Approval, and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana; Redesignation of the Evansville Area to Attainment of the Fine Particulate Matter Standard, 29695-29706 [2011-12609]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
costs on Tribal governments or preempt
Tribal law.
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable federal regulations
(42 U.S.C. 7410(k), 40 CFR 52.02(a)).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed
action merely approves some state law
as meeting federal requirements and
disapproves other state law because it
does not meet federal requirements; this
proposed action does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
this proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Is certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Does not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999); is not an economically significant
regulatory action based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• Is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; 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
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Intergovernmental relations, Lead,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile
organic compounds.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
Dated: May 16, 2011.
James B. Martin,
Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2011–12606 Filed 5–20–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R05–OAR–2008–0396; FRL–9307–1]
Approval, and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana;
Redesignation of the Evansville Area
to Attainment of the Fine Particulate
Matter Standard
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
On April 3, 2008, the Indiana
Department of Environmental
Management (IDEM) submitted a
request for EPA to approve the
redesignation of the Evansville, Indiana
nonattainment area to attainment of the
1997 annual fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) standard. The air quality
improvement in this area and
maintenance of the standard in this area
is attributable in substantial part to
power plant emission reductions in the
Eastern United States prompted by the
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). The
United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit (D.C.
Circuit) has remanded CAIR, but EPA
has proposed a replacement rule known
as the Transport Rule. The Evansville
area has attained the standard with only
a fraction of the reductions that the
proposed Transport Rule proposed to
require. Therefore, EPA is proposing to
approve the redesignation request for
the Evansville area, along with related
SIP revisions, if and when EPA takes
final action to promulgate the Transport
Rule, provided that the final Transport
Rule requires emission reductions that
are at least substantially equivalent to
those of the proposed Transport Rule for
purposes of maintaining the standard in
the Evansville area.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before June 22, 2011.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
29695
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2008–0396, by one of the
following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (312) 692–2551.
4. Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, Air
Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney,
Chief, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Regional Office
normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for
deliveries of boxed information. The
Regional Office official hours of
business are Monday through Friday,
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal
holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2008–
0396. 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 information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through https://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional instructions on
submitting comments, go to Section I of
ADDRESSES:
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
29696
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
of this document.
Docket: All documents in the docket
are listed in the https://
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
will be publicly available only in hard
copy. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation
Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is
open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding
Federal holidays. We recommend that
you telephone John Summerhays,
Environmental Scientist, at (312) 886–
6067 before visiting the Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John
Summerhays, Environmental Scientist,
Attainment Planning and Maintenance
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6067,
summerhays.john@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
supplementary information section is
arranged as follows:
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
I. What should I consider as I prepare my
comments for EPA?
II. What actions is EPA proposing to take?
III. What is the background for this action?
IV. What are the criteria for redesignation to
attainment?
V. What is EPA’s analysis of the State’s
request?
1. Attainment
2. Fully Approved SIP Meeting All
Pertinent Requirements
a. General Requirements
b. Section 110(a) Requirements
c. Emission Inventories
d. Other Nonattainment Area Requirements
3. Permanent and Enforceable Emission
Reductions
4. Maintenance Plan
5. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets
6. Summary of Proposed Actions
VI. What are the effects of EPA’s proposed
actions?
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What should I consider as I prepare
my comments for EPA?
When submitting comments,
remember to:
1. Identify the rulemaking by docket
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date, and page number).
2. Follow directions—The EPA may
ask you to respond to specific questions
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
or organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.
3. Explain why you agree or disagree;
suggest alternatives and substitute
language for your requested changes.
4. Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information and/
or data that you used.
5. If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
6. Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns, and suggest
alternatives.
7. Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats.
8. Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
II. What actions is EPA proposing to
take?
On November 27, 2009, at 74 FR
62243, EPA made a final determination
that the Evansville area has attained the
1997 annual PM2.5 national ambient air
quality standards (NAAQS). EPA here is
proposing to determine that the area
continues to attain that standard. EPA is
also proposing to take several additional
actions related to Indiana’s request to
redesignate the area to attainment for
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
First, EPA is proposing to approve
Indiana’s 1997 annual PM2.5
maintenance plan for the Evansville
area as a revision to the Indiana SIP,
subject to the proviso that EPA
promulgates a final Transport Rule
requiring power plant emission
reductions substantially equivalent for
purposes of maintaining the PM2.5
standard in Evansville to those
proposed in EPA’s Transport Rule
proposal. Since maintenance of the
standard in Evansville is based in large
part on maintaining substantial control
of power plant emissions, promulgation
of such a Transport Rule is necessary to
help make recent reductions in power
plant emissions (or equivalent
reductions at other power plants)
permanent and enforceable.
Second, EPA is proposing to approve
the 2005 emission inventory in
Indiana’s maintenance plan as satisfying
the requirement of section 172(c)(3) for
a comprehensive emission inventory.
