Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Maine; Redesignation of the Portland, ME and the Hancock, Knox, Lincoln and Waldo Counties, Maine 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Areas to Attainment for Ozone, 60937-60952 [E6-17226]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 17, 2006 / Proposed Rules
environmental health or safety risk that
EPA has reason to believe may have a
disproportionate effect on children. If
the regulatory action meets both criteria,
the Agency must evaluate the
environmental health or safety effects of
the planned rule on children, and
explain why the planned regulation is
preferable to other potentially effective
and reasonably feasible alternatives
considered by the Agency.
This rule is not subject to Executive
Order 13045 because it does not involve
decisions intended to mitigate
environmental health or safety risks.
H. Executive Order 13211, Actions that
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
This rule is not subject to Executive
Order 13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use’’ (66
FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is
not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
I. National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act
Section 12 of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act
(NTTAA) of 1995 requires Federal
agencies to evaluate existing technical
standards when developing a new
regulation. To comply with NTTAA,
EPA must consider and use ‘‘voluntary
consensus standards’’ (VCS) if available
and applicable when developing
programs and policies unless doing so
would be inconsistent with applicable
law or otherwise impractical.
The EPA believes that VCS are
inapplicable to this action. Today’s
action does not require the public to
perform activities conducive to the use
of VCS.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
Dated: September 14, 2006.
Wayne Nastri,
Regional Administrator, Region IX.
[FR Doc. E6–17233 Filed 10–16–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
06:09 Oct 17, 2006
Jkt 211001
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R01–OAR–2006–0226; FRL–8231–7]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans and Designation
of Areas for Air Quality Planning
Purposes; Maine; Redesignation of the
Portland, ME and the Hancock, Knox,
Lincoln and Waldo Counties, Maine 8Hour Ozone Nonattainment Areas to
Attainment for Ozone
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve:
A request to redesignate two 8-hour
ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standard (NAAQS) nonattainment areas
to attainment for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS; and a State Implementation
Plan (SIP) revision containing a separate
10-year maintenance plan for each area.
The two areas are the Portland, Maine
8-hour ozone nonattainment area and
the Hancock, Knox, Lincoln and Waldo
Counties (Midcoast), Maine 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area. EPA is also
providing information on the status of
its transportation conformity adequacy
determination for the new motor vehicle
emissions budgets (MVEBs) for the year
2016 that are contained in the 10-year
8-hour ozone maintenance plans for
each area. EPA is proposing to approve
MVEBs for both areas.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before November 16,
2006.
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R01–OAR–2006–OAR–0226 by one of
the following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. E-mail: arnold.anne@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (617) 918–0047.
4. Mail: ‘‘Docket Identification
Number EPA–R01–OAR–2006–OAR–
0226’’, Anne Arnold, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, One
Congress Street, Suite 1100 (mail code
CAQ), Boston, MA 02114–2023.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver
your comments to: Anne Arnold,
Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit,
Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, One
Congress Street, 11th floor, (CAQ),
Boston, MA 02114–2023. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
ADDRESSES:
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
60937
Regional Office’s normal hours of
operation. The Regional Office’s official
hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding legal
holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R01–OAR–2006–
OAR–0226. EPA’s policy is that all
comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and
may be made available online at
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 through
www.regulations.gov or e-mail,
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ systems, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through
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. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
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 www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at Air Quality Planning
Unit, Office of Ecosystem Protection,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
EPA New England Regional Office, One
Congress Street, 11th floor, (CAQ),
Boston, MA 02114–2023. EPA requests
that if at all possible, you contact the
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
60938
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 17, 2006 / Proposed Rules
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30,
excluding legal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard P. Burkhart, Air Quality
Planning Unit, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, One Congress Street,
Suite 1100 (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114–
2023, telephone number (617) 918–
1664, fax number (617) 918–0664, email Burkhart.Richard@epa.gov.
General Information
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
A. How Can I Get Copies of This
Document and Other Related
Information?
In addition to the publicly available
docket materials available for inspection
electronically in the Federal Docket
Management System at
www.regulations.gov, and the hard copy
available at the Regional Office, which
are identified in the ADDRESSES section
of this Federal Register, copies of the
state submittal and EPA’s technical
support document are also available for
public inspection during normal
business hours, by appointment at the
State Air Agency: The Bureau of Air
Quality Control, Department of
Environmental Protection, First Floor of
the Tyson Building, Augusta Mental
Health Institute Complex, Augusta, ME
04333–0017.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What is EPA Proposing?
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 Portland
Redesignation Request?
VII. How are MVEBs Developed and What is
an Adequacy Determination?
VIII. What is the Status of EPA’s Adequacy
Determination for the Portland Area’s
MVEBs for the Year 2016?
IX. What is EPA’s Analysis of the Midcoast
Redesignation Request?
X. What is the Status of EPA’s Adequacy
Determination for the Midcoast Area’s
MVEBs for the Year 2016?
XI. Proposed Actions on Maine’s
Redesignation Requests, 175
Maintenance Plans, and Associated
MVEBs.
XII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.
I. What Is EPA Proposing?
EPA is proposing to take several
related actions. EPA is proposing to
determine that both the Portland and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
06:09 Oct 17, 2006
Jkt 211001
the Midcoast, Maine 8-hour ozone
nonattainment areas have attained the 8hour ozone standard. EPA is also
proposing to approve a request to
change the legal designation of the two
areas from nonattainment to attainment
for the 8-hour ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). In
addition, EPA is proposing to approve a
10-year maintenance plan for each area
and motor vehicle emissions budgets
(MVEBs) for each area.
The Portland nonattainment area is
located in southern Maine. The Portland
nonattainment area consists of 57
coastal towns and cities located in York
County (partial), Cumberland County
(partial), Sagadahoc County (full) along
with Durham, Maine, a town in
Androscoggin County. The Portland
area is designated as ‘‘marginal’’
nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone
standard. (See 40 CFR 81.320) The
Midcoast area is located north of the
Portland area and consists of 55 coastal
towns and islands in Hancock, Knox,
Lincoln, and Waldo Counties (all are
partial Counties), and is designated as
‘‘subpart 1, basic’’ for the 8-hour ozone
standard. (See 40 CFR 81.320)
II. What Is the Background for These
Proposed Actions?
The CAA required EPA to designate
as nonattainment any area that was
violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
based on the three most recent years
(2001–2003) of air quality data. The
Federal Register notice making these
designations was signed on April 15,
2004, and published on April 30, 2004,
(69 FR 23857). The CAA contains two
sets of provisions—subpart 1 and
subpart 2— that address planning and
control requirements for nonattainment
areas. (Both are found in Title I, Part D
of the CAA.) Subpart 1 (which EPA
refers to as ‘‘basic’’ nonattainment)
contains general, less prescriptive,
requirements for nonattainment areas
for any pollutant—including ozone—
governed by a NAAQS. Subpart 2
(which EPA refers to as ‘‘classified’’
nonattainment) provides more specific
requirements for ozone nonattainment
areas. Some 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 8hour average ozone concentration), if it
had a 1-hour design value at or above
0.121 ppm (the lowest 1-hour design
value in Table 1 of subpart 2). All other
areas are covered under subpart 1, based
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
upon their 8-hour design values. The
Portland and Midcoast areas were
designated as 8-hour ozone
nonattainment areas by EPA on April
30, 2004, (69 FR 23857). The 2004
classification for the Portland 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area is based on
air quality monitoring data from 2001–
2003. The Portland area is classified as
marginal. The 2004 classification for the
Midcoast 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area is also based on air quality
monitoring data from 2001–2003. The
Midcoast area is classified as subpart 1,
basic.
Control requirements are linked to
each classification. Areas with more
serious ozone pollution are subject to
more prescribed requirements. The
requirements are designed to bring areas
into attainment by their specified
attainment dates. The control
requirements and dates by which
attainment needs to be achieved vary
with the area’s classification. For
example, marginal areas are subject to
the fewest mandated control
requirements and have the earliest
attainment date. Under EPA regulations
at 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 ozone
concentrations is less than or equal to
0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm). (See 69 FR
23857 (April 30, 2004) for further
information.) The data completeness
requirement is met when the average
percent of days with valid ambient
monitoring data is greater than 90%,
and no single year has less than 75%
data completeness as determined in
Appendix I of 40 CFR part 50.
On August 3, 2006, Maine requested
redesignation to attainment for the 8hour ozone standard for the both areas.
The redesignation request includes
three years of complete, quality-assured
data for the period of 2003 through
2005, indicating the 8-hour NAAQS for
ozone had been achieved for the both
areas. The data satisfies the CAA
requirements when 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. Under the CAA,
nonattainment areas may be
redesignated to attainment if sufficient
complete, quality-assured data is
available for the Administrator to
determine that the area has attained the
standard and the area meets the other
CAA redesignation requirements in
section 107(d)(3)(E).
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 17, 2006 / Proposed Rules
60939
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) 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
(TSD’s) 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.
V. What Would Be the Effect of These
Actions?
Approval of the redesignation request
would change the official designation of
both the Portland and the Midcoast,
Maine 8-hour ozone nonattainment
EPA is proposing to determine that
the Portland area has attained the 8hour ozone NAAQS. For ozone, an area
is attaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS if
there are no violations, as determined in
accordance with 40 CFR 50.10 and
Appendix I, 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 an
area over each year must not exceed
0.08 ppm. This 3-year average is known
as the design value. 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 EPA’s Air Quality Data
System (AQS). The monitors generally
should have remained at the same
location for the duration of the
monitoring period required for
demonstrating attainment.
Maine submitted ozone monitoring
data for the April through September
ozone season from 2003 to 2005. This
data has been quality assured and is
recorded in AQS. The data are
summarized in Table 1:
1 The ME DEP submitted the redesignation
request on August 3, 2006. The submittal showed
evidence of a public hearing, but did not include
the public hearing transcript, which was not
available at that time. The ME DEP submitted the
public transcript on August 30, 2006. The transcript
is available in the docket for this action.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
06:09 Oct 17, 2006
Jkt 211001
IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?
On August 3, 2006,1 the state
requested redesignation of the both the
Portland, Maine and the Midcoast,
Maine 8-hour ozone nonattainment
areas to attainment for the 8-hour ozone
standard. EPA believes that both areas
have attained the standard and have met
the requirements for redesignation set
forth in section 107(d)(3)(E). EPA is
proposing to approve the maintenance
plans to fulfill the requirements of
section 175(A). EPA is also proposing to
approve the MVEB’s for these two areas.
EPA has previously determined that the
2016 budgets are adequate.
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
areas for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
found at 40 CFR 81.320. It would also
incorporate into the Maine SIP plans for
maintaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
through 2016, for both areas. The
maintenance plans include contingency
measures to remedy future violations of
the 8-hour NAAQS. In addition MVEBs
are established for the year 2016. The
MVEBs will be used to assure that plans
for the area’s transportation system
which effect vehicle miles traveled, do
not cause motor vehicle emissions in
excess of levels consistent with
maintaining attainment of the NAAQS.
VI. What Is EPA’s Analysis of the
Portland Redesignation Request?
EPA is proposing to determine that
the Portland nonattainment area has
attained the 8-hour ozone standard and
that all other redesignation criteria have
been met. The basis for EPA’s proposed
determination is as outlined below.
A. The Portland Area Has Attained the
8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
60940
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 17, 2006 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1.—8-HOUR OZONE (PARTS PER MILLION, PPM) FOR THE PORTLAND AREA
4th High 8-hr ozone average
Monitor
County
2003
Kittery ................................................
Kennebunkport ..................................
West Buxton ......................................
Cape Elizabeth ..................................
Reid State Park .................................
Area Design Value ............................
York ..................................................
York ..................................................
York ..................................................
Cumberland ......................................
Sagadahoc .......................................
...........................................................
The design value for an area is the
highest design value recorded at any
monitor in the area. Therefore, as shown
in Table 1, the design value for the
Portland area is 0.077 ppm, which
meets the standard as described above.
Preliminary ozone data for the summer
of 2006 still show the area as being in
attainment.
In addition, as discussed below with
respect to the maintenance plan, Maine
has committed to continue monitoring
in these areas in accordance with 40
CFR Part 58. In summary, EPA believes
that the data submitted by Maine
provides an adequate demonstration
that the Portland area has attained the
8-hour ozone NAAQS.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
B. The Portland Area Has Met All
Applicable Requirements for Purposes
of Redesignation Under Section 110 and
Part D of the CAA and the Area Has a
Fully Approved SIP Under Section
110(k) for Purposes of Redesignation
EPA has determined that Maine has
met all applicable SIP requirements for
the Portland area for purposes of
redesignation under section 110 of the
CAA (general SIP requirements). EPA
has also determined that the Maine SIP
meets applicable SIP requirements for
purposes of redesignation under Part D
of Title I of the CAA (requirements
specific to marginal nonattainment
areas, see section 107(d)(3)(E)(v)). In
addition, EPA has determined that the
Maine SIP is fully approved with
respect to all applicable requirements
for purposes of redesignation (see
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)). In making these
determinations, EPA ascertained what
requirements are applicable to the area
and that they are fully approved under
section 110(k). SIPs must be fully
approved only with respect to
applicable requirements.
The September 4, 1992 Calcagni
memorandum (see ‘‘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).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
06:09 Oct 17, 2006
Jkt 211001
2004
2005
0.080
0.076
0.069
0.073
0.074
........................
0.080
0.076
0.075
0.068
0.069
........................
0.072
0.072
0.076
0.073
0.068
........................
Under this interpretation, to qualify for
redesignation, states requesting
redesignation to attainment must meet
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,
MI). 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
(May 12, 2003).
