Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; Redesignation of the Hampton Roads 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area to Attainment and Approval of the Associated Maintenance Plan and 2002 Base-Year Inventory, 18602-18614 [E7-7017]
Download as PDF
18602
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 71 / Friday, April 13, 2007 / Proposed Rules
2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding
the following new AD:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH: Docket
No. FAA–2007–27708; Directorate
Identifier 2007–CE–027–AD.
¨
AMM Temporary Revision AMM–TR–OAM–
42–056f, dated January 23, 2007, specifies
additional repetitive inspections for the
auxiliary tank vent system.
FAA AD Differences
[EPA–R03–OAR–2006–0919; FRL–8298–2]
Comments Due Date
(a) We must receive comments by May 14,
2007.
Note 2: This AD differs from the MCAI
and/or service information as follows: No
differences.
Affected ADs
(b) None.
Other FAA AD Provisions
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;
Redesignation of the Hampton Roads
8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area to
Attainment and Approval of the
Associated Maintenance Plan and 2002
Base-Year Inventory
§ 39.13
[Amended]
Applicability
(c) This AD applies to Model DA 42
airplanes; serial numbers 42.015, 42.028,
42.036, 42.044, 42.055, 42.059, 42.062,
42.067, 42.069, 42.075 through 42.100,
42.105, 42.106, 42.108, 42.114, 42.115,
42.117 through 42.122, and 42.124;
certificated in any category.
Subject
(d) Air Transport Association of America
(ATA) Code 28: Fuel.
cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
Reason
(e) The mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI) states:
From airplanes that have installed the
Auxiliary Fuel Tank Optional Design Change
¨
(OAM) No. 42–056, three in-service failures
of the auxiliary fuel tank venting system have
been reported. These failures have led to the
inability to supply the complete auxiliary
fuel quantity to the main tanks and the
collapse of the auxiliary tank. It is suspected
that the vent lines were obstructed either by
ice accretion under certain climatic
conditions or by blockage of the vent valves
because of fuel contaminants.
Undetected malfunctions of the venting
system and damaged auxiliary fuel tanks may
lead to a lower usable fuel quantity,
subsequent fuel starvation and/or fuel
spillage into the nacelle.
Actions and Compliance
(f) Unless already done, do the following
actions within the next 30 days after the
effective date of this AD:
(1) Inspect and modify the auxiliary fuel
tank system following Diamond Aircraft
Industries GmbH Mandatory Service Bulletin
No. MSB–42–032/1, dated January 24, 2007.
(2) Incorporate Doc. No. 7.02.01, Section
05–20–00, page 68a of Diamond Aircraft DA
42 AMM Temporary Revision AMM–TR–
¨
OAM–42–056f, dated January 23, 2007, into
the Airworthiness Limitations documents of
the FAA-approved maintenance program
(e.g., maintenance manual). The owner/
operator holding at least a private pilot
certificate as authorized by section 43.7 of
the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR
43.7) may insert the information specified in
paragraph (f)(2) of this AD into the
maintenance program (e.g., maintenance
manual). Make an entry into the aircraft
records showing compliance with this
portion of the AD in accordance with section
43.9 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 43.9).
Note 1: Doc. No. 7.02.01, Section 05–20–
00, page 68a of Diamond Aircraft DA 42
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:53 Apr 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
(g) The following provisions also apply to
this AD:
(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance
(AMOCs): The Manager, Standards Staff,
FAA, ATTN: Sarjapur Nagarajan, Aerospace
Engineer, FAA, Small Airplane Directorate,
901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas City, Missouri
64106; telephone: (816) 329–4145; fax: (816)
329–4090, has the authority to approve
AMOCs for this AD, if requested using the
procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. Before
using any approved AMOC on any airplane
to which the AMOC applies, notify your
appropriate principal inspector (PI) in the
FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO),
or lacking a PI, your local FSDO.
(2) Airworthy Product: For any
requirement in this AD to obtain corrective
actions from a manufacturer or other source,
use these actions if they are FAA-approved.
Corrective actions are considered FAAapproved if they are approved by the State
of Design Authority (or their delegated
agent). You are required to assure the product
is airworthy before it is returned to service.
(3) Reporting Requirements: For any
reporting requirement in this AD, under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et. seq.), the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) has
approved the information collection
requirements and has assigned OMB Control
Number 2120–0056.
Related Information
(h) Refer to MCAI European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) AD No.: 2007–0047,
dated February 23, 2007; Diamond Aircraft
Industries GmbH Mandatory Service Bulletin
No. MSB–42–032/1, dated January 24, 2007;
and Diamond Aircraft DA 42 AMM
¨
Temporary Revision AMM–TR–OAM–42–
056f, dated January 23, 2007 for related
information.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on April
6, 2007.
Kim Smith,
Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. E7–7049 Filed 4–12–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve
a redesignation request and State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions
submitted by the Commonwealth of
Virginia. The Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality (VADEQ) is
requesting that the Hampton Roads
ozone nonattainment area (‘‘Hampton
Roads Area’’ or ‘‘Area’’) be redesignated
as attainment for the 8-hour ozone
national ambient air quality standard
(NAAQS). The Area is comprised of the
Cities of Chesapeake, Hampton,
Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson,
Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach,
and Williamsburg, and the Counties of
Gloucester, Isle of Wight, James City,
and York, Virginia. EPA is proposing to
approve the ozone redesignation request
for the Hampton Roads Area. In
conjunction with its redesignation
request, the Commonwealth submitted a
SIP revision consisting of a maintenance
plan for the Hampton Roads Area that
provides for continued attainment of the
8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10
years after redesignation. EPA is
proposing to make a determination that
the Hampton Roads Area has attained
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, based upon
three years of complete, quality-assured
ambient air quality monitoring data for
2003–2005. EPA’s proposed approval of
the 8-hour ozone redesignation request
is based on its determination that the
Hampton Roads Area has met the
criteria for redesignation to attainment
specified in the Clean Air Act (CAA). In
addition, the Commonwealth of Virginia
has also submitted a 2002 base-year
inventory for the Hampton Roads Area,
and EPA is proposing to approve that
inventory for the Hampton Roads Area
as a SIP revision. EPA is also providing
information on the status of its
adequacy determination for the motor
vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) that
are identified in the maintenance plan
for the Hampton Roads Area for
purposes of transportation conformity,
and is also proposing to approve those
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 71 / Friday, April 13, 2007 / Proposed Rules
MVEBs. EPA is proposing approval of
the redesignation request and of the
maintenance plan and 2002 base-year
inventory SIP revisions in accordance
with the requirements of the CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before May 14, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R03–OAR–2006–0919 by one of the
following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
B. E-mail: morris.makeba@epa.gov
C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2006–0919,
Makeba Morris, Chief, Air Quality
Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2006–
0919. 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 information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through www.regulations.gov
or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov Web
site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system,
which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless
you provide it in the body of your
comment. If you send an e-mail
comment directly to EPA without going
through www.regulations.gov, your email address will be automatically
captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public
docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you
include your name and other contact
information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD–ROM
you submit. If EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
EPA may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:53 Apr 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
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 during normal business
hours at the Air Protection Division,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
Copies of the State submittal are
available at the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality, 629 East Main
Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amy Caprio, (215) 814–2156, or by email at caprio.amy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA.
Table of Contents
I. What Are the Actions EPA Is Proposing to
Take?
II. What Is the Background for These
Proposed Actions?
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation
to Attainment?
IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?
V. What Would Be the Effect of These
Actions?
VI. What Is EPA’s Analysis of the
Commonwealth’s Request?
VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions
Budgets Established and Identified in the
Maintenance Plan for the Hampton
Roads Area Adequate and Approvable?
VIII. Proposed Actions
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Are the Actions EPA Is
Proposing to Take?
On October 16, 2006 the VADEQ
formally submitted a request to
redesignate the Hampton Roads Area
from nonattainment to attainment of the
8-hour NAAQS for ozone. On October
18, 2006 Virginia submitted a
maintenance plan for the Hampton
Roads Area as a SIP revision to ensure
continued attainment in the Area over
the next 11 years. VADEQ also
submitted a 2002 base-year inventory
for the Hampton Roads Area as a SIP
revision on October 12, 2006 and
supplements to the base-year inventory
were submitted on November 20, 2006
and February 13, 2007. The Hampton
Roads Area is comprised of the Cities of
Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News,
Norfolk, Poquoson, Portsmouth, Suffolk,
Virginia Beach, and Williamsburg, and
the Counties of Gloucester, Isle of
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
18603
Wight, James City, and York, Virginia. It
is currently designated a marginal 8hour ozone nonattainment area. EPA is
proposing to determine that the
Hampton Roads Area has attained the 8hour ozone NAAQS and that it has met
the requirements for redesignation
pursuant to section 107(d)(3)(E) of the
CAA. EPA is, therefore, proposing to
approve the redesignation request to
change the designation of the Hampton
Roads Area from nonattainment to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. EPA is also proposing to
approve the Hampton Roads
maintenance plan as a SIP revision for
the Area (such approval being one of the
CAA criteria for redesignation to
attainment status). The maintenance
plan is designed to ensure continued
attainment in the Hampton Roads Area
for the next 11 years. Concurrently, the
Commonwealth is requesting that this 8hour maintenance plan supersede the
previous 1-hour maintenance plan. EPA
is also proposing to approve the 2002
base-year inventory for the Hampton
Roads Area as a SIP revision.
Additionally, EPA is announcing its
action on the adequacy process for the
MVEBs identified in the Hampton
Roads maintenance plan, and proposing
to approve the MVEBs identified for
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and
nitrogen oxides (NOX) for the Hampton
Roads Area for transportation
conformity purposes.
II. What Is the Background for These
Proposed Actions?
A. General
Ground-level ozone is not emitted
directly by sources. Rather, emissions of
NOX and VOC react in the presence of
sunlight to form ground-level ozone.
The air pollutants NOX and VOC are
referred to as precursors of ozone. The
CAA establishes a process for air quality
management through the attainment and
maintenance of the NAAQS.
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a
revised 8-hour ozone standard of 0.08
parts per million (ppm). This new
standard is more stringent than the
previous 1-hour standard. EPA
designated, as nonattainment, any area
violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
based on the air quality data for the
three years of 2001–2003. These were
the most recent three years of data at the
time EPA designated 8-hour areas. The
Hampton Roads Area was designated a
marginal 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area in a Federal Register notice signed
on April 15, 2004 and published on
April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857), based on
its exceedance of the 8-hour healthbased standard for ozone during the
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
18604
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 71 / Friday, April 13, 2007 / Proposed Rules
years 2001–2003. On April 30, 2004,
EPA issued a final rule (69 FR 23951,
23996) to revoke the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS in the Hampton Roads Area (as
well as most other areas of the country)
effective June 15, 2005. See 40 CFR
50.9(b); 69 FR at 23996 (April 30, 2004);
and see 70 FR 44470 (August 3, 2005).
However, on December 22, 2006, the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit vacated EPA’s Phase 1
Implementation Rule for the 8-hour
Ozone Standard. (69 FR 23951, April 30,
2004). South Coast Air Quality
Management Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882
(D.C. Cir. 2006) (hereafter ‘‘South
Coast.’’). The Court held that certain
provisions of EPA’s Phase I Rule were
inconsistent with the requirements of
the Clean Air Act. The Court rejected
EPA’s reasons for implementing the 8hour standard in nonattainment areas
under Subpart 1 in lieu of subpart 2 of
Title I, part D of the Act. The Court also
held that EPA improperly failed to
retain four measures required for 1-hour
nonattainment areas under the antibacksliding provisions of the
regulations: (1) Nonattainment area New
Source Review (NSR) requirements
based on an area’s 1-hour nonattainment
classification; (2) Section 185 penalty
fees for 1-hour severe or extreme
nonattainment areas; (3) measures to be
implemented pursuant to section
172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the Act, on the
contingency of an area not making
reasonable further progress toward
attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or for
failure to attain that NAAQS; and (4) the
certain conformity requirements for
certain types of federal. The Court
upheld EPA’s authority to revoke the 1hour standard provided there were
adequate anti-backsliding provisions.
Elsewhere in this document, mainly in
section VI. B. ‘‘The Hampton Roads
Area Has Met All Applicable
Requirements under Section 110 and
Part D of the CAA and Has a Fully
Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) of
the CAA,’’ EPA discusses its rationale
why the decision in South Coast is not
an impediment to redesignating the
Hampton Roads Area to attainment of
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
The CAA, title I, part D, contains two
sets of provisions—subpart 1 and
subpart 2—that address planning and
control requirements for nonattainment
areas. Subpart 1 (which EPA refers to as
‘‘basic’’ nonattainment) contains
general, less prescriptive requirements
for nonattainment areas for any
pollutant—including ozone—governed
by a NAAQS. Subpart 2 (which EPA
refers to as ‘‘classified’’ nonattainment)
provides more specific requirements for
ozone nonattainment areas. In 2004, the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:53 Apr 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
Hampton Roads Area was classified a
marginal 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area based on air quality monitoring
data from 2001–2003. Therefore, the
Hampton Roads Area is subject to the
requirements of subpart 2 of part D.
Under 40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour
ozone standard is attained when the 3year average of the annual fourthhighest daily maximum 8-hour average
ambient air quality ozone
concentrations is less than or equal to
0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when
rounding is considered). See 69 FR
23857 (April 30, 2004) for further
information. Ambient air quality
monitoring data for the 3-year period
must meet data completeness
requirements. The data completeness
requirements are met when the average
percent of days with valid ambient
monitoring data is greater than 90
percent, and no single year has less than
75 percent data completeness as
determined in Appendix I of 40 CFR
part 50. The ozone monitoring data
indicates that the Hampton Roads Area
has a design value of 0.078 ppm for the
3-year period of 2003–2005, using
complete, quality-assured data.
Therefore, the ambient ozone data for
the Hampton Roads Area indicates no
violations of the 8-hour ozone standard.