Third, EPA is proposing to find that,
subject to final approval of the
emissions inventory and the proviso set
forth above with respect to EPA’s
proposed Transport Rule, Indiana meets
the requirements for redesignation of
the Evansville area to attainment of the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS under section
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act.
Because CAIR was remanded, the
reductions associated with that rule
cannot be considered permanent and
enforceable. For this reason, the
submissions from Indiana do not
currently demonstrate satisfaction of the
requirement of section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii),
that the area’s air quality improvement
be due to permanent and enforceable
measures. However, EPA proposes that
this requirement will be met if and
when EPA finalizes a Transport Rule
which, for purposes of this action, is
substantially equivalent to the Transport
Rule that EPA proposed on August 2,
2010. Therefore, subject to this proviso,
EPA is proposing to approve the request
from the State of Indiana to change the
designation of the Evansville area,
consisting of Dubois, Vanderburgh, and
Warrick Counties along with
Montgomery Township in Gibson
County, Ohio Township in Spencer
County, and Washington Township in
Pike County, from nonattainment to
attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Finally, EPA is proposing to approve
the 2015 and 2022 motor vehicle
emission budgets (MVEBs) for the
Evansville area into the Indiana SIP.
EPA proposes to take final action on this
and the other proposed actions
delineated in this section if and when
EPA takes final action promulgating a
Transport Rule substantially equivalent
for purposes of air quality in the
Evansville area to the Transport Rule
proposed on August 2, 2010.
III. What is the background for these
actions?
The first air quality standards for
PM2.5 were promulgated on July 18,
1997, at 62 FR 38652. EPA promulgated
an annual standard at a level of 15
micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3),
based on a three-year average of annual
mean PM2.5 concentrations. In the same
rulemaking, EPA promulgated a 24-hour
standard of 65 μg/m3, based on a threeyear average of the 98th percentile of 24hour concentrations. On October 17,
2006, at 71 FR 61144, EPA retained the
annual average standard at 15 μg/m3 but
revised the 24-hour standard to 35 μg/
m3, based again on the three-year
average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour
concentrations.
On January 5, 2005, at 70 FR 944, as
supplemented on April 14, 2005, at 70
FR 19844, EPA designated the
Evansville area as nonattainment for the
1997 PM2.5 air quality standards. In that
action, EPA defined the Evansville
nonattainment area to include the
entirety of Dubois, Vanderburgh, and
Warrick Counties and portions of three
other counties, specifically including
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Montgomery Township in Gibson
County, Ohio Township in Spencer
County, and Washington Township in
Pike County. On November 13, 2009, at
74 FR 58688, EPA promulgated
designations for the 24-hour standard
set in 2006, designating the Evansville
area as attaining this standard. In that
action, EPA also clarified the
designations for the NAAQS
promulgated in 1997, stating that the
Evansville area remained designated
nonattainment for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 standard, but was designated
attainment for the 1997 24-hour
standard. Thus today’s action does not
address attainment of either the 1997 or
the 2006 24-hour standards.
In response to legal challenges of the
annual standard promulgated in 2006,
the D.C. Circuit remanded this standard
to EPA for further consideration. See
American Farm Bureau Federation and
National Pork Producers Council, et al.
v. EPA, 559 F.3d 512 (D.C. Cir. 2009).
However, given that the 1997 and 2006
annual standards are essentially
identical, attainment of the 1997 annual
standard would also indicate attainment
of the remanded 2006 annual standard.
Since the Evansville area is designated
nonattainment only for the annual
standard promulgated in 1997, today’s
action addresses redesignation to
attainment only for this standard.
Indiana has provided multiple
submittals in support of its request for
redesignation of the Evansville area. On
April 3, 2008, Indiana submitted its
original request that EPA redesignate
the Evansville area to attainment of the
1997 annual PM2.5 standard. This
request was based on 2004 to 2006
monitoring data indicating that no
monitor violated the annual standard. A
public hearing was held on March 27,
2008, and the comment period closed
on March 31, 2008. Indiana completed
the redesignation request by submitting
documentation of the public hearing
conducted by the State for the PM2.5
redesignation request and additional
regional air quality analysis on October
20, 2008. On March 6, 2009, Indiana
provided updated monitoring data for
the 2006 to 2008 period. On April 7,
2009, Indiana submitted supplemental
information on regional emissions. On
December 7, 2009, Indiana submitted
modeling intended to show that the
Evansville area would attain and
maintain the standard even in the
absence of the emission reductions
prompted by CAIR. On January 28,
2011, Indiana submitted updated
emissions data (including updated
MVEBs) to show that maintenance
extended further into the future, to
2022. On April 8, 2011, Indiana
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
resubmitted the information submitted
on January 28, 2011, in conjunction
with evidence that the State provided a
public comment period and held a
public hearing on the information and
received no public comments.
Fine particle pollution can be emitted
directly or formed secondarily through
chemical reactions in the atmosphere.