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
emission 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. General SIP elements and
requirements are delineated in section
110(a)(2) of Title I, part A of the CAA.
These requirements 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) and provisions for the
implementation of part D requirements
(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
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
3-Year average
(design value)
0.077
0.074
0.073
0.072
0.070
0.077
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 classification 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
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
conformity and oxygenated fuels
requirements, as well as with section
184 ozone transport requirements. See
Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and
final rulemakings (61 FR 53174–53176,
October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7,
1997); Cleveland–Akron–Lorain, Ohio,
final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7,
1996); and Tampa, Florida, final
rulemaking at (60 FR 62748, December
7, 1995). See also the discussion on this
issue in the Cincinnati redesignation (65
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 17, 2006 / Proposed Rules
FR 37890, June 19, 2000), and in the
Pittsburgh redesignation (66 FR 50399,
October 19, 2001).
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, since, as explained below, no Part
D requirements applicable for purposes
of redesignation under the 8-hour
standard became due prior to
submission of the redesignation request,
except for the submission of the 2002
base year inventory, which Maine has
submitted and EPA has approved (71 FR
14815; March 24, 2006). Therefore EPA
believes that the State has satisfied the
criterion of section 107(d)(3)(E)
regarding section 110 of the Act.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
2. Part D Nonattainment Area
Requirements under the 8-Hour
Standard
The Portland area was designated a
marginal nonattainment area for the 8hour 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. Section 182 of the CAA, found in
subpart 2 of Part D, establishes
additional specific requirements
depending on the area’s nonattainment
classification. For a marginal
nonattainment area for the 8-hour
standard, such as the Portland area,
section 182(a) sets forth requirements.
Section 184 also sets forth additional
requirements for this area, due to its
location within the Ozone Transport
Region (OTR).
With respect to the 8-hour standard,
EPA has to determined that the Maine
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, except for the submission of the
2002 base year inventory, which Maine
has submitted and EPA has approved
(71 FR 14815; March 24, 2006). Under
part D, an area’s classification (marginal,
moderate, serious, severe, and extreme)
indicates the requirements to which it
will be subject. Subpart 1 of part D,
found in sections 172–176 of the CAA,
sets forth the basic nonattainment
requirements applicable to all
nonattainment areas. Subpart 2 of part
D, found in section 182 of the CAA,
establishes additional specific
requirements depending on the area’s
nonattainment classification.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
06:09 Oct 17, 2006
Jkt 211001
For purposes of evaluating this
redesignation request, the applicable
part D, subpart 1 requirements for all
nonattainment areas are contained in
section 172(c)(1)–(9). A thorough
discussion of the requirements
contained in section 172 can be found
in the General Preamble for
Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498).
(See also 68 FR 4852–3 in St. Louis NPR
for discussion of section 172
requirements.) In addition to the fact
that certain Part D requirements
applicable for purposes of redesignation
did not become due prior to submission
of the redesignation request, EPA
believes it is reasonable to interpret the
conformity, new source review
requirements, and OTR requirements as
not requiring approval prior to
redesignation.
Section 176(c) of the CAA requires
states to establish criteria and
procedures to ensure the 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) because
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 (6th Cir. 2001),
upholding this interpretation. See also
60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995)
(Tampa, FL).
Maine has a fully approved NSR
program (61 FR 5690; Februrary 14,
1996). Even if Maine did not have a
fully approved NSR program, EPA has
interpreted the section 184 OTR
requirements, including NSR, as not
being applicable for purposes of
redesignation. The rationale for this is
based on two factors. First, the
requirement to submit SIP revisions for
the section 184 requirements continues
to apply to areas in the OTR after
redesignation to attainment. Therefore,
the State remains obligated to have New
Source Review, as well as reasonably
available control requirements (RACT)
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
60941
and Vehicle Inspection and
Maintenance (I/M) programs even after
redesignation. Second, the section 184
control measures are region-wide
requirements and do not apply to the
area by virtue of its designation and
classification. See 61 FR 53174, 53175–
53176 (October 10, 1996) and 62 FR
24826, 24830–32 (May 7, 1997). Thus,
EPA proposes to find that the Portland
area has satisfied all 8-hour ozone
standard requirements applicable for
purposes of section 107(d)(3)(E) under
Part D of the CAA.
3. Part D Nonattainment Area
Requirements Under the 1-Hour
Standard and EPA’s Anti-Backsliding
Rules
Prior to its designation as an 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area, the Portland
area was designated moderate for the 1hour ozone standard. While, on June 15,
2005, the 1-hour ozone standard was
revoked (see 40 CFR 50.9(b)), under
EPA’s anti-backsliding rules, areas
designated nonattainment for the 1-hour
standard at the time of the 8-hour ozone
designations remained subject to certain
control measures that applied by virtue
of the area’s classification for the 1-hour
NAAQS. 40 CFR 51.900 et seq., see also
70 FR 30592, 30604 (May 26, 2005). The
applicable Part D 1-hour standard
requirements for purposes of
redesignation are those that continue to
apply under EPA’s anti-backsliding
rules, which were promulgated in
conjunction with the implementation of
the 8-hour NAAQS. 40 CFR 51.900 et
seq., as amended 70 FR 30592, 30604
(May 26, 2005).
40 CFR 51.905(a)(1) prescribes the 1hour NAAQS requirements that
continue to apply after revocation of the
1-hour NAAQS to former 1-hour ozone
nonattainment areas. Section
51.905(a)(1)(i) provides that:
‘‘The area remains subject to the
obligation to adopt and implement the
applicable requirements as defined in
section 51.900(f), except as provided in
paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of this section, and
except as provided in paragraph (b) of
this section * * *.’’ Section 51.900(f),
as amended by 70 FR 30592, 30604
(May 26, 2005), states that: ‘‘Applicable
Requirements means for an area the
following requirements to the extent
such requirements apply or applied to
the area for the area’s classification
under section 181(a)(1) of the CAA for
the 1-hour NAAQS at the time the
Administrator signs a final rule
designating the area for the 8-hour
standard as nonattainment, attainment,
or unclassifiable.’’ For a former 1-hour
moderate area, such as Portland, the
applicable requirements are as follows:
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
60942
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 17, 2006 / Proposed Rules
(1) Reasonably available control
technology (RACT);
(2) Inspection and maintenance
programs (I/M);
(3) Major source applicability cut-offs
for purposes of RACT;
(4) Rate of Progress (ROP) Reductions;
(5) NOX requirements under section
182(f) of the CAA; and
(6) Attainment demonstration or an
alternative as provided under
§ 51.905(a)(1)(ii).
Table 2 lists the control measures,
effective in the Portland area. The table
shows how the applicable requirements
have been met for the Portland area.
Thus, EPA believes that Portland has
met all applicable Part D requirements
under the 1-hour standard for purposes
of redesignation under the 8-hour
standard. In addition, Table 2a lists
other programs Maine has implemented
to address emissions of ozone
precursors.
TABLE 2.—CONTROL MEASURES IN THE PORTLAND OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA
Name of measure
Type of measure
On-board refueling vapor recovery ...................................
Federal motor vehicle control program .............................
Federal non-road heavy duty diesel engines ...................
Federal non-road gasoline engines ..................................
Automotive refinishing ......................................................
Consumer & commercial products ...................................
AIM Surface Coatings .......................................................
1990 Base Year Emissions Inventory ..............................
Federal Rule .......................
Federal Rule .......................
Federal Rule .......................
Federal Rule .......................
Federal Rule .......................
Federal Rule .......................
Federal Rule .......................
Section 182 CAA Requirement.
Section 182 CAA Requirement.
Section 182 CAA Requirement.
Section 182 CAA Requirement.
Section 182 CAA Requirement.
Section 182 CAA Requirement.
2002 Base Year Emissions Inventory ..............................
1-Hour Emissions Statements ..........................................
5% Reduction Plan in Lieu of 1-Hour Ozone Attainment
Demonstration.
15% VOC Reduction Plan ................................................
VOC RACT pursuant to sections 182(a)(2)(A) and
182(b)(2)(B) of CAA.
VOC RACT pursuant to sections 182(b)(2)(A) and (C) of
CAA.
NOX RACT ........................................................................
Approval status
Section 182 CAA Requirement.
Section 182 CAA Requirement.
Promulgated at 40 CFR part 86.
Promulgated at 40 CFR part 86.
Promulgated at 40 CFR part 89.
Promulgated at 40 CFR part 90.
Promulgated at 40 CFR part 59, subpart B.
Promulgated at 40 CFR part 59, subpart C.
Promulgated at 40 CFR part 59, subpart D.
SIP approved (62 FR 9081; 2/28/97).
SIP approved (71 FR 14815; 3/24/06).
SIP approved (60 FR 2524; 1/10/95).
SIP approved (71 FR 14815, 3/24/06).
SIP approved (71 FR 14815, 3/24/06).
SIPs approved (57 FR 3046; 2/13/92), (58 FR 15281;
3/22/93), (59 FR 31154; 6/17/94), (60 FR 33730; 6/
29/95).
SIPs approved (65 FR 20749; 4/18/00), (67 FR 35439;
5/20/02).
SIP approved (67 FR 57154; 9/9/02).
TABLE 2A.—NEW SOURCE REVIEW PROGRAM AND OTHER CLEAN AIR ACT PROGRAMS IN THE PORTLAND OZONE
NONATTAINMENT AREA
Name of measure
Type of measure
New Source Review .........................................................
Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program .................
CAA Requirement ..............
Ozone Transport Region
Requirement.
Ozone Transport Region
Requirement.
State Initiative .....................
State Initiative .....................
State Initiative .....................
State Initiative .....................
SIP approved (61 FR 5690; 2/14/96).
SIP approved (66 FR 1871; 1/10/01).
State Initiative .....................
State Initiative .....................
SIP approved (71 FR 13767; 03/17/06).
SIP approved (70 FR 61382; 10/24/05).
State Initiative .....................
State Initiative .....................
SIP approved (70 FR 30367; 05/26/05).
SIP approved (70 FR 6352; 02/07/05).
Stage II Vapor Recovery ..................................................
Low RVP Gasoline ...........................................................
Solvent Cleaners ..............................................................
NOX Control Program .......................................................
Emissions from Smaller-Scale Electric Generating Resources.
Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings
Control of Emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds
from Consumer Products.
Mobile Equipment Repair and Refinishing .......................
Portable Fuel Container Spillage Control .........................
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
4. The Portland Area has a Fully
Approved Applicable SIP for Purposes
of Redesignation under Section 110(k)
of the CAA
EPA has fully approved the applicable
Maine SIP for purposes of redesignation
for the Portland area under section
110(k) of the CAA. EPA may rely on
prior SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request. Calcagni Memo,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
06:09 Oct 17, 2006
Jkt 211001
Approval status
SIP approved (61 FR 53636; 10/15/96).
SIP
SIP
SIP
SIP
approved
approved
approved
approved
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
25426 (May 12, 2003) and citations
therein. Following passage of the CAA
of 1970, Maine has adopted and
submitted and EPA has fully approved
at various times provisions addressing
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(67
(70
(70
(70
FR
FR
FR
FR
10099;
30367;
11879;
30373;
3/6/02).
05/26/05).
03/10/05).
05/26/05).
the various SIP elements applicable in
the Portland area under the 1-hour
standard (see Table 2).
As indicated above, EPA believes that
the section 110 elements not connected
with 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
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 17, 2006 / Proposed Rules
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
for purposes of redesignation have yet
become due, except for the submission
of the 2002 base year inventory, which
Maine has submitted and EPA has
approved (71 FR 14815 (March 24,
2006)), and therefore they need not be
approved into SIP prior to
redesignation.
C. The Air Quality Improvement in the
Portland 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 Portland
area is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions
resulting from implementation of the
SIP, Federal measures, and other stateadopted measures. EPA approved
Maine’s SIP control strategy for the
Portland area, including rules and the
emission reductions achieved as a result
of those rules that are enforceable.
Several Federal and statewide rules are
in place which have improved the
ambient air quality in this area. (See
Tables 2 and 2a above for a list of
control measures and other CAA
requirements.) The emission inventories
for the Portland area show that between
2002 (the ozone season for which the
area was classified) and 2005 (the year
the area came into attainment), VOC
emissions were reduced by over 10 tons
per summer day and NOX emissions
were reduced by over 19 tons per
summer day. Ozone precursor emissions
were also reduced in upwind states.
The Maine submittal discusses the
meteorological data for the years 2003,
2004 and 2005, and for many of the
years leading up to 2003. The Maine
submittal has numerous graphs and
charts of ozone data, ozone precursor
data, and meteorological data for the
Portland area. These data all support the
claim that the downward trend in ozone
data is not due to favorable meteorology,
but is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in ozone precursor
emissions, both within the state and
upwind from the state. EPA agrees with
Maine’s analysis on ozone trends. EPA
agrees the downward trend in ozone in
Maine has been occurring for several
ozone seasons. The meteorology for the
Portland area shows that for some of
these ozone seasons the summers have
been warmer than average, while others
have been cooler than average, but the
weather over the past several ozone
VerDate Aug<31>2005
06:09 Oct 17, 2006
Jkt 211001
seasons has not been unfavorable to
ozone formation. In short, the air quality
improvement in the Portland 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, not favorable
meteorology. Therefore, EPA finds this
requirement is met for the Portland area.
D. The Portland Area Has a Fully
Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant
to Section 175A of the CAA
In conjunction with its request to
redesignate the Portland nonattainment
area to attainment status, Maine
submitted a SIP revision to provide for
the maintenance of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS in the Portland area for at least
10 years after redesignation.
