Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of Kansas, 44781-44784 [E7-15251]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 153 / Thursday, August 9, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by October 9, 2007. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of this rule for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
44781
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
I
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: July 27, 2007.
John B. Askew,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart AA—Missouri
2. In § 52.1320(e) the table is amended
by adding an entry in numerical order
to read as follows:
I
§ 52.1320
*
Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
I
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED MISSOURI NONREGULATORY SIP PROVISIONS
Name of nonregulatory SIP
provision
Applicable geographic or nonattainment area
State submittal
date
*
*
*
(53) Maintenance Plan for the Kansas City ............................
8-hour ozone standard in
the Missouri portion of the
Kansas City area.
*
5/23/07
[FR Doc. E7–15264 Filed 8–8–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R07–OAR–2007–0620; FRL–8450–5]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; State of Kansas
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a
revision to the Kansas State
Implementation Plan (SIP) prepared by
Kansas to maintain the 8-hour national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS)
for ozone in the Kansas portion of the
Kansas City area. The Kansas City area
is designated attainment for the ozone
NAAQS. This revision is required by the
Clean Air Act. A similar final
rulemaking pertaining to the Missouri
portion of the Kansas City maintenance
area is being done in conjunction with
this rulemaking. The effect of this
approval is to ensure Federal
enforceability of the state air program
plan and to maintain consistency
between the state-adopted plan and the
approved SIP.
DATES: This direct final rule will be
effective October 9, 2007, without
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Aug 08, 2007
Jkt 211001
EPA approval date
*
8/9/07 [insert FR page number where the document
begins].
further notice, unless EPA receives
adverse comment by September 10,
2007. If adverse comment is received,
EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of
the direct final rule in the Federal
Register informing the public that the
rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R07–
OAR–2007–0620, by one of the
following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. E-mail: algoe-eakin.amy@epa.gov.
3. Mail: Amy Algoe-Eakin,
Environmental Protection Agency, Air
Planning and Development Branch, 901
North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas
66101.
4. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver
your comments to Amy Algoe-Eakin,
Environmental Protection Agency, Air
Planning and Development Branch, 901
North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas
66101.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R07–OAR–2007–
0620. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Explanation
*
*
This plan replaces numbers
(46) and (50).
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The https://
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 https://
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
https://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.
E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM
09AUR1
44782
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 153 / Thursday, August 9, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in
https://www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy at the Environmental Protection
Agency, Air Planning and Development
Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas
City, Kansas 66101. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8 to 4:30
excluding Federal holidays. The
interested persons wanting to examine
these documents should make an
appointment with the office at least 24
hours in advance.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Amy Algoe-Eakin at (913) 551–7942, or
by e-mail at algoe-eakin.amy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. This section provides additional
information by addressing the following
questions:
What is a Section 110(a)(1) maintenance
plan?
What are the components of a Section
110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone maintenance plan?
How has the state addressed the components
of a Section 110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan? What action is EPA
taking?
What is a Section 110(a)(1)
maintenance plan?
Section 110(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act
(CAA or Act) requires, in part, that
states submit to EPA plans to maintain
any NAAQS promulgated by EPA. EPA
interprets this provision to require that
areas that were maintenance areas for
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS but
attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS
submit a plan to demonstrate the
continued maintenance of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS. EPA established June
15, 2007, three years after the effective
date of the initial 8-hour ozone
designations, as the deadline for
submission of plans for these areas.
Kansas’s Section 110(a)(1) maintenance
plan was received by EPA on May 23,
2007.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
What are the components of a Section
110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone maintenance
plan?