Sulfates are a type of secondary particle
formed from sulfur dioxide (SO2)
emissions from power plants and
industrial facilities. Nitrates, another
common type of secondary particle, are
formed from emissions of nitrogen
oxides (NOX) from power plants,
automobiles, and other combustion
sources.
Given the significance of sulfates and
nitrates in the Evansville area, the area’s
air quality is strongly affected by
regulations of SO2 and NOX emissions
from power plants. EPA proposed CAIR
on January 30, 2004, at 69 FR 4566,
promulgated CAIR on May 12, 2005, at
70 FR 25162, and promulgated
associated federal implementation plans
(FIPs) on April 28, 2006, at 71 FR 25328,
in order to reduce SO2 and NOX
emissions and improve air quality in
many areas across the eastern part of the
United States. However, on July 11,
2008, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals
issued a decision to vacate and remand
both CAIR and the associated CAIR FIPs
in their entirety (North Carolina v. EPA,
531 F.3d 836 (D.C. Cir. 2008)). EPA
petitioned for rehearing, and the court
issued an order remanding CAIR and
the CAIR FIPs to EPA without vacatur
(North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176
(D.C. Cir. 2008)). The Court, thereby, left
CAIR in place in order to ‘‘temporarily
preserve the environmental values
covered by CAIR’’ until EPA replaces it
with a rule consistent with the court’s
opinion. Id. at 1178. The court directed
EPA to ‘‘remedy CAIR’s flaws’’
consistent with its July 11, 2008,
opinion, but declined to impose a
schedule on EPA for completing that
action. Id. As a result of these court
rulings, the power plant emission
reductions that have resulted from the
development, promulgation, and
implementation of CAIR, and the
associated air quality improvement that
has occurred in the Evansville area and
elsewhere, cannot be considered
permanent.
On August 2, 2010, EPA published its
proposal of the Transport Rule to
address interstate transport of emissions
with respect to the 1997 ozone and the
1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, to replace
CAIR. (See 75 FR 45210.) This rule, as
proposed, would require substantial
reductions of SO2 and NOX emissions
from electric generating units (EGUs)
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
29697
across most of the Eastern United States.
In particular, it would require
reductions of these emissions to levels
well below the levels that led to
attainment in the Evansville area. The
proposed Transport Rule proposed to
establish permanent and enforceable
limits on EGU emissions across most of
the Eastern United States. Since the
Transport Rule as proposed would
require EGU emissions to be well below
the levels that have led to attainment in
the Evansville area. If EPA finalizes a
Transport Rule that similarly requires
EGU emissions to be below the levels
that led to attainment in the Evansville
area, that rule would provide support
for a determination that the air quality
improvement may be considered
permanent and enforceable.
IV. What are the criteria for
redesignation to attainment?
The Clean Air Act sets forth the
requirements for redesignating a
nonattainment area to attainment.
Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the
Clean Air Act allows for redesignation
provided that: (1) The Administrator
determines that the area has attained the
applicable NAAQS based on current air
quality data; (2) the Administrator has
fully approved an applicable state
implementation plan for the area under
section 110(k) of the Clean Air Act; (3)
the Administrator determines that the
improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable emission
reductions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP,
Federal air pollution control
regulations, and other permanent and
enforceable emission reductions; (4) the
Administrator has fully approved a
maintenance plan for the area meeting
the requirements of section 175A of the
Clean Air Act; and (5) the state
containing the area has met all
requirements applicable to the area for
purposes of redesignation under section
110 and part D of the Clean Air Act.
V. What is EPA’s analysis of the State’s
request?
EPA is proposing to approve the
redesignation of the Evansville area to
attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS and is proposing to approve the
maintenance plan for the area and other
related SIP revisions, subject to the
provisos discussed in this notice. The
bases for these proposed actions follow.
1. Attainment
As noted above, in a final rulemaking
dated November 27, 2009, at 74 FR
62243, EPA determined that the
Evansville area is attaining the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Further
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
29698
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
discussion of pertinent air quality issues
underlying this determination was
provided in the notice of proposed
rulemaking, published on September 24,
2009, at 74 FR 49690. This
determination was based primarily on
air quality data from 2006 to 2008.
EPA has reviewed more recent data,
including certified, quality-assured data
for 2009 and data for all of 2010. These
data show that the Evansville area
continues to attain the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. Table 1 provides an
historical summary of air quality data
for the area. This summary is based on
quality assured data that have been
entered into the EPA Air Quality
System, though the data for 2010 have
not yet been certified.
TABLE 1—PM2.5 DESIGN VALUES FOR EVANSVILLE AREA SITES
County
Site name
Dubois (ended 2008) ...............................
Dubois (ended 2008) ...............................
Dubois ......................................................
Gibson (began 2009) ...............................
Spencer ....................................................
Vanderburgh (ended 2009) .....................
Vanderburgh ............................................
Vanderburgh ............................................
Vanderburgh ............................................
Vanderburgh ............................................
Jasper Sport ............................................
Jasper Golf ..............................................
6th Street .................................................
