Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Arkansas; Redesignation of the Crittenden County, Arkansas Portion of the Memphis, Tennessee-Arkansas 1997 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area to Attainment, 2091-2102 [2010-586]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2010 / Proposed Rules
III. What Is EPA’s Analysis of Indiana’s
Automobile Refinishing Rule?
Background of Rule and Its Revisions
EPA issued National VOC Emission
Standards for Automobile Refinishing
Coatings at 40 CFR part 59, subpart B,
on September 11, 1998 (64 FR 48815, as
amended at 69 FR 18803, April 9, 2004),
promulgated under the Consumer and
Commercial Products provisions of
section 183(e) of the Act. The VOC
emission limits in this rule apply
nationwide to manufacturers and
importers of automobile refinishing
coatings or coating components that sell
or distribute these coatings in the
United States.
On December 20, 1999, EPA approved
326 IAC 8–10, in which Indiana adopted
the requirements in EPA’s national rule,
but applied its requirements to the sale
of automobile refinishing coatings and
the owners and operators of automobile
refinishing facilities. Indiana’s SIP rule
also contains additional work practice
standards that reduce VOC emissions by
specifying acceptable methods of spray
gun cleaning, the type of application
equipment that can be used (which
reduces the amount of overspray) and
housekeeping practices (such as storing
VOC-containing materials in closed
containers) that reduce VOC emissions.
The revised rules submitted by
Indiana expand the applicability of the
previously approved rules from Clark,
Floyd, Lake, Porter and Vanderburgh
Counties to all of Indiana.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
Analysis of Rule and Its Revisions
The revisions to Indiana’s automobile
refinishing rule, 326 IAC 8–10, are
approvable because they are consistent
with the Act and applicable EPA
regulations, and should result in
additional VOC emission reductions. A
description of the rule revisions follows:
326 IAC 8–10–1 Applicability—This
section has been revised so that after
June 1, 2009, it applies to any person
who sells automobile refinishing
coatings or refinishes motor vehicles in
all Indiana counties.
326 IAC 8–10–2 Definitions—The
definitions of ‘‘control device,’’ ‘‘control
device efficiency’’ and ‘‘control system’’
have been deleted from this section
because those terms are no longer used
in this rule. A few other minor editorial
and clarifying revisions have also been
made.
326 IAC 8–10–3 Requirements—
This section expands the applicability
of the control requirements to all of
Indiana and eliminates requirements
that had specifically applied to only
Vanderburgh County.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:37 Jan 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
2091
326 IAC 8–10–4 Means to limit VOC
emissions—This section specifies the
VOC limits that must be met by the
owners or operators of a refinishing
facility. It has been revised to eliminate
the use of add-on control systems as a
compliance option. This compliance
option is not necessary because VOC
content limits are more appropriate for
automobile refinishing facilities than
add-on control devices.
326 IAC 8–10–5 Work Practice
Standards and 326 IAC 8–10–6
Compliance procedures have not been
substantively revised.
326 IAC 8–10–7 Test procedures and
326 IAC 8–10–9 Recordkeeping and
reporting—These sections have been
revised primarily by removing the
testing, recordkeeping and reporting
requirements applicable to control
devices. A new section, 326 IAC 8–10–
9(e), has been added which requires the
owners or operators of refinishing
facilities subject to this rule to report
any incidence in which a noncompliant
coating was used within thirty days.
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 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.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the 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 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
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Dated: December 30, 2009.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2010–619 Filed 1–13–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R06–OAR–2009–0202; FRL–9103–2]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans and Designation
of Areas for Air Quality Planning
Purposes; Arkansas; Redesignation of
the Crittenden County, Arkansas
Portion of the Memphis, TennesseeArkansas 1997 8-Hour Ozone
Nonattainment Area to Attainment
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
SUMMARY: On February 24, 2009, the
State of Arkansas, through the Arkansas
Department of Environmental Quality
(ADEQ), submitted a request to
redesignate the Arkansas portion of the
bi-state Memphis, Tennessee-Arkansas
(Memphis TN-AR) 1997 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area to attainment for the
E:\FR\FM\14JAP1.SGM
14JAP1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
2092
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2010 / Proposed Rules
8-hour ozone National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS); and to
approve the State Implementation Plan
(SIP) revision containing a maintenance
plan for the Arkansas portion of the bistate Memphis TN-AR Area. The bi-state
Memphis TN-AR 1997 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area is composed of
Memphis, Shelby County, Tennessee
(Shelby County) and Crittenden County,
Arkansas. In this action, EPA proposes
to approve the 1997 8-hour ozone
redesignation request for Crittenden
County, Arkansas. Additionally, EPA
proposes to approve the 1997 8-hour
ozone maintenance plan for Crittenden
County, including the state motor
vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for
nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile
organic compounds (VOCs) for the years
2006 and 2021. This proposed approval
of Arkansas’ redesignation request is
based on EPA’s determination that
Arkansas has demonstrated that
Crittenden County has met the criteria
for redesignation to attainment specified
in the Clean Air Act (CAA), including
the determination that the entire
Memphis TN-AR ozone nonattainment
area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before February 16, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R06–
OAR–2009–0202, by one of the
following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. E-mail: donaldson.guy@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (214) 665–7263.
4. Mail: EPA–R06–OAR–2009–0202
Air Planning Section, Multimedia
Planning and Permitting Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite
1200, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Mr. Guy
Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning Section,
Air Planning Branch, Multimedia
Planning and Permitting Division, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite
1200, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office’s normal hours of
operation. The Regional Office’s official
hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal
holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R06–OAR–2009–
0202. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:37 Jan 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail,
information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The https://
www.regulations.gov Web site is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Air Planning Section, Air Branch,
Multimedia Planning and Permitting
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733.
EPA requests that if at all possible, you
contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional
Office’s official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30,
excluding Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Jeffrey Riley, Air Planning Section
(6PD–L), Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733,
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
telephone (214) 665–8542; fax number
214–665–7263; e-mail address
riley.jeffrey@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What Proposed Actions Is EPA Taking?
II. What Is the Background for EPA’s
Proposed Actions?
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation?
IV. Why Is EPA Proposing These Actions?
V. What Is the Effect of EPA’s Proposed
Actions?
VI. What Is EPA’s Analysis of the Request?
VII. What Is EPA’s Analysis of Arkansas’
Proposed State NOX and VOC MVEBs for
Crittenden County, Arkansas?
VIII. What Is the Status of EPA’s Adequacy
Determination for the Proposed State
NOX and VOC MVEBs for the Years 2006
and 2021 for Crittenden County,
Arkansas?
IX. Proposed Action on the Redesignation
Request and Maintenance Plan SIP
Revision Including Proposed Approval
of the 2006 and 2021 State NOX and VOC
MVEBs for Crittenden County, Arkansas
X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Proposed Actions Is EPA
Taking?
EPA proposes several related actions,
which are summarized below and
described in greater detail throughout
this notice of rulemaking:
(1) To redesignate Crittenden County,
Arkansas to attainment for the 1997 8hour ozone NAAQS. EPA proposes to
determine that the bi-state Memphis,
TN-AR Area has attained the 1997
8-hour ozone standard, and that the
Crittenden County, Arkansas portion
has met the requirements for
redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E)
of the CAA. The bi-state Memphis, TNAR 1997 8-hour ozone area comprises
Shelby County in Tennessee and
Crittenden County in Arkansas. Today’s
proposal addresses only the Arkansas
portion of the bi-state Memphis, TN-AR
1997 8-hour ozone area. EPA is now
proposing to approve a request to
change the legal designation of
Crittenden County, Arkansas from
nonattainment to attainment for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
(2) To approve Arkansas’ 1997 8-hour
ozone maintenance plan into the
Arkansas SIP, including the 2006 and
2021 motor vehicle emissions budgets
(MVEB’s) that are part of the
maintenance plan. EPA has already
made a finding of adequacy for the
MVEBs (74 FR 21356). These MVEBs
apply only to Crittenden County,
Arkansas. MVEB’s contained in the
Tennessee submittal for Shelby County
will be addressed in a separate action.
EPA proposes to approve Arkansas’
1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for
Crittenden County (such approval being
E:\FR\FM\14JAP1.SGM
14JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2010 / Proposed Rules
one of the CAA criteria for redesignation
to attainment status). The maintenance
plan is designed to help keep the
Memphis TN-AR area (of which
Crittenden County is a part) in
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS through 2021.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
II. What Is the Background for EPA’s
Proposed Actions?
Ground-level ozone is not emitted
directly by sources. Rather, emissions of
NOX and VOC react in the presence of
sunlight to form ground-level ozone.
NOX and VOC are precursors of ozone.
The CAA establishes a process for air
quality management through the
NAAQS. EPA establishes NAAQS for
criteria pollutants as the maximum level
of air pollution allowed to protect
public health and welfare.
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a
revised 8-hour ozone standard of 0.08
parts per million (ppm). This standard
is more stringent than the previous
1-hour ozone standard. Under EPA
regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour
ozone standard is attained when the
3-year average of the annual fourth
highest daily maximum 8-hour average
ambient air quality ozone
concentrations is less than or equal to
0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when
rounding is considered). (See, 69 FR
23857 (April 30, 2004) for further
information.) Ambient air quality
monitoring data for the 3-year period
must meet a data completeness
requirement. The ambient air quality
monitoring data completeness
requirement is met when the average
percent of days with valid ambient
monitoring data is greater than 90
percent, and no single year has less than
75 percent data completeness as
determined in Appendix I of part 50.
Specifically, section 2.3 of 40 CFR part
50, Appendix I, ‘‘Comparisons with the
Primary and Secondary Ozone
Standards’’ states:
The primary and secondary ozone
ambient air quality standards are met at
an ambient air quality monitoring site
when the 3-year average of the annual
fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour
average ozone concentration is less than
or equal to 0.08 ppm. The number of
significant figures in the level of the
standard dictates the rounding
convention for comparing the computed
3-year average annual fourth-highest
daily maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentration with the level of the
standard. The third decimal place of the
computed value is rounded, with values
equal to or greater than 5 rounding up.
Thus, a computed 3-year average ozone
concentration of 0.085 ppm is the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:37 Jan 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
smallest value that is greater than 0.08
ppm.;
The CAA requires EPA to designate as
nonattainment any area that was
violating the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
based on the three most recent years of
ambient air quality data. The CAA
contains two sets of provisions—subpart
1 and subpart 2—that address planning
and control requirements for ozone
nonattainment areas. (Both are found in
title I, part D.) Subpart 1 (which EPA
refers to as ‘‘basic’’ nonattainment)
contains general, less prescriptive,
requirements for nonattainment areas
for any pollutant—including ozone—
governed by a NAAQS. Subpart 2
(which EPA refers to as ‘‘classified’’
nonattainment) provides more specific
requirements for certain ozone
nonattainment areas. Some 1997 8-hour
ozone nonattainment areas are subject
only to the provisions of subpart 1.
Other 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment
areas are also subject to the provisions
of subpart 2. Under EPA’s Phase 1 1997
8-hour ozone implementation rule (69
FR 23857) (Phase 1 Rule), signed on
April 15, 2004, and published April 30,
2004, an area was classified under
subpart 2 based on its 1997 8-hour
ozone design value (i.e., the 3-year
average of the annual fourth-highest
daily maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentrations), if it had a 1-hour design
value at or above 0.121 ppm (the lowest
1-hour design value in Table 1 of
subpart 2). All other areas are covered
under subpart 1, based upon their
8-hour ambient air quality design value.
Shelby County, Tennessee was
originally designated as a marginal
nonattainment area for the 1-hour ozone
standard on November 6, 1991 (56 FR
56694). Crittenden County, Arkansas
was not part of the nonattainment area
during the 1991 1-hour designations. On
February 16, 1995 (60 FR 3352) Shelby
County was redesignated as attainment
for the 1-hour ozone standard and is
considered to be a 1-hour maintenance
area subject to a CAA section 175A
maintenance plan for the 1-hour
standard.
On April 30, 2004, EPA designated
the Memphis, TN-AR Area (which then
included Crittenden County, Arkansas)
as a ‘‘moderate’’ 1997 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area (see, 69 FR 23857,
April 30, 2004). On July 15, 2004,
pursuant to section 181(a)(4) of the
CAA, the States of Tennessee and
Arkansas submitted a petition to EPA
Regions 4 and 6, requesting a downward
reclassification of the Memphis TN-AR
nonattainment area from ‘‘moderate’’ to
‘‘marginal’’ for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard. The petition was based on the
area’s ‘‘moderate’’ design value of .092
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2093
ppm being within five percent of the
maximum ‘‘marginal’’ design value of
0.091 ppm. Pursuant to Section
181(a)(4), areas with design values
within five percent of the standard may
request a reclassification under specific
circumstances. Factors for EPA to
consider as part of such a request are
described in section 181(a)(4) of the
CAA. The petition for reclassification to
‘‘marginal’’ was approved by EPA, and
became effective on November 22, 2004
(see, 69 FR 56697, September 22, 2004).
As a result of the downward
classification, the new attainment date
for the Memphis TN-AR ‘‘marginal’’
nonattainment area was set at June 15,
2007, consistent with the CAA, with an
attainment determination to be based on
2004–2006 air quality data.
Air quality data monitored for the
Memphis TN-AR nonattainment area
subsequently showed that the area did
not attain the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS by the June 15, 2007, deadline.
Section 181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA
provides that, when EPA finds that an
area failed to attain by the applicable
date, the area is reclassified by
operation of law to the higher of: The
next higher classification or the
classification applicable to the area’s
ozone design value at the time of the
required notice under section
181(b)(2)(B). The next higher
classification for the Memphis TN-AR
Nonattainment Area was ‘‘moderate.’’