On May 20, 2005, EPA issued
guidance that applies, in part, to areas
that are designated attainment/
unclassifiable for the 8-hour ozone
standard and that had an approved 1hour ozone maintenance plan. The
purpose of the guidance, referred to as
Section 110(a)(1) guidance, is to assist
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Aug 08, 2007
Jkt 211001
the states in the development of a SIP
which addresses the maintenance
requirements found in Section 110(a)(1)
of the CAA. There are five components
of the Section 110(a)(1) maintenance
plan which are: (1) An attainment
inventory, which is based on actual
typical summer day emissions of
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and
oxides of nitrogen (NOX) for a ten-year
period from a base year as chosen by the
state; (2) a maintenance demonstration
which shows how the area will remain
in compliance with the 8-hour ozone
standard for 10 years after the effective
date of designations (June 15, 2004); (3)
a commitment to continue to operate air
quality monitors; (4) a contingency plan
that will ensure that a violation of the
8-hour ozone NAAQS is promptly
addressed; and (5) an explanation of
how the state will track the progress of
the maintenance plan.
How has the state addressed the
components of a Section 110(a)(1) 8hour ozone maintenance plan?
The Kansas Department of Health and
Environment’s (KDHE) 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan addresses the
components of the Section 110(a)(1) 8hour ozone maintenance plan as
outlined in EPA’s May 20, 2005,
guidance. Kansas has requested that the
Section 110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan replace the existing
Section 175A 1-hour ozone maintenance
plan.
Emissions Inventory: An emissions
inventory is an itemized list of emission
estimates for sources of air pollution in
a given area for a specified time period.
KDHE has provided a comprehensive
and current emissions inventory for
ozone precursors (NOX, and VOCs) in
the area. KDHE has chosen to use 2002
as the base year from which they project
emissions. The maintenance plan also
includes an explanation of the
methodology used for determining the
anthropogenic (point, area, and mobile
sources) emissions in the maintenance
area. The inventory is based on
emissions for a typical ozone season
day. The term ‘‘typical’’ refers to
emissions expected on a typical
weekday during the months where
ozone concentrations are typically the
highest. For Kansas City, these months
are June through August.
Maintenance Demonstration and
Tracking Progress: With regard to
demonstrating continued maintenance
of the 8-hour ozone standard, Kansas
projects that the total emissions from
the entire Kansas City Maintenance
Area (KCMA) will decrease during the
ten-year maintenance period. KDHE has
projected emissions for 10 years from
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
the effective date of initial designations,
or 2014. In 2002, the total anthropogenic
emissions in the entire KCMA were
226.42 tons/ozone season day for VOCs
and 316.09 tons/ozone season day for
NOX. The projected 2014 anthropogenic
emissions from the entire KCMA are
181.07 tons/ozone season day for VOCs
and 180.08 tons/ozone season day for
NOX. As such, the plan demonstrates
that, from an emissions projections
standpoint, emissions are projected to
decrease.
It is important to note that the
formation of ozone is dependent on a
number of variables which cannot be
estimated through emissions growth and
reduction calculations. A few of these
variables include weather and the
transport of ozone precursors from
outside the maintenance area. In the
Section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan,
KDHE has indicated that the state will
track the progress of the maintenance
plan by updating the emissions
inventory for the KCMA approximately
every three years. The years of 2005,
2008, and 2011 were chosen as the years
in which emissions will be reviewed. A
review of the 2005 emissions inventory
is underway. The emissions inventory
update will include point, area, and
onroad and offroad emissions.
Information from these future updates
will be compared with the projected
growth estimates for the 2002 base
inventory data to track maintenance of
the standard.
Ambient Monitoring: With regard to
the ambient air monitoring component
of the maintenance plan, Kansas’s plan
describes the ozone monitoring network
in Kansas City and explains that states
and local air agencies are responsible for
the operation, maintenance and data
collection at these monitoring sites.
KDHE commits to continue operating air
quality monitors in accordance with 40
CFR Part 58 to verify maintenance of the
8-hour ozone standard. If any changes to
the monitoring locations become
necessary, KDHE commits to working
with EPA to ensure that the adequacy of
the monitoring network is maintained.
