Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; West Virginia; Revised Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for the Parkersburg 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Area, 64548-64551 [E8-25662]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
64548
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 211 / Thursday, October 30, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
approval from the Regional Supervisor
for any change in purpose of the
platform, following the provisions of
API RP 2A–WSD, Section 15, Re-use.
■ 14. Amend § 250.1007 by revising
paragraph (a)(4) to read as follows:
§ 250.920 What are the MMS requirements
for assessment of fixed platforms?
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with RULES
obtain approval from MMS before you
make major repairs of any damage
unless you meet the requirements of
§ 250.900(c).
■ 13. Revise § 250.920 to read as
follows:
§ 250.1007
(a) You must document all wells,
equipment, and pipelines supported by
the platform if you intend to use either
the A–2 or A–3 assessment category.
Assessment categories are defined in
API RP 2A–WSD, Section 17.3. If MMS
objects to the assessment category you
used for your assessment, you may need
to redesign and/or modify the platform
to adequately demonstrate that the
platform is able to withstand the
environmental loadings for the
appropriate assessment category.
(b) You must perform an analysis
check when your platform will have
additional personnel, additional topside
facilities, increased environmental or
operational loading, or inadequate deck
height your platform suffered significant
damage (e.g., experienced damage to
primary structural members or
conductor guide trays or global
structural integrity is adversely
affected); or the exposure category
changes to a more restrictive level (see
Sections 17.2.1 through 17.2.5 of API RP
2A–WSD for a description of assessment
initiators).
(c) You must initiate mitigation
actions for platforms that do not pass
the assessment process of API RP 2A–
WSD. You must submit applications for
your mitigation actions (e.g., repair,
modification, decommissioning) to the
Regional Supervisor for approval before
you conduct the work.
(d) The MMS may require you to
conduct a platform design basis check
when the reduced environmental
loading criteria contained in API RP
2A–WSD Section 17.6 are not
applicable.
(e) By November 1, 2009, you must
submit a complete list of all the
platforms you operate, together with all
the appropriate data to support the
assessment category you assign to each
platform and the platform assessment
initiators (as defined in API RP 2A–
WSD) to the Regional Supervisor. You
must submit subsequent complete lists
and the appropriate data to support the
consequence-of-failure category every 5
years thereafter, or as directed by the
Regional Supervisor.
(f) The use of Section 17, Assessment
of Existing Platforms, of API RP 2A–
WSD is limited to existing fixed
structures that are serving their original
approved purpose. You must obtain
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:08 Oct 29, 2008
Jkt 217001
What to include in applications.
(a) * * *
(4) A description of any additional
design precautions you took to enable
the pipeline to withstand the effects of
water currents, storm or ice scouring,
soft bottoms, mudslides, earthquakes,
permafrost, and other environmental
factors.
(i) If you propose to use unbonded
flexible pipe, your application must
include:
(A) The manufacturer’s design
specification sheet;
(B) The design pressure (psi);
(C) An identification of the design
standards you used; and
(D) A review by a third-party
independent verification agent (IVA)
according to API Spec 17J (incorporated
by reference as specified in § 250.198),
if applicable.
(ii) If you propose to use one or more
pipeline risers for a tension leg platform
or other floating platform, your
application must include:
(A) The design fatigue life of the riser,
with calculations, and the fatigue point
at which you would replace the riser;
(B) The results of your vortex-induced
vibration (VIV) analysis;
(C) An identification of the design
standards you used; and
(D) A description of any necessary
mitigation measures such as the use of
helical strakes or anchoring devices.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. E8–25720 Filed 10–29–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–MR–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2008–0746; FRL–8735–7]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; West
Virginia; Revised Motor Vehicle
Emission Budgets for the Parkersburg
8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Area
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final
action to approve revisions to the West
Virginia State Implementation Plan
(SIP). The revision amends the 8-hour
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
ozone maintenance plan for the
Parkersburg area. This revision amends
the maintenance plans’ 2009 and 2018
motor vehicle emissions budgets
(MVEBs) by reallocating a portion of the
plans’ safety margins, which results in
an increase in the MVEBs. The revised
plan continues to demonstrate
maintenance of the 8-hour national
ambient air quality standard (NAAQS)
for ozone. EPA is approving this SIP
revision to the West Virginia
maintenance plan for Parkersburg in
accordance with the requirements of the
Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: This rule is effective on
December 29, 2008 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse
written comment by December 1, 2008.