Oakland City ............................................
Dale .........................................................
Civic Center .............................................
West Mill Road ........................................
U. of Evansville .......................................
Post Office ...............................................
Buena Vista .............................................
2004–
2006
2006–
2008
2007–
2009
2008–
2010
*13.6
*13.7
15.0
..............
13.9
14.5
14.6
14.8
..............
..............
*13.4
13.7
13.6
..............
13.0
13.4
13.7
13.6
..............
..............
*13.4
*13.7
*13.3
..............
12.6
*12.8
*13.0
13.1
..............
..............
..............
..............
12.1
12.2
13.0
..............
..............
12.8
*12.9
*13.0
Site No.
180370004
180370005
180372001
180510012
181470009
181630006
181630012
181630016
181630020
181630021
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
* Less than 75 percent complete data in at least one quarter.
Several of these sites had less than 75
percent complete data for one or more
of the applicable recent quarters. From
2008 to 2009, four monitoring sites
ended operation, and three new sites
began operating. In its prior
determination of attainment, EPA
determined that prior to ending
operation, these monitoring sites
recorded data indicating attainment of
the annual PM2.5 standard.
From 2008 to 2009, three additional
sites began operating: Site 18–051–0012
in Gibson County starting in 2008, and
sites 18–163–0020 and 18–163–0021 in
Vanderburgh County starting in 2009.
As a result of their short operating
history, these monitors have incomplete
data for purposes of comparison to the
NAAQS, but the data that are available,
summarized in Table 1 above, indicate
concentrations well below the NAAQS,
consistent with other data showing
continued attainment in the area.
Although the monitoring network was
in flux during this latter period, the area
has been and continues to be monitored
at numerous locations addressing the
range of locations in the area with
potential to violate the standard. EPA
has approved these various revisions to
Indiana’s monitoring network, including
approval most recently on October 29,
2010, reflecting its belief that the
revised network remains adequate to
assess air quality in the Evansville area.
For this and related reasons, EPA
proposes to approve the use of these
incomplete data, pursuant to Subpart
4.1(c) of 40 CFR part 50, Appendix N,
as supplemental evidence for evaluating
whether the Evansville area is attaining
the standard.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
Indiana’s request to redesignate the
Evansville area was predicated on
monitoring data from 2004 to 2006
showing that the area meets the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS. Subsequently, EPA
determined that the area is meeting the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, based primarily on
2006 to 2008 data. According to more
recent data, average concentrations for
all sites, including these sites with
incomplete data as well as the sites with
complete data, remain well below the
PM2.5 NAAQS. Indeed, EPA believes
that the Evansville area has been
attaining the PM2.5 NAAQS for five
consecutive three-year periods.
Therefore, EPA proposes to determine
that the Evansville area continues to
meet the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
2. Fully Approved SIP Meeting All
Pertinent Requirements
a. General Requirements
Sections 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and
107(d)(3)(E)(v) set forth related
requirements for the State to have a
fully approved SIP meeting all pertinent
requirements, and the following
discussion addresses Indiana’s
satisfaction of both of these portions of
section 107(d)(3)(E). Since the passage
of the Clean Air Act in 1970, Indiana
has adopted and submitted, and EPA
has fully approved, provisions
addressing the various required SIP
elements addressing particulate matter
in the Evansville area and elsewhere in
Indiana. Indiana submitted the ‘‘State of
Indiana Air Pollution Control
Implementation Plan,’’ its SIP, on
January 31, 1972. EPA approved
Indiana’s SIP on May 31, 1972, at 37 FR
10863. These rules addressed total
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
suspended particulate (TSP), reflecting
the particulate size range regulated
under the 1971 standards. EPA
designated Evansville as nonattainment
for TSP on March 3, 1978, at 43 FR
8962. Indiana submitted general TSP
Reasonably Available Control
Technology emission limits and
regulations for process sources on
October 6, 1980. On January 29, 1981,
Indiana submitted its source specific
limits for Vanderburgh County with
amendments on October 28, 1981. These
elements were approved into the
Indiana SIP on July 16, 1982. On July 1,
1987, EPA replaced the TSP standard
with a standard for finer-sized
particulate matter, specifically for
particles up to a nominal aerodynamic
diameter of ten micrometers, a set of
particles known as PM10. EPA
promulgated designations under the
PM10 NAAQS on March 15, 1991, at 56
FR 11101. The Evansville area was
designated as attaining the PM10
standards. Consequently, Indiana had
no obligation to submit PM10 attainment
plans for the Evansville area.
b. Section 110(a) Requirements
EPA believes that the section 110
elements not connected with
nonattainment plan submissions and
not linked to the area’s nonattainment
status are not applicable requirements
for purposes of review of the State’s
redesignation request.
On December 7, 2007, September 19,
2008, and October 20, 2009, Indiana
made submittals addressing
‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ elements required
under Clean Air Act section 110(a)(2).
