Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island; Reasonable Further Progress Plans and 2002 Base Year Emission Inventories, 57221-57230 [2010-23402]

Download as PDF jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules provided they notify us before October 8, 2010. The EPA will make every effort to accommodate all speakers that arrive and register. No lunch break is scheduled. Because this hearing is being held at U.S. government facilities, individuals planning to attend the hearing should be prepared to show valid picture identification to the security staff in order to gain access to the meeting room. In addition, you will need to obtain a property pass for any personal belongings you bring with you. Upon leaving the building, you will be required to return this property pass to the security desk. No large signs will be allowed in the building, cameras may only be used outside of the building, and demonstrations will not be allowed on federal property for security reasons. The EPA Web site for the rulemaking, which includes the proposal and information about the public hearing, can be found at https://www.epa.gov/nsr. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you would like to present oral testimony at the public hearing, please contact Ms. Pamela Long, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Air Quality Planning Division, (C504–03), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone (919) 541–0641, fax number (919) 541– 5509, e-mail address: long.pam@epa.gov (preferred method for registering), no later than 2 business days prior to the public hearing. The last day to register will be October 8, 2010. If using e-mail, please provide the following information: Time you wish to speak (morning, afternoon), name, affiliation, address, e-mail address, and telephone and fax numbers. Questions concerning the August 24, 2010 (75 FR 51960), proposed rule should be addressed to Mr. David Painter, U.S. EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, New Source Review Group, (C504–03), Research Triangle Park, NC 27711, telephone number (919) 541–5515, e-mail at painter.david@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The public hearing is to provide the public with an opportunity to present oral comments regarding EPA’s proposed action to clarify the obligation to retain 1-hour nonattainment new source review (NSR) program requirements for certain areas designated nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS). The EPA has proposed to revise the rule for implementing the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS to address how NSR requirements that applied by virtue of the area’s 1-hour ozone NAAQS classification should apply under the VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:31 Sep 17, 2010 Jkt 220001 anti-backsliding provisions of the 1997 8-hour implementation rule. The proposed rule responds to the ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that the 1-hour major NSR program, as it applies to areas that were designated 1-hour nonattainment on the date of designation for the 1997 8-hour NAAQS, is a required control to prevent backsliding. Public hearing: The proposal for which EPA is holding the public hearing was published in the Federal Register on August 24, 2010 (75 FR 51960), and is available at https:// www.epa.gov/nsr and also available in the docket identified below. The public hearing will provide interested parties the opportunity to present data, views, or arguments concerning the proposal. The EPA may ask clarifying questions during the oral presentations, but will not respond to comments or issues raised in the presentations at that time. Written statements and supporting information submitted during the comment period will be considered with the same weight as any oral comments and supporting information presented at the public hearing. Written comments on the proposed rule must be postmarked by October 1, 2010, which is the closing date for the comment period, as specified in the proposal for the rule. However, the record will remain open until November 13, 2010, to allow 30 days after the public hearing for submittal of additional information related to the hearing. The hearing schedule, including a list of speakers, will be posted on EPA’s Web site: https://www.epa.gov/nsr. Verbatim transcripts of the hearings and written statements will be included in the docket for the rulemaking. The EPA will make every effort to follow the schedule as closely as possible on the day of the hearings; however, please plan for the hearing to run either ahead of schedule or behind schedule. How can I get copies of this document and other related information? The EPA has established a docket for the ‘‘Proposed Rule to Implement the 1997 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard: New Source Review Anti-Backsliding Provisions for Former 1-Hour Ozone Standard’’ under Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OAR–2008– 0462 (available at https:// www.regulations.gov). As stated previously, the proposed rule was published in the Federal Register on August 24, 2010, and is available at https://www.epa.gov/nsr and in the previously cited docket. PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 57221 Dated: September 14, 2010. Mary Henigin, Acting Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards. [FR Doc. 2010–23398 Filed 9–17–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R01–OAR–2008–0117; EPA–RO1– OAR–2008–0107; EPA–RO1–OAR–2008– 0445; A–1–FRL–9203–4] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island; Reasonable Further Progress Plans and 2002 Base Year Emission Inventories Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed rule. AGENCY: EPA is proposing to approve State Implementation Plan revisions submitted by the States of Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island. These revisions establish 2002 base year emission inventories and reasonable further progress emission reduction plans for areas within these states designated as nonattainment of EPA’s 1997 8-hour ozone standard. The intended effect of this action is to propose approval of these states’ 2002 base year inventories and reasonable further progress (RFP) emission reduction plans, and to propose approval of the 2008 motor vehicle transportation budgets and contingency measures associated with the RFP plans. EPA also proposes approval of three rules adopted by Connecticut that will reduce volatile organic compound emissions in the state. DATES: Written comments must be received on or before October 20, 2010. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by one of the following Docket ID Numbers: EPA–R01–OAR– 2008–0117 for comments pertaining to our proposed action for Connecticut, EPA–RO1–OAR–2008–0107 for comments pertaining to our proposed action for Massachusetts, or EPA–RO1– OAR–2008–0445 for comments pertaining to our proposed action for Rhode Island, by one of the following methods: 1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. E-mail: arnold.anne@epa.gov. 3. Fax: (617) 918–0047. SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM 20SEP1 57222 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 4. Mail: ‘‘Docket Identification Number EPA–R01–OAR–2008–0117, EPA–RO1–OAR–2008–0107, or EPA– RO1–OAR–2008–0445, Anne Arnold, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100 (mail code OEP05–2), Boston, MA 02109–3912. 5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to: Anne Arnold, Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit, Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100 (mail code OEP05–2), Boston, MA 02109–3912. 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 legal holidays. Instructions: Direct your comments to one of the following Docket ID Numbers: EPA–R01–OAR–2008–0117 for comments pertaining to our proposed action for Connecticut, EPA– RO1–OAR–2008–0107 for comments pertaining to our proposed action for Massachusetts, or EPA–RO1–OAR– 2008–0445 for comments pertaining to our proposed action for Rhode Island. EPA’s policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at https:// www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through https:// www.regulations.gov, or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. The https:// www.regulations.gov Web site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through https:// www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 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 Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the contact 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 legal holidays. In addition, copies of the state submittal and EPA’s technical support document are also available for public inspection during normal business hours, by appointment at the respective State Air Agency: The Bureau of Air Management, Department of Environmental Protection, State Office Building, 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06106–1630; Division of Air Quality Control, Department of Environmental Protection, One Winter Street, 8th Floor, Boston, MA 02108; Office of Air Resources, Department of Environmental Management, 235 Promenade Street, Providence, RI 02908–5767. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob McConnell, Air Quality Planning Unit, U.S. EPA Region 1—New England, 5 Post Office Square, Boston, MA 02109– 3912, phone number: 617–918–1046; e-Mail: mcconnell.robert@epa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean EPA. The following outline is provided to aid in locating information in this preamble. I. Background and Purpose II. 2002 Base Year Emissions Inventory A. What is a base year inventory, and why are these states required to prepare one? 1. Point Source Emissions 2. Area Source Emissions 3. On-Road Mobile Source Emissions 4. Non-Road Mobile Source Emissions 5. Biogenic Emission Sources B. Summary of 2002 Base Year Inventories C. What action is EPA taking on these inventories? III. Reasonable Further Progress Plans A. What is a Reasonable Further Progress plan, and why are these states required to prepare one? B. What action is EPA taking on these plans? C. What emission levels must Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island meet by 2008? D. To what extent do the RFP plans reduce ozone precursor emissions? E. Are banked emissions properly accounted for within these RFP plans? F. What are the pollution control programs that accomplish this change in emissions? G. Is EPA proposing approval of any state control measures in this action? H. Have these states met their contingency measure obligation? I. Are transportation conformity budgets contained in these plans? IV. Proposed Action V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. Background and Purpose On April 30, 2004, pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (the Act, or CAA), 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq., EPA designated portions of the country as being in nonattainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) (69 FR 23858).1 All parts of Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island were designated as nonattainment for ozone, and all were classified as moderate. There were five nonattainment areas created that encompassed the entirety of these states, as shown in Table 1. TABLE 1—8-HOUR OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREAS IN CONNECTICUT, MASSACHUSETTS, AND RHODE ISLAND Geographic area covered (counties) State Area name CT ..................... New York—N. New Jersey—Long Island, NY–NJ–CT (NY– NJ–CT area). Fairfield, Middlesex, New Haven. 1 The 1997 8-hour ozone standard itself is codified at 40 CFR 50.10. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:51 Sep 17, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM 20SEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 57223 TABLE 1—8-HOUR OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREAS IN CONNECTICUT, MASSACHUSETTS, AND RHODE ISLAND—Continued Area name Geographic area covered (counties) CT ..................... MA ..................... Greater Connecticut area ......................................................... Bos-Law-Wor (E. MA) area ...................................................... MA ..................... RI ....................... jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 State Springfield (W. MA) area .......................................................... Providence area ....................................................................... Hartford, Litchfield, New London, Tolland, Windham. Barnstable, Bristol, Dukes, Essex, Middlesex, Nantucket, Norfolk, Plymouth, Suffolk, Worcester. Berkshire, Franklin, Hampden, Hampshire. Statewide. Sections 182(a)(1) and 182(b)(1) of the CAA compel the preparation and submittal of an emission inventory by states containing ozone nonattainment areas. On November 18, 2002, EPA issued guidance 2 indicating that 2002 was the preferred year for states to use as their base year in development of state implementation plans (SIPs) for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. On November 29, 2005, EPA published a final rule in the Federal Register identifying, in part, the requirements that areas designated nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard must fulfill in order to meet their obligations under the Act. 70 FR 71612, codified at 40 CFR part 51 subpart X. This rule is commonly referred to as the ‘‘Phase 2’’ implementation rule. The Phase 2 rule provides that areas that had previously met the CAA section 182(b)(1) requirement for a 15% volatile organic compound (VOC) emission reduction pursuant to the one-hour ozone standard would be considered to have met this requirement for the 1997 8-hour standard. According to the Phase 2 rule, such areas must meet reasonable further progress (RFP) obligations under the provisions of subpart 1 of the Act, rather than the more stringent RFP obligations of subpart 2. The Phase 2 rule divides the areas subject to subpart 1 RFP requirements into two categories: Those with attainment dates within 5 years of designation, and those with attainment dates beyond 5 years from designation. Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island all fall into the latter category because their attainment dates were 6 years from the date of designation. The Phase 2 rule further provides that areas with an attainment date beyond 5 years from the date of designation would be required to meet their RFP requirement by demonstrating a 15 percent emission reduction between 2002 and 2008 in VOC, nitrogen oxide (NOx) or a combination of both of these pollutants such that the total reduction in these 2 ‘‘2002 Base Year Emission Inventory SIP Planning: 8-hr Ozone, PM 2.5, and Regional Haze Programs.’’ VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:51 Sep 17, 2010 Jkt 220001 ozone precursor emissions equaled 15 percent.3 On February 1, 2008, Connecticut submitted its 2002 to 2008 RFP plan and 2002 base year inventory to EPA as part of its attainment demonstration SIP submittal. Similar submittals were made by Massachusetts on January 31, 2008, and by Rhode Island on April 30, 2008. II. 2002 Base Year Emissions Inventory A. What is a base year inventory and why are these states required to prepare one? The Act contains a number of requirements for moderate ozone nonattainment areas. One requirement, found at section 182(a)(1) of the Act and made applicable to moderate ozone nonattainment areas through section 182(b)(1), compels the preparation and submittal of a ‘‘comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from all sources.’’ As mentioned above, EPA’s November 18, 2002 guidance memorandum identified 2002 as the preferred year for states to use as their base year in development of SIPs for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, and the Phase 2 rule affirms this selection of the 2002 inventory as the baseline for the RFP requirement. In August, 2005, EPA published supplemental guidance for states to use in development of their base year inventories entitled, ‘‘Emission Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulation’’ (EPA–454/R–05–001). This guidance describes for states the requirements for development of comprehensive emission estimates from stationary point and area sources, and from mobile on-road and non-road sources, such that complete emission inventories are available to support SIP development for the 8-hour ozone standard. The guidance directs states to 3 The Phase 2 rule’s application of the CAA’s VOC percentage reduction requirements was challenged before the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. However, the court upheld EPA’s interpretation of these requirements. See NRDC v. EPA, 571 F.3d 1245 (DC Cir. 2009). PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 prepare their emission estimates on a ‘‘typical summer day’’ basis to reflect emissions that occur during high ozone episodes, which occur predominantly during the warm summer months. As mentioned above, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island all contain ozone nonattainment areas designated as moderate for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. Therefore, they were required to develop 2002 base year emission inventories of VOC and NOx, as these compounds react in the presence of heat and sunlight to form ozone. 