
continued attainment of the 8-hour
ozone standard.
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS
B. The Charleston Area
The Charleston area consists of
Kanawha and Putnam Counties. Prior to
its designation as an 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area, the Charleston area
was a maintenance area for the 1-hour
ozone nonattainment NAAQS.
On November 30, 2005, the WVDEP
requested that the Charleston area be
redesignated to attainment for the 8hour ozone standard. The redesignation
request included 3 years of complete,
quality-assured data for the period of
2002–2004, indicating that the 8-hour
NAAQS for ozone had been achieved in
the Charleston area. The data satisfies
the CAA requirements when the 3-year
average of the annual fourth-highest
daily maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentration (commonly referred to as
the area’s design value) is less than or
equal to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when
rounding is considered). Under the
CAA, a nonattainment area may be
redesignated if sufficient complete,
quality-assured data is available to
determine that the area has attained the
standard and the area meets the other
CAA redesignation requirements set
forth in section 107(d)(3)(E).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:42 May 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
III. What Are the Criteria for
Redesignation to Attainment?
The CAA provides the requirements
for redesignating a nonattainment area
to attainment. Specifically, section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA allows for
redesignation providing that:
(1) EPA determines that the area has
attained the applicable NAAQS;
(2) EPA has fully approved the
applicable implementation plan for the
area under section 110(k);
(3) EPA determines that the
improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions
in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP
and applicable Federal air pollutant
control regulations and other permanent
and enforceable reductions;
(4) EPA has fully approved a
maintenance plan for the area as
meeting the requirements of section
175A; and
(5) the state containing such area has
met all requirements applicable to the
area under section 110 and Part D.
EPA provided guidance on
redesignation in the General Preamble
for the Implementation of Title I of the
CAA Amendments of 1990, on April 16,
1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented
this guidance on April 28, 1992 (57 FR
18070). EPA has provided further
guidance on processing redesignation
requests in the following documents:
• ‘‘Ozone and Carbon Monoxide
Design Value Calculations’’,
Memorandum from Bill Laxton, June 18,
1990;
• ‘‘Maintenance Plans for
Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,’’
Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief,
Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs
Branch, April 30, 1992;
• ‘‘Contingency Measures for Ozone
and Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Redesignations,’’ Memorandum from
G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1,
1992;
• ‘‘Procedures for Processing
Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,’’ Memorandum from John
Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4,
1992;
• ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Actions Submitted in Response to Clean
Air Act (Act) Deadlines,’’ Memorandum
from John Calcagni, Director, Air
Quality Management Division, October
28, 1992;
• ‘‘Technical Support Documents
(TSDs) for Redesignation Ozone and
Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment
Areas,’’ Memorandum from G.T. Helms,
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
26301
Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide
Programs Branch, August 17, 1993;
• ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Requirements for Areas Submitting
Requests for Redesignation to
Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) On or After
November 15, 1992,’’ Memorandum
from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting
Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, September 17, 1993;
• Memorandum from D. Kent Berry,
Acting Director, Air Quality
Management Division, to Air Division
Directors, Regions 1–10, ‘‘Use of Actual
Emissions in Maintenance
Demonstrations for Ozone and CO
Nonattainment Areas,’’ dated November
30, 1993;
• ‘‘Part D New Source Review (Part D
NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to
Attainment,’’ Memorandum from Mary
D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for
Air and Radiation, October 14, 1994;
and
• ‘‘Reasonable Further Progress,
Attainment Demonstration, and Related
Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment
Areas Meeting the Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard,’’
Memorandum from John S. Seitz,
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, May 10, 1995.
IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?
On November 30, 2005, the WVDEP
requested redesignation of the
Charleston area to attainment for the 8hour ozone standard. On November 30,
2005, the WVDEP submitted a
maintenance plan for the Charleston
area as a SIP revision, to assure
continued attainment over the next 12
years, until 2018. Concurrently, West
Virginia is requesting that EPA approve
maintenance plan as meeting the
requirements of CAA 175A(b) with
respect to the 1-hour ozone maintenance
plan update. EPA is proposing to
approve the maintenance plan to fulfill
the requirement of section 175A(b) for
submission of a maintenance plan
update eight years after the area was
redesignated to attainment of the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS. EPA believes that such
an update must ensure that the
maintenance plan in the SIP provides
maintenance of the NAAQS for a period
of 20 years after the area is initially
redesignated to attainment. EPA can
propose approval because the
maintenance plan, which demonstrates
maintenance of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS through 2018, also
demonstrates maintenance of the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS through 2018, even
though the latter standard is no longer
E:\FR\FM\04MYP1.SGM
04MYP1
26302
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
in effect. The Charleston area was
redesignated to attainment of the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS on September 6, 1994 (59
FR 45985), and, the initial 1-hour ozone
maintenance plan provided for
maintenance through 2005. Section
51.905(e) of the ‘‘Final Rule To
Implement the 8-Hour Requirements—
Phase 1,’’ April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23999)
specifies the conditions that must be
satisfied before EPA may approve a
modification to a 1-hour maintenance
plan which: (1) removes the obligation
to submit a maintenance plan for the
1-hour ozone NAAQS eight years after
approval of the initial 1-hour
maintenance plan and/or (2) removes
the obligation to implement contingency
measures upon a violation of the 1-hour
NAAQS. EPA believes that section
51.905(e) of the final rule allows a State
to make either one or both of these
modifications to a 1-hour maintenance
plan SIP once EPA approves a
maintenance plan for the 8-hour
NAAQS. The maintenance plan will not
trigger the contingency plan upon a
violation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS,
but upon a violation of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. EPA believes that the 8-hour
standard is now the proper standard
which should trigger the contingency
plan now that the 1-hour NAAQS has
been revoked and now that approval of
the maintenance plan would allow the
State to remove a 1-hour NAAQS
obligation from the SIP. EPA has
determined that the Charleston area has
attained the standard and has met the
requirements for redesignation set forth
in section 107(d)(3)(E).
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS
V. What Would Be the Effect of These
Actions?
Approval of the redesignation request
would change the designation of the
Charleston area from nonattainment to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
found at 40 CFR part 81. It would also
incorporate into the West Virginia SIP a
maintenance plan ensuring continued
attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
in the Charleston area for the next 12
years, until 2018. The maintenance plan
includes contingency measures to
remedy any future violations of the 8hour NAAQS (should they occur), and
identifies the MVEBs for NOX and VOC
for transportation conformity purposes
for the years 2004, 2009 and 2018.
These MVEBs are displayed in the
following table:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 May 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
TABLE 1.—MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS
BUDGETS IN TONS PER DAY
[tpd]
Year
NOX
2004 ..............
2009 ..............
2018 ..............
VOC
26.4
19.8
8.20
16.1
11.6
7.20
VI. What Is EPA’s Analysis of the
State’s Request?
EPA is proposing to determine that
the Charleston nonattainment area has
attained the 8-hour ozone standard and
that all other redesignation criteria have
been met. The following is a description
of how the WVDEP’s November 30,
2005 submittal satisfies the
requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) of
the CAA.
A. The Charleston Area Has Attained
the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
EPA is proposing to determine that
the Charleston area has attained the 8hour ozone NAAQS. For ozone, an area
may be considered to be attaining the 8hour ozone NAAQS if there are no
violations, as determined in accordance
with 40 CFR 50.10 and Appendix I of
part 50, based on three complete,
consecutive calendar years of qualityassured air quality monitoring data. To
attain this standard, the 3-year average
of the fourth-highest daily maximum 8hour average ozone concentrations
measured at each monitor, within the
area, over each year must not exceed the
ozone standard of 0.08 ppm. Based on
the rounding convention described in
40 CFR part 50, appendix I, the standard
is attained if the design value is 0.084
ppm or below. The data must be
collected and quality-assured in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and
recorded in the Aerometric Information
Retrieval System (AIRS). The monitors
generally should have remained at the
same location for the duration of the
monitoring period required for
demonstrating attainment.
In the Charleston area there is one
ozone monitor, located in Kanawha
County, that measures air quality with
respect to ozone. As part of its
redesignation request, West Virginia
submitted ozone monitoring data for the
years 2002–2004 (the most recent three
years of data available as of the time of
the redesignation request). This data has
been quality assured and is recorded in
AIRS. The fourth high 8-hour daily
maximum concentrations, along with
the three-year average, are summarized
in Table 2.
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
TABLE 2.—CHARLESTON NONATTAINMENT AREA FOURTH HIGHEST 8HOUR AVERAGE VALUES; CHARLESTON MONITOR, AIRS ID 54–033–
4000
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
Annual 4th
high reading
(ppm)
0.087
0.088
0.069
0.079
The average for the 3-year period 2002
through 2004 is 0.081 ppm.
The data for 2002–2004 show that the
area has attained the standard, and
preliminary data for the 2005 ozone
season show that the annual fourth high
reading is 0.079 ppm and that the area
continues to attain the standard. The
data collected at the Charleston monitor
satisfies the CAA requirement that the
3-year average of the annual fourthhighest daily maximum 8-hour average
ozone concentration is less than or
equal to 0.08 ppm. The WVDEP’s
request for redesignation for the
Charleston area indicates that the data
was quality assured in accordance with
40 CFR part 58. The WVDEP uses AIRS
as the permanent database to maintain
its data and quality assures the data
transfers and content for accuracy. In
addition, as discussed below with
respect to the maintenance plan,
WVDEP has committed to continue
monitoring in accordance with 40 CFR
part 58. In summary, EPA has
determined that the data submitted by
West Virginia indicates that the
Charleston area has attained the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.
B. The Charleston Area Has Met All
Applicable Requirements Under Section
110 and Part D of the CAA and the Area
Has a Fully Approved SIP Under
Section 110(k) of the CAA
EPA has determined that West
Virginia has met all SIP requirements
for the Charleston area applicable for
purposes of redesignation under section
110 of the CAA (General SIP
Requirements) and that it meets all
applicable SIP requirements under Part
D of Title I of the CAA, in accordance
with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition,
EPA has determined that the SIP is fully
approved with respect to all
requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation in accordance with
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these
proposed determinations, EPA
ascertained what requirements are
applicable to the area, and determined
that the applicable portions of the SIP
E:\FR\FM\04MYP1.SGM
04MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
meeting these requirements are fully
approved under section 110(k) of the
CAA. We note that SIPs must be fully
approved only with respect to
applicable requirements.
The September 4, 1992 Calcagni
memorandum (‘‘Procedures for
Processing Requests to Redesignate
Areas to Attainment,’’ Memorandum
from John Calcagni, Director, Air
Quality Management Division,
September 4, 1992) describes EPA’s
interpretation of section 107(d)(3)(E)
with respect to the timing of applicable
requirements. Under this interpretation,
to qualify for redesignation, states
requesting redesignation to attainment
must meet only the relevant CAA
requirements that come due prior to the
submittal of a complete redesignation
request. See also Michael Shapiro
memorandum, September 17, 1993, and
60 FR 12459, 12465–66, (March 7, 1995)
(redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor).
Applicable requirements of the CAA
that come due subsequent to the area’s
submittal of a complete redesignation
request remain applicable until a
redesignation is approved, but are not
required as a prerequisite to
redesignation. Section 175A(c) of the
CAA. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537
(7th Cir. 2004). See also 68 FR 25424,
25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of
St. Louis).
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS
1. Section 110 General SIP
Requirements
Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA
delineates the general requirements for
a SIP, which include enforceable
emissions limitations and other control
measures, means, or techniques,
provisions for the establishment and
operation of appropriate devices
necessary to collect data on ambient air
quality, and programs to enforce the
limitations. The general SIP elements
and requirements set forth in section
110(a)(2) include, but are not limited to,
the following:
• Submittal of a SIP that has been
adopted by the state after reasonable
public notice and hearing;
• Provisions for establishment and
operation of appropriate procedures
needed to monitor ambient air quality;
• Implementation of a source permit
program; provisions for the
implementation of Part C requirement
(Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD));
• Provisions for the implementation
of Part D requirements for New Source
Review (NSR) permit programs;
• Provisions for air pollution
modeling; and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:42 May 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
• Provisions for public and local
agency participation in planning and
emission control rule development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs
contain certain measures to prevent
sources in a state from significantly
contributing to air quality problems in
another state. To implement this
provision, EPA has required certain
states to establish programs to address
transport of air pollutants in accordance
with the NOX SIP Call, October 27, 1998
(63 FR 57356), amendments to the NOX
SIP Call, May 14, 1999 (64 FR 26298)
and March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), and
the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR),
May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25161). However,
the section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for
a state are not linked with a particular
nonattainment area’s designation and
classification in that state. EPA believes
that the requirements linked with a
particular nonattainment area’s
designation and classifications are the
relevant measures to evaluate in
reviewing a redesignation request. The
transport SIP submittal requirements,
where applicable, continue to apply to
a state regardless of the designation of
any one particular area in the state.