EPA has published proposed
rulemaking on these submittals
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
(published on April 28, 2011, at 76 FR
23757), but has not completed final
rulemaking on these submittals.
However, the requirements of section
110(a)(2) are statewide requirements
that are not linked to the PM2.5
nonattainment status of or requirements
for the Evansville area. EPA believes
that section 110 elements not linked to
an area’s nonattainment status are not
applicable for purposes of
redesignation. See the Reading,
Pennsylvania proposed and final
rulemakings (October 10, 1996, at 61 FR
53174–53176, and May 7, 1997, at 62 FR
24826), the Cleveland-Akron-Loraine,
Ohio final rulemaking (May 7, 1996, at
61 FR 20458), and the Tampa, Florida
final rulemaking (December 7, 1995, at
60 FR 62748). Therefore,
notwithstanding the fact that EPA has
not yet completed rulemaking on
Indiana’s submittals for the
‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ elements of section
110(a)(2), EPA believes that these
elements are not applicable
requirements for purposes of review of
the State’s redesignation request.
c. Emission Inventories
Under section 172(c)(3), Indiana is
required to submit a comprehensive,
accurate and current inventory of actual
emissions. As part of Indiana’s
redesignation request for the Evansville
area, the State submitted a maintenance
plan that included emissions
inventories for the area for SO2 and NOX
(which are precursors for secondarily
formed PM2.5) and for directly emitted
PM2.5 for 2005, 2015, 2020, and 2022.
The inventories for 2005 address the
requirement under section 172(c)(3) for
a base year emission inventory, and the
other inventories help address the
requirement for a demonstration that the
area can expect to maintain the standard
for at least 10 years after approval of a
redesignation.
For each of the applicable pollutants
and years, Indiana prepared emission
estimates by county and by five source
types, namely onroad mobile sources,
nonroad mobile sources, area sources,
EGUs, and other point sources. Onroad
and nonroad mobile source emissions
were estimated by the Evansville
Metropolitan Planning Organization and
by the Indiana Department of
Transportation. The onroad emission
estimates were derived using EPA’s
MOBILE6.2 emission model. When
Indiana submitted updated emissions
data on April 8, 2011, which showed
1 MOVES2010a is EPA’s most recent model for
estimating on-road mobile source emissions. It was
officially released for use in SIPs and regional
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
that the area continued to maintain the
annual PM2.5 standard to 2022, it
continued to use MOBILE6.2 rather than
MOVES2010a to estimate the onroad
emissions.1 EPA is proposing to approve
Indiana’s continued use of MOBILE6.2
in this maintenance plan. Air quality
data indicates that the area has attained
the annual PM2.5 standard and large
emissions reductions are expected in
the coming years, which will allow the
area to continue to meet the annual
PM2.5 standard. If MOVES2010a had
been used to estimate onroad emissions
for the new last year of this maintenance
plan, it would not change this
conclusion. In addition, the recent
submittal only extended the
maintenance period by two years and it
was not necessary for the submittal to
revisit earlier years of the maintenance
period. This extension was necessary
because EPA could not act on the
submittal at an earlier date due to issues
related to the remand of the CAIR rule
and the Clean Air Act’s requirement that
maintenance plans address a period that
covers 10 years after EPA approves the
submitted maintenance plan. Also,
consistent with Question 5 in EPA’s
‘‘Policy Guidance on the Use of MOVES
2010 for State Implementation Plan
Development, Transportation
Conformity, and Other Purposes’’
(https://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/
moves/420b09046.pdf) we believe that
since the bulk of the work on the
maintenance plan was performed in
2008, which well before MOVES2010
was released, the continued use of
MOBILE6.2 in this maintenance plan is
warranted. Even the supplemental work
performed by Indiana to support the
April 2011 revision was done relatively
soon after MOVES was officially
released for use in SIPs on March 2,
2010, at 75 FR 9411. It is also worth
noting that the area has been attaining
the standard for several years, and
future anticipated emissions reductions
will ensure that the area will continue
to maintain the standard through the
maintenance period. Based on all of
these factors we believe that Indiana’s
continued use of MOBILE6.2 is justified
because it avoids an adverse impact on
state resources as is also described in
Question 5 of the MOVES SIP and
Conformity guidance document.
Most of the nonroad emission
estimates were derived using EPA’s
NONROAD model. Nonroad activity
levels reflect information compiled by
the Lake Michigan Air Directors
Consortium (LADCO), described at
https://www.ladco.org/reports/technical_
support_document/references/round_5_
emissions_summary-february_2008.pdf.
In addition, the inventory includes
emission estimates for marine and
railroad sources under contract to
LADCO. Area source emissions were
developed using local activity level
estimates and EPA emission factors as
reflected in the 2005 National Emissions
Inventory.
