Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Michigan; Redesignation of the Detroit-Ann Arbor Area to Attainment for Ozone, 30950-30953 [E9-14750]

Download as PDF 30950 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 123 / Monday, June 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations [FR Doc. E9–15367 Filed 6–26–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7710–FW–C ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 [EPA–R05–OAR–2009–0219; FRL–8921–2] Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Michigan; Redesignation of the Detroit-Ann Arbor Area to Attainment for Ozone cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with RULES AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: EPA is making a determination under the Clean Air Act (CAA) that the Detroit-Ann Arbor nonattainment area has attained the 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The DetroitAnn Arbor area includes Lenawee, Livingston, Macomb, Monroe, Oakland, St. Clair, Washtenaw, and Wayne Counties. This determination is based on quality-assured ambient air quality monitoring data for the 2006–2008 ozone seasons that demonstrate that the 8-hour ozone NAAQS has been attained in the area. EPA is approving a request from the State of Michigan to redesignate the Detroit-Ann Arbor area to attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ) submitted this request on March 6, 2009. In approving this request, EPA is also approving, as a revision to the Michigan State Implementation Plan (SIP), the State’s plan for maintaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the area through 2020. EPA is approving the 2005 base year emissions inventory for the Detroit-Ann Arbor area as meeting the requirements of section 182(a)(1) of the CAA. EPA also finds adequate and is approving the State’s 2020 Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEBs) for the Detroit-Ann Arbor area. EPA proposed these actions on April 23, 2009. EPA provided a 30-day review and comment period, which closed on May 26, 2009. EPA received comments in support of the redesignation from Consumers Energy and the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments. EPA received no comments in opposition to the proposal. DATES: This final rule is effective June 29, 2009. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action: Docket ID No. VerDate Nov<24>2008 15:24 Jun 26, 2009 Jkt 217001 EPA–R05–OAR–2009–0219. All documents in the docket are listed on the https://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 at https:// www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the U.S. 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 Kathleen D’Agostino, Environmental Engineer, at (312) 886– 1767 before visiting the Region 5 office. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen D’Agostino, Environmental Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–1767, dagostino.kathleen@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information section is arranged as follows: Table of Contents I. What Is the Background for This Rule? II. What Comments Did We Receive on the Proposed Rule? III. What Action Is EPA Taking? IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. What Is the Background for This Rule? A. What Is the General Background Information? On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38856), EPA promulgated an 8-hour ozone standard of 0.08 parts per million (ppm). EPA published a final rule designating and classifying areas under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857). On March 12, 2008, EPA promulgated a more stringent 8-hour ozone standard of 0.075 ppm which was published in the Federal Register on March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16436). EPA will designate nonattainment areas under the 2008 8-hour ozone standard in 2010. Today’s approval of Michigan’s SIP revision addresses only the status of the DetroitAnn Arbor area with respect to the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 The background for today’s actions with respect to the 1997 ozone standard is discussed in detail in EPA’s April 23, 2009, proposal (74 FR 18479). In that rulemaking, we noted that, under EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour ozone standard is attained when the three-year average of the annual fourthhighest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm. (See 69 FR 23857 (April 30, 2004) for further information.) The data completeness requirement is met when the average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data is greater than 90%, and no single year has less than 75% data completeness, as determined in accordance with appendix I of part 50. Under the CAA, EPA may redesignate nonattainment areas to attainment if sufficient complete, quality-assured data are available to determine that the area has attained the standard and that it meets the other CAA redesignation requirements in section 107(d)(3)(E). On March 6, 2009, MDEQ submitted a request to redesignate the Detroit-Ann Arbor area to attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard. The request included three years of complete, quality-assured data for the period of 2006 through 2008, indicating the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone had been achieved. The April 23, 2009, proposed rule provides a detailed discussion of how Michigan met this and other CAA requirements. B. What Are the Impacts of the December 22, 2006, and June 8, 2007, United States Court of Appeals Decisions Regarding EPA’s Phase 1 Implementation Rule? On December 22, 2006, in South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. v. EPA, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated EPA’s Phase 1 Implementation Rule for the 8-hour ozone standard (69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004). 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006). On June 8, 2007, in response to several petitions for rehearing, the D.C. Circuit Court clarified that the Phase 1 Rule was vacated only with regard to those parts of the rule that had been successfully challenged. Id., Docket No. 04–1201. Therefore, the Phase 1 Rule provisions related to classifications for areas currently classified under subpart 2 of Title I, part D of the CAA as 8-hour nonattainment areas, the 8-hour attainment dates, and the timing for emissions reductions needed for attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS remain effective. The June 8th decision left intact the Court’s rejection of EPA’s reasons for implementing the 8-hour standard in certain nonattainment areas under subpart 1 in lieu of subpart 2. By E:\FR\FM\29JNR1.SGM 29JNR1 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 123 / Monday, June 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with RULES limiting the vacatur, the Court let stand EPA’s revocation of the 1-hour standard and those antibacksliding provisions of the Phase 1 Rule that had not been successfully challenged. The June 8th decision reaffirmed the Court’s December 22, 2006, decision that EPA had improperly failed to retain four measures required for 1-hour nonattainment areas under the anti-backsliding provisions of the regulations: (1) Nonattainment