If EPA receives such comments, it will
publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register
and inform the public that the rule will
not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number EPA–
R03–OAR–2008–0746 by one of the
following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
B. E-mail: febbo.carol@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2008–0746,
Carol Febbo, Chief, Energy, Radiation
and Indoor Environment Branch,
Mailcode 3AP23, 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–2008–
0746. 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-
E:\FR\FM\30OCR1.SGM
30OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 211 / Thursday, October 30, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
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 West Virginia
Department of Environmental
Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601
57th Street, SE., Charleston, West
Virginia 25304.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Megan Goold (215) 814–2027, or by email at goold.megan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On May 8, 2007 (72 FR 25967) EPA
redesignated the Parkersburg area of
West Virginia to attainment for the 8hour ozone NAAQS. For the
Parkersburg area, the redesignation
included approval of an 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan, identifying on-road
MVEBs for VOCs and NOX, which are
ozone precursors, used for
transportation planning and conformity
purposes. Subsequently, after the SIP
approval by EPA, West Virginia
discovered that the MVEBs which were
included in the previously approved
maintenance plan did not provide a
sufficient buffer to account for
64549
unforseen future growth or significant
changes in the planning assumption
data which was used in developing the
original MVEBs in its September 2006
submission.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
2009 and 2018 Motor Vehicle Emission
Budgets
On August 25, 2008, the State of West
Virginia submitted to EPA a formal
revision to its State Implementation
Plan (SIP). The SIP revision proposes
new MVEBs to reflect the reallocation of
a portion of the differences (‘‘safety
margins’’) between the total base year
and total projected 2009 and 2018
emissions, thus producing an increase
in the MVEBs. The base year is 2004 for
the Parkersburg area. By increasing the
MVEBs, the West Virginia Department
of Environmental Protection (WVDEP) is
ensuring that transportation conformity
can be demonstrated in the Parkersburg
area. The August 25, 2008 submittal,
while increasing the MVEBs, still
ensures maintenance of the NAAQS for
ozone for the Parkersburg area.
Tables 1 and 2 and the discussion that
follows describe the basis of the new
MVEBs for the Parkersburg area.
TABLE 1—PARKERSBURG AREA REALLOCATION OF SAFETY MARGIN TO THE MVEBS
[Tons/day]
2004
Base year
2009
Projection
2018
Projection
Current MVEBs in the Approved Maintenance Plan
VOC .........................................................................................................................................................
NOX ..........................................................................................................................................................
4.00
5.66
3.0
4.1
1.9
2.0
4.00
5.66
3.8
5.5
2.4
2.7
Proposed MVEBs in the Revised Maintenance Plan
VOC .........................................................................................................................................................
NOX ..........................................................................................................................................................
TABLE 2—PARKERSBURG AREA TOTAL EMISSIONS (POINT, AREA AND MOBILE) BEFORE AND AFTER REALLOCATION OF
SAFETY MARGIN TO THE MVEBS
[Tons/day]
2004
Base year
2009
Projection
2018
Projection
Current Total Emissions in the Approved Maintenance Plan
VOC .........................................................................................................................................................
NOX ..........................................................................................................................................................
16.7
15.2
14.0
11.8
13.6
9.4
16.7
15.2
14.8
13.2
14.1
10.1
Proposed Total Emissions in the Revised Maintenance Plan
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with RULES
VOC .........................................................................................................................................................
NOX ..........................................................................................................................................................
For the Parkersburg, West Virginia 8hour ozone maintenance area addressed
herein, the WVDEP recalculated the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:08 Oct 29, 2008
Jkt 217001
2009 and 2018 MVEBs using revised
planning data which became available
after the original maintenance plan was
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
submitted to EPA on September 8, 2006.