Base year emissions for EGUs for SO2
and NOX were obtained from
continuously monitored emission data
that the facilities reported to EPA’s
Clean Air Markets Division. Projections
of these emissions were based on
simulations using the Integrated
Planning Model (IPM) premised on
implementation of CAIR and the
associated allowance allocations and
trading programs. Indiana’s April 2011
submittal states that these emission
projections rely on an expectation that
the Transport Rule that EPA proposed
on August 2, 2010, will require EGUs to
achieve a similar set of reductions as
has been required by CAIR. EGU
emissions of PM2.5 were estimated using
the same information on activity levels
(i.e., baseline heat inputs reported to
EPA and projected heat inputs forecast
by IPM) in conjunction with EPA
emission factors and current emission
control levels. For other point sources,
baseline emissions were obtained from
routine source reports to the State, and
projections were based on growth
factors developed by LADCO based on
appropriate economic indicators.
Table 2 summarizes the 2005 base
year emissions estimates, subdivided by
source type, that Indiana provided in its
maintenance plan as submitted on
January 28, 2011. The area has a modest
number of people—the 2009 population
estimate for the Evansville Metropolitan
Statistical Area according to the U.S.
Census Bureau is 351,911. The PM2.5
nonattainment area includes several
large power plants that serve a broad
area within the industrial Midwest and
beyond. Therefore, point sources (in
particular power plants) emit a very
high fraction of the area’s emissions.
Indeed, point sources are estimated to
emit over 99 percent of the area’s SO2
emissions, about 86 percent of the area’s
NOX emissions, and about 71 percent of
the area’s PM2.5 emissions, and most of
the point source emissions are from
power plants. EPA proposes to find that
transportation conformity determinations on March
2, 2010, at 75 FR 9411.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
29699
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
29700
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
the inventory satisfies the requirements
of section 172(c)(3).
TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF 2005 EMISSIONS ESTIMATES FOR THE EVANSVILLE AREA BY SOURCE TYPE
[Tons per year]
SO2
NOX
PM2.5
EGUs .............................................................................................................................................................
Point ...............................................................................................................................................................
On-road ..........................................................................................................................................................
Non-road ........................................................................................................................................................
Area ...............................................................................................................................................................
360,822
3,685
237
537
674
85,320
774
6,528
5,676
1,624
8,240
1,427
118
337
37
Total ........................................................................................................................................................
365,954
99,922
10,160
Table 3 shows the 2005 base year
emission estimates and the 2015 and
2022 emission projections for the
Evansville area that Indiana provided in
its April 8, 2011, submission.
TABLE 3—EVANSVILLE AREA EMISSION PROJECTIONS
[Ions per year]
SO2
2005 ...............................................................................................................................
2015 ...............................................................................................................................
2022 ...............................................................................................................................
Change 2005–2022 .......................................................................................................
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
c. Other Nonattainment Area
Requirements
EPA is proposing to determine that, if
EPA issues final approval of the
emission inventories discussed above,
the Indiana SIP will meet the SIP
requirements for the Evansville area
applicable for purposes of redesignation
under Part D of the Clean Air Act.
Subpart 1 of Part D, sections 172 to 176
of the Clean Air Act, set forth the basic
nonattainment plan requirements
applicable to PM2.5 nonattainment areas.
Under section 172, states with
nonattainment areas must submit plans
providing for timely attainment and
meeting a variety of other requirements.
However, pursuant to 40 CFR
51.1004(c), EPA’s November 27, 2009,
determination that the Evansville area is
attaining the PM2.5 standard suspended
Indiana’s obligation to submit most of
the attainment planning requirements
that would otherwise apply.
Specifically, the determination of
attainment suspended Indiana’s
obligation to submit an attainment
demonstration, and requirements to
provide for reasonable further progress,
reasonable available control measures,
and contingency measures under
section 172(c)(9).
The General Preamble for
Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498,
April 16, 1992) also discusses the
evaluation of these requirements in the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
NOX
365,954 ..............
117,830 ..............
94,627 ................
¥271,327 ...........
74% decrease ....
99,922 ................
59,897 ................
51,885 ................
¥48,037 .............
48% decrease ....
context of EPA’s consideration of a
redesignation request. The General
Preamble sets forth EPA’s view of
applicable requirements for purposes of
evaluating redesignation requests when
an area is attaining the standard.
General Preamble for Implementation of
Title I (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992).
Because attainment has been reached,
no additional measures are needed to
provide for attainment, and section
172(c)(1) requirements for an attainment
demonstration and RACM are no longer
considered to be applicable for purposes
of redesignation as long as the area
continues to attain the standard until
redesignation. See also 40 CFR
51.1004(c). The RFP requirement under
section 172(c)(2) and contingency
measures requirement under section
172(c)(9) are similarly not relevant for
purposes of redesignation.
Section 172(c)(3) requires submission
and approval of a comprehensive,
accurate and current inventory of actual
emissions. As part of Indiana’s
redesignation request for the Evansville
area, the State submitted a 2005
emissions inventory. As discussed
above, EPA is proposing to approve this
inventory as meeting the section
172(c)(3) emissions inventory
requirement.
Section 172(c)(4) requires the
identification and quantification of
allowable emissions for major new and
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
PM2.5
10,160.