B. The Hampton Roads Area
Under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, the
Hampton Roads Area consists of the
Cities of Chesapeake, Hampton,
Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson,
Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach,
and Williamsburg, and the Counties of
James City, and York, Virginia. Under
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the Hampton
Roads Area was expanded to also
include Gloucester County and Isle of
Wight County. Prior to the Area’s
designation as an 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area, the Hampton Roads
Area was a maintenance area for the 1hour ozone NAAQS.1 See June 26, 1997
(62 FR 34408).
On October 16, 2006 the VADEQ
requested that the Hampton Roads Area
be redesignated to attainment for the 8hour ozone standard. The redesignation
request included three years of
complete, quality-assured data for the
period of 2003–2005, indicating that the
8-hour NAAQS for ozone had been
achieved in the Hampton Roads Area.
The data satisfies the CAA requirements
that the 3-year average of the annual
fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour
1 Under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS the Hampton
Roads Area consisted of the Cities of Chesapeake,
Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson,
Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach, and
Williamsburg, and the Counties of James City and
York. See November 6, 1991 (58 FR 56694).
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
average ozone concentration (commonly
referred to as the area’s design value),
must be less than or equal to 0.08 ppm
(i.e., 0.084 ppm when rounding is
considered). Under the CAA, a
nonattainment area may be redesignated
if sufficient complete, quality-assured
data is available to determine that the
area has attained the standard and the
area meets the other CAA redesignation
requirements set forth in section
107(d)(3)(E).
III. What Are the Criteria for
Redesignation to Attainment?
The CAA provides the requirements
for redesignating a nonattainment area
to attainment. Specifically, section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, allows for
redesignation, providing that:
(1) EPA determines that the area has
attained the applicable NAAQS;
(2) EPA has fully approved the
applicable implementation plan for the
area under section 110(k);
(3) EPA determines that the
improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions
in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP
and applicable Federal air pollutant
control regulations and other permanent
and enforceable reductions;
(4) EPA has fully approved a
maintenance plan for the area as
meeting the requirements of section
175A; and
(5) The State containing such area has
met all requirements applicable to the
area under section 110 and part D.
EPA provided guidance on
redesignations 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
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 71 / Friday, April 13, 2007 / Proposed Rules
cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
Management Division, September 4,
1992;
• ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Actions Submitted in Response to Clean
Air Act (Act) Deadlines,’’ Memorandum
from John Calcagni Director, Air Quality
Management Division, October 28, 1992;
• ‘‘Technical Support Documents
(TSDs) for Redesignation Ozone and
Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment
Areas,’’ Memorandum from G.T. Helms,
Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide
Programs Branch, August 17, 1993;
• ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Requirements for Areas Submitting
Requests for Redesignation to
Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) on or after
November 15, 1992,’’ Memorandum
from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting
Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, September 17, 1993;
• Memorandum from D. Kent Berry,
Acting Director, Air Quality
Management Division, to Air Division
Directors, Regions 1–10, ‘‘Use of Actual
Emissions in Maintenance
Demonstrations for Ozone and CO
Nonattainment Areas,’’ dated November
30, 1993;
• ‘‘Part D New Source Review (part D
NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to
Attainment,’’ Memorandum from Mary
D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for
Air and Radiation, October 14, 1994;
and
• ‘‘Reasonable Further Progress,
Attainment Demonstration, and Related
Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment
Areas Meeting the Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard,’’
Memorandum from John S. Seitz,
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, May 10, 1995.
IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?
On October 16, 2006, the VADEQ
requested redesignation of the Hampton
Roads Area to attainment for the 8-hour
ozone standard. On October 18, 2006,
VADEQ submitted a maintenance plan
for the Hampton Roads Area as a SIP
revision, to ensure continued attainment
of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS over the
next 11 years, until 2018. Concurrently,
Virginia is requesting that 8-hour
maintenance plan submittal supersede
the 1-hour maintenance plan
requirements already in place and that
the 8-hour maintenance plan meet the
requirement of CAA section 175A(b)
with respect to the 1-hour ozone
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:53 Apr 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
maintenance plan update. EPA is
proposing to approve the maintenance
plan to fulfill the requirement of section
175A(b) for submission of a
maintenance plan update eight years
after the area was redesignated to
attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
EPA believes that such an update must
ensure that the maintenance plan in the
SIP provides maintenance of the
NAAQS for a period of 20 years after the
area is initially redesignated to
attainment. EPA can propose approval
because the maintenance plan, which
demonstrates maintenance of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS through 2018, also
demonstrates maintenance of the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS through 2018.
VADEQ also submitted a 2002 baseyear inventory with its maintenance
plan as a SIP revision on October 12,
2006 and supplemental to that submittal
on November 20, 2006 and February 13,
2007, which is an applicable
requirement for the Hampton Roads
Area for purposes of redesignation. EPA
has determined that the Hampton Roads
Area has attained the 8-hour ozone
standard and has met the requirements
for redesignation set forth in section
107(d)(3)(E).
V. What Would Be the Effect of These
Actions?
Approval of the redesignation request
would change the official designation of
the Hampton Roads Area from
nonattainment to attainment for the 8hour ozone NAAQS found at 40 CFR
part 81. It would also incorporate into
the Virginia SIP a 2002 base-year
inventory and a maintenance plan
ensuring continued attainment of the 8hour ozone NAAQS in the Hampton
Roads Area for the next 11 years, until
2018. The maintenance plan includes
contingency measures to remedy any
future violations of the 8-hour NAAQS
(should they occur), and identifies the
NOX and VOC MVEBs for transportation
conformity purposes for the years 2011
and 2018. These MVEBs are displayed
in the following table:
TABLE 1.—MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS
BUDGETS IN TONS PER DAY (TPD)
Year
VOC
2011 ..................
2018 ..................
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
37.846
27.574
Sfmt 4702
NOX
50.387
31.890
18605
VI. What Is EPA’s Analysis of the
Commonwealth’s Request?
EPA is proposing to determine that
the Hampton Roads Area has attained
the 8-hour ozone standard and that all
other redesignation criteria have been
met. The following is a description of
how the VADEQ’s October 16, 2006
(redesignation request), October 18,
2006 (maintenance plan and MVEBs),
October 12, 2006 (base-year emissions
inventory), November 20, 2006
(supplement to base-year inventory),
and February 13, 2007 (second
supplement to base-year inventory)
submittals satisfy the requirements of
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.
A. The Hampton Roads Area Has
Attained the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
EPA is proposing to determine that
the Hampton Roads Area has attained
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. For ozone, an
area may be considered to be attaining
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS if there are no
violations, as determined in accordance
with 40 CFR 50.10 and Appendix I of
Part 50, based on three complete,
consecutive calendar years of qualityassured air quality monitoring data. To
attain this standard, the 3-year average
of the fourth-highest daily maximum 8hour average ozone concentrations
measured at each monitor, within the
area, over each year must not exceed the
ozone standard of 0.08 ppm. Based on
the rounding convention described in
40 CFR part 50, Appendix I, the
standard is attained if the design value
is 0.084 ppm or below. The data must
be collected and quality-assured in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and
recorded in the Air Quality System
(AQS). The monitors generally should
have remained at the same location for
the duration of the monitoring period
required for demonstrating attainment.
There are three ozone monitors in the
Hampton Roads Area. As part of its
redesignation request, Virginia
referenced ozone monitoring data for
the years 2003–2005 for the Hampton
Roads Area. This data has been quality
assured and is recorded in the AQS. The
fourth-high 8-hour daily maximum
concentrations, along with the threeyear averages are summarized in Table
2. The Hampton and Suffolk—TCC
monitoring sites had the highest 3-year
average of the fourth highest daily
maximum 8-hour average and are
therefore used to make air quality
determinations.
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
18606
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 71 / Friday, April 13, 2007 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 2.—HAMPTON ROADS AREA FOURTH HIGHEST 8-HOUR AVERAGE VALUES, HAMPTON ROADS MONITORS, PARTS
PER MILLION (PPM)
Monitor
AQS ID No.
Hampton ...............................................................................
Suffolk—TCC .......................................................................
Suffolk—Holland ..................................................................
516500004
518000004
518000005
2003
2004
0.083
0.083
0.079
0.074
0.074
0.075
2005
0.078
0.077
0.078
3-year
average
0.078
0.078
0.077
The average for the 3-year period 2003–2005 is 0.078 ppm.
cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
The air quality data for 2003–2005
show that the Hampton Roads Area has
attained the standard with a design
value of 0.078 ppm. The data collected
at the Hampton Roads Area monitors
satisfy the CAA requirement that the 3year average of the annual fourthhighest daily maximum 8-hour average
ozone concentration is less than or
equal to 0.08 ppm. The VADEQ’s
request for redesignation for the
Hampton Roads Area indicates that the
data is complete and was quality
assured in accordance with 40 CFR part
58. The VADEQ uses the AQS as the
permanent database to maintain its data
and quality assures the data transfers
and content for accuracy. In addition, as
discussed below with respect to the
maintenance plan, VADEQ has
committed to continue monitoring in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58. In
summary, EPA has determined that the
data submitted by Virginia indicates
that the Hampton Roads Area has
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
B. The Hampton Roads Area Has Met
All Applicable Requirements Under
Section 110 and Part D of the CAA and
Has a Fully Approved SIP Under
Section 110(k) of the CAA
EPA has determined that the
Hampton Roads Area has met all SIP
requirements applicable for purposes of
this redesignation under section 110 of
the CAA (General SIP Requirements)
and that it meets all applicable SIP
requirements under part D of Title I of
the CAA, in accordance with section
107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, EPA has
determined that the SIP is fully
approved with respect to all
requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation in accordance with
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these
proposed determinations, EPA
ascertained which requirements are
applicable to the Hampton Roads Area
and determined that the applicable
portions of the SIP meeting these
requirements are fully approved under
section 110(k) of the CAA. We note that
SIPs must be fully approved only with
respect to applicable requirements. The
September 4, 1992 Calcagni
memorandum (‘‘Procedures for
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:53 Apr 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
Processing Requests to Redesignate
Areas to Attainment,’’ Memorandum
from John Calcagni, Director, Air
Quality Management Division,
September 4, 1992) describes EPA’s
interpretation of section 107(d)(3)(E)
with respect to the timing of applicable
requirements. Under this interpretation,
to qualify for redesignation, States
requesting redesignation to attainment
must meet only the relevant CAA
requirements that came due prior to the
submittal of a complete redesignation
request. See also Michael Shapiro
memorandum, September 17, 1993, and
60 FR 12459, 12465–66 (March 7, 1995)
(redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor).
Applicable requirements of the CAA
that come due subsequent to the area’s
submittal of a complete redesignation
request remain applicable until a
redesignation is approved, but are not
required as a prerequisite to
redesignation. Section 175A(c) of the
CAA. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537
(7th Cir. 2004). See also 68 FR at 25424,
25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of
St. Louis).
This section also sets forth EPA’s
views on the potential effect of the
Court’s ruling in South Coast on this
redesignation action. For the reasons set
forth below, EPA does not believe that
the Court’s ruling alters any
requirements relevant to this
redesignation action so as to preclude
redesignation, and does not prevent
EPA from finalizing this redesignation.
EPA believes that the Court’s decision,
as it currently stands or as it may be
modified based upon any petition for
rehearing that has been filed, imposes
no impediment to moving forward with
redesignation of this area to attainment,
because in either circumstance
redesignation is appropriate under the
relevant redesignation provisions of the
Act and longstanding policies regarding
redesignation requests.
1. Section 110 General SIP
Requirements
Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA
delineates the general requirements for
a SIP, which include enforceable
emissions limitations and other control
measures, means, or techniques,
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
provisions for the establishment and
operation of appropriate devices
necessary to collect data on ambient air
quality, and programs to enforce the
limitations. The general SIP elements
and requirements set forth in section
110(a)(2) include, but are not limited to
the following:
• Submittal of a SIP that has been
adopted by the State after reasonable
public notice and hearing;
• Provisions for establishment and
operation of appropriate procedures
needed to monitor ambient air quality;
• Implementation of a source permit
program; provisions for the
implementation of part C requirements
(Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD));
• Provisions for the implementation
of part D requirements for New Source
Review (NSR) permit programs;
• Provisions for air pollution
modeling; and
• Provisions for public and local
agency participation in planning and
emission control rule development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs
contain certain measures to prevent
sources in a state from significantly
contributing to air quality problems in
another State. To implement this
provision, EPA has required certain
states to establish programs to address
transport of air pollutants in accordance
with the NOX SIP Call, October 27, 1998
(63 FR 57356), amendments to the NOX
SIP Call, May 14, 1999 (64 FR 26298)
and March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), and
the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR),
May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162). However,
the section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for
a State are not linked with a particular
nonattainment area’s designation and
classification in that State. EPA believes
that the requirements linked with a
particular nonattainment area’s
designation and classifications are the
relevant measures to evaluate in
reviewing a redesignation request. The
transport SIP submittal requirements,
where applicable, continue to apply to
a state regardless of the designation of
any one particular area in the State.
Thus, we do not believe that these
requirements are applicable
requirements for purposes of
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 71 / Friday, April 13, 2007 / Proposed Rules
cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
redesignation. 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 Hampton Roads Area
will still be subject to these
requirements after it is redesignated.
The section 110 and part D
requirements, which are linked with a
particular area’s designation and
classification, are the relevant measures
to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation
request. This policy is consistent with
EPA’s existing policy on applicability of
conformity (i.e., for redesignations) and
oxygenated fuels requirement. See
Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and
final rulemakings (61 FR 53174, 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
(60 FR 62748, December 7, 1995). See
also the discussion on this issue in the
Cincinnati redesignation (65 FR at
37890, June 19, 2000), and in the
Pittsburgh redesignation (66 FR at
53099, October 19, 2001). Similarly,
with respect to the NOX SIP Call rules,
EPA noted in its Phase 1 Final Rule to
Implement the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS,
that the NOX SIP Call rules are not ‘‘an’’
‘applicable requirement’ for purposes of
section 110(1) because the NOX rules
apply regardless of an area’s attainment
or nonattainment status for the 8-hour
(or the 1-hour) NAAQS.’’ 69 FR 23951,
23983 (April 30, 2004).