Contingency Measures: EPA interprets
Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA to require
that the state develop a contingency
plan which will ensure that any
violation of an NAAQS is promptly
corrected. The purposes of the
contingency measures, outlined in
KDHE’s maintenance plan, are to
achieve sufficient VOC and/or NOX
emissions to reduce ozone monitored
concentrations. Kansas and Missouri
worked to design a two-phased
approach for the contingency measure
portion of the maintenance plan. The
approach includes specific triggers for
E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM
09AUR1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 153 / Thursday, August 9, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
each phase. The triggers are the same for
both states, although the measures vary
slightly. For Phase 1, the Kansas plan
provides that a violation of the 8-hour
ozone standard, once quality assured,
would trigger two control measures,
which are, (1) reduction in NOX
emission from point sources greater
than 1000 tons of actual annual
emissions from the entire facility
averaged over the last three years of
complete, quality-assured inventory
data in Wyandotte and Johnson
Counties. This would be accomplished
through either NOX Reasonable
Available Control Technology (RACT)
rules or signed agreements with affected
sources, and (2) diesel idle reduction in
Wyandotte and Johnson Counties
through administrative regulations or
local ordinances. If this measure is
implemented, KDHE would develop the
enforcement mechanism through
contracts with local agencies.
Phase 2 contingency measures would
be triggered by the occurrences of either
of the following two events: (1) A threeyear design value for the area equaling
or exceeding 0.089 parts per million
(ppm) which would become active one
year following the end of the ozone
season that triggered the Phase 1
contingency measures or (2) three
consecutive years following the Phase 1
trigger year with a design value greater
than 0.084 ppm. Either of these events
would implement the selection of
control measures of Phase 2. Following
the implementation of Phase 1, if any
one year has a three-year design value
equaling or exceeding 0.085 ppm, an
evaluation to determine appropriate
action will be undertaken by KDHE. The
purpose of delaying the potential
implementation of Phase 2 control
measures for a period of time following
the implementation of Phase 1 is to
allow for Phase 1 controls to be initiated
and have an effect on air quality in the
region before Phase 2 is implemented. It
also allows for further evaluation of the
various control measures that could be
implemented under Phase 2. Below are
a few of the control options being
considered for Phase 2:
• Reductions in NOX emissions from
point sources that exceed 100 tons of
actual annual emissions from the entire
facility averaged over the last three
years of complete, quality-assured
inventory data in Wyandotte and
Johnson Counties. This would be
accomplished through either NOX RACT
rules or signed agreements with affected
sources.
• Reductions in NOX emissions from
point sources greater than 1000 tons of
actual annual emissions from the entire
facility averaged over the last three
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Aug 08, 2007
Jkt 211001
years of complete, quality-assured
inventory data in areas located south of
and outside the KCMA (Miami and Linn
Counties). Based on current emissions
inventory, this would affect two
sources. Reductions would be
accomplished through either a regional
NOX administrative regulation or signed
agreements with affected sources.
• Open burning restrictions in
Wyandotte and Johnson Counties.
• Lower threshold for major sources
of VOC to 75 tons per year (tpy) in
Wyandotte and Johnson Counties. The
KDHE would evaluate remaining large
VOC emitters subject to existing VOC
RACT rules to determine if further
reductions could be achieved (VOC
RACT rules).
• VOC control for 46 Architectural
and Industrial Maintenance Coatings,
including traffic coatings in Wyandotte
and Johnson Counties.
• Diesel Engine Chip Re-Flashing
regulations in Wyandotte and Johnson
Counties.
If triggered, the Phase 2 measures will
be selected based on emission reduction
benefits, cost effectiveness and
timeframe for implementation. KDHE
also would consider additional potential
measures if other beneficial emission
reduction methods are determined to be
useful to the air quality in the KCMA.
What action is EPA taking?
Kansas has addressed the components
of a maintenance plan pursuant to
EPA’s May 20, 2005, guidance. The
section 110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone Kansas
City maintenance plan approved in this
action will replace the existing section
175A 1-hour ozone maintenance plan.