1. Point Source Emissions The point source portion of the inventory consists of emission estimates for the major industrial facilities within the state. The emission estimates are prepared based on facility specific information collected during annual surveys conducted by each state’s air agency. Connecticut and Massachusetts survey all industrial sources that emit 10 tons/year or more of VOC or NOx. Rhode Island surveys facilities that emit 10 tons/year or more of VOC, and/or 25 tons/year or more of NOx. The emission estimates are prepared for each process operation, fuel combustion process, or other air emitting activity, then summed together to obtain an overall emission estimate for the facility. The states submit these air emission estimates to EPA, and we incorporate them into our national emissions inventory (NEI) database. 2. Area Source Emissions Area source emissions include emissions from small industrial facilities not included in the point source inventory, and from sources whose emissions are, in most circumstances, spread over a wide geographic area from a large number of small sources. Examples include gasoline service stations, small graphic arts facilities, landfills, and emissions from consumer and commercial products. Emission estimates are made for most area source categories by multiplying some indicator of activity level for the sector, such as gasoline consumption data for gasoline stations, E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM 20SEP1 57224 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules by emission factors that relate air emissions to the activity level. The Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island area source inventories provide emission estimates for a large number of source categories, complementing the emission estimates made for individual point sources and completing the estimate of emissions from stationary sources in the state. 3. On-Road Mobile Source Emissions Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island all used a highway vehicle emission estimation model developed by EPA referred to as the MOBILE 6.2 model to estimate emissions from onroad motor vehicles. Each state obtained estimates of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) from their respective Departments of Transportation. The states also obtained the information necessary to run the MOBILE model accurately for their mix of vehicles, fuel types, and control programs and used this information to obtain VOC and NOX emission estimates from the model. 4. Non-Road Mobile Source Emissions Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island estimated emissions for the majority of equipment within the non-road sector using the EPA’s NONROAD 2005 model. The NONROAD model estimates emissions for diesel, gasoline, liquefied petroleum gasoline, and compressed natural gas-fueled non-road equipment types. The non-road model does not estimate emissions from aircraft, locomotives, or commercial marine vessels, and so the states used other EPA recommended methods to estimate emissions from these sectors. jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 5. Biogenic Emission Sources Biogenic (naturally occurring) emissions occur from plants, trees, grasses and crops. EPA developed a computer model, referred to as the Biogenic Emissions Inventory System (BEIS v. 3.12), to estimate VOC emissions from this source category, and calculates biogenic emissions for all counties in the country. EPA recommends that states use EPA’s biogenic emission estimates, and Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island all relied on EPA’s emission estimates for this sector. B. Summary of 2002 Base Year Inventories The 2002 VOC and NOX base year inventories prepared by Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island are shown below in Tables 2a through 2e. EPA has concluded that these states have adequately derived and VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:31 Sep 17, 2010 Jkt 220001 documented the 2002 base year VOC and NOX emissions for these areas. TABLE 2A—2002 BASE YEAR INVENTORY FOR THE NY–NJ–CT AREA Nonattainment area 2002 VOC missions (tons/day) 2002 NOX emissions (tons/day) NY–NJ–CT area: Point .............. Area ............... On-road ......... Non-road ....... Biogenics ....... 11.3 84.1 48.1 66.0 125.6 37.7 7.2 102.7 38.7 0.7 Total ........... 335.3 187.0 TABLE 2B—2002 BASE YEAR INVENTORY FOR THE GREATER CONNECTICUT AREA Nonattainment area 2002 VOC emissions (tons/day) 2002 NOX Emissions (tons/day) Greater Connecticut area: Point .............. Area ............... On-road ......... Non-road ....... Biogenics ....... 4.6 75.5 45.1 56.2 268.9 19.0 6.4 89.3 30.8 1.3 Total ........... 450.3 146.8 TABLE 2D—2002 BASE YEAR INVENTORY FOR THE SPRINGFIELD (W. MA) AREA—Continued Nonattainment area Total ........... 2002 VOC Emissions (tons/day) 2002 NOX Emissions (tons/day) 354.7 113.4 TABLE 2E—2002 BASE YEAR INVENTORY FOR THE PROVIDENCE AREA Nonattainment area 2002 VOC emissions (tons/day) 2002 NOX emissions (tons/day) Providence area: Point .............. Area ............... On-road ......... Non-road ....... Biogenics ....... 10.3 47.9 32.3 26.8 124.2 7.0 3.4 42.4 19.7 0.7 Total ........... 241.5 73.2 C. What action is EPA taking on these inventories? We are proposing approval of the 2002 base year inventories listed in Tables 2a through 2e above. III. Reasonable Further Progress Plans A. What is a reasonable further progress plan, and why are these states required to prepare one? TABLE 2C—2002 BASE YEAR INVENA reasonable further progress (RFP) TORY FOR THE BOS-LAW-WOR (E. plan illustrates how an ozone MA) AREA nonattainment area will make emission Nonattainment area 2002 VOC emissions (tons/day) 2002 NOX Emissions (tons/day) Bos-Law-Wor (E. MA) area: Point .............. Area ............... On-road ......... Non-road ....... Biogenics ....... 13.6 282.0 127.4 196.2 535.7 116.6 33.9 381.4 122.1 4.4 Total ........... 1,154.9 658.4 TABLE 2D—2002 BASE YEAR INVENTORY FOR THE SPRINGFIELD (W. MA) AREA Nonattainment area 2002 VOC Emissions (tons/day) Springfield (W. MA) area: Point .............. Area ............... On-road ......... Non-road ....... Biogenics ....... PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4702 2002 NOX Emissions (tons/day) reductions of a set amount over a given time period. Section 182(b)(1) of the CAA required moderate and above ozone nonattainment areas to develop plans to reduce VOC emissions by 15 percent over a six year time period beginning with the date of enactment of the 1990 amendments to the Act, which occurred on November 15, 1990. EPA’s Phase 2 rule interpreted how this requirement would apply to areas designated as moderate (or higher) nonattainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, and did so in a number of ways. See 40 CFR part 51 subpart X. Of relevance for Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island is what the Phase 2 rule required for areas with attainment dates greater than 5 years from designation that previously accomplished a 15% reduction in VOC emissions pursuant to one-hour ozone nonattainment requirements, as all three of these states meet these criteria. For such areas, the Phase 2 rule indicates that RFP will be met if the area can demonstrate a 15% reduction in ozone precursor emissions (VOC and/or NOX) 2.4 45.5 24.5 27.7 254.6 13.0 5.2 71.7 22.4 1.1 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM 20SEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules will occur between 2002 and 2008.4 See 40 CFR 51.910(b)(2)(ii)(A)–(B). If the area uses NOX reductions to meet part or all of this requirement, it must satisfy EPA guidance concerning the conditions under which NOX control may be substituted for, or combined with, VOC control in order to maximize the reduction in ozone pollution. The most current such guidance is EPA’s December 1993 ‘‘NOX Substitution Guidance.’’ Therefore, the RFP plans submitted by Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island were evaluated against these criteria. These states prepared RFP plans for each of the nonattainment areas shown in Table 1 above. We note that Connecticut’s plan for the NY–NJ–CT area only accounts for emission reductions from within the Connecticut portion of the area. As noted above, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island submitted final, adopted RFP plans to EPA between January 31 and April 30, 2008. Although the Phase 2 rule required that these plans be submitted by June 15, 2007, the states submitted draft plans to EPA shortly after the due date, and as discussed in this document the plans meet EPA’s approval requirements for RFP plans developed to help meet the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Each of these state’s RFP plans rely to some degree on NOX emission reductions to achieve the overall 15 percent reduction in ozone precursor emissions. Available modeling indicates that NOX emission reductions are clearly beneficial in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island, and so as outlined in EPA’s NOX Substitution Guidance, use of NOX emission reductions to meet RFP requirements is appropriate. The manner in which states are to determine the required level of emission reductions is similar to the procedure explained in the guidance document entitled, ‘‘Guidance on the Adjusted Base Year Emissions Inventory and the 1996 Target for the 15% Rate of Progress Plans’’ (EPA–452/R–92–005). Adjustments to this procedure pertaining to proper accounting of the non-creditable emission reductions from the pre-1990 Federal motor vehicle control program (FMVCP) are noted within Appendix A of the Phase 2 rule (70 FR 71696, as corrected by 71 FR 58498). B. What action is EPA taking on these plans? We are proposing approval of the RFP plans submitted by Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island for the moderate nonattainment areas shown in Table 1 above, as revisions to these states’ implementation plans. Note that regarding the NY–NJ–CT moderate area, 57225 we are proposing action today only on the Connecticut portion of the RFP plan. C. What emission levels must Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island achieve by 2008? Tables 3a–3e below contain a summary of the RFP calculations as performed by Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island for their moderate ozone nonattainment areas. Some of the 2002 base year inventory values shown in Step 1 of Tables 3a–3e are slightly higher than those shown in Tables 2a–2e due to adjustments each state made to their RFP SIPs to account for emissions banking and trading programs. These adjustments are described elsewhere in this proposal. The emission target levels are shown in step 6 of Tables 3a–3e. The emission targets represent the maximum amount of emissions that can occur in 2008 given the state’s selected mix of VOC and NOX percent reductions as noted in step 4 of the calculations. The RFP plans submitted by Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island indicate that the projected, controlled emissions for 2008 shown in Step 7 of Tables 3a–3e are below the 2008 emission target levels shown in step 6, with the exception of Rhode Island’s VOC emissions. To remedy this small shortfall, Rhode Island allocated surplus NOX emissions reductions that were available as shown in Table 3e. TABLE 3a—2008 RFP CALCULATIONS FOR THE NY–NJ–CT AREA Description VOC emissions (tons/day) NOX emissions (tons/day) Step 1: Calculate 2002 base year inventory ................................................................................... Step 2: Develop RFP inventory (subtract biogenics) ...................................................................... Step 3: Develop adjusted base year inventory by subtracting non-creditable, pre-1990 FMVCP 5 reductions from RFP inventory. Step 4: Calculate required reduction (total of VOC and NOX reductions must equal 15 percent) Step 5: Calculate total expected reduction (add steps 3 & 4 together) .......................................... Step 6: Set target level for 2008 (subtract step 5 from step 2) ...................................................... Step 7: Projected, controlled 2008 emissions ................................................................................. 335.3 ......................... 209.7 ......................... ¥4.5 = 205.2 ............ 189.1. 188.4. ¥11.7 = 176.7. 10%; 20.5 tons .......... 4.5 + 20.5 = 24.9 ...... 209.7¥24.9 = 184.6 167.6 ......................... 5%; 8.8 tons. 11.7 + 8.8 = 20.5. 186.3¥20.4 = 167.9. 142.6. 5 FMVCP is the acronym for the federal motor vehicle control program. Pre-1990 FMVCP reductions are not creditable towards meeting the 15% emission reduction. TABLE 3b—2008 RFP CALCULATIONS FOR THE GREATER CONNECTICUT AREA jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 Description VOC emissions (tons/day) Step 1: Calculate 2002 base year inventory ................................................................................... Step 2: Develop RFP inventory (subtract biogenics) ...................................................................... Step 3: Develop adjusted base year inventory by subtracting non-creditable, pre-1990 FMVCP reductions from RFP inventory. Step 4: Calculate required reduction (total of VOC and NOX reductions must equal 15 percent) Step 5: Calculate total expected reduction (add steps 3 & 4 together) .......................................... Step 6: Set target level for 2008 (subtract step 5 from step 2) ...................................................... 450.3 ......................... 181.4 ......................... ¥4.3 = 177.1 ............ 147.3. 146.1. ¥9.3 = 136.8. 10%; 17.7 tons .......... 4.3 + 17.7 = 22.0 ...... 181.4¥22.0 = 159.4 5%; 6.8 tons. 9.3 + 6.8 = 16.1. 145.5¥16.1 = 130.0. 4 If the area wishes to use NO reductions to meet X part or all of this 15% requirement, the calculation is not done by measuring the overall percent of VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:31 Sep 17, 2010 Jkt 220001 combined VOC and NOX reductions, but rather by separately calculating the percent of VOC PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 NOX emissions (tons/day) reductions and the percent of NOX reductions, and adding those percentages together. E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM 20SEP1 57226 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules TABLE 3b—2008 RFP CALCULATIONS FOR THE GREATER CONNECTICUT AREA—Continued Description VOC emissions (tons/day) Step 7: Projected, controlled 2008 emissions ................................................................................. 149.3 ......................... NOX emissions (tons/day) 107.1. TABLE 3c—2008 RFP CALCULATIONS FOR THE BOS-LAW-WOR AREA NOX emissions (tons/day) Description VOC emissions (tons/day) Step 1: Calculate 2002 base year inventory ................................................................................... Step 2: Develop RFP inventory (subtract biogenics) ...................................................................... Step 3: Develop adjusted base year inventory by subtracting non-creditable, pre-1990 FMVCP reductions from RFP inventory. Step 4: Calculate required reduction (total of VOC and NOX reductions must equal 15 percent) Step 5: Calculate total expected reduction (add steps 3 & 4 together) .......................................... Step 6: Set target level for 2008 (subtract step 5 from step 2) ...................................................... 1,157.3 ...................... 621.6 ......................... ¥15.3 = 606.3 .......... 689.0. 684.6. ¥45.2 = 639.4. 3%; 18.2 tons ............ 15.3 + 18.2 = 33.5 .... 621.6¥33.5 = 588.1 Step 7: Projected, controlled 2008 emissions ................................................................................. 