EPA believes that section 110
elements not linked to the Area’s
nonattainment status are not applicable
for purposes of redesignation. As
explained later in this notice, two part
D requirements applicable for purposes
of redesignation under the 8-hour
standard became due prior to the
submission of the redesignation request.
Because the Virginia SIP satisfies all
of the applicable general SIP elements
and requirements set forth in section
110(a)(2), EPA concludes that Virginia
has satisfied the criterion of section
107(d)(3)(E) regarding section 110 of the
Act.
2. Part D Nonattainment Requirements
Under the 8-Hour Standard
The Hampton Roads Area was
classified a Subpart 2, 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
applicable to all nonattainment areas.
Section 182 of the CAA, found in
subpart 2 of part D, establishes
additional specific requirements
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:53 Apr 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
depending on the area’s nonattainment
classification.
The Hampton Roads Area is classified
as a Subpart 2, marginal nonattainment
area. We do not believe that any part of
the Court’s opinion would require that
this subpart 2 classification be changed
upon remand to EPA. However, even
assuming for present purposes that the
Hampton Roads Area would become
subject to a different classification
under a classification scheme created in
a future rule in response to the court’s
decision, that would not prevent EPA
from finalizing a redesignation for this
area. For the reasons set forth below, we
believe that any additional requirements
that might apply based on that different
classification would not be applicable
for purposes of evaluating the
redesignation request.
This belief is based upon (1) EPA’s
longstanding policy of evaluating
redesignation requests in accordance
with only the requirements due at the
time the request was submitted; and (2)
consideration of the inequity of
applying retroactively any requirements
that might be applied in the future.
First, at the time the redesignation
request was submitted, the area was
classified under Subpart 2 and was
required to meet the Subpart 2
requirements. Under EPA’s
longstanding interpretation of section
107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act, to
qualify for redesignation, states
requesting redesignation to attainment
must meet only the relevant SIP
requirements that came due prior to the
submittal of a complete redesignation
request. September 4, 1992 Calcagni
memorandum (‘‘Procedures for
Processing Requests to Redesignate
Areas to Attainment’’, Memorandum
from John Calcagni, Director, Air
Quality Management Division) See also
Michael Shapiro Memorandum,
September 17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459,
12465–66 (March 7, 1995)
(redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor);
Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th
Cir. 2004), which upheld this
interpretation. See, e.g, also 68 FR
25418, 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003)
(redesignation of St. Louis). At the time
the redesignation request was
submitted, the Hampton Roads Area
was classified as a marginal area under
Subpart 2 and thus only Subpart 2
marginal area requirements are
applicable for purposes of
redesignation.
Moreover, it would be inequitable to
retroactively apply any new SIP
requirements that were not applicable at
the time the request was submitted, but
which might later become applicable.
The D.C. Circuit has recognized the
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
18607
inequity in such retroactive rulemaking.
See Sierra Club v. Whitman, 285 F.3d 63
(D.C. Cir. 2002), in which the D.C.
Circuit upheld a District Court’s ruling
refusing to make retroactive an EPA
determination of nonattainment that
was past the statutory due date. Such a
determination would have resulted in
the imposition of additional
requirements on the area. The Court
stated: ‘‘Although EPA failed to make
the nonattainment determination within
the statutory time frame, Sierra Club’s
proposed solution only makes the
situation worse. Retroactive relief would
likely impose large costs on the States,
which would face fines and suits for not
implementing air pollution prevention
plans in 1997, even though they were
not on notice at the time.’’ Id. at 68.
Similarly, here it would be unfair to
penalize the area by applying to it for
purposes of redesignation any
additional requirements that were not in
effect at the time it submitted its
redesignation request, but that might
apply in the future.
Two Subpart 2 requirements became
due for the Hampton Roads Area under
section 182(a) of the CAA prior to
redesignation—a 2002 base-year
inventory, and the emissions statement
requirement pursuant to section
182(a)(3)(B). Virginia has in its
approved SIP an approved emissions
statement rule for the 1-hour standard
covering those portions of the 8-hour
nonattainment area that were part of the
previous 1-hour attainment area, which
satisfies the emissions statement
requirement for the 8-hour standard. See
65 FR 21315 (April 21, 2000). Virginia
recently submitted a rulemaking to
expand the VOC and NOX Hampton
Roads Emissions Control Area to
include Gloucester County and Isle of
Wight County. EPA approved this
rulemaking on March 2, 2007 (72 FR
9441) and will become effective on
April 2, 2007. Today, EPA is proposing
to approve the 2002 base-year inventory
for the Hampton Roads Area, which was
submitted on October 12, 2006, and
supplemented on November 20, 2006
and February 13, 2007, concurrently
with its maintenance plan, into the
Virginia SIP. A detailed evaluation of
Virginia’s 2002 base-year inventory for
the Hampton Roads Area can be found
in a Technical Support Document (TSD)
prepared by EPA for this rulemaking.
EPA has determined that the emission
inventory and emissions statement
requirements for the Hampton Roads
Area have been satisfied.
EPA believes it is reasonable to
interpret the general conformity and
NSR requirements of part D as not
requiring approval prior to
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
18608
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 71 / Friday, April 13, 2007 / Proposed Rules
Michigan (61 FR at 31831, 31834–37,
June 21, 1996).
Thus the decision in South Coast
should not alter requirements that
would preclude EPA from finalizing the
redesignation of this area.
redesignation. With respect to section
176, Conformity Requirements, section
176(c) of the CAA requires states to
establish criteria and procedures to
ensure that Federally-supported or
funded projects conform to the air
quality planning goals in the applicable
SIP. The requirement to determine
conformity applies to transportation
plans, programs, and projects
developed, funded or approved under
Title 23 U.S.C. and the Federal Transit
Act (‘‘transportation conformity’’) as
well as to all other Federally supported
or funded projects (‘‘general
conformity’’). State conformity revisions
must be consistent with Federal
conformity regulations relating to
consultation, enforcement and
enforceability that the CAA required the
EPA to promulgate.
EPA believes it is reasonable to
interpret the conformity SIP
requirements as not applying for
purposes of evaluating the redesignation
request under section 107(d) since state
conformity rules are still required after
redesignation and federal conformity
rules apply where state rules have not
been approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.
3d 426, 438 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding
this interpretation. See also 60 FR 62748
(December 7, 1995).
EPA has also determined that areas
being redesignated need not comply
with the requirement that a NSR
program be approved prior to
redesignation, provided that the area
demonstrates maintenance of the
standard without part D NSR in effect,
because PSD requirements will apply
after redesignation. The rationale for
this position is described in a
memorandum from Mary Nichols,
Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, dated October 14, 1994,
entitled, ‘‘Part D NSR Requirements or
Areas Requesting Redesignation to
Attainment.’’ Virginia has demonstrated
that the Area will be able to maintain
the standard without Part D NSR in
effect in the Hampton Roads Area, and
therefore, Virginia need not have a fully
approved Part D NSR program prior to
approval of the redesignation request.
Virginia’s SIP-approved PSD program
will become effective in Hampton Roads
upon redesignation to attainment. See
rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60
FR at 12467–68); Cleveland-AkronLorrain, Ohio (61 FR at 20458, 20469–
70); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665,
53669 October 23, 2001); Grand Rapids,
With respect to the 1-hour standard
requirements, the Gloucester County
and Isle of Wight County portions of the
Hampton Roads Area were designated
Unclassifiable/Attainment under the 1hour standard and were never
designated nonattainment for the 1-hour
standard. Therefore, there are no
outstanding 1-hour nonattainment area
requirements these portions of the
Hampton Roads Area would be required
to meet. Thus, we find that the Court’s
ruling does not result in any additional
1-hour requirements for purposes of
redesignation.
The portion of the Hampton Roads
Area consisting of the Cities of
Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News,
Norfolk, Poquoson, Portsmouth, Suffolk,
Virginia Beach, and Williamsburg, and
the Counties of James City, and York,
Virginia was an Attainment area subject
to a Clean Air Act section 175A
maintenance plan under the 1-hour
standard. The Court’s ruling does not
impact redesignation requests for these
types of areas.
First, there are no conformity
requirements that are relevant for
redesignation requests for any standard,
including the requirement to submit a
transportation conformity SIP.2 Under
longstanding EPA policy, EPA believes
that it is reasonable to interpret the
conformity SIP requirement as not
applying for purposes of evaluating a
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. 40
CFR 51.390. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d
426 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding this
interpretation. See also 60 FR 62748
(Dec. 7, 1995) (Tampa, FL
redesignation).
Second, with respect to the three
other anti-backsliding provisions for the
1-hour standard that the Court found
were not properly retained, this portion
of the Hampton Roads Area is an
attainment area subject to a
maintenance plan for the 1-hour
standard, and the NSR, contingency
measure (pursuant to section 172(c)(9)
or 182(c)(9)) and fee provision
requirements no longer apply to an area
that has been redesignated to attainment
of the 1-hour standard.
4. Hampton Roads Has a Fully
Approved SIP for Purposes of
Redesignation
2 Clean Air Act section 176(c)(4)(E) currently
requires States to submit revisions to their SIPs to
reflect certain federal criteria and procedures for
determining transportation conformity.
Transportation conformity SIPs are different from
the motor vehicle emissions budgets that are
established in control strategy SIPs and
maintenance plans.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:53 Apr 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
3. Requirements Under the 1-Hour
Standard
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
EPA has fully approved the Virginia
SIP for the purposes of this
redesignation. EPA may rely on prior
SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request. Calcagni Memo,
p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth
Alliance v. Browner, 144 F. 3d 984, 989–
90 (6th Cir. 1998), Wall v. EPA, 265 F.
3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), plus any
additional measures it may approve in
conjunction with a redesignation action.
See 68 FR at 25425 (May 12, 2003) and
citations therein. The Hampton Roads
Area was a 1-hour ozone maintenance
area at the time of its designation as a
marginal 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area on April 30, 2004. As stated
previously, two subpart 2 part D
requirements became due for the
Hampton Roads Area prior to
redesignation—a 2002 base-year
inventory, and the emissions statement
requirement. VADEQ has submitted
concurrently with its maintenance plan,
a 2002 base-year inventory as a SIP
revision. In this action, EPA is
proposing approval of this inventory.
The emissions statement requirement
for the entire Hampton Roads Area was
recently fulfilled on March 2, 2007 (72
FR 9441). Because there are no
outstanding SIP submission
requirements applicable for the
purposes of the redesignation of the
Hampton Roads Area, the applicable
implementation plan satisfies all
pertinent SIP requirements.
C. The Air Quality Improvement in the
Hampton Roads 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 Commonwealth
has demonstrated that the observed air
quality improvement in the Hampton
Roads Area is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions
resulting from implementation of the
SIP, Federal measures, and other Stateadopted measures. Emissions reductions
attributable to these rules are shown in
Table 3.
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 71 / Friday, April 13, 2007 / Proposed Rules
18609
TABLE 3.—TOTAL VOC AND NOX EMISSIONS FOR 2002 AND 2005 IN TONS PER DAY (TPD)
Year
Point
Area *
Nonroad
Mobile
Total
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
2002 .....................................................................................
2005 .....................................................................................
Diff (02–05) ..........................................................................
18.758
20.091
+1.333
87.402
91.980
+4.578
46.543
42.320
¥4.223
67.293
50.591
¥16.702
219.996
204.982
¥15.014
57.961
55.207
¥2.754
31.002
30.208
¥0.794
93.844
78.169
¥15.675
274.210
226.120
¥48.090
Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)
2002 .....................................................................................
2005 .....................................................................................
Diff (02–05) ..........................................................................
91.403
62.536
¥28.867
* Area source category includes emissions from motor vehicle refueling.
Between 2002 and 2005, VOC
emissions decreased by 15.014 tpd and
NOX emissions decreased by 48.090 tpd
because of permanent and enforceable
measures implemented by the
Commonwealth and the federal
government. These reductions, and
anticipated future reductions, are due to
the following permanent and
enforceable measures.
cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
Programs Currently in Effect
(a) Tier 1;
(b) Tier 2;
(c) National Low Emission Vehicle
(NLEV) Program; and
(d) NOX SIP Call.
EPA believes that permanent and
enforceable emissions reductions are the
cause of the long-term improvement in
ozone levels and are the cause of the
Area achieving attainment of the 8-hour
ozone standard.
D. The Hampton Roads Area Has a
Fully Approvable Maintenance Plan
Pursuant to Section 175A of the CAA
In conjunction with its request to
redesignate the Hampton Roads Area to
attainment status, Virginia submitted a
SIP revision to provide for maintenance
of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Area
for at least 11 years after redesignation.
The Commonwealth is requesting that
EPA approve this SIP revision as
meeting the requirement of CAA 175A
and 175A(b). Section 175A(a) was met
with the October 18, 2006 submission of
the maintenance plan, because it states
that Hampton Roads will maintain the
8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10
years after redesignation. Section
175A(b) was met with the October 18,
2006 submission of the maintenance
plan, because it will replace the 1-hour
maintenance plan update requirement
that was due 8 years after redesingation
of Hampton Roads to attainment. Once
approved, the maintenance plan for the
8-hour ozone NAAQS will ensure that
the SIP for Hampton Roads meets the
requirements of the CAA regarding
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:53 Apr 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
maintenance of the applicable 8-hour
ozone standard.
What Is Required in a Maintenance
Plan?