On March 28, 2008, the Memphis TNAR nonattainment area was reclassified
as ‘‘moderate’’ (73 FR 16547). EPA set a
deadline of March 1, 2009 for the State
to submit the moderate area SIP
provisions required under the area’s
new classification (73 FR 16550).
In 2008, the ambient ozone data for
the Memphis TN-AR Area showed
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS, using data from the 3-year
period of 2006–2008. On February 24,
2009, Arkansas requested redesignation
of Crittenden County, Arkansas to
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. The redesignation request
included three years of complete,
quality-assured ambient air quality data
for the ozone seasons (March 1st thru
November 30th) of 2006–2008,
indicating that the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS has been achieved for the entire
Memphis TN-AR Area. Under the CAA,
nonattainment areas may be
redesignated to attainment if sufficient,
complete, quality-assured data is
available for the Administrator to
determine that the area has attained the
standard and the area meets the other
CAA redesignation requirements in
section 107(d)(3)(E).
E:\FR\FM\14JAP1.SGM
14JAP1
2094
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2010 / Proposed Rules
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
III. What Are the Criteria for
Redesignation?
The CAA provides the requirements
for redesignating a nonattainment area
to attainment. Specifically, section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA allows for
redesignation providing that: (1) The
Administrator determines that the area
has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2)
the Administrator has fully approved
the applicable implementation plan for
the area under section 110(k); (3) the
Administrator determines that the
improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions
in emissions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP
and applicable Federal air pollutant
control regulations and other permanent
and enforceable reductions; (4) the
Administrator has fully approved a
maintenance plan for the area as
meeting the requirements of section
175A; and, (5) the state containing such
area has met all requirements applicable
to the area under section 110 and part
D of the CAA.
EPA provided guidance on
redesignation in the General Preamble
for the Implementation of title I of the
CAA Amendments of 1990, on April 16,
1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented
this guidance on April 28, 1992 (57 FR
18070). EPA has provided further
guidance on processing redesignation
requests in the following documents:
1. ‘‘Ozone and Carbon Monoxide
Design Value Calculations,’’
Memorandum from Bill Laxton,
Director, Technical Support Division,
June 18,1990;
2. ‘‘Maintenance Plans for
Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,’’
Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief,
Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs
Branch, April 30, 1992;
3. ‘‘Contingency Measures for Ozone
and Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Redesignations,’’ Memorandum from
G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1,
1992;
4. ‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests
to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’
Memorandum from John Calcagni,
Director, Air Quality Management
Division, September 4, 1992 (hereafter
referred to as the ‘‘Calcagni
Memorandum’’);
5. ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Actions Submitted in Response to Clean
Air Act (ACT) Deadlines,’’
Memorandum from John Calcagni,
Director, Air Quality Management
Division, October 28, 1992;
6. ‘‘Technical Support Documents
(TSD’s) for Redesignation of Ozone and
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:37 Jan 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment
Areas,’’ Memorandum from G. T. Helms,
Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide
Programs Branch, August 17, 1993;
7. ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP)
Requirements for Areas Submitting
Requests for Redesignation to
Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) On or After
November 15, 1992,’’ Memorandum
from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting
Assistant Administrator for Air and
Radiation, September 17, 1993;
8. ‘‘Use of Actual Emissions in
Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone
and CO Nonattainment Areas,’’
Memorandum from D. Kent Berry,
Acting Director, Air Quality
Management Division, November 30,
1993;
9. ‘‘Part D New Source Review (Part D
NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to
Attainment,’’ Memorandum from Mary
D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for
Air and Radiation, October 14, 1994;
and
10. ‘‘Reasonable Further Progress,
Attainment Demonstration, and Related
Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment
Areas Meeting the Ozone National
Ambient Air Quality Standard,’’
Memorandum from John S. Seitz,
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning
and Standards, May 10, 1995.
IV. Why Is EPA Proposing These
Actions?
On February 24, 2009, Arkansas
requested redesignation of the Arkansas
portion (Crittenden County) of the bistate Memphis TN-AR 1997 8-hour
ozone nonattainment area to attainment
for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
EPA’s evaluation indicates that the bistate Memphis Area has attained the
standard and that Crittenden County has
met the requirements for redesignation
set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E),
including the maintenance plan
requirements under section 175A of the
CAA. EPA is also announcing the status
of its adequacy determination and
proposing approval of the 2006 and
2021 NOX and VOC MVEBs which are
relevant to the requested redesignation.
V. What Is the Effect of EPA’s Proposed
Actions?
Approval of Arkansas’ redesignation
request would change the legal
designation of Crittenden County for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS found at 40
CFR part 81. Approval of Arkansas’
request would also incorporate into the
Arkansas SIP, a plan for Crittenden
County for maintaining the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS in the area through 2021.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
This maintenance plan includes
contingency measures to remedy future
violations of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. The maintenance plan also
establishes state NOX and VOC MVEBs
for Crittenden County. Table 1 identifies
the state NOX and VOC MVEBs for the
year 2006 and 2021 for Crittenden
County.
TABLE 1—CRITTENDEN COUNTY NOX
AND VOC MVEBS
[Summer season tons per day]
2006
NOX ..................................
VOC ..................................
6.27
2.95
2021
1.84
1.39
Approval of Arkansas’ maintenance
plan would also result in approval of
the NOX and VOC state MVEBs.
Additionally, EPA is notifying the
public of the status of its adequacy
determination for the 2006 and 2021
NOX and VOC state MVEBs pursuant to
40 CFR 93.118(f)(1).
VI. What Is EPA’s Analysis of the
Request?
EPA proposes to determine that the
Crittenden County portion of the
Memphis TN-AR 1997 8-hour ozone
nonattainment area has attained the
1997 8-hour ozone standard, and that all
other redesignation criteria have been
met for that portion of the Memphis TNAR area. The basis for EPA’s
determination for the area is discussed
in greater detail below.
Criteria (1)—Crittenden County,
Arkansas has attained the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS.
EPA proposes to determine that the
Crittenden County portion of the
Memphis TN-AR area has attained the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. For ozone,
an area may be considered to be
attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
if the air quality in the nonattainment
area meets the standard, as determined
in accordance with 40 CFR 50.10 and
Appendix I of part 50, based on three
complete, consecutive calendar years of
quality-assured air quality monitoring
data. To attain this standard, the 3-year
average of the fourth-highest daily
maximum 1997 8-hour average ozone
concentrations measured at each
monitor within an area over each year
must not exceed 0.08 ppm. Based on the
rounding convention described in 40
CFR part 50, Appendix I, the standard
is attained if the design value is 0.084
ppm or below. The data must be
collected and quality-assured in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and
recorded in the EPA Air Quality System
(AQS). The monitors generally should
E:\FR\FM\14JAP1.SGM
14JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2010 / Proposed Rules
have remained at the same location for
the duration of the monitoring period
required for demonstrating attainment.
EPA reviewed ozone monitoring data
from ambient ozone monitoring stations
in the Memphis TN-AR area for the
ozone season from 2006–2008. This data
has been quality assured and is recorded
in AQS. The fourth high averages for
2006, 2007 and 2008, and the 3-year
2095
average of these values (i.e., design
values), are summarized in Table 2:
TABLE 2—ANNUAL 4TH MAX HIGH AND DESIGN VALUE CONCENTRATION FOR 1997 8-HOUR OZONE FOR THE MEMPHIS,
TN-AR AREA
[In parts per million]
County
Shelby County,
Tennessee
Memphis-Frayser
Boulevard
(#47–157–0021)
Monitor (AQS ID)
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
2006 ...........................................................................................................................
2007 ...........................................................................................................................
2008 ...........................................................................................................................
Design Value .............................................................................................................
As discussed above, the design value
for an area is the highest design value
recorded at any monitor in the area.
Therefore, the design value for the
Memphis TN-AR Area is 0.082 ppm,
which meets the standard as described
above. Preliminary data from 2009 also
indicate the area continues to attain the
standard. The data from 2009 is
considered preliminary because it has
not yet completed full data certification.
As discussed in more detail below,
Arkansas has committed to continue
monitoring in this area in accordance
with 40 CFR part 58. The data submitted
by Arkansas provides an adequate
demonstration that Crittenden County
(as part of the Memphis TN-AR area)
has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS.
Criteria (2)—Arkansas has a fully
approved SIP under section 110(k) for
Crittenden County and Criteria (5)—
Arkansas has met all Applicable
Requirements under Section 110 and
part D of the CAA.
Below is a summary of how these two
criteria were met.
EPA has determined that Arkansas
has met all applicable SIP requirements
for Crittenden County under section 110
of the CAA (general SIP requirements).
EPA has also determined that the
Arkansas SIP satisfies the criterion that
it meet applicable SIP requirements
under part D of title I of the CAA
(including requirements specific to
subpart 2 marginal 1997 8-hour ozone
nonattainment areas) in accordance
with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition,
EPA has determined that the SIP is fully
approved with respect to all
requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation in accordance with
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these
determinations, EPA ascertained which
requirements are applicable to the area
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:37 Jan 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
a. Crittenden County, Arkansas Has Met
All Applicable Requirements Under
Section 110 and Part D of the CAA
The September 4, 1992, Calcagni
Memorandum (see ‘‘Procedures for
Processing Requests to Redesignate
Areas to Attainment,’’ Memorandum
from John Calcagni, Director, Air
Quality Management Division,
September 4, 1992) describes EPA’s
interpretation of section 107(d)(3)(E).
Under this interpretation, to qualify for
redesignation, states requesting
redesignation to attainment must meet
only the relevant CAA requirements that
come due prior to the submittal of a
complete redesignation request. See
also, Michael Shapiro Memorandum,
(‘‘SIP Requirements for Areas
Submitting Requests for Redesignation
to Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide NAAQS On or After
November 15, 1992,’’ September 17,
1993), and 60 FR 12459, 12465–66
(March 7, 1995) (redesignation of
Detroit-Ann Arbor, Michigan).
Applicable requirements of the CAA
that come due subsequent to the area’s
submittal of a complete redesignation
request remain applicable until a
redesignation is approved, but are not
required as a prerequisite to
redesignation. See, section 175A(c) of
the CAA; Sierra Club, 375 F.3d 537 (7th
Cir. 2004); see also, 68 FR 25424, 25427
(May 12, 2003) (redesignation of St.
Louis, Missouri).
General SIP requirements. Section
110(a)(2) of title I of the CAA delineates
the general requirements for a SIP,
which include enforceable emissions
limitations and other control measures,
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Edmond Orgill
Park
(#47–157–1004)
0.083
0.081
0.084
0.082
and that if applicable, they are fully
approved under section 110(k). SIPs
must be fully approved only with
respect to applicable requirements.
Crittenden County,
Arkansas
0.084
0.080
0.077
0.080
Marion
(#05–035–0005)
0.089
0.084
0.074
0.082
means, or techniques, provisions for the
establishment and operation of
appropriate devices necessary to collect
data on ambient air quality, and
programs to enforce the limitations.
General SIP elements and requirements
are delineated in section 110(a)(2) of
title I, part A of the CAA. These
requirements include, but are not
limited to, the following: Submittal of a
SIP that has been adopted by the state
after reasonable public notice and
hearing; provisions for establishment
and operation of appropriate procedures
needed to monitor ambient air quality;
implementation of a source permit
program; provisions for the
implementation of part C requirements
(Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD)) and provisions for the
implementation of part D requirements
(NSR permit programs); provisions for
air pollution modeling; and provisions
for public and local agency participation
in planning and emission control rule
development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs
contain certain measures to prevent
sources in a state from significantly
contributing to air quality problems in
another state. To implement this
provision, EPA has required certain
states to establish programs to address
the transport of air pollutants (NOX SIP
Call, Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)).
The section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements
for a state are not linked with a
particular nonattainment area’s
designation and classification in that
state. EPA believes that the
requirements linked with a particular
nonattainment area’s designation and
classifications are the relevant measures
to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation
request. The transport SIP submittal
requirements, where applicable,
continue to apply to a state regardless of
E:\FR\FM\14JAP1.SGM
14JAP1
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
2096
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2010 / Proposed Rules
the designation of any one particular
area in the state. Thus, we do not
believe that the CAA’s interstate
transport requirements should be
construed to be applicable requirements
for purposes of redesignation.
In addition, EPA believes that the
other section 110 elements not
connected with nonattainment plan
submissions and not linked with an
area’s attainment status are not
applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation. The area will still be
subject to these requirements after the
area is redesignated. The section 110
and part D requirements that are linked
with a particular area’s designation and
classification are the relevant measures
to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation
request. This approach is consistent
with EPA’s existing policy on
applicability (i.e., for redesignations) of
conformity and oxygenated fuels
requirements, as well as with section
184 ozone transport requirements. See,
Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and
final rulemakings (61 FR 53174–53176,
October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7,
1997); Cleveland-Akron-Loraine, Ohio,
final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7,
1996); and Tampa, Florida, final
rulemaking at (60 FR 62748, December
7, 1995). See also, the discussion on this
issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio
redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19,
2000), and in the Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania redesignation (66 FR
50399, October 19, 2001).
EPA believes that section 110
elements not linked to the area’s
nonattainment status are not applicable
for purposes of redesignation. Therefore,
as discussed above, for purposes of
redesignation, they are not considered
applicable requirements. We have
reviewed the Arkansas SIP and have
concluded it meets the general
requirements of section 110, to the
extent that these are applicable for
redesignation. EPA has previously
approved provisions in the Arkansas
SIP addressing section 110 elements
under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS (See, 40
CFR 52.172).