525.7 ......................... 12%; 76.7 tons. 45.2 + 76.7 = 121.9. 684.6 ¥ 121.9 = 562.7. 440.6. TABLE 3d—2008 RFP CALCULATIONS FOR THE SPRINGFIELD AREA Description VOC emissions (tons/day) NOX emissions (tons/day) Step 1: Calculate 2002 base year inventory ................................................................................... Step 2: Develop RFP inventory (subtract biogenics) ...................................................................... Step 3: Develop adjusted base year inventory by subtracting non-creditable, pre-1990 FMVCP reductions from RFP inventory. Step 4: Calculate required reduction (total of VOC and NOX reductions must equal 15 percent) Step 5: Calculate total expected reduction (add steps 3 & 4 together) .......................................... Step 6: Set target level for 2008 (subtract step 5 from step 2) ...................................................... Step 7: Projected, controlled 2008 emissions ................................................................................. 354.8 ......................... 100.2 ......................... ¥2.9 = 97.3 .............. 114.2. 113.1. ¥8.5 = 104.6. 3%; 2.9 tons .............. 2.9 + 2.9 = 5.8 .......... 2.9 + 2.9 = 5.8 .......... 84.2 ........................... 12%; 12.6 tons. 8.5 + 12.6 = 21.1. 8.5 + 12.6 = 21.1. 66.9. TABLE 3e—2008 RFP CALCULATIONS FOR THE PROVIDENCE AREA VOC Emissions (tons/day) Step 1: Calculate 2002 base year inventory ................................................................................... Step 2: Develop RFP inventory (subtract biogenics) ...................................................................... Step 3: Develop adjusted base year inventory by subtracting non-creditable, pre-1990 FMVCP reductions from RFP inventory. Step 4: Calculate required reduction (total of VOC and NOX reductions must equal 15 percent) Step 5: Calculate total expected reduction (add steps 3 & 4 together) .......................................... Step 6: Set target level for 2008 (subtract step 5 from step 2; also, the Providence area NOX target includes additional 1.1 ton reduction to cover VOC shortfall). Step 7: Projected, controlled 2008 emissions ................................................................................. jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 Description 243.4 ......................... 119.2 ......................... ¥5.5 = 113.7 ............ 73.2. 72.5. ¥3.2 = 69.3. 0% ............................. 5.5 + 0 = 5.5 ............. 119.2¥5.5 = 113.7 ... 15%. 3.2 + 10.4 = 13.6. 72.5¥3.6¥1.1 = 57.8. 55.3. Note that in Tables 3a–3e above, all of the projected, controlled 2008 emission levels shown in step 7 are lower than the corresponding 2008 emission target levels shown in step 6, with the exception of the Providence area’s VOC emissions which are 1.5% higher than the 2008 VOC target. In light of this, Rhode Island allocated an additional 1.5% NOX reduction (which translates to 1.1 tons) to cover this shortfall. Thus, Rhode Island has set its 2008 NOX target to 57.8 tons/day rather than 58.9 tons/ day. In essence, Rhode Island has selected a 16.6% reduction in NOX emissions and a 1.5% increase in VOC emissions, resulting in a combined reduction of 15.1%. VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:31 Sep 17, 2010 Jkt 220001 EPA’s guidance to states on the development of RFP plans does not directly address the situation found in Rhode Island’s RFP plan, where surplus reductions for one ozone precursor were used to cover an increase in emissions for the other precursor. For example, EPA’s Phase 2 implementation rule provides that moderate areas such as Rhode Island with attainment dates more than 5 years from the date of designation, ‘‘(A) Shall provide for a 15 percent emission reduction from the baseline year within 6 years after the baseline year. (B) May use either NOX or VOC emissions reductions (or both) to achieve the 15 percent emission reduction requirement. Use of NOX PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 115.4 ......................... NOX emissions (tons/day) emissions reductions must meet the criteria in section 182(c)(2)(C) of the Act.’’ 40 CFR 51.910(b)(2)(ii). EPA’s NOX Substitution Guidance, which EPA issued pursuant to section 182(c)(2)(C), does not specifically address offsetting an increase in one precursor with surplus reductions from another precursor. Thus, we reviewed the facts of this specific case and, as explained below, have determined that the submitted plan is consistent with the CAA requirements. First, EPA’s December 1993 NOX substitution guidance provides the criteria that must be met in order for NOX emission reductions to be used in RFP plans as provided by section E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM 20SEP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules 182(c)(2)(C) of the Act. The guidance directs states to ensure that such substitution is done only to the extent that the modeled attainment demonstration for the area indicates that this substitution is appropriate. For example, section 2 of the guidance provides that, ‘‘This linkage provides assurance that the RFP reductions are consistent with the SIP attainment demonstration. States are required to justify substitution by illustrating ‘‘consistency’’ between the cumulative emission changes emerging from the RFP/substitution proposal and the emission reductions in the modeled attainment demonstration.’’ Rhode Island worked in conjunction with the other states within the ozone transport region (OTR) to perform the urban airshed modeling that the state included within its attainment demonstration, and on development of recommended control strategies to reduce VOC and NOX emissions in the Northeast such that the ozone NAAQS would be met by 2009. This modeling exercise showed that both VOC and NOX emission reductions would be needed to reach the area’s attainment goals. The resulting suite of federal and state control measures indicate that NOX emission reductions figured prominently in the area’s attainment strategy. This is most clearly seen by the fact that NOX emissions were projected to decline by a greater extent than VOC emissions between the base year and attainment year across the OTR. This illustrates that Rhode Island’s use of NOX emission reductions within its RFP plan is appropriate. Second, the increase in VOC emissions between 2002 and 2008 is an artifact of EPA’s RFP calculation procedure; the state’s actual VOC emissions in 2008 were predicted to be lower than they were in 2002. In explanation, as shown in step 2 of Table 3e above, Rhode Island’s 2002 anthropogenic VOC emissions were 119.2 tons per summer day (tpsd). However, EPA’s RFP calculation procedure requires that emission reductions from the pre-1990 federal motor vehicle control program (FMVCP) that will accrue between 2002 and 2008 be subtracted from the 2002 anthropogenic baseline because the Act, at section 182(b)(1)(D)(i), provides such reductions are not creditable for purposes of meeting RFP requirements. This subtraction is shown in step 3 of Table 3e above, and resulted in the 2002 baseline being lowered by 5.5 tpsd to 113.7 tpsd. Since no VOC reductions were planned for in the RFP plan, 113.7 tpsd is also the state’s target level of emissions for VOCs. As shown in step VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:31 Sep 17, 2010 Jkt 220001 7 of Table 3e, Rhode Island’s 2008 VOC emissions were estimated to be 115.4 tpsd. This is higher than the VOC target emission level of 113.7 tpsd by 1.7 tpsd, but is lower than the state’s actual 2002 anthropogenic baseline emissions of 119.2 tpsd by 3.8 tpsd. The preceding comparison is not intended to diminish the significance of the Act’s prohibition against crediting reductions due to the pre-1990 FMVCP towards RFP. Rather, this analysis simply clarifies that this is not a situation where a state proposes to rely on a larger-than-15% decrease in NOX emissions to offset an actual increase in VOC emissions; rather, here Rhode Island has in fact reduced its VOC emissions from the baseline. Third, in 2009, Rhode Island adopted and implemented VOC control measures on consumer and commercial products and architectural and industrial maintenance coatings. The effective date for these two rules was June 4, 2009, and since the RFP plan covers the time period between 2003 to 2008 Rhode Island did not factor reductions from these rules into their RFP analysis. However, these rules are now in effect and are currently acting to lower VOC emissions beyond that shown in the RFP analysis. Thus, while Rhode Island could not take credit for these emission reductions as part of the RFP plan for 2003 to 2008, additional reductions in VOC emissions have occurred in the state since then. Last, but by no means of least importance, Rhode Island is currently in attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, and EPA published a clean data determination for the area on June 3, 2010 (75 FR 31288). In addition, on July 28, 2010 (75 FR 44179), EPA published a notice of proposed rulemaking indicating that this area attained the 1997 8-hour ozone standard by its attainment date of June 15, 2010. Thus, our primary basis for approving the RFP plan is to approve the 2008 motor vehicle emission budgets contained within the plan as the plan is not necessary to ensure that the state makes reasonable further progress towards the 1997 standard it has already attained. In light of these circumstances, EPA has determined that it is appropriate to propose approval of Rhode Island’s RFP plan. D. To what extent do the RFP plans reduce ozone precursor emissions? The Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island RFP plans indicate that ozone precursor emissions will be substantially reduced between 2002 and 2008, allowing each state to exceed the 15% ozone precursor emission PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 57227 reduction obligation over this time frame. Compared to 2002 emission levels, the RFP plans and associated modeling showed that VOC emissions were expected to decline by 19% in Connecticut, 16% in Massachusetts, and 3% in Rhode Island by 2008. Additionally, NOX emissions were expected to decline by 25% in Connecticut, 37% in Massachusetts, and 24% in Rhode Island over this timeframe. These percent reductions include reductions from the pre-1990 FMVCP program shown in step 3 of Tables 3a–3e. E. Are banked emissions properly accounted for within these RFP plans? Although the initial RFP plan submittals made by Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island did not account for banked emissions, each state made subsequent amendments to their plans that incorporated banked emissions into the RFP analysis. Many states operate emissions banking and trading programs. These programs allow facilities that agree to permanently cease, or alternatively agree to permanently reduce their emissions to levels below allowable levels, to generate emission reduction credits (ERCs) that can be sold or traded to other facilities. ERCs are often purchased by facilities seeking emission offsets to meet the requirements of the new source review (NSR) program. State air agencies facilitate and monitor these transactions by creating and maintaining an emissions bank where ERCs are stored until they are purchased. Since ERCs represent emissions that may occur at some point in the future, and RFP plans contain both base year and future year emission estimates as well as maximum allowable (target level) emissions for the nonattainment area as a whole, banked emissions need to be accounted for in a state’s RFP analysis. On October 14, 2009, Connecticut submitted a revision to the RFP plan which it had originally submitted to EPA on February 1, 2008. The revision consisted of the incorporation of a small number of banked NOX ERCs into the state’s RFP analysis. The inclusion of the banked ERCs into the RFP analysis did not alter the state’s conclusion that it easily meets RFP requirements. The emission estimates within Tables 3a and 3b above reflect the revised calculations contained within Connecticut’s October 14, 2009 submittal to EPA. On October 23, 2009, Massachusetts submitted a revision to the RFP plan which it had originally submitted to EPA on January 31, 2008. The revision consisted of the incorporation of a small E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM 20SEP1 57228 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 amount of banked VOC, and a larger amount of banked NOX ERCs into the state’s RFP analysis. As with Connecticut, the inclusion of Massachusetts’ banked ERCs into the RFP analysis did not change the state’s conclusion that it readily meets RFP. Tables 3c and 3d above contains the revised RFP calculations contained within Massachusetts’ October 23, 2009 submittal. On October 19, 2009, Rhode Island submitted a revision to the RFP plan which it had submitted to EPA on April 30, 2008. The revision consisted of the incorporation of banked VOC ERCs into the state’s RFP analysis. As with the above mentioned submittals from Connecticut and Massachusetts, Rhode Island’s revised plan continues to show that the state meets its RFP emission reduction obligations, and these revised estimates are reflected in Table 3e above. F. What are the pollution control programs that accomplish this change in emissions? Many post-1990 Federal mobile source control programs which are creditable towards meeting RFP took effect between 2002 and 2008, and they are responsible for the bulk of the VOC and NOX emission reductions that occurred over this time frame in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island. For example, within the on-road mobile sector the Federal Tier 2 motor vehicle control program and controls for heavy duty diesel vehicles and fuels were significant programs that helped to reduce emissions during this period of time. Within the non-road sector, Federal controls on diesel engines and the Phase 2 standards for gasoline powered handheld and non-handheld equipment began, which helped reduce emissions from that sector. In addition to Federal measures for mobile source emissions, state-adopted control measures also acted to reduce VOC and NOX emissions between 2002 and 2008. In Connecticut, state-adopted rules limiting emissions from portable fuel containers, architectural and industrial maintenance (AIM) coatings, pressure-vacuum (PV) valves at gasoline service stations, and requirements for solvent cleaning fluids were adopted between 2002 and 2008, and will help to reduce VOC emissions in the state. The portable fuel container and PV valves at gasoline station rules have been approved by EPA into the state’s SIP. (See 71 FR 51761). The AIM and solvent cleaning rules have not yet been approved by EPA into the State’s SIP, but we are proposing approval of them in other parts of this document and VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:31 Sep 17, 2010 Jkt 220001 intend to approve them prior to, or in conjunction with, our final rulemaking action on Connecticut’s RFP plan. Additionally, in May of 2003, Phase 2 of the state’s limits for emissions from municipal waste combustors began, and this program will reduce NOX emissions from that sector. This program has also been approved into the state’s SIP. (See 66 FR 63311). Connecticut’s NOX budget program began in 2002 and so emission reductions from the program are reflected in the state’s 2002 base year inventory. Connecticut’s Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) rule has taken the place of its NOX budget program beginning in 2009. On July 11, 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued an opinion vacating and remanding EPA’s CAIR rule. See North Carolina v EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (DC Cir. 2008). However, on December 23, 2008, the court granted rehearing in part and remanded the rule back to EPA for revision without vacatur. 