1. 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 ten
years after the Administrator approves a
redesignation to attainment. Eight years
after the redesignation, the State must
submit a revised maintenance plan
which demonstrates that attainment will
continue to be maintained for the ten
years following the initial ten-year
period. 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
60943
2. What Is EPA’s Analysis of the
Portland Maintenance Plan?
(a) Attainment Emissions Inventory—
Maine selected 2005 as the attainment
year for purposes of demonstrating
attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
The 2005 VOC and NOX emission
estimates for the Portland area were
developed consistent with EPA
guidance and are summarized in Table
3 below. Point source emissions were
obtained using 2004 data collected
pursuant to Maine’s Chapter 137
Emission Statement regulation;
projections were made to 2005, 2009,
and 2016 using economic-based growth
factors. Non-road mobile emissions
were calculated using the most recent
NONROAD Model. On-road mobile
source emissions were calculated using
MOBILE 6.2 for 2005, 2009, and 2016.
Area source emissions for 2002 were
derived from Maine DEP’s submittal
made to the EPA’s national emissions
inventory (NEI) for 2002, and modified
as described in support material
submitted by Maine DEP to EPA. The
2002 area emissions were then projected
to 2005, 2009, and 2016.
(b) Maintenance demonstration—
Maine’s August 3, 2006 SIP submittal
includes a 10-year maintenance plan for
the Portland area as required by section
175A of the Act. This demonstration
shows compliance and maintenance of
the 8-hour ozone standard by assuring
that current and future emissions of
VOC and NOX remain at or below
attainment year emission levels. A
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 25430–25432
(May 12, 2003).
Maine used 2005 as the base year,
2009 was chosen as the interim year and
2016 is the ‘‘out year,’’ which as
required, is at least 10 years after the
time necessary for EPA to review and
approve the maintenance plan. (In
addition, per 40 CFR part 93, a MVEB
must be established for the last year of
the maintenance plan. MVEBs are
discussed in Section VII below.) Table
3 shows the emissions inventories for
2005, 2009 and 2016, for the Portland
area. The emissions inventory shows a
downward trend in precursor emissions
data from 2005, through 2009 and
continuing on until 2016. The decreases
in emissions are a requirement of a
maintenance plan. Maine has fulfilled
this requirement.
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
60944
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 17, 2006 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 3.—ATTAINMENT (2005), INTERIM (2009) AND MAINTENANCE (2016) INVENTORIES FOR THE PORTLAND
NONATTAINMENT AREA (3 COUNTIES) 1
[All emissions expressed in tons per summer week day]
2005
VOC
2005
NOX
2009
VOC
2009
NOX
2016
NOX
2016
NOX
..........................................................
..........................................................
Onroad 2 ..........................................
Nonroad ...........................................
Locomotives ....................................
4.220
41.557
27.033
20.592
0.030
10.480
6.301
55.328
12.020
0.849
4.540
42.579
20.018
17.917
0.027
11.140
6.491
38.849
10.170
0.747
5.350
47.331
13.243
15.560
0.024
12.990
6.723
19.078
6.801
0.620
Total ..........................................
..........................................................
93.432
84.978
85.081
67.397
81.508
46.212
Change in emissions from 2005
..........................................................
..............
..............
¥8.351
¥17.581
¥11.924
¥38.766
Category
Subcategory
Point .................................................
Area ..................................................
Mobile ...............................................
Mobile ...............................................
Mobile ...............................................
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
1 The emissions in the table are based on an inventory for three entire counties (Cumberland, Sagadahoc, and York Counties) rather than the
somewhat smaller 57 town Portland nonattainment area. EPA believes it is reasonable to use countywide inventories for the purpose of this redesignation demonstration even though the nonattainment area itself includes the 57 towns in these three counties nearest the coast. The Agency concludes that the distribution of emissions for each source category across the counties will generally track population, which is highest
along the coast. Therefore, the declining emissions trends reflected in this table for the three entire counties should generally be true for 57 town
nonattainment area as well.
2 To provide a consistent comparison with the other source categories, the mobile onroad inventory numbers are based on an inventory for
three entire counties (Cumberland, Sagadahoc and York Counties) and are therefore larger than motor vehicle emissions calculated for the 57
town Portland nonattainment area shown in Table 4.
(c) Monitoring Network—There are
currently 5 monitors measuring ozone
in the Portland area. The State of Maine
has committed in the maintenance plan
to the necessary continued operation of
the ozone monitoring network in
compliance with 40 CFR Part 58, and
has, therefore, addressed the
requirement for continued ozone
monitoring in this area.
(d) Verification of Continued
Attainment—The state has the legal
authority to enforce and implement the
requirements of the ozone maintenance
plan. This includes the authority to
adopt, implement and enforce any
subsequent emission control
contingency measures determined to be
necessary to correct future ozone
attainment problems. To implement the
ozone maintenance plan, the state will
continue to monitor ozone levels in the
area. Maine has also committed to track
the progress of the maintenance
demonstration by periodically updating
their emission inventory. Maine has
committed to do this annually. The
update will be based, in part, on the
annual update of the NEI, and will
indicate new source growth and other
changes from the attainment inventory,
including changes in vehicle miles
traveled or in traffic patterns and
changes in MOBILE6.2 or its successor.
(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 assure that the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
06:09 Oct 17, 2006
Jkt 211001
state will promptly correct a violation of
the NAAQS that occurs after
redesignation. The maintenance plan
should identify the contingency
measures to be adopted, a schedule and
procedure for adoption and
implementation, and a time limit for
action by the state. The state should also
identify specific indicators to be used to
determine when the contingency
measures need to be implemented. The
maintenance plan must include a
requirement that the state will
implement all measures with respect to
control of the pollutant that were
contained in the SIP before
redesignation of the area to attainment
(see section 175A(d)).
As stated in the Portland area
maintenance plan, the Maine DEP has
committed to the following procedure.
At the conclusion of each ozone season,
the Maine DEP will evaluate whether
the design value for the Portland area is
above or below the 8-hour ozone
standard. If the design value is above
the standard, the DEP will evaluate the
potential causes of this design value
increase. The DEP will examine whether
this increase is due to an increase in
local in-state emissions or an increase in
upwind out-of-state emissions. If an
increase in in-state emissions is
determined to be a contributing factor to
the design value increase, Maine will
evaluate the projected in-state emissions
for the Portland area for the ozone
season in the following year. If in-state
emissions are not expected to
satisfactorily decrease in the following
ozone season in order to mitigate the
violation, Maine will implement one or
more of the contingency measures listed
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
in this section, or substitute a new VOC
or NOX control measure(s) to achieve
additional in-state emissions reductions.
The contingency measures(s) will be
selected by the Governor or the
Governor’s designee within 6 months of
the end of the ozone season for which
contingency measures have been
determined necessary. Possible
contingency measures include:
Adhesives
Establish VOC content limits for
industrial and commercial application
of solvent-based adhesives and sealants
based on California Air Resources Board
(CARB) suggested RACT controls (1998).
Asphalt Paving
Reduce the VOC content limit for
cutback asphalt from 5% to 4%, and
lower current VOC content limits for
emulsified asphalt by 20%.
Automobile Refinish Coatings
Adopt the VOC content limits
contained in the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District (BAAQMD)
regulations.
Consumer Products
Adopt and implement the July 20,
2005 CARB regulations. These
regulations include emission limits for
additional consumer product categories
that are not included in Maine’s existing
Chapter 151 consumer products rule.
Rule Effectiveness Improvement
Increase enforcement of existing rules
in order to increase rule effectiveness.
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
60945
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 17, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Small Source Non-CTG VOC RACT
Reduce the major source and Chapter
134 non-CTG VOC RACT applicability
threshold from 40 to 10 tons per year of
actual emissions.
The Portland area 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. Therefore, EPA
believes that the maintenance plan SIP
revision submitted by Maine for the
Portland area meets the requirements of
section 175A of the Act.
VII. How are MVEBs Developed and
What is an Adequacy Determination?
Under the CAA, states are required to
submit, at various times, control strategy
SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone
areas. These control strategy SIPs (e.g.
reasonable further progress SIPs and
attainment demonstration SIPs) and
maintenance plans create MVEBs for
criteria pollutants and/or their
precursors to address pollution from
cars and trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, a
MVEB is established for the last year of
the maintenance plan. The MVEB is the
portion of the total allowable emissions
that is allocated to highway and transit
vehicle use and emissions. The 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 the MVEB in the SIP
and revise the MVEB.
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 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 SIP.
When reviewing submitted ‘‘control
strategy’’ SIPs or maintenance plans
containing MVEBs, EPA must
affirmatively find the MVEB budget
contained therein ‘‘adequate’’ for use in
determining transportation conformity.
Once 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 SIP as required by
section 176(c) of the Act. EPA’s
substantive criteria for determining
‘‘adequacy’’ of an MVEB are set out in
40 CFR 93.118(e)(4).
VIII. What is the Status of EPA’s
Adequacy Determination for the
Portland Area’s MVEB for the Year
2016?
The Portland area’s 10-year
maintenance plan submission contains
new VOC and NOX MVEBs for the year
2016, which are shown in Table 4. The
availability of the SIP submission with
these 2016 MVEBs was announced for
public comment on EPA’s adequacy
web page on August 8, 2006, at: https://
www.epa.gov/otaq/transp/conform/
currsips.htm. The EPA public comment
period on adequacy of the 2016 MVEBs
for the Portland area closed on
September 7, 2006. EPA did not receive
any adverse comments. EPA New
England sent a letter to the Maine
Department of Environmental Protection
on September 8, 2006, stating that the
2016 MOBILE 6.2 motor vehicle
emissions budgets in the August 3, 2006
SIP submittal are adequate.
Additionally, EPA through this
rulemaking is proposing to approve
those MVEBs for use in determining
transportation conformity because EPA
has determined that the area maintains
the standard with emissions at the
levels of the budgets. The Maine DEP
utilized the MOBILE 6.2 model to
calculate on-road emissions of VOC and
NOX for the 57 towns in York,
Cumberland, Sagadahoc and
Androscoggin County comprising the 8hour nonattainment area. Maine is
establishing motor vehicle emissions
budgets for the last year of the Portland
8-hour ozone maintenance plan (year
2016) at 16.659 tons per summer
weekday (tpswd) of VOC and 32.837
tpswd of NOX. These on-road mobile
source emissions when added to
emissions from all other inventory
sources (stationary, other mobile (i.e.,
non-road, marine vessels, airplanes,
locomotives) and area sources) result in
year 2016 emissions inventories lower
than the year 2005 attainment emissions
inventory. These emissions budgets,
once approved by EPA must be used for
future transportation conformity
determinations.
TABLE 4.—THE 2016 MVEBS FOR THE PORTLAND 8-HOUR OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA (57 TOWNS)
[Emissions expressed in tons per summer weekday (tpswd)]
2005
VOC
2005
NOX
2016
VOC
2016
OX
3.669
33.433
8.210
5.207
4.627
38.118
10.118
5.596
17.401
0.015
22.476
10.556
0.423
46.776
13.146
0.013
11.032
5.545
0.342
16.098
Total Inventory ...........................................................................................................
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
Point .........................................................................................................................................
Area .........................................................................................................................................
Mobile:
Nonroad ............................................................................................................................
Locomotives ......................................................................................................................
Onroad ..............................................................................................................................
76.994
71.172
66.936
37.699
Total Safety Margin .................................................................................................................
MVEB:
Onroad ..............................................................................................................................
Plus Safety Margin applied to MVEB ...............................................................................
..................
..................
10.058
33.473
22.476
..................
46.776
..................
11.032
5.627
16.098
16.739
Total MVEB ...............................................................................................................
..................
..................
16.659
32.837
Safety Margin Remaining ........................................................................................................
..................
..................
4.431
16.734
VerDate Aug<31>2005
06:09 Oct 17, 2006
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
60946
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 17, 2006 / Proposed Rules
As part of its maintenance plan,
Maine elected to apply a portion of its
‘‘safety margin’’ to its MVEBs. In this
case, a ‘‘safety margin’’ is the amount by
which the total projected ozone
precursor emissions, from all sources
(point, area and mobile) are less than
the total emissions that would maintain
the ozone standard (i.e. the difference
between 2005 and 2016 precursor
emissions, with VOC and NOX treated
separately). The attainment level of
emissions is the level of emissions
during one of the years in which the
area met the NAAQS. For example, the
Portland area attained the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS during the 2003–2005 time
period. Maine uses 2005 emissions as
the attainment level of emissions for the
area. The emissions from point, area,
nonroad, and mobile sources in 2005
equaled 76.994 tpswd of VOC for the
Portland area (see Table 4). Projected
VOC emissions from point, area,
nonroad, and mobile sources, out to the
year 2016, equals 66.936 tpswd of VOC.
The SIP demonstrates that the area will
continue to maintain the standard with
emissions at this level. The safety
margin for VOCs is calculated to be the
difference between the 2005 VOC
emissions (76.994 tpswd) and the 2016
VOC emissions (66.936 tpswd), in this
case, 10.058 tpswd is the VOC safety
margin for 2016. By this same method,
33.473 tpswd (i.e., 71.172 tpswd less
37.699 tpswd) is the safety margin for
NOX for 2016. The emissions are
projected to maintain the area’s air
quality consistent with the NAAQS. The
safety margin is the extra emissions that
can be allocated as long as the total
attainment level of emissions is
maintained. The credit, or a portion
thereof, can be allocated to any of the
source categories. For the year 2016, the
available safety margin (see Table 4) is
10.058 tpswd for VOC and 33.473 tpswd
for NOX. After partial allocation of the
safety margin to the MVEB (5.627 tpswd
VOC and 16.739 tpswd NOX), the
remaining safety margins are 4.431
tpswd for VOC and 16.734 tpswd for
NOX. Maine has not yet allocated the
remaining safety margin to any source
category under its maintenance plan,
and the State will need to submit a SIP
revision to amend its maintenance plan
if in the future it decides to use any of
the remaining safety margin. The 2016
MVEBs for Portland are approvable
because the MVEBs for NOX and VOC,
including the allocated safety margins,
when added to all other inventory
sources, continue to maintain the total
emissions at or below the attainment
year inventory levels as required by the
transportation conformity regulations.