Kansas has committed to continue
implementation of the VOC control
measures in the 1-hour maintenance
plan. Kansas has also committed to
implementing the contingency measures
no later than 24 months after the trigger
date and will take action to maintain the
standard in the event the contingency
measures are triggered.
We are processing this action as a
direct final action because we do not
anticipate any adverse comments.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse
comment on part of this rule and if that
part can be severed from the remainder
of the rule, EPA may adopt as final
those parts of the rule that are not the
subject of an adverse comment.
Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this action is
not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and
therefore is not subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget. For
this reason, this action is also not
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
44783
subject to Executive Order 13211,
‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). This action merely approves
state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional
requirements beyond those imposed by
state law. Accordingly, the
Administrator certifies that this rule
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this
rule approves pre-existing requirements
under state law and does not impose
any additional enforceable duty beyond
that required by state law, it does not
contain any unfunded mandate or
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, as described in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104–4).
This rule also does not have tribal
implications because it will not have a
substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
as specified by Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). This action merely
approves a State rule implementing a
Federal standard, and does not alter the
relationship or the distribution of power
and responsibilities established in the
CAA. This rule also is not subject to
Executive Order 13045, ‘‘Protection of
Children from Environmental Health
Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885,
April 23, 1997), because it approves a
State rule implementing a Federal
standard.
In reviewing state submissions, EPA’s
role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. 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 state submission for
failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for
EPA, when it reviews a state
submission, to use VCS in place of a
state submission that otherwise satisfies
the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the
requirements of section 12(d) of the
E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM
09AUR1
44784
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 153 / Thursday, August 9, 2007 / Rules and Regulations
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) do not apply. This rule does
not impose an information collection
burden under the provisions of the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by October 9, 2007.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
the Administrator of this final rule does
not affect the finality of this rule for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action may not
be challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
I
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
§ 52.870
Dated: July 27, 2007.
John B. Askew,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
I
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart R—Kansas
2. In § 52.870(e) the table is amended
by adding an entry at the end of the
table to read as follows:
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED KANSAS NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS
Name of nonregulatory SIP provision
*
*
(31) Maintenance Plan for the 8hour ozone standard in the Kansas portion of the Kansas City
area.
Applicable
geographic or
nonattainment area
*
Kansas City
[FR Doc. E7–15251 Filed 8–8–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R05–OAR–2007–0001; FRL–8451–9]
Determination of Attainment, Approval
and Promulgation of Implementation
Plans and Designation of Areas for Air
Quality Planning Purposes; Ohio;
Redesignation of the Toledo Area 8Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area to
Attainment
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Ohio Environmental
Protection Agency (Ohio EPA)
submitted a request on December 22,
2006, and supplemented it on March 9,
2007, for redesignation of the Toledo,
Ohio area (Lucas and Wood Counties) to
attainment for the 8-hour ozone
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:01 Aug 08, 2007
State submittal
date
Jkt 211001
5/23/07
EPA approval date
Explanation
*
*
8/9/07 [insert FR page number
where the document begins].
*
*
This plan replaces numbers (28)
and (29).
standard. The submission also includes
a maintenance plan that provides for
continued attainment through 2018. On
June 12, 2007, EPA proposed to approve
this submission. EPA provided a 30-day
review and comment period. One
comment, from BP Products, North
America Inc., was received supporting
EPA’s proposal. Today, EPA is
approving Ohio’s request and
corresponding State Implementation
Plan (SIP) revision. In so doing, EPA is
making a determination that the Toledo,
Ohio area has attained the 8-hour ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS). This determination is based
on three years of complete, qualityassured ambient air quality monitoring
data for the 2004–2006 ozone seasons
that demonstrate that the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS has been attained in the area.
Preliminary 2007 air quality data show
that the area continues to attain the 8hour ozone standard. EPA is approving
the maintenance plan for this area and
is redesignating the area to attainment.