550 F.3d 1176 (DC Cir. 2008). Accordingly, CAIR is to be implemented as it was originally intended until EPA revises the rule to address the court’s remand.6 Therefore, the NOX reductions achieved by Connecticut’s NOX budget program continue as the state has transitioned to its CAIR program. Connecticut’s CAIR program was approved by EPA on January 24, 2008 (73 FR 4105). For the on-road mobile sector, in 2004, Connecticut adopted an enhanced motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I&M) program including on-board diagnostics (OBD–2) requirements. EPA approved Connecticut’s I&M program with OBD– 2 requirements into the state’s SIP on December 5, 2008 (73 FR 74019). Massachusetts claimed emission reduction credit within its RFP plan for the NOX emission reductions achieved by the state’s NOX SIP Call Trading program, as that program’s implementation date was in 2003. Massachusetts submitted its ‘‘NOX Allowance Trading Program’’ (also referred to as the NOX Budget or the NOX SIP Call trading program) to EPA as a SIP revision request, and EPA approved the rule into the Commonwealth’s SIP. Amendments to the rule were incorporated into the state’s SIP on December 3, 2007. (72 FR 67854). EPA’s December 3, 2007 action also approved the Commonwealth’s CAIR, which replaced the state’s NOX Budget program beginning in 2009. 6 On August 2, 2010 (75 FR 45210), EPA proposed the Transport Rule to address the flaws in CAIR noted by the Court. PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 Therefore, NOX emissions from sources covered by the Commonwealth’s NOX Allowance trading program will remain constrained after 2008 as the state implements its CAIR control program. Massachusetts expects to reduce onroad mobile source emissions by its state-run Low Emissions Vehicle (LEV) program. Massachusetts submitted the adopted LEV program to EPA, and EPA approved it into the state’s SIP on December 23, 2002 (67 FR 78179). At the time Rhode Island developed its RFP SIP, it was in the process of adopting a number of control measures for stationary sources of VOC emissions that were set to take effect in 2009, and so emission reductions from these measures were not incorporated into the state’s RFP plan because measures in such plans need to have an impact by 2008. Rhode Island was not required to participate in EPA’s CAIR program. Accordingly, Rhode Island’s RFP plan shows that it meets the 15% emission reduction obligation by relying exclusively on emission reductions between 2002 and 2008 in the mobile source sector. Additionally, the state shows that it can meet its obligation by relying only upon NOX emission reductions. These emission reductions occur as a result of the post-1990 Federal mobile source control measures, as mentioned above, the state’s adoption of a motor vehicle I&M Program, and the state-adopted Low Emissions Vehicle program. EPA has approved both of these programs into the Rhode Island SIP. (See 66 FR 9661, and 65 FR 12476, respectively.) G. Is EPA proposing approval of any state control measures in this action? We are proposing to approve three VOC control measures from Connecticut, two of which were included in the state’s February 1, 2008 SIP submittal to EPA. These rules consist of a solvent metal cleaning rule, an architectural and industrial maintenance (AIM) coatings rule, and an asphalt paving rule submitted on January 8, 2009. The solvent metal cleaning and AIM coatings rules have compliance dates in May of 2008, and so achieve emission reductions that help Connecticut demonstrate compliance with its RFP obligation. The asphalt paving rule has a May 1, 2009 compliance date and was submitted to help the state demonstrate that it meets the Clean Air Act section 182(b)(2) requirement that sources in the state use reasonably available control technology (RACT) to control air pollution. We are not proposing action on Connecticut’s overall RACM or RACT submittals at E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM 20SEP1 jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules this time. Additional information about each of these rules is provided below. Metal cleaning rule. Connecticut’s February 1, 2008 SIP submittal to EPA included an amendment to its existing SIP approved metal cleaning rule, located at section 22a–174–20 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies (‘‘Control of organic compound emissions, loading of gasoline and other volatile organic compounds’’), paragraph (l) (‘‘Metal cleaning’’). The amended rule adds a limit on the vapor pressure of solvents used in cold cleaning and other requirements to further limit emissions of VOCs from metal cleaning operations. These requirements are consistent with the Ozone Transport Commission’s (OTC’s) 2001 model rule for solvent cleaning. The compliance date for the rule was May 1, 2008. AIM coatings rule. Connecticut’s February 1, 2008 SIP submittal included a new rule, section 22a–174–41 (‘‘Architectural and industrial maintenance coatings’’), that limits VOC emissions from AIM coatings. The state’s rule establishes VOC content limits consistent with those developed in 2001 within a model rule created by the OTC. The limits in the state’s rule are as stringent as, or more stringent than, those contained in the Federal AIM rule adopted by EPA in December 1998 (40 CFR part 59, subpart D). The compliance date for most of the regulated product categories was May 1, 2008. EPA notes that we are relying on the federal enforceability of section (g)(3)(A)(iii) referenced in that section of the rule. Asphalt paving rule. On January 8, 2009, Connecticut submitted an amendment to its existing SIP-approved section 22a–174–20 (‘‘Control of organic compound emissions, loading of gasoline and other volatile organic compounds’’), paragraph (k) (‘‘Restrictions on VOC emissions from cutback and emulsified asphalt’’). The amended regulation includes a seasonal ban on the use of cutback asphalt and a reduction in the acceptable VOC content of emulsified asphalt. The compliance date for the rule was May 1, 2009. Connecticut held a public hearing on the first two rules mentioned above on June 27, 2006, and held a hearing on the asphalt paving rule on May 1, 2007. EPA reviewed draft versions of these rules and provided comments to Connecticut during the public hearing process, and Connecticut responded adequately to our comments. We are proposing approval of Connecticut’s revised solvent metal cleaning and asphalt paving rules, and its new AIM coatings rule, so that they may become VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:31 Sep 17, 2010 Jkt 220001 part of the state’s federally enforceable SIP. H. Have these states met their contingency measure obligation? Section 172(c)(9) of the CAA requires, in part, that nonattainment areas provide for contingency measures ‘‘to be undertaken if the area fails to make reasonable further progress, or to attain the national primary ambient air quality standard by the attainment date applicable under this part.’’ EPA has long interpreted the Act to require that contingency measures must provide reductions of 3 percent of the emissions from the adjusted base year inventory (57 FR 13498, 13510–13511). States may choose to meet this requirement by consuming surplus emission reductions shown in their RFP target level calculations, if a surplus exists. However, pursuant to a guidance memorandum issued by EPA on November 8, 1993,7 any measures that are already required are not creditable as contingency measures. Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island each chose to meet the contingency obligation using surplus emission reductions as noted in the target level calculations. Connecticut and Massachusetts can both readily show that ample surplus emission reductions exist, and that they have implemented controls not otherwise required. In Connecticut’s case, 2008 VOC emissions are projected to be 5.7% lower than the target, and NOX emissions 16.5% lower than the target in the Greater Connecticut area. For the Connecticut portion of the NY– NJ–CT area, these surpluses are 8.3% for VOC, and 14.5% for NOX. Connecticut has adopted a number of rules that are not otherwise required by the CAA that it could count towards its contingency obligation, such as its AIM coatings, automobile refinishing, and solvent cleaning rules. For Massachusetts, 2008 VOC emissions are projected to be 10.6% lower than the target, and NOX emissions 22.6% lower in the Eastern Massachusetts area. For the Western Massachusetts area, these surpluses are 10.8% for VOC, and 27.6% for NOX. The state’s low emission vehicle program, which achieves both VOC and NOX emission reductions, is an example of a rule the state adopted that was not otherwise required by the CAA. Rhode Island projects that it will have a 3.6% NOX surplus that it claims can be devoted towards meeting the RFP 7 ‘‘Clarification of Issues Regarding the Contingency Measures that are due November 15, 1993 for Moderate and Above Ozone Nonattainment Areas.’’ PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 57229 contingency requirement. Given the state’s reliance on Federal measures to reduce emissions between 2002 and 2008, the state has not demonstrated that it can meet the contingency requirement via reductions from already-adopted NOX rules not otherwise required by the CAA. However, Rhode Island could remedy this by relying on the additional VOC control programs for stationary sources that it adopted in 2009, which included rules establishing emission limits for consumer and commercial products, and on architectural and industrial maintenance coatings. A public hearing on these proposed rules was held on February 20, 2009, and they were promulgated as final state regulations May 15, 2009, with an effective date of June 4, 2009. Rhode Island submitted these regulations to EPA as SIP revisions, but EPA has not yet approved into the Rhode Island SIP. Section 8.3 of Rhode Island’s attainment demonstration submittal alludes to the possibility of using reductions from these measures as an alternative means of meeting the RFP contingency obligation. We are therefore proposing to approve use of emission reductions from these stationary source measures (which, as noted above, have taken effect under state law but have not yet been approved into Rhode Island’s SIP) as meeting the state’s contingency plan requirement. Section 8.3 of Rhode Island’s attainment demonstration submittal stated that reductions from these regulations were expected to reduce VOC emissions by 2009 by 5.0 tons/day. This would cover the 3% contingency obligation, as 3% of the state’s 2002 RFP inventory for VOCs, which is 119.2 tons/day, equals 3.6 tons/day. EPA would need to approve these two rules into Rhode Island’s SIP prior to, or in conjunction with, our taking final action on the state’s RFP plan. I. Are transportation conformity budgets contained in these plans? Section 176(c) of the CAA, and EPA’s transportation conformity rule at 40 CFR part 93 subpart A, require that transportation plans, programs, and projects conform to state air quality implementation plans. Conformity to a SIP means that transportation activities will not cause or contribute to new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS. States are required to establish motor vehicle emission budgets in any control strategy SIP that is submitted for attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. The RFP plans submitted by Connecticut, E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM 20SEP1 57230 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 181 / Monday, September 20, 2010 / Proposed Rules jdjones on DSK8KYBLC1PROD with PROPOSALS-1 Massachusetts, and Rhode Island are control strategy SIPs, and they contain 2008 motor vehicle budgets for VOCs and NOX by nonattainment area. Table 4 contains these VOC and NOX transportation conformity budgets in units of tons per summer day: emission target levels even after providing these buffers to their budgets. IV. Proposed Action EPA’s review indicates that the 2002 base year emission inventories, RFP plans, transportation conformity budgets, and contingency plans TABLE 4.—CONFORMITY BUDGETS IN submitted by Connecticut on February THE CONNECTICUT, MASSACHU- 1, 2008, Massachusetts on January 31, 2008, and Rhode Island on April 30, SETTS, AND RHODE ISLAND RFP 2008 to meet, in part, their obligations PLANS under EPA’s 1997 8-hour ozone standard meet the requirements for 2008 Transporthese programs. Therefore, EPA is tation conformity proposing to approve these listed budgets Area name components of the state’s submittals as (tons/day) revisions to each state’s SIP. VOC NOX Additionally, EPA is proposing approval of three rules adopted by NY–NJ–CT area (CT Connecticut that will reduce VOC portion) ...................... 29.7 60.5 emissions in the state. It should be Greater Connecticut ..... 28.5 54.3 noted that each states’ submittal also Bos-Law-Wor (E. MA) area ........................... 68.30 191.30 included other SIP elements, most notably attainment demonstrations for Springfield (W. MA) area ........................... 11.80 31.30 EPA’s 1997 8-hour ozone standard, but Providence .................... 24.64 28.26 EPA is not acting on those other components at this time. Additional details regarding the state’s submittals EPA issued letters on June 2, 2008 to and EPA’s review of these submittals is Connecticut, March 7, 2008 to contained in the technical support Massachusetts, and June 16, 2008 to document (TSD) prepared for this Rhode Island in which we stated these action. The TSD is available in the budgets were adequate for use in docket for this action. EPA is soliciting transportation conformity public comments on the issues determinations. Additionally, EPA discussed in this proposal or on other published announcements of these relevant matters. These comments will adequacy findings in the Federal be considered before taking final action. Register on June 12, 2008 for Interested parties may participate in the Connecticut (73 FR 33428), March 18, Federal rulemaking procedure by 2008 for Massachusetts (73 FR 14466), submitting written comments to the and June 30, 2008 for Rhode Island EPA New England Regional Office listed (36862). In today’s action, we are in the ADDRESSES section of this Federal proposing approval of the 2008 Register. conformity budgets for VOC and NOX for the areas shown in Table 4 above. V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews Connecticut and Rhode Island increased their projected 2008 motor Under the Clean Air Act, the vehicle emission estimates slightly to Administrator is required to approve a provide a buffer to their transportation SIP submission that complies with the conformity budgets. Connecticut provisions of the Act and applicable increased its 2008 motor vehicle Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); emission estimates by 2 percent, and 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP Rhode Island by 0.5 tons/day. Doing so submissions, EPA’s role is to approve made meeting the 2008 RFP emission state choices, provided that they meet target slightly more difficult to achieve. the criteria of the Clean Air Act. However, both of these states were able Accordingly, this proposed action to meet their respective RFP targets even merely approves state law as meeting after increasing their projected 2008 Federal requirements and does not motor vehicle emission estimates. These impose additional requirements beyond increases are reflected in the budgets those imposed by state law. For that shown above in Table 4, and were also reason, this proposed action: used in the projected, controlled 2008 • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory emission estimates shown in step 7 of action’’ subject to review by the Office Tables 3 a, b, and e. The Connecticut of Management and Budget under and Rhode Island 2008 motor vehicle Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, conformity budgets are approvable October 4, 1993); because these states were able to show • Does not impose an information that they can meet their 2008 RFP collection burden under the provisions VerDate Mar<15>2010 14:31 Sep 17, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); • Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); • Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L.104–4); • Does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); • Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); • Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); • Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; and • Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. Dated: September 9, 2010. Ira W. Leighton, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New England. [FR Doc. 2010–23402 Filed 9–17–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 42 CFR Chapter I 340B Drug Pricing Program Manufacturer Civil Monetary Penalties Health Resources and Services Administration, HHS. ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking and request for comments. AGENCY: Section 602 of Public Law 102–585, the ‘‘Veterans Health Care Act SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\20SEP1.SGM 20SEP1