Thus, we do not believe that these
requirements should be construed to be
applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation. In addition, EPA believes
that the other section 110 elements not
connected with nonattainment plan
submissions and not linked with an
area’s attainment status are not
applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation. The State will still be
subject to these requirements after the
Charleston area is redesignated. The
section 110 and Part D requirements,
which are linked with a particular area’s
designation and classification, are the
relevant measures to evaluate in
reviewing a redesignation request. This
policy is consistent with EPA’s existing
policy on applicability of conformity
(i.e., for redesignations) and oxygenated
fuels requirement. See Reading,
Pennsylvania, proposed and final
rulemakings 61 FR 53174–53176
(October 10, 1996), 62 FR 24816 (May 7,
1997); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio,
final rulemaking 61 FR 20458 (May 7,
1996); and Tampa, Florida, final
rulemaking 60 FR 62748 (December 7,
1995). See also the discussion on this
issue in the Cincinnati redesignation 65
FR 37890 (June 19, 2000), and in the
Pittsburgh redesignation 66 FR 50399
(October 19, 2001). Similarly, with
respect to the NOX SIP Call rules, EPA
noted in its Phase 1 Final Rule to
Implement the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS,
that the NOX SIP Call rules are not ‘‘an
‘applicable requirement’ for purposes of
section 110(l) because the NOX rules
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
26303
apply regardless of an area’s attainment
or nonattainment status for the 8-hour
(or the 1-hour) NAAQS.’’ 69 FR 23951,
23983 (April 30, 2004).
EPA believes that section 110
elements not linked to the area’s
nonattainment status are not applicable
for purposes of redesignation. Any
section 110 requirements that are linked
to the Part D requirements for 8-hour
ozone nonattainment areas are not yet
due, because, as we explain later in this
notice, no Part D requirements
applicable for purposes of redesignation
under the 8-hour standard became due
prior to submission of the redesignation
request.
Because the West Virginia SIP
satisfies all of the applicable general SIP
elements and requirements set forth in
section 110(a)(2), EPA concludes that
West Virginia has satisfied the criterion
of section 107(d)(3)(E) regarding section
110 of the Act.
2. Part D Nonattainment Area
Requirements Under the 8-Hour
Standard
The Charleston area was designated a
basic nonattainment area for the 8-hour
ozone standard. Sections 172–176 of the
CAA, found in subpart 1 of Part D, set
forth the basic nonattainment
requirements for all nonattainment
areas. Since the Charleston area was
maintaining attainment of the 1-hour
standard at the time of its designation as
a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment area
on April 30, 2004, no Part D submittals
under the 1-hour standard were
required or made for this area.
Section 182 of the CAA, found in
subpart 2 of Part D, establishes
additional specific requirements
depending on the area’s nonattainment
classification. The Charleston area was
classified as a subpart 1 nonattainment
area; therefore, no subpart 2
requirements apply to this area.
With respect to the 8-hour standard,
EPA proposes to determine that the
West Virginia SIP meets all applicable
SIP requirements under Part D of the
CAA, because no 8-hour ozone standard
Part D requirements applicable for
purposes of redesignation became due
prior to submission of the area’s
redesignation request. Because the State
submitted a complete redesignation
request for the Charleston area prior to
the deadline for any submissions
required under the 8-hour standard, we
have determined that the Part D
requirements do not apply to the
Charleston area for the purposes of
redesignation
In addition to the fact that Part D
requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation did not become due prior
E:\FR\FM\04MYP1.SGM
04MYP1
26304
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
to submission of the redesignation
request, EPA believes it is reasonable to
interpret the general conformity and
NSR requirements as not requiring
approval prior to redesignation.
With respect to section 176,
Conformity Requirements, section
176(c) of the CAA requires states to
establish criteria and procedures to
ensure that federally supported or
funded projects conform to the air
quality planning goals in the applicable
SIP. The requirement to determine
conformity applies to transportation
plans, programs, and projects
developed, funded or approved under
Title 23 U.S.C. and the Federal Transit
Act (‘‘transportation conformity’’) as
well as to all other federally supported
or funded projects (‘‘general
conformity’’). State conformity revisions
must be consistent with Federal
conformity regulations relating to
consultation, enforcement and
enforceability that the CAA required the
EPA to promulgate.
EPA believes it is reasonable to
interpret the conformity SIP
requirements as not applying for
purposes of evaluating the redesignation
request under section 107(d) since state
conformity rules are still required after
redesignation and federal conformity
rules apply where state rules have not
been approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265
F.3d 426, 438–440 (6th Cir. 2001),
upholding this interpretation. See also
60 FR 62748 (Dec. 7, 1995).
EPA has also determined that areas
being redesignated need not comply
with the requirement that a NSR
program be approved prior to
redesignation, provided that the area
demonstrates maintenance of the
standard without Part D NSR in effect,
because PSD requirements will apply
after redesignation. The rationale for
this view is described in a
memorandum from Mary Nichols,
Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, dated October 14, 1994,
entitled, ‘‘Part D NSR Requirements or
Areas Requesting Redesignation to
Attainment.’’ West Virginia has
demonstrated that the area will be able
to maintain the standard without Part D
NSR in effect in the Charleston area, and
therefore, West Virginia need not have
a fully approved Part D NSR program
prior to approval of the redesignation
request. West Virginia’s SIP-approved
PSD program will become effective in
the area upon redesignation to
attainment in the Charleston area. See
rulemakings for Detroit, MI (60 FR
12467–12468, March 7, 1995);
Cleveland-Akron-Lorrain, OH (61 FR
20458, 20469–70, May 7, 1996);
Louisville, KY (66 FR 53665, October
23, 2001); Grand Rapids, Michigan (61
FR 31834–31837, June 21, 1996).
3. The Area Has a Fully Approved SIP
for the Purposes of Redesignation
EPA has fully approved the West
Virginia SIP for the purposes of
redesignation. EPA may rely on prior
SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request. Calcagni Memo,
p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth
Alliance v. Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989–
90 (6th Cir. 1998), Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d
426 (6th Cir. 2001), plus any additional
measures it may approve in conjunction
with a redesignation action. See 68 FR
25425 (May 12, 2003) and citations
therein.
The Charleston area was maintaining
attainment of the 1-hour standard at the
time of its designation as a basic 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area on April 30,
2004. Because the area was redesignated
as a 1-hour maintenance area, no Part D
SIP submittals were previously
required. Because there are no current
SIP submission requirements applicable
for the purposes of redesignation of the
Charleston area, the applicable
implementation plan satisfies all
pertinent SIP requirements. As
indicated previously, EPA believes that
the section 110 elements not connected
with Part D nonattainment plan
submissions and not linked to the area’s
nonattainment status are not applicable
requirements for purposes of
redesignation. EPA also believes that no
8-hour Part D requirements applicable
for purposes of redesignation have yet
become due for the Charleston area, and
therefore they need not be approved
into the SIP prior to redesignation.
4. The Air Quality Improvement in the
Charleston Area Is Due to Permanent
and Enforceable Reductions in
Emissions Resulting From
Implementation of the SIP and
Applicable Federal Air Pollution
Control Regulations and Other
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions
EPA believes that the State has
demonstrated that the observed air
quality improvement in the area is due
to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the SIP, Federal
measures, and other state-adopted
measures. Emissions reductions
attributable to these rules are shown in
Table 3.
TABLE 3.—TOTAL VOC AND NOX EMISSIONS FOR 2002 AND 2004
[tpd]
Year
Point
Area
Nonroad
Mobile
Total
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
Year 2002 ....................................................................................................................
Year 2004 * ..................................................................................................................
Diff. (02–04) .................................................................................................................
10.1
10.0
¥0.1
21.2
20.9
¥0.3
5.5
5.3
¥0.2
15.7
13.4
¥2.3
52.5
49.6
¥2.9
133.8
87.8
¥46.0
2.4
2.5
+0.1
13.0
12.7
¥0.3
25.5
22.0
¥3.5
174.7
125.0
¥49.7
Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)
Year 2002 ....................................................................................................................
Year 2004 * ..................................................................................................................
Diff. (02–04) .................................................................................................................
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS
* 2004 Emissions estimated by linear interpolation for all sectors except highway and point EGUs.
Between 2002 and 2004, VOC
emissions were reduced by 2.9 tpd, and
NOX emissions were reduced by 49.7
tpd, due to the following permanent and
enforceable measures implemented or in
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 May 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
the process of being implemented in the
Charleston area:
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Programs Currently in Effect
(a) National Low Emission Vehicle
(NLEV);
E:\FR\FM\04MYP1.SGM
04MYP1
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
(b) Motor vehicle fleet turnover with
new vehicles meeting the Tier 2
standards; and,
(c) Clean Diesel Program.
West Virginia has demonstrated that
the implementation of permanent
enforceable emissions controls have
reduced local VOC and NOX emissions.
Nearly all of the reductions in VOC are
attributable to mobile source emission
controls such as NLEV and Tier 2
programs. The mobile programs
produced 2.3 tpd of VOC reductions and
3.5 tpd of NOX reductions.
Nearly all of the reductions in NOX
are attributable to the implementation of
the NOX SIP Call. West Virginia has
indicated in its submittal that the
implementation of the NOX SIP Call,
with its mandatory reductions in NOX
emissions from Electric Generating
Units (EGUs) and large industrial boilers
(non-EGUs), reduced NOX emissions
throughout the Charleston area. NOX
emissions from EGUs in the Charleston
area were reduced by 6,798 tons
between 2002 and 2004. Also, NOX
emissions from non-EGU sources in the
Charleston area were reduced by 806
tons between 2003 and 2004. The
WVDEP believes that the improvement
in ozone air quality from 2002 to 2004
was the result of identifiable, permanent
and enforceable reductions in ozone
precursor emissions for the same period.
Additionally, WVDEP has identified,
but not quantified, additional
reductions in VOC emissions that will
be achieved as a co-benefit of the
reductions in the emission of hazardous
air pollutants (HAPs) as a result of
implementation of EPA’s Maximum
Achievable Control Technology (MACT)
standards.
Other regulations, such as the nonroad diesel, 69 FR 39858 (June 29,
2004), the heavy duty engine and
vehicle standards, 66 FR 5002 (January
18, 2001) and the new Tier 2 tailpipe
standards for automobiles, 65 FR 6698
(January 10, 2000), are also expected to
greatly reduce emissions throughout the
country and thereby reduce emissions
impacting the Charleston area monitor.
The Tier 2 standards came into effect in
2004, and by 2030, EPA expects that the
new Tier 2 standards will reduce NOX
emissions by about 74 percent
nationally. EPA believes that permanent
and enforceable emissions reductions
are the cause of the long-term
improvement in ozone levels and are
the cause of the area achieving
attainment of the 8-hour ozone
standard.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:42 May 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
5. The Charleston Area Has a Fully
Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant
to Section 175A of the CAA
In conjunction with its request to
redesignate the Charleston area to
attainment status, West Virginia
submitted a SIP revision to provide for
maintenance of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS in the area for at least 12 years
after redesignation. West Virginia is
requesting that EPA approve this SIP
revision as meeting the requirement of
CAA 175A(b) and replace the 1-hour
ozone maintenance plan update
requirement.