In a letter to EPA dated March 28,
2008, the State set forth its belief that
the existing SIP is also sufficient to meet
the CAA 110(a)(2) requirements for the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA has
not yet approved this submission, but
such approval is not necessary for
purposes of redesignation.
Part D requirements. EPA has also
determined that the Arkansas SIP meets
applicable SIP requirements under part
D of the CAA. Sections 172–176 of the
CAA, found in subpart 1 of part D, set
forth the basic nonattainment
requirements applicable to all
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:37 Jan 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
nonattainment areas. Section 182 of the
CAA, found in subpart 2 of part D,
establishes additional specific
requirements depending on the area’s
nonattainment classification and applies
to the Memphis TN–AR area. As
discussed in Section II, Crittenden
County was classified as marginal, and
then reclassified to moderate. In the
reclassification, EPA required that the
necessary SIP revisions for the new
moderate area requirements be
submitted by both Tennessee and
Arkansas as expeditiously as
practicable, but no later than March 1,
2009. The request for redesignation was
submitted by Arkansas on February 24,
2009, prior to the date that the moderate
area requirements came due. Thus, for
purposes of redesignation, only the
marginal area requirements under Part
D, subpart 2 are applicable to Crittenden
County.
A SIP revision submitted to EPA by
the State of Arkansas on November 19,
2007 satisfied the marginal area
requirements set forth in section
182(a)(1). This submittal consisted of an
emissions inventory for the year 2002
containing NOX, VOC and carbon
monoxide (CO) emissions as precursors
to ozone formation, as well as a revision
to State Regulation 19, Chapter 7
(Sampling, Monitoring, and Reporting
Requirements), to require emissions
statements. EPA approved this SIP
revision on January 15, 2009 (74 FR
2383). Requirements set forth in
sections 182(a)(2)(A) (Reasonably
Available Control Technology
Corrections) and 182(a)(2)(B) (Savings
Clause for Vehicle Inspection and
Maintenance) are not applicable to
Crittenden County due to its status of
attainment of the 1-hour ozone
standard. Requirements set forth in
section 182(a)(2)(C) (Permit Programs)
are discussed in the NSR Requirements
section of this notice.
In addition to the fact that only the
marginal classification part D
requirements became due prior to
submission of the redesignation request
and therefore are applicable for
purposes of redesignation, EPA believes
it is reasonable to interpret the
conformity requirements as not
requiring approval prior to
redesignation.
Section 176 Conformity
Requirements. Section 176(c) of the
CAA requires states to establish criteria
and procedures to ensure that federally
supported or funded projects conform to
the air quality planning goals in the
applicable SIP. The requirement to
determine conformity applies to
transportation plans, programs and
projects developed, funded or approved
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
under title 23 of the United States Code
(U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act
(transportation conformity) as well as to
all other federally supported or funded
projects (general conformity). State
conformity revisions must be consistent
with Federal conformity regulations
relating to consultation, enforcement
and enforceability that the CAA
required the EPA to promulgate.
EPA believes it is reasonable to
interpret the conformity SIP
requirements as not applying for
purposes of evaluating the redesignation
request under section 107(d) because
state conformity rules are still required
after redesignation and Federal
conformity rules apply where state rules
have not been approved. See, Wall v.
EPA, 265 F.3d 426, 438–40 (6th Cir.
2001) (upholding this interpretation).
See also, 60 FR 62748 (December 7,
1995, Tampa, Florida). Although
Crittenden County does not currently
have fully approved conformity rules, a
Memorandum of Agreement outlining
interagency consultation procedures is
in place for transportation conformity
purposes.
NSR Requirements. Arkansas’
permitting requirements for major
sources in or impacting upon
nonattainment areas are set forth in
‘‘Regulation No. 31—Nonattainment
New Source Review Requirements.’’ On
July 3, 2006, Arkansas submitted
Regulation No. 31 to address the
marginal Nonattainment New Source
Review (NNSR) permitting requirements
in Crittenden County, and EPA
approved the submittal on April 12,
2007 (72 FR 18394). This regulation
applies to the construction and
modification of any major stationary
source of air pollution in a
nonattainment area, as required by part
D of Title I of the Act. Regulation No.
31 also includes provisions that
implement EPA’s designation of
Crittenden County as an Economic
Development Zone (EDZ) subject to the
requirements of Section 173(a)(1)(B) of
the Act. These provisions establish VOC
and NOX emissions caps and provide for
the Director of ADEQ to grant growth
allowances to affected sources in lieu of
meeting the NNSR offset requirement.
Arkansas has maintained that sources
locating to the Memphis area will
continue to undergo new source review
requirements and existing source
control will continue under the NNSR/
EDZ program until Crittenden County is
redesignated to attainment.
Upon redesignation, however, the
identification of Crittenden County as a
section 173 EDZ expires under federal
law. The rules that apply for the 1997
8-hour ozone standard after
E:\FR\FM\14JAP1.SGM
14JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2010 / Proposed Rules
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
redesignation would be those contained
in the Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) SIP program. The
State must reapply for EDZ status
should Crittenden County be designated
nonattainment under a revised 8-hour
primary ozone standard. In any event,
EPA notes that fully approved NSR is
not required for redesignation to
attainment as long as PSD applies after
redesignation, and the area has shown it
can attain and maintain without
nonattainment NSR.
EPA has also determined that areas
being redesignated need not comply
with the requirement that a
nonattainment NSR program be
approved prior to redesignation,
provided that the area demonstrates
maintenance of the standard without a
part D NSR program in effect since PSD
requirements will apply after
redesignation. The rationale for this
view is described in a memorandum
from Mary Nichols, Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation,
dated October 14, 1994, entitled ‘‘Part D
New Source Review (Part D NSR)
Requirements for Areas Requesting
Redesignation to Attainment.’’
Arkansas in its submittal for
Crittenden County showed that sources
locating to the Crittenden area will be
subject to PSD requirements and has
demonstrated that Crittenden County
will be able to maintain the standard
without a part D nonattainment NSR
program in effect. Therefore, Arkansas
need not have a fully approved part D
NSR program prior to approval of the
redesignation request. Arkansas’s PSD
program will become effective in
Crittenden County upon redesignation
to attainment. See, rulemakings for
Detroit, Michigan (60 FR 12467–12468,
March 7, 1995); Cleveland-AkronLorraine, Ohio (61 FR 20458, 20469–70,
May 7, 1996); Louisville, Kentucky (66
FR 53665, October 23, 2001); Grand
Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31834–31837,
June 21, 1996). Thus, EPA believes that
Crittenden County, Arkansas has
satisfied all applicable requirements for
purposes of redesignation under section
110 and part D of the CAA.
b. Crittenden County, Arkansas Has a
Fully Approved Applicable SIP Under
Section 110(k) of the CAA
EPA has fully approved the applicable
Arkansas SIP for Crittenden County,
under section 110(k) of the CAA for all
requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation. EPA may rely on prior
SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request (see Calcagni
Memorandum at p. 3; Southwestern
Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v.
Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989–90 (6th Cir.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:37 Jan 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
1998); Wall, 265 F.3d 426, at 438) plus
any additional measures it may approve
in conjunction with a redesignation
action. See, 68 FR 25426 (May 12, 2003)
and citations therein.
As indicated above, EPA believes that
the section 110 elements not connected
with nonattainment plan submissions
and not linked to the area’s
nonattainment status are not applicable
requirements for purposes of
redesignation. EPA also believes that
since the moderate area part D
requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation did not become due prior
to submission of the redesignation
request, they also are not applicable
requirements for purposes of
redesignation. As set forth above, the
area has met all other applicable
requirements for purposes of
redesignation under its prior marginal
classification.
Criteria (3)—The air quality
improvement in the Memphis TN-AR
1997 8-hour Ozone Area is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions
in emissions resulting from
implementation of the SIP and
applicable federal air pollution control
regulations and other permanent and
enforceable reductions.
EPA believes that Arkansas has
demonstrated that the observed air
quality improvement in the MemphisCrittenden County Nonattainment Area
is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the SIP, Federal
measures, and other state adopted
measures. Additionally, new emissions
control programs for fuels and motor
vehicles will help ensure a continued
decrease in emissions throughout the
region.
Because Crittenden County is itself
largely rural in nature, measured
reductions in ozone concentrations in
and around Crittenden County are
largely attributable to permanent and
enforceable reductions from emission
sources of VOCs and NOX in the
Memphis area. There were reductions in
Crittenden County. Table 3 summarizes
several of the measures adopted that
resulted in emissions reductions in
Crittenden County.
TABLE 3—CRITTENDEN COUNTY
EMISSION REDUCTIONS PROGRAMS
Mobile Sources
Æ Tier 2 Fuel and Vehicle Emission Standards.
Æ Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program.
Æ Heavy Duty Diesel Rule (2007 Highway
Rule).
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2097
TABLE 3—CRITTENDEN COUNTY EMISSION
REDUCTIONS PROGRAMS—
Continued
State and Local Measures
Æ Stage I Vapor Recovery.
Æ Proform Company, LLC closure, air permit
voided.
Æ CIBA Corporation reclassified to minor
source, MACT standard modifications.
Additional Voluntary Reductions
Æ Diesel Emissions Reduction Act—ADEQ
received State Clean Diesel Grant in October 2008.
Æ Retrofit of city and county (21 on-road, 12
non-road trucks) w/diesel oxidation catalyst.
Æ Retrofit of 50 school buses w/diesel oxidation catalyst.
Æ Retrofit of 12 refuse trucks w/diesel oxidation catalyst.
Æ 196 California Air Resources Board certified gas cans exchanged in Crittenden
County.
Æ Truck stop electrification (equipped 65
parking spaces in Crittenden County).
Emission reductions in Shelby County
as a result of federal motor vehicle
controls from 2002 to 2006 are
estimated to be 7 tons per day of VOCs
and 28 tons per day of NOX.
Additionally, continuing new emissions
control programs will help to ensure a
further decrease in emissions
throughout the area in the future.
Crittenden County is expected to receive
upwind benefits in emission reductions.
Regarding point source emissions, the
Tennessee Valley Authority’s (TVA)
Allen Steam Plant located in Shelby
County operates three coal-fired boilers.
As a result of EPA’s ‘‘Finding of
Significant Contribution and
Rulemaking for Certain States in the
Ozone Transport Assessment Group
Region for Purposes of Reducing Region
Transport of Ozone’’ (NOX SIP Call),
TVA began operation of two selective
catalytic reduction (SCR) control units
during the 2002 ozone control season,
May 1st through September 30th. The
third SCR began operating in 2003.
Ozone season daily NOX reductions in
the area as a result of these controls
equal approximately 45 tons per day.
These are substantial reductions when
compared to the remaining total NOX
inventory from all sources in Shelby
and Crittenden Counties in 2006 of
116.81 tons per day (99.09 tons per day
in Shelby County and 17.72 tons per
day in Crittenden County) and a VOC
inventory of 128.67 tons per day (99.11
tons per day in Shelby County and
29.56 tons per day in Crittenden
County).
E:\FR\FM\14JAP1.SGM
14JAP1
2098
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Because of the uncertainty introduced
by the recent court actions affecting the
CAIR Rule and NOX SIP Call, EPA
projections of NOX emissions from
nearby states from 2002 to 2018. These
values are presented in Tables 4 and 5:
undertook an analysis of the changes in
NOX expected across a broader region.
In particular, EPA reviewed available
TABLE 4—2002 BASE ANNUAL EMISSION INVENTORY SUMMARY FOR NOX*
EGU
point
States
Non-EGU
point
Non-road
area
Mobile
Fires
Total
AR ................................................................................
KY ................................................................................
LA .................................................................................
MS ................................................................................
MO ...............................................................................
TN ................................................................................
24,722
201,928
111,703
40,433
145,438
152,137
47,698
38,434
199,218
61,533
36,144
64,344
62,472
104,571
114,711
88,787
99,306
96,827
21,700
39,507
93,069
4,200
32,435
17,844
141,894
156,417
180,664
111,914
189,852
238,577
5,492
534
6,942
308
2,442
217
303,978
541,391
706,307
307,175
505,617
569,946
Total ......................................................................
676,361
447,371
566,674
208,755
1,019,318
15,935
2,934,414
* From Tennessee Regional Haze SIP, Appendix D, page D.3–5 and support table for Technical Support Document for CENRAP Emissions
and Air Quality Modeling to Support Regional Haze State Implementation Plans, page 2–40, figure 2–4.
TABLE 5—2018 BASE ANNUAL EMISSION INVENTORY SUMMARY FOR NOX*
EGU
point
States
Non-EGU
point
Non-road
Area
Mobile
Fires
Total
AR ....................................................................................
KY ....................................................................................
LA .....................................................................................
MS ....................................................................................
MO ...................................................................................
TN ....................................................................................
34,938
64,378
44,485
21,535
83,181
31,715
36,169
41,034
225,748
61,252
51,489
62,519
34,305
79,392
106,685
68,252
59,625
70,226
25,672
44,346
114,374
4,483
35,213
19,597
33,640
52,263
44,806
30,619
50,861
69,385
5,600
714
6,969
1,073
2,442
405
170,324
282,127
543,067
187,214
282,811
253,847
Total ..........................................................................
280,232
478,211
418,485
243,685
281,574
17,203
1,708,390
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
* From Tennessee Regional Haze SIP, Appendix D, page D.3–5 and support table for Technical Support Document for CENRAP Emissions
and Air Quality Modeling to Support Regional Haze State Implementation Plans, page 2–40, figure 2–4.