Agencies

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 181 (Monday, September 20, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57221-57230]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-23402]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2008-0117; EPA-RO1-OAR-2008-0107; EPA-RO1-OAR-2008-0445;
A-1-FRL-9203-4]

Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island; Reasonable Further
Progress Plans and 2002 Base Year Emission Inventories

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve State Implementation Plan
revisions submitted by the States of Connecticut, Massachusetts, and
Rhode Island. These revisions establish 2002 base year emission
inventories and reasonable further progress emission reduction plans
for areas within these states designated as nonattainment of EPA's 1997
8-hour ozone standard. The intended effect of this action is to propose
approval of these states' 2002 base year inventories and reasonable
further progress (RFP) emission reduction plans, and to propose
approval of the 2008 motor vehicle transportation budgets and
contingency measures associated with the RFP plans. EPA also proposes
approval of three rules adopted by Connecticut that will reduce
volatile organic compound emissions in the state.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before October 20, 2010.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by one of the following
Docket ID Numbers: EPA-R01-OAR-2008-0117 for comments pertaining to our
proposed action for Connecticut, EPA-RO1-OAR-2008-0107 for comments
pertaining to our proposed action for Massachusetts, or EPA-RO1-OAR-
2008-0445 for comments pertaining to our proposed action for Rhode
Island, by one of the following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. E-mail: arnold.anne@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (617) 918-0047.

[[Page 57222]]

4. Mail: ``Docket Identification Number EPA-R01-OAR-2008-0117, EPA-
RO1-OAR-2008-0107, or EPA-RO1-OAR-2008-0445, Anne Arnold, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, 5
Post Office Square, Suite 100 (mail code OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-
3912.
5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to: Anne Arnold,
Manager, Air Quality Planning Unit, Office of Ecosystem Protection,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office,
5 Post Office Square, Suite 100 (mail code OEP05-2), Boston, MA 02109-
3912. 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 legal
holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to one of the following Docket
ID Numbers: EPA-R01-OAR-2008-0117 for comments pertaining to our
proposed action for Connecticut, EPA-RO1-OAR-2008-0107 for comments
pertaining to our proposed action for Massachusetts, or EPA-RO1-OAR-
2008-0445 for comments pertaining to our proposed action for Rhode
Island. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and may be made available online at
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit through https://www.regulations.gov, or e-mail, information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site is an
``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through https://www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 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 Office of Ecosystem
Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England
Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square, Boston, MA. EPA requests that if
at all possible, you contact the contact 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 legal holidays.
In addition, copies of the state submittal and EPA's technical
support document are also available for public inspection during normal
business hours, by appointment at the respective State Air Agency: The
Bureau of Air Management, Department of Environmental Protection, State
Office Building, 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06106-1630; Division of
Air Quality Control, Department of Environmental Protection, One Winter
Street, 8th Floor, Boston, MA 02108; Office of Air Resources,
Department of Environmental Management, 235 Promenade Street,
Providence, RI 02908-5767.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob McConnell, Air Quality Planning
Unit, U.S. EPA Region 1--New England, 5 Post Office Square, Boston, MA
02109-3912, phone number: 617-918-1046; e-Mail:
mcconnell.robert@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. The following outline is
provided to aid in locating information in this preamble.

I. Background and Purpose
II. 2002 Base Year Emissions Inventory
A. What is a base year inventory, and why are these states
required to prepare one?
1. Point Source Emissions
2. Area Source Emissions
3. On-Road Mobile Source Emissions
4. Non-Road Mobile Source Emissions
5. Biogenic Emission Sources
B. Summary of 2002 Base Year Inventories
C. What action is EPA taking on these inventories?
III. Reasonable Further Progress Plans
A. What is a Reasonable Further Progress plan, and why are these
states required to prepare one?
B. What action is EPA taking on these plans?
C. What emission levels must Connecticut, Massachusetts, and
Rhode Island meet by 2008?
D. To what extent do the RFP plans reduce ozone precursor
emissions?
E. Are banked emissions properly accounted for within these RFP
plans?
F. What are the pollution control programs that accomplish this
change in emissions?
G. Is EPA proposing approval of any state control measures in
this action?
H. Have these states met their contingency measure obligation?
I. Are transportation conformity budgets contained in these
plans?
IV. Proposed Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Background and Purpose

On April 30, 2004, pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (the Act,
or CAA), 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq., EPA designated portions of the country
as being in nonattainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air
quality standard (NAAQS) (69 FR 23858).\1\ All parts of Connecticut,
Massachusetts, and Rhode Island were designated as nonattainment for
ozone, and all were classified as moderate. There were five
nonattainment areas created that encompassed the entirety of these
states, as shown in Table 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\1\ The 1997 8-hour ozone standard itself is codified at 40 CFR
50.10.

Table 1--8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Areas in Connecticut, Massachusetts,
and Rhode Island
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geographic area
State Area name covered (counties)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CT........................ New York--N. New Fairfield, Middlesex,
Jersey--Long Island, New Haven.
NY-NJ-CT (NY-NJ-CT
area).

[[Page 57223]]

CT........................ Greater Connecticut Hartford, Litchfield,
area. New London, Tolland,
Windham.
MA........................ Bos-Law-Wor (E. MA) Barnstable, Bristol,
area. Dukes, Essex,
Middlesex,
Nantucket, Norfolk,
Plymouth, Suffolk,
Worcester.
MA........................ Springfield (W. MA) Berkshire, Franklin,
area. Hampden, Hampshire.
RI........................ Providence area...... Statewide.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sections 182(a)(1) and 182(b)(1) of the CAA compel the preparation
and submittal of an emission inventory by states containing ozone
nonattainment areas. On November 18, 2002, EPA issued guidance \2\
indicating that 2002 was the preferred year for states to use as their
base year in development of state implementation plans (SIPs) for the
1997 8-hour ozone standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\2\ ``2002 Base Year Emission Inventory SIP Planning: 8-hr
Ozone, PM 2.5, and Regional Haze Programs.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

On November 29, 2005, EPA published a final rule in the Federal
Register identifying, in part, the requirements that areas designated
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard must fulfill in order
to meet their obligations under the Act. 70 FR 71612, codified at 40
CFR part 51 subpart X. This rule is commonly referred to as the ``Phase
2'' implementation rule. The Phase 2 rule provides that areas that had
previously met the CAA section 182(b)(1) requirement for a 15% volatile
organic compound (VOC) emission reduction pursuant to the one-hour
ozone standard would be considered to have met this requirement for the
1997 8-hour standard. According to the Phase 2 rule, such areas must
meet reasonable further progress (RFP) obligations under the provisions
of subpart 1 of the Act, rather than the more stringent RFP obligations
of subpart 2.
The Phase 2 rule divides the areas subject to subpart 1 RFP
requirements into two categories: Those with attainment dates within 5
years of designation, and those with attainment dates beyond 5 years
from designation. Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island all fall
into the latter category because their attainment dates were 6 years
from the date of designation. The Phase 2 rule further provides that
areas with an attainment date beyond 5 years from the date of
designation would be required to meet their RFP requirement by
demonstrating a 15 percent emission reduction between 2002 and 2008 in
VOC, nitrogen oxide (NOx) or a combination of both of these pollutants
such that the total reduction in these ozone precursor emissions
equaled 15 percent.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\3\ The Phase 2 rule's application of the CAA's VOC percentage
reduction requirements was challenged before the United States Court
of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. However, the court
upheld EPA's interpretation of these requirements. See NRDC v. EPA,
571 F.3d 1245 (DC Cir. 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

On February 1, 2008, Connecticut submitted its 2002 to 2008 RFP
plan and 2002 base year inventory to EPA as part of its attainment
demonstration SIP submittal. Similar submittals were made by
Massachusetts on January 31, 2008, and by Rhode Island on April 30,
2008.