The 2009 and 2018 MVEBs for VOCs
and NOX emissions listed above in
E:\FR\FM\30OCR1.SGM
30OCR1
64550
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 211 / Thursday, October 30, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Table 1 under the Proposed MVEBs in
the Revised Maintenance Plan section
will serve as the new MVEBs for
transportation conformity planning.
As shown in Table 1, above, WVDEP
has proposed reallocating a portion of
the previous safety margin into the
MVEBs for both VOCs and NOX. The
remaining surplus emissions have been
reserved as residual safety margins in
the total maintenance budgets to ensure
continued maintenance of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.
To explain how the safety margins are
determined and allocated, the VOC
emissions for the Parkersburg area may
be used as an example. In Table 2, listed
under the Current Total Emissions in
the Approved Maintenance Plan
section, the total 2004 base year VOC
emissions are 16.7 tons/day (tpd), which
is the maximum amount of VOC
emissions consistent with maintenance
of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The total
projected 2009 emissions are 14.0 tpd,
which provides a 2.7 tpd VOC safety
margin (i.e., the ozone NAAQS would
continue to be maintained if total VOC
emissions increased as much as 2.7 tpd
above the projected 2009 emissions of
14.0 tpd). In the Proposed Total
Emissions in the Revised Maintenance
Plan section, the total projected
emissions for 2009 would be increased
by 0.8 tpd through the increase in the
allowable mobile emissions for VOC
while still leaving a safety margin of 1.9
tpd. Therefore, even with the
reallocation of some of the current
safety margin into the MVEBs, the State
of West Virginia has left a safety margin
for any other unforeseen growth.
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with RULES
III. Final Action
EPA is approving West Virginia’s
August 25, 2008 SIP revision submittal
which amends the 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan for the Parkersburg
area. These revisions amend the
maintenance plans’ 2009 and 2018
MVEBs to reflect the reallocation of a
portion of the plans’ safety margins
which results in an increase in the
MVEBs. EPA is approving this SIP
revision to the maintenance plan for the
Parkersburg area because the August 25,
2008 submittal continues to
demonstrate maintenance of the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS as even after reallocation
of a portion of the safety margin a
sufficient safety margin still exists to
demonstrate continued attainment.
EPA notes that the DC Circuit issued
a decision on July 11, 2008, vacating the
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). North
Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (DC Cir.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:08 Oct 29, 2008
Jkt 217001
2008).1 EPA’s CAIR modeling was
included in the last Parkersburg
maintenance plan effective June 17,
2007 (72 FR 25967, May 8, 2007) as a
supplemental analysis however, EPA’s
approval of that maintenance plan was
based on permanent and enforceable
measures (as instructed in the Calcagni
memorandum, September 4, 1992).
These permanent and enforceable
measures are sufficient to provide for
continued maintenance even without
any CAIR reductions. EPA did note in
the approval that, in addition to
permanent and enforceable measures,
further emissions reductions in the
nonattainment area (specifically
Washington County, OH) are largely
attributable to CAIR, but these
reductions are not needed to
demonstrate maintenance in the area.
Therefore, EPA’s approval of the August
25, 2008 SIP revision is not impacted by
the DC Circuit Court decision as even
without any CAIR reductions the area
continues to demonstrate maintenance
after reallocation of a portion of the
safety margin.
EPA is publishing this rule without
prior proposal because the Agency
views this as a noncontroversial
amendment and anticipates no adverse
comment, since no significant adverse
comments were received on the SIP
revision at the State level. However, in
the ‘‘Proposed Rules’’ section of today’s
Federal Register, EPA is publishing a
separate document that will serve as the
proposal to approve the SIP revision if
adverse comments are filed. This rule
will be effective on December 29, 2008
without further notice unless EPA
receives adverse comment by December
1, 2008.
If EPA receives adverse comment,
EPA will publish a timely withdrawal in
the Federal Register informing the
public that the rule will not take effect.
EPA will address all public comments
in a subsequent final rule based on the
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a
second comment period on this action.