area New Source Review (NSR) requirements based on an area’s 1-hour nonattainment classification; (2) Section 185 penalty fees for 1-hour severe or extreme nonattainment areas; (3) measures to be implemented pursuant to section 172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the CAA, contingent on an area not making reasonable further progress toward attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or for failure to attain that NAAQS; and (4) certain transportation conformity requirements for certain types of Federal actions. The June 8th decision clarified that the Court’s reference to conformity requirements was limited to requiring the continued use of 1-hour motor vehicle emissions budgets until 8-hour budgets were available for 8-hour conformity determinations. For the reasons set forth in the proposal, EPA does not believe that the Court’s rulings alter any requirements relevant to this redesignation action so as to preclude redesignation. EPA believes that the Court’s December 22, 2006, and June 8, 2007, decisions impose no impediment to moving forward with redesignation of this area to attainment, because, even in light of the Court’s decisions, redesignation is appropriate under the relevant redesignation provisions of the CAA and longstanding policies regarding redesignation requests. With respect to the requirement for transportation conformity under the 1hour standard, the Court in its June 8th decision clarified that, for those areas with 1-hour motor vehicle emissions budgets in their maintenance plans, anti-backsliding requires only that those 1-hour budgets must be used for 8-hour conformity determinations until replaced by 8-hour budgets. To meet this requirement, conformity determinations in such areas must comply with the applicable requirements of EPA’s conformity regulations at 40 CFR part 93. II. What Comments Did We Receive on the Proposed Rule? EPA provided a 30-day review and comment period. The comment period closed on May 26, 2009. EPA received comments in support of the VerDate Nov<24>2008 15:24 Jun 26, 2009 Jkt 217001 redesignation from Consumers Energy and the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments. EPA did not receive any adverse comments. III. What Action Is EPA Taking? EPA is making a determination that the Detroit-Ann Arbor area has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also approving the maintenance plan SIP revision for the Detroit-Ann Arbor area. EPA’s approval of the maintenance plan is based on Michigan’s demonstration that the plan meets the requirements of section 175A of the CAA. After evaluating Michigan’s redesignation request, EPA has determined that it meets the redesignation criteria set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. Therefore, EPA is approving the redesignation of the Detroit-Ann Arbor area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is approving the 2005 base year emissions inventory for the Detroit-Ann Arbor area as meeting the requirements of section 182(a)(1) of the CAA. Finally, EPA also finds adequate and is approving the State’s 2020 MVEBs for the Detroit-Ann Arbor area. In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(d), EPA finds there is good cause for this action to become effective immediately upon publication. This is because a delayed effective date is unnecessary due to the nature of a redesignation to attainment, which relieves the area from certain CAA requirements that would otherwise apply to it. The immediate effective date for this action is authorized under both 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), which provides that rulemaking actions may become effective less than 30 days after publication if the rule ‘‘grants or recognizes an exemption or relieves a restriction,’’ and section 553(d)(3) which allows an effective date less than 30 days after publication ‘‘as otherwise provided by the agency for good cause found and published with the rule.’’ The purpose of the 30-day waiting period prescribed in section 553(d) is to give affected parties a reasonable time to adjust their behavior and prepare before the final rule takes effect. Today’s rule, however, does not create any new regulatory requirements such that affected parties would need time to prepare before the rule takes effect. Rather, today’s rule relieves the State of planning requirements for this 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. For these reasons, EPA finds good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) for this action to become effective on the date of publication of this action. PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 30951 IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Executive Order 12866; Regulatory Planning and Review Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, September 30, 1993), this action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. Paperwork Reduction Act 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.). Regulatory Flexibility Act This action merely approves State law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. Redesignation of an area to attainment under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA does not impose any new requirements on small entities. Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a geographical area and does not impose any new regulatory requirements on sources. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this 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.). Unfunded Mandates Reform Act Because this rule approves preexisting 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). Executive Order 13132: Federalism 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). Redesignation is an action that merely affects the status of a geographical area, does not impose any new requirements on sources, or allows a State to avoid adopting or implementing other requirements, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the CAA. E:\FR\FM\29JNR1.SGM 29JNR1 30952 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 123 / Monday, June 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments 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). Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks 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 is not economically significant. Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use Because it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under Executive Order 12866 or a ‘‘significant energy action,’’ 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). National Technology Transfer Advancement Act Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), 15 U.S.C. 272, requires Federal agencies to use technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus to carry out policy objectives, so long as such standards are not inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impracticable. In reviewing program submissions, EPA’s role is to approve State choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Absent a prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards, EPA has no authority to disapprove a program submission for failure to use such standards, and it would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in place of a program submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Act. Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a geographical area but does not impose any new requirements on sources. Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801, et seq., enacted pursuant to 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 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). 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 August 28, 2009. 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 the action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See 42 U.S.C. 7607(b)(2).) List of Subjects 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds. 40 CFR Part 81 Air pollution control, Environmental protection, National parks, Wilderness areas. Dated: June 11, 2009. Walter W. Kovalick Jr, Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. Parts 52 and 81, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations are amended as follows: ■ PART 52—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. Subpart X—Michigan 2. Section 52.1170(e) is amended by adding an entry to the end of the table to read as follows: ■ § 52.1170 * Identification of plan. * * (e) * * * * * EPA-APPROVED MICHIGAN NONREGULATORY AND QUASI-REGULATORY PROVISIONS Name of nonregulatory SIP provision Applicable geographic or nonattainment area * * * * * 8-hour ozone maintenance plan ........................... Detroit-Ann Arbor (Lenawee, Livingston, Macomb, Monroe, Oakland, St. Clair, Washtenaw, and Wayne Counties). 3. Section 52.1174 is amended by adding paragraph (z) to read as follows: cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with RULES ■ § 52.1174 Control strategy: Ozone. * * * * * (z) Approval—On March 6, 2009, Michigan submitted a request to redesignate the Detroit-Ann Arbor area (Lenawee, Livingston, Macomb, VerDate Nov<24>2008 15:24 Jun 26, 2009 Jkt 217001 Monroe, Oakland, St. Clair, Washtenaw, and Wayne Counties) to attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). As part of its redesignation requests, the State submitted a maintenance plan as required by section 175A of the Clean Air Act. Elements of the section 175 maintenance plan PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 State submittal date * 3/6/2009 EPA approval date Comments * 6/29/2009 include a contingency plan and an obligation to submit subsequent maintenance plan revisions in 8 years as required by the Clean Air Act. If monitors in any of these areas record a violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, Michigan will adopt and implement one or more contingency measures. The list of possible contingency measures E:\FR\FM\29JNR1.SGM 29JNR1 30953 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 123 / Monday, June 29, 2009 / Rules and Regulations includes: Reduced VOC content in architectural, industrial, and maintenance (AIM) coatings rule; auto body refinisher self-certification audit program; reduced VOC degreasing/ solvent cleaning rule; diesel retrofit program; reduced idling program; portable fuel container replacement rule; and, food preparation flame broiler control rule. Also included in the Michigan’s submittal were a 2005 base year emissions inventory and motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) for use to determine transportation conformity in the area. For the DetroitAnn Arbor area, Michigan has established separate MVEBS for the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG) region (Livingston, Macomb, Monroe, Oakland, St. Clair, Washtenaw, and Wayne Counties) and for Lenawee County. MDEQ has determined the 2020 MVEBs for the SEMCOG region to be 106 tons per day for VOC and 274 tpd for NOX. MDEQ has determined the 2020 MVEBs for Lenawee County to be 2.1 tpd for VOC and 4.4 tpd for NOX. PART 81—[AMENDED] 1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 2. Section 81.323 is amended by revising the entry for Detroit-Ann Arbor, MI in the table entitled ‘‘MichiganOzone (8-Hour Standard)’’ to read as follows: ■ § 81.323 * * Michigan. * * * MICHIGAN-OZONE (8-HOUR STANDARD) Designation a Classification Designated area Date 1 * * * Detroit-Ann Arbor, MI: Lenawee County ................................................................. Livingston County. Macomb County. Monroe County. Oakland County. St. Clair County. Washtenaw County. Wayne County. * * * Type * * * * 6/29/2009 * Date 1 Type * * Attainment. * a Includes 1 This Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted. [FR Doc. E9–14750 Filed 6–26–09; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 141 and 143 [EPA–HQ–OW–2008–0644; FRL–8920–8] RIN 2040–AF00 National Primary Drinking Water Regulations: Minor Correction to Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule and Changes in References to Analytical Methods AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency. ACTION: Final rule. In this action, EPA is making a minor correction to the Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule (DBPR) and minor, unrelated, editorial changes in references to analytical methods in the regulations. EPA promulgated the Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule on January 4, 2006. A requirement for ground water systems serving 500–9,999 people was cprice-sewell on PRODPC61 with RULES SUMMARY: VerDate Nov<24>2008 15:24 Jun 26, 2009 Jkt 217001 unintentionally excluded from the final rule. As a result, the rule allowed for less routine compliance monitoring than intended for this category of public water systems (PWSs). These PWSs should have been required to monitor for both total trihalomethanes (TTHM) and haloacetic acids (HAA5) concentrations at two locations. Due to the error, they were only required to monitor for either TTHM or HAA5 at two locations. EPA is also making minor, unrelated changes in the regulations by adding references to the list of analytical methods approved under the Expedited Approval Process, removing references to outdated methods, and specifying a new source for the publication titled Technical Notes on Drinking Water Methods. DATES: This final rule is effective on July 29, 2009. For judicial review purposes, this final rule is promulgated as of June 29, 2009. The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in this rule is effective as of June 29, 2009. ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID No. OW–2008–0644. All documents in the docket are listed on the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some information is PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 not publicly available, e.g., 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 OW Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW., Washington, DC. The Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744, and the telephone number for the OW docket is (202) 566– 2426. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information concerning the Stage 2 DBPR minor correction contact Tom Grubbs, Standards and Risk Management Division, Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water, M/C 4607M, Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number (202) 564–5262; e-mail address grubbs.thomas@epa.gov. For information concerning the methods E:\FR\FM\29JNR1.SGM 29JNR1