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth
the elements of a maintenance plan for
areas seeking redesignation from
nonattainment to attainment. Under
section 175A(a), the plan must
demonstrate continued attainment of
the applicable NAAQS for at least 10
years after approval of a redesignation of
an area to attainment. Section 175A(b)
states that eight years after redesignation
from nonattainment to attainment, the
State must submit a revised
maintenance plan demonstrating that
attainment will continue to be
maintained for the next 10-year period
following the initial 10-year period. To
address the possibility of future NAAQS
violations, the maintenance plan must
contain such contingency measures,
with a schedule for implementation, as
EPA deems necessary to assure prompt
correction of any future 8-hour ozone
violations. Section 175A of the CAA sets
forth the elements of a maintenance
plan for areas seeking redesignation
from nonattainment to attainment. The
Calcagni memorandum dated September
4, 1992, provides additional guidance
on the content of a maintenance plan.
An ozone maintenance plan should
address the following provisions:
(a) An attainment emissions
inventory;
(b) A maintenance demonstration;
(c) A monitoring network;
(d) Verification of continued
attainment; and
(e) A contingency plan.
Analysis of the Hampton Roads Area
Maintenance Plan
(a) Attainment inventory—An
attainment inventory includes the
emissions during the time period
associated with the monitoring data
showing attainment. VADEQ
determined that the appropriate
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
attainment inventory year is 2005. That
year establishes a reasonable year
within the three-year block of 2003–
2005 as a baseline and accounts for
reductions attributable to
implementation of the CAA
requirements to date. The 2005
inventory is consistent with EPA
guidance and is based on actual ‘‘typical
summer day’’ emissions of VOC and
NOX during 2005 and consists of a list
of sources and their associated
emissions.
To develop the NOX and VOC base
year emissions inventories, VADEQ
used the following approaches:
(i) Point source emissions were
developed using the latest version of
EPA’s Economic Growth Analysis
System (EGAS 5.0).
(ii) Area source emissions were also
developed using growth factors from
EGAS 5.0 and then applied to the 2002
Area source inventory.
(iii) Mobile nonroad emissions were
developed using EPA’s NONROAD 2005
model. The NONROAD 2005 model
estimates fuel consumption and
emissions of total hydrocarbons, carbon
monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur
oxides, and particulate matter for all
nonroad mobile source categories except
for aircraft, locomotives, and
commercial marine vessels (CMV).
(iv) Mobile on-road source emissions
were calculated using EPA’s MOBILE6.2
mobile source inventory model. The
Virginia Department of Transportation
(VDOT) provided daily vehicle miles
traveled (DVMT), average speed data for
each road type by jurisdiction, and
annual growth rates that were used to
forecast DVMT into the future. Also, the
Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles
provided registration data that was
specific to each jurisdiction. Mobile
source emission projections include the
National Low Emission Vehicle Program
(NLEV), the 2004 Tier 2 and Low Sulfur
Gasoline Rule, the 2004 and 2007
Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicle Rules, and
the 2006 Low Sulfur Diesel Rule. In
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
18610
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 71 / Friday, April 13, 2007 / Proposed Rules
addition, James City, York, Chesapeake,
Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk,
Poquoson, Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia
Beach, and Williamsburg were modeled
with Phase II Reformulated Gasoline
(RFG) while Gloucester and Isle of
Wight were modeled with conventional
gasoline fuel.
More detailed information on the
compilation of the 2002, 2005, 2011,
and 2018 inventories can found in the
Technical Appendices, which are part
of VADEQ’s October 18, 2006 submittal.
(b) Maintenance Demonstration—On
October 18, 2006, the VADEQ submitted
a maintenance plan as required by
section 175A of the CAA. The Hampton
Roads maintenance plan shows
maintenance of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS by demonstrating that future
emissions of VOC and NOX will not
exceed the attainment year 2005
emissions levels throughout the
Hampton Roads Area through the year
2018. A maintenance demonstration
need not be based on modeling. See
Wall v. EPA, supra; Sierra Club v. EPA,
supra. See also 66 FR at 53099–53100;
68 FR at 25430–32.
Tables 4 and 5 specify the VOC and
NOX emissions for the Hampton Roads
Area for 2005, 2011, and 2018. The
VADEQ chose 2011 as an interim year
in the maintenance demonstration
period to demonstrate that the VOC and
NOX emissions are not projected to
increase above the 2005 attainment level
during the time of the maintenance
period.
TABLE 4.—TOTAL VOC EMISSIONS FOR 2005–2018 (TPD)
2005 VOC
emissions
Source category
2011 VOC
emissions
2018 VOC
emissions
Point .............................................................................................................................................
Area 1 ...........................................................................................................................................
Mobile 2 ........................................................................................................................................
Nonroad .......................................................................................................................................
20.091
91.980
50.591
42.320
23.280
100.960
37.846
33.912
26.700
112.790
27.574
31.315
Total ......................................................................................................................................
204.982
195.998
198.379
1 Includes
vehicle refueling emissions and the benefits of selected local controls (Stage I, CTG RACT, and open burning). Also includes site/
project specific emissions estimates and projections.
2 Includes transportation provisions.
TABLE 5.—TOTAL NOX EMISSIONS FOR 2005–2018 (TPD)
2005 NOX
emissions
Source category
2011 NOX
emissions
2018 NOX
emissions
Point .............................................................................................................................................
Area 1 ...........................................................................................................................................
Mobile 2 ........................................................................................................................................
Non-road ......................................................................................................................................
62.536
55.207
78.169
30.208
69.333
56.974
50.387
29.116
75.241
60.105
31.890
23.093
Total ......................................................................................................................................
226.120
205.810
190.329
1 Includes
cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
selected local controls (open burning). Also includes site/project specific emissions estimates and projections.
2 Includes transportation provisions.
Additionally, the following programs
are either effective or due to become
effective and will further contribute to
the maintenance demonstration of the 8hour ozone NAAQS:
Currently in Effect:
• The National Low Emission Vehicle
(NLEV) program;
• Open burning restrictions for James
City, York, Chesapeake, Hampton,
Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson,
Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach,
and Williamsburg;
• Control Technology Guideline
(CTG) Reasonable Available Control
Technology (RACT) requirements for
James City, York, Chesapeake, Hampton,
Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson,
Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach,
and Williamsburg;
• Stage I gasoline vapor recovery
requirements for James City, York,
Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News,
Norfolk, Poquoson, Portsmouth, Suffolk,
Virginia Beach, and Williamsburg;
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:53 Apr 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
• Motor vehicle fleet turnover with
new vehicles meeting the Tier 2
standards; and
• Low sulfur gasoline.
Additionally, the following programs
are in place and either effective or are
due to become effective:
• Heavy duty diesel on-road (2004/
2007) and low sulfur on-road (2006); 66
FR 5002, (January 18, 2001)
• Non-road emission standards (2008)
and off-road diesel fuel 2007/2010); 69
FR 38958 (June 29, 2004).
Lastly, to further improve air quality
and to provide room for industrial and
population growth while maintaining
emissions in the area to less than 2005
levels, the Commonwealth of Virginia
has initiated rulemaking to implement
the following programs:
• Implement the Stage I requirements
of 9 VAC 5 Chapter 40, Article 37 in Isle
of Wight and Gloucester;
• Implement open burning restriction
requirements of 9 VAC 5 Chapter 40,
Article 40 in Isle of Wight and
Gloucester; and
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• Implement existing source CTG
RACT requirements of 9 VAC 5 Chapter
40, Articles 5–6, 24–36, and 39 in Isle
of Wight and Gloucester.
Based on the comparison of the
projected emissions and the attainment
year emissions along with the additional
measures, EPA concludes that VADEQ
has successfully demonstrated that the
8-hour ozone standard should be
maintained in the Hampton Roads Area.
(c) Monitoring Network—There are
three monitors measuring ozone in the
Hampton Roads Area. VADEQ will
continue to operate its current air
quality monitors (located in the
Hampton Roads Area), in accordance
with 40 CFR part 58.
(d) Verification of Continued
Attainment—In addition to maintaining
the key elements of its regulatory
program, the Commonwealth will
acquire ambient and source emission
data to track attainment and
maintenance. The Commonwealth will
track the progress of the maintenance
demonstration by periodically updating
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 71 / Friday, April 13, 2007 / Proposed Rules
the emissions inventory. This tracking
will consist of annual and periodic
evaluations. The annual evaluation will
consist of checks on key emissions trend
indicators as they actually emission
update of stationary sources, the
Highway Performance Monitoring
System (HPMS) vehicle miles traveled
data reported to the Federal Highway
Administration, and other growth
indicators. These indicators will be
compared to the growth assumptions
used in the plan to determine if the
predicted versus the observed growth
remains relatively constant. The
Commonwealth will also develop and
submit periodic (every three years)
emission inventories prepared under
EPA’s Consolidated Emission Reporting
Regulation (40 CFR 51, subpart A),
beginning in 2005.
(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 CAA
requires that a maintenance plan
include such contingency measures as
EPA deems necessary to ensure that the
Commonwealth will promptly correct a
violation of the NAAQS that occurs after
redesignation. The maintenance plan
should identify the events that would
‘‘trigger’’ the adoption and
implementation of a contingency
measure(s), the contingency measure(s)
that would be adopted and
implemented, and the schedule
indicating the time frame by which the
state would adopt and implement the
measure(s).
The ability of the Hampton Roads
Area to stay in compliance with the 8hour ozone standard after redesignation
depends upon VOC and NOX emissions
in the Area remaining at or below 2005
levels. The Commonwealth’s
maintenance plan projects VOC and
NOX emissions to decrease and stay
below 2005 levels through the year
2018. The Commonwealth’s
maintenance plan outlines the
procedures for the adoption and
implementation of contingency
measures to further reduce emissions
should a violation occur.
The Commonwealth’s maintenance
plan lays out situations where the need
to adopt and implement a contingency
measure to further reduce emissions
would be triggered. Those situations are
as follows:
18611
(i) An actual increase of the VOC or
NOX emissions exceed the regional
emissions budgets, which would be
identified or predicted through the
development of the comprehensive
periodic tracking inventories—The
maintenance plan states that the
VADEQ will monitor the observed
growth rates for VMT, population, and
point source VOC and NOX emissions
on a yearly basis which will serve as an
early warning indicator of the potential
for a violation. The plan also states that
comprehensive tracking inventories will
also be developed every 3 years using
current EPA-approved methods to
estimate emissions, concentrating on
areas identified in the less rigorous
yearly evaluations as being potential
problems. If the regional emissions
budget for VOC or NOX is exceeded, the
following control strategies will be
implemented as follows:
• Preparation of a complete VOC and
NOX emission inventory; and
• The expanded implementation of
one or more of the following control
strategies, listed in Table 6, that are not
currently in place in the Hampton
Roads Area.
TABLE 6.—MAINTENANCE PLAN CONTINGENCY MEASURE OPTIONS
Control strategy
Description
9 VAC 5 Chapter 40, Article 42 ...............................................................
9 VAC 5 Chapter 40, Article 47 ...............................................................
9 VAC 5 Chapter 40, Article 48 ...............................................................
Emission Standards for Portable Fuel Container Spillage.
Emissions Standards for Solvent Metal Cleaning Operations.
Emissions Standards for Mobile Equipment Repair and Refinishing Operations.
Emissions Standards for Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coatings.
Emission Standards for Consumer Products.
General Process Operations—Standard for Volatile Organic Compounds (non-CTG RACT for major sources).
General Process Operations—Standards for Nitrogen Oxides (nonCTG RACT for major sources).
9 VAC 5 Chapter 40, Article 49 ...............................................................
9 VAC 5 Chapter 40, Article 50 ...............................................................
9 VAC 5–40–300 of 9 VAC 5 Chapter 40, Article 4 ................................
cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
9 VAC 5–40–310 of 9 VAC 5 Chapter 40, Article 4 ................................
(ii) A violation (any 3-year average of
each annual fourth highest 8-hour
average) of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS of
0.08 ppm occurs—The maintenance
plan states that if a violation (any 3-year
average of each annual fourth highest 8hour average) of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS of 0.08 ppm occurs at a monitor
located in the Hampton Roads
monitoring network, the VADEQ will
implement two of the following control
strategies as follows:
• The expanded implementation of
one or more of the control strategies,
listed in Table 6 that is not currently in
place in the Hampton Roads Area.
(iii) A violation (any 3-year average of
each annual fourth highest 8-hour
average) of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS of
0.08 ppm in any subsequent ozone
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:23 Apr 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
season—The maintenance plan states
that if a violation (any 3-year average of
each annual fourth highest 8-hour
average) of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS of
0.08 ppm occurs in the Hampton Roads
monitoring network following the
implementation of the requirements
listed in the previous section (section
e(ii)) and in any subsequent ozone
season, two additional control strategies
from Table 6 will be implemented.
The following schedule for adoption,
implementation and compliance applies
to the contingency measures concerning
non-CTG RACT requirements. It would
also apply to the imposition of the area
source VOC regulations if those
regulations had not already been
implemented due to other triggers or
provisions of the maintenance plan.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
• Notification received from EPA that
a contingency measure must be
implemented, or three months after a
recorded violation;
• Applicable regulation to be adopted
6 months after this date;
• Applicable regulation to be
implemented 6 months after adoption;3
3 In the event of implementation of the RACT
contingency measure, Virginia would amend its
current RACT regulations to apply them to nonCTG sources in the Hampton Roads Area within 6
months after (a) notification received from EPA that
the contingency measure must be implemented, or
(b) three months after a recorded violation. The
newly subject non-CTG RACT sources would need
to develop source-specific RACT plans and comply
with their plans no later than 12 months from the
date of Virginia’s adoption of the amended
regulations.
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
18612
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 71 / Friday, April 13, 2007 / Proposed Rules
• Compliance with regulation to be
achieved within 12 months of adoption.
The maintenance plan adequately
addresses the five basic components of
a maintenance plan: Attainment
inventory, maintenance demonstration,
monitoring network, verification of
continued attainment, and a
contingency plan. EPA believes that the
maintenance plan SIP revision
submitted by Virginia for the Hampton
Roads area meets the requirements of
section 175A of the Act.
VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions
Budgets Established and Identified in
the Hampton Roads Maintenance Plan
Adequate and Approvable?
A. What Are the Motor Vehicle
Emissions Budgets?