From 2002 to 2018 NOX emissions are
projected to decrease in the region by
1,215,024 tons/year or 41.4 percent in
all. EGU NOX anticipated decreases due
to CAIR and the NOX SIP Call were
projected to be 198,150 tons per year.
However, the largest source in this
region remains the motor vehicle sector,
which is projected to decrease 737,744
tons per year. Hence even without EGU
controls on NOX emissions, total NOX
emissions are projected to continually
decrease throughout the maintenance
period. As is noted in the following
paragraph, the NOX SIP Call will remain
in effect.
The NOX SIP Call requires states to
make significant, specific emissions
reductions. It also provided a
mechanism, the NOX Budget Trading
Program, which states could use to
achieve those reductions. When EPA
promulgated CAIR, it discontinued
(starting in 2009) the NOX Budget
Trading Program, 40 CFR 51.121(r), but
created another mechanism—the CAIR
ozone season trading program—which
states could use to meet their SIP Call
obligations, 70 FR 25289–90. EPA notes
that a number of states, when
submitting SIP revisions to require
sources to participate in the CAIR ozone
season trading program, removed the
SIP provisions that required sources to
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:37 Jan 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
participate in the NOX Budget Trading
Program. In addition, because the
provisions of CAIR including the ozone
season NOX trading program remain in
place during the remand (North
Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176 (DC Cir.
Dec. 23, 2008)), EPA is not currently
administering the NOX Budget Trading
Program. Nonetheless, all states
regardless of the current status of their
regulations that previously required
participation in the NOX Budget Trading
Program, will remain subject to all of
the requirements in the NOX SIP Call
even if the existing CAIR ozone season
trading program is withdrawn or
altered. In addition, the anti-backsliding
provisions of 40 CFR 51.905(f)
specifically provide that the provisions
of the NOX SIP Call, including the
statewide NOX emission budgets,
continue to apply after revocation of the
1-hr standard.
All NOX SIP Call states have SIPs that
currently satisfy their obligations under
the SIP Call, the SIP Call reduction
requirements are being met, and EPA
will continue to enforce the
requirements of the NOX SIP Call even
after any response to the CAIR remand.
For these reasons, EPA believes that
regardless of the status of the CAIR
program, the NOX SIP Call requirements
can be relied upon in demonstrating
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
maintenance. Thus, the NOX SIP Call
adds to assurances that the area will
remain in attainment.
These regional projections of
emissions data have been prepared only
through 2018. However, since motor
vehicle and off road emissions continue
to decrease long after a rule is adopted
as the engine population is gradually
replaced by newer engines, it is
reasonable to assume that this projected
decrease in regional NOX emissions
from mobile and non-road sources
should continue through 2020 and
assure that ozone in the Memphis region
will continue to decline throughout the
10 year maintenance period. Hence we
believe the projected regional NOX
reductions are adequate to assure that
the Memphis region will continue
demonstrating maintenance throughout
the 10 year maintenance period.
Criteria (4)—The area has a fully
approved maintenance plan pursuant to
section 175A of the CAA.
In conjunction with its request to
redesignate Crittenden County,
Arkansas (as part of the Memphis TNAR 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area) to attainment, Arkansas submitted
a SIP revision to provide for the
maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS for at least 10 years after the
E:\FR\FM\14JAP1.SGM
14JAP1
2099
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2010 / Proposed Rules
effective date of redesignation to
attainment.
a. What is required in a maintenance
plan?
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth
the elements of a maintenance plan for
areas seeking redesignation from
nonattainment to attainment. Under
section 175A, the plan must
demonstrate continued attainment of
the applicable NAAQS for at least 10
years after the Administrator approves a
redesignation to attainment. Eight years
after the redesignation, the State of
Arkansas must submit a revised
maintenance plan, which demonstrates
that attainment will continue to be
maintained for the 10 years following
the initial 10-year period. To address
the possibility of future NAAQS
violations, the maintenance plan must
contain such contingency measures,
with a schedule for implementation as
EPA deems necessary to assure prompt
correction of any future 8-hour ozone
violations. Section 175A of the CAA sets
forth the elements of a maintenance
plan for areas seeking redesignation
from nonattainment to attainment. The
Calcagni Memorandum provides
additional guidance on the content of a
maintenance plan. The Calcagni
Memorandum explains that an ozone
maintenance plan should address five
requirements: The attainment emissions
inventory, maintenance demonstration,
monitoring, verification of continued
attainment, and a contingency plan. As
is discussed more fully below,
Arkansas’ maintenance plan includes all
the necessary components and is
approvable as part of the redesignation
request.
b. Attainment Emissions Inventory
In coordination with Shelby County,
Tennessee, Arkansas selected 2006 ‘‘the
attainment year’’ for the purposes of
demonstrating attainment of the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS. This attainment
inventory identifies the level of
emissions in the area, which is
sufficient to attain the 1997 8-hour
ozone standard. Arkansas began
development of this attainment
inventory by first developing a baseline
emissions inventory for the Memphis
area. The year 2006 was chosen as the
base year for developing a
comprehensive ozone precursor
emissions inventory for which projected
emissions could be developed for 2009,
2012, 2015, 2017, 2018 and 2021. The
projected inventory estimates emissions
forward to 2021, which is beyond the
10-year interval required in Section
175(A) of the CAA. Non-road mobile
emissions estimates were based on the
EPA’s NONROAD2005 model. On-road
mobile source emissions were
calculated using EPA’s MOBILE6.2
emission factors model. The 2006 VOC
and NOX emissions, as well as the
emissions for other years, for Crittenden
County were developed consistent with
EPA guidance, and are summarized in
Tables 6 and 7 in the following
subsection.
c. Maintenance Demonstration
The February 24, 2009 final submittal
includes a maintenance plan for
Crittenden County. This demonstration:
(i) Shows compliance and
maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard by providing information to
support the demonstration that current
and future emissions of VOC and NOX
remain at or below attainment year 2006
emissions levels. The year 2006 was
chosen as the attainment year because it
is one of the most recent three years
(i.e., 2006, 2007, and 2008) for which
Crittenden County has clean air quality
data for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
(ii) Uses 2006 as the attainment year
and includes future emission inventory
projections for 2009, 2012, 2015, 2017,
2018, and 2021.
(iii) Identifies an ‘‘out year,’’ at least 10
years (and beyond) after the time
necessary for EPA to review and
approve the maintenance plan. Per 40
CFR part 93, state NOX and VOC MVEBs
were established for the last year (2021)
of the maintenance plan. Additionally,
Arkansas chose, through interagency
consultation, to establish MVEBs for the
year 2006 for NOX and VOC. EPA has
already notified the public of its
adequacy determination for these 2006
and 2021 MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR
93.118(f)(1) (74 FR 21356).
(iv) Provides the following actual and
projected emissions inventories, in tons
per day (tpd) for Crittenden County,
Arkansas. See, Tables 6 and 7.
TABLE 6—CRITTENDEN COUNTY VOC EMISSIONS
[Summer season tons per day]
Source category
2006
2009
2012
2015
2017
2018
2021
Point .................................................................................................................
Area ..................................................................................................................
On-road * ..........................................................................................................
Non-road ** .......................................................................................................
2.13
21.32
3.12
2.99
2.17
21.30
2.63
2.85
2.27
21.49
2.30
2.60
2.36
21.68
1.97
2.36
2.43
21.80
1.75
2.19
2.47
21.89
1.68
2.14
2.62
22.14
1.50
1.97
Total ..........................................................................................................
29.56
28.94
28.65
28.36
28.17
28.18
28.23
2015
2017
2018
2021
* Calculated using MOBILE 6.2.
** Calculated using NONROAD2005c.
TABLE 7—CRITTENDEN COUNTY AREA NOX EMISSIONS
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
[Summer season tons per day]
Source category
2006
2009
2012
Point .................................................................................................................
Area ..................................................................................................................
On-road * ..........................................................................................................
Non-road ** .......................................................................................................
1.09
0.90
6.27
9.46
1.15
0.90
5.13
9.38
1.22
0.91
4.12
9.10
1.29
0.91
3.12
8.82
1.34
0.92
2.45
8.63
1.37
0.92
2.30
8.39
1.45
0.93
1.84
7.66
Total ..........................................................................................................
17.72
16.56
15.35
14.14
13.34
12.97
11.88
* Calculated using MOBILE 6.2.
** Calculated using NONROAD2005c.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:37 Jan 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\14JAP1.SGM
14JAP1
2100
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2010 / Proposed Rules
Although the Arkansas SIP
submission provided NOX and VOC
emissions for the attainment and future
years for Crittenden County, EPA has
considered emissions for the entire
Memphis TN-AR area for demonstration
of maintenance. Maintenance is
demonstrated if the future year NOX and
VOC emission for the entire area
remains at or below the level of the
attainment year emissions. Both
Tennessee and Arkansas chose 2006 for
their ‘‘attainment year’’ for this area. It is
important to note that this area is
composed of two counties (Shelby
County, Tennessee and Crittenden
County, Arkansas) for which emissions
should be considered. The area and
point sources for both counties indicate
a steady NOX and VOC emission
increase. However, large projected
reductions in mobile source emissions
more than compensate for this relatively
small increase. Moreover, EPA’s review
of the entire area’s total inventory for
NOX and VOCs indicate that future total
area emissions are below the level of the
total area attainment year emissions.
Therefore, EPA believes that the 1997
8-hour ozone standard will be
maintained in the future for the
Memphis TN-AR area.
d. Monitoring Network
There are currently three monitors
measuring ozone in the Memphis TNAR Area (two in Shelby County,
Tennessee and one in Crittenden
County, Arkansas). ADEQ has
committed, in the maintenance plan, to
continue operation of the monitor in
Crittenden County in compliance with
40 CFR part 58, and has addressed the
requirement for monitoring.
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
Arkansas has the legal authority to
enforce and implement the
requirements of the ozone maintenance
plan. This includes the authority to
adopt, implement and enforce any
subsequent emissions control
contingency measures determined to be
necessary to correct future ozone
attainment problems.
Arkansas will track the progress of the
maintenance plan by performing future
reviews of triennial emissions inventory
for Crittenden County using the latest
emissions factors, models and
methodologies. For these periodic
inventories, Crittenden County will
review the assumptions made for the
purpose of the maintenance
demonstration concerning projected
growth of activity levels. If any of these
assumptions appear to have changed
substantially, Arkansas will re-project
emissions.
f. Contingency Plan
The contingency plan provisions are
designed to promptly correct a violation
of the NAAQS that occurs after
redesignation. Section 175A of the CAA
requires that a maintenance plan
include such contingency measures as
EPA deems necessary to assure that the
state will promptly correct a violation of
the NAAQS that occurs after
redesignation. The maintenance plan
should identify the contingency
measures to be adopted, a schedule and
procedure for adoption and
implementation, and a time limit for
action by the state. A state should also
identify specific indicators to be used to
determine when the contingency
measures need to be implemented. The
maintenance plan must include a
requirement that a state will implement
all measures with respect to control of
the pollutant that were contained in the
SIP before redesignation of the area to
attainment in accordance with section
175A(d).
In the February 24, 2009, submittal,
Arkansas affirms that all programs
instituted by the State and EPA will
remain enforceable, and that sources are
prohibited from reducing emissions
controls following the redesignation of
the area. The contingency plan included
in the submittal provides a two-phase
approach to tracking and triggering
mechanisms to determine when
contingency measures are needed and a
process of developing and adopting
appropriate control measures.
Phase I—Potential increases in local
emissions specifically, when the
certified triennial emissions inventory
for VOCs or NOX exceed the 2006 base
year attainment inventory by ten
percent or more and at least one
documentation of an exceedance of the
1997 ozone NAAQS at any
nonattainment monitor in the area
based on certified data during the most
recent monitoring season.
In the event this occurs, ADEQ will
conduct an investigation into the cause
to determine if the data are due to
reporting errors or a non-recurring
variance in the local emission profile.
The investigation will be coordinated
with the Memphis/Shelby County
Health Department and the State of
Tennessee as appropriate. If the
investigation reveals the data are valid,
ADEQ will expand voluntary programs
and develop regulations to address the
concerns. All regulatory programs will
be implemented within 24 months and
include a selection of measures shown
in Table 8.
Phase II—Addresses a monitored
violation of the 1997 ozone NAAQS in
the nonattainment area according to
certified data during the most recent
monitoring season.
In the event this occurs, ADEQ will
conduct an investigation to determine if
the cause of the violation can be
attributed to errors or clearly
identifiable exceptional events outside
of local control. ADEQ will solicit the
involvement of all State agencies having
jurisdiction in the surrounding area. If
the investigation reveals the data are
valid, provisions will be adopted and
implemented within 24 months of the
monitored violation and include a
selection of measures shown in Table 8.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
TABLE 8—CRITTENDEN COUNTY CONTINGENCY MEASURE OPTIONS
Reasonable Available Control Technology (RACT) for VOC and NOX sources.
Anti-idling ordinances.
Open burning restrictions during peak ozone season (May–September).
Diesel retrofit/replacement initiatives.
Programs or incentives to decrease motor vehicle use.
Trip reduction ordinances.
Implementation of a program to require additional emissions reductions from stationary sources.
Implementation of a program to enhance inspection of stationary sources to ensure emissions control equipment is functioning properly.
Implementation of fuel programs, including incentives for alternative fuels.
Employer-based transportation management plans, including incentives.
Programs to limit or restrict vehicle use in downtown areas, or other areas of high emissions concentration, particularly during periods of
peak use.
fi Programs for new construction and major reconstruction of paths for use by pedestrians or by non-motorized vehicles when economically
feasible and in the public interest.
fi Other currently unspecified control measures that might prove to be advantageous.