IX. What is EPA’s Analysis of the
Midcoast Redesignation Request?
EPA is also proposing to determine
that the Midcoast nonattainment area
has attained the 8-hour ozone standard
and that all other redesignation criteria
have been met. The basis for EPA’s
proposed determination is as follows.
A. The Midcoast Area Has Attained the
8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
EPA is proposing to determine that
the Midcoast 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,
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 an area over
each year must not exceed 0.08 ppm.
This 3-year average is known as the
design value. 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 qualityassured in accordance with 40 CFR part
58, and recorded in AQS. The monitors
generally should have remained at the
same location for the duration of the
monitoring period required for
demonstrating attainment.
Maine submitted ozone monitoring
data for the April through September
ozone season from 2003 to 2005. This
data has been quality assured and is
recorded in AQS. The ozone data are
summarized in Table 5:
TABLE 5.—8-HOUR OZONE (PARTS PER MILLION, PPM) FOR THE MIDCOAST AREA
4th High 8-hr ozone average
Monitor
County
2003
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
Port Clyde .........................................
McFarland Hill ...................................
Cadillac Mountain .............................
Area Design Value ............................
Knox .................................................
Hancock ...........................................
Hancock ...........................................
...........................................................
The design value for an area is the
highest design value recorded at any
monitor in the area. Therefore, as shown
in Table 5, the design value for the
Midcoast area is 0.082 ppm, which
meets the standard as described above.
Preliminary ozone data for the summer
of 2006 still show the area as being in
attainment.
In addition, as discussed below with
respect to the maintenance plan, Maine
has committed to continue monitoring
in this area in accordance with 40 CFR
part 58. In summary, EPA believes that
the data submitted by Maine provides
an adequate demonstration that the
Midcoast area has attained the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
06:09 Oct 17, 2006
Jkt 211001
2004
2005
0.082
0.080
0.094
........................
0.074
0.073
0.088
........................
0.075
0.074
0.082
........................
B. The Midcoast Area Has Met All
Applicable Requirements for Purposes
of Redesignation Under Section 110 and
Part D of the CAA and the Area Has a
Fully Approved SIP Under Section
110(k) for Purposes of Redesignation
EPA has determined that Maine has
met all applicable SIP requirements for
the Midcoast area for purposes of
redesignation under section 110 of the
CAA (general SIP requirements). EPA
has also determined that the Maine SIP
meets applicable SIP requirements for
purposes of redesignation under Part D
of Title I of the CAA (requirements
specific to subpart I, basic
nonattainment areas, see section
107(d)(3)(E)(v)). In addition, EPA has
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
3-Year Average (design
value)
0.077
0.075
0.082
0.082
determined that the SIP is fully
approved with respect to all applicable
requirements for purposes of
redesignation (see section
107(d)(3)(E)(ii)). In making these
determinations, EPA ascertained what
requirements are applicable to the area
and that they are fully approved under
section 110(k). SIPs must be fully
approved only with respect to
applicable requirements.
The September 4, 1992 Calcagni
memorandum (see ‘‘Procedures for
Processing Requests to Redesignate
Areas to Attainment,’’ Memorandum
from John Calcagni, Director, Air
Quality Management Division,
September 4, 1992) describes EPA’s
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 17, 2006 / Proposed Rules
interpretation of section 107(d)(3)(E).
Under this interpretation, to qualify for
redesignation states requesting
redesignation to attainment must meet
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,
MI). 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).
1. Section 110 General SIP
Requirements
As explained in more detail in section
VI.B.1 above, 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, since, as explained below, no Part
D requirements applicable for purposes
of redesignation under the 8-hour
standard became due prior to
submission of the redesignation request.
Therefore, EPA believes that the State
has satisfied the criterion of section
107(d)(3)(E) regarding section 110 of the
CAA for the Midcoast redesignation
request.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
2. Part D Nonattainment Area
Requirements Under the 8-Hour
Standard
The Midcoast area is designated a
subpart 1, 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. Section 182 of the
CAA, found in subpart 2 of Part D,
establishes additional specific
requirements depending on the area’s
nonattainment classification. EPA has
determined that the Maine SIP meets
SIP requirements applicable for
purposes of redesignation under part D
of the Act. Under part D, an area’s
classification (marginal, moderate,
serious, severe, and extreme) indicates
the requirements to which it will be
subject. For purposes of evaluating this
redesignation request, the applicable
part D, subpart 1 requirements for all
nonattainment areas are contained in
section 172(c)(1)–(9). A thorough
discussion of the requirements
contained in section 172 can be found
in the General Preamble for
Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498).
(See also 68 FR 4852–3 in St. Louis NPR
for discussion of section 172
requirements.)
With respect to the 8-hour standard,
EPA proposes to determine that the
Maine SIP meets all applicable SIP
requirements for purposes of
redesignation of the Midcoast area
under part D of the CAA since no 8-hour
ozone standard Part D requirements
applicable for purposes of redesignation
became due prior to submission of the
area’s redesignation request. In addition
to the fact that certain Part D
requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation did not become due prior
to submission of the redesignation
request, EPA believes it is reasonable to
interpret the conformity, new source
review requirements, and OTR
requirements as not requiring approval
prior to redesignation. (See Section VI.B
for a more detailed discussion of this
interpretation.) Therefore, EPA proposes
to find that the Midcoast area has
satisfied all 8-hour ozone standard
requirements applicable for purposes of
section 107(d)(3)(E) under Part D of the
CAA.
3. Part D Nonattainment Area
Requirements Under the 1-Hour
Standard and EPA’s Anti-Backsliding
Rules
Prior to its designation as an 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area, parts of the
Midcoast area were designated
maintenance for the 1-hour standard
and the rest of the area was designated
moderate nonattainment for the 1-hour
ozone standard. While, on June 15,
2005, the 1-hour ozone standard was
revoked (See 40 CFR 50.9(b)), under
EPA’s anti-backsliding rules, areas
designated nonattainment for the 1-hour
standard at the time of the 8-hour ozone
designations remained subject to certain
control measures that applied by virtue
of the area’s classification for the 1-hour
NAAQS. 40 CFR 51.900 et seq., see also
70 FR 30592, 30604 (May 26, 2005). The
applicable Part D 1-hour standard
requirements for purposes of
redesignation are those that continue to
apply under EPA’s anti-backsliding
rules, which were promulgated in
conjunction with the implementation of
the 8-hour NAAQS. 40 CFR 51.900 et
seq., as amended 70 FR 30592, 30604
(May 26, 2005).
40 CFR 51.905(a)(1) prescribes the 1hour NAAQS requirements that
continue to apply after revocation of the
1-hour NAAQS to former 1-hour ozone
nonattainment areas. Section
51.905(a)(1)(i) provides that:
‘‘The area remains subject to the
obligation to adopt and implement the
applicable requirements as defined in
section 51.900(f), except as provided in
paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of this section, and
except as provided in paragraph (b) of
this section * * *.’’ Section 51.900(f),
as amended by 70 FR 30592, 30604
(May 26, 2005), states that: ‘‘Applicable
Requirements means for an area the
following requirements to the extent
such requirements apply or applied to
the area for the area’s classification
under section 181(a)(1) of the CAA for
the 1-hour NAAQS at the time the
Administrator signs a final rule
designating the area for the 8-hour
standard as nonattainment, attainment,
or unclassifiable.’’ For the Midcoast
area, where portions of the area were
classified as moderate under the 1-hour
standard the applicable requirements for
those portions are as follows:
(1) Reasonably available control
technology (RACT);
(2) Inspection and maintenance
programs (I/M);
(3) Major source applicability cut-offs
for purposes of RACT;
(4) Rate of Progress (ROP) Reductions;
(5) NOX requirements under section
182(f) of the CAA; and
(6) Attainment demonstration or an
alternative as provided under
§ 51.905(a)(1)(ii).
Table 6 lists the control measures
effective in the Midcoast area. The table
shows how the applicable requirements
have been met for the Midcoast area.
Thus, EPA believes that Midcoast area
has met all applicable Part D
requirements under the 1-hour standard
for purposes of redesignation under the
8-hour standard. In addition, Table 6a
lists other programs Maine has
implemented to address emissions of
ozone precursors.
TABLE 6.—CONTROL MEASURES IN THE MIDCOAST MAINE OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA
Name of control measure
Type of measure
On-board refueling vapor recovery ...................................
Federal Rule .......................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
06:09 Oct 17, 2006
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
60947
Approval status
Promulgated at 40 CFR part 86.
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
60948
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 17, 2006 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 6.—CONTROL MEASURES IN THE MIDCOAST MAINE OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA—Continued
Name of control measure
Type of measure
Federal motor vehicle control program .............................
Federal non-road heavy duty diesel engines ...................
Federal non-road gasoline engines ..................................
Automotive Refinishing .....................................................
Consumer & commercial products ...................................
AIM Surface Coatings .......................................................
1990 Base Year Emissions Inventory ..............................
Federal Rule .......................
Federal Rule .......................
Federal Rule .......................
Federal Rule .......................
Federal Rule .......................
Federal Rule .......................
Section 182 CAA Requirement.
Section 182 CAA Requirement.
Section 182 CAA Requirement.
1 Hour Emissions Statements ..........................................
Ozone Attainment Demonstration ....................................
Approval status
1-hour 15% VOC Rate of Progress Plan .........................
Section 182 CAA Requirement.
VOC RACT pursuant to sections 182(a)(2)(A) and
182(b)(2)(B) of CAA.
Section 182 CAA Requirement.
VOC RACT pursuant to sections 182(b)(2)(A) and (C) of
CAA.
NOX RACT ........................................................................
Section 182 CAA Requirement.
Section 182 CAA Requirement.
Promulgated at 40 CFR part 86.
Promulgated at 40 CFR part 89.
Promulgated at 40 CFR part 90.
Promulgated at 40 CFR part 59, subpart B.
Promulgated at 40 CFR part 59, subpart C.
Promulgated at 40 CFR part 59, subpart D.
SIP approved (62 FR 9081; 2/28/97).
SIP approved (60 FR 2524; 1/10/95).
Not required for the portion of the area that was classified as marginal under the 1-hour standard and the
requirement was waived do to clean air quality for
the portions of the area that was classified as moderate under the 1-hour standard (60 FR 29763; June
6, 1995.
Not required for the portion of the area that was classified as marginal under the 1-hour standard and the
requirement was waived do to clean air quality for
the portions of the area that was classified as moderate under the 1-hour standard (60 FR 29763, June
6, 1995).
SIPs approved (57 FR 3046; 2/13/92), (58 FR 15281;
3/22/93), (59 FR 31154; 6/17/94), (60 FR 33730; 6/
29/95).
SIP approved (65 FR 20749; 4/18/00), (67 FR 35439;
5/20/02).
SIP approved (67 FR 57154; 9/9/02).
TABLE 6A.—NEW SOURCE REVIEW PROGRAM AND OTHER CLEAN AIR ACT PROGRAMS IN THE MIDCOAST NONATTAINMENT
AREA
Name of measure
Type of measure
New Source Review .........................................................
Low RVP Gasoline applicable in Knox and Lincoln counties.
Solvent Cleaners ..............................................................
NOX Control Program .......................................................
Emissions from Smaller-Scale Electric Generating Resources.
Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings
Control of Emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds
from Consumer Products.
Mobile Equipment Repair and Refinishing .......................
Portable Fuel Container Spillage Control .........................
CAA Requirement ..............
State Initiative .....................
SIP approved (61 FR 5690; 2/14/96).
SIP approved (67 FR 10099; 3/6/02).
State Initiative .....................
State Initiative .....................
State Initiative .....................
SIP approved (70 FR 30367; 05/26/05).
SIP approved(70 FR 11879; 03/10/05).
SIP approved (70 FR 30373; 05/26/05).
State Initiative .....................
State Initiative .....................
SIP approved (71 FR 13767; 03/17/06).
SIP approved (70 FR 61382; 10/24/05).
State Initiative .....................
State Initiative .....................
SIP approved (70 FR 30367; 05/26/05).
SIP approved (70 FR 6352; 02/07/05).
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
4. The Midcoast Area Has a Fully
Approved Applicable SIP for Purposes
of Redesignation Under Section 110(k)
of the CAA
EPA has fully approved the applicable
Maine SIP for purposes of redesignation
for the Midcoast area under section
110(k) of the Act. EPA may rely on prior
SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request (See 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 25426 (May 12, 2003)
and citations therein. Following passage
VerDate Aug<31>2005
06:09 Oct 17, 2006
Jkt 211001
Approval status
of the CAA of 1970, Maine has adopted
and submitted and EPA has fully
approved at various times provisions
addressing the various SIP elements
applicable in the Midcoast area under
the 1-hour standard (see Table 6 and
Table 6a).
As indicated above, EPA believes that
the section 110 elements not connected
with 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 of the
Midcoast area have yet become due, and
therefore they need not be approved
into the SIP prior to redesignation.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
C. The Air Quality Improvement in the
Midcoast 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 Midcoast
area is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions
resulting from implementation of the
SIP, Federal measures, and other stateadopted measures. EPA approved
Maine’s SIP control strategy for the
Midcoast area, including rules and the
emission reductions achieved as a result
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
60949
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 17, 2006 / Proposed Rules
of those rules that are enforceable.