Under the CAA, States are required to
submit, at various times, control strategy
SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone
areas. These control strategy SIPs (i.e.,
RFP SIPs and attainment demonstration
SIPs) and maintenance plans identify
and establish MVEBs for certain criteria
pollutants and/or their precursors to
address pollution from on-road mobile
sources. In the maintenance plan, the
MVEBs are termed ‘‘on-road mobile
source emission budgets.’’ Pursuant to
40 CFR part 93 and 51.112, MVEBs must
be established in an ozone maintenance
plan. An MVEB is the portion of the
total allowable emissions that is
allocated to highway and transit vehicle
use and emissions. An MVEB serves as
a ceiling on emissions from an area’s
planned transportation system. The
MVEB concept is further explained in
the preamble to the November 24, 1993,
transportation conformity rule (58 FR
62188). The preamble also describes
how to establish and revise the MVEBs
in control strategy SIPs and
maintenance plans.
Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new
transportation projects, such as the
construction of new highways, must
‘‘conform’’ to (i.e., be consistent with)
the part of the State’s air quality plan
that addresses pollution from cars and
trucks. ‘‘Conformity’’ to the SIP means
that transportation activities will not
cause new air quality violations, worsen
existing violations, or delay timely
attainment of or reasonable progress
towards the NAAQS. 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 ensuring 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 contained
therein ‘‘adequate’’ for use in
determining transportation conformity.
After EPA affirmatively finds the
submitted MVEB is adequate for
transportation conformity purposes, that
MVEB can be used by state and federal
agencies in determining whether
proposed transportation projects
‘‘conform’’ to the SIP as required by
section 176(c) of the CAA. EPA’s
substantive criteria for determining
‘‘adequacy’’ of a MVEB are set out in 40
CFR 93.118(e)(4).
EPA’s process for determining
‘‘adequacy’’ consists of three basic steps:
Public notification of a SIP submission,
a public comment period, and EPA’s
adequacy finding. This process for
determining the adequacy of submitted
SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in
EPA’s May 14, 1999 guidance,
‘‘Conformity Guidance on
Implementation of March 2, 1999,
Conformity Court Decision.’’ This
guidance was finalized in the
Transportation Conformity Rule
Amendments for the ‘‘New 8-Hour
Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air
Quality Standards and Miscellaneous
Revisions for Existing Areas;
Transportation Conformity Rule
Amendments—Response to Court
Decision and Additional Rule Change’’
on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). EPA
consults this guidance and follows this
rulemaking in making its adequacy
determinations.
The MVEBS for the Hampton Roads
Area are listed in Table 1 of this
document for 2011 and 2018, and are
the projected emissions for the on-road
mobile sources plus any portion of the
safety margin allocated to the MVEBs
(safety margin allocation for 2011 and
2018 only). These emission budgets,
when approved by EPA, must be used
for transportation conformity
determinations.
B. What Is a Safety Margin?
A ‘‘safety margin’’ is the difference
between the attainment level of
emissions (from all sources) and the
projected level of emissions (from all
sources) in the maintenance plan. The
attainment level of emissions is the
level of emissions during one of the
years in which the area met the NAAQS.
The following example is for the 2018
safety margin: Hampton Roads first
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
during the 2003 to 2005 time period.
The Commonwealth used 2005 as the
year to determine attainment levels of
emissions for Hampton Roads. The total
emissions from point, area, mobile onroad, and mobile non-road sources in
2005 equaled 204.982 tpd of VOC and
226.120 tpd of NOX. The VADEQ
projected emissions out to the year 2018
and projected a total of 198.379 tpd of
VOC and 190.329 tpd of NOX from all
sources in Hampton Roads. The safety
margin for 2018 would be the difference
between these amounts, or 6.603 tpd of
VOC and 35.791 tpd of NOX. The
emissions up to the level of the
attainment year including the safety
margins are projected to maintain the
Area’s air quality consistent with the 8hour ozone NAAQS. The safety margin
is the extra emissions reduction below
the attainment levels that can be
allocated for emissions by various
sources as long as the total emission
levels are maintained at or below the
attainment levels. Table 7 shows the
safety margins for the 2011 and 2018
years.
TABLE 7.—2011 AND 2018 SAFETY MARGINS FOR HAMPTON ROADS
VOC emissions
(tpd)
cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
Inventory year
2005
2011
2011
2005
2018
2018
NOX emissions
(tpd)
204.982
195.998
8.984
204.982
198.379
6.603
226.120
205.810
20.310
226.120
190.329
35.791
Attainment ...................................................................................................................................................
Interim .........................................................................................................................................................
Safety Margin .............................................................................................................................................
Attainment ...................................................................................................................................................
Final ............................................................................................................................................................
Safety Margin .............................................................................................................................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:53 Apr 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 71 / Friday, April 13, 2007 / Proposed Rules
The VADEQ allocated 1.000 tpd VOC
and 3.000 tpd NOX to the 2011 interim
VOC projected on-road mobile source
emissions projection and the 2011
interim NOX projected on-road mobile
source emissions projection to arrive at
the 2011 MVEBs. For the 2018 MVEBs
the VADEQ allocated 1.000 tpd VOC
and 3.000 tpd NOX from the 2018 safety
margins to arrive at the 2018 MVEBs.
Once allocated to the mobile source
budgets these portions of the safety
18613
margins are no longer available, and
may no longer be allocated to any other
source category. Table 8 shows the final
2009 and 2018 MVEBS for the Hampton
Roads Area.
TABLE 8.—2011 AND 2018 FINAL MVEBS FOR HAMPTON ROADS
VOC emissions
(tpd)
Inventory year
2011
2011
2011
2018
2018
2018
36.846
1.000
37.846
26.574
1.000
27.574
47.387
3.000
50.387
28.890
3.000
31.890
Projected on-road mobile source projected emissions ..............................................................................
Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs ............................................................................................................
MVEBs ........................................................................................................................................................
Projected on-road mobile source projected emissions ..............................................................................
Safety Margin Allocated to MVEBs ............................................................................................................
MVEBs ........................................................................................................................................................
C. Why Are the MVEBs Approvable?
The 2011 and 2018 MVEBs for the
Hampton Roads Area are approvable
because the MVEBs for NOX and VOCs
continue to maintain the total emissions
at or below the attainment year
inventory levels as required by the
transportation conformity regulations.
D. What Is the Adequacy and Approval
Process for the MVEBs in the Hampton
Roads Maintenance Plan?
cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
NOX emissions
(tpd)
The MVEBs for the Hampton Roads
Area maintenance plan are being posted
to EPA’s conformity Web site
concurrently with this proposal. The
public comment period will end at the
same time as the public comment period
for this proposed rule. In this case, EPA
is concurrently processing the action on
the maintenance plan and the adequacy
process for the MVEBs contained
therein. In this proposed rule, EPA is
proposing to find the MVEBs adequate
and also proposing to approve the
MVEBs as part of the maintenance plan.
The MVEBs cannot be used for
transportation conformity until the
maintenance plan and associated
MVEBs are approved in a final Federal
Register notice, or EPA otherwise finds
the budgets adequate in a separate
action following the comment period.
If EPA receives adverse written
comments with respect to the proposed
approval of the Hampton Roads MVEBs,
or any other aspect of our proposed
approval of this updated maintenance
plan, we will respond to the comments
on the MVEBs in our final action or
proceed with the adequacy process as a
separate action. Our action on the
Hampton Roads Area MVEBs will also
be announced on EPA’s conformity Web
site: https://www.epa.gov/otaq/
stateresources/transconf/index.htm
(once there, click on the ‘‘Conformity’’
button, then look for ‘‘Adequacy Review
of SIP Submissions’’).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
14:53 Apr 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
VIII. Proposed Actions
EPA is proposing to determine that
the Hampton Roads Area has attained
the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also
proposing to approve the redesignation
of the Hampton Roads Area from
nonattainment to attainment for the 8hour ozone NAAQS. EPA has evaluated
Virginia’s redesignation request and
determined that it meets the
redesignation criteria set forth in section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA believes
that the redesignation request and
monitoring data demonstrate that the
Hampton Roads Area has attained the 8hour ozone standard. The final approval
of this redesignation request would
change the designation of the Hampton
Roads Area from nonattainment to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone
standard. EPA is also proposing to
approve the associated maintenance
plan for the Hampton Roads Area,
submitted on October 18, 2006, as a
revision to the Virginia SIP. EPA is
proposing to approve the maintenance
plan for the Hampton Roads Area
because it meets the requirements of
section 175A as described previously in
this notice. EPA is also proposing to
approve the 2002 base-year inventory
for the Hampton Roads Area, and the
MVEBs submitted by Virginia for the
Hampton Roads Area in conjunction
with its redesignation request. EPA is
soliciting public comments on the
issues discussed in this document.
These comments will be considered
before taking final action.
IX. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed
action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ and therefore is not subject to
review by the Office of Management and
Budget. For this reason, this action is
also not subject to Executive Order
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355 (May
22, 2001)). This action merely proposes
to approve state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional
requirements beyond those imposed by
state law. Accordingly, the
Administrator certifies that this
proposed rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.). Because this rule proposes to
approve pre-existing requirements
under state law and does not impose
any additional enforceable duty beyond
that required by state law, it does not
contain any unfunded mandate or
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, as described in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Public Law 104–4). This proposed rule
also does not have a substantial direct
effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will
it have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the
national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999), because it merely
proposes to approve a state rule
implementing a Federal requirement,
and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. This proposed rule also is not
subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
18614
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 71 / Friday, April 13, 2007 / Proposed Rules
approves a state rule implementing a
Federal standard.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s
role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the
absence of a prior existing requirement
for the State to use voluntary consensus
standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for
failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for
EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,
to use VCS in place of a SIP submission
that otherwise satisfies the provisions of
the Clean Air Act. Redesignation is an
action that affects the status of a
geographical area and does not impose
any new requirements on sources. Thus,
the requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) do not apply. As required by
section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61
FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing
this proposed rule, EPA has taken the
necessary steps to eliminate drafting
errors and ambiguity, minimize
potential litigation, and provide a clear
legal standard for affected conduct. EPA
has complied with Executive Order
12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by
examining the takings implications of
the rule in accordance with the
‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental
Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk
and Avoidance of Unanticipated
Takings’’ issued under the executive
order.
This rule, proposing to approve the
redesignation of the Hampton Roads
Area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, the associated maintenance
plan, the 2002 base-year inventory, and
the MVEBS identified in the
maintenance plan, does not impose an
information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide,
Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with PROPOSALS
40 CFR Part 81
Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: April 5, 2007.
Judith Katz,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
[FR Doc. E7–7017 Filed 4–12–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:23 Apr 12, 2007
Jkt 211001
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
49 CFR Part 39
[Docket OST 2007–26829]
RIN 2105–AB87
Transportation for Individuals With
Disabilities: Passenger Vessels
Department of Transportation,
Office of the Secretary.
ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of
comment period.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Department is extending
through June 22, 2007, the period for
interested persons to submit comments
to its proposed rule to amend its
Americans with Disabilities Act
regulations concerning passenger
vessels.
COMMENT CLOSING DATE: Comments
should be submitted by June 22, 2007.
Late-filed comments will be considered
to the extent practicable.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
identified by the docket number OST
2007–26829 by any of the following
methods:
• Web site: https://dms.dot.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting
comments on the DOT electronic docket
site.
• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: (202) 493–2251.
• Mail: Docket Management System;
U.S. Department of Transportation, 400
Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building,
Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590–
0001.
• Hand Delivery: To the Docket
Management System; Room PL–401 on
the plaza level of the Nassif Building,
400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Instructions: You must include the
agency name and docket number OST–
2007–26829 or the Regulatory
Identification Number (RIN) for this
rulemaking at the beginning of your
comment. Note that all comments
received will be posted without change
to https://dms.dot.gov, including any
personal information provided.
Docket: You may view the public
docket through the Internet at https://
dms.dot.gov or in person at the Docket
Management System office at the above
address.
The Department of Transportation is
in the process of moving to a new
building. It is anticipated that the
Docket Office will move to its new
location before the end of the extended
comment period. We do not yet have the
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
complete address for the Docket Office
in the Department’s new building. The
Department will publish a Federal
Register notice when this information
becomes available. The address change
will not affect electronic submissions,
and mail submissions will be forwarded
to the new address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert C. Ashby, Deputy Assistant
General Counsel for Regulation and
Enforcement, Department of
Transportation, 400 7th Street, SW.,
Room 10424, Washington, DC 20590–
0001. (202) 366–9306 (voice); (202) 755–
7687 (TDD); bob.ashby@dot.gov (email).
On
January 23, 2007, the Department of
Transportation issued a notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPRM) (72 FR
2833) to amend its Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) rules to add
requirements concerning passenger
vessels. The comment period for this
NPRM was scheduled to end on April
23, 2007. A 90-day comment period is
commonly provided for significant
proposed rules.
On January 31, 2007, the Cruise Lines
International Association (CLIA)
requested a 120-day extension of the
comment period. CLIA cited as reasons
for its request the need for potential
commenters to consider the questions
the Department asked in the preamble to
the NPRM and the relationship between
the NPRM and ongoing work of the
Access Board concerning accessibility
guidelines for passenger vessels.
The Department believes that some
extension of the comment period can be
justified and that the Department can
extend the comment period for a
reasonable time without unduly
delaying work toward a final rule.
However, we do not believe that a 120day extension, which would more the
double the length of the original
comment period, is necessary to allow
interested persons to provide informed
comments to the Department, and we
are concerned that such a lengthy
extension could create unnecessary
delay.