Agencies

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 123 (Monday, June 29, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30950-30953]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-14750]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R05-OAR-2009-0219; FRL-8921-2]

Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation
of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Michigan; Redesignation of
the Detroit-Ann Arbor Area to Attainment for Ozone

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is making a determination under the Clean Air Act (CAA)
that the Detroit-Ann Arbor nonattainment area has attained the 8-hour
ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). The Detroit-Ann
Arbor area includes Lenawee, Livingston, Macomb, Monroe, Oakland, St.
Clair, Washtenaw, and Wayne Counties. This determination is based on
quality-assured ambient air quality monitoring data for the 2006-2008
ozone seasons that demonstrate that the 8-hour ozone NAAQS has been
attained in the area. EPA is approving a request from the State of
Michigan to redesignate the Detroit-Ann Arbor area to attainment of the
8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
(MDEQ) submitted this request on March 6, 2009. In approving this
request, EPA is also approving, as a revision to the Michigan State
Implementation Plan (SIP), the State's plan for maintaining the 8-hour
ozone NAAQS in the area through 2020. EPA is approving the 2005 base
year emissions inventory for the Detroit-Ann Arbor area as meeting the
requirements of section 182(a)(1) of the CAA. EPA also finds adequate
and is approving the State's 2020 Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets
(MVEBs) for the Detroit-Ann Arbor area. EPA proposed these actions on
April 23, 2009. EPA provided a 30-day review and comment period, which
closed on May 26, 2009. EPA received comments in support of the
redesignation from Consumers Energy and the Southeast Michigan Council
of Governments. EPA received no comments in opposition to the proposal.