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:37 Jan 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\14JAP1.SGM
14JAP1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2010 / Proposed Rules
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
EPA believes that the maintenance
plan adequately addresses the five basic
components of a maintenance plan:
Attainment inventory, maintenance
demonstration, monitoring network,
verification of continued attainment,
and a contingency plan. The
maintenance plan SIP revision
submitted by Arkansas meets the
requirements of section 175A of the
CAA and is approvable.
maintains the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard with the emissions at the
levels of the budgets. EPA has already
made a finding of adequacy for these
MVEBs (74 FR 21356), and they must be
used for future conformity
determinations.
VIII. What Is the Status of EPA’s
Adequacy Determination for the
Proposed State NOX and VOC MVEBs
for the Years 2006 and 2021 for
VII. What Is EPA’s Analysis of
Crittenden County, Arkansas?
Arkansas’ Proposed State NOX and
Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new
VOC MVEBs for Crittenden County,
transportation projects, such as the
Arkansas?
construction of new highways, must
Under the CAA, states are required to ‘‘conform’’ to (i.e., be consistent with)
submit, at various times, control strategy the part of the state’s air quality plan
that addresses pollution from cars and
SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone
trucks. ‘‘Conformity’’ to the SIP means
areas. These control strategy SIPs
that transportation activities will not
(reasonable further progress and
cause new air quality violations, worsen
attainment demonstration) and
existing violations, or delay timely
maintenance plans create MVEBs for
attainment of the NAAQS. If a
criteria pollutants and/or their
transportation plan does not ‘‘conform,’’
precursors to address pollution from
most new projects that would expand
cars and trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, an
the capacity of roadways cannot go
MVEB is established for the last year of
forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93
the maintenance plan. A state may
set forth EPA policy, criteria, and
adopt MVEBs for other years as well.
procedures for demonstrating and
The MVEB is the portion of the total
allowable emissions in the maintenance assuring conformity of such
transportation activities to a SIP. The
demonstration that is allocated to
regional emissions analysis is one, but
highway and transit vehicle use and
not the only, requirement for
emissions. See 40 CFR 93.101. The
implementing transportation
MVEB serves as a ceiling on emissions
conformity. Transportation conformity
from an area’s planned transportation
is a requirement for nonattainment and
system. The MVEB concept is further
maintenance areas. Maintenance areas
explained in the preamble to the
are areas that were previously
November 24, 1993, transportation
nonattainment for a particular NAAQS
conformity rule (58 FR 62188). The
but have since been redesignated to
preamble also describes how to
attainment with a maintenance plan for
establish the MVEB in the SIP and how
that NAAQS.
to revise the MVEB.
When reviewing submitted ‘‘control
After interagency consultation with
strategy’’ SIPs or maintenance plans
the transportation partners for
Crittenden County, Arkansas has elected containing MVEBs, EPA may
affirmatively find the MVEB contained
to develop state MVEBs for VOC and
therein ‘‘adequate’’ for use in
NOX. Arkansas has developed these
determining transportation conformity.
MVEBs, as required, for the last year of
Once EPA affirmatively finds the
the Crittenden County maintenance
plan, 2021, and a base year of 2006. The submitted MVEB is adequate for
transportation conformity purposes, that
NOx and VOC state MVEBs for
MVEB must be used by state and
Crittenden County are defined in Table
Federal agencies in determining
9 below.
whether proposed transportation
TABLE 9—CRITTENDEN COUNTY NOX projects ‘‘conform’’ to the SIP as required
by section 176(c) of the CAA.
AND VOC MVEBS
EPA’s substantive criteria for
[Summer season tons per day]
determining ‘‘adequacy’’ of an MVEB are
set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). The
2006
2021
process for determining ‘‘adequacy’’
NOX ...................................
6.27
1.84 consists of three basic steps: Public
VOC ..................................
2.95
1.39 notification of a SIP submission, a
public comment period, and EPA’s
Through this rulemaking, EPA is
adequacy finding. This process for
proposing to fully approve the 2006 and determining the adequacy of submitted
2021 MVEBs for VOC and NOX for
SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in
Crittenden County into the SIP because
EPA’s May 14, 1999, guidance,
EPA has determined that the area
‘‘Conformity Guidance on
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:37 Jan 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
2101
Implementation of March 2, 1999,
Conformity Court Decision.’’ This
guidance was finalized in the
Transportation Conformity Rule
Amendments for the ‘‘New 8-Hour
Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air
Quality Standards and Miscellaneous
Revisions for Existing Areas;
Transportation Conformity Rule
Amendments—Response to Court
Decision and Additional Rule Change,’’
on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004).
Additional information on the adequacy
process for MVEBs is available in the
proposed rule entitled, ‘‘Transportation
Conformity Rule Amendments:
Response to Court Decision and
Additional Rule Changes,’’ 68 FR 38974,
38984 (June 30, 2003).
As discussed earlier, Arkansas’
maintenance plan submission includes
VOC and NOX state MVEBs for
Crittenden County for the years 2006
and 2021. EPA reviewed both the VOCs
and NOX state MVEBs through the
adequacy process. The Arkansas SIP
submission, including the Crittenden
County VOC and NOX MVEBs, was
open for public comment on EPA’s
adequacy Web site on March 11, 2009,
found at: https://www.epa.gov/otaq/
stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm.
The EPA public comment period on
adequacy of the 2006 and 2021 VOC and
NOX state MVEBs for Crittenden
County, Arkansas closed on April 10,
2009. EPA did not receive any
comments on the adequacy of the
MVEBs, nor did EPA receive any
requests for the SIP submittal. On May
7, 2009, EPA made a finding of
adequacy for the MVEBs included in
this 8-hour ozone maintenance plan.
EPA provided a separate adequacy
posting for the MVEBs in association
with Shelby County, Tennessee. The
status of the adequacy process for the
Shelby County MVEBs is discussed in
EPA’s separate action related to Shelby
County (74 FR 58277).
The new MVEBs for VOC and NOX
must be used for future transportation
conformity determinations. For required
regional emissions analysis years that
involve the years 2006 through 2020,
the applicable budgets for the purposes
of conducting transportation conformity
will be the new 2006 MVEBs; for
required regional emissions analysis
years that involve 2021 or beyond, the
applicable budgets will be the new 2021
MVEBs. The 2006 and 2021 MVEBs are
defined in section VII of this proposed
rulemaking.
E:\FR\FM\14JAP1.SGM
14JAP1
2102
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 9 / Thursday, January 14, 2010 / Proposed Rules
IX. Proposed Action on the
Redesignation Request and
Maintenance Plan SIP Revision
Including Proposed Approval of the
2006 and 2021 State NOX and VOC
MVEBs for Crittenden County,
Arkansas
EPA is proposing to make the
determination that Crittenden County,
Arkansas has met the criteria for
redesignation from nonattainment to
attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS. Further, EPA is proposing to
approve Arkansas’ February 24, 2009,
SIP submittal including the
redesignation request for Crittenden
County, Arkansas (as part of the
Memphis TN-AR 1997 8-hour ozone
area). EPA’s action with respect to the
redesignation request for the Shelby
County portion of the 1997 8-hour
ozone area was proposed in a separate
rulemaking (74 FR 59943). EPA believes
that the redesignation request and
complete quality-assured monitoring
data demonstrate that the Memphis TNAR area has attained, and will continue
to maintain, the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard, and that the Crittenden
County portion of the area has met the
other requirements for redesignation to
attainment under CAA sections
107(d)(3)(E) and 175A.
EPA is also proposing to approve the
maintenance plan for Crittenden County
included as part of the February 24,
2009, SIP revision, including state NOX
and VOC MVEBs for 2006 and 2021.
EPA has already made a finding of
adequacy for the MVEBs included in
this 8-hour ozone maintenance plan (74
FR 21356). EPA believes that the
redesignation request and maintenance
plan meet the requirements of CAA
sections 107(d)(3)(E) and 175A.
wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with PROPOSALS_PART 1
X. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed
action is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ and therefore is not subject to
review by the Office of Management and
Budget. For this reason, this action is
also not subject to Executive Order
13211, ‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). This proposed action merely
proposes to approve state law as
meeting Federal requirements and
imposes no additional requirements
beyond those imposed by state law.
Redesignation of an area to attainment
under section 107(d)(3)(e) of the CAA
does not impose any new requirements
on small entities. Redesignation is an
action that affects the status of a
VerDate Nov<24>2008
13:37 Jan 13, 2010
Jkt 220001
geographical area and does not impose
any new regulatory requirements on
sources. Accordingly, the Administrator
certifies that this proposed rule will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this rule
proposes to approve pre-existing
requirements under state law and does
not impose any additional enforceable
duty beyond that required by state law,
it does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4).
This proposed rule also does not have
tribal implications because it will not
have a substantial direct effect on one or
more Indian tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal Government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal Government and Indian tribes,
as specified by Executive Order 13175
(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have
substantial direct effects on the states,
on the relationship between the national
government and the states, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). This action merely
affects the status of a geographical area,
does not impose any new requirements
on sources, or allow 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. This proposed rule also is not
subject to Executive Order 13045
‘‘Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
because it is not economically
significant and because the Agency does
not have reason to believe that the rule
concerns an environmental health risk
or safety risk that may
disproportionately affect children.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s
role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. In this context, in the absence
of a prior existing requirement for the
state to use voluntary consensus
standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for
failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for
EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission,
to use VCS in place of a SIP submission
that otherwise satisfies the provisions of
the CAA. Redesignation is an action that
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
affects the status of a geographical area
but does not impose any new
requirements on sources. Thus, the
requirements of section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C.
272 note) do not apply. This proposed
rule does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Incorporation by reference,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: January 5, 2010.
Al Armendariz,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2010–586 Filed 1–13–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R6–ES–2009–0027;
92220–1113–0000; ABC Code: C3]
RIN 1018–AW27
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Proposed Rule To List the
Shovelnose Sturgeon as Threatened
Due to Similarity of Appearance
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of
comment period and notice of public
hearing.
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service or USFWS),
announce the reopening of the comment
period for our September 22, 2009,
proposed rule to treat the shovelnose
sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus
platorynchus) as threatened under the
‘‘Similarity of Appearance’’ provisions of
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). We also announce the
location and time of a public hearing to
receive public comments on the
proposal. If you have previously
submitted comments, please do not
resubmit them because we have already
E:\FR\FM\14JAP1.SGM
14JAP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 9 (Thursday, January 14, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 2091-2102]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-586]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R06-OAR-2009-0202; FRL-9103-2]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation
of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Arkansas; Redesignation of
the Crittenden County, Arkansas Portion of the Memphis, Tennessee-
Arkansas 1997 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area to Attainment
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On February 24, 2009, the State of Arkansas, through the
Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ), submitted a
request to redesignate the Arkansas portion of the bi-state Memphis,
Tennessee-Arkansas (Memphis TN-AR) 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area
to attainment for the
[[Page 2092]]
8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS); and to
approve the State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision containing a
maintenance plan for the Arkansas portion of the bi-state Memphis TN-AR
Area. The bi-state Memphis TN-AR 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area
is composed of Memphis, Shelby County, Tennessee (Shelby County) and
Crittenden County, Arkansas. In this action, EPA proposes to approve
the 1997 8-hour ozone redesignation request for Crittenden County,
Arkansas. Additionally, EPA proposes to approve the 1997 8-hour ozone
maintenance plan for Crittenden County, including the state motor
vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) for nitrogen oxides (NOX)
and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) for the years 2006 and 2021. This
proposed approval of Arkansas' redesignation request is based on EPA's
determination that Arkansas has demonstrated that Crittenden County has
met the criteria for redesignation to attainment specified in the Clean
Air Act (CAA), including the determination that the entire Memphis TN-
AR ozone nonattainment area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 16, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R06-
OAR-2009-0202, by one of the following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. E-mail: donaldson.guy@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (214) 665-7263.
4. Mail: EPA-R06-OAR-2009-0202 Air Planning Section, Multimedia
Planning and Permitting Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning
Section, Air Planning Branch, Multimedia Planning and Permitting
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross
Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The
Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through Friday,
8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR-
2009-0202. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through https://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public
docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either electronically in https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Planning Section, Air
Branch, Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas,
Texas 75202-2733. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to
schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of
business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal
holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jeffrey Riley, Air Planning
Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross
Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone (214) 665-8542;
fax number 214-665-7263; e-mail address riley.jeffrey@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. What Proposed Actions Is EPA Taking?
II. What Is the Background for EPA's Proposed Actions?
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation?
IV. Why Is EPA Proposing These Actions?
V. What Is the Effect of EPA's Proposed Actions?
VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Request?
VII. What Is EPA's Analysis of Arkansas' Proposed State
NOX and VOC MVEBs for Crittenden County, Arkansas?
VIII. What Is the Status of EPA's Adequacy Determination for the
Proposed State NOX and VOC MVEBs for the Years 2006 and
2021 for Crittenden County, Arkansas?
IX. Proposed Action on the Redesignation Request and Maintenance
Plan SIP Revision Including Proposed Approval of the 2006 and 2021
State NOX and VOC MVEBs for Crittenden County, Arkansas
X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Proposed Actions Is EPA Taking?
EPA proposes several related actions, which are summarized below
and described in greater detail throughout this notice of rulemaking:
(1) To redesignate Crittenden County, Arkansas to attainment for
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA proposes to determine that the bi-
state Memphis, TN-AR Area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone standard,
and that the Crittenden County, Arkansas portion has met the
requirements for redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA.