Consequently, the Department will
extend the comment period for 60 days,
through June 22, 2007. The Department
does not anticipate the need for any
further extensions. Given the additional
time provided for comments, we urge
interested persons to make every effort
to provide detailed information
concerning the issues they raise.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\13APP1.SGM
13APP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 71 (Friday, April 13, 2007)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18602-18614]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-7017]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0919; FRL-8298-2]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Virginia; Redesignation of the Hampton Roads 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment
Area to Attainment and Approval of the Associated Maintenance Plan and
2002 Base-Year Inventory
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve a redesignation request and State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions submitted by the Commonwealth of
Virginia. The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VADEQ) is
requesting that the Hampton Roads ozone nonattainment area (``Hampton
Roads Area'' or ``Area'') be redesignated as attainment for the 8-hour
ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The Area is
comprised of the Cities of Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk,
Poquoson, Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach, and Williamsburg, and
the Counties of Gloucester, Isle of Wight, James City, and York,
Virginia. EPA is proposing to approve the ozone redesignation request
for the Hampton Roads Area. In conjunction with its redesignation
request, the Commonwealth submitted a SIP revision consisting of a
maintenance plan for the Hampton Roads Area that provides for continued
attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years after
redesignation. EPA is proposing to make a determination that the
Hampton Roads Area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, based upon
three years of complete, quality-assured ambient air quality monitoring
data for 2003-2005. EPA's proposed approval of the 8-hour ozone
redesignation request is based on its determination that the Hampton
Roads Area has met the criteria for redesignation to attainment
specified in the Clean Air Act (CAA). In addition, the Commonwealth of
Virginia has also submitted a 2002 base-year inventory for the Hampton
Roads Area, and EPA is proposing to approve that inventory for the
Hampton Roads Area as a SIP revision. EPA is also providing information
on the status of its adequacy determination for the motor vehicle
emission budgets (MVEBs) that are identified in the maintenance plan
for the Hampton Roads Area for purposes of transportation conformity,
and is also proposing to approve those
[[Page 18603]]
MVEBs. EPA is proposing approval of the redesignation request and of
the maintenance plan and 2002 base-year inventory SIP revisions in
accordance with the requirements of the CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before May 14, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2006-0919 by one of the following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. E-mail: morris.makeba@epa.gov
C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2006-0919, Makeba Morris, Chief, Air Quality
Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-listed EPA Region III address.
Such deliveries are only accepted during the Docket's normal hours of
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of
boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R03-OAR-
2006-0919. 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 information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or e-mail.
The www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information
unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-
mail comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov,
your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part
of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available
on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends
that you include your name and other contact information in the body of
your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic
files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or
in hard copy during normal business hours at the Air Protection
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region III, 1650 Arch
Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. Copies of the State submittal
are available at the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, 629
East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Caprio, (215) 814-2156, or by e-
mail at caprio.amy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.
Table of Contents
I. What Are the Actions EPA Is Proposing to Take?
II. What Is the Background for These Proposed Actions?
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?
IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?
V. What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?
VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Commonwealth's Request?
VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Established and
Identified in the Maintenance Plan for the Hampton Roads Area
Adequate and Approvable?
VIII. Proposed Actions
IX. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Are the Actions EPA Is Proposing to Take?
On October 16, 2006 the VADEQ formally submitted a request to
redesignate the Hampton Roads Area from nonattainment to attainment of
the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone. On October 18, 2006 Virginia submitted a
maintenance plan for the Hampton Roads Area as a SIP revision to ensure
continued attainment in the Area over the next 11 years. VADEQ also
submitted a 2002 base-year inventory for the Hampton Roads Area as a
SIP revision on October 12, 2006 and supplements to the base-year
inventory were submitted on November 20, 2006 and February 13, 2007.
The Hampton Roads Area is comprised of the Cities of Chesapeake,
Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson, Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia
Beach, and Williamsburg, and the Counties of Gloucester, Isle of Wight,
James City, and York, Virginia. It is currently designated a marginal
8-hour ozone nonattainment area. EPA is proposing to determine that the
Hampton Roads Area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS and that it has
met the requirements for redesignation pursuant to section 107(d)(3)(E)
of the CAA. EPA is, therefore, proposing to approve the redesignation
request to change the designation of the Hampton Roads Area from
nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also
proposing to approve the Hampton Roads maintenance plan as a SIP
revision for the Area (such approval being one of the CAA criteria for
redesignation to attainment status). The maintenance plan is designed
to ensure continued attainment in the Hampton Roads Area for the next
11 years. Concurrently, the Commonwealth is requesting that this 8-hour
maintenance plan supersede the previous 1-hour maintenance plan. EPA is
also proposing to approve the 2002 base-year inventory for the Hampton
Roads Area as a SIP revision. Additionally, EPA is announcing its
action on the adequacy process for the MVEBs identified in the Hampton
Roads maintenance plan, and proposing to approve the MVEBs identified
for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides
(NOX) for the Hampton Roads Area for transportation
conformity purposes.
II. What Is the Background for These Proposed Actions?
A. General
Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather,
emissions of NOX and VOC react in the presence of sunlight
to form ground-level ozone. The air pollutants NOX and VOC
are referred to as precursors of ozone. The CAA establishes a process
for air quality management through the attainment and maintenance of
the NAAQS.
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone standard
of 0.08 parts per million (ppm). This new standard is more stringent
than the previous 1-hour standard. EPA designated, as nonattainment,
any area violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the air quality data
for the three years of 2001-2003. These were the most recent three
years of data at the time EPA designated 8-hour areas. The Hampton
Roads Area was designated a marginal 8-hour ozone nonattainment area in
a Federal Register notice signed on April 15, 2004 and published on
April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857), based on its exceedance of the 8-hour
health-based standard for ozone during the
[[Page 18604]]
years 2001-2003. On April 30, 2004, EPA issued a final rule (69 FR
23951, 23996) to revoke the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the Hampton Roads
Area (as well as most other areas of the country) effective June 15,
2005. See 40 CFR 50.9(b); 69 FR at 23996 (April 30, 2004); and see 70
FR 44470 (August 3, 2005).
However, on December 22, 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit vacated EPA's Phase 1 Implementation Rule
for the 8-hour Ozone Standard. (69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004). South
Coast Air Quality Management Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir.
2006) (hereafter ``South Coast.''). The Court held that certain
provisions of EPA's Phase I Rule were inconsistent with the
requirements of the Clean Air Act. The Court rejected EPA's reasons for
implementing the 8-hour standard in nonattainment areas under Subpart 1
in lieu of subpart 2 of Title I, part D of the Act. The Court also held
that EPA improperly failed to retain four measures required for 1-hour
nonattainment areas under the anti-backsliding provisions of the
regulations: (1) Nonattainment area New Source Review (NSR)
requirements based on an area's 1-hour nonattainment classification;
(2) Section 185 penalty fees for 1-hour severe or extreme nonattainment
areas; (3) measures to be implemented pursuant to section 172(c)(9) or
182(c)(9) of the Act, on the contingency of an area not making
reasonable further progress toward attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or
for failure to attain that NAAQS; and (4) the certain conformity
requirements for certain types of federal. The Court upheld EPA's
authority to revoke the 1-hour standard provided there were adequate
anti-backsliding provisions. Elsewhere in this document, mainly in
section VI. B. ``The Hampton Roads Area Has Met All Applicable
Requirements under Section 110 and Part D of the CAA and Has a Fully
Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) of the CAA,'' EPA discusses its
rationale why the decision in South Coast is not an impediment to
redesignating the Hampton Roads Area to attainment of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.
The CAA, title I, part D, contains two sets of provisions--subpart
1 and subpart 2--that address planning and control requirements for
nonattainment areas. Subpart 1 (which EPA refers to as ``basic''
nonattainment) contains general, less prescriptive requirements for
nonattainment areas for any pollutant--including ozone--governed by a
NAAQS. Subpart 2 (which EPA refers to as ``classified'' nonattainment)
provides more specific requirements for ozone nonattainment areas. In
2004, the Hampton Roads Area was classified a marginal 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area based on air quality monitoring data from 2001-2003.
Therefore, the Hampton Roads Area is subject to the requirements of
subpart 2 of part D.
Under 40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour ozone standard is attained when
the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour
average ambient air quality ozone concentrations is less than or equal
to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when rounding is considered). See 69 FR
23857 (April 30, 2004) for further information. Ambient air quality
monitoring data for the 3-year period must meet data completeness
requirements. The data completeness requirements are met when the
average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data is greater
than 90 percent, and no single year has less than 75 percent data
completeness as determined in Appendix I of 40 CFR part 50. The ozone
monitoring data indicates that the Hampton Roads Area has a design
value of 0.078 ppm for the 3-year period of 2003-2005, using complete,
quality-assured data. Therefore, the ambient ozone data for the Hampton
Roads Area indicates no violations of the 8-hour ozone standard.
B. The Hampton Roads Area
Under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, the Hampton Roads Area consists of
the Cities of Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson,
Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach, and Williamsburg, and the Counties
of James City, and York, Virginia. Under the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the
Hampton Roads Area was expanded to also include Gloucester County and
Isle of Wight County. Prior to the Area's designation as an 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area, the Hampton Roads Area was a maintenance area
for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.\1\ See June 26, 1997 (62 FR 34408).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS the Hampton Roads Area
consisted of the Cities of Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News,
Norfolk, Poquoson, Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach, and
Williamsburg, and the Counties of James City and York. See November
6, 1991 (58 FR 56694).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On October 16, 2006 the VADEQ requested that the Hampton Roads Area
be redesignated to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. The
redesignation request included three years of complete, quality-assured
data for the period of 2003-2005, indicating that the 8-hour NAAQS for
ozone had been achieved in the Hampton Roads Area. The data satisfies
the CAA requirements that the 3-year average of the annual fourth-
highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration (commonly
referred to as the area's design value), must be less than or equal to
0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when rounding is considered). Under the CAA,
a nonattainment area may be redesignated if sufficient complete,
quality-assured data is available to determine that the area has
attained the standard and the area meets the other CAA redesignation
requirements set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E).
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?
The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA,
allows for redesignation, providing that:
(1) EPA determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS;
(2) EPA has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for
the area under section 110(k);
(3) EPA determines that the improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP and applicable Federal air
pollutant control regulations and other permanent and enforceable
reductions;
(4) EPA has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area as
meeting the requirements of section 175A; and
(5) The State containing such area has met all requirements
applicable to the area under section 110 and part D.
EPA provided guidance on redesignations 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
[[Page 18605]]
Management Division, September 4, 1992;
``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in
Response to Clean Air Act (Act) Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John
Calcagni Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;
``Technical Support Documents (TSDs) for Redesignation
Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from
G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17,
1993;
``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas
Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and
Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) on
or after November 15, 1992,'' Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17,
1993;
Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, Acting Director, Air
Quality Management Division, to Air Division Directors, Regions 1-10,
``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone and
CO Nonattainment Areas,'' dated November 30, 1993;
``Part D New Source Review (part D NSR) Requirements for
Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Memorandum from Mary D.
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14,
1994; and
``Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration,
and Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the
Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard,'' Memorandum from John S.
Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, May 10,
1995.
IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions?
On October 16, 2006, the VADEQ requested redesignation of the
Hampton Roads Area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone standard. On
October 18, 2006, VADEQ submitted a maintenance plan for the Hampton
Roads Area as a SIP revision, to ensure continued attainment of the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS over the next 11 years, until 2018. Concurrently,
Virginia is requesting that 8-hour maintenance plan submittal supersede
the 1-hour maintenance plan requirements already in place and that the
8-hour maintenance plan meet the requirement of CAA section 175A(b)
with respect to the 1-hour ozone maintenance plan update. EPA is
proposing to approve the maintenance plan to fulfill the requirement of
section 175A(b) for submission of a maintenance plan update eight years
after the area was redesignated to attainment of the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS. EPA believes that such an update must ensure that the
maintenance plan in the SIP provides maintenance of the NAAQS for a
period of 20 years after the area is initially redesignated to
attainment. EPA can propose approval because the maintenance plan,
which demonstrates maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS through 2018,
also demonstrates maintenance of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS through 2018.
VADEQ also submitted a 2002 base-year inventory with its
maintenance plan as a SIP revision on October 12, 2006 and supplemental
to that submittal on November 20, 2006 and February 13, 2007, which is
an applicable requirement for the Hampton Roads Area for purposes of
redesignation. EPA has determined that the Hampton Roads Area has
attained the 8-hour ozone standard and has met the requirements for
redesignation set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E).
V. What Would Be the Effect of These Actions?
Approval of the redesignation request would change the official
designation of the Hampton Roads Area from nonattainment to attainment
for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS found at 40 CFR part 81. It would also
incorporate into the Virginia SIP a 2002 base-year inventory and a
maintenance plan ensuring continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS in the Hampton Roads Area for the next 11 years, until 2018. The
maintenance plan includes contingency measures to remedy any future
violations of the 8-hour NAAQS (should they occur), and identifies the
NOX and VOC MVEBs for transportation conformity purposes for
the years 2011 and 2018. These MVEBs are displayed in the following
table:
Table 1.--Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets in Tons per Day (tpd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011.......................................... 37.846 50.387
2018.......................................... 27.574 31.890
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Commonwealth's Request?
EPA is proposing to determine that the Hampton Roads Area has
attained the 8-hour ozone standard and that all other redesignation
criteria have been met. The following is a description of how the
VADEQ's October 16, 2006 (redesignation request), October 18, 2006
(maintenance plan and MVEBs), October 12, 2006 (base-year emissions
inventory), November 20, 2006 (supplement to base-year inventory), and
February 13, 2007 (second supplement to base-year inventory) submittals
satisfy the requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.
A. The Hampton Roads Area Has Attained the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
EPA is proposing to determine that the Hampton Roads Area has
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. For ozone, an area may be considered
to be attaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS if there are no violations, as
determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.10 and Appendix I of Part 50,
based on three complete, consecutive calendar years of quality-assured
air quality monitoring data. To attain this standard, the 3-year
average of the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentrations measured at each monitor, within the area, over each
year must not exceed the ozone standard of 0.08 ppm. Based on the
rounding convention described in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix I, the
standard is attained if the design value is 0.084 ppm or below. The
data must be collected and quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR
part 58, and recorded in the Air Quality System (AQS). The monitors
generally should have remained at the same location for the duration of
the monitoring period required for demonstrating attainment.