13,892.
12,604.
+2,444.
24% increase.
modified stationary sources in an area,
and section 172(c)(5) requires source
permits for the construction and
operation of new and modified major
stationary sources anywhere in the
nonattainment area. EPA has
determined that, since prevention of
significant deterioration (PSD)
requirements will apply after
redesignation, areas being redesignated
need not comply with the requirement
that a nonattainment new source review
(NSR) program be approved prior to
redesignation, provided that the area
demonstrates maintenance of the
NAAQS without part D NSR. A more
detailed rationale for this view is
described in a memorandum from Mary
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air
and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994,
entitled, ‘‘Part D New Source Review
Requirements for Areas Requesting
Redesignation to Attainment.’’ Indiana
has demonstrated that emissions will
remain sufficiently low even without
part D NSR in effect for the Evansville
area to be able to maintain the standard;
therefore, the State need not have a fully
approved part D NSR program prior to
approval of the redesignation request.
The State’s PSD program will become
effective in the Evansville area upon
redesignation to attainment. See
rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan
(March 7, 1995, at 60 FR 12467–12468);
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio (May 7,
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
1996, at 61 FR 20458, 20469–20470);
Louisville, Kentucky (October 23, 2001,
at 66 FR 53665); and Grand Rapids,
Michigan (June 21, 1996, at 61 FR
31834–31837).
Section 172(c)(6) requires the SIP to
contain control measures necessary to
provide for attainment of the standard.
Because attainment has been reached,
no additional measures are needed to
provide for attainment.
Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to
meet the applicable provisions of
section 110(a)(2). As noted above, we
believe the Indiana SIP meets the
requirements of section 110(a)(2)
applicable for purposes of
redesignation.
Section 176(c) of the CAA requires
states to establish criteria and
procedures to ensure that Federallysupported or funded activities,
including highway projects, conform to
the air quality planning goals in the
applicable SIPs.
EPA believes that it is reasonable to
interpret the conformity SIP
requirements as not applying for
purposes of evaluating the redesignation
request under section 107(d) for two
reasons. First, the requirement to submit
SIP revisions to comply with the
conformity provisions of the CLEAN
AIR ACT continues to apply to areas
after redesignation to attainment, since
such areas would be subject to a section
175A maintenance plan. Second, EPA’s
Federal conformity rules require the
performance of conformity analyses in
the absence of Federally-approved state
rules. Therefore, because areas are
subject to the conformity requirements
regardless of whether they are
redesignated to attainment and, because
they must implement conformity under
Federal rules if state rules are not yet
approved, EPA believes it is reasonable
to view these requirements as not
applying for purposes of evaluating a
redesignation request. See Wall v. EPA,
265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding
this interpretation. See also 60 FR
62748, 62749–62750 (Dec. 7, 1995)
(Tampa, Florida).
EPA approved Indiana’s general and
transportation conformity SIPs on
January 14, 1998, at 63 FR 2146, and
August 17, 2010, at 75 FR 50730,
respectively. Indiana has submitted
onroad motor vehicle budgets for the
Evansville area for 2015 and 2022. The
area must use the MVEBs from the
maintenance plan in any conformity
determination that is effective on or
after the effective date of the
maintenance plan approval.
No SIP provisions relevant to the
Evansville area are currently
disapproved, conditionally approved, or
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
partially approved. If EPA approves the
Evansville area emission inventory as
proposed, EPA believes that Indiana
will have a fully approved SIP for all
requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation.
3. Permanent and Enforceable Emission
Reductions
Indiana’s original redesignation
submission cited a number of regulatory
programs that it believed resulted in the
air quality improvement in the
Evansville area between the period that
was the basis of the area’s 1997 PM2.5
nonattainment designation (2002 to
2004), and the period that the Evansville
area began attaining the 1997 annual
PM2.5 standard (2004 to 2006). These
programs included the EPA NOX Budget
Trading Program, the acid rain program,
mobile source rules such as Heavy-duty
Highway Vehicle standards and Nonroad Diesel Engine standards, and CAIR.
Indiana subsequently supplemented
its request with submittals intended to
demonstrate that the Evansville area
could be expected to continue to attain
the standard even if the emission
reductions associated with the
promulgation of CAIR did not continue.
In particular, on December 7, 2009,
Indiana submitted the results of
modeling purporting to show PM2.5
concentrations that Indiana estimated
would occur in the Evansville area in
the absence of CAIR. For most power
plants, this modeling was based on
projections derived from actual
emission rates for 2007. For the power
plants within the Evansville
nonattainment area, this modeling used
the highest emission rates from 2000 to
2007. Indiana’s modeling showed that
these emission rates yielded Evansville
area concentrations below the PM2.5
NAAQS.