Finally, EPA is approving, for purposes
of transportation conformity, the motor
PO 00000
Frm 00060
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) for
the years 2009 and 2018.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
August 9, 2007.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R05–OAR–2007–0001. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., Confidential Business Information
(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 through
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604. This facility is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We
recommend that you telephone Michael
E:\FR\FM\09AUR1.SGM
09AUR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 153 (Thursday, August 9, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 44781-44784]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-15251]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R07-OAR-2007-0620; FRL-8450-5]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of
Kansas
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a revision to the Kansas State
Implementation Plan (SIP) prepared by Kansas to maintain the 8-hour
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) for ozone in the Kansas
portion of the Kansas City area. The Kansas City area is designated
attainment for the ozone NAAQS. This revision is required by the Clean
Air Act. A similar final rulemaking pertaining to the Missouri portion
of the Kansas City maintenance area is being done in conjunction with
this rulemaking. The effect of this approval is to ensure Federal
enforceability of the state air program plan and to maintain
consistency between the state-adopted plan and the approved SIP.
DATES: This direct final rule will be effective October 9, 2007,
without further notice, unless EPA receives adverse comment by
September 10, 2007. If adverse comment is received, EPA will publish a
timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register
informing the public that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R07-
OAR-2007-0620, by one of the following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. E-mail: algoe-eakin.amy@epa.gov.
3. Mail: Amy Algoe-Eakin, Environmental Protection Agency, Air
Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City,
Kansas 66101.
4. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to Amy Algoe-
Eakin, Environmental Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development
Branch, 901 North 5th Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R07-OAR-
2007-0620. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The https://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 https://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
https://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.
[[Page 44782]]
Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Environmental
Protection Agency, Air Planning and Development Branch, 901 North 5th
Street, Kansas City, Kansas 66101. The Regional Office's official hours
of business are Monday through Friday, 8 to 4:30 excluding Federal
holidays. The interested persons wanting to examine these documents
should make an appointment with the office at least 24 hours in
advance.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Algoe-Eakin at (913) 551-7942, or
by e-mail at algoe-eakin.amy@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This section provides
additional information by addressing the following questions:
What is a Section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan?
What are the components of a Section 110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan?
How has the state addressed the components of a Section 110(a)(1) 8-
hour ozone maintenance plan? What action is EPA taking?
What is a Section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan?
Section 110(a)(1) of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) requires, in
part, that states submit to EPA plans to maintain any NAAQS promulgated
by EPA. EPA interprets this provision to require that areas that were
maintenance areas for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS but attainment for the 8-
hour ozone NAAQS submit a plan to demonstrate the continued maintenance
of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA established June 15, 2007, three years
after the effective date of the initial 8-hour ozone designations, as
the deadline for submission of plans for these areas. Kansas's Section
110(a)(1) maintenance plan was received by EPA on May 23, 2007.
What are the components of a Section 110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone maintenance
plan?
On May 20, 2005, EPA issued guidance that applies, in part, to
areas that are designated attainment/unclassifiable for the 8-hour
ozone standard and that had an approved 1-hour ozone maintenance plan.
The purpose of the guidance, referred to as Section 110(a)(1) guidance,
is to assist the states in the development of a SIP which addresses the
maintenance requirements found in Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA. There
are five components of the Section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan which
are: (1) An attainment inventory, which is based on actual typical
summer day emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of
nitrogen (NOX) for a ten-year period from a base year as
chosen by the state; (2) a maintenance demonstration which shows how
the area will remain in compliance with the 8-hour ozone standard for
10 years after the effective date of designations (June 15, 2004); (3)
a commitment to continue to operate air quality monitors; (4) a
contingency plan that will ensure that a violation of the 8-hour ozone
NAAQS is promptly addressed; and (5) an explanation of how the state
will track the progress of the maintenance plan.
How has the state addressed the components of a Section 110(a)(1) 8-
hour ozone maintenance plan?
The Kansas Department of Health and Environment's (KDHE) 8-hour
ozone maintenance plan addresses the components of the Section
110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone maintenance plan as outlined in EPA's May 20,
2005, guidance. Kansas has requested that the Section 110(a)(1) 8-hour
ozone maintenance plan replace the existing Section 175A 1-hour ozone
maintenance plan.