There are three ozone monitors in the Hampton Roads Area. As part
of its redesignation request, Virginia referenced ozone monitoring data
for the years 2003-2005 for the Hampton Roads Area. This data has been
quality assured and is recorded in the AQS. The fourth-high 8-hour
daily maximum concentrations, along with the three-year averages are
summarized in Table 2. The Hampton and Suffolk--TCC monitoring sites
had the highest 3-year average of the fourth highest daily maximum 8-
hour average and are therefore used to make air quality determinations.
[[Page 18606]]
Table 2.--Hampton Roads Area Fourth Highest 8-Hour Average Values, Hampton Roads Monitors, Parts per Million
(ppm)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3-year
Monitor AQS ID No. 2003 2004 2005 average
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hampton......................... 516500004 0.083 0.074 0.078 0.078
Suffolk--TCC.................... 518000004 0.083 0.074 0.077 0.078
Suffolk--Holland................ 518000005 0.079 0.075 0.078 0.077
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The average for the 3-year period 2003-2005 is 0.078 ppm.
The air quality data for 2003-2005 show that the Hampton Roads Area
has attained the standard with a design value of 0.078 ppm. The data
collected at the Hampton Roads Area monitors satisfy the CAA
requirement that the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily
maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration is less than or equal to
0.08 ppm. The VADEQ's request for redesignation for the Hampton Roads
Area indicates that the data is complete and was quality assured in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58. The VADEQ uses the AQS as the permanent
database to maintain its data and quality assures the data transfers
and content for accuracy. In addition, as discussed below with respect
to the maintenance plan, VADEQ has committed to continue monitoring in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58. In summary, EPA has determined that the
data submitted by Virginia indicates that the Hampton Roads Area has
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
B. The Hampton Roads Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under
Section 110 and Part D of the CAA and Has a Fully Approved SIP Under
Section 110(k) of the CAA
EPA has determined that the Hampton Roads Area has met all SIP
requirements applicable for purposes of this redesignation under
section 110 of the CAA (General SIP Requirements) and that it meets all
applicable SIP requirements under part D of Title I of the CAA, in
accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, EPA has
determined that the SIP is fully approved with respect to all
requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation in accordance
with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these proposed determinations,
EPA ascertained which requirements are applicable to the Hampton Roads
Area and determined that the applicable portions of the SIP meeting
these requirements are fully approved under section 110(k) of the CAA.
We note that SIPs must be fully approved only with respect to
applicable requirements. The September 4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum
(``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4, 1992) describes EPA's interpretation
of section 107(d)(3)(E) with respect to the timing of applicable
requirements. Under this interpretation, to qualify for redesignation,
States requesting redesignation to attainment must meet only the
relevant CAA requirements that came due prior to the submittal of a
complete redesignation request. See also Michael Shapiro memorandum,
September 17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66 (March 7, 1995)
(redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor). Applicable requirements of the
CAA that come due subsequent to the area's submittal of a complete
redesignation request remain applicable until a redesignation is
approved, but are not required as a prerequisite to redesignation.
Section 175A(c) of the CAA. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir.
2004). See also 68 FR at 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of
St. Louis).
This section also sets forth EPA's views on the potential effect of
the Court's ruling in South Coast on this redesignation action. For the
reasons set forth below, EPA does not believe that the Court's ruling
alters any requirements relevant to this redesignation action so as to
preclude redesignation, and does not prevent EPA from finalizing this
redesignation. EPA believes that the Court's decision, as it currently
stands or as it may be modified based upon any petition for rehearing
that has been filed, imposes no impediment to moving forward with
redesignation of this area to attainment, because in either
circumstance redesignation is appropriate under the relevant
redesignation provisions of the Act and longstanding policies regarding
redesignation requests.
1. Section 110 General SIP Requirements
Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA delineates the general
requirements for a SIP, which include enforceable emissions limitations
and other control measures, means, or techniques, provisions for the
establishment and operation of appropriate devices necessary to collect
data on ambient air quality, and programs to enforce the limitations.
The general SIP elements and requirements set forth in section
110(a)(2) include, but are not limited to the following:
Submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the State
after reasonable public notice and hearing;
Provisions for establishment and operation of appropriate
procedures needed to monitor ambient air quality;
Implementation of a source permit program; provisions for
the implementation of part C requirements (Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD));
Provisions for the implementation of part D requirements
for New Source Review (NSR) permit programs;
Provisions for air pollution modeling; and
Provisions for public and local agency participation in
planning and emission control rule development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to
prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air
quality problems in another State. To implement this provision, EPA has
required certain states to establish programs to address transport of
air pollutants in accordance with the NOX SIP Call, October
27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), amendments to the NOX SIP Call, May
14, 1999 (64 FR 26298) and March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), and the Clean
Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162). However, the
section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a State are not linked with a
particular nonattainment area's designation and classification in that
State. EPA believes that the requirements linked with a particular
nonattainment area's designation and classifications are the relevant
measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. The
transport SIP submittal requirements, where applicable, continue to
apply to a state regardless of the designation of any one particular
area in the State.
Thus, we do not believe that these requirements are applicable
requirements for purposes of
[[Page 18607]]
redesignation. 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 Hampton Roads Area will still be subject to these
requirements after it is redesignated. The section 110 and part D
requirements, which are linked with a particular area's designation and
classification, are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a
redesignation request. This policy is consistent with EPA's existing
policy on applicability of conformity (i.e., for redesignations) and
oxygenated fuels requirement. See Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and
final rulemakings (61 FR 53174, 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 (60 FR 62748, December
7, 1995). See also the discussion on this issue in the Cincinnati
redesignation (65 FR at 37890, June 19, 2000), and in the Pittsburgh
redesignation (66 FR at 53099, October 19, 2001). Similarly, with
respect to the NOX SIP Call rules, EPA noted in its Phase 1
Final Rule to Implement the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS, that the NOX
SIP Call rules are not ``an'' `applicable requirement' for purposes of
section 110(1) because the NOX rules apply regardless of an
area's attainment or nonattainment status for the 8-hour (or the 1-
hour) NAAQS.'' 69 FR 23951, 23983 (April 30, 2004).
EPA believes that section 110 elements not linked to the Area's
nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation.
As explained later in this notice, two part D requirements applicable
for purposes of redesignation under the 8-hour standard became due
prior to the submission of the redesignation request.
Because the Virginia SIP satisfies all of the applicable general
SIP elements and requirements set forth in section 110(a)(2), EPA
concludes that Virginia has satisfied the criterion of section
107(d)(3)(E) regarding section 110 of the Act.
2. Part D Nonattainment Requirements Under the 8-Hour Standard
The Hampton Roads Area was classified a Subpart 2, 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 applicable to 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.
The Hampton Roads Area is classified as a Subpart 2, marginal
nonattainment area. We do not believe that any part of the Court's
opinion would require that this subpart 2 classification be changed
upon remand to EPA. However, even assuming for present purposes that
the Hampton Roads Area would become subject to a different
classification under a classification scheme created in a future rule
in response to the court's decision, that would not prevent EPA from
finalizing a redesignation for this area. For the reasons set forth
below, we believe that any additional requirements that might apply
based on that different classification would not be applicable for
purposes of evaluating the redesignation request.
This belief is based upon (1) EPA's longstanding policy of
evaluating redesignation requests in accordance with only the
requirements due at the time the request was submitted; and (2)
consideration of the inequity of applying retroactively any
requirements that might be applied in the future.
First, at the time the redesignation request was submitted, the
area was classified under Subpart 2 and was required to meet the
Subpart 2 requirements. Under EPA's longstanding interpretation of
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act, to qualify for
redesignation, states requesting redesignation to attainment must meet
only the relevant SIP requirements that came due prior to the submittal
of a complete redesignation request. September 4, 1992 Calcagni
memorandum (``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas
to Attainment'', Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division) See also Michael Shapiro Memorandum, September 17,
1993, and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66 (March 7, 1995) (redesignation of
Detroit-Ann Arbor); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004),
which upheld this interpretation. See, e.g, also 68 FR 25418, 25424,
25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of St. Louis). At the time the
redesignation request was submitted, the Hampton Roads Area was
classified as a marginal area under Subpart 2 and thus only Subpart 2
marginal area requirements are applicable for purposes of
redesignation.
Moreover, it would be inequitable to retroactively apply any new
SIP requirements that were not applicable at the time the request was
submitted, but which might later become applicable. The D.C. Circuit
has recognized the inequity in such retroactive rulemaking. See Sierra
Club v. Whitman, 285 F.3d 63 (D.C. Cir. 2002), in which the D.C.
Circuit upheld a District Court's ruling refusing to make retroactive
an EPA determination of nonattainment that was past the statutory due
date. Such a determination would have resulted in the imposition of
additional requirements on the area. The Court stated: ``Although EPA
failed to make the nonattainment determination within the statutory
time frame, Sierra Club's proposed solution only makes the situation
worse. Retroactive relief would likely impose large costs on the
States, which would face fines and suits for not implementing air
pollution prevention plans in 1997, even though they were not on notice
at the time.'' Id. at 68. Similarly, here it would be unfair to
penalize the area by applying to it for purposes of redesignation any
additional requirements that were not in effect at the time it
submitted its redesignation request, but that might apply in the
future.
Two Subpart 2 requirements became due for the Hampton Roads Area
under section 182(a) of the CAA prior to redesignation--a 2002 base-
year inventory, and the emissions statement requirement pursuant to
section 182(a)(3)(B). Virginia has in its approved SIP an approved
emissions statement rule for the 1-hour standard covering those
portions of the 8-hour nonattainment area that were part of the
previous 1-hour attainment area, which satisfies the emissions
statement requirement for the 8-hour standard. See 65 FR 21315 (April
21, 2000). Virginia recently submitted a rulemaking to expand the VOC
and NOX Hampton Roads Emissions Control Area to include
Gloucester County and Isle of Wight County. EPA approved this
rulemaking on March 2, 2007 (72 FR 9441) and will become effective on
April 2, 2007. Today, EPA is proposing to approve the 2002 base-year
inventory for the Hampton Roads Area, which was submitted on October
12, 2006, and supplemented on November 20, 2006 and February 13, 2007,
concurrently with its maintenance plan, into the Virginia SIP. A
detailed evaluation of Virginia's 2002 base-year inventory for the
Hampton Roads Area can be found in a Technical Support Document (TSD)
prepared by EPA for this rulemaking. EPA has determined that the
emission inventory and emissions statement requirements for the Hampton
Roads Area have been satisfied.
EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the general conformity
and NSR requirements of part D as not requiring approval prior to
[[Page 18608]]
redesignation. With respect to section 176, Conformity Requirements,
section 176(c) of the CAA requires states to establish criteria and
procedures to ensure that Federally-supported or funded projects
conform to the air quality planning goals in the applicable SIP. The
requirement to determine conformity applies to transportation plans,
programs, and projects developed, funded or approved under Title 23
U.S.C. and the Federal Transit Act (``transportation conformity'') as
well as to all other Federally supported or funded projects (``general
conformity''). State conformity revisions must be consistent with
Federal conformity regulations relating to consultation, enforcement
and enforceability that the CAA required the EPA to promulgate.
EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity SIP
requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating the
redesignation request under section 107(d) since state conformity rules
are still required after redesignation and federal conformity rules
apply where state rules have not been approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.
3d 426, 438 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding this interpretation. See also 60
FR 62748 (December 7, 1995).
EPA has also determined that areas being redesignated need not
comply with the requirement that a NSR program be approved prior to
redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the
standard without part D NSR in effect, because PSD requirements will
apply after redesignation. The rationale for this position is described
in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled, ``Part D NSR Requirements
or Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.'' Virginia has
demonstrated that the Area will be able to maintain the standard
without Part D NSR in effect in the Hampton Roads Area, and therefore,
Virginia need not have a fully approved Part D NSR program prior to
approval of the redesignation request. Virginia's SIP-approved PSD
program will become effective in Hampton Roads upon redesignation to
attainment. See rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60 FR at 12467-68);
Cleveland-Akron-Lorrain, Ohio (61 FR at 20458, 20469-70); Louisville,
Kentucky (66 FR 53665, 53669 October 23, 2001); Grand Rapids, Michigan
(61 FR at 31831, 31834-37, June 21, 1996).
3. Requirements Under the 1-Hour Standard
With respect to the 1-hour standard requirements, the Gloucester
County and Isle of Wight County portions of the Hampton Roads Area were
designated Unclassifiable/Attainment under the 1-hour standard and were
never designated nonattainment for the 1-hour standard. Therefore,
there are no outstanding 1-hour nonattainment area requirements these
portions of the Hampton Roads Area would be required to meet. Thus, we
find that the Court's ruling does not result in any additional 1-hour
requirements for purposes of redesignation.
The portion of the Hampton Roads Area consisting of the Cities of
Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson, Portsmouth,
Suffolk, Virginia Beach, and Williamsburg, and the Counties of James
City, and York, Virginia was an Attainment area subject to a Clean Air
Act section 175A maintenance plan under the 1-hour standard. The
Court's ruling does not impact redesignation requests for these types
of areas.
First, there are no conformity requirements that are relevant for
redesignation requests for any standard, including the requirement to
submit a transportation conformity SIP.\2\ Under longstanding EPA
policy, EPA believes that it is reasonable to interpret the conformity
SIP requirement as not applying for purposes of evaluating a
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. 40 CFR 51.390.
See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding this
interpretation. See also 60 FR 62748 (Dec. 7, 1995) (Tampa, FL
redesignation).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Clean Air Act section 176(c)(4)(E) currently requires States
to submit revisions to their SIPs to reflect certain federal
criteria and procedures for determining transportation conformity.
Transportation conformity SIPs are different from the motor vehicle
emissions budgets that are established in control strategy SIPs and
maintenance plans.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, with respect to the three other anti-backsliding provisions
for the 1-hour standard that the Court found were not properly
retained, this portion of the Hampton Roads Area is an attainment area
subject to a maintenance plan for the 1-hour standard, and the NSR,
contingency measure (pursuant to section 172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9)) and
fee provision requirements no longer apply to an area that has been
redesignated to attainment of the 1-hour standard.