Under 40 CFR 51.905(e), the EPA may
approve a SIP revision requesting the
removal of the obligation to implement
contingency measures upon a violation
of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS when the
State submits and EPA approves an
attainment demonstration for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS for an area initially
designated nonattainment for the 8-hour
NAAQS or a maintenance SIP for the 8hour NAAQS for an area initially
designated attainment for the 8-hour
NAAQS.
The rationale behind 40 CFR
51.905(e) is to ensure that the area
maintains the applicable ozone standard
(the 8-hour standard in areas where the
1-hour standard has been revoked). EPA
believes this rationale analogously
applies to areas that were not initially
designated, but are redesignated as
attainment with the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. Therefore, EPA intends to treat
redesignated areas as though they had
been initially designated attainment of
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and
accordingly proposes to relieve the
Charleston area of its maintenance plan
obligations with respect to the 1-hour
standard. Once approved, the
maintenance plan for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS will ensure that the SIP for the
Charleston area meets the requirements
of the CAA regarding maintenance of
the applicable 8-hour ozone standard.
What Is Required in a Maintenance
Plan?
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth
the elements of a maintenance plan for
areas seeking redesignation from
nonattainment to attainment. Under
section 175A, the plan must
demonstrate continued attainment of
the applicable NAAQS for at least 10
years after approval of a redesignation of
an area to attainment. Eight years after
the redesignation, the State must submit
a revised maintenance plan
demonstrating that attainment will
continue to be maintained for the next
10-year period following the initial 10year period (12 years in Charleston’s
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
26305
case). To address the possibility of
future NAAQS violations, the
maintenance plan must contain such
contingency measures, with a schedule
for implementation, as EPA deems
necessary to assure prompt correction of
any future 8-hour ozone violations.
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the
elements of a maintenance plan for
areas seeking redesignation from
nonattainment to attainment. The
Calcagni memorandum dated September
4, 1992, provides additional guidance
on the content of a maintenance plan.
An ozone maintenance plan should
address the following provisions:
(a) An attainment emissions
inventory;
(b) A maintenance demonstration;
(c) A monitoring network;
(d) Verification of continued
attainment; and
(e) A contingency plan.
Analysis of the Charleston Area
Maintenance Plan
(a) Attainment Inventory—An
attainment inventory includes the
emissions during the time period
associated with the monitoring data
showing attainment. An attainment year
of 2004 was used for the Charleston area
since it is a reasonable year within the
3-year block of 2002–2004 and accounts
for reductions attributable to
implementation of the CAA
requirements to date.
The WVDEP prepared comprehensive
VOC and NOX emissions inventories for
the Charleston area, including point,
area, mobile on-road, and mobile nonroad sources for a base year of 2002.
To develop the NOX and VOC base
year emissions inventories, WVDEP
used the following approaches and
sources of data:
(i) Point source emissions—West
Virginia maintains its point source
emissions inventory data on the iSTEPS database, which is commercial
software purchased from a vendor,
Pacific Environmental Services.
Facilities subject to emissions inventory
reporting requirements were those
operating point sources subject to Title
V permitting requirements. Affected
sources were identified from the
WVDEP’s Regulation 30 database which
is maintained by the WVDEP’s Title V
Permitting Group. For the 2002
inventory, diskettes were populated
with i-STEPS software information, as
well as source-specific data from the
previous year and sent to facilities for
updates of their 2002 activity and
emissions data. The facilities then sent
the diskettes back to the State and,
where WVDEP staff quality assured the
data and submitted it to EPA’s Central
E:\FR\FM\04MYP1.SGM
04MYP1
26306
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Data Exchange (CDX) site as well as to
contractors for the Visibility
Improvement State and Tribal
Association of the Southeast (VISTAS),
a Regional Planning Organization (RPO).
WVDEP used the VISTAS revised
2002 base year point source inventory
including both EGUs and non-EGUs.
The WVDEP took VISTAS data and
calculated the emissions for the EGUs
and non-EGUs for a typical summer
weekday for peak ozone season (June
thru August).
(ii) Area source emissions—In order
to calculate the area source emissions
inventory the WVDEP took the annual
values from the VISTAS base year
inventory and derived the typical ozone
summer weekday, using procedures
outlined in the EPA’s Emissions
Modeling Clearinghouse (EMCH)
Memorandum, ‘‘Temporal Allocation of
Annual Emissions Using EMCH
Temporal Profiles, April 29, 2002.’’ This
enabled WVDEP to arrive at the
‘‘typical’’ summer day emissions.
(iii) On-road mobile source
emissions—VISTAS developed 2002 onroad mobile (highway) emissions
inventory data based on vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) updates provided by
WVDEP. VISTAS also estimated future
emissions based upon expected growth
for the future years 2009 and 2018.
However, Federal Transportation
Conformity requirements dictate that
the WVDEP consult with the
Metropolitan Planning Organization
(MPO) responsible for transportation
planning in developing SIP revisions
which may establish highway emissions
budgets. This applies to the
maintenance plan submitted by WVDEP
on November 30, 2005. Therefore, the
WVDEP has consulted with the
Charleston MPO, and the Regional
Intergovernmental Council (RIC). The
RIC provided base year and projection
emissions data consistent with their
most recent available Travel Demand
Model (TDM) results along with EPA’s
most recent emission factor model,
MOBILE6.2. The WVDEP used these
data to estimate highway emissions and,
in consultation with the RIC, to develop
highway emissions budgets for VOC and
NOX. The RIC must evaluate future Long
Range Transportation Plans and
Transportation Improvement Programs
to ensure that the associated emissions
are equal to or less than the final
emissions budgets. The budgets are
designed to facilitate a positive
conformity determination while
ensuring overall maintenance of the 8hour NAAQS. It should be noted that an
actual decrease in highway emissions
occurred between 2002 and 2004.
(iv) Mobile non-road emissions—
Mobile non-road emissions were
calculated in the same manner as the
area source emissions.
The 2004 attainment year VOC and
NOX emissions for the Charleston area
are summarized along with the 2009
and 2018 projected emissions for this
area in tables 4 and 5, which cover the
demonstration of maintenance for this
area. EPA has concluded that West
Virginia has adequately derived and
documented the 2004 attainment year
VOC and NOX emissions for this area.
(b) Maintenance Demonstration—On
November 30, 2005, the WVDEP
submitted a SIP revision to supplement
its November 30, 2005 redesignation
request. The submittal by WVDEP
consists of the maintenance plan as
required by section 175A of the CAA.
The Charleston area plan shows
maintenance of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS by demonstrating that current
and future emissions of VOC and NOX
remain at or below the attainment year
2004 emissions levels throughout the
Charleston area through the year 2018.
The Charleston area maintenance
demonstration need not be based on
modeling. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d
426 (6th Cir. 2001); Sierra Club v. EPA,
375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also 66
FR 53094, 53099–53100 (October 19,
2001), 68 FR 25430–32 (May 12, 2003).
Tables 4 and 5 specify the VOC and
NOX emissions for the Charleston area
for 2004, 2009, and 2018. The WVDEP
chose 2009 as an interim year in the 12year maintenance demonstration period
to demonstrate that the VOC and NOX
emissions are not projected to increase
above the 2004 attainment level during
the time of the 12-year maintenance
period.
TABLE 4.—TOTAL VOC EMISSIONS FOR 2004–2018
[tpd]
2004 VOC
emissions 1
Source category
2009 VOC
emissions
2018 VOC
emissions
Mobile ......................................................................................................................................................
Nonroad ...................................................................................................................................................
Area .........................................................................................................................................................
Point 2 .......................................................................................................................................................
13.4
5.3
20.9
10.0
11.6
4.6
20.1
10.4
7.2
3.5
22.1
12.2
Total ..................................................................................................................................................
49.6
46.7
45.0
1 2004
Emissions estimated by linear interpolation for all sectors except highway and EGUs.
emissions updated for 2008 NOX SIP Call.
2 Non-EGU
TABLE 5.—TOTAL NOX EMISSIONS 2004–2018
[tpd]
2004 NOX
emissions 1
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS
Source category
2009 NOX
emissions
2018 NOX
emissions
Mobile ......................................................................................................................................................
Nonroad ...................................................................................................................................................
Area .........................................................................................................................................................
Point 2 .......................................................................................................................................................
22.0
12.7
2.5
87.8
19.8
12.0
2.6
67.9
8.2
10.1
2.9
59.4
Total ..................................................................................................................................................
125.0
102.3
80.6
1 2004
Emissions estimated by linear interpolation for all sectors except highway and EGUs.
emissions updated for 2008 NOX SIP Call.
2 Non-EGU
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 May 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\04MYP1.SGM
04MYP1
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Additionally, the following mobile
programs are either effective or due to
become effective and will further
contribute to the maintenance
demonstration of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS:
• Heavy duty diesel on-road (2004/
2007) and low-sulfur on-road (2006); 66
FR 2001 (January 18, 2001); and
• Non-road emissions standards
(2008) and off-road diesel fuel (2007/
2010); 69 FR 39858 (June 29, 2004).
In addition to the permanent and
enforceable measures, the Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR), promulgated
May 12, 2005, (70 FR 25161) should
have positive impacts on the State’s air
quality. CAIR, which will be
implemented in the eastern portion of
the country in two phases (2009 and
2015) should reduce long range
transport of ozone precursors, which
will have a beneficial effect on the air
quality in the Charleston area.
Currently, the State is in the process
of adopting rules to address CAIR
through state rules 45CSR3, 45CSR40,
and 45CSR41, which require annual and
ozone season NOX reductions from
EGUs and ozone season NOX reductions
from non-EGUs. These rules will be
submitted to EPA as a SIP revision by
September 11, 2006 as required in the
May 12, 2005, (70 FR 25161) Federal
Register publication.
Based upon the comparison of the
projected emissions and the attainment
year emissions along with the additional
measures, EPA concludes that WVDEP
has successfully demonstrated that the
8-hour ozone standard should be
maintained in the Charleston area.
(c) Monitoring Network—There is
currently one monitor measuring ozone
in the Charleston area. West Virginia
will continue to operate its current air
quality monitor in accordance with 40
CFR part 58.
(d) Verification of Continued
Attainment—The State of West Virginia
has the legal authority to implement and
enforce specified measures necessary to
attain and maintain the NAAQS.
Additionally, federal programs such as
Tier2/Low Sulfur Gasoline Rule, 2007
On-Road Diesel Engine Rule, and
Federal Non-road Engine/Equipment
Rules will continue to be implemented
on a national level. These programs help
provide the reductions necessary for the
Charleston area to maintain attainment.
In addition to maintaining the key
elements of its regulatory program, the
State requires ambient and source
emissions data to track attainment and
maintenance. The WVDEP proposes to
fully update its point, area, and mobile
emission inventories at 3-year intervals
as required by the Consolidated
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:42 May 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) to
assure that its growth projections
relative to emissions in these areas are
sufficiently accurate to assure ongoing
attainment with the NAAQS. The
WVDEP will review stationary source
VOC and NOX emissions by review of
annual emissions statements and by
update of its emissions inventories. The
area source inventory will be updated
using non-point NEI. However, some
source categories may be updated using
historic activity levels determined from
Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
data or West Virginia University/
Regional Research Institute (WVU/RRI)
population estimates. The mobile source
inventory model will be updated by
obtaining county-level VMT from the
West Virginia Department of
Transportation (WVDOT) for the subject
year and calculating emissions using the
latest approved MOBILE model.
Alternatively, the highway emissions
may be obtained in consultation with
the MPO, the RIC, using methodology
similar to that used for Transportation
Conformity purposes.
(e) The Maintenance Plan’s
Contingency Measures—The
contingency plan provisions are
designed to promptly correct a violation
of the NAAQS that occurs after
redesignation. Section 175A of the Act
requires that a maintenance plan
include such contingency measures as
EPA deems necessary to ensure that the
State will promptly correct a violation
of the NAAQS that occurs after
redesignation. The maintenance plan
should identify the events that would
‘‘trigger’’ the adoption and
implementation of a contingency
measure(s), the contingency measure(s)
that would be adopted and
implemented, and the schedule
indicating the time frame by which the
state would adopt and implement the
measure(s).