Several Federal and statewide rules are
in place which have improved the
ambient air quality in this area. (See
Tables 6 and 6a above for a list of
control measures and other CAA
requirements). The emission inventories
in the four counties that comprise the
Midcoast area show that between 2002
(the ozone season for which the area
was classified) and 2005 (the year they
came into attainment), VOC emissions
were reduced by over 4 tons per
summer day and NOX emissions were
reduced by over 8 tons per summer day.
Ozone precursor emissions were also
reduced in upwind states.
The Maine submittal discusses the
meteorological data for the years 2003,
2004 and 2005, and for many of the
years leading up to 2003. The Maine
submittal has numerous graphs and
charts of ozone data, ozone precursor
data, and meteorological data for the
Midcoast area. These data all support
the claim that the downward trend in
ozone data is not due to favorable
meteorology, but is due to permanent
and enforceable reductions in ozone
precursor emissions, both within the
state and upwind from the state. EPA
agrees with Maine’s analysis on ozone
trends. EPA agrees the downward trend
in ozone in Maine has been occurring
for several ozone seasons. The
meteorology for the Midcoast area
shows that for some of these ozone
seasons the summers have been warmer
than average, while others have been
cooler than average, but the weather
over the past several ozone seasons has
not been unfavorable to ozone
formation. In short, the air quality
improvement in the Midcoast 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, not favorable
meteorology. Therefore, EPA finds this
requirement is met for the Midcoast
area.
D. The Midcoast Area Has a Fully
Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant
to Section 175A of the CAA
In conjunction with its request to
redesignate the Midcoast nonattainment
area to attainment status, Maine
submitted a SIP revision to provide for
the maintenance of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS in the Midcoast area for at least
10 years after redesignation.
1. What Is Required in a Maintenance
Plan?
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth
the elements of 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 ten
years after the Administrator approves a
redesignation to attainment. Eight years
after the redesignation, the State must
submit a revised maintenance plan
which demonstrates that attainment will
continue to be maintained for the ten
years following the initial ten-year
period. 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.
2. What Is EPA’s Analysis of the
Midcoast Maintenance Plan?
(a) Attainment Inventory—Maine
selected 2005 as the attainment year for
purposes of demonstrating attainment of
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The 2005
VOC and NOX emission estimates for
the Midcoast area were developed
consistent with EPA guidance and are
summarized in Table 7 below. Point
source emissions were obtained using
2004 data collected pursuant to Maine’s
Chapter 137 Emission Statement
regulation; projections were made to
2005, 2009, and 2016 using economic
based growth factors. Non-road mobile
emissions were calculated using the
most recent NONROAD model. On-road
mobile source emissions were
calculated using MOBILE 6.2 for 2005,
2009, and 2016. Area source emissions
for 2002 were derived from Maine DEP’s
submittal made to the EPA’s national
emissions inventory (NEI) for 2002, and
modified as described in support
material submitted by Maine DEP to
EPA. The 2002 area emissions were then
projected to 2005, 2009, and 2016.
(b) Maintenance demonstration—
Maine’s August 3, 2006 SIP submittal
includes a 10-year maintenance plan for
the Midcoast area as required by section
175A of the Act. This demonstration
shows compliance and maintenance of
the 8-hour ozone standard by assuring
that current and future emissions of
VOC and NOX remain at or below
attainment year emission levels. A
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 25430–25432
(May 12, 2003).
Maine used 2005 as the base year,
2009 was chosen as the interim year and
2106 is the ‘‘out year,’’ which as
required is at least 10 years, after the
time necessary for EPA to review and
approve the maintenance plan. (In
addition per 40 CFR part 93, a MVEB
must be established for the last year of
the maintenance plan.) MVEBs for the
Midcoast area are discussed in Section
X below. Table 7 shows the Midcoast
area emissions inventories for 2005,
2009 and 2016. The emissions inventory
shows a downward trend in precursor
emissions data from 2005, through 2009
and continuing on until 2016. The
decreases in emissions are a
requirement of a maintenance plan.
Maine has fulfilled this requirement.
TABLE 7.—ATTAINMENT (2005), INTERIM (2009) AND MAINTENANCE (2016) INVENTORIES FOR THE MIDCOAST
NONATTAINMENT AREA (4 COUNTIES) 1
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
[All emissions expressed in tons per summer weekday (tpswd)]
2005
Category
VOC
Point ........................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
06:09 Oct 17, 2006
2009
2016
Subcategory
.................................................
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
1.520
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
NOX
4.530
VOC
1.640
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
NOX
5.360
17OCP1
VOC
1.840
NOX
6.080
60950
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 17, 2006 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 7.—ATTAINMENT (2005), INTERIM (2009) AND MAINTENANCE (2016) INVENTORIES FOR THE MIDCOAST
NONATTAINMENT AREA (4 COUNTIES) 1—Continued
[All emissions expressed in tons per summer weekday (tpswd)]
2005
Category
VOC
Area .........................................
Mobile ......................................
Mobile ......................................
Mobile ......................................
2009
2016
Subcategory
NOX
VOC
NOX
VOC
NOX
.................................................
Onroad 2 .................................
Nonroad ..................................
Locomotives ...........................
14.214
8.664
13.727
0.005
3.659
15.296
4.713
0.183
14.610
6.368
12.073
0.005
3.816
10.731
4.284
0.161
15.989
4.154
10.217
0.004
4.081
5.332
3.343
0.135
Total ........................................
38.130
28.381
34.696
24.352
32.204
18.971
..................
..................
¥3.434
¥4.029
¥5.926
¥9.41
Change in emissions from
2005.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
1 The emissions in the table are based on an inventory for four entire counties (Hancock, Knox, Lincoln and Waldo Counties) rather than the
somewhat smaller 55 town Midcoast nonattainment area. EPA believes it is reasonable to use countywide inventories for the purpose of this redesignation demonstration even though the nonattainment area itself includes the 55 towns in these four counties nearest the coast. The Agency
concludes that the distribution of emissions for each source category across the counties will generally track population, which is highest along
the coast. Therefore, the declining emissions trends reflected in this table for the four entire counties should generally be true for 55 town nonattainment area as well.
2 To provide a consistent comparison with the other source categories, these Mobile Onroad Inventory numbers are based on an inventory for
the entire four county area (Hancock, Knox, Lincoln and Waldo Counties) and are, therefore larger than motor vehicle emissions calculated for
the 55 Town Midcoast nonattainment area shown in Table 8.
(c) Monitoring Network—There are
currently three monitors measuring
ozone in the Midcoast area. The State of
Maine has committed in the
maintenance plan to the necessary
continued operation of the ozone
monitoring network in compliance with
40 CFR part 58, and has, therefore
addressed the requirement for
continued ozone monitoring in this
area.
(d) Verification of Continued
Attainment—The state has the legal
authority to enforce and implement the
requirements of the ozone maintenance
plan. This includes the authority to
adopt, implement and enforce any
subsequent emission control
contingency measures determined to be
necessary to correct future ozone
attainment problems. To implement the
ozone maintenance plan, the state will
continue to monitor ozone levels in the
area. Maine has also committed to track
the progress of the maintenance
demonstration by periodically updating
their emission inventory. Maine has
committed to do this annually. The
update will be based, in part, on the
annual update of the NEI, and will
indicate new source growth and other
changes from the attainment inventory,
including changes in vehicle miles
traveled or in traffic patterns and
changes in MOBILE6.2 or its successor.
(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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
06:09 Oct 17, 2006
Jkt 211001
EPA deems necessary to assure that the
state will promptly correct a violation of
the NAAQS that occurs after
redesignation. The maintenance plan
should identify the contingency
measures to be adopted, a schedule and
procedure for adoption and
implementation, and a time limit for
action by the state. The state should also
identify specific indicators to be used to
determine when the contingency
measures need to be implemented. The
maintenance plan must include a
requirement that the state will
implement all measures with respect to
control of the pollutant that were
contained in the SIP before
redesignation of the area to attainment.
Section 175A(d).
As stated in the Midcoast area
maintenance plan, the Maine DEP has
committed to the following procedure.
At the conclusion of each ozone season,
the Maine DEP will evaluate whether
the design value for the Midcoast area
is above or below the 8-hour ozone
standard. If the design value is above
the standard, the DEP will evaluate the
potential causes of this design value
increase. The DEP will examine whether
this increase is due to an increase in
local in-state emissions or an increase in
upwind out-of-state emissions. If an
increase in in-state emissions is
determined to be a contributing factor to
the design value increase, Maine will
evaluate the projected in-state emissions
for the Midcoast area for the ozone
season in the following year. If in-state
emissions are not expected to
satisfactorily decrease in the following
ozone season in order to mitigate the
violation, Maine will implement one or
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
more of the contingency measures listed
in this section, or substitute a new VOC
or NOX control measures to achieve
additional in-state emissions reductions.
The contingency measures(s) will be
selected by the Governor or the
Governor’s designee within 6 months of
the end of the ozone season for which
contingency measures have been
determined necessary. Possible
contingency measures include:
Adhesives
Establish VOC content limits for
industrial and commercial application
of solvent-based adhesives and sealants
based on California Air Resources Board
(CARB) suggested RACT controls (1998).
Asphalt Paving
Reduce the VOC content limit for
cutback asphalt from 5% to 4%, and
lower current VOC content limits for
emulsified asphalt by 20%.
Automobile Refinish Coatings
Adopt the VOC content limits
contained in the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District (BAAQMD)
regulations.
Consumer Products
Adopt and implement the July 20,
2005 California Air Resources Board
(CARB) regulations. These regulations
include emission limits for additional
consumer product categories that are
not included in Maine’s existing
Chapter 151 consumer products rule.
Rule Effectiveness Improvement
Increase enforcement of existing rules
in order to increase rule effectiveness.
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
60951
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 17, 2006 / Proposed Rules
Small Source Non-CTG VOC RACT
Reduce the major source and Chapter
134 non-CTG VOC RACT applicability
threshold from 40 to 10 tons per year of
actual emissions.
The Midcoast area 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. Therefore, EPA
believes that the maintenance plan SIP
revision submitted by Maine for the
Midcoast area meets the requirements of
section 175A of the Act.
X. What is the Status of EPA’s
Adequacy Determination for the
Midcoast area’s MVEB for the Year
2016?
The Midcoast area’s 10-year
maintenance plan submission contains
new VOC and NOX MVEBs for the year
2016, which are shown in Table 8. The
development of MVEBs and adequacy
determinations are explained in section
VII above. The availability of the SIP
submission with these 2016 MVEBs was
announced for public comment on
EPA’s adequacy Web page on August 8,
2006, at: https://www.epa.gov/otaq/
transp/conform/currsips.htm. The EPA
public comment period on adequacy of
the 2016 MVEBs for the Midcoast area
closed on September 7, 2006. EPA did
not receive any adverse comments. EPA
New England sent a letter to the Maine
Department of Environmental Protection
on September 8, 2006, stating that the
2016 MOBILE6.2 motor vehicle
emissions budgets in the August 3, 2006
SIP submittal are adequate.
40 CFR 93.118(b)(2) provides that
when a maintenance plan has been
submitted (as in this redesignation
request), motor vehicle emissions must
be less than or equal to the motor
vehicle emissions budgets established
for any other years for which the
maintenance plan establishes motor
vehicle emissions budgets. The Maine
DEP used the MOBILE 6.2 model to
calculate on-road VOC and NOX
emissions for the last year (year 2016) of
the Midcoast maintenance plan for the
55 towns that make up the Midcoast
maintenance area in Hancock, Knox,
Lincoln and Waldo Counties. Maine is
establishing motor vehicle emissions
budgets for the last year of the Midcoast
8-hour ozone maintenance area (year
2016) at 3.763 tons per summer week
day of VOC and 6.245 tons per summer
week day. These on-road mobile source
emissions when added to emissions
from all other inventory sources
(stationary, other mobile (i.e., non-road,
marine vessels, airplanes, locomotives)
and area sources) result in year 2016
emissions inventories lower than the
year 2005 attainment emissions
inventory.
EPA through this rulemaking is
proposing to approve these MVEBs for
use in determining transportation
conformity because EPA has determined
that the area maintains the standard
with emissions at the levels of the
budgets.
TABLE 8.—THE 2016 MVEBS FOR THE MIDCOAST 8-HOUR OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA (55 TOWNS)
[Emissions expressed in tons per summer day (tpswd)]
2005
2016
VOC
NOX
VOC
NOX
1.179 .......................................................................
8.568 .......................................................................
4.300
2.365
1.390
9.726
5.788
2.619
8.684 .......................................................................
0.009 .......................................................................
5.131 .......................................................................
2.689
0.224
8.923
6.439
0.009
2.442
1.987
0.191
3.103
Total Inventory ...........................................
23.571 .....................................................................
18.501
20.006
13.688
Total Safety Margin ...................................
MVEB:
Onroad ..............................................................
Plus Safety Margin applied to MVEB ...............
..................................................................................
..................
3.565
4.813
5.131 .......................................................................
..................................................................................
8.923
..................
2.442
1.321
3.103
3.142
Total MVEB ...............................................
..................................................................................
..................
3.763
6.245
Safety Margin Remaining ...................
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
Point .........................................................................
Area ..........................................................................
Mobile:
Nonroad ............................................................
Locomotives ......................................................
Onroad ..............................................................
..................................................................................
..................