Any parties interested in commenting
must do so at this time.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. General Requirements
Under the Clean Air Act, the
Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve
1 EPA filed a petition for rehearing with the Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on
September 24, 2008.
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
state choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely
approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
this action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• 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);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act;
and
• Does not provide EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have
tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175(65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the state, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
B. Submission to Congress and the
Comptroller General
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
E:\FR\FM\30OCR1.SGM
30OCR1
64551
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 211 / Thursday, October 30, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
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 action 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).
2008. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of
this final rule does not affect the finality
of this action 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 to revise the
MVEBs for the Parkersburg 8-hour
Ozone Maintenance Plan may not be
challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2).)
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
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 December 29,
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Name of non-regulatory SIP revision
Applicable geographic area
State submittal date
*
*
8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan for the
Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH Area.
*
Wood County .........
Dated: October 20, 2008.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
■
40 CFR Part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for 40 CFR
part 52 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart XX—West Virginia
2. In § 52.2520, the table in paragraph
(e) is amended by revising the entry for
the 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan for
the Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH Area
to read as follows:
■
§ 52.2520
*
EPA approval date
*
*
*
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
approve permitted emission limits that
enable Virginia to meet its remaining
NOX reduction obligations under the
NOX SIP Call.
EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
Number EPA–R03–OAR–2007–0382. All
documents in the docket are listed in
the https://www.regulations.gov Web
site. Although listed in the electronic
docket, 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
https://www.regulations.gov or in hard
copy for public inspection 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
ADDRESSES:
[EPA–R03–OAR–2007–0382, EPA–R03–
OAR–2008–0113; FRL–8735–6]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia;
Emission Reductions From Large
Stationary Internal Combustion
Engines and Large Cement Kilns
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: EPA is approving State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions
submitted by the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality (VADEQ). These
revisions require nitrogen oxides (NOX)
emission reductions from four large
stationary internal combustion (IC)
engines and a large cement kiln located
in the Commonwealth of Virginia. The
intended effect of this action is to
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
*
Sfmt 4700
*
*
Reallocation of emissions from the existing ‘‘safety margin’’ to increase the
available motor vehicle emission
budgets for highway vehicles.
*
Effective Date: This final rule is
effective on December 1, 2008.
40 CFR Part 52
hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with RULES
*
DATES:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
16:08 Oct 29, 2008
10/30/08; [Insert
page number
where the document begins].
*
Additional explanation
*
5/8/07; 72 FR 2967
*
[FR Doc. E8–25662 Filed 10–29–08; 8:45 am]
VerDate Aug<31>2005
*
09/08/06
08/25/08
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
*
*
Environmental Quality, 629 East Main
Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Marilyn Powers, (215) 814–2308, or by
e-mail at powers.marilyn@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On August 21, 2008 (73 FR 49373),
EPA published a notice of proposed
rulemaking (NPR) for the
Commonwealth of Virginia. The NPR
proposed approval of NOX emission
reductions from four large stationary IC
engines and a large cement kiln located
in the Commonwealth. The formal SIP
revisions were submitted by VADEQ on
February 26, 2007, March 5, 2007,
March 12, 2007, March 19, 2007, and
August 8, 2007. The SIP revision for
each source consists of State operating
permits that contain emission limits to
ensure the Commonwealth meets its
NOX budget for these sectors as required
under the NOX SIP Call. Other specific
requirements of the State operating
permits and the rationale for EPA’s
proposed action are explained in the
NPR and will not be restated here. No
public comments were received on the
NPR.