The ability of the Charleston area to
stay in compliance with the 8-hour
ozone standard after redesignation
depends upon VOC and NOX emissions
in the area remaining at or below 2004
levels. The State’s maintenance plan
projects VOC and NOX emissions to
decrease and stay below 2004 levels
through the year 2018. The State’s
maintenance plan lays out two
situations where the need to adopt and
implement a contingency measure to
further reduce emissions would be
triggered. Those situations are as
follows:
(i) If the triennial inventories indicate
emissions growth in excess of 10 percent
of the 2002 base-year inventory or if a
monitored air quality exceedance
pattern indicates that an ozone NAAQS
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
26307
violation may be imminent—The
maintenance plan states that an
exceedance pattern would include, but
is not limited to, the measurement of
three exceendances or more occurring at
the same monitor during a calendar
year. The plan also states that
comprehensive tracking inventories will
also be developed every 3 years using
current EPA-approved methods to
assure that its growth projections
relative to emissions in the area are
sufficiently accurate to assure ongoing
attainment with the NAAQS. If the 2002
base-year inventory or a monitored air
quality exceedance pattern occurs, the
following measure will be implemented:
• WVDEP will evaluate existing
control measures to ascertain if
additional regulatory revisions are
necessary to maintain the ozone
standard.
(ii) In the event that a violation of the
8-hour ozone standard occurs at the
Kanawha County/Charleston monitor—
The maintenance plan states that in the
event that a violation of the ozone
standard occurs at the Charleston
monitor, the State of West Virginia, in
consultation with EPA Region III, will
implement one or more of the following
measures to assure continued
attainment:
• Extend the applicability of 45CSR21
(VOC/RACT rule) to include source
categories previously excluded (e.g.,
waste water treatment facilities);
• Revised new source permitting
requirements requiring more stringent
emissions control technology and/or
emissions offsets;
• NOX RACT requirements;
• Regulations to establish plant-wide
emissions caps (potentially with
emissions trading provisions);
• Establish a Public Awareness/
Ozone Action Day Program, a two
pronged program focusing on increasing
the public’s understanding of air quality
issues in the region and increasing
support for actions to improve the air
quality, resulting in reduced emissions
on days when the ozone levels are likely
to be high.
• Initiate one or more of the following
voluntary local control measures:
(1) Bicycle and Pedestrian Measures—
A series of measures designed to
promote bicycling and walking
including both promotional activities
and enhancing the environment for
these activities;
(2) Reduce Engine Idling—Voluntary
programs to restrict heavy duty diesel
engine idling times for both trucks and
school buses;
(3) Voluntary Partnership with
Ground Freight Industry—A voluntary
program using incentives to encourage
E:\FR\FM\04MYP1.SGM
04MYP1
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS
26308
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
the ground freight industry to reduce
emissions;
(4) Increase Compliance with Open
Burning Restrictions—Increase public
awareness of the existing open burning
restrictions and work with communities
to increase compliance; and
(5) School Bus Engine Retrofit
Program—Have existing school bus
engines retrofitted to lower emissions.
The following schedule for adoption,
implementation and compliance applies
to the contingency measures concerning
the option of implementing regulatory
requirements.
• Confirmation of the monitored
violation within 45 days of occurrence;
• Measure to be selected within 3
months after verification of a monitored
ozone standard violation;
• Develop rule within 6 months of
selection of measure;
• File rule with state secretary
(process takes up to 42 days);
• Applicable regulation to be fully
implemented 6 months after adoption.
The following schedule for adoption,
implementation and compliance applies
to the voluntary contingency measures.
• Confirmation of the monitored
violation within 45 days of occurrence;
• Measure to be selected within 3
months after verification of a monitored
ozone standard violation;
• Initiation of program development
with local governments within the area
by the start of the following ozone
season.
(f) An Additional Provision of the
Maintenance Plan—The State’s
maintenance plan for the Charleston
area has an additional provision. That
provision states that based on the 2002
inventory data and calculation
methodology, it is expected that area
and mobile source emissions would not
exhibit substantial increases between
consecutive periodic year inventories.
Therefore, if significant unanticipated
emissions growth occurs, it is expected
that point sources would be the cause.
West Virginia regulation 45CSR29
requires significant point source
emitters in six counties, including
Kanawha and Putnam, to submit annual
emission statements which contain
emission totals for VOCs and NOX. Any
significant increases that occur can be
identified from these reports without
waiting for a periodic inventory. This
gives West Virginia the capability to
identify needed regulations by source,
source category and pollutant and to
begin the rule promulgation process, if
necessary, in an expeditious manner.
The maintenance plan adequately
addresses the five basic components of
a maintenance plan: attainment
inventory, maintenance demonstration,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:42 May 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
monitoring network, verification of
continued attainment, and a
contingency plan. EPA believes that the
maintenance plan SIP revision
submitted by West Virginia for the
Charleston area meets the requirements
of section 175A of the Act.
VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions
Budgets Established and Identified in
the Maintenance Plan for the
Charleston Area Adequate and
Approvable?
A. What Are the Motor Vehicle
Emissions Budgets (MVEBs)?
Under the CAA, States are required to
submit, at various times, control strategy
SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone
areas. These control strategy SIPs (i.e.
RFP SIPs and attainment demonstration
SIPs) and maintenance plans identify
and establish MVEBs for certain criteria
pollutants and/or their precursors to
address pollution from on-road mobile
sources. In the maintenance plan the
MVEBs are termed ‘‘on-road mobile
source emissions budgets.’’ Pursuant to
40 CFR part 93 and 51.112, MVEBs must
be established in an ozone maintenance
plan. A MVEB is the portion of the total
allowable emissions that is allocated to
highway and transit vehicle use and
emissions. A MVEB serves as a ceiling
on emissions from an area’s planned
transportation system. The MVEB
concept is further explained in the
preamble to the November 24, 1993,
transportation conformity rule (58 FR
62188). The preamble also describes
how to establish and revise the MVEBs
in control strategy SIPs and
maintenance plans.
Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new
transportation projects, such as the
construction of new highways, must
‘‘conform’’ to (i.e., be consistent with)
the part of the State’s air quality plan
that addresses pollution from cars and
trucks. ‘‘Conformity’’ to the SIP means
that transportation activities will not
cause new air quality violations, worsen
existing violations, or delay timely
attainment of or reasonable progress
towards the national ambient air quality
standards. If a transportation plan does
not ‘‘conform,’’ most new projects that
would expand the capacity of roadways
cannot go forward. Regulations at 40
CFR part 93 set forth EPA policy,
criteria, and procedures for
demonstrating and assuring conformity
of such transportation activities to a
state implementation plan.
When reviewing submitted ‘‘control
strategy’’ SIPs or maintenance plans
containing MVEBs, EPA must
affirmatively find the MVEB budget
contained therein ‘‘adequate’’ for use in
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
determining transportation conformity.
After EPA affirmatively finds the
submitted MVEB is adequate for
transportation conformity purposes, that
MVEB can be used by state and federal
agencies in determining whether
proposed transportation projects
‘‘conform’’ to the state implementation
plan as required by section 176(c) of the
CAA. EPA’s substantive criteria for
determining ‘‘adequacy’’ of a MVEB are
set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4).
EPA’s process for determining
‘‘adequacy’’ consists of three basic steps:
public notification of a SIP submission,
a public comment period, and EPA’s
adequacy finding. This process for
determining the adequacy of submitted
SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in
EPA’s May 14, 1999 guidance,
‘‘Conformity Guidance on
Implementation of March 2, 1999,
Conformity Court Decision.’’ This
guidance was finalized in the
Transportation Conformity Rule
Amendments for the ‘‘New 8-Hour
Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air
Quality Standards and Miscellaneous
Revisions for Existing Areas;
Transportation Conformity Rule
Amendments—Response to Court
Decision and Additional Rule Change’’
on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). EPA
follows this guidance and rulemaking in
making its adequacy determinations.
The MVEBs for the Charleston area
are listed in Table 1 of this document
for the 2004, 2009, and 2018 years and
are the projected emissions for the onroad mobile sources plus any portion of
the safety margin allocated to the
MVEBs. These emission budgets, when
approved by EPA, must be used for
transportation conformity
determinations.
B. What Is a Safety Margin?
A ‘‘safety margin’’ is the difference
between the attainment level of
emissions (from all sources) and the
projected level of emissions (from all
sources) in the maintenance plan. The
attainment level of emissions is the
level of emissions during one of the
years in which the area met the NAAQS.
The following example is for the 2018
safety margin: The Charleston area first
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
during the 2002 to 2004 time period.
The State used 2004 as the year to
determine attainment levels of
emissions for the Charleston area. The
total emissions from point, area, mobile
on-road, and mobile non-road sources in
2004 equaled 49.6 tpd of VOC and 125
tpd of NOX. The WVDEP projected
emissions out to the year 2018 and
projected a total of 45 tpd of VOC and
80.6 tpd of NOX from all sources in the
E:\FR\FM\04MYP1.SGM
04MYP1
26309
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Charleston area. The safety margin for
the Charleston area for 2018 would be
the difference between these amounts,
or 4.6 tpd of VOC and 44.4 tpd of NOX.
The emissions up to the level of the
attainment year including the safety
margins are projected to maintain the
area’s air quality consistent with the 8hour ozone NAAQS. The safety margin
is the extra emissions reduction below
the attainment levels that can be
allocated for emissions by various
sources as long as the total emission
levels are maintained at or below the
attainment levels. Table 6 shows the
safety margins for the 2009 and 2018
years.
TABLE 6.—2009 AND 2018 SAFETY MARGINS FOR THE CHARLESTON AREA
VOC emissions
(tpd)
Inventory year
2004
2009
2009
2004
2018
2018
NOX emissions
(tpd)
49.6
46.7
2.9
49.6
45
4.6
125
102.3
22.7
125
80.6
44.4
Attainment ...................................................................................................................................................
Interim .........................................................................................................................................................
Safety Margin .............................................................................................................................................
Attainment ...................................................................................................................................................
Final ............................................................................................................................................................
Safety Margin .............................................................................................................................................
The WVDEP allocated 3.3 tpd NOX
and 1.9 tpd VOC to the 2009 interim
VOC projected on-road mobile source
emissions projection and the 2009
interim NOX projected on-road mobile
source emissions projection to arrive at
the 2009 MVEBs. For the 2018 MVEBs
the VADEQ allocated 1.4 tpd NOX and
1.2 tpd VOC from the 2018 safety
margins to arrive at the 2018 MVEBs.
Once allocated to the mobile source
budgets these portions of the safety
margins are no longer available, and
may no longer be allocated to any other
source category. Table 7 shows the final
2009 and 2018 MVEBS for the
Charleston area.
TABLE 7.—2009 AND 2018 FINAL MVEBS FOR THE CHARLESTON AREA
VOC emissions
(tpd)
Inventory year
2009
2009
2009
2018
2018
2018
9.7
1.9
11.6
6.0
1.2
7.20
16.5
3.3
19.8
6.8
1.4
8.20
projected on-road mobile source projected emissions ..............................................................................
Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs ............................................................................................................
MVEBs ........................................................................................................................................................
projected on-road mobile source projected emissions ..............................................................................
Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs ............................................................................................................
MVEBs ........................................................................................................................................................
C. Why Are the MVEBs Approvable?
The 2004, 2009 and 2018 MVEBs for
the Charleston area are approvable
because the MVEBs for NOX and VOC,
including the allocated safety margins,
continue to maintain the total emissions
at or below the attainment year
inventory levels as required by the
transportation conformity regulations.
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS
NOX emissions
(tpd)
D. What Is the Adequacy and Approval
Process for the MVEBs in the Charleston
Area Maintenance Plan?
The MVEBs for the Charleston area
maintenance plan are being posted to
EPA’s conformity Web site concurrent
with this proposal. The public comment
period will end at the same time as the
public comment period for this
proposed rule. In this case, EPA is
concurrently processing the action on
the maintenance plan and the adequacy
process for the MVEBs contained
therein. In this proposed rule, EPA is
proposing to find the MVEBs adequate
and also proposing to approve the
MVEBs as part of the maintenance plan.