The bi-state Memphis, TN-AR 1997 8-hour ozone area comprises Shelby
County in Tennessee and Crittenden County in Arkansas. Today's proposal
addresses only the Arkansas portion of the bi-state Memphis, TN-AR 1997
8-hour ozone area. EPA is now proposing to approve a request to change
the legal designation of Crittenden County, Arkansas from nonattainment
to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
(2) To approve Arkansas' 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan into
the Arkansas SIP, including the 2006 and 2021 motor vehicle emissions
budgets (MVEB's) that are part of the maintenance plan. EPA has already
made a finding of adequacy for the MVEBs (74 FR 21356). These MVEBs
apply only to Crittenden County, Arkansas. MVEB's contained in the
Tennessee submittal for Shelby County will be addressed in a separate
action. EPA proposes to approve Arkansas' 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance
plan for Crittenden County (such approval being
[[Page 2093]]
one of the CAA criteria for redesignation to attainment status). The
maintenance plan is designed to help keep the Memphis TN-AR area (of
which Crittenden County is a part) in attainment of the 1997 8-hour
ozone NAAQS through 2021.
II. What Is the Background for EPA's Proposed Actions?
Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather,
emissions of NOX and VOC react in the presence of sunlight
to form ground-level ozone. NOX and VOC are precursors of
ozone. The CAA establishes a process for air quality management through
the NAAQS. EPA establishes NAAQS for criteria pollutants as the maximum
level of air pollution allowed to protect public health and welfare.
On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone standard
of 0.08 parts per million (ppm). This standard is more stringent than
the previous 1-hour ozone standard. Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR
part 50, the 8-hour ozone standard is attained when the 3-year average
of the annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average ambient air
quality ozone concentrations is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm (i.e.,
0.084 ppm when rounding is considered). (See, 69 FR 23857 (April 30,
2004) for further information.) Ambient air quality monitoring data for
the 3-year period must meet a data completeness requirement. The
ambient air quality monitoring data completeness requirement is met
when the average percent of days with valid ambient monitoring data is
greater than 90 percent, and no single year has less than 75 percent
data completeness as determined in Appendix I of part 50. Specifically,
section 2.3 of 40 CFR part 50, Appendix I, ``Comparisons with the
Primary and Secondary Ozone Standards'' states:
The primary and secondary ozone ambient air quality standards are
met at an ambient air quality monitoring site when the 3-year average
of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentration is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm. The number of
significant figures in the level of the standard dictates the rounding
convention for comparing the computed 3-year average annual fourth-
highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration with the level
of the standard. The third decimal place of the computed value is
rounded, with values equal to or greater than 5 rounding up. Thus, a
computed 3-year average ozone concentration of 0.085 ppm is the
smallest value that is greater than 0.08 ppm.;
The CAA requires EPA to designate as nonattainment any area that
was violating the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the three most
recent years of ambient air quality data. The CAA contains two sets of
provisions--subpart 1 and subpart 2--that address planning and control
requirements for ozone nonattainment areas. (Both are found in title I,
part D.) Subpart 1 (which EPA refers to as ``basic'' nonattainment)
contains general, less prescriptive, requirements for nonattainment
areas for any pollutant--including ozone--governed by a NAAQS. Subpart
2 (which EPA refers to as ``classified'' nonattainment) provides more
specific requirements for certain ozone nonattainment areas. Some 1997
8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are subject only to the provisions of
subpart 1. Other 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are also subject
to the provisions of subpart 2. Under EPA's Phase 1 1997 8-hour ozone
implementation rule (69 FR 23857) (Phase 1 Rule), signed on April 15,
2004, and published April 30, 2004, an area was classified under
subpart 2 based on its 1997 8-hour ozone design value (i.e., the 3-year
average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone
concentrations), if it had a 1-hour design value at or above 0.121 ppm
(the lowest 1-hour design value in Table 1 of subpart 2). All other
areas are covered under subpart 1, based upon their 8-hour ambient air
quality design value.
Shelby County, Tennessee was originally designated as a marginal
nonattainment area for the 1-hour ozone standard on November 6, 1991
(56 FR 56694). Crittenden County, Arkansas was not part of the
nonattainment area during the 1991 1-hour designations. On February 16,
1995 (60 FR 3352) Shelby County was redesignated as attainment for the
1-hour ozone standard and is considered to be a 1-hour maintenance area
subject to a CAA section 175A maintenance plan for the 1-hour standard.
On April 30, 2004, EPA designated the Memphis, TN-AR Area (which
then included Crittenden County, Arkansas) as a ``moderate'' 1997 8-
hour ozone nonattainment area (see, 69 FR 23857, April 30, 2004). On
July 15, 2004, pursuant to section 181(a)(4) of the CAA, the States of
Tennessee and Arkansas submitted a petition to EPA Regions 4 and 6,
requesting a downward reclassification of the Memphis TN-AR
nonattainment area from ``moderate'' to ``marginal'' for the 1997 8-
hour ozone standard. The petition was based on the area's ``moderate''
design value of .092 ppm being within five percent of the maximum
``marginal'' design value of 0.091 ppm. Pursuant to Section 181(a)(4),
areas with design values within five percent of the standard may
request a reclassification under specific circumstances. Factors for
EPA to consider as part of such a request are described in section
181(a)(4) of the CAA. The petition for reclassification to ``marginal''
was approved by EPA, and became effective on November 22, 2004 (see, 69
FR 56697, September 22, 2004). As a result of the downward
classification, the new attainment date for the Memphis TN-AR
``marginal'' nonattainment area was set at June 15, 2007, consistent
with the CAA, with an attainment determination to be based on 2004-2006
air quality data.
Air quality data monitored for the Memphis TN-AR nonattainment area
subsequently showed that the area did not attain the 1997 8-hour ozone
NAAQS by the June 15, 2007, deadline. Section 181(b)(2)(A) of the CAA
provides that, when EPA finds that an area failed to attain by the
applicable date, the area is reclassified by operation of law to the
higher of: The next higher classification or the classification
applicable to the area's ozone design value at the time of the required
notice under section 181(b)(2)(B). The next higher classification for
the Memphis TN-AR Nonattainment Area was ``moderate.'' On March 28,
2008, the Memphis TN-AR nonattainment area was reclassified as
``moderate'' (73 FR 16547). EPA set a deadline of March 1, 2009 for the
State to submit the moderate area SIP provisions required under the
area's new classification (73 FR 16550).
In 2008, the ambient ozone data for the Memphis TN-AR Area showed
attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, using data from the 3-year
period of 2006-2008. On February 24, 2009, Arkansas requested
redesignation of Crittenden County, Arkansas to attainment for the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS. The redesignation request included three years of
complete, quality-assured ambient air quality data for the ozone
seasons (March 1st thru November 30th) of 2006-2008, indicating that
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS has been achieved for the entire Memphis
TN-AR Area. Under the CAA, nonattainment areas may be redesignated to
attainment if sufficient, complete, quality-assured data is available
for the Administrator to determine that the area has attained the
standard and the area meets the other CAA redesignation requirements in
section 107(d)(3)(E).
[[Page 2094]]
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation?
The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA
allows for redesignation providing that: (1) The Administrator
determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) the
Administrator has fully approved the applicable implementation plan for
the area under section 110(k); (3) the Administrator determines that
the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions resulting from implementation of the applicable
SIP and applicable Federal air pollutant control regulations and other
permanent and enforceable reductions; (4) the Administrator has fully
approved a maintenance plan for the area as meeting the requirements of
section 175A; and, (5) the state containing such area has met all
requirements applicable to the area under section 110 and part D of the
CAA.
EPA provided guidance on redesignation in the General Preamble for
the Implementation of title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990, on April
16, 1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented this guidance on April 28,
1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has provided further guidance on processing
redesignation requests in the following documents:
1. ``Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations,''
Memorandum from Bill Laxton, Director, Technical Support Division, June
18,1990;
2. ``Maintenance Plans for Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon
Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief,
Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, April 30, 1992;
3. ``Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Redesignations,'' Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon
Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 1992;
4. ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management Division, September 4, 1992 (hereafter referred to as the
``Calcagni Memorandum'');
5. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response
to Clean Air Act (ACT) Deadlines,'' Memorandum from John Calcagni,
Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992;
6. ``Technical Support Documents (TSD's) for Redesignation of Ozone
and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from G. T.
Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17, 1993;
7. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas
Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and
Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) On
or After November 15, 1992,'' Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro,
Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17,
1993;
8. ``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for
Ozone and CO Nonattainment Areas,'' Memorandum from D. Kent Berry,
Acting Director, Air Quality Management Division, November 30, 1993;
9. ``Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Memorandum from Mary D.
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14,
1994; and
10. ``Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and
Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone
National Ambient Air Quality Standard,'' Memorandum from John S. Seitz,
Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, May 10, 1995.
IV. Why Is EPA Proposing These Actions?
On February 24, 2009, Arkansas requested redesignation of the
Arkansas portion (Crittenden County) of the bi-state Memphis TN-AR 1997
8-hour ozone nonattainment area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard. EPA's evaluation indicates that the bi-state Memphis Area has
attained the standard and that Crittenden County has met the
requirements for redesignation set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E),
including the maintenance plan requirements under section 175A of the
CAA. EPA is also announcing the status of its adequacy determination
and proposing approval of the 2006 and 2021 NOX and VOC
MVEBs which are relevant to the requested redesignation.
V. What Is the Effect of EPA's Proposed Actions?
Approval of Arkansas' redesignation request would change the legal
designation of Crittenden County for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS found
at 40 CFR part 81. Approval of Arkansas' request would also incorporate
into the Arkansas SIP, a plan for Crittenden County for maintaining the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the area through 2021. This maintenance plan
includes contingency measures to remedy future violations of the 1997
8-hour ozone NAAQS. The maintenance plan also establishes state
NOX and VOC MVEBs for Crittenden County. Table 1 identifies
the state NOX and VOC MVEBs for the year 2006 and 2021 for
Crittenden County.
Table 1--Crittenden County NOX and VOC MVEBs
[Summer season tons per day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2006 2021
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX................................................... 6.27 1.84
VOC................................................... 2.95 1.39
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Approval of Arkansas' maintenance plan would also result in
approval of the NOX and VOC state MVEBs. Additionally, EPA
is notifying the public of the status of its adequacy determination for
the 2006 and 2021 NOX and VOC state MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR
93.118(f)(1).
VI. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Request?
EPA proposes to determine that the Crittenden County portion of the
Memphis TN-AR 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area has attained the
1997 8-hour ozone standard, and that all other redesignation criteria
have been met for that portion of the Memphis TN-AR area. The basis for
EPA's determination for the area is discussed in greater detail below.
Criteria (1)--Crittenden County, Arkansas has attained the 1997 8-
hour ozone NAAQS.
EPA proposes to determine that the Crittenden County portion of the
Memphis TN-AR area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. For ozone,
an area may be considered to be attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS
if the air quality in the nonattainment area meets the standard, as
determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.10 and Appendix I of part 50,
based on three complete, consecutive calendar years of quality-assured
air quality monitoring data. To attain this standard, the 3-year
average of the fourth-highest daily maximum 1997 8-hour average ozone
concentrations measured at each monitor within an area over each year
must not exceed 0.08 ppm. Based on the rounding convention described in
40 CFR part 50, Appendix I, the standard is attained if the design
value is 0.084 ppm or below. The data must be collected and quality-
assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and recorded in the EPA Air
Quality System (AQS). The monitors generally should
[[Page 2095]]
have remained at the same location for the duration of the monitoring
period required for demonstrating attainment.
EPA reviewed ozone monitoring data from ambient ozone monitoring
stations in the Memphis TN-AR area for the ozone season from 2006-2008.
This data has been quality assured and is recorded in AQS. The fourth
high averages for 2006, 2007 and 2008, and the 3-year average of these
values (i.e., design values), are summarized in Table 2:
Table 2--Annual 4th Max High and Design Value Concentration for 1997 8-Hour Ozone for the Memphis, TN-AR Area
[In parts per million]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
County Shelby County, Tennessee Crittenden County,
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Arkansas
Memphis-Frayser -----------------------
Monitor (AQS ID) Boulevard (47- Edmond Orgill Park Marion (05-
157-0021) (47-157-1004) 035-0005)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2006.................................... 0.083 0.084 0.089
2007.................................... 0.081 0.080 0.084
2008.................................... 0.084 0.077 0.074
Design Value............................ 0.082 0.080 0.082
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed above, the design value for an area is the highest
design value recorded at any monitor in the area. Therefore, the design
value for the Memphis TN-AR Area is 0.082 ppm, which meets the standard
as described above. Preliminary data from 2009 also indicate the area
continues to attain the standard. The data from 2009 is considered
preliminary because it has not yet completed full data certification.
As discussed in more detail below, Arkansas has committed to continue
monitoring in this area in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. The data
submitted by Arkansas provides an adequate demonstration that
Crittenden County (as part of the Memphis TN-AR area) has attained the
1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
Criteria (2)--Arkansas has a fully approved SIP under section
110(k) for Crittenden County and Criteria (5)--Arkansas has met all
Applicable Requirements under Section 110 and part D of the CAA.
Below is a summary of how these two criteria were met.
EPA has determined that Arkansas has met all applicable SIP
requirements for Crittenden County under section 110 of the CAA
(general SIP requirements). EPA has also determined that the Arkansas
SIP satisfies the criterion that it meet applicable SIP requirements
under part D of title I of the CAA (including requirements specific to
subpart 2 marginal 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas) in accordance
with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, EPA has determined that the
SIP is fully approved with respect to all requirements applicable for
purposes of redesignation in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii).