2.244
1.671
As part of the maintenance plan for
the Midcoast area, Maine elected to
apply a portion of its ‘‘safety margin’’ to
its MVEBs. In this case, a ‘‘safety
margin’’ is the amount by which the
total projected ozone precursor
emissions, from all sources (point area
and mobile) are less than the total
emissions that would maintain the
ozone standard (i.e. the difference
between 2005 and 2016 precursor
emissions, with VOC and NOX treated
separately). The attainment level of
emissions is the level of emissions
during one of the years in which the
area met the NAAQS. For example, the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
06:09 Oct 17, 2006
Jkt 211001
Midcoast area attained the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS during the 2003–2005 time
period. Maine uses 2005 emissions as
the attainment level of emissions for the
area. The emissions from point, area,
nonroad, and mobile sources in 2005
equaled 23.571 tpswd of VOC for the
Midcoast area (see Table 8). Projected
VOC emissions from point, area,
nonroad, and mobile sources, out to the
year 2016, equals 20.006 tpswd of VOC.
The SIP demonstrates that the area will
continue to maintain the standard with
emissions at this level. The safety
margin for VOCs is calculated to be the
difference between the 2005 VOC
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
emissions (23.571 tpswd) and the 2016
VOC emissions (20.006 tpswd), in this
case, 3.565 tpswd is the VOC safety
margin for 2016. By this same method,
4.813 tpswd (i.e., 18.501 tpswd less
13.688 tpswd) is the safety margin for
NOX for 2016. The emissions are
projected to maintain the area’s air
quality consistent with the NAAQS. The
safety margin is the extra emissions that
can be allocated as long as the total
attainment level of emissions is
maintained. The credit, or a portion
thereof, can be allocated to any of the
source categories. For the year 2016, the
available safety margin (see Table 8) is
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
60952
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 200 / Tuesday, October 17, 2006 / Proposed Rules
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with PROPOSAL
3.565 tpswd for VOC and 4.813 tpswd
for NOX. After partial allocation of the
safety margin to the MVEB (1.321 tpswd
VOC and 3.142 tpswd NOX), the
remaining safety margins are 2.244
tpswd for VOC and 1.671 tpswd for
NOX. Maine has not yet allocated the
remaining safety margin to any source
category under its maintenance plan,
and the State will need to submit a SIP
revision to amend its maintenance plan
if in the future it decides to use any of
the remaining safety margin. The 2016
MVEBs for Midcoast area are approvable
because the MVEBs for NOX and VOC,
including the allocated safety margins,
when added to all other inventory
sources, continue to maintain the total
emissions at or below the attainment
year inventory levels as required by the
transportation conformity regulations.
XI. Proposed Actions on Maine’s
Redesignation Requests, 175
Maintenance Plan SIP Revisions, and
Associated MVEBs
EPA is proposing to determine that
both the Portland, Maine and the
Midcoast, Maine, 8-hour ozone
nonattainment areas have attained the 8hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also
proposing to approve the redesignation
of both the Portland, Maine and the
Midcoast, Maine 8-hour ozone
nonattainment areas from
nonattainment to attainment for the 8hour ozone NAAQS. EPA has evaluated
the State of Maine’s redesignation
requests and determined that they meet
the redesignation criteria set forth in
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA
believes that the redesignation requests
and monitoring data demonstrate that
these two areas have attained the 8-hour
ozone standard. The final approval of
this redesignation request would change
the official designation for both the
Portland, Maine and the Midcoast,
Maine 8-hour ozone nonattainment
areas from nonattainment to attainment
for the 8-hour ozone standard.
EPA is proposing to approve the
maintenance plan SIP revision and the
2016 MVEBs submitted by Maine for
both the Portland, Maine and the
Midcoast, Maine 8-hour ozone
nonattainment areas in conjunction
with the corresponding redesignation
requests. EPA is proposing to approve
the maintenance plan for both the
Portland, Maine and the Midcoast,
Maine 8-hour ozone nonattainment
areas, because they meet the
requirements of section 175A as
described more fully above.
EPA is soliciting public comments on
the issues discussed in this document.
These comments will be considered
before taking final action.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
06:09 Oct 17, 2006
Jkt 211001
XII. 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 proposed 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. 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
tribal implications because it will not
have a substantial direct effect on one or
more Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
as specified by Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). This action merely
proposes to affect the status of a
geographical area, does not impose any
new requirements on sources, or allows
a state to avoid adopting or
implementing other requirements, and
does not alter the relationship or the
distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Air Act. This proposed rule also is not
subject to Executive Order 13045
‘‘Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997),
because it is not economically
significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s
role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the
absence of a prior existing requirement
for the State to use voluntary consensus
standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove 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 but 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. This proposed
rule does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxides, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: October 8, 2006.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
[FR Doc. E6–17226 Filed 10–16–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Federal Emergency Management
Agency
44 CFR Part 67
[Docket No. FEMA–D–7676]
Proposed Flood Elevation
Determinations
Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA),
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\17OCP1.SGM
17OCP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 200 (Tuesday, October 17, 2006)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 60937-60952]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-17226]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R01-OAR-2006-0226; FRL-8231-7]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation
of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Maine; Redesignation of the
Portland, ME and the Hancock, Knox, Lincoln and Waldo Counties, Maine
8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Areas to Attainment for Ozone
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve: A request to redesignate two 8-
hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) nonattainment
areas to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS; and a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision containing a separate 10-year
maintenance plan for each area. The two areas are the Portland, Maine
8-hour ozone nonattainment area and the Hancock, Knox, Lincoln and
Waldo Counties (Midcoast), Maine 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. EPA
is also providing information on the status of its transportation
conformity adequacy determination for the new motor vehicle emissions
budgets (MVEBs) for the year 2016 that are contained in the 10-year 8-
hour ozone maintenance plans for each area. EPA is proposing to approve
MVEBs for both areas.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before November 16,
2006.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R01-OAR-2006-OAR-0226 by one of the following methods:
1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. E-mail: arnold.anne@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (617) 918-0047.
4. Mail: ``Docket Identification Number EPA-R01-OAR-2006-OAR-
0226'', Anne Arnold, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New
England Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (mail code
CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: Anne Arnold,
Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit, Office of Ecosystem Protection,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office,
One Congress Street, 11th floor, (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours
of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding legal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R01-OAR-
2006-OAR-0226. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be
included in the public docket without change and may be made available
online at 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 through
www.regulations.gov or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' systems, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through 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. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/
epahome/dockets.htm.
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 www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy at Air Quality Planning Unit, Office of Ecosystem
Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, One Congress Street, 11th floor, (CAQ), Boston, MA
02114-2023. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
[[Page 60938]]
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding legal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard P. Burkhart, Air Quality
Planning Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAQ), Boston, MA
02114-2023, telephone number (617) 918-1664, fax number (617) 918-0664,
e-mail Burkhart.Richard@epa.gov.
General Information
A. How Can I Get Copies of This Document and Other Related Information?
In addition to the publicly available docket materials available
for inspection electronically in the Federal Docket Management System
at www.regulations.gov, and the hard copy available at the Regional
Office, which are identified in the ADDRESSES section of this Federal
Register, copies of the state submittal and EPA's technical support
document are also available for public inspection during normal
business hours, by appointment at the State Air Agency: The Bureau of
Air Quality Control, Department of Environmental Protection, First
Floor of the Tyson Building, Augusta Mental Health Institute Complex,
Augusta, ME 04333-0017.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What is EPA Proposing?
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 Portland Redesignation Request?
VII. How are MVEBs Developed and What is an Adequacy Determination?
VIII. What is the Status of EPA's Adequacy Determination for the
Portland Area's MVEBs for the Year 2016?
IX. What is EPA's Analysis of the Midcoast Redesignation Request?
X. What is the Status of EPA's Adequacy Determination for the
Midcoast Area's MVEBs for the Year 2016?
XI. Proposed Actions on Maine's Redesignation Requests, 175
Maintenance Plans, and Associated MVEBs.
XII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.
I. What Is EPA Proposing?
EPA is proposing to take several related actions. EPA is proposing
to determine that both the Portland and the Midcoast, Maine 8-hour
ozone nonattainment areas have attained the 8-hour ozone standard. EPA
is also proposing to approve a request to change the legal designation
of the two areas from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). In addition, EPA is
proposing to approve a 10-year maintenance plan for each area and motor
vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for each area.
The Portland nonattainment area is located in southern Maine. The
Portland nonattainment area consists of 57 coastal towns and cities
located in York County (partial), Cumberland County (partial),
Sagadahoc County (full) along with Durham, Maine, a town in
Androscoggin County. The Portland area is designated as ``marginal''
nonattainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. (See 40 CFR 81.320) The
Midcoast area is located north of the Portland area and consists of 55
coastal towns and islands in Hancock, Knox, Lincoln, and Waldo Counties
(all are partial Counties), and is designated as ``subpart 1, basic''
for the 8-hour ozone standard. (See 40 CFR 81.320)
II. What Is the Background for These Proposed Actions?
The CAA required EPA to designate as nonattainment any area that
was violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the three most recent
years (2001-2003) of air quality data. The Federal Register notice
making these designations was signed on April 15, 2004, and published
on April 30, 2004, (69 FR 23857). The CAA contains two sets of
provisions--subpart 1 and subpart 2-- that address planning and control
requirements for nonattainment areas. (Both are found in Title I, Part
D of the CAA.) Subpart 1 (which EPA refers to as ``basic''
nonattainment) contains general, less prescriptive, requirements for
nonattainment areas for any pollutant--including ozone--governed by a
NAAQS. Subpart 2 (which EPA refers to as ``classified'' nonattainment)
provides more specific requirements for ozone nonattainment areas. Some
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 Table 1 of subpart 2). All other
areas are covered under subpart 1, based upon their 8-hour design
values. The Portland and Midcoast areas were designated as 8-hour ozone
nonattainment areas by EPA on April 30, 2004, (69 FR 23857). The 2004
classification for the Portland 8-hour ozone nonattainment area is
based on air quality monitoring data from 2001-2003. The Portland area
is classified as marginal. The 2004 classification for the Midcoast 8-
hour ozone nonattainment area is also based on air quality monitoring
data from 2001-2003. The Midcoast area is classified as subpart 1,
basic.
Control requirements are linked to each classification. Areas with
more serious ozone pollution are subject to more prescribed
requirements. The requirements are designed to bring areas into
attainment by their specified attainment dates. The control
requirements and dates by which attainment needs to be achieved vary
with the area's classification. For example, marginal areas are subject
to the fewest mandated control requirements and have the earliest
attainment date. Under EPA regulations at 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 ozone concentrations is
less than or equal to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm). (See 69 FR 23857
(April 30, 2004) for further information.) The data completeness
requirement is met when the average percent of days with valid ambient
monitoring data is greater than 90%, and no single year has less than
75% data completeness as determined in Appendix I of 40 CFR part 50.
On August 3, 2006, Maine requested redesignation to attainment for
the 8-hour ozone standard for the both areas. The redesignation request
includes three years of complete, quality-assured data for the period
of 2003 through 2005, indicating the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone had been
achieved for the both areas. The data satisfies the CAA requirements
when 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.
Under the CAA, nonattainment areas may be redesignated to attainment if
sufficient complete, quality-assured data is available for the
Administrator to determine that the area has attained the standard and
the area meets the other CAA redesignation requirements in section
107(d)(3)(E).
[[Page 60939]]
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) 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 (TSD's) 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 August 3, 2006,\1\ the state requested redesignation of the both
the Portland, Maine and the Midcoast, Maine 8-hour ozone nonattainment
areas to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. EPA believes that
both areas have attained the standard and have met the requirements for
redesignation set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E). EPA is proposing to
approve the maintenance plans to fulfill the requirements of section
175(A). EPA is also proposing to approve the MVEB's for these two
areas. EPA has previously determined that the 2016 budgets are
adequate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The ME DEP submitted the redesignation request on August 3,
2006. The submittal showed evidence of a public hearing, but did not
include the public hearing transcript, which was not available at
that time. The ME DEP submitted the public transcript on August 30,
2006. The transcript is available in the docket for this action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?
Approval of the redesignation request would change the official
designation of both the Portland and the Midcoast, Maine 8-hour ozone
nonattainment areas for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS found at 40 CFR 81.320.
It would also incorporate into the Maine SIP plans for maintaining the
8-hour ozone NAAQS through 2016, for both areas. The maintenance plans
include contingency measures to remedy future violations of the 8-hour
NAAQS. In addition MVEBs are established for the year 2016. The MVEBs
will be used to assure that plans for the area's transportation system
which effect vehicle miles traveled, do not cause motor vehicle
emissions in excess of levels consistent with maintaining attainment of
the NAAQS.
VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Portland Redesignation Request?
EPA is proposing to determine that the Portland nonattainment area
has attained the 8-hour ozone standard and that all other redesignation
criteria have been met. The basis for EPA's proposed determination is
as outlined below.
A. The Portland Area Has Attained the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
EPA is proposing to determine that the Portland area has attained
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. For ozone, an area is attaining the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS if there are no violations, as determined in accordance
with 40 CFR 50.10 and Appendix I, 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 an area over each year must not exceed 0.08 ppm. This 3-year
average is known as the design value. 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
EPA's Air Quality Data System (AQS). The monitors generally should have
remained at the same location for the duration of the monitoring period
required for demonstrating attainment.
Maine submitted ozone monitoring data for the April through
September ozone season from 2003 to 2005. This data has been quality
assured and is recorded in AQS. The data are summarized in Table 1:
[[Page 60940]]
Table 1.--8-hour Ozone (Parts Per Million, ppm) for the Portland Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4th High 8-hr ozone average 3-Year average
Monitor County ------------------------------------------------ (design
2003 2004 2005 value)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kittery....................... York............ 0.080 0.080 0.072 0.077
Kennebunkport................. York............ 0.076 0.076 0.072 0.074
West Buxton................... York............ 0.069 0.075 0.076 0.073
Cape Elizabeth................ Cumberland...... 0.073 0.068 0.073 0.072
Reid State Park............... Sagadahoc....... 0.074 0.069 0.068 0.070
Area Design Value............. ................ .............. .............. .............. 0.077
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The design value for an area is the highest design value recorded
at any monitor in the area. Therefore, as shown in Table 1, the design
value for the Portland area is 0.077 ppm, which meets the standard as
described above. Preliminary ozone data for the summer of 2006 still
show the area as being in attainment.