The MVEBs cannot be used for
transportation conformity until the
maintenance plan update and associated
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:42 May 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
MVEBs are approved in a final Federal
Register notice, or EPA otherwise finds
the budgets adequate in a separate
action following the comment period.
If EPA receives adverse written
comments with respect to the proposed
approval of the Charleston MVEBs, or
any other aspect of our proposed
approval of this updated maintenance
plan, we will respond to the comments
on the MVEBs in our final action or
proceed with the adequacy process as a
separate action. Our action on the
Charleston area MVEBs will also be
announced on EPA’s conformity Web
site: https://www.epa.gov/oms/traq,
(once there, click on the ‘‘Conformity’’
button, then look for ‘‘Adequacy Review
of SIP Submissions for Conformity’’).
VIII. Proposed Actions
EPA is proposing to determine that
the Charleston area has attained the 8hour ozone NAAQS. The EPA is also
proposing to approve the State of West
Virginia’s November 30, 2005 request
for the Charleston area to be designated
to attainment of the 8-hour NAAQS for
ozone because the requirements for
approval have been satisfied. EPA has
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
evaluated West Virginia’s redesignation
request and determined that it meets the
redesignation criteria set forth in section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA believes
that the redesignation request and
monitoring data demonstrate that the
area has attained the 8-hour ozone
standard. The final approval of this
redesignation request would change the
designation of the Charleston area from
nonattainment to attainment for the 8hour ozone standard. EPA is also
proposing to approve the associated
maintenance plan for this area,
submitted on November 30, 2005, as a
revision to the West Virginia SIP. EPA
is proposing to approve the
maintenance plan for the area because it
meets the requirements of section 175A
as described previously in this notice.
EPA is also proposing to approve the
MVEBs submitted by West Virginia for
the area in conjunction with its
redesignation request. EPA is soliciting
public comments on the issues
discussed in this document. These
comments will be considered before
taking final action.
E:\FR\FM\04MYP1.SGM
04MYP1
mstockstill on PROD1PC68 with PROPOSALS
26310
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 86 / Thursday, May 4, 2006 / Proposed Rules
IX. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed
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)). This action merely proposes
to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional
requirements beyond those imposed by
state law. Redesignation of an area to
attainment under section 107(d)(3)(e) of
the Clean Air Act does not impose any
new requirements on small entities.
Redesignation is an action that affects
the status of a geographical area and
does not impose any new regulatory
requirements on sources. Redesignation
of an area to attainment under section
107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act does
not impose any new requirements on
small entities. Redesignation is an
action that affects the status of a
geographical area and does not impose
any new regulatory requirements on
sources. Accordingly, the Administrator
certifies that this proposed 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
proposes to approve pre-existing
requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable
duty beyond that required by state law,
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 proposed
rule also does 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), nor will
it 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
proposes to affect the status of a
geographical area, does not impose any
new requirements on sources, or allow
the state to avoid adopting or
implementing other requirements, and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:42 May 03, 2006
Jkt 208001
does not alter the relationship or the
distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. This proposed rule also is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 (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 a SIP submission for
failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for
EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,
to use VCS in place of a SIP submission
that otherwise satisfies the provisions of
the Clean Air Act. Redesignation is an
action that affects the status of a
geographical area and does not impose
any new requirements on sources. 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. As required by
section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61
FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing
this proposed rule, EPA has taken the
necessary steps to eliminate drafting
errors and ambiguity, minimize
potential litigation, and provide a clear
legal standard for affected conduct. EPA
has complied with Executive Order
12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by
examining the takings implications of
the rule in accordance with the
‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental
Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk
and Avoidance of Unanticipated
Takings’’ issued under the executive
order. This rule proposing to approve
the redesignation of the SNP area to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, the associated maintenance
plan, and the MVEBs identified in the
maintenance plan, does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
This rule proposing to approve the
redesignation of the Charleston area to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, the associated maintenance
plan, and the MVEBs identified in the
maintenance plan, 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
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Nitrogen Oxides,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Air pollution control, National Parks,
Wilderness Areas.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: April 24, 2006.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. E6–6754 Filed 5–3–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
47 CFR Part 73
[DA 06–849; MM Docket No. 01–154; RM–
10163]
Radio Broadcasting Services;
Goldthwaite, TX
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document dismisses an
Application for Review filed by Charles
Crawford directed to the Report and
Order in this proceeding. With this
action, the proceeding is terminated.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert Hayne, Media Bureau (202) 418–
2177.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a
synopsis of the Commission’s
Memorandum Opinion and Order in
MM Docket No. 01–154, adopted April
12, 2006, and released April 14, 2006.
The full text of this decision is available
for inspection and copying during
normal business hours in the FCC’s
Reference Information Center at Portals
II, CY–A257, 445 12th Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20554. The complete
text of this decision may also be
purchased from the Commission’s copy
contractor, Best Copy and Printing, Inc.,
445 12th Street, SW., Room CY–B402,
Washington, DC 20554, telephone 1–
800–378–3160 or https://
www.BCPIWEB.com. This document is
not subject to the Congressional Review
Act. The Commission is, therefore, not
required to submit a copy of this Report
and Order to GAO, pursuant to the
Congressional Review Act, see 5 U.S.C.
801(a)(1)(A), because the proposed rule
published at 66 FR 38410, July 24, 2001
is withdrawn.
List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73
Radio, Radio broadcasting.
E:\FR\FM\04MYP1.SGM
04MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 86 (Thursday, May 4, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26299-26310]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-6754]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R03-OAR-2005-0548; FRL-8165-4]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
West Virginia; Redesignation of the Charleston Ozone Nonattainment Area
to Attainment and Approval of the Area's Maintenance Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a redesignation request and a
State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of West
Virginia. The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection
(WVDEP) is requesting that the Charleston area be redesignated as
attainment for the 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard
(NAAQS). In conjunction with its redesignation request, the WVDEP
submitted a SIP revision consisting of a maintenance plan for the
Charleston area that provides for continued attainment of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS for the next 12 years. EPA is proposing to make a
determination that the Charleston area has attained the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS based upon three years of complete, quality-assured ambient air
quality ozone monitoring data for 2002-2004. EPA's proposed approval of
the 8-hour ozone redesignation request is based on its determination
that the Charleston area has met the criteria for redesignation to
attainment specified in the Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA is providing
information on the status of its adequacy determination for the motor
vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) that are identified in the maintenance
plan for the Charleston area for purposes of transportation conformity,
and is also proposing to approve those MVEBs. EPA is proposing approval
of the redesignation request and of the maintenance plan revision to
the West Virginia SIP in accordance with the requirements of the CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before June 5, 2006.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2005-0548 by one of the following methods:
A. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
B. E-mail: morris.makeba@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2005-0548, Makeba Morris, Chief, Air Quality
Planning Branch.
[[Page 26300]]
D. Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
E. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2005-0548. 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, https://www.regulations.gov, 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 www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, 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 www.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
www.regulations.gov index. 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 https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the
Air Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the
State submittal are available at the West Virginia Department of
Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street SE.,
Charleston, WV 25304.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Caprio, (215) 814-2156, or by e-
mail at caprio.amy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we'',
``us'', or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
Table of Contents
I. What Actions Are EPA Proposing To Take?
II. What Is the Background for These Proposed Actions?
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?
IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?
V. What Would be the Effect of These Actions?
VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the State's Request?
VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and
Identified in the Maintenance Plan for the Charleston Area Adequate
and Approvable?
VIII. Proposed Action
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Actions Are EPA Proposing To Take?
On November 30, 2005, WVDEP formally submitted a request to
redesignate the Charleston area from nonattainment to attainment of the
8-hour NAAQS for ozone. On November 30, 2005, West Virginia submitted a
maintenance plan for the Charleston area as a SIP revision, to ensure
continued attainment over the next 12 years. The Charleston area is
composed of Kanawha and Putnam Counties. It is currently designated as
a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. EPA is proposing to determine
that the Charleston area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS and that
it has met the requirements for redesignation pursuant to section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is, therefore, proposing to approve the
redesignation request to change the designation of the Charleston area
from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is
also proposing to approve the maintenance plan SIP revision for the
area, such approval being one of the CAA requirements for approval of a
redesignation request. The maintenance plan is designed to ensure
continued attainment in the Charleston area for the next 12 years.
Additionally, EPA is announcing its action on the adequacy process for
the MVEBs identified in the maintenance plan, and proposing to approve
the MVEBs identified for volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen
oxides (NOX) for the Charleston area for transportation
conformity purposes. Concurrently, the State is requesting that EPA
approve the maintenance plan as meeting the requirements of CAA
175(A)(b) with respect to the 1-hour ozone maintenance plan update.
II. What Is the Background for These Proposed Actions?
A. General
Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather,
emissions of NOX and VOC react in the presence of sunlight
to form ground-level ozone. The air pollutants NOX and VOC
are referred to as precursors of ozone. The CAA establishes a process
for air quality management through the attainment and maintenance of
the NAAQS.
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone standard
of 0.08 parts per million (ppm). This new standard is more stringent
than the previous 1-hour ozone standard. EPA designated, as
nonattainment, any area violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the
air quality data for the three years of 2001-2003. These were the most
recent three years of data at the time EPA designated 8-hour areas. The
Charleston area was designated as basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment
status in a Federal Register notice signed on April 25, 2004 and
published on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857). On June 15, 2005 (69 FR at
23396), the 1-hour ozone NAAQS was revoked in the Charleston area (as
well as most other areas of the country). See 40 CFR 50.9(b); 69 FR at
23396, April 30, 2004; and see 70 FR 44470, August 3, 2005.
The CAA, Title I, Part D, contains two sets of provisions--subpart
1 and subpart 2--that address planning and control requirements for
nonattainment areas. Subpart 1 (which EPA refers to as ``basic''
nonattainment) contains general, less prescriptive requirements for
nonattainment areas for any pollutant--including ozone--governed by an
NAAQS. Subpart 2 (which EPA refers to as ``classified'' nonattainment)
provides more specific requirements for ozone nonattainment areas. Some
8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are subject only to the provisions of
subpart 1. Other areas are also subject to the provisions of subpart 2.
Under EPA's 8-hour ozone implementation rule, signed on April 15, 2004,
an area was classified under subpart 2 based on its 8-hour ozone design
value (i.e., the 3-year average annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-
hour average ozone concentration), if it had a 1-hour design value at
or above 0.121 ppm (the lowest 1-hour design value in the CAA for
[[Page 26301]]
subpart 2 requirements). All other areas are covered under subpart 1,
based upon their 8-hour design values. In 2004, the Charleston area was
designated a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment area based upon air
quality monitoring data from 2001-2003, and is subject to the
requirements of subpart 1.
Under 40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour ozone standard is attained when
the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour
average ambient air quality ozone concentration is less than or equal
to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when rounding is considered). See 69 FR
23857, (April 30, 2004) for further information. Ambient air quality
monitoring data for the 3-year period must meet data completeness
requirements. The data completeness requirements are met when the
average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data is greater
than 90 percent, and no single year has less than 75 percent data
completeness as determined in Appendix I of 40 CFR part 50. The ozone
monitoring data from the 3-year period of 2002-2004 indicates that the
Charleston area has a design value of 0.081 ppm. Therefore, the ambient
ozone data for the Charleston area indicates no violations of the 8-
hour ozone standard. Monitoring data for 2005 indicates continued
attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard.
B. The Charleston Area
The Charleston area consists of Kanawha and Putnam Counties. Prior
to its designation as an 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, the
Charleston area was a maintenance area for the 1-hour ozone
nonattainment NAAQS.
On November 30, 2005, the WVDEP requested that the Charleston area
be redesignated to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. The
redesignation request included 3 years of complete, quality-assured
data for the period of 2002-2004, indicating that the 8-hour NAAQS for
ozone had been achieved in the Charleston area. The data satisfies the
CAA requirements when the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest
daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration (commonly referred to
as the area's design value) is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm (i.e.,
0.084 ppm when rounding is considered). Under the CAA, a nonattainment
area may be redesignated if sufficient complete, quality-assured data
is available to determine that the area has attained the standard and
the area meets the other CAA redesignation requirements set forth in
section 107(d)(3)(E).