In making these determinations, EPA ascertained which requirements are
applicable to the area and that if applicable, they are fully approved
under section 110(k). SIPs must be fully approved only with respect to
applicable requirements.
a. Crittenden County, Arkansas Has Met All Applicable Requirements
Under Section 110 and Part D of the CAA
The September 4, 1992, Calcagni Memorandum (see ``Procedures for
Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' Memorandum
from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division,
September 4, 1992) describes EPA's interpretation of section
107(d)(3)(E). Under this interpretation, to qualify for redesignation,
states requesting redesignation to attainment must meet only the
relevant CAA requirements that come due prior to the submittal of a
complete redesignation request. See also, Michael Shapiro Memorandum,
(``SIP Requirements for Areas Submitting Requests for Redesignation to
Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon Monoxide NAAQS On or After November
15, 1992,'' September 17, 1993), and 60 FR 12459, 12465-66 (March 7,
1995) (redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor, Michigan). Applicable
requirements of the CAA that come due subsequent to the area's
submittal of a complete redesignation request remain applicable until a
redesignation is approved, but are not required as a prerequisite to
redesignation. See, section 175A(c) of the CAA; Sierra Club, 375 F.3d
537 (7th Cir. 2004); see also, 68 FR 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003)
(redesignation of St. Louis, Missouri).
General SIP requirements. Section 110(a)(2) of title I of the CAA
delineates the general requirements for a SIP, which include
enforceable emissions limitations and other control measures, means, or
techniques, provisions for the establishment and operation of
appropriate devices necessary to collect data on ambient air quality,
and programs to enforce the limitations. General SIP elements and
requirements are delineated in section 110(a)(2) of title I, part A of
the CAA. These requirements include, but are not limited to, the
following: Submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the state after
reasonable public notice and hearing; provisions for establishment and
operation of appropriate procedures needed to monitor ambient air
quality; implementation of a source permit program; provisions for the
implementation of part C requirements (Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD)) and provisions for the implementation of part D
requirements (NSR permit programs); provisions for air pollution
modeling; and provisions for public and local agency participation in
planning and emission control rule development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to
prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air
quality problems in another state. To implement this provision, EPA has
required certain states to establish programs to address the transport
of air pollutants (NOX SIP Call, Clean Air Interstate Rule
(CAIR)). The section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a state are not
linked with a particular nonattainment area's designation and
classification in that state. EPA believes that the requirements linked
with a particular nonattainment area's designation and classifications
are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation
request. The transport SIP submittal requirements, where applicable,
continue to apply to a state regardless of
[[Page 2096]]
the designation of any one particular area in the state. Thus, we do
not believe that the CAA's interstate transport requirements should be
construed to be applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation.
In addition, EPA believes that the other section 110 elements not
connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not linked with an
area's attainment status are not applicable requirements for purposes
of redesignation. The area will still be subject to these requirements
after the area is redesignated. The section 110 and part D requirements
that are linked with a particular area's designation and classification
are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation
request. This approach is consistent with EPA's existing policy on
applicability (i.e., for redesignations) of conformity and oxygenated
fuels requirements, as well as with section 184 ozone transport
requirements. See, Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final
rulemakings (61 FR 53174-53176, October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7,
1997); Cleveland-Akron-Loraine, Ohio, final rulemaking (61 FR 20458,
May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida, final rulemaking at (60 FR 62748,
December 7, 1995). See also, the discussion on this issue in the
Cincinnati, Ohio redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 2000), and in the
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania redesignation (66 FR 50399, October 19, 2001).
EPA believes that section 110 elements not linked to the area's
nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation.
Therefore, as discussed above, for purposes of redesignation, they are
not considered applicable requirements. We have reviewed the Arkansas
SIP and have concluded it meets the general requirements of section
110, to the extent that these are applicable for redesignation. EPA has
previously approved provisions in the Arkansas SIP addressing section
110 elements under the 1-hour ozone NAAQS (See, 40 CFR 52.172).
In a letter to EPA dated March 28, 2008, the State set forth its
belief that the existing SIP is also sufficient to meet the CAA
110(a)(2) requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA has not yet
approved this submission, but such approval is not necessary for
purposes of redesignation.
Part D requirements. EPA has also determined that the Arkansas SIP
meets applicable SIP requirements under part D of the CAA. Sections
172-176 of the CAA, found in subpart 1 of part D, set forth the basic
nonattainment requirements applicable to all nonattainment areas.
Section 182 of the CAA, found in subpart 2 of part D, establishes
additional specific requirements depending on the area's nonattainment
classification and applies to the Memphis TN-AR area. As discussed in
Section II, Crittenden County was classified as marginal, and then
reclassified to moderate. In the reclassification, EPA required that
the necessary SIP revisions for the new moderate area requirements be
submitted by both Tennessee and Arkansas as expeditiously as
practicable, but no later than March 1, 2009. The request for
redesignation was submitted by Arkansas on February 24, 2009, prior to
the date that the moderate area requirements came due. Thus, for
purposes of redesignation, only the marginal area requirements under
Part D, subpart 2 are applicable to Crittenden County.
A SIP revision submitted to EPA by the State of Arkansas on
November 19, 2007 satisfied the marginal area requirements set forth in
section 182(a)(1). This submittal consisted of an emissions inventory
for the year 2002 containing NOX, VOC and carbon monoxide
(CO) emissions as precursors to ozone formation, as well as a revision
to State Regulation 19, Chapter 7 (Sampling, Monitoring, and Reporting
Requirements), to require emissions statements. EPA approved this SIP
revision on January 15, 2009 (74 FR 2383). Requirements set forth in
sections 182(a)(2)(A) (Reasonably Available Control Technology
Corrections) and 182(a)(2)(B) (Savings Clause for Vehicle Inspection
and Maintenance) are not applicable to Crittenden County due to its
status of attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard. Requirements set
forth in section 182(a)(2)(C) (Permit Programs) are discussed in the
NSR Requirements section of this notice.
In addition to the fact that only the marginal classification part
D requirements became due prior to submission of the redesignation
request and therefore are applicable for purposes of redesignation, EPA
believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity requirements as
not requiring approval prior to redesignation.
Section 176 Conformity Requirements. Section 176(c) of the CAA
requires states to establish criteria and procedures to ensure that
federally supported or funded projects conform to the air quality
planning goals in the applicable SIP. The requirement to determine
conformity applies to transportation plans, programs and projects
developed, funded or approved under title 23 of the United States Code
(U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act (transportation conformity) as
well as to all other federally supported or funded projects (general
conformity). State conformity revisions must be consistent with Federal
conformity regulations relating to consultation, enforcement and
enforceability that the CAA required the EPA to promulgate.
EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity SIP
requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating the
redesignation request under section 107(d) because state conformity
rules are still required after redesignation and Federal conformity
rules apply where state rules have not been approved. See, Wall v. EPA,
265 F.3d 426, 438-40 (6th Cir. 2001) (upholding this interpretation).
See also, 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995, Tampa, Florida). Although
Crittenden County does not currently have fully approved conformity
rules, a Memorandum of Agreement outlining interagency consultation
procedures is in place for transportation conformity purposes.
NSR Requirements. Arkansas' permitting requirements for major
sources in or impacting upon nonattainment areas are set forth in
``Regulation No. 31--Nonattainment New Source Review Requirements.'' On
July 3, 2006, Arkansas submitted Regulation No. 31 to address the
marginal Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) permitting requirements
in Crittenden County, and EPA approved the submittal on April 12, 2007
(72 FR 18394). This regulation applies to the construction and
modification of any major stationary source of air pollution in a
nonattainment area, as required by part D of Title I of the Act.
Regulation No. 31 also includes provisions that implement EPA's
designation of Crittenden County as an Economic Development Zone (EDZ)
subject to the requirements of Section 173(a)(1)(B) of the Act. These
provisions establish VOC and NOX emissions caps and provide
for the Director of ADEQ to grant growth allowances to affected sources
in lieu of meeting the NNSR offset requirement. Arkansas has maintained
that sources locating to the Memphis area will continue to undergo new
source review requirements and existing source control will continue
under the NNSR/EDZ program until Crittenden County is redesignated to
attainment.
Upon redesignation, however, the identification of Crittenden
County as a section 173 EDZ expires under federal law. The rules that
apply for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard after
[[Page 2097]]
redesignation would be those contained in the Prevention of Significant
Deterioration (PSD) SIP program. The State must reapply for EDZ status
should Crittenden County be designated nonattainment under a revised 8-
hour primary ozone standard. In any event, EPA notes that fully
approved NSR is not required for redesignation to attainment as long as
PSD applies after redesignation, and the area has shown it can attain
and maintain without nonattainment NSR.
EPA has also determined that areas being redesignated need not
comply with the requirement that a nonattainment NSR program be
approved prior to redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates
maintenance of the standard without a part D NSR program in effect
since PSD requirements will apply after redesignation. The rationale
for this view is described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled
``Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.''
Arkansas in its submittal for Crittenden County showed that sources
locating to the Crittenden area will be subject to PSD requirements and
has demonstrated that Crittenden County will be able to maintain the
standard without a part D nonattainment NSR program in effect.
Therefore, Arkansas need not have a fully approved part D NSR program
prior to approval of the redesignation request. Arkansas's PSD program
will become effective in Crittenden County upon redesignation to
attainment. See, rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60 FR 12467-12468,
March 7, 1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorraine, Ohio (61 FR 20458, 20469-70,
May 7, 1996); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665, October 23, 2001);
Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31834-31837, June 21, 1996). Thus, EPA
believes that Crittenden County, Arkansas has satisfied all applicable
requirements for purposes of redesignation under section 110 and part D
of the CAA.
b. Crittenden County, Arkansas Has a Fully Approved Applicable SIP
Under Section 110(k) of the CAA
EPA has fully approved the applicable Arkansas SIP for Crittenden
County, under section 110(k) of the CAA for all requirements applicable
for purposes of redesignation. EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in
approving a redesignation request (see Calcagni Memorandum at p. 3;
Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F.3d 984,
989-90 (6th Cir. 1998); Wall, 265 F.3d 426, at 438) plus any additional
measures it may approve in conjunction with a redesignation action.
See, 68 FR 25426 (May 12, 2003) and citations therein.
As indicated above, EPA believes that the section 110 elements not
connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not linked to the
area's nonattainment status are not applicable requirements for
purposes of redesignation. EPA also believes that since the moderate
area part D requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation did
not become due prior to submission of the redesignation request, they
also are not applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. As
set forth above, the area has met all other applicable requirements for
purposes of redesignation under its prior marginal classification.
Criteria (3)--The air quality improvement in the Memphis TN-AR 1997
8-hour Ozone Area is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in
emissions resulting from implementation of the SIP and applicable
federal air pollution control regulations and other permanent and
enforceable reductions.
EPA believes that Arkansas has demonstrated that the observed air
quality improvement in the Memphis-Crittenden County Nonattainment Area
is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting
from implementation of the SIP, Federal measures, and other state
adopted measures. Additionally, new emissions control programs for
fuels and motor vehicles will help ensure a continued decrease in
emissions throughout the region.
Because Crittenden County is itself largely rural in nature,
measured reductions in ozone concentrations in and around Crittenden
County are largely attributable to permanent and enforceable reductions
from emission sources of VOCs and NOX in the Memphis area.
There were reductions in Crittenden County. Table 3 summarizes several
of the measures adopted that resulted in emissions reductions in
Crittenden County.
Table 3--Crittenden County Emission Reductions Programs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mobile Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[cir] Tier 2 Fuel and Vehicle Emission Standards.
[cir] Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program.
[cir] Heavy Duty Diesel Rule (2007 Highway Rule).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State and Local Measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[cir] Stage I Vapor Recovery.
[cir] Proform Company, LLC closure, air permit voided.
[cir] CIBA Corporation reclassified to minor source, MACT standard
modifications.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional Voluntary Reductions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[cir] Diesel Emissions Reduction Act--ADEQ received State Clean Diesel
Grant in October 2008.
[cir] Retrofit of city and county (21 on-road, 12 non-road trucks) w/
diesel oxidation catalyst.
[cir] Retrofit of 50 school buses w/diesel oxidation catalyst.
[cir] Retrofit of 12 refuse trucks w/diesel oxidation catalyst.
[cir] 196 California Air Resources Board certified gas cans exchanged in
Crittenden County.
[cir] Truck stop electrification (equipped 65 parking spaces in
Crittenden County).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission reductions in Shelby County as a result of federal motor
vehicle controls from 2002 to 2006 are estimated to be 7 tons per day
of VOCs and 28 tons per day of NOX. Additionally, continuing
new emissions control programs will help to ensure a further decrease
in emissions throughout the area in the future. Crittenden County is
expected to receive upwind benefits in emission reductions.
Regarding point source emissions, the Tennessee Valley Authority's
(TVA) Allen Steam Plant located in Shelby County operates three coal-
fired boilers. As a result of EPA's ``Finding of Significant
Contribution and Rulemaking for Certain States in the Ozone Transport
Assessment Group Region for Purposes of Reducing Region Transport of
Ozone'' (NOX SIP Call), TVA began operation of two selective
catalytic reduction (SCR) control units during the 2002 ozone control
season, May 1st through September 30th. The third SCR began operating
in 2003. Ozone season daily NOX reductions in the area as a
result of these controls equal approximately 45 tons per day.