Thus the decision in South Coast should not alter requirements that
would preclude EPA from finalizing the redesignation of this area.
4. Hampton Roads Has a Fully Approved SIP for Purposes of Redesignation
EPA has fully approved the Virginia SIP for the purposes of this
redesignation. EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request. Calcagni Memo, p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania
Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F. 3d 984, 989-90 (6th Cir. 1998), Wall
v. EPA, 265 F. 3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), plus any additional measures it
may approve in conjunction with a redesignation action. See 68 FR at
25425 (May 12, 2003) and citations therein. The Hampton Roads Area was
a 1-hour ozone maintenance area at the time of its designation as a
marginal 8-hour ozone nonattainment area on April 30, 2004. As stated
previously, two subpart 2 part D requirements became due for the
Hampton Roads Area prior to redesignation--a 2002 base-year inventory,
and the emissions statement requirement. VADEQ has submitted
concurrently with its maintenance plan, a 2002 base-year inventory as a
SIP revision. In this action, EPA is proposing approval of this
inventory. The emissions statement requirement for the entire Hampton
Roads Area was recently fulfilled on March 2, 2007 (72 FR 9441).
Because there are no outstanding SIP submission requirements applicable
for the purposes of the redesignation of the Hampton Roads Area, the
applicable implementation plan satisfies all pertinent SIP
requirements.
C. The Air Quality Improvement in the Hampton Roads 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 Commonwealth has demonstrated that the
observed air quality improvement in the Hampton Roads Area is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the SIP, Federal measures, and other State-adopted
measures. Emissions reductions attributable to these rules are shown in
Table 3.
[[Page 18609]]
Table 3.--Total VOC and NOX Emissions for 2002 and 2005 in Tons per Day (tpd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year Point Area * Nonroad Mobile Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002............................ 18.758 87.402 46.543 67.293 219.996
2005............................ 20.091 91.980 42.320 50.591 204.982
Diff (02-05).................... +1.333 +4.578 -4.223 -16.702 -15.014
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002............................ 91.403 57.961 31.002 93.844 274.210
2005............................ 62.536 55.207 30.208 78.169 226.120
Diff (02-05).................... -28.867 -2.754 -0.794 -15.675 -48.090
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Area source category includes emissions from motor vehicle refueling.
Between 2002 and 2005, VOC emissions decreased by 15.014 tpd and
NOX emissions decreased by 48.090 tpd because of permanent
and enforceable measures implemented by the Commonwealth and the
federal government. These reductions, and anticipated future
reductions, are due to the following permanent and enforceable
measures.
Programs Currently in Effect
(a) Tier 1;
(b) Tier 2;
(c) National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV) Program; and
(d) NOX SIP Call.
EPA believes that permanent and enforceable emissions reductions
are the cause of the long-term improvement in ozone levels and are the
cause of the Area achieving attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard.
D. The Hampton Roads Area Has a Fully Approvable Maintenance Plan
Pursuant to Section 175A of the CAA
In conjunction with its request to redesignate the Hampton Roads
Area to attainment status, Virginia submitted a SIP revision to provide
for maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the Area for at least 11
years after redesignation. The Commonwealth is requesting that EPA
approve this SIP revision as meeting the requirement of CAA 175A and
175A(b). Section 175A(a) was met with the October 18, 2006 submission
of the maintenance plan, because it states that Hampton Roads will
maintain the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years after
redesignation. Section 175A(b) was met with the October 18, 2006
submission of the maintenance plan, because it will replace the 1-hour
maintenance plan update requirement that was due 8 years after
redesingation of Hampton Roads to attainment. Once approved, the
maintenance plan for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS will ensure that the SIP
for Hampton Roads meets the requirements of the CAA regarding
maintenance of the applicable 8-hour ozone standard.
What Is Required in a Maintenance Plan?
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment.
Under section 175A(a), the plan must demonstrate continued attainment
of the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after approval of a
redesignation of an area to attainment. Section 175A(b) states that
eight years after redesignation from nonattainment to attainment, the
State must submit a revised maintenance plan demonstrating that
attainment will continue to be maintained for the next 10-year period
following the initial 10-year period. To address the possibility of
future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must contain such
contingency measures, with a schedule for implementation, as EPA deems
necessary to assure prompt correction of any future 8-hour ozone
violations. Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a
maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to
attainment. The Calcagni memorandum dated September 4, 1992, provides
additional guidance on the content of a maintenance plan. An ozone
maintenance plan should address the following provisions:
(a) An attainment emissions inventory;
(b) A maintenance demonstration;
(c) A monitoring network;
(d) Verification of continued attainment; and
(e) A contingency plan.
Analysis of the Hampton Roads Area Maintenance Plan
(a) Attainment inventory--An attainment inventory includes the
emissions during the time period associated with the monitoring data
showing attainment. VADEQ determined that the appropriate attainment
inventory year is 2005. That year establishes a reasonable year within
the three-year block of 2003-2005 as a baseline and accounts for
reductions attributable to implementation of the CAA requirements to
date. The 2005 inventory is consistent with EPA guidance and is based
on actual ``typical summer day'' emissions of VOC and NOX
during 2005 and consists of a list of sources and their associated
emissions.
To develop the NOX and VOC base year emissions
inventories, VADEQ used the following approaches:
(i) Point source emissions were developed using the latest version
of EPA's Economic Growth Analysis System (EGAS 5.0).
(ii) Area source emissions were also developed using growth factors
from EGAS 5.0 and then applied to the 2002 Area source inventory.
(iii) Mobile nonroad emissions were developed using EPA's NONROAD
2005 model. The NONROAD 2005 model estimates fuel consumption and
emissions of total hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides,
sulfur oxides, and particulate matter for all nonroad mobile source
categories except for aircraft, locomotives, and commercial marine
vessels (CMV).
(iv) Mobile on-road source emissions were calculated using EPA's
MOBILE6.2 mobile source inventory model. The Virginia Department of
Transportation (VDOT) provided daily vehicle miles traveled (DVMT),
average speed data for each road type by jurisdiction, and annual
growth rates that were used to forecast DVMT into the future. Also, the
Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles provided registration data that
was specific to each jurisdiction. Mobile source emission projections
include the National Low Emission Vehicle Program (NLEV), the 2004 Tier
2 and Low Sulfur Gasoline Rule, the 2004 and 2007 Heavy-Duty Diesel
Vehicle Rules, and the 2006 Low Sulfur Diesel Rule. In
[[Page 18610]]
addition, James City, York, Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk,
Poquoson, Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach, and Williamsburg were
modeled with Phase II Reformulated Gasoline (RFG) while Gloucester and
Isle of Wight were modeled with conventional gasoline fuel.
More detailed information on the compilation of the 2002, 2005,
2011, and 2018 inventories can found in the Technical Appendices, which
are part of VADEQ's October 18, 2006 submittal.
(b) Maintenance Demonstration--On October 18, 2006, the VADEQ
submitted a maintenance plan as required by section 175A of the CAA.
The Hampton Roads maintenance plan shows maintenance of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS by demonstrating that future emissions of VOC and
NOX will not exceed the attainment year 2005 emissions
levels throughout the Hampton Roads Area through the year 2018. A
maintenance demonstration need not be based on modeling. See Wall v.
EPA, supra; Sierra Club v. EPA, supra. See also 66 FR at 53099-53100;
68 FR at 25430-32.
Tables 4 and 5 specify the VOC and NOX emissions for the
Hampton Roads Area for 2005, 2011, and 2018. The VADEQ chose 2011 as an
interim year in the maintenance demonstration period to demonstrate
that the VOC and NOX emissions are not projected to increase
above the 2005 attainment level during the time of the maintenance
period.
Table 4.--Total VOC Emissions for 2005-2018 (tpd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2005 VOC 2011 VOC 2018 VOC
Source category emissions emissions emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point........................................................... 20.091 23.280 26.700
Area \1\........................................................ 91.980 100.960 112.790
Mobile \2\...................................................... 50.591 37.846 27.574
Nonroad......................................................... 42.320 33.912 31.315
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 204.982 195.998 198.379
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes vehicle refueling emissions and the benefits of selected local controls (Stage I, CTG RACT, and
open burning). Also includes site/project specific emissions estimates and projections.
\2\ Includes transportation provisions.
Table 5.--Total NOX Emissions for 2005-2018 (tpd)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2005 NOX 2011 NOX 2018 NOX
Source category emissions emissions emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point........................................................... 62.536 69.333 75.241
Area \1\........................................................ 55.207 56.974 60.105
Mobile \2\...................................................... 78.169 50.387 31.890
Non-road........................................................ 30.208 29.116 23.093
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 226.120 205.810 190.329
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes selected local controls (open burning). Also includes site/project specific emissions estimates and
projections.
\2\ Includes transportation provisions.
Additionally, the following programs are either effective or due to
become effective and will further contribute to the maintenance
demonstration of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS:
Currently in Effect:
The National Low Emission Vehicle (NLEV) program;
Open burning restrictions for James City, York,
Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson, Portsmouth,
Suffolk, Virginia Beach, and Williamsburg;
Control Technology Guideline (CTG) Reasonable Available
Control Technology (RACT) requirements for James City, York,
Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson, Portsmouth,
Suffolk, Virginia Beach, and Williamsburg;
Stage I gasoline vapor recovery requirements for James
City, York, Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson,
Portsmouth, Suffolk, Virginia Beach, and Williamsburg;
Motor vehicle fleet turnover with new vehicles meeting the
Tier 2 standards; and
Low sulfur gasoline.
Additionally, the following programs are in place and either
effective or are due to become effective:
Heavy duty diesel on-road (2004/2007) and low sulfur on-
road (2006); 66 FR 5002, (January 18, 2001)
Non-road emission standards (2008) and off-road diesel
fuel 2007/2010); 69 FR 38958 (June 29, 2004).
Lastly, to further improve air quality and to provide room for
industrial and population growth while maintaining emissions in the
area to less than 2005 levels, the Commonwealth of Virginia has
initiated rulemaking to implement the following programs:
Implement the Stage I requirements of 9 VAC 5 Chapter 40,
Article 37 in Isle of Wight and Gloucester;
Implement open burning restriction requirements of 9 VAC 5
Chapter 40, Article 40 in Isle of Wight and Gloucester; and
Implement existing source CTG RACT requirements of 9 VAC 5
Chapter 40, Articles 5-6, 24-36, and 39 in Isle of Wight and
Gloucester.
Based on the comparison of the projected emissions and the
attainment year emissions along with the additional measures, EPA
concludes that VADEQ has successfully demonstrated that the 8-hour
ozone standard should be maintained in the Hampton Roads Area.
(c) Monitoring Network--There are three monitors measuring ozone in
the Hampton Roads Area. VADEQ will continue to operate its current air
quality monitors (located in the Hampton Roads Area), in accordance
with 40 CFR part 58.
(d) Verification of Continued Attainment--In addition to
maintaining the key elements of its regulatory program, the
Commonwealth will acquire ambient and source emission data to track
attainment and maintenance. The Commonwealth will track the progress of
the maintenance demonstration by periodically updating
[[Page 18611]]
the emissions inventory. This tracking will consist of annual and
periodic evaluations. The annual evaluation will consist of checks on
key emissions trend indicators as they actually emission update of
stationary sources, the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS)
vehicle miles traveled data reported to the Federal Highway
Administration, and other growth indicators. These indicators will be
compared to the growth assumptions used in the plan to determine if the
predicted versus the observed growth remains relatively constant. The
Commonwealth will also develop and submit periodic (every three years)
emission inventories prepared under EPA's Consolidated Emission
Reporting Regulation (40 CFR 51, subpart A), beginning in 2005.
(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 CAA requires
that a maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems
necessary to ensure that the Commonwealth will promptly correct a
violation of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The maintenance
plan should identify the events that would ``trigger'' the adoption and
implementation of a contingency measure(s), the contingency measure(s)
that would be adopted and implemented, and the schedule indicating the
time frame by which the state would adopt and implement the measure(s).
The ability of the Hampton Roads Area to stay in compliance with
the 8-hour ozone standard after redesignation depends upon VOC and
NOX emissions in the Area remaining at or below 2005 levels.
The Commonwealth's maintenance plan projects VOC and NOX
emissions to decrease and stay below 2005 levels through the year 2018.
The Commonwealth's maintenance plan outlines the procedures for the
adoption and implementation of contingency measures to further reduce
emissions should a violation occur.
The Commonwealth's maintenance plan lays out situations where the
need to adopt and implement a contingency measure to further reduce
emissions would be triggered. Those situations are as follows:
(i) An actual increase of the VOC or NOX emissions
exceed the regional emissions budgets, which would be identified or
predicted through the development of the comprehensive periodic
tracking inventories--The maintenance plan states that the VADEQ will
monitor the observed growth rates for VMT, population, and point source
VOC and NOX emissions on a yearly basis which will serve as
an early warning indicator of the potential for a violation. The plan
also states that comprehensive tracking inventories will also be
developed every 3 years using current EPA-approved methods to estimate
emissions, concentrating on areas identified in the less rigorous
yearly evaluations as being potential problems. If the regional
emissions budget for VOC or NOX is exceeded, the following
control strategies will be implemented as follows:
Preparation of a complete VOC and NOX emission
inventory; and
The expanded implementation of one or more of the
following control strategies, listed in Table 6, that are not currently
in place in the Hampton Roads Area.
Table 6.--Maintenance Plan Contingency Measure Options
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Control strategy Description
------------------------------------------------------------------------
9 VAC 5 Chapter 40, Article 42......... Emission Standards for Portable
Fuel Container Spillage.
9 VAC 5 Chapter 40, Article 47......... Emissions Standards for Solvent
Metal Cleaning Operations.
9 VAC 5 Chapter 40, Article 48......... Emissions Standards for Mobile