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?
The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA
allows for redesignation providing that:
(1) EPA determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS;
(2) EPA has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for
the area under section 110(k);
(3) EPA determines that the improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP and applicable Federal air
pollutant control regulations and other permanent and enforceable
reductions;
(4) EPA has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area as
meeting the requirements of section 175A; and
(5) the state containing such area has met all requirements
applicable to the area under section 110 and Part D.
EPA provided guidance on redesignation in the General Preamble for
the Implementation of Title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990, on April
16, 1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented this guidance on April 28,
1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has provided further guidance on processing
redesignation requests in the following documents:
``Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations'',
Memorandum from Bill Laxton, June 18, 1990;
``Maintenance Plans for Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief,
Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, April 30, 1992;
``Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Redesignations,'' Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 1992;
``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas
to Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4, 1992;
``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in
Response to Clean Air Act (Act) Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John
Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;
``Technical Support Documents (TSDs) for Redesignation
Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from
G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17,
1993;
``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas
Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and
Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) On
or After November 15, 1992,'' Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17,
1993;
Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, Acting Director, Air
Quality Management Division, to Air Division Directors, Regions 1-10,
``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone and
CO Nonattainment Areas,'' dated November 30, 1993;
``Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for
Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Memorandum from Mary D.
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14,
1994; and
``Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration,
and Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard,'' Memorandum from John S.
Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, May 10,
1995.
IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?
On November 30, 2005, the WVDEP requested redesignation of the
Charleston area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. On
November 30, 2005, the WVDEP submitted a maintenance plan for the
Charleston area as a SIP revision, to assure continued attainment over
the next 12 years, until 2018. Concurrently, West Virginia is
requesting that EPA approve maintenance plan as meeting the
requirements of CAA 175A(b) with respect to the 1-hour ozone
maintenance plan update. EPA is proposing to approve the maintenance
plan to fulfill the requirement of section 175A(b) for submission of a
maintenance plan update eight years after the area was redesignated to
attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA believes that such an update
must ensure that the maintenance plan in the SIP provides maintenance
of the NAAQS for a period of 20 years after the area is initially
redesignated to attainment. EPA can propose approval because the
maintenance plan, which demonstrates maintenance of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS through 2018, also demonstrates maintenance of the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS through 2018, even though the latter standard is no longer
[[Page 26302]]
in effect. The Charleston area was redesignated to attainment of the 1-
hour ozone NAAQS on September 6, 1994 (59 FR 45985), and, the initial
1-hour ozone maintenance plan provided for maintenance through 2005.
Section 51.905(e) of the ``Final Rule To Implement the 8-Hour
Requirements--Phase 1,'' April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23999) specifies the
conditions that must be satisfied before EPA may approve a modification
to a 1-hour maintenance plan which: (1) removes the obligation to
submit a maintenance plan for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS eight years after
approval of the initial 1-hour maintenance plan and/or (2) removes the
obligation to implement contingency measures upon a violation of the 1-
hour NAAQS. EPA believes that section 51.905(e) of the final rule
allows a State to make either one or both of these modifications to a
1-hour maintenance plan SIP once EPA approves a maintenance plan for
the 8-hour NAAQS. The maintenance plan will not trigger the contingency
plan upon a violation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, but upon a violation
of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA believes that the 8-hour standard is now
the proper standard which should trigger the contingency plan now that
the 1-hour NAAQS has been revoked and now that approval of the
maintenance plan would allow the State to remove a 1-hour NAAQS
obligation from the SIP. EPA has determined that the Charleston area
has attained the standard and has met the requirements for
redesignation set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E).
V. What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?
Approval of the redesignation request would change the designation
of the Charleston area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS found at 40 CFR part 81. It would also incorporate into the
West Virginia SIP a maintenance plan ensuring continued attainment of
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Charleston area for the next 12 years,
until 2018. The maintenance plan includes contingency measures to
remedy any future violations of the 8-hour NAAQS (should they occur),
and identifies the MVEBs for NOX and VOC for transportation
conformity purposes for the years 2004, 2009 and 2018. These MVEBs are
displayed in the following table:
Table 1.--Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in Tons per Day
[tpd]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year NOX VOC
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004........................................ 26.4 16.1
2009........................................ 19.8 11.6
2018........................................ 8.20 7.20
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the State's Request?
EPA is proposing to determine that the Charleston nonattainment
area has attained the 8-hour ozone standard and that all other
redesignation criteria have been met. The following is a description of
how the WVDEP's November 30, 2005 submittal satisfies the requirements
of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.
A. The Charleston Area Has Attained the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
EPA is proposing to determine that the Charleston area has attained
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. For ozone, an area may be considered to be
attaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS if there are no violations, as
determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.10 and Appendix I of part 50,
based on three complete, consecutive calendar years of quality-assured
air quality monitoring data. To attain this standard, the 3-year
average of the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentrations measured at each monitor, within the area, over each
year must not exceed the ozone standard of 0.08 ppm. Based on the
rounding convention described in 40 CFR part 50, appendix I, the
standard is attained if the design value is 0.084 ppm or below. The
data must be collected and quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR
part 58, and recorded in the Aerometric Information Retrieval System
(AIRS). The monitors generally should have remained at the same
location for the duration of the monitoring period required for
demonstrating attainment.
In the Charleston area there is one ozone monitor, located in
Kanawha County, that measures air quality with respect to ozone. As
part of its redesignation request, West Virginia submitted ozone
monitoring data for the years 2002-2004 (the most recent three years of
data available as of the time of the redesignation request). This data
has been quality assured and is recorded in AIRS. The fourth high 8-
hour daily maximum concentrations, along with the three-year average,
are summarized in Table 2.
Table 2.--Charleston Nonattainment Area Fourth Highest 8-Hour Average
Values; Charleston Monitor, AIRS ID 54-033-4000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual 4th
Year high reading
(ppm)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002.................................................... 0.087
2003.................................................... 0.088
2004.................................................... 0.069
2005.................................................... 0.079
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The average for the 3-year period 2002 through 2004 is 0.081 ppm.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The data for 2002-2004 show that the area has attained the
standard, and preliminary data for the 2005 ozone season show that the
annual fourth high reading is 0.079 ppm and that the area continues to
attain the standard. The data collected at the Charleston monitor
satisfies the CAA requirement that the 3-year average of the annual
fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration is less
than or equal to 0.08 ppm. The WVDEP's request for redesignation for
the Charleston area indicates that the data was quality assured in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58. The WVDEP uses AIRS as the permanent
database to maintain its data and quality assures the data transfers
and content for accuracy. In addition, as discussed below with respect
to the maintenance plan, WVDEP has committed to continue monitoring in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58. In summary, EPA has determined that the
data submitted by West Virginia indicates that the Charleston area has
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
B. The Charleston Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under
Section 110 and Part D of the CAA and the Area Has a Fully Approved SIP
Under Section 110(k) of the CAA
EPA has determined that West Virginia has met all SIP requirements
for the Charleston area applicable for purposes of redesignation under
section 110 of the CAA (General SIP Requirements) and that it meets all
applicable SIP requirements under Part D of Title I of the CAA, in
accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, EPA has
determined that the SIP is fully approved with respect to all
requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation in accordance
with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these proposed determinations,
EPA ascertained what requirements are applicable to the area, and
determined that the applicable portions of the SIP
[[Page 26303]]
meeting these requirements are fully approved under section 110(k) of
the CAA. We note that SIPs must be fully approved only with respect to
applicable requirements.
The September 4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum (``Procedures for
Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' Memorandum
from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division,
September 4, 1992) describes EPA's interpretation of section
107(d)(3)(E) with respect to the timing of applicable requirements.
Under this interpretation, to qualify for redesignation, states
requesting redesignation to attainment must meet only the relevant CAA
requirements that come due prior to the submittal of a complete
redesignation request. See also Michael Shapiro memorandum, September
17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66, (March 7, 1995) (redesignation of
Detroit-Ann Arbor). Applicable requirements of the CAA that come due
subsequent to the area's submittal of a complete redesignation request
remain applicable until a redesignation is approved, but are not
required as a prerequisite to redesignation. Section 175A(c) of the
CAA. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also 68 FR
25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of St. Louis).
1. Section 110 General SIP Requirements
Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA delineates the general
requirements for a SIP, which include enforceable emissions limitations
and other control measures, means, or techniques, provisions for the
establishment and operation of appropriate devices necessary to collect
data on ambient air quality, and programs to enforce the limitations.
The general SIP elements and requirements set forth in section
110(a)(2) include, but are not limited to, the following:
Submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the state
after reasonable public notice and hearing;
Provisions for establishment and operation of appropriate
procedures needed to monitor ambient air quality;
Implementation of a source permit program; provisions for
the implementation of Part C requirement (Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD));
Provisions for the implementation of Part D requirements
for New Source Review (NSR) permit programs;
Provisions for air pollution modeling; and
Provisions for public and local agency participation in
planning and emission control rule development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to
prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air
quality problems in another state. To implement this provision, EPA has
required certain states to establish programs to address transport of
air pollutants in accordance with the NOX SIP Call, October
27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), amendments to the NOX SIP Call, May
14, 1999 (64 FR 26298) and March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), and the Clean
Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25161). However, the
section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a state are not linked with a
particular nonattainment area's designation and classification in that
state. EPA believes that the requirements linked with a particular
nonattainment area's designation and classifications are the relevant
measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. The
transport SIP submittal requirements, where applicable, continue to
apply to a state regardless of the designation of any one particular
area in the state.
Thus, we do not believe that these requirements should be construed
to be applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. In
addition, EPA believes that the other section 110 elements not
connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not linked with an
area's attainment status are not applicable requirements for purposes
of redesignation. The State will still be subject to these requirements
after the Charleston area is redesignated. The section 110 and Part D
requirements, which are linked with a particular area's designation and
classification, are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a
redesignation request. This policy is consistent with EPA's existing
policy on applicability of conformity (i.e., for redesignations) and
oxygenated fuels requirement. See Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and
final rulemakings 61 FR 53174-53176 (October 10, 1996), 62 FR 24816
(May 7, 1997); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio, final rulemaking 61 FR
20458 (May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida, final rulemaking 60 FR 62748
(December 7, 1995). See also the discussion on this issue in the
Cincinnati redesignation 65 FR 37890 (June 19, 2000), and in the
Pittsburgh redesignation 66 FR 50399 (October 19, 2001). Similarly,
with respect to the NOX SIP Call rules, EPA noted in its
Phase 1 Final Rule to Implement the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS, that the
NOX SIP Call rules are not ``an `applicable requirement' for
purposes of section 110(l) because the NOX rules apply
regardless of an area's attainment or nonattainment status for the 8-
hour (or the 1-hour) NAAQS.'' 69 FR 23951, 23983 (April 30, 2004).
EPA believes that section 110 elements not linked to the area's
nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation.
Any section 110 requirements that are linked to the Part D requirements
for 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are not yet due, because, as we
explain later in this notice, no Part D requirements applicable for
purposes of redesignation under the 8-hour standard became due prior to
submission of the redesignation request.
Because the West Virginia SIP satisfies all of the applicable
general SIP elements and requirements set forth in section 110(a)(2),
EPA concludes that West Virginia has satisfied the criterion of section
107(d)(3)(E) regarding section 110 of the Act.
2. Part D Nonattainment Area Requirements Under the 8-Hour Standard
The Charleston area was designated a basic nonattainment area for
the 8-hour ozone standard. Sections 172-176 of the CAA, found in
subpart 1 of Part D, set forth the basic nonattainment requirements for
all nonattainment areas. Since the Charleston area was maintaining
attainment of the 1-hour standard at the time of its designation as a
basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment area on April 30, 2004, no Part D
submittals under the 1-hour standard were required or made for this
area.
Section 182 of the CAA, found in subpart 2 of Part D, establishes
additional specific requirements depending on the area's nonattainment
classification. The Charleston area was classified as a subpart 1
nonattainment area; therefore, no subpart 2 requirements apply to this
area.