II. 2002 Base Year Emissions Inventory

A. What is a base year inventory and why are these states required to
prepare one?

The Act contains a number of requirements for moderate ozone
nonattainment areas. One requirement, found at section 182(a)(1) of the
Act and made applicable to moderate ozone nonattainment areas through
section 182(b)(1), compels the preparation and submittal of a
``comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from
all sources.'' As mentioned above, EPA's November 18, 2002 guidance
memorandum identified 2002 as the preferred year for states to use as
their base year in development of SIPs for the 1997 8-hour ozone
standard, and the Phase 2 rule affirms this selection of the 2002
inventory as the baseline for the RFP requirement.
In August, 2005, EPA published supplemental guidance for states to
use in development of their base year inventories entitled, ``Emission
Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze
Regulation'' (EPA-454/R-05-001). This guidance describes for states the
requirements for development of comprehensive emission estimates from
stationary point and area sources, and from mobile on-road and non-road
sources, such that complete emission inventories are available to
support SIP development for the 8-hour ozone standard. The guidance
directs states to prepare their emission estimates on a ``typical
summer day'' basis to reflect emissions that occur during high ozone
episodes, which occur predominantly during the warm summer months.
As mentioned above, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island
all contain ozone nonattainment areas designated as moderate for the
1997 8-hour ozone standard. Therefore, they were required to develop
2002 base year emission inventories of VOC and NOx, as these compounds
react in the presence of heat and sunlight to form ozone.
1. Point Source Emissions
The point source portion of the inventory consists of emission
estimates for the major industrial facilities within the state. The
emission estimates are prepared based on facility specific information
collected during annual surveys conducted by each state's air agency.
Connecticut and Massachusetts survey all industrial sources that emit
10 tons/year or more of VOC or NOx. Rhode Island surveys facilities
that emit 10 tons/year or more of VOC, and/or 25 tons/year or more of
NOx. The emission estimates are prepared for each process operation,
fuel combustion process, or other air emitting activity, then summed
together to obtain an overall emission estimate for the facility. The
states submit these air emission estimates to EPA, and we incorporate
them into our national emissions inventory (NEI) database.
2. Area Source Emissions
Area source emissions include emissions from small industrial
facilities not included in the point source inventory, and from sources
whose emissions are, in most circumstances, spread over a wide
geographic area from a large number of small sources. Examples include
gasoline service stations, small graphic arts facilities, landfills,
and emissions from consumer and commercial products. Emission estimates
are made for most area source categories by multiplying some indicator
of activity level for the sector, such as gasoline consumption data for
gasoline stations,

[[Page 57224]]

by emission factors that relate air emissions to the activity level.
The Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island area source
inventories provide emission estimates for a large number of source
categories, complementing the emission estimates made for individual
point sources and completing the estimate of emissions from stationary
sources in the state.
3. On-Road Mobile Source Emissions
Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island all used a highway
vehicle emission estimation model developed by EPA referred to as the
MOBILE 6.2 model to estimate emissions from on-road motor vehicles.
Each state obtained estimates of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) from
their respective Departments of Transportation. The states also
obtained the information necessary to run the MOBILE model accurately
for their mix of vehicles, fuel types, and control programs and used
this information to obtain VOC and NOX emission estimates
from the model.
4. Non-Road Mobile Source Emissions
Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island estimated emissions
for the majority of equipment within the non-road sector using the
EPA's NONROAD 2005 model. The NONROAD model estimates emissions for
diesel, gasoline, liquefied petroleum gasoline, and compressed natural
gas-fueled non-road equipment types. The non-road model does not
estimate emissions from aircraft, locomotives, or commercial marine
vessels, and so the states used other EPA recommended methods to
estimate emissions from these sectors.
5. Biogenic Emission Sources
Biogenic (naturally occurring) emissions occur from plants, trees,
grasses and crops. EPA developed a computer model, referred to as the
Biogenic Emissions Inventory System (BEIS v. 3.12), to estimate VOC
emissions from this source category, and calculates biogenic emissions
for all counties in the country. EPA recommends that states use EPA's
biogenic emission estimates, and Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode
Island all relied on EPA's emission estimates for this sector.
B. Summary of 2002 Base Year Inventories
The 2002 VOC and NOX base year inventories prepared by
Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island are shown below in Tables
2a through 2e. EPA has concluded that these states have adequately
derived and documented the 2002 base year VOC and NOX
emissions for these areas.

Table 2a--2002 Base Year Inventory for the NY-NJ-CT Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002 VOC 2002 NOX
Nonattainment area emissions emissions
(tons/day) (tons/day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NY-NJ-CT area:
Point....................................... 11.3 37.7
Area........................................ 84.1 7.2
On-road..................................... 48.1 102.7
Non-road.................................... 66.0 38.7
Biogenics................................... 125.6 0.7
-------------------------
Total..................................... 335.3 187.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 2b--2002 Base Year Inventory for the Greater Connecticut Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002 VOC 2002 NOX
Nonattainment area emissions Emissions
(tons/day) (tons/day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Greater Connecticut area:
Point....................................... 4.6 19.0
Area........................................ 75.5 6.4
On-road..................................... 45.1 89.3
Non-road.................................... 56.2 30.8
Biogenics................................... 268.9 1.3
-------------------------
Total..................................... 450.3 146.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 2c--2002 Base Year Inventory for the Bos-Law-Wor (E. MA) Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002 VOC 2002 NOX
Nonattainment area emissions Emissions
(tons/day) (tons/day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bos-Law-Wor (E. MA) area:
Point....................................... 13.6 116.6
Area........................................ 282.0 33.9
On-road..................................... 127.4 381.4
Non-road.................................... 196.2 122.1
Biogenics................................... 535.7 4.4
-------------------------
Total..................................... 1,154.9 658.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 2d--2002 Base Year Inventory for the Springfield (W. MA) Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002 VOC 2002 NOX
Nonattainment area Emissions Emissions
(tons/day) (tons/day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Springfield (W. MA) area:
Point....................................... 2.4 13.0
Area........................................ 45.5 5.2
On-road..................................... 24.5 71.7
Non-road.................................... 27.7 22.4
Biogenics................................... 254.6 1.1
-------------------------
Total..................................... 354.7 113.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 2e--2002 Base Year Inventory for the Providence Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2002 VOC 2002 NOX
Nonattainment area emissions emissions
(tons/day) (tons/day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Providence area:
Point....................................... 10.3 7.0
Area........................................ 47.9 3.4
On-road..................................... 32.3 42.4
Non-road.................................... 26.8 19.7
Biogenics................................... 124.2 0.7
-------------------------
Total..................................... 241.5 73.2
------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. What action is EPA taking on these inventories?

We are proposing approval of the 2002 base year inventories listed
in Tables 2a through 2e above.

III. Reasonable Further Progress Plans

A. What is a reasonable further progress plan, and why are these states
required to prepare one?

A reasonable further progress (RFP) plan illustrates how an ozone
nonattainment area will make emission reductions of a set amount over a
given time period. Section 182(b)(1) of the CAA required moderate and
above ozone nonattainment areas to develop plans to reduce VOC
emissions by 15 percent over a six year time period beginning with the
date of enactment of the 1990 amendments to the Act, which occurred on
November 15, 1990. EPA's Phase 2 rule interpreted how this requirement
would apply to areas designated as moderate (or higher) nonattainment
of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, and did so in a number of ways. See
40 CFR part 51 subpart X. Of relevance for Connecticut, Massachusetts,
and Rhode Island is what the Phase 2 rule required for areas with
attainment dates greater than 5 years from designation that previously
accomplished a 15% reduction in VOC emissions pursuant to one-hour
ozone nonattainment requirements, as all three of these states meet
these criteria. For such areas, the Phase 2 rule indicates that RFP
will be met if the area can demonstrate a 15% reduction in ozone
precursor emissions (VOC and/or NOX)

[[Page 57225]]

will occur between 2002 and 2008.\4\ See 40 CFR 51.910(b)(2)(ii)(A)-
(B). If the area uses NOX reductions to meet part or all of
this requirement, it must satisfy EPA guidance concerning the
conditions under which NOX control may be substituted for,
or combined with, VOC control in order to maximize the reduction in
ozone pollution. The most current such guidance is EPA's December 1993
``NOX Substitution Guidance.'' Therefore, the RFP plans
submitted by Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island were
evaluated against these criteria. These states prepared RFP plans for
each of the nonattainment areas shown in Table 1 above. We note that
Connecticut's plan for the NY-NJ-CT area only accounts for emission
reductions from within the Connecticut portion of the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\4\ If the area wishes to use NOX reductions to meet
part or all of this 15% requirement, the calculation is not done by
measuring the overall percent of combined VOC and NOX
reductions, but rather by separately calculating the percent of VOC
reductions and the percent of NOX reductions, and adding
those percentages together.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

As noted above, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island
submitted final, adopted RFP plans to EPA between January 31 and April
30, 2008. Although the Phase 2 rule required that these plans be
submitted by June 15, 2007, the states submitted draft plans to EPA
shortly after the due date, and as discussed in this document the plans
meet EPA's approval requirements for RFP plans developed to help meet
the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
Each of these state's RFP plans rely to some degree on
NOX emission reductions to achieve the overall 15 percent
reduction in ozone precursor emissions. Available modeling indicates
that NOX emission reductions are clearly beneficial in
Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island, and so as outlined in
EPA's NOX Substitution Guidance, use of NOX
emission reductions to meet RFP requirements is appropriate.
The manner in which states are to determine the required level of
emission reductions is similar to the procedure explained in the
guidance document entitled, ``Guidance on the Adjusted Base Year
Emissions Inventory and the 1996 Target for the 15% Rate of Progress
Plans'' (EPA-452/R-92-005). Adjustments to this procedure pertaining to
proper accounting of the non-creditable emission reductions from the
pre-1990 Federal motor vehicle control program (FMVCP) are noted within
Appendix A of the Phase 2 rule (70 FR 71696, as corrected by 71 FR
58498).

B. What action is EPA taking on these plans?

We are proposing approval of the RFP plans submitted by
Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island for the moderate
nonattainment areas shown in Table 1 above, as revisions to these
states' implementation plans. Note that regarding the NY-NJ-CT moderate
area, we are proposing action today only on the Connecticut portion of
the RFP plan.

C. What emission levels must Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode
Island achieve by 2008?

Tables 3a-3e below contain a summary of the RFP calculations as
performed by Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island for their
moderate ozone nonattainment areas. Some of the 2002 base year
inventory values shown in Step 1 of Tables 3a-3e are slightly higher
than those shown in Tables 2a-2e due to adjustments each state made to
their RFP SIPs to account for emissions banking and trading programs.
These adjustments are described elsewhere in this proposal. The
emission target levels are shown in step 6 of Tables 3a-3e. The
emission targets represent the maximum amount of emissions that can
occur in 2008 given the state's selected mix of VOC and NOX
percent reductions as noted in step 4 of the calculations. The RFP
plans submitted by Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island
indicate that the projected, controlled emissions for 2008 shown in
Step 7 of Tables 3a-3e are below the 2008 emission target levels shown
in step 6, with the exception of Rhode Island's VOC emissions. To
remedy this small shortfall, Rhode Island allocated surplus
NOX emissions reductions that were available as shown in
Table 3e.

Table 3a--2008 RFP Calculations for the NY-NJ-CT Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description VOC emissions (tons/day) NOX emissions (tons/day)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 1: Calculate 2002 base year 335.3.............................. 189.1.
inventory.
Step 2: Develop RFP inventory 209.7.............................. 188.4.
(subtract biogenics).
Step 3: Develop adjusted base year -4.5 = 205.2....................... -11.7 = 176.7.
inventory by subtracting non-
creditable, pre-1990 FMVCP \5\
reductions from RFP inventory.
Step 4: Calculate required reduction 10%; 20.5 tons..................... 5%; 8.8 tons.
(total of VOC and NOX reductions must
equal 15 percent).
Step 5: Calculate total expected 4.5 + 20.5 = 24.9.................. 11.7 + 8.8 = 20.5.
reduction (add steps 3 & 4 together).
Step 6: Set target level for 2008 209.7-24.9 = 184.6................. 186.3-20.4 = 167.9.
(subtract step 5 from step 2).
Step 7: Projected, controlled 2008 167.6.............................. 142.6.
emissions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ FMVCP is the acronym for the federal motor vehicle control program. Pre-1990 FMVCP reductions are not
creditable towards meeting the 15% emission reduction.

Table 3b--2008 RFP Calculations for the Greater Connecticut area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description VOC emissions (tons/day) NOX emissions (tons/day)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 1: Calculate 2002 base year 450.3.............................. 147.3.
inventory.
Step 2: Develop RFP inventory 181.4.............................. 146.1.
(subtract biogenics).
Step 3: Develop adjusted base year -4.3 = 177.1....................... -9.3 = 136.8.
inventory by subtracting non-
creditable, pre-1990 FMVCP reductions
from RFP inventory.
Step 4: Calculate required reduction 10%; 17.7 tons..................... 5%; 6.8 tons.
(total of VOC and NOX reductions must
equal 15 percent).
Step 5: Calculate total expected 4.3 + 17.7 = 22.0.................. 9.3 + 6.8 = 16.1.
reduction (add steps 3 & 4 together).
Step 6: Set target level for 2008 181.4-22.0 = 159.4................. 145.5-16.1 = 130.0.
(subtract step 5 from step 2).