E:\FR\FM\30OCR1.SGM
30OCR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 211 (Thursday, October 30, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64548-64551]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-25662]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R03-OAR-2008-0746; FRL-8735-7]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
West Virginia; Revised Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for the
Parkersburg 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final action to approve revisions to the
West Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP). The revision amends the
8-hour ozone maintenance plan for the Parkersburg area. This revision
amends the maintenance plans' 2009 and 2018 motor vehicle emissions
budgets (MVEBs) by reallocating a portion of the plans' safety margins,
which results in an increase in the MVEBs. The revised plan continues
to demonstrate maintenance of the 8-hour national ambient air quality
standard (NAAQS) for ozone. EPA is approving this SIP revision to the
West Virginia maintenance plan for Parkersburg in accordance with the
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: This rule is effective on December 29, 2008 without further
notice, unless EPA receives adverse written comment by December 1,
2008. If EPA receives such comments, it will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register and inform
the public that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Number EPA-
R03-OAR-2008-0746 by one of the following methods:
A. www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
B. E-mail: febbo.carol@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA-R03-OAR-2008-0746, Carol Febbo, Chief, Energy,
Radiation and Indoor Environment Branch, Mailcode 3AP23, 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-
2008-0746. 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-
[[Page 64549]]
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 West Virginia Department of Environmental
Protection, Division of Air Quality, 601 57th Street, SE., Charleston,
West Virginia 25304.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Megan Goold (215) 814-2027, or by e-
mail at goold.megan@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On May 8, 2007 (72 FR 25967) EPA redesignated the Parkersburg area
of West Virginia to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. For the
Parkersburg area, the redesignation included approval of an 8-hour
ozone maintenance plan, identifying on-road MVEBs for VOCs and
NOX, which are ozone precursors, used for transportation
planning and conformity purposes. Subsequently, after the SIP approval
by EPA, West Virginia discovered that the MVEBs which were included in
the previously approved maintenance plan did not provide a sufficient
buffer to account for unforseen future growth or significant changes in
the planning assumption data which was used in developing the original
MVEBs in its September 2006 submission.
II. Summary of SIP Revision
2009 and 2018 Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets
On August 25, 2008, the State of West Virginia submitted to EPA a
formal revision to its State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP
revision proposes new MVEBs to reflect the reallocation of a portion of
the differences (``safety margins'') between the total base year and
total projected 2009 and 2018 emissions, thus producing an increase in
the MVEBs. The base year is 2004 for the Parkersburg area. By
increasing the MVEBs, the West Virginia Department of Environmental
Protection (WVDEP) is ensuring that transportation conformity can be
demonstrated in the Parkersburg area. The August 25, 2008 submittal,
while increasing the MVEBs, still ensures maintenance of the NAAQS for
ozone for the Parkersburg area.
Tables 1 and 2 and the discussion that follows describe the basis
of the new MVEBs for the Parkersburg area.
Table 1--Parkersburg Area Reallocation of Safety Margin to the MVEBs
[Tons/day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004 Base 2009 2018
year Projection Projection
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current MVEBs in the Approved Maintenance Plan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC.............................. 4.00 3.0 1.9
NOX.............................. 5.66 4.1 2.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed MVEBs in the Revised Maintenance Plan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC.............................. 4.00 3.8 2.4
NOX.............................. 5.66 5.5 2.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2--Parkersburg Area Total Emissions (Point, Area and Mobile)
Before and After Reallocation of Safety Margin to the MVEBs
[Tons/day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2004 Base 2009 2018
year Projection Projection
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current Total Emissions in the Approved Maintenance Plan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC.............................. 16.7 14.0 13.6
NOX.............................. 15.2 11.8 9.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Total Emissions in the Revised Maintenance Plan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC.............................. 16.7 14.8 14.1
NOX.............................. 15.2 13.2 10.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the Parkersburg, West Virginia 8-hour ozone maintenance area
addressed herein, the WVDEP recalculated the 2009 and 2018 MVEBs using
revised planning data which became available after the original
maintenance plan was submitted to EPA on September 8, 2006. The 2009
and 2018 MVEBs for VOCs and NOX emissions listed above in
[[Page 64550]]
Table 1 under the Proposed MVEBs in the Revised Maintenance Plan
section will serve as the new MVEBs for transportation conformity
planning.