In addition, as discussed below with respect to the maintenance
plan, Maine has committed to continue monitoring in these areas in
accordance with 40 CFR Part 58. In summary, EPA believes that the data
submitted by Maine provides an adequate demonstration that the Portland
area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
B. The Portland Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements for Purposes
of Redesignation Under Section 110 and Part D of the CAA and the Area
Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) for Purposes of
Redesignation
EPA has determined that Maine has met all applicable SIP
requirements for the Portland area for purposes of redesignation under
section 110 of the CAA (general SIP requirements). EPA has also
determined that the Maine SIP meets applicable SIP requirements for
purposes of redesignation under Part D of Title I of the CAA
(requirements specific to marginal nonattainment areas, see section
107(d)(3)(E)(v)). In addition, EPA has determined that the Maine SIP is
fully approved with respect to all applicable requirements for purposes
of redesignation (see section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)). In making these
determinations, EPA ascertained what requirements are applicable to the
area and that they are fully approved under section 110(k). SIPs must
be fully approved only with respect to applicable requirements.
The September 4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum (see ``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). Under this interpretation, to qualify for redesignation,
states requesting redesignation to attainment must meet 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, MI). 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 (May 12, 2003).
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 emission 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.
General SIP elements and requirements are delineated in section
110(a)(2) of Title I, part A of the CAA. These requirements 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) and provisions for the
implementation of part D requirements (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 classification 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 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
conformity and oxygenated fuels requirements, as well as with section
184 ozone transport requirements. See Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed
and final rulemakings (61 FR 53174-53176, October 10, 1996), (62 FR
24826, May 7, 1997); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio, final rulemaking (61
FR 20458, May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida, final rulemaking at (60 FR
62748, December 7, 1995). See also the discussion on this issue in the
Cincinnati redesignation (65
[[Page 60941]]
FR 37890, June 19, 2000), and in the Pittsburgh redesignation (66 FR
50399, October 19, 2001).
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, since, as
explained below, no Part D requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation under the 8-hour standard became due prior to submission
of the redesignation request, except for the submission of the 2002
base year inventory, which Maine has submitted and EPA has approved (71
FR 14815; March 24, 2006). Therefore EPA believes that the State 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 Portland area was designated a marginal 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. Section 182 of the CAA, found in subpart 2 of
Part D, establishes additional specific requirements depending on the
area's nonattainment classification. For a marginal nonattainment area
for the 8-hour standard, such as the Portland area, section 182(a) sets
forth requirements. Section 184 also sets forth additional requirements
for this area, due to its location within the Ozone Transport Region
(OTR).
With respect to the 8-hour standard, EPA has to determined that the
Maine 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, except for the submission of the 2002
base year inventory, which Maine has submitted and EPA has approved (71
FR 14815; March 24, 2006). Under part D, an area's classification
(marginal, moderate, serious, severe, and extreme) indicates the
requirements to which it will be subject. Subpart 1 of part D, found in
sections 172-176 of the CAA, sets forth the basic nonattainment
requirements applicable to all nonattainment areas. Subpart 2 of part
D, found in section 182 of the CAA, establishes additional specific
requirements depending on the area's nonattainment classification.
For purposes of evaluating this redesignation request, the
applicable part D, subpart 1 requirements for all nonattainment areas
are contained in section 172(c)(1)-(9). A thorough discussion of the
requirements contained in section 172 can be found in the General
Preamble for Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498). (See also 68 FR
4852-3 in St. Louis NPR for discussion of section 172 requirements.) In
addition to the fact that certain Part D requirements applicable for
purposes of redesignation did not become due prior to submission of the
redesignation request, EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the
conformity, new source review requirements, and OTR requirements as not
requiring approval prior to redesignation.
Section 176(c) of the CAA requires states to establish criteria and
procedures to ensure the 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) because 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 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding this interpretation. See also
60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995) (Tampa, FL).
Maine has a fully approved NSR program (61 FR 5690; Februrary 14,
1996). Even if Maine did not have a fully approved NSR program, EPA has
interpreted the section 184 OTR requirements, including NSR, as not
being applicable for purposes of redesignation. The rationale for this
is based on two factors. First, the requirement to submit SIP revisions
for the section 184 requirements continues to apply to areas in the OTR
after redesignation to attainment. Therefore, the State remains
obligated to have New Source Review, as well as reasonably available
control requirements (RACT) and Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/
M) programs even after redesignation. Second, the section 184 control
measures are region-wide requirements and do not apply to the area by
virtue of its designation and classification. See 61 FR 53174, 53175-
53176 (October 10, 1996) and 62 FR 24826, 24830-32 (May 7, 1997). Thus,
EPA proposes to find that the Portland area has satisfied all 8-hour
ozone standard requirements applicable for purposes of section
107(d)(3)(E) under Part D of the CAA.
3. Part D Nonattainment Area Requirements Under the 1-Hour Standard and
EPA's Anti-Backsliding Rules
Prior to its designation as an 8-hour ozone nonattainment area, the
Portland area was designated moderate for the 1-hour ozone standard.
While, on June 15, 2005, the 1-hour ozone standard was revoked (see 40
CFR 50.9(b)), under EPA's anti-backsliding rules, areas designated
nonattainment for the 1-hour standard at the time of the 8-hour ozone
designations remained subject to certain control measures that applied
by virtue of the area's classification for the 1-hour NAAQS. 40 CFR
51.900 et seq., see also 70 FR 30592, 30604 (May 26, 2005). The
applicable Part D 1-hour standard requirements for purposes of
redesignation are those that continue to apply under EPA's anti-
backsliding rules, which were promulgated in conjunction with the
implementation of the 8-hour NAAQS. 40 CFR 51.900 et seq., as amended
70 FR 30592, 30604 (May 26, 2005).
40 CFR 51.905(a)(1) prescribes the 1-hour NAAQS requirements that
continue to apply after revocation of the 1-hour NAAQS to former 1-hour
ozone nonattainment areas. Section 51.905(a)(1)(i) provides that:
``The area remains subject to the obligation to adopt and implement
the applicable requirements as defined in section 51.900(f), except as
provided in paragraph (a)(1)(iii) of this section, and except as
provided in paragraph (b) of this section * * *.'' Section 51.900(f),
as amended by 70 FR 30592, 30604 (May 26, 2005), states that:
``Applicable Requirements means for an area the following requirements
to the extent such requirements apply or applied to the area for the
area's classification under section 181(a)(1) of the CAA for the 1-hour
NAAQS at the time the Administrator signs a final rule designating the
area for the 8-hour standard as nonattainment, attainment, or
unclassifiable.'' For a former 1-hour moderate area, such as Portland,
the applicable requirements are as follows:
[[Page 60942]]
(1) Reasonably available control technology (RACT);
(2) Inspection and maintenance programs (I/M);
(3) Major source applicability cut-offs for purposes of RACT;
(4) Rate of Progress (ROP) Reductions;
(5) NOX requirements under section 182(f) of the CAA;
and
(6) Attainment demonstration or an alternative as provided under
Sec. 51.905(a)(1)(ii).
Table 2 lists the control measures, effective in the Portland area.
The table shows how the applicable requirements have been met for the
Portland area. Thus, EPA believes that Portland has met all applicable
Part D requirements under the 1-hour standard for purposes of
redesignation under the 8-hour standard. In addition, Table 2a lists
other programs Maine has implemented to address emissions of ozone
precursors.
Table 2.--Control Measures in the Portland Ozone Nonattainment Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name of measure Type of measure Approval status
------------------------------------------------------------------------
On-board refueling vapor Federal Rule..... Promulgated at 40 CFR
recovery. part 86.
Federal motor vehicle control Federal Rule..... Promulgated at 40 CFR
program. part 86.
Federal non-road heavy duty Federal Rule..... Promulgated at 40 CFR
diesel engines. part 89.
Federal non-road gasoline Federal Rule..... Promulgated at 40 CFR
engines. part 90.
Automotive refinishing........ Federal Rule..... Promulgated at 40 CFR
part 59, subpart B.
Consumer & commercial products Federal Rule..... Promulgated at 40 CFR
part 59, subpart C.
AIM Surface Coatings.......... Federal Rule..... Promulgated at 40 CFR
part 59, subpart D.
1990 Base Year Emissions Section 182 CAA SIP approved (62 FR
Inventory. Requirement. 9081; 2/28/97).
2002 Base Year Emissions Section 182 CAA SIP approved (71 FR
Inventory. Requirement. 14815; 3/24/06).
1-Hour Emissions Statements... Section 182 CAA SIP approved (60 FR
Requirement. 2524; 1/10/95).
5% Reduction Plan in Lieu of 1- Section 182 CAA SIP approved (71 FR
Hour Ozone Attainment Requirement. 14815, 3/24/06).
Demonstration.
15% VOC Reduction Plan........ Section 182 CAA SIP approved (71 FR
Requirement. 14815, 3/24/06).
VOC RACT pursuant to sections Section 182 CAA SIPs approved (57 FR
182(a)(2)(A) and 182(b)(2)(B) Requirement. 3046; 2/13/92), (58
of CAA. FR 15281; 3/22/93),
(59 FR 31154; 6/17/
94), (60 FR 33730; 6/
29/95).
VOC RACT pursuant to sections Section 182 CAA SIPs approved (65 FR
182(b)(2)(A) and (C) of CAA. Requirement. 20749; 4/18/00), (67
FR 35439; 5/20/02).
NOX RACT...................... Section 182 CAA SIP approved (67 FR
Requirement. 57154; 9/9/02).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2a.--New Source Review Program and Other Clean Air Act Programs in
the Portland Ozone Nonattainment Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name of measure Type of measure Approval status
------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Source Review............. CAA Requirement.. SIP approved (61 FR
5690; 2/14/96).
Vehicle Inspection and Ozone Transport SIP approved (66 FR
Maintenance Program. Region 1871; 1/10/01).
Requirement.
Stage II Vapor Recovery....... Ozone Transport SIP approved (61 FR
Region 53636; 10/15/96).
Requirement.
Low RVP Gasoline.............. State Initiative. SIP approved (67 FR
10099; 3/6/02).
Solvent Cleaners.............. State Initiative. SIP approved (70 FR
30367; 05/26/05).
NOX Control Program........... State Initiative. SIP approved (70 FR
11879; 03/10/05).
Emissions from Smaller-Scale State Initiative. SIP approved (70 FR
Electric Generating Resources. 30373; 05/26/05).
Architectural and Industrial State Initiative. SIP approved (71 FR
Maintenance (AIM) Coatings. 13767; 03/17/06).
Control of Emissions of State Initiative. SIP approved (70 FR
Volatile Organic Compounds 61382; 10/24/05).
from Consumer Products.
Mobile Equipment Repair and State Initiative. SIP approved (70 FR
Refinishing. 30367; 05/26/05).
Portable Fuel Container State Initiative. SIP approved (70 FR
Spillage Control. 6352; 02/07/05).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. The Portland Area has a Fully Approved Applicable SIP for Purposes
of Redesignation under Section 110(k) of the CAA
EPA has fully approved the applicable Maine SIP for purposes of
redesignation for the Portland area under section 110(k) of the CAA.
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 25426 (May 12, 2003)
and citations therein. Following passage of the CAA of 1970, Maine has
adopted and submitted and EPA has fully approved at various times
provisions addressing the various SIP elements applicable in the
Portland area under the 1-hour standard (see Table 2).
As indicated above, EPA believes that the section 110 elements not
connected with 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
[[Page 60943]]
for purposes of redesignation have yet become due, except for the
submission of the 2002 base year inventory, which Maine has submitted
and EPA has approved (71 FR 14815 (March 24, 2006)), and therefore they
need not be approved into SIP prior to redesignation.
C. The Air Quality Improvement in the Portland 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 Portland area is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of
the SIP, Federal measures, and other state-adopted measures. EPA
approved Maine's SIP control strategy for the Portland area, including
rules and the emission reductions achieved as a result of those rules
that are enforceable. Several Federal and statewide rules are in place
which have improved the ambient air quality in this area. (See Tables 2
and 2a above for a list of control measures and other CAA
requirements.) The emission inventories for the Portland area show that
between 2002 (the ozone season for which the area was classified) and
2005 (the year the area came into attainment), VOC emissions were
reduced by over 10 tons per summer day and NOX emissions
were reduced by over 19 tons per summer day. Ozone precursor emissions
were also reduced in upwind states.
The Maine submittal discusses the meteorological data for the years
2003, 2004 and 2005, and for many of the years leading up to 2003. The
Maine submittal has numerous graphs and charts of ozone data, ozone
precursor data, and meteorological data for the Portland area. These
data all support the claim that the downward trend in ozone data is not
due to favorable meteorology, but is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in ozone precursor emissions, both within the state and
upwind from the state. EPA agrees with Maine's analysis on ozone
trends. EPA agrees the downward trend in ozone in Maine has been
occurring for several ozone seasons. The meteorology for the Portland
area shows that for some of these ozone seasons the summers have been
warmer than average, while others have been cooler than average, but
the weather over the past several ozone seasons has not been
unfavorable to ozone formation. In short, the air quality improvement
in the Portland 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, not favorable meteorology. Therefore, EPA finds
this requirement is met for the Portland area.