EPA has reviewed Indiana’s
submission and believes that Indiana’s
modeling does not properly reflect
power plant emissions that would occur
in the absence of CAIR. Although the
compliance deadlines in CAIR were
2009 for the first phase of NOX
reductions and 2010 for the first phase
of SO2 reductions, CAIR provided
significant incentives for earlier
emission reductions. Indeed, especially
for SO2, a comparison of 2007 emissions
for states in the CAIR region against
2003 emissions shows a significant
decline in emissions. For example,
according to continuous emission
monitoring data submitted by EGUs to
EPA’s Clean Air Markets Division, EGU
emissions of SO2 in Indiana declined
from 804,800 tons per year in 2003 to
714,500 tons per year in 2007, a decline
of 93,000 tons per year. Similarly,
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
29701
according to the same set of data, EGU
emissions of NOX in Indiana declined
from 261,000 tons per year to 196,600
tons per year, a decline of 64,400 tons
per year. Similar declines occur in other
states influencing Evansville area air
quality. These declines can reasonably
be attributed to the incentives of CAIR,
such that even the 2004 to 2006 air
quality data underlying Indiana’s
request would reflect benefits from
EPA’s development, proposal, and
promulgation of CAIR.
Given that the DC Circuit has now
remanded CAIR to EPA, it will not
remain in force indefinitely. As a
consequence, the emission reductions
associated with CAIR cannot be
considered to be permanent.
EPA’s proposed Transport Rule
would, in a manner consistent with the
D.C. Circuit opinion on CAIR, among
other things identify emission
reductions in the Eastern United States
necessary to address significant
interference with attainment and
maintenance pursuant to section
110(a)(2)(d)(i)(I) of the Clean Air Act
with respect to the 1997 ozone and 1997
and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. The comment
period on this proposed rule closed on
October 1, 2010. EPA is reviewing all
comments received. EPA may not
prejudge the requirements of the final
Transport Rule, and so cannot complete
final rulemaking on Indiana’s
redesignation request in a manner that
relies on Transport Rule requirements
unless and until EPA has promulgated
a final Transport Rule.
In the proposed Transport Rule, EPA
proposed to quantify the reductions
needed in specific states to address each
covered state’s significant contribution
to nonattainment and interference with
maintenance of specific NAAQS. In that
action, EPA also proposed to establish
FIPs to ensure that the significant
contribution to nonattainment and
interference with maintenance
identified by EPA is prohibited.
The Evansville area is notable for
having several sizable electric
generating facilities, and most of these
facilities are operating with new or
upgraded SO2 and NOX controls for
their coal-fired units. Vectron’s A.B.
Brown facility operates a dual alkali
system for SO2 control and select
catalytic reduction (SCR) of NOX.
Alcoa’s Warrick Power Plant uses wet
lime scrubbing to control SO2 emissions
and combustion controls, and uses SCR
for one unit and low NOX burners (LNB)
and over-fire air (OFA) for all units to
limit its NOX emissions. Vectron’s F.B.
Culley generating station uses wet
limestone scrubbing for SO2 control and
SCR with LNB for NOX control at its two
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
29702
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
units. Hoosier Energy uses LNB to
reduce NOX emissions from both Frank
E. Ratts Generating Station units. Duke
Energy’s Gibson plant uses wet
limestone scrubbing with SCR, LNB,
and OFA on all five units. Indianapolis
Power and Light operates wet limestone
scrubbers along with SCR, LNB, and
OFA on the four units of its Petersburg
power plant. Indiana-Michigan Power
uses LNB on the two coal-fired units at
the Rockport plant.
These emission controls, along with
similar controls at many other plants in
the Eastern United States, are providing
substantial air quality benefits. As
explained above, some of the reductions
were associated with the now-remanded
CAIR. The proposed Transport Rule, if
finalized, would similarly require
reductions in NOX and SO2 from EGUs.
The reductions associated with the
Transport Rule, if and when it is
finalized, may be considered permanent
and enforceable.
The modeling for the proposed
Transport Rule identified 13 states,
including Indiana, that have emissions
that significantly affect Evansville area
air quality. Table 4 shows state-wide
emission estimates for SO2 and NOX for
2005, 2012, and 2014 for these states.
The values for 2005 reflect base year
emissions estimates. Given the timing of
attainment in the Evansville area, these
values reflect an approximation of
statewide emission levels at which the
Evansville area attained the PM2.5
standard. The values for 2012 reflect
estimates for a scenario in which neither
CAIR nor a replacement Transport Rule
is in effect, reflecting a baseline that
EPA used in developing its proposed
rule. The values for 2014 reflect
estimates for a scenario in which the
proposed Transport Rule is finalized as
proposed. These estimates are taken
from Tables 6–1 (NOX) and 6–2 (SO2) of
the emissions technical support
document for the proposed Transport
Rule, available at https://www.epa.gov/
airquality/transport/pdfs/TR_Proposal
_Emissions_TSD.pdf. These estimates
exclude emissions from fires, which are
a small fraction of the inventory (well
under 0.1 percent) that is projected to
remain constant and does not materially
affect the comparison here.
TABLE 4—SO2 AND