As shown in Table 1, above, WVDEP has proposed reallocating a
portion of the previous safety margin into the MVEBs for both VOCs and
NOX. The remaining surplus emissions have been reserved as
residual safety margins in the total maintenance budgets to ensure
continued maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
To explain how the safety margins are determined and allocated, the
VOC emissions for the Parkersburg area may be used as an example. In
Table 2, listed under the Current Total Emissions in the Approved
Maintenance Plan section, the total 2004 base year VOC emissions are
16.7 tons/day (tpd), which is the maximum amount of VOC emissions
consistent with maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The total
projected 2009 emissions are 14.0 tpd, which provides a 2.7 tpd VOC
safety margin (i.e., the ozone NAAQS would continue to be maintained if
total VOC emissions increased as much as 2.7 tpd above the projected
2009 emissions of 14.0 tpd). In the Proposed Total Emissions in the
Revised Maintenance Plan section, the total projected emissions for
2009 would be increased by 0.8 tpd through the increase in the
allowable mobile emissions for VOC while still leaving a safety margin
of 1.9 tpd. Therefore, even with the reallocation of some of the
current safety margin into the MVEBs, the State of West Virginia has
left a safety margin for any other unforeseen growth.
III. Final Action
EPA is approving West Virginia's August 25, 2008 SIP revision
submittal which amends the 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for the
Parkersburg area. These revisions amend the maintenance plans' 2009 and
2018 MVEBs to reflect the reallocation of a portion of the plans'
safety margins which results in an increase in the MVEBs. EPA is
approving this SIP revision to the maintenance plan for the Parkersburg
area because the August 25, 2008 submittal continues to demonstrate
maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS as even after reallocation of a
portion of the safety margin a sufficient safety margin still exists to
demonstrate continued attainment.
EPA notes that the DC Circuit issued a decision on July 11, 2008,
vacating the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). North Carolina v. EPA,
531 F.3d 896 (DC Cir. 2008).\1\ EPA's CAIR modeling was included in the
last Parkersburg maintenance plan effective June 17, 2007 (72 FR 25967,
May 8, 2007) as a supplemental analysis however, EPA's approval of that
maintenance plan was based on permanent and enforceable measures (as
instructed in the Calcagni memorandum, September 4, 1992). These
permanent and enforceable measures are sufficient to provide for
continued maintenance even without any CAIR reductions. EPA did note in
the approval that, in addition to permanent and enforceable measures,
further emissions reductions in the nonattainment area (specifically
Washington County, OH) are largely attributable to CAIR, but these
reductions are not needed to demonstrate maintenance in the area.
Therefore, EPA's approval of the August 25, 2008 SIP revision is not
impacted by the DC Circuit Court decision as even without any CAIR
reductions the area continues to demonstrate maintenance after
reallocation of a portion of the safety margin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ EPA filed a petition for rehearing with the Court of Appeals
for the District of Columbia Circuit on September 24, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates no
adverse comment, since no significant adverse comments were received on
the SIP revision at the State level. However, in the ``Proposed Rules''
section of today's Federal Register, EPA is publishing a separate
document that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision if
adverse comments are filed. This rule will be effective on December 29,
2008 without further notice unless EPA receives adverse comment by
December 1, 2008.
If EPA receives adverse comment, EPA will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule
will not take effect. EPA will address all public comments in a
subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. EPA will not
institute a second comment period on this action. Any parties
interested in commenting must do so at this time.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
A. General Requirements
Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
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);
Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
B. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
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
[[Page 64551]]
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 action 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).
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
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 December 29, 2008. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action 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 to revise the MVEBs for the
Parkersburg 8-hour Ozone Maintenance Plan 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, Incorporation by
reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
Dated: October 20, 2008.
Donald S. Welsh,
Regional Administrator, Region III.
0
40 CFR Part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for 40 CFR part 52 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart XX--West Virginia
0
2. In Sec. 52.2520, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by revising
the entry for the 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan for the Parkersburg-
Marietta, WV-OH Area to read as follows:
Sec. 52.2520 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State
Name of non-regulatory SIP Applicable submittal EPA approval date Additional
revision geographic area date explanation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan for Wood County......... 09/08/06 5/8/07; 72 FR 2967..
the Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH
Area.
08/25/08 10/30/08; [Insert Reallocation of
page number where emissions from the
the document existing ``safety
begins]. margin'' to
increase the
available motor
vehicle emission
budgets for highway
vehicles.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. E8-25662 Filed 10-29-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