DATES: This final rule is effective June 29, 2009.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action: Docket ID No.
EPA-R05-OAR-2009-0219. All documents in the docket are listed on the
https://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 at https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the
U.S. 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 Kathleen
D'Agostino, Environmental Engineer, at (312) 886-1767 before visiting
the Region 5 office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen D'Agostino, Environmental
Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-1767,
dagostino.kathleen@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:

Table of Contents

I. What Is the Background for This Rule?
II. What Comments Did We Receive on the Proposed Rule?
III. What Action Is EPA Taking?
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Is the Background for This Rule?

A. What Is the General Background Information?

On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 38856), EPA promulgated an 8-hour ozone
standard of 0.08 parts per million (ppm). EPA published a final rule
designating and classifying areas under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS on
April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857).
On March 12, 2008, EPA promulgated a more stringent 8-hour ozone
standard of 0.075 ppm which was published in the Federal Register on
March 27, 2008 (73 FR 16436). EPA will designate nonattainment areas
under the 2008 8-hour ozone standard in 2010. Today's approval of
Michigan's SIP revision addresses only the status of the Detroit-Ann
Arbor area with respect to the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
The background for today's actions with respect to the 1997 ozone
standard is discussed in detail in EPA's April 23, 2009, proposal (74
FR 18479). In that rulemaking, we noted that, under EPA regulations at
40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour ozone standard is attained when the three-
year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average
ozone concentrations is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm. (See 69 FR
23857 (April 30, 2004) for further information.) The data completeness
requirement is met when the average percent of days with valid ambient
monitoring data is greater than 90%, and no single year has less than
75% data completeness, as determined in accordance with appendix I of
part 50.
Under the CAA, EPA may redesignate nonattainment areas to
attainment if sufficient complete, quality-assured data are available
to determine that the area has attained the standard and that it meets
the other CAA redesignation requirements in section 107(d)(3)(E).
On March 6, 2009, MDEQ submitted a request to redesignate the
Detroit-Ann Arbor area to attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard. The
request included three years of complete, quality-assured data for the
period of 2006 through 2008, indicating the 8-hour NAAQS for ozone had
been achieved. The April 23, 2009, proposed rule provides a detailed
discussion of how Michigan met this and other CAA requirements.

B. What Are the Impacts of the December 22, 2006, and June 8, 2007,
United States Court of Appeals Decisions Regarding EPA's Phase 1
Implementation Rule?

On December 22, 2006, in South Coast Air Quality Management Dist.
v. EPA, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
vacated EPA's Phase 1 Implementation Rule for the 8-hour ozone standard
(69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004). 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006). On June
8, 2007, in response to several petitions for rehearing, the D.C.
Circuit Court clarified that the Phase 1 Rule was vacated only with
regard to those parts of the rule that had been successfully
challenged. Id., Docket No. 04-1201. Therefore, the Phase 1 Rule
provisions related to classifications for areas currently classified
under subpart 2 of Title I, part D of the CAA as 8-hour nonattainment
areas, the 8-hour attainment dates, and the timing for emissions
reductions needed for attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS remain
effective. The June 8th decision left intact the Court's rejection of
EPA's reasons for implementing the 8-hour standard in certain
nonattainment areas under subpart 1 in lieu of subpart 2. By