[[Page 57226]]

Step 7: Projected, controlled 2008 149.3.............................. 107.1.
emissions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 3c--2008 RFP Calculations for the Bos-Law-Wor area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description VOC emissions (tons/day) NOX emissions (tons/day)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 1: Calculate 2002 base year 1,157.3............................ 689.0.
inventory.
Step 2: Develop RFP inventory 621.6.............................. 684.6.
(subtract biogenics).
Step 3: Develop adjusted base year -15.3 = 606.3...................... -45.2 = 639.4.
inventory by subtracting non-
creditable, pre-1990 FMVCP reductions
from RFP inventory.
Step 4: Calculate required reduction 3%; 18.2 tons...................... 12%; 76.7 tons.
(total of VOC and NOX reductions must
equal 15 percent).
Step 5: Calculate total expected 15.3 + 18.2 = 33.5................. 45.2 + 76.7 = 121.9.
reduction (add steps 3 & 4 together).
Step 6: Set target level for 2008 621.6-33.5 = 588.1................. 684.6 - 121.9 = 562.7.
(subtract step 5 from step 2).
Step 7: Projected, controlled 2008 525.7.............................. 440.6.
emissions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 3d--2008 RFP Calculations for the Springfield area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description VOC emissions (tons/day) NOX emissions (tons/day)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 1: Calculate 2002 base year 354.8.............................. 114.2.
inventory.
Step 2: Develop RFP inventory 100.2.............................. 113.1.
(subtract biogenics).
Step 3: Develop adjusted base year -2.9 = 97.3........................ -8.5 = 104.6.
inventory by subtracting non-
creditable, pre-1990 FMVCP reductions
from RFP inventory.
Step 4: Calculate required reduction 3%; 2.9 tons....................... 12%; 12.6 tons.
(total of VOC and NOX reductions must
equal 15 percent).
Step 5: Calculate total expected 2.9 + 2.9 = 5.8.................... 8.5 + 12.6 = 21.1.
reduction (add steps 3 & 4 together).
Step 6: Set target level for 2008 2.9 + 2.9 = 5.8.................... 8.5 + 12.6 = 21.1.
(subtract step 5 from step 2).
Step 7: Projected, controlled 2008 84.2............................... 66.9.
emissions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 3e--2008 RFP Calculations for the Providence area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Description VOC Emissions (tons/day) NOX emissions (tons/day)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Step 1: Calculate 2002 base year 243.4.............................. 73.2.
inventory.
Step 2: Develop RFP inventory 119.2.............................. 72.5.
(subtract biogenics).
Step 3: Develop adjusted base year -5.5 = 113.7....................... -3.2 = 69.3.
inventory by subtracting non-
creditable, pre-1990 FMVCP reductions
from RFP inventory.
Step 4: Calculate required reduction 0%................................. 15%.
(total of VOC and NOX reductions must
equal 15 percent).
Step 5: Calculate total expected 5.5 + 0 = 5.5...................... 3.2 + 10.4 = 13.6.
reduction (add steps 3 & 4 together).
Step 6: Set target level for 2008 119.2-5.5 = 113.7.................. 72.5-3.6-1.1 = 57.8.
(subtract step 5 from step 2; also,
the Providence area NOX target
includes additional 1.1 ton reduction
to cover VOC shortfall).
Step 7: Projected, controlled 2008 115.4.............................. 55.3.
emissions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note that in Tables 3a-3e above, all of the projected, controlled
2008 emission levels shown in step 7 are lower than the corresponding
2008 emission target levels shown in step 6, with the exception of the
Providence area's VOC emissions which are 1.5% higher than the 2008 VOC
target. In light of this, Rhode Island allocated an additional 1.5%
NOX reduction (which translates to 1.1 tons) to cover this
shortfall. Thus, Rhode Island has set its 2008 NOX target to
57.8 tons/day rather than 58.9 tons/day. In essence, Rhode Island has
selected a 16.6% reduction in NOX emissions and a 1.5%
increase in VOC emissions, resulting in a combined reduction of 15.1%.
EPA's guidance to states on the development of RFP plans does not
directly address the situation found in Rhode Island's RFP plan, where
surplus reductions for one ozone precursor were used to cover an
increase in emissions for the other precursor. For example, EPA's Phase
2 implementation rule provides that moderate areas such as Rhode Island
with attainment dates more than 5 years from the date of designation,
``(A) Shall provide for a 15 percent emission reduction from the
baseline year within 6 years after the baseline year. (B) May use
either NOX or VOC emissions reductions (or both) to achieve
the 15 percent emission reduction requirement. Use of NOX
emissions reductions must meet the criteria in section 182(c)(2)(C) of
the Act.'' 40 CFR 51.910(b)(2)(ii). EPA's NOX Substitution
Guidance, which EPA issued pursuant to section 182(c)(2)(C), does not
specifically address offsetting an increase in one precursor with
surplus reductions from another precursor. Thus, we reviewed the facts
of this specific case and, as explained below, have determined that the
submitted plan is consistent with the CAA requirements.
First, EPA's December 1993 NOX substitution guidance
provides the criteria that must be met in order for NOX
emission reductions to be used in RFP plans as provided by section

[[Page 57227]]

182(c)(2)(C) of the Act. The guidance directs states to ensure that
such substitution is done only to the extent that the modeled
attainment demonstration for the area indicates that this substitution
is appropriate. For example, section 2 of the guidance provides that,
``This linkage provides assurance that the RFP reductions are
consistent with the SIP attainment demonstration. States are required
to justify substitution by illustrating ``consistency'' between the
cumulative emission changes emerging from the RFP/substitution proposal
and the emission reductions in the modeled attainment demonstration.''
Rhode Island worked in conjunction with the other states within the
ozone transport region (OTR) to perform the urban airshed modeling that
the state included within its attainment demonstration, and on
development of recommended control strategies to reduce VOC and
NOX emissions in the Northeast such that the ozone NAAQS
would be met by 2009. This modeling exercise showed that both VOC and
NOX emission reductions would be needed to reach the area's
attainment goals. The resulting suite of federal and state control
measures indicate that NOX emission reductions figured
prominently in the area's attainment strategy. This is most clearly
seen by the fact that NOX emissions were projected to
decline by a greater extent than VOC emissions between the base year
and attainment year across the OTR. This illustrates that Rhode
Island's use of NOX emission reductions within its RFP plan
is appropriate.
Second, the increase in VOC emissions between 2002 and 2008 is an
artifact of EPA's RFP calculation procedure; the state's actual VOC
emissions in 2008 were predicted to be lower than they were in 2002. In
explanation, as shown in step 2 of Table 3e above, Rhode Island's 2002
anthropogenic VOC emissions were 119.2 tons per summer day (tpsd).
However, EPA's RFP calculation procedure requires that emission
reductions from the pre-1990 federal motor vehicle control program
(FMVCP) that will accrue between 2002 and 2008 be subtracted from the
2002 anthropogenic baseline because the Act, at section
182(b)(1)(D)(i), provides such reductions are not creditable for
purposes of meeting RFP requirements. This subtraction is shown in step
3 of Table 3e above, and resulted in the 2002 baseline being lowered by
5.5 tpsd to 113.7 tpsd. Since no VOC reductions were planned for in the
RFP plan, 113.7 tpsd is also the state's target level of emissions for
VOCs. As shown in step 7 of Table 3e, Rhode Island's 2008 VOC emissions
were estimated to be 115.4 tpsd. This is higher than the VOC target
emission level of 113.7 tpsd by 1.7 tpsd, but is lower than the state's
actual 2002 anthropogenic baseline emissions of 119.2 tpsd by 3.8 tpsd.
The preceding comparison is not intended to diminish the significance
of the Act's prohibition against crediting reductions due to the pre-
1990 FMVCP towards RFP. Rather, this analysis simply clarifies that
this is not a situation where a state proposes to rely on a larger-
than-15% decrease in NOX emissions to offset an actual
increase in VOC emissions; rather, here Rhode Island has in fact
reduced its VOC emissions from the baseline.
Third, in 2009, Rhode Island adopted and implemented VOC control
measures on consumer and commercial products and architectural and
industrial maintenance coatings. The effective date for these two rules
was June 4, 2009, and since the RFP plan covers the time period between
2003 to 2008 Rhode Island did not factor reductions from these rules
into their RFP analysis. However, these rules are now in effect and are
currently acting to lower VOC emissions beyond that shown in the RFP
analysis. Thus, while Rhode Island could not take credit for these
emission reductions as part of the RFP plan for 2003 to 2008,
additional reductions in VOC emissions have occurred in the state since
then.
Last, but by no means of least importance, Rhode Island is
currently in attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, and EPA
published a clean data determination for the area on June 3, 2010 (75
FR 31288). In addition, on July 28, 2010 (75 FR 44179), EPA published a
notice of proposed rulemaking indicating that this area attained the
1997 8-hour ozone standard by its attainment date of June 15, 2010.
Thus, our primary basis for approving the RFP plan is to approve the
2008 motor vehicle emission budgets contained within the plan as the
plan is not necessary to ensure that the state makes reasonable further
progress towards the 1997 standard it has already attained.
In light of these circumstances, EPA has determined that it is
appropriate to propose approval of Rhode Island's RFP plan.

D. To what extent do the RFP plans reduce ozone precursor emissions?

The Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island RFP plans indicate
that ozone precursor emissions will be substantially reduced between
2002 and 2008, allowing each state to exceed the 15% ozone precursor
emission reduction obligation over this time frame. Compared to 2002
emission levels, the RFP plans and associated modeling showed that VOC
emissions were expected to decline by 19% in Connecticut, 16% in
Massachusetts, and 3% in Rhode Island by 2008. Additionally,
NOX emissions were expected to decline by 25% in
Connecticut, 37% in Massachusetts, and 24% in Rhode Island over this
timeframe. These percent reductions include reductions from the pre-
1990 FMVCP program shown in step 3 of Tables 3a-3e.

E. Are banked emissions properly accounted for within these RFP plans?

Although the initial RFP plan submittals made by Connecticut,
Massachusetts, and Rhode Island did not account for banked emissions,
each state made subsequent amendments to their plans that incorporated
banked emissions into the RFP analysis.
Many states operate emissions banking and trading programs. These
programs allow facilities that agree to permanently cease, or
alternatively agree to permanently reduce their emissions to levels
below allowable levels, to generate emission reduction credits (ERCs)
that can be sold or traded to other facilities. ERCs are often
purchased by facilities seeking emission offsets to meet the
requirements of the new source review (NSR) program. State air agencies
facilitate and monitor these transactions by creating and maintaining
an emissions bank where ERCs are stored until they are purchased. Since
ERCs represent emissions that may occur at some point in the future,
and RFP plans contain both base year and future year emission estimates
as well as maximum allowable (target level) emissions for the
nonattainment area as a whole, banked emissions need to be accounted
for in a state's RFP analysis.
On October 14, 2009, Connecticut submitted a revision to the RFP
plan which it had originally submitted to EPA on February 1, 2008. The
revision consisted of the incorporation of a small number of banked
NOX ERCs into the state's RFP analysis. The inclusion of the
banked ERCs into the RFP analysis did not alter the state's conclusion
that it easily meets RFP requirements. The emission estimates within
Tables 3a and 3b above reflect the revised calculations contained
within Connecticut's October 14, 2009 submittal to EPA.
On October 23, 2009, Massachusetts submitted a revision to the RFP
plan which it had originally submitted to EPA on January 31, 2008. The
revision consisted of the incorporation of a small

[[Page 57228]]

amount of banked VOC, and a larger amount of banked NOX ERCs
into the state's RFP analysis. As with Connecticut, the inclusion of
Massachusetts' banked ERCs into the RFP analysis did not change the
state's conclusion that it readily meets RFP. Tables 3c and 3d above
contains the revised RFP calculations contained within Massachusetts'
October 23, 2009 submittal.
On October 19, 2009, Rhode Island submitted a revision to the RFP
plan which it had submitted to EPA on April 30, 2008. The revision
consisted of the incorporation of banked VOC ERCs into the state's RFP
analysis. As with the above mentioned submittals from Connecticut and
Massachusetts, Rhode Island's revised plan continues to show that the
state meets its RFP emission reduction obligations, and these revised
estimates are reflected in Table 3e above.