Emissions Inventory: An emissions inventory is an itemized list of
emission estimates for sources of air pollution in a given area for a
specified time period. KDHE has provided a comprehensive and current
emissions inventory for ozone precursors (NOX, and VOCs) in
the area. KDHE has chosen to use 2002 as the base year from which they
project emissions. The maintenance plan also includes an explanation of
the methodology used for determining the anthropogenic (point, area,
and mobile sources) emissions in the maintenance area. The inventory is
based on emissions for a typical ozone season day. The term ``typical''
refers to emissions expected on a typical weekday during the months
where ozone concentrations are typically the highest. For Kansas City,
these months are June through August.
Maintenance Demonstration and Tracking Progress: With regard to
demonstrating continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard,
Kansas projects that the total emissions from the entire Kansas City
Maintenance Area (KCMA) will decrease during the ten-year maintenance
period. KDHE has projected emissions for 10 years from the effective
date of initial designations, or 2014. In 2002, the total anthropogenic
emissions in the entire KCMA were 226.42 tons/ozone season day for VOCs
and 316.09 tons/ozone season day for NOX. The projected 2014
anthropogenic emissions from the entire KCMA are 181.07 tons/ozone
season day for VOCs and 180.08 tons/ozone season day for
NOX. As such, the plan demonstrates that, from an emissions
projections standpoint, emissions are projected to decrease.
It is important to note that the formation of ozone is dependent on
a number of variables which cannot be estimated through emissions
growth and reduction calculations. A few of these variables include
weather and the transport of ozone precursors from outside the
maintenance area. In the Section 110(a)(1) maintenance plan, KDHE has
indicated that the state will track the progress of the maintenance
plan by updating the emissions inventory for the KCMA approximately
every three years. The years of 2005, 2008, and 2011 were chosen as the
years in which emissions will be reviewed. A review of the 2005
emissions inventory is underway. The emissions inventory update will
include point, area, and onroad and offroad emissions. Information from
these future updates will be compared with the projected growth
estimates for the 2002 base inventory data to track maintenance of the
standard.
Ambient Monitoring: With regard to the ambient air monitoring
component of the maintenance plan, Kansas's plan describes the ozone
monitoring network in Kansas City and explains that states and local
air agencies are responsible for the operation, maintenance and data
collection at these monitoring sites. KDHE commits to continue
operating air quality monitors in accordance with 40 CFR Part 58 to
verify maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard. If any changes to the
monitoring locations become necessary, KDHE commits to working with EPA
to ensure that the adequacy of the monitoring network is maintained.
Contingency Measures: EPA interprets Section 110(a)(1) of the CAA
to require that the state develop a contingency plan which will ensure
that any violation of an NAAQS is promptly corrected. The purposes of
the contingency measures, outlined in KDHE's maintenance plan, are to
achieve sufficient VOC and/or NOX emissions to reduce ozone
monitored concentrations. Kansas and Missouri worked to design a two-
phased approach for the contingency measure portion of the maintenance
plan. The approach includes specific triggers for
[[Page 44783]]
each phase. The triggers are the same for both states, although the
measures vary slightly. For Phase 1, the Kansas plan provides that a
violation of the 8-hour ozone standard, once quality assured, would
trigger two control measures, which are, (1) reduction in
NOX emission from point sources greater than 1000 tons of
actual annual emissions from the entire facility averaged over the last
three years of complete, quality-assured inventory data in Wyandotte
and Johnson Counties. This would be accomplished through either
NOX Reasonable Available Control Technology (RACT) rules or
signed agreements with affected sources, and (2) diesel idle reduction
in Wyandotte and Johnson Counties through administrative regulations or
local ordinances. If this measure is implemented, KDHE would develop
the enforcement mechanism through contracts with local agencies.