These are substantial reductions when compared to the remaining
total NOX inventory from all sources in Shelby and
Crittenden Counties in 2006 of 116.81 tons per day (99.09 tons per day
in Shelby County and 17.72 tons per day in Crittenden County) and a VOC
inventory of 128.67 tons per day (99.11 tons per day in Shelby County
and 29.56 tons per day in Crittenden County).
[[Page 2098]]
Because of the uncertainty introduced by the recent court actions
affecting the CAIR Rule and NOX SIP Call, EPA undertook an
analysis of the changes in NOX expected across a broader
region. In particular, EPA reviewed available projections of
NOX emissions from nearby states from 2002 to 2018. These
values are presented in Tables 4 and 5:
Table 4--2002 Base Annual Emission Inventory Summary for NOX*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-EGU
States EGU point point Non-road area Mobile Fires Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AR............................. 24,722 47,698 62,472 21,700 141,894 5,492 303,978
KY............................. 201,928 38,434 104,571 39,507 156,417 534 541,391
LA............................. 111,703 199,218 114,711 93,069 180,664 6,942 706,307
MS............................. 40,433 61,533 88,787 4,200 111,914 308 307,175
MO............................. 145,438 36,144 99,306 32,435 189,852 2,442 505,617
TN............................. 152,137 64,344 96,827 17,844 238,577 217 569,946
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total...................... 676,361 447,371 566,674 208,755 1,019,318 15,935 2,934,414
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* From Tennessee Regional Haze SIP, Appendix D, page D.3-5 and support table for Technical Support Document for
CENRAP Emissions and Air Quality Modeling to Support Regional Haze State Implementation Plans, page 2-40,
figure 2-4.
Table 5--2018 Base Annual Emission Inventory Summary for NOX*
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-EGU
States EGU point point Non-road Area Mobile Fires Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AR............................... 34,938 36,169 34,305 25,672 33,640 5,600 170,324
KY............................... 64,378 41,034 79,392 44,346 52,263 714 282,127
LA............................... 44,485 225,748 106,685 114,374 44,806 6,969 543,067
MS............................... 21,535 61,252 68,252 4,483 30,619 1,073 187,214
MO............................... 83,181 51,489 59,625 35,213 50,861 2,442 282,811
TN............................... 31,715 62,519 70,226 19,597 69,385 405 253,847
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total........................ 280,232 478,211 418,485 243,685 281,574 17,203 1,708,390
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* From Tennessee Regional Haze SIP, Appendix D, page D.3-5 and support table for Technical Support Document for
CENRAP Emissions and Air Quality Modeling to Support Regional Haze State Implementation Plans, page 2-40,
figure 2-4.
From 2002 to 2018 NOX emissions are projected to
decrease in the region by 1,215,024 tons/year or 41.4 percent in all.
EGU NOX anticipated decreases due to CAIR and the
NOX SIP Call were projected to be 198,150 tons per year.
However, the largest source in this region remains the motor vehicle
sector, which is projected to decrease 737,744 tons per year. Hence
even without EGU controls on NOX emissions, total
NOX emissions are projected to continually decrease
throughout the maintenance period. As is noted in the following
paragraph, the NOX SIP Call will remain in effect.
The NOX SIP Call requires states to make significant,
specific emissions reductions. It also provided a mechanism, the
NOX Budget Trading Program, which states could use to
achieve those reductions. When EPA promulgated CAIR, it discontinued
(starting in 2009) the NOX Budget Trading Program, 40 CFR
51.121(r), but created another mechanism--the CAIR ozone season trading
program--which states could use to meet their SIP Call obligations, 70
FR 25289-90. EPA notes that a number of states, when submitting SIP
revisions to require sources to participate in the CAIR ozone season
trading program, removed the SIP provisions that required sources to
participate in the NOX Budget Trading Program. In addition,
because the provisions of CAIR including the ozone season
NOX trading program remain in place during the remand (North
Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176 (DC Cir. Dec. 23, 2008)), EPA is not
currently administering the NOX Budget Trading Program.
Nonetheless, all states regardless of the current status of their
regulations that previously required participation in the
NOX Budget Trading Program, will remain subject to all of
the requirements in the NOX SIP Call even if the existing
CAIR ozone season trading program is withdrawn or altered. In addition,
the anti-backsliding provisions of 40 CFR 51.905(f) specifically
provide that the provisions of the NOX SIP Call, including
the statewide NOX emission budgets, continue to apply after
revocation of the 1-hr standard.
All NOX SIP Call states have SIPs that currently satisfy
their obligations under the SIP Call, the SIP Call reduction
requirements are being met, and EPA will continue to enforce the
requirements of the NOX SIP Call even after any response to
the CAIR remand. For these reasons, EPA believes that regardless of the
status of the CAIR program, the NOX SIP Call requirements
can be relied upon in demonstrating maintenance. Thus, the
NOX SIP Call adds to assurances that the area will remain in
attainment.
These regional projections of emissions data have been prepared
only through 2018. However, since motor vehicle and off road emissions
continue to decrease long after a rule is adopted as the engine
population is gradually replaced by newer engines, it is reasonable to
assume that this projected decrease in regional NOX
emissions from mobile and non-road sources should continue through 2020
and assure that ozone in the Memphis region will continue to decline
throughout the 10 year maintenance period. Hence we believe the
projected regional NOX reductions are adequate to assure
that the Memphis region will continue demonstrating maintenance
throughout the 10 year maintenance period.
Criteria (4)--The area has a fully approved maintenance plan
pursuant to section 175A of the CAA.
In conjunction with its request to redesignate Crittenden County,
Arkansas (as part of the Memphis TN-AR 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment
area) to attainment, Arkansas submitted a SIP revision to provide for
the maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years
after the
[[Page 2099]]
effective date of redesignation to attainment.
a. What is required in a maintenance plan?
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment.
Under section 175A, the plan must demonstrate continued attainment of
the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after the Administrator
approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after the
redesignation, the State of Arkansas must submit a revised maintenance
plan, which demonstrates that attainment will continue to be maintained
for the 10 years following the initial 10-year period. To address the
possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must
contain such contingency measures, with a schedule for implementation
as EPA deems necessary to assure prompt correction of any future 8-hour
ozone violations. Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a
maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to
attainment. The Calcagni Memorandum provides additional guidance on the
content of a maintenance plan. The Calcagni Memorandum explains that an
ozone maintenance plan should address five requirements: The attainment
emissions inventory, maintenance demonstration, monitoring,
verification of continued attainment, and a contingency plan. As is
discussed more fully below, Arkansas' maintenance plan includes all the
necessary components and is approvable as part of the redesignation
request.
b. Attainment Emissions Inventory
In coordination with Shelby County, Tennessee, Arkansas selected
2006 ``the attainment year'' for the purposes of demonstrating
attainment of the 1997 8[dash]hour ozone NAAQS. This attainment
inventory identifies the level of emissions in the area, which is
sufficient to attain the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. Arkansas began
development of this attainment inventory by first developing a baseline
emissions inventory for the Memphis area. The year 2006 was chosen as
the base year for developing a comprehensive ozone precursor emissions
inventory for which projected emissions could be developed for 2009,
2012, 2015, 2017, 2018 and 2021. The projected inventory estimates
emissions forward to 2021, which is beyond the 10-year interval
required in Section 175(A) of the CAA. Non-road mobile emissions
estimates were based on the EPA's NONROAD2005 model. On-road mobile
source emissions were calculated using EPA's MOBILE6.2 emission factors
model. The 2006 VOC and NOX emissions, as well as the
emissions for other years, for Crittenden County were developed
consistent with EPA guidance, and are summarized in Tables 6 and 7 in
the following subsection.
c. Maintenance Demonstration
The February 24, 2009 final submittal includes a maintenance plan
for Crittenden County. This demonstration:
(i) Shows compliance and maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard by providing information to support the demonstration that
current and future emissions of VOC and NOX remain at or
below attainment year 2006 emissions levels. The year 2006 was chosen
as the attainment year because it is one of the most recent three years
(i.e., 2006, 2007, and 2008) for which Crittenden County has clean air
quality data for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.
(ii) Uses 2006 as the attainment year and includes future emission
inventory projections for 2009, 2012, 2015, 2017, 2018, and 2021.
(iii) Identifies an ``out year,'' at least 10 years (and beyond)
after the time necessary for EPA to review and approve the maintenance
plan. Per 40 CFR part 93, state NOX and VOC MVEBs were
established for the last year (2021) of the maintenance plan.
Additionally, Arkansas chose, through interagency consultation, to
establish MVEBs for the year 2006 for NOX and VOC. EPA has
already notified the public of its adequacy determination for these
2006 and 2021 MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR 93.118(f)(1) (74 FR 21356).
(iv) Provides the following actual and projected emissions
inventories, in tons per day (tpd) for Crittenden County, Arkansas.
See, Tables 6 and 7.
Table 6--Crittenden County VOC Emissions
[Summer season tons per day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source category 2006 2009 2012 2015 2017 2018 2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point............................................ 2.13 2.17 2.27 2.36 2.43 2.47 2.62
Area............................................. 21.32 21.30 21.49 21.68 21.80 21.89 22.14
On-road *........................................ 3.12 2.63 2.30 1.97 1.75 1.68 1.50
Non-road **...................................... 2.99 2.85 2.60 2.36 2.19 2.14 1.97
--------------------------------------------------------------
Total........................................ 29.56 28.94 28.65 28.36 28.17 28.18 28.23
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Calculated using MOBILE 6.2.
** Calculated using NONROAD2005c.
Table 7--Crittenden County Area NOX Emissions
[Summer season tons per day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source category 2006 2009 2012 2015 2017 2018 2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point............................................ 1.09 1.15 1.22 1.29 1.34 1.37 1.45
Area............................................. 0.90 0.90 0.91 0.91 0.92 0.92 0.93
On-road *........................................ 6.27 5.13 4.12 3.12 2.45 2.30 1.84
Non-road **...................................... 9.46 9.38 9.10 8.82 8.63 8.39 7.66
--------------------------------------------------------------
Total........................................ 17.72 16.56 15.35 14.14 13.34 12.97 11.88
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Calculated using MOBILE 6.2.
** Calculated using NONROAD2005c.
[[Page 2100]]
Although the Arkansas SIP submission provided NOX and
VOC emissions for the attainment and future years for Crittenden
County, EPA has considered emissions for the entire Memphis TN-AR area
for demonstration of maintenance. Maintenance is demonstrated if the
future year NOX and VOC emission for the entire area remains
at or below the level of the attainment year emissions. Both Tennessee
and Arkansas chose 2006 for their ``attainment year'' for this area. It
is important to note that this area is composed of two counties (Shelby
County, Tennessee and Crittenden County, Arkansas) for which emissions
should be considered. The area and point sources for both counties
indicate a steady NOX and VOC emission increase. However,
large projected reductions in mobile source emissions more than
compensate for this relatively small increase. Moreover, EPA's review
of the entire area's total inventory for NOX and VOCs
indicate that future total area emissions are below the level of the
total area attainment year emissions. Therefore, EPA believes that the
1997 8[dash]hour ozone standard will be maintained in the future for
the Memphis TN-AR area.
d. Monitoring Network
There are currently three monitors measuring ozone in the Memphis
TN-AR Area (two in Shelby County, Tennessee and one in Crittenden
County, Arkansas). ADEQ has committed, in the maintenance plan, to
continue operation of the monitor in Crittenden County in compliance
with 40 CFR part 58, and has addressed the requirement for monitoring.
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
Arkansas has the legal authority to enforce and implement the
requirements of the ozone maintenance plan. This includes the authority
to adopt, implement and enforce any subsequent emissions control
contingency measures determined to be necessary to correct future ozone
attainment problems.
Arkansas will track the progress of the maintenance plan by
performing future reviews of triennial emissions inventory for
Crittenden County using the latest emissions factors, models and
methodologies. For these periodic inventories, Crittenden County will
review the assumptions made for the purpose of the maintenance
demonstration concerning projected growth of activity levels. If any of
these assumptions appear to have changed substantially, Arkansas will
re-project emissions.
f. Contingency Plan
The contingency plan provisions are designed to promptly correct a
violation of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. Section 175A of
the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include such contingency
measures as EPA deems necessary to assure that the state will promptly
correct a violation of the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The
maintenance plan should identify the contingency measures to be
adopted, a schedule and procedure for adoption and implementation, and
a time limit for action by the state. A state should also identify
specific indicators to be used to determine when the contingency
measures need to be implemented. The maintenance plan must include a
requirement that a state will implement all measures with respect to
control of the pollutant that were contained in the SIP before
redesignation of the area to attainment in accordance with section
175A(d).
In the February 24, 2009, submittal, Arkansas affirms that all
programs instituted by the State and EPA will remain enforceable, and
that sources are prohibited from reducing emissions controls following
the redesignation of the area. The contingency plan included in the
submittal provides a two-phase approach to tracking and triggering
mechanisms to determine when contingency measures are needed and a
process of developing and adopting appropriate control measures.
Phase I--Potential increases in local emissions specifically, when
the certified triennial emissions inventory for VOCs or NOX exceed the
2006 base year attainment inventory by ten percent or more and at least
one documentation of an exceedance of the 1997 ozone NAAQS at any
nonattainment monitor in the area based on certified data during the
most recent monitoring season.
In the event this occurs, ADEQ will conduct an investigation into
the cause to determine if the data are due to reporting errors or a
non-recurring variance in the local emission profile. The investigation
will be coordinated with the Memphis/Shelby County Health Department
and the State of Tennessee as appropriate. If the investigation reveals
the data are valid, ADEQ will expand voluntary programs and develop
regulations to address the concerns. All regulatory programs will be
implemented within 24 months and include a selection of measures shown
in Table 8.