F. What are the pollution control programs that accomplish this change
in emissions?

Many post-1990 Federal mobile source control programs which are
creditable towards meeting RFP took effect between 2002 and 2008, and
they are responsible for the bulk of the VOC and NOX
emission reductions that occurred over this time frame in Connecticut,
Massachusetts, and Rhode Island. For example, within the on-road mobile
sector the Federal Tier 2 motor vehicle control program and controls
for heavy duty diesel vehicles and fuels were significant programs that
helped to reduce emissions during this period of time. Within the non-
road sector, Federal controls on diesel engines and the Phase 2
standards for gasoline powered handheld and non-handheld equipment
began, which helped reduce emissions from that sector.
In addition to Federal measures for mobile source emissions, state-
adopted control measures also acted to reduce VOC and NOX
emissions between 2002 and 2008. In Connecticut, state-adopted rules
limiting emissions from portable fuel containers, architectural and
industrial maintenance (AIM) coatings, pressure-vacuum (PV) valves at
gasoline service stations, and requirements for solvent cleaning fluids
were adopted between 2002 and 2008, and will help to reduce VOC
emissions in the state. The portable fuel container and PV valves at
gasoline station rules have been approved by EPA into the state's SIP.
(See 71 FR 51761). The AIM and solvent cleaning rules have not yet been
approved by EPA into the State's SIP, but we are proposing approval of
them in other parts of this document and intend to approve them prior
to, or in conjunction with, our final rulemaking action on
Connecticut's RFP plan. Additionally, in May of 2003, Phase 2 of the
state's limits for emissions from municipal waste combustors began, and
this program will reduce NOX emissions from that sector.
This program has also been approved into the state's SIP. (See 66 FR
63311).
Connecticut's NOX budget program began in 2002 and so
emission reductions from the program are reflected in the state's 2002
base year inventory. Connecticut's Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)
rule has taken the place of its NOX budget program beginning
in 2009. On July 11, 2008, the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia issued an opinion vacating and remanding EPA's
CAIR rule. See North Carolina v EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (DC Cir. 2008).
However, on December 23, 2008, the court granted rehearing in part and
remanded the rule back to EPA for revision without vacatur. 550 F.3d
1176 (DC Cir. 2008). Accordingly, CAIR is to be implemented as it was
originally intended until EPA revises the rule to address the court's
remand.\6\ Therefore, the NOX reductions achieved by
Connecticut's NOX budget program continue as the state has
transitioned to its CAIR program. Connecticut's CAIR program was
approved by EPA on January 24, 2008 (73 FR 4105).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\6\ On August 2, 2010 (75 FR 45210), EPA proposed the Transport
Rule to address the flaws in CAIR noted by the Court.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

For the on-road mobile sector, in 2004, Connecticut adopted an
enhanced motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I&M) program
including on-board diagnostics (OBD-2) requirements. EPA approved
Connecticut's I&M program with OBD-2 requirements into the state's SIP
on December 5, 2008 (73 FR 74019).
Massachusetts claimed emission reduction credit within its RFP plan
for the NOX emission reductions achieved by the state's
NOX SIP Call Trading program, as that program's
implementation date was in 2003. Massachusetts submitted its
``NOX Allowance Trading Program'' (also referred to as the
NOX Budget or the NOX SIP Call trading program)
to EPA as a SIP revision request, and EPA approved the rule into the
Commonwealth's SIP. Amendments to the rule were incorporated into the
state's SIP on December 3, 2007. (72 FR 67854). EPA's December 3, 2007
action also approved the Commonwealth's CAIR, which replaced the
state's NOX Budget program beginning in 2009. Therefore,
NOX emissions from sources covered by the Commonwealth's
NOX Allowance trading program will remain constrained after
2008 as the state implements its CAIR control program.
Massachusetts expects to reduce on-road mobile source emissions by
its state-run Low Emissions Vehicle (LEV) program. Massachusetts
submitted the adopted LEV program to EPA, and EPA approved it into the
state's SIP on December 23, 2002 (67 FR 78179).
At the time Rhode Island developed its RFP SIP, it was in the
process of adopting a number of control measures for stationary sources
of VOC emissions that were set to take effect in 2009, and so emission
reductions from these measures were not incorporated into the state's
RFP plan because measures in such plans need to have an impact by 2008.
Rhode Island was not required to participate in EPA's CAIR program.
Accordingly, Rhode Island's RFP plan shows that it meets the 15%
emission reduction obligation by relying exclusively on emission
reductions between 2002 and 2008 in the mobile source sector.
Additionally, the state shows that it can meet its obligation by
relying only upon NOX emission reductions. These emission
reductions occur as a result of the post-1990 Federal mobile source
control measures, as mentioned above, the state's adoption of a motor
vehicle I&M Program, and the state-adopted Low Emissions Vehicle
program. EPA has approved both of these programs into the Rhode Island
SIP. (See 66 FR 9661, and 65 FR 12476, respectively.)

G. Is EPA proposing approval of any state control measures in this
action?

We are proposing to approve three VOC control measures from
Connecticut, two of which were included in the state's February 1, 2008
SIP submittal to EPA. These rules consist of a solvent metal cleaning
rule, an architectural and industrial maintenance (AIM) coatings rule,
and an asphalt paving rule submitted on January 8, 2009. The solvent
metal cleaning and AIM coatings rules have compliance dates in May of
2008, and so achieve emission reductions that help Connecticut
demonstrate compliance with its RFP obligation. The asphalt paving rule
has a May 1, 2009 compliance date and was submitted to help the state
demonstrate that it meets the Clean Air Act section 182(b)(2)
requirement that sources in the state use reasonably available control
technology (RACT) to control air pollution. We are not proposing action
on Connecticut's overall RACM or RACT submittals at

[[Page 57229]]

this time. Additional information about each of these rules is provided
below.
Metal cleaning rule. Connecticut's February 1, 2008 SIP submittal
to EPA included an amendment to its existing SIP approved metal
cleaning rule, located at section 22a-174-20 of the Regulations of
Connecticut State Agencies (``Control of organic compound emissions,
loading of gasoline and other volatile organic compounds''), paragraph
(l) (``Metal cleaning''). The amended rule adds a limit on the vapor
pressure of solvents used in cold cleaning and other requirements to
further limit emissions of VOCs from metal cleaning operations. These
requirements are consistent with the Ozone Transport Commission's
(OTC's) 2001 model rule for solvent cleaning. The compliance date for
the rule was May 1, 2008.
AIM coatings rule. Connecticut's February 1, 2008 SIP submittal
included a new rule, section 22a-174-41 (``Architectural and industrial
maintenance coatings''), that limits VOC emissions from AIM coatings.
The state's rule establishes VOC content limits consistent with those
developed in 2001 within a model rule created by the OTC. The limits in
the state's rule are as stringent as, or more stringent than, those
contained in the Federal AIM rule adopted by EPA in December 1998 (40
CFR part 59, subpart D). The compliance date for most of the regulated
product categories was May 1, 2008. EPA notes that we are relying on
the federal enforceability of section (g)(3)(A)(iii) referenced in that
section of the rule.
Asphalt paving rule. On January 8, 2009, Connecticut submitted an
amendment to its existing SIP-approved section 22a-174-20 (``Control of
organic compound emissions, loading of gasoline and other volatile
organic compounds''), paragraph (k) (``Restrictions on VOC emissions
from cutback and emulsified asphalt''). The amended regulation includes
a seasonal ban on the use of cutback asphalt and a reduction in the
acceptable VOC content of emulsified asphalt. The compliance date for
the rule was May 1, 2009.
Connecticut held a public hearing on the first two rules mentioned
above on June 27, 2006, and held a hearing on the asphalt paving rule
on May 1, 2007. EPA reviewed draft versions of these rules and provided
comments to Connecticut during the public hearing process, and
Connecticut responded adequately to our comments. We are proposing
approval of Connecticut's revised solvent metal cleaning and asphalt
paving rules, and its new AIM coatings rule, so that they may become
part of the state's federally enforceable SIP.

H. Have these states met their contingency measure obligation?

Section 172(c)(9) of the CAA requires, in part, that nonattainment
areas provide for contingency measures ``to be undertaken if the area
fails to make reasonable further progress, or to attain the national
primary ambient air quality standard by the attainment date applicable
under this part.'' EPA has long interpreted the Act to require that
contingency measures must provide reductions of 3 percent of the
emissions from the adjusted base year inventory (57 FR 13498, 13510-
13511). States may choose to meet this requirement by consuming surplus
emission reductions shown in their RFP target level calculations, if a
surplus exists. However, pursuant to a guidance memorandum issued by
EPA on November 8, 1993,\7\ any measures that are already required are
not creditable as contingency measures. Connecticut, Massachusetts, and
Rhode Island each chose to meet the contingency obligation using
surplus emission reductions as noted in the target level calculations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

\7\ ``Clarification of Issues Regarding the Contingency Measures
that are due November 15, 1993 for Moderate and Above Ozone
Nonattainment Areas.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Connecticut and Massachusetts can both readily show that ample
surplus emission reductions exist, and that they have implemented
controls not otherwise required. In Connecticut's case, 2008 VOC
emissions are projected to be 5.7% lower than the target, and
NOX emissions 16.5% lower than the target in the Greater
Connecticut area. For the Connecticut portion of the NY-NJ-CT area,
these surpluses are 8.3% for VOC, and 14.5% for NOX.
Connecticut has adopted a number of rules that are not otherwise
required by the CAA that it could count towards its contingency
obligation, such as its AIM coatings, automobile refinishing, and
solvent cleaning rules. For Massachusetts, 2008 VOC emissions are
projected to be 10.6% lower than the target, and NOX
emissions 22.6% lower in the Eastern Massachusetts area. For the
Western Massachusetts area, these surpluses are 10.8% for VOC, and
27.6% for NOX. The state's low emission vehicle program,
which achieves both VOC and NOX emission reductions, is an
example of a rule the state adopted that was not otherwise required by
the CAA.
Rhode Island projects that it will have a 3.6% NOX
surplus that it claims can be devoted towards meeting the RFP
contingency requirement. Given the state's reliance on Federal measures
to reduce emissions between 2002 and 2008, the state has not
demonstrated that it can meet the contingency requirement via
reductions from already-adopted NOX rules not otherwise
required by the CAA. However, Rhode Island could remedy this by relying
on the additional VOC control programs for stationary sources that it
adopted in 2009, which included rules establishing emission limits for
consumer and commercial products, and on architectural and industrial
maintenance coatings. A public hearing on these proposed rules was held
on February 20, 2009, and they were promulgated as final state
regulations May 15, 2009, with an effective date of June 4, 2009. Rhode
Island submitted these regulations to EPA as SIP revisions, but EPA has
not yet approved into the Rhode Island SIP. Section 8.3 of Rhode
Island's attainment demonstration submittal alludes to the possibility
of using reductions from these measures as an alternative means of
meeting the RFP contingency obligation. We are therefore proposing to
approve use of emission reductions from these stationary source
measures (which, as noted above, have taken effect under state law but
have not yet been approved into Rhode Island's SIP) as meeting the
state's contingency plan requirement. Section 8.3 of Rhode Island's
attainment demonstration submittal stated that reductions from these
regulations were expected to reduce VOC emissions by 2009 by 5.0 tons/
day. This would cover the 3% contingency obligation, as 3% of the
state's 2002 RFP inventory for VOCs, which is 119.2 tons/day, equals
3.6 tons/day. EPA would need to approve these two rules into Rhode
Island's SIP prior to, or in conjunction with, our taking final action
on the state's RFP plan.

I. Are transportation conformity budgets contained in these plans?

Section 176(c) of the CAA, and EPA's transportation conformity rule
at 40 CFR part 93 subpart A, require that transportation plans,
programs, and projects conform to state air quality implementation
plans. Conformity to a SIP means that transportation activities will
not cause or contribute to new air quality violations, worsen existing
violations, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS. States are
required to establish motor vehicle emission budgets in any control
strategy SIP that is submitted for attainment and maintenance of the
NAAQS. The RFP plans submitted by Connecticut,

[[Page 57230]]

Massachusetts, and Rhode Island are control strategy SIPs, and they
contain 2008 motor vehicle budgets for VOCs and NOX by
nonattainment area. Table 4 contains these VOC and NOX
transportation conformity budgets in units of tons per summer day:

Table 4.--Conformity Budgets in the Connecticut, Massachusetts, and
Rhode Island RFP Plans
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008
Transportation
conformity budgets
Area name (tons/day)
-------------------
VOC NOX
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NY-NJ-CT area (CT portion).......................... 29.7 60.5
Greater Connecticut................................. 28.5 54.3
Bos-Law-Wor (E. MA) area............................ 68.30 191.30
Springfield (W. MA) area............................ 11.80 31.30
Providence.......................................... 24.64 28.26
------------------------------------------------------------------------

EPA issued letters on June 2, 2008 to Connecticut, March 7, 2008 to
Massachusetts, and June 16, 2008 to Rhode Island in which we stated
these budgets were adequate for use in transportation conformity
determinations. Additionally, EPA published announcements of these
adequacy findings in the Federal Register on June 12, 2008 for
Connecticut (73 FR 33428), March 18, 2008 for Massachusetts (73 FR
14466), and June 30, 2008 for Rhode Island (36862). In today's action,
we are proposing approval of the 2008 conformity budgets for VOC and
NOX for the areas shown in Table 4 above.
Connecticut and Rhode Island increased their projected 2008 motor
vehicle emission estimates slightly to provide a buffer to their
transportation

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