With respect to the 8-hour standard, EPA proposes to determine that
the West Virginia SIP meets all applicable SIP requirements under Part
D of the CAA, because no 8-hour ozone standard Part D requirements
applicable for purposes of redesignation became due prior to submission
of the area's redesignation request. Because the State submitted a
complete redesignation request for the Charleston area prior to the
deadline for any submissions required under the 8-hour standard, we
have determined that the Part D requirements do not apply to the
Charleston area for the purposes of redesignation
In addition to the fact that Part D requirements applicable for
purposes of redesignation did not become due prior
[[Page 26304]]
to submission of the redesignation request, EPA believes it is
reasonable to interpret the general conformity and NSR requirements as
not requiring approval prior to redesignation.
With respect to section 176, Conformity Requirements, section
176(c) of the CAA requires states to establish criteria and procedures
to ensure that federally supported or funded projects conform to the
air quality planning goals in the applicable SIP. The requirement to
determine conformity applies to transportation plans, programs, and
projects developed, funded or approved under Title 23 U.S.C. and the
Federal Transit Act (``transportation conformity'') as well as to all
other federally supported or funded projects (``general conformity'').
State conformity revisions must be consistent with Federal conformity
regulations relating to consultation, enforcement and enforceability
that the CAA required the EPA to promulgate.
EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity SIP
requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating the
redesignation request under section 107(d) since state conformity rules
are still required after redesignation and federal conformity rules
apply where state rules have not been approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265
F.3d 426, 438-440 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding this interpretation. See
also 60 FR 62748 (Dec. 7, 1995).
EPA has also determined that areas being redesignated need not
comply with the requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to
redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the
standard without Part D NSR in effect, because PSD requirements will
apply after redesignation. The rationale for this view is described in
a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled, ``Part D NSR Requirements
or Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.'' West Virginia has
demonstrated that the area will be able to maintain the standard
without Part D NSR in effect in the Charleston area, and therefore,
West Virginia need not have a fully approved Part D NSR program prior
to approval of the redesignation request. West Virginia's SIP-approved
PSD program will become effective in the area upon redesignation to
attainment in the Charleston area. See rulemakings for Detroit, MI (60
FR 12467-12468, March 7, 1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorrain, OH (61 FR
20458, 20469-70, May 7, 1996); Louisville, KY (66 FR 53665, October 23,
2001); Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31834-31837, June 21, 1996).
3. The Area Has a Fully Approved SIP for the Purposes of Redesignation
EPA has fully approved the West Virginia SIP for the purposes of
redesignation. EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request. Calcagni Memo, p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania
Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989-90 (6th Cir. 1998), Wall
v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), plus any additional measures it
may approve in conjunction with a redesignation action. See 68 FR 25425
(May 12, 2003) and citations therein.
The Charleston area was maintaining attainment of the 1-hour
standard at the time of its designation as a basic 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area on April 30, 2004. Because the area was redesignated
as a 1-hour maintenance area, no Part D SIP submittals were previously
required. Because there are no current SIP submission requirements
applicable for the purposes of redesignation of the Charleston area,
the applicable implementation plan satisfies all pertinent SIP
requirements. As indicated previously, EPA believes that the section
110 elements not connected with Part D nonattainment plan submissions
and not linked to the area's nonattainment status are not applicable
requirements for purposes of redesignation. EPA also believes that no
8-hour Part D requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation
have yet become due for the Charleston area, and therefore they need
not be approved into the SIP prior to redesignation.
4. The Air Quality Improvement in the Charleston Area Is Due to
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions Resulting From
Implementation of the SIP and Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control
Regulations and Other Permanent and Enforceable Reductions
EPA believes that the State has demonstrated that the observed air
quality improvement in the area is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the SIP,
Federal measures, and other state-adopted measures. Emissions
reductions attributable to these rules are shown in Table 3.
Table 3.--Total VOC and NOX Emissions for 2002 and 2004
[tpd]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Point Area Nonroad Mobile Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 2002................................................ 10.1 21.2 5.5 15.7 52.5
Year 2004 *.............................................. 10.0 20.9 5.3 13.4 49.6
Diff. (02-04)............................................ -0.1 -0.3 -0.2 -2.3 -2.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 2002................................................ 133.8 2.4 13.0 25.5 174.7
Year 2004 *.............................................. 87.8 2.5 12.7 22.0 125.0
Diff. (02-04)............................................ -46.0 +0.1 -0.3 -3.5 -49.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* 2004 Emissions estimated by linear interpolation for all sectors except highway and point EGUs.
Between 2002 and 2004, VOC emissions were reduced by 2.9 tpd, and
NOX emissions were reduced by 49.7 tpd, due to the following
permanent and enforceable measures implemented or in the process of
being implemented in the Charleston area:
Programs Currently in Effect
(a) National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV);
[[Page 26305]]
(b) Motor vehicle fleet turnover with new vehicles meeting the Tier
2 standards; and,
(c) Clean Diesel Program.
West Virginia has demonstrated that the implementation of permanent
enforceable emissions controls have reduced local VOC and
NOX emissions. Nearly all of the reductions in VOC are
attributable to mobile source emission controls such as NLEV and Tier 2
programs. The mobile programs produced 2.3 tpd of VOC reductions and
3.5 tpd of NOX reductions.
Nearly all of the reductions in NOX are attributable to
the implementation of the NOX SIP Call. West Virginia has
indicated in its submittal that the implementation of the
NOX SIP Call, with its mandatory reductions in
NOX emissions from Electric Generating Units (EGUs) and
large industrial boilers (non-EGUs), reduced NOX emissions
throughout the Charleston area. NOX emissions from EGUs in
the Charleston area were reduced by 6,798 tons between 2002 and 2004.
Also, NOX emissions from non-EGU sources in the Charleston
area were reduced by 806 tons between 2003 and 2004. The WVDEP believes
that the improvement in ozone air quality from 2002 to 2004 was the
result of identifiable, permanent and enforceable reductions in ozone
precursor emissions for the same period.
Additionally, WVDEP has identified, but not quantified, additional
reductions in VOC emissions that will be achieved as a co-benefit of
the reductions in the emission of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) as a
result of implementation of EPA's Maximum Achievable Control Technology
(MACT) standards.
Other regulations, such as the non-road diesel, 69 FR 39858 (June
29, 2004), the heavy duty engine and vehicle standards, 66 FR 5002
(January 18, 2001) and the new Tier 2 tailpipe standards for
automobiles, 65 FR 6698 (January 10, 2000), are also expected to
greatly reduce emissions throughout the country and thereby reduce
emissions impacting the Charleston area monitor. The Tier 2 standards
came into effect in 2004, and by 2030, EPA expects that the new Tier 2
standards will reduce NOX emissions by about 74 percent
nationally. EPA believes that permanent and enforceable emissions
reductions are the cause of the long-term improvement in ozone levels
and are the cause of the area achieving attainment of the 8-hour ozone
standard.
5. The Charleston Area Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant
to Section 175A of the CAA
In conjunction with its request to redesignate the Charleston area
to attainment status, West Virginia submitted a SIP revision to provide
for maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the area for at least 12
years after redesignation. West Virginia is requesting that EPA approve
this SIP revision as meeting the requirement of CAA 175A(b) and replace
the 1-hour ozone maintenance plan update requirement.
Under 40 CFR 51.905(e), the EPA may approve a SIP revision
requesting the removal of the obligation to implement contingency
measures upon a violation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS when the State
submits and EPA approves an attainment demonstration for the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS for an area initially designated nonattainment for the 8-
hour NAAQS or a maintenance SIP for the 8-hour NAAQS for an area
initially designated attainment for the 8-hour NAAQS.
The rationale behind 40 CFR 51.905(e) is to ensure that the area
maintains the applicable ozone standard (the 8-hour standard in areas
where the 1-hour standard has been revoked). EPA believes this
rationale analogously applies to areas that were not initially
designated, but are redesignated as attainment with the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. Therefore, EPA intends to treat redesignated areas as though
they had been initially designated attainment of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, and accordingly proposes to relieve the Charleston area of its
maintenance plan obligations with respect to the 1-hour standard. Once
approved, the maintenance plan for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS will ensure
that the SIP for the Charleston area meets the requirements of the CAA
regarding maintenance of the applicable 8-hour ozone standard.
What Is Required in a Maintenance Plan?
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment.
Under section 175A, the plan must demonstrate continued attainment of
the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after approval of a
redesignation of an area to attainment. Eight years after the
redesignation, the State must submit a revised maintenance plan
demonstrating that attainment will continue to be maintained for the
next 10-year period following the initial 10-year period (12 years in
Charleston's case). To address the possibility of future NAAQS
violations, the maintenance plan must contain such contingency
measures, with a schedule for implementation, as EPA deems necessary to
assure prompt correction of any future 8-hour ozone violations. Section
175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance plan for areas
seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment. The Calcagni
memorandum dated September 4, 1992, provides additional guidance on the
content of a maintenance plan. An ozone maintenance plan should address
the following provisions:
(a) An attainment emissions inventory;
(b) A maintenance demonstration;
(c) A monitoring network;
(d) Verification of continued attainment; and
(e) A contingency plan.
Analysis of the Charleston Area Maintenance Plan
(a) Attainment Inventory--An attainment inventory includes the
emissions during the time period associated with the monitoring data
showing attainment. An attainment year of 2004 was used for the
Charleston area since it is a reasonable year within the 3-year block
of 2002-2004 and accounts for reductions attributable to implementation
of the CAA requirements to date.
The WVDEP prepared comprehensive VOC and NOX emissions
inventories for the Charleston area, including point, area, mobile on-
road, and mobile non-road sources for a base year of 2002.
To develop the NOX and VOC base year emissions
inventories, WVDEP used the following approaches and sources of data:
(i) Point source emissions--West Virginia maintains its point
source emissions inventory data on the i-STEPS database, which is
commercial software purchased from a vendor, Pacific Environmental
Services. Facilities subject to emissions inventory reporting
requirements were those operating point sources subject to Title V
permitting requirements. Affected sources were identified from the
WVDEP's Regulation 30 database which is maintained by the WVDEP's Title
V Permitting Group. For the 2002 inventory, diskettes were populated
with i-STEPS software information, as well as source-specific data from
the previous year and sent to facilities for updates of their 2002
activity and emissions data. The facilities then sent the diskettes
back to the State and, where WVDEP staff quality assured the data and
submitted it to EPA's Central
[[Page 26306]]
Data Exchange (CDX) site as well as to contractors for the Visibility
Improvement State and Tribal Association of the Southeast (VISTAS), a
Regional Planning Organization (RPO).
WVDEP used the VISTAS revised 2002 base year point source inventory
including both EGUs and non-EGUs. The WVDEP took VISTAS data and
calculated the emissions for the EGUs and non-EGUs for a typical summer
weekday for peak ozone season (June thru August).
(ii) Area source emissions--In order to calculate the area source
emissions inventory the WVDEP took the annual values from the VISTAS
base year inventory and derived the typical ozone summer weekday, using
procedures outlined in the EPA's Emissions Modeling Clearinghouse
(EMCH) Memorandum, ``Temporal Allocation of Annual Emissions Using EMCH
Temporal Profiles, April 29, 2002.'' This enabled WVDEP to arrive at
the ``typical'' summer day emissions.
(iii) On-road mobile source emissions--VISTAS developed 2002 on-
road mobile (highway) emissions inventory data based on vehicle miles
traveled (VMT) updates provided by WVDEP. VISTAS also estimated future
emissions based upon expected growth for the future years 2009 and
2018. However, Federal Transportation Conformity requirements dictate
that the WVDEP consult with the Metropolitan Planning Organization
(MPO) responsible for transportation planning in developing SIP
revisions which may establish highway emissions budgets. This applies
to the maintenance plan submitted by WVDEP on November 30, 2005.
Therefore, the WVDEP has consulted with the Charleston MPO, and the
Regional Intergovernmental Council (RIC). The RIC provided base year
and projection emissions data consistent with their most recent
available Travel Demand Model (TDM) results along with EPA's most
recent emission factor model, MOBILE6.2. The WVDEP used these data to
estimate highway emissions and, in consultation with the RIC, to
develop highway emissions budgets for VOC and NOX. The RIC
must evaluate future Long Range Transportation Plans and Transportation
Improvement Programs to ensure that the associated emissions are equal
to or less than the final emissions budgets. The budgets are designed
to facilitate a positive conformity determination while ensuring
overall maintenance of the 8-hour NAAQS. It should be noted that an
actual decrease in highway emissions occurred between 2002 and 2004.