Phase 2 contingency measures would be triggered by the occurrences
of either of the following two events: (1) A three-year design value
for the area equaling or exceeding 0.089 parts per million (ppm) which
would become active one year following the end of the ozone season that
triggered the Phase 1 contingency measures or (2) three consecutive
years following the Phase 1 trigger year with a design value greater
than 0.084 ppm. Either of these events would implement the selection of
control measures of Phase 2. Following the implementation of Phase 1,
if any one year has a three-year design value equaling or exceeding
0.085 ppm, an evaluation to determine appropriate action will be
undertaken by KDHE. The purpose of delaying the potential
implementation of Phase 2 control measures for a period of time
following the implementation of Phase 1 is to allow for Phase 1
controls to be initiated and have an effect on air quality in the
region before Phase 2 is implemented. It also allows for further
evaluation of the various control measures that could be implemented
under Phase 2. Below are a few of the control options being considered
for Phase 2:
Reductions in NOX emissions from point sources
that exceed 100 tons of actual annual emissions from the entire
facility averaged over the last three years of complete, quality-
assured inventory data in Wyandotte and Johnson Counties. This would be
accomplished through either NOX RACT rules or signed
agreements with affected sources.
Reductions in NOX emissions from point sources
greater than 1000 tons of actual annual emissions from the entire
facility averaged over the last three years of complete, quality-
assured inventory data in areas located south of and outside the KCMA
(Miami and Linn Counties). Based on current emissions inventory, this
would affect two sources. Reductions would be accomplished through
either a regional NOX administrative regulation or signed
agreements with affected sources.
Open burning restrictions in Wyandotte and Johnson
Counties.
Lower threshold for major sources of VOC to 75 tons per
year (tpy) in Wyandotte and Johnson Counties. The KDHE would evaluate
remaining large VOC emitters subject to existing VOC RACT rules to
determine if further reductions could be achieved (VOC RACT rules).
VOC control for 46 Architectural and Industrial
Maintenance Coatings, including traffic coatings in Wyandotte and
Johnson Counties.
Diesel Engine Chip Re-Flashing regulations in Wyandotte
and Johnson Counties.
If triggered, the Phase 2 measures will be selected based on
emission reduction benefits, cost effectiveness and timeframe for
implementation. KDHE also would consider additional potential measures
if other beneficial emission reduction methods are determined to be
useful to the air quality in the KCMA.
What action is EPA taking?
Kansas has addressed the components of a maintenance plan pursuant
to EPA's May 20, 2005, guidance. The section 110(a)(1) 8-hour ozone
Kansas City maintenance plan approved in this action will replace the
existing section 175A 1-hour ozone maintenance plan. Kansas has
committed to continue implementation of the VOC control measures in the
1-hour maintenance plan. Kansas has also committed to implementing the
contingency measures no later than 24 months after the trigger date and
will take action to maintain the standard in the event the contingency
measures are triggered.
We are processing this action as a direct final action because we
do not anticipate any adverse comments. Please note that if EPA
receives adverse comment on part of this rule and if that part can be
severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those
parts of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment.
Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law.
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a State rule
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA.
This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045, ``Protection of
Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997), because it approves a State rule implementing a
Federal standard.
In reviewing state submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. 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 state submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a state
submission, to use VCS in place of a state submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the
[[Page 44784]]
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) do not apply. This rule does not impose an information collection
burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 9, 2007. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: July 27, 2007.
John B. Askew,
Regional Administrator, Region 7.
0
Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart R--Kansas
0
2. In Sec. 52.870(e) the table is amended by adding an entry at the
end of the table to read as follows:
Sec. 52.870 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
EPA-Approved Kansas Nonregulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable
Name of nonregulatory SIP geographic or State EPA approval date Explanation
provision nonattainment area submittal date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
(31) Maintenance Plan for the 8- Kansas City......... 5/23/07 8/9/07 [insert FR This plan replaces
hour ozone standard in the page number where numbers (28) and
Kansas portion of the Kansas the document (29).
City area. begins].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. E7-15251 Filed 8-8-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P