[[Page 30951]]

limiting the vacatur, the Court let stand EPA's revocation of the 1-
hour standard and those anti-backsliding provisions of the Phase 1 Rule
that had not been successfully challenged. The June 8th decision
reaffirmed the Court's December 22, 2006, decision that EPA had
improperly failed to retain four measures required for 1-hour
nonattainment areas under the anti-backsliding provisions of the
regulations: (1) Nonattainment area New Source Review (NSR)
requirements based on an area's 1-hour nonattainment classification;
(2) Section 185 penalty fees for 1-hour severe or extreme nonattainment
areas; (3) measures to be implemented pursuant to section 172(c)(9) or
182(c)(9) of the CAA, contingent on an area not making reasonable
further progress toward attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or for failure
to attain that NAAQS; and (4) certain transportation conformity
requirements for certain types of Federal actions. The June 8th
decision clarified that the Court's reference to conformity
requirements was limited to requiring the continued use of 1-hour motor
vehicle emissions budgets until 8-hour budgets were available for 8-
hour conformity determinations.
For the reasons set forth in the proposal, EPA does not believe
that the Court's rulings alter any requirements relevant to this
redesignation action so as to preclude redesignation. EPA believes that
the Court's December 22, 2006, and June 8, 2007, decisions impose no
impediment to moving forward with redesignation of this area to
attainment, because, even in light of the Court's decisions,
redesignation is appropriate under the relevant redesignation
provisions of the CAA and longstanding policies regarding redesignation
requests.
With respect to the requirement for transportation conformity under
the 1-hour standard, the Court in its June 8th decision clarified that,
for those areas with 1-hour motor vehicle emissions budgets in their
maintenance plans, anti-backsliding requires only that those 1-hour
budgets must be used for 8-hour conformity determinations until
replaced by 8-hour budgets. To meet this requirement, conformity
determinations in such areas must comply with the applicable
requirements of EPA's conformity regulations at 40 CFR part 93.

II. What Comments Did We Receive on the Proposed Rule?

EPA provided a 30-day review and comment period. The comment period
closed on May 26, 2009. EPA received comments in support of the
redesignation from Consumers Energy and the Southeast Michigan Council
of Governments. EPA did not receive any adverse comments.

III. What Action Is EPA Taking?

EPA is making a determination that the Detroit-Ann Arbor area has
attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also approving the maintenance
plan SIP revision for the Detroit-Ann Arbor area. EPA's approval of the
maintenance plan is based on Michigan's demonstration that the plan
meets the requirements of section 175A of the CAA. After evaluating
Michigan's redesignation request, EPA has determined that it meets the
redesignation criteria set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.
Therefore, EPA is approving the redesignation of the Detroit-Ann Arbor
area from nonattainment to attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA
is approving the 2005 base year emissions inventory for the Detroit-Ann
Arbor area as meeting the requirements of section 182(a)(1) of the CAA.
Finally, EPA also finds adequate and is approving the State's 2020
MVEBs for the Detroit-Ann Arbor area.
In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(d), EPA finds there is good cause
for this action to become effective immediately upon publication. This
is because a delayed effective date is unnecessary due to the nature of
a redesignation to attainment, which relieves the area from certain CAA
requirements that would otherwise apply to it. The immediate effective
date for this action is authorized under both 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(1), which
provides that rulemaking actions may become effective less than 30 days
after publication if the rule ``grants or recognizes an exemption or
relieves a restriction,'' and section 553(d)(3) which allows an
effective date less than 30 days after publication ``as otherwise
provided by the agency for good cause found and published with the
rule.'' The purpose of the 30-day waiting period prescribed in section
553(d) is to give affected parties a reasonable time to adjust their
behavior and prepare before the final rule takes effect. Today's rule,
however, does not create any new regulatory requirements such that
affected parties would need time to prepare before the rule takes
effect. Rather, today's rule relieves the State of planning
requirements for this 8-hour ozone nonattainment area. For these
reasons, EPA finds good cause under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3) for this action
to become effective on the date of publication of this action.

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Executive Order 12866; Regulatory Planning and Review

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, September 30, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.

Paperwork Reduction Act

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.).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

This action merely approves State law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those
imposed by State law. Redesignation of an area to attainment under
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA does not impose any new requirements on
small entities. Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a
geographical area and does not impose any new regulatory requirements
on sources. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this 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.).

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

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).

Executive Order 13132: Federalism

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). Redesignation is an action that merely affects the status of
a geographical area, does not impose any new requirements on sources,
or allows a State to avoid adopting or implementing other requirements,
and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and
responsibilities established in the CAA.

[[Page 30952]]

Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments

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).

Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks

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 is not economically significant.

Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use

Because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866 or a ``significant energy action,'' 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).

National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (NTTAA), 15 U.S.C. 272, requires Federal agencies to use
technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus to carry out policy objectives, so long as such standards are
not inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impracticable. In
reviewing program submissions, EPA's role is to approve State choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Absent a prior
existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus
standards, EPA has no authority to disapprove a program submission for
failure to use such standards, and it would thus be inconsistent with
applicable law for EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in place of
a program submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the
Act. Redesignation is an action that affects the status of a
geographical area but does not impose any new requirements on sources.
Thus, the requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply.
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801, et seq., enacted
pursuant to 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
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).
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 August 28, 2009. 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 the action. This
action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See 42 U.S.C. 7607(b)(2).)

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone,
Volatile organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

Air pollution control, Environmental protection, National parks,
Wilderness areas.

Dated: June 11, 2009.
Walter W. Kovalick Jr,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

0
Parts 52 and 81, chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations
are 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 X--Michigan

0
2. Section 52.1170(e) is amended by adding an entry to the end of the
table to read as follows:

Sec. 52.1170 Identification of plan.

* * * * *
(e) * * *

EPA-Approved Michigan Nonregulatory and Quasi-Regulatory Provisions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State EPA
Name of nonregulatory SIP provision Applicable geographic or submittal approval Comments
nonattainment area date date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * * * *
8-hour ozone maintenance plan............. Detroit-Ann Arbor (Lenawee, 3/6/2009 6/29/2009
Livingston, Macomb, Monroe,
Oakland, St. Clair,
Washtenaw, and Wayne
Counties).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
3. Section 52.1174 is amended by adding paragraph (z) to read as
follows:

Sec. 52.1174 Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
(z) Approval--On March 6, 2009, Michigan submitted a request to
redesignate the Detroit-Ann Arbor area (Lenawee, Livingston, Macomb,
Monroe, Oakland, St. Clair, Washtenaw, and Wayne Counties) to
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standard (NAAQS). As part of its redesignation requests, the State
submitted a maintenance plan as required by section 175A of the Clean
Air Act. Elements of the section 175 maintenance plan include a
contingency plan and an obligation to submit subsequent maintenance
plan revisions in 8 years as required by the Clean Air Act. If monitors
in any of these areas record a violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS,
Michigan will adopt and implement one or more contingency measures. The
list of possible contingency measures

[[Page 30953]]

includes: Reduced VOC content in architectural, industrial, and
maintenance (AIM) coatings rule; auto body refinisher self-
certification audit program; reduced VOC degreasing/solvent cleaning
rule; diesel retrofit program; reduced idling program; portable fuel
container replacement rule; and, food preparation flame broiler control
rule. Also included in the Michigan's submittal were a 2005 base year
emissions inventory and motor vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) for use
to determine transportation conformity in the area. For the Detroit-Ann
Arbor area, Michigan has established separate MVEBS for the Southeast
Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG) region (Livingston, Macomb,
Monroe, Oakland, St. Clair, Washtenaw, and Wayne Counties) and for
Lenawee County. MDEQ has determined the 2020 MVEBs for the SEMCOG
region to be 106 tons per day for VOC and 274 tpd for NOX.
MDEQ has determined the 2020 MVEBs for Lenawee County to be 2.1 tpd for
VOC and 4.4 tpd for NOX.

PART 81--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

0
2. Section 81.323 is amended by revising the entry for Detroit-Ann
Arbor, MI in the table entitled ``Michigan-Ozone (8-Hour Standard)'' to
read as follows:

Sec. 81.323 Michigan.

* * * * *

Michigan-Ozone (8-Hour Standard)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation \a\ Classification
Designated area -------------------------------------------------------------------
Date \1\ Type Date \1\ Type
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * * * *
Detroit-Ann Arbor, MI:
Lenawee County.......................... 6/29/2009 Attainment.....................
Livingston County.
Macomb County...........................
Monroe County...........................
Oakland County..........................
St. Clair County........................
Washtenaw County........................
Wayne County............................

* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\a\ Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
\1\ This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted.

[FR Doc. E9-14750 Filed 6-26-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.