D. The Portland Area Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to
Section 175A of the CAA
In conjunction with its request to redesignate the Portland
nonattainment area to attainment status, Maine submitted a SIP revision
to provide for the maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the
Portland area for at least 10 years after redesignation.
1. 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 ten years after the Administrator
approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after the
redesignation, the State must submit a revised maintenance plan which
demonstrates that attainment will continue to be maintained for the ten
years following the initial ten-year period. 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.
2. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Portland Maintenance Plan?
(a) Attainment Emissions Inventory--Maine selected 2005 as the
attainment year for purposes of demonstrating attainment of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. The 2005 VOC and NOX emission estimates for the
Portland area were developed consistent with EPA guidance and are
summarized in Table 3 below. Point source emissions were obtained using
2004 data collected pursuant to Maine's Chapter 137 Emission Statement
regulation; projections were made to 2005, 2009, and 2016 using
economic-based growth factors. Non-road mobile emissions were
calculated using the most recent NONROAD Model. On-road mobile source
emissions were calculated using MOBILE 6.2 for 2005, 2009, and 2016.
Area source emissions for 2002 were derived from Maine DEP's submittal
made to the EPA's national emissions inventory (NEI) for 2002, and
modified as described in support material submitted by Maine DEP to
EPA. The 2002 area emissions were then projected to 2005, 2009, and
2016.
(b) Maintenance demonstration--Maine's August 3, 2006 SIP submittal
includes a 10-year maintenance plan for the Portland area as required
by section 175A of the Act. This demonstration shows compliance and
maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard by assuring that current and
future emissions of VOC and NOX remain at or below
attainment year emission levels. A 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 25430-25432 (May 12,
2003).
Maine used 2005 as the base year, 2009 was chosen as the interim
year and 2016 is the ``out year,'' which as required, is at least 10
years after the time necessary for EPA to review and approve the
maintenance plan. (In addition, per 40 CFR part 93, a MVEB must be
established for the last year of the maintenance plan. MVEBs are
discussed in Section VII below.) Table 3 shows the emissions
inventories for 2005, 2009 and 2016, for the Portland area. The
emissions inventory shows a downward trend in precursor emissions data
from 2005, through 2009 and continuing on until 2016. The decreases in
emissions are a requirement of a maintenance plan. Maine has fulfilled
this requirement.
[[Page 60944]]
Table 3.--Attainment (2005), Interim (2009) and Maintenance (2016) Inventories for the Portland Nonattainment
Area (3 Counties) \1\
[All emissions expressed in tons per summer week day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2005 2005 2009
Category Subcategory VOC NOX VOC 2009 NOX 2016 NOX 2016 NOX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point......................... ................. 4.220 10.480 4.540 11.140 5.350 12.990
Area.......................... ................. 41.557 6.301 42.579 6.491 47.331 6.723
Mobile........................ Onroad \2\....... 27.033 55.328 20.018 38.849 13.243 19.078
Mobile........................ Nonroad.......... 20.592 12.020 17.917 10.170 15.560 6.801
Mobile........................ Locomotives...... 0.030 0.849 0.027 0.747 0.024 0.620
--------------------------------------------------------------
Total..................... ................. 93.432 84.978 85.081 67.397 81.508 46.212
rChange in emissions from ................. ........ ........ -8.351 -17.581 -11.924 -38.766
2005.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
r\1\ The emissions in the table are based on an inventory for three entire counties (Cumberland, Sagadahoc, and
York Counties) rather than the somewhat smaller 57 town Portland nonattainment area. EPA believes it is
reasonable to use countywide inventories for the purpose of this redesignation demonstration even though the
nonattainment area itself includes the 57 towns in these three counties nearest the coast. The Agency
concludes that the distribution of emissions for each source category across the counties will generally track
population, which is highest along the coast. Therefore, the declining emissions trends reflected in this
table for the three entire counties should generally be true for 57 town nonattainment area as well.
\2\ To provide a consistent comparison with the other source categories, the mobile onroad inventory numbers are
based on an inventory for three entire counties (Cumberland, Sagadahoc and York Counties) and are therefore
larger than motor vehicle emissions calculated for the 57 town Portland nonattainment area shown in Table 4.
(c) Monitoring Network--There are currently 5 monitors measuring
ozone in the Portland area. The State of Maine has committed in the
maintenance plan to the necessary continued operation of the ozone
monitoring network in compliance with 40 CFR Part 58, and has,
therefore, addressed the requirement for continued ozone monitoring in
this area.
(d) Verification of Continued Attainment--The state has the legal
authority to enforce and implement the requirements of the ozone
maintenance plan. This includes the authority to adopt, implement and
enforce any subsequent emission control contingency measures determined
to be necessary to correct future ozone attainment problems. To
implement the ozone maintenance plan, the state will continue to
monitor ozone levels in the area. Maine has also committed to track the
progress of the maintenance demonstration by periodically updating
their emission inventory. Maine has committed to do this annually. The
update will be based, in part, on the annual update of the NEI, and
will indicate new source growth and other changes from the attainment
inventory, including changes in vehicle miles traveled or in traffic
patterns and changes in MOBILE6.2 or its successor.
(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 assure that the state will promptly correct a violation of
the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The maintenance plan should
identify the contingency measures to be adopted, a schedule and
procedure for adoption and implementation, and a time limit for action
by the state. The state should also identify specific indicators to be
used to determine when the contingency measures need to be implemented.
The maintenance plan must include a requirement that the state will
implement all measures with respect to control of the pollutant that
were contained in the SIP before redesignation of the area to
attainment (see section 175A(d)).
As stated in the Portland area maintenance plan, the Maine DEP has
committed to the following procedure. At the conclusion of each ozone
season, the Maine DEP will evaluate whether the design value for the
Portland area is above or below the 8-hour ozone standard. If the
design value is above the standard, the DEP will evaluate the potential
causes of this design value increase. The DEP will examine whether this
increase is due to an increase in local in-state emissions or an
increase in upwind out-of-state emissions. If an increase in in-state
emissions is determined to be a contributing factor to the design value
increase, Maine will evaluate the projected in-state emissions for the
Portland area for the ozone season in the following year. If in-state
emissions are not expected to satisfactorily decrease in the following
ozone season in order to mitigate the violation, Maine will implement
one or more of the contingency measures listed in this section, or
substitute a new VOC or NOX control measure(s) to achieve
additional in-state emissions reductions.
The contingency measures(s) will be selected by the Governor or the
Governor's designee within 6 months of the end of the ozone season for
which contingency measures have been determined necessary. Possible
contingency measures include:
Adhesives
Establish VOC content limits for industrial and commercial
application of solvent-based adhesives and sealants based on California
Air Resources Board (CARB) suggested RACT controls (1998).
Asphalt Paving
Reduce the VOC content limit for cutback asphalt from 5% to 4%, and
lower current VOC content limits for emulsified asphalt by 20%.
Automobile Refinish Coatings
Adopt the VOC content limits contained in the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District (BAAQMD) regulations.
Consumer Products
Adopt and implement the July 20, 2005 CARB regulations. These
regulations include emission limits for additional consumer product
categories that are not included in Maine's existing Chapter 151
consumer products rule.
Rule Effectiveness Improvement
Increase enforcement of existing rules in order to increase rule
effectiveness.
[[Page 60945]]
Small Source Non-CTG VOC RACT
Reduce the major source and Chapter 134 non-CTG VOC RACT
applicability threshold from 40 to 10 tons per year of actual
emissions.
The Portland area 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. Therefore, EPA believes
that the maintenance plan SIP revision submitted by Maine for the
Portland area meets the requirements of section 175A of the Act.
VII. How are MVEBs Developed and What is an Adequacy Determination?
Under the CAA, states are required to submit, at various times,
control strategy SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone areas. These
control strategy SIPs (e.g. reasonable further progress SIPs and
attainment demonstration SIPs) and maintenance plans create MVEBs for
criteria pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution from
cars and trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, a MVEB is established for the last
year of the maintenance plan. The MVEB is the portion of the total
allowable emissions that is allocated to highway and transit vehicle
use and emissions. The 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 the MVEB in the SIP and revise the MVEB.
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
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 SIP.
When reviewing submitted ``control strategy'' SIPs or maintenance
plans containing MVEBs, EPA must affirmatively find the MVEB budget
contained therein ``adequate'' for use in determining transportation
conformity. Once 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 SIP as required by section 176(c) of the
Act. EPA's substantive criteria for determining ``adequacy'' of an MVEB
are set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4).
VIII. What is the Status of EPA's Adequacy Determination for the
Portland Area's MVEB for the Year 2016?
The Portland area's 10-year maintenance plan submission contains
new VOC and NOX MVEBs for the year 2016, which are shown in
Table 4. The availability of the SIP submission with these 2016 MVEBs
was announced for public comment on EPA's adequacy web page on August
8, 2006, at: https://www.epa.gov/otaq/transp/conform/
currsips.htm. The EPA public comment period on adequacy of the
2016 MVEBs for the Portland area closed on September 7, 2006. EPA did
not receive any adverse comments. EPA New England sent a letter to the
Maine Department of Environmental Protection on September 8, 2006,
stating that the 2016 MOBILE 6.2 motor vehicle emissions budgets in the
August 3, 2006 SIP submittal are adequate.
Additionally, EPA through this rulemaking is proposing to approve
those MVEBs for use in determining transportation conformity because
EPA has determined that the area maintains the standard with emissions
at the levels of the budgets. The Maine DEP utilized the MOBILE 6.2
model to calculate on-road emissions of VOC and NOX for the
57 towns in York, Cumberland, Sagadahoc and Androscoggin County
comprising the 8-hour nonattainment area. Maine is establishing motor
vehicle emissions budgets for the last year of the Portland 8-hour
ozone maintenance plan (year 2016) at 16.659 tons per summer weekday
(tpswd) of VOC and 32.837 tpswd of NOX. These on-road mobile
source emissions when added to emissions from all other inventory
sources (stationary, other mobile (i.e., non-road, marine vessels,
airplanes, locomotives) and area sources) result in year 2016 emissions
inventories lower than the year 2005 attainment emissions inventory.
These emissions budgets, once approved by EPA must be used for future
transportation conformity determinations.
Table 4.--The 2016 MVEBs for the Portland 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area (57 Towns)
[Emissions expressed in tons per summer weekday (tpswd)]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2005 VOC 2005 NOX 2016 VOC 2016 OX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point........................................................... 3.669 8.210 4.627 10.118
Area............................................................ 33.433 5.207 38.118 5.596
Mobile:
Nonroad..................................................... 17.401 10.556 13.146 5.545
Locomotives................................................. 0.015 0.423 0.013 0.342
Onroad...................................................... 22.476 46.776 11.032 16.098
-----------------------------------------------
Total Inventory......................................... 76.994 71.172 66.936 37.699
-----------------------------------------------
Total Safety Margin............................................. .......... .......... 10.058 33.473
MVEB:
Onroad...................................................... 22.476 46.776 11.032 16.098
Plus Safety Margin applied to MVEB.......................... .......... .......... 5.627 16.739
-----------------------------------------------
Total MVEB.............................................. .......... .......... 16.659 32.837
-----------------------------------------------
Safety Margin Remaining......................................... .......... .......... 4.431 16.734
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 60946]]
As part of its maintenance plan, Maine elected to apply a portion
of its ``safety margin'' to its MVEBs. In this case, a ``safety
margin'' is the amount by which the total projected ozone precursor
emissions, from all sources (point, area and mobile) are less than the
total emissions that would maintain the ozone standard (i.e. the
difference between 2005 and 2016 precursor emissions, with VOC and
NOX treated separately). The attainment level of emissions
is the level of emissions during one of the years in which the area met
the NAAQS. For example, the Portland area attained the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS during the 2003-2005 time period. Maine uses 2005 emissions as
the attainment level of emissions for the area. The emissions from
point, area, nonroad, and mobile sources in 2005 equaled 76.994 tpswd
of VOC for the Portland area (see Table 4). Projected VOC emissions
from point, area, nonroad, and mobile sources, out to the year 2016,
equals 66.936 tpswd of VOC. The SIP demonstrates that the area will
continue to maintain the standard with emissions at this level. The
safety margin for VOCs is calculated to be the difference between the
2005 VOC emissions (76.994 tpswd) and the 2016 VOC emissions (66.936
tpswd), in this case, 10.058 tpswd is the VOC safety margin for 2016.
By this same method, 33.473 tpswd (i.e., 71.172 tpswd less 37.699
tpswd) is the safety margin for NOX for 2016. The emissions
are projected to maintain the area's air quality consistent with the
NAAQS. The safety margin is the extra emissions that can be allocated
as long as the total attainment level of emissions is maintained. The
credit, or a portion thereof, can be allocated to any of the source
categories. For the year 2016, the available safety margin (see Table
4) is 10.058 tpswd for VOC and 33.473 tpswd for NOX. After
partial allocation of the safety margin to the MVEB (5.627 tpswd VOC
and 16.739 tpswd NOX), the remaining safety margins are
4.431 tpswd for VOC and 16.734 tpswd for NOX. Maine has not
yet allocated the remaining safety margin to any source category under
its maintenance plan, and the State will need to submit a SIP revision
to amend its maintenance plan if in the future it decides to use any of
the remaining safety margin. The 2016 MVEBs for Portland are approvable
because the MVEBs for NOX and VOC, including the allocated
safety margins, when added to all other inventory sources, continue to
maintain the total emissions at or below the attainment year inventory
levels as required by the transportation conformity regulations.
IX. What is EPA's Analysis of the Midcoast Redesignation Request?
EPA is al