(iv) Mobile non-road emissions--Mobile non-road emissions were
calculated in the same manner as the area source emissions.
The 2004 attainment year VOC and NOX emissions for the
Charleston area are summarized along with the 2009 and 2018 projected
emissions for this area in tables 4 and 5, which cover the
demonstration of maintenance for this area. EPA has concluded that West
Virginia has adequately derived and documented the 2004 attainment year
VOC and NOX emissions for this area.
(b) Maintenance Demonstration--On November 30, 2005, the WVDEP
submitted a SIP revision to supplement its November 30, 2005
redesignation request. The submittal by WVDEP consists of the
maintenance plan as required by section 175A of the CAA. The Charleston
area plan shows maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS by demonstrating
that current and future emissions of VOC and NOX remain at
or below the attainment year 2004 emissions levels throughout the
Charleston area through the year 2018. The Charleston area maintenance
demonstration need not be based on modeling. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d
426 (6th Cir. 2001); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004).
See also 66 FR 53094, 53099-53100 (October 19, 2001), 68 FR 25430-32
(May 12, 2003).
Tables 4 and 5 specify the VOC and NOX emissions for the
Charleston area for 2004, 2009, and 2018. The WVDEP chose 2009 as an
interim year in the 12-year maintenance demonstration period to
demonstrate that the VOC and NOX emissions are not projected
to increase above the 2004 attainment level during the time of the 12-
year maintenance period.
Table 4.--Total VOC Emissions for 2004-2018
[tpd]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004 VOC
Source category emissions 2009 VOC 2018 VOC
\1\ emissions emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobile........................... 13.4 11.6 7.2
Nonroad.......................... 5.3 4.6 3.5
Area............................. 20.9 20.1 22.1
Point \2\........................ 10.0 10.4 12.2
--------------------------------------
Total........................ 49.6 46.7 45.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 2004 Emissions estimated by linear interpolation for all sectors
except highway and EGUs.
\2\ Non-EGU emissions updated for 2008 NOX SIP Call.
Table 5.--Total NOX Emissions 2004-2018
[tpd]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004 NOX
Source category emissions 2009 NOX 2018 NOX
\1\ emissions emissions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobile........................... 22.0 19.8 8.2
Nonroad.......................... 12.7 12.0 10.1
Area............................. 2.5 2.6 2.9
Point \2\........................ 87.8 67.9 59.4
--------------------------------------
Total........................ 125.0 102.3 80.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 2004 Emissions estimated by linear interpolation for all sectors
except highway and EGUs.
\2\ Non-EGU emissions updated for 2008 NOX SIP Call.
[[Page 26307]]
Additionally, the following mobile programs are either effective or
due to become effective and will further contribute to the maintenance
demonstration of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS:
Heavy duty diesel on-road (2004/2007) and low-sulfur on-
road (2006); 66 FR 2001 (January 18, 2001); and
Non-road emissions standards (2008) and off-road diesel
fuel (2007/2010); 69 FR 39858 (June 29, 2004).
In addition to the permanent and enforceable measures, the Clean
Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), promulgated May 12, 2005, (70 FR 25161)
should have positive impacts on the State's air quality. CAIR, which
will be implemented in the eastern portion of the country in two phases
(2009 and 2015) should reduce long range transport of ozone precursors,
which will have a beneficial effect on the air quality in the
Charleston area.
Currently, the State is in the process of adopting rules to address
CAIR through state rules 45CSR3, 45CSR40, and 45CSR41, which require
annual and ozone season NOX reductions from EGUs and ozone
season NOX reductions from non-EGUs. These rules will be
submitted to EPA as a SIP revision by September 11, 2006 as required in
the May 12, 2005, (70 FR 25161) Federal Register publication.
Based upon the comparison of the projected emissions and the
attainment year emissions along with the additional measures, EPA
concludes that WVDEP has successfully demonstrated that the 8-hour
ozone standard should be maintained in the Charleston area.
(c) Monitoring Network--There is currently one monitor measuring
ozone in the Charleston area. West Virginia will continue to operate
its current air quality monitor in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.
(d) Verification of Continued Attainment--The State of West
Virginia has the legal authority to implement and enforce specified
measures necessary to attain and maintain the NAAQS. Additionally,
federal programs such as Tier2/Low Sulfur Gasoline Rule, 2007 On-Road
Diesel Engine Rule, and Federal Non-road Engine/Equipment Rules will
continue to be implemented on a national level. These programs help
provide the reductions necessary for the Charleston area to maintain
attainment.
In addition to maintaining the key elements of its regulatory
program, the State requires ambient and source emissions data to track
attainment and maintenance. The WVDEP proposes to fully update its
point, area, and mobile emission inventories at 3-year intervals as
required by the Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) to assure
that its growth projections relative to emissions in these areas are
sufficiently accurate to assure ongoing attainment with the NAAQS. The
WVDEP will review stationary source VOC and NOX emissions by
review of annual emissions statements and by update of its emissions
inventories. The area source inventory will be updated using non-point
NEI. However, some source categories may be updated using historic
activity levels determined from Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) data
or West Virginia University/Regional Research Institute (WVU/RRI)
population estimates. The mobile source inventory model will be updated
by obtaining county-level VMT from the West Virginia Department of
Transportation (WVDOT) for the subject year and calculating emissions
using the latest approved MOBILE model. Alternatively, the highway
emissions may be obtained in consultation with the MPO, the RIC, using
methodology similar to that used for Transportation Conformity
purposes.
(e) The Maintenance Plan's Contingency Measures--The contingency
plan provisions are designed to promptly correct a violation of the
NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. Section 175A of the Act requires
that a maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems
necessary to ensure that the State will promptly correct a violation of
the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The maintenance plan should
identify the events that would ``trigger'' the adoption and
implementation of a contingency measure(s), the contingency measure(s)
that would be adopted and implemented, and the schedule indicating the
time frame by which the state would adopt and implement the measure(s).
The ability of the Charleston area to stay in compliance with the
8-hour ozone standard after redesignation depends upon VOC and
NOX emissions in the area remaining at or below 2004 levels.
The State's maintenance plan projects VOC and NOX emissions
to decrease and stay below 2004 levels through the year 2018. The
State's maintenance plan lays out two situations where the need to
adopt and implement a contingency measure to further reduce emissions
would be triggered. Those situations are as follows:
(i) If the triennial inventories indicate emissions growth in
excess of 10 percent of the 2002 base-year inventory or if a monitored
air quality exceedance pattern indicates that an ozone NAAQS violation
may be imminent--The maintenance plan states that an exceedance pattern
would include, but is not limited to, the measurement of three
exceendances or more occurring at the same monitor during a calendar
year. The plan also states that comprehensive tracking inventories will
also be developed every 3 years using current EPA-approved methods to
assure that its growth projections relative to emissions in the area
are sufficiently accurate to assure ongoing attainment with the NAAQS.
If the 2002 base-year inventory or a monitored air quality exceedance
pattern occurs, the following measure will be implemented:
WVDEP will evaluate existing control measures to ascertain
if additional regulatory revisions are necessary to maintain the ozone
standard.
(ii) In the event that a violation of the 8-hour ozone standard
occurs at the Kanawha County/Charleston monitor--The maintenance plan
states that in the event that a violation of the ozone standard occurs
at the Charleston monitor, the State of West Virginia, in consultation
with EPA Region III, will implement one or more of the following
measures to assure continued attainment:
Extend the applicability of 45CSR21 (VOC/RACT rule) to
include source categories previously excluded (e.g., waste water
treatment facilities);
Revised new source permitting requirements requiring more
stringent emissions control technology and/or emissions offsets;
NOX RACT requirements;
Regulations to establish plant-wide emissions caps
(potentially with emissions trading provisions);
Establish a Public Awareness/Ozone Action Day Program, a
two pronged program focusing on increasing the public's understanding
of air quality issues in the region and increasing support for actions
to improve the air quality, resulting in reduced emissions on days when
the ozone levels are likely to be high.
Initiate one or more of the following voluntary local
control measures:
(1) Bicycle and Pedestrian Measures--A series of measures designed
to promote bicycling and walking including both promotional activities
and enhancing the environment for these activities;
(2) Reduce Engine Idling--Voluntary programs to restrict heavy duty
diesel engine idling times for both trucks and school buses;
(3) Voluntary Partnership with Ground Freight Industry--A voluntary
program using incentives to encourage
[[Page 26308]]
the ground freight industry to reduce emissions;
(4) Increase Compliance with Open Burning Restrictions--Increase
public awareness of the existing open burning restrictions and work
with communities to increase compliance; and
(5) School Bus Engine Retrofit Program--Have existing school bus
engines retrofitted to lower emissions.
The following schedule for adoption, implementation and compliance
applies to the contingency measures concerning the option of
implementing regulatory requirements.
Confirmation of the monitored violation within 45 days of
occurrence;
Measure to be selected within 3 months after verification
of a monitored ozone standard violation;
Develop rule within 6 months of selection of measure;
File rule with state secretary (process takes up to 42
days);
Applicable regulation to be fully implemented 6 months
after adoption.
The following schedule for adoption, implementation and compliance
applies to the voluntary contingency measures.
Confirmation of the monitored violation within 45 days of
occurrence;
Measure to be selected within 3 months after verification
of a monitored ozone standard violation;
Initiation of program development with local governments
within the area by the start of the following ozone season.
(f) An Additional Provision of the Maintenance Plan--The State's
maintenance plan for the Charleston area has an additional provision.
That provision states that based on the 2002 inventory data and
calculation methodology, it is expected that area and mobile source
emissions would not exhibit substantial increases between consecutive
periodic year inventories. Therefore, if significant unanticipated
emissions growth occurs, it is expected that point sources would be the
cause. West Virginia regulation 45CSR29 requires significant point
source emitters in six counties, including Kanawha and Putnam, to
submit annual emission statements which contain emission totals for
VOCs and NOX. Any significant increases that occur can be
identified from these reports without waiting for a periodic inventory.
This gives West Virginia the capability to identify needed regulations
by source, source category and pollutant and to begin the rule
promulgation process, if necessary, in an expeditious manner.
The maintenance plan adequately addresses the five basic components
of a maintenance plan: attainment inventory, maintenance demonstration,
monitoring network, verification of continued attainment, and a
contingency plan. EPA believes that the maintenance plan SIP revision
submitted by West Virginia for the Charleston area meets the
requirements of section 175A of the Act.
VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and Identified
in the Maintenance Plan for the Charleston Area Adequate and
Approvable?
A. What Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEBs)?
Under the CAA, States are required to submit, at various times,
control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone areas. These
control strategy SIPs (i.e. RFP SIPs and attainment demonstration SIPs)
and maintenance plans identify and establish MVEBs for certain criteria
pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution from on-road
mobile sources. In the maintenance plan the MVEBs are termed ``on-road
mobile source emissions budgets.'' Pursuant to 40 CFR part 93 and
51.112, MVEBs must be established in an ozone maintenance plan. A MVEB
is the portion of the total allowable emissions that is allocated to
highway and transit vehicle use and emissions. A MVEB serves as a
ceiling on emissions from an area's planned transportation system. The
MVEB concept is further explained in the preamble to the November 24,
1993, transportation conformity rule (58 FR 62188). The preamble also
describes how to establish and revise the MVEBs in control strategy
SIPs and maintenance plans.
Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation projects, such
as the construction of new highways, must ``conform'' to (i.e., be
consistent with) the part of the State's air quality plan that
addresses pollution from cars and trucks. ``Conformity'' to the SIP
means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality
violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of
or reasonable progress towards the national ambient air quality
standards. If a transportation plan does not ``conform,'' most new
projects that would expand the capacity of roadways cannot go forward.
Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth EPA policy, criteria, and
procedures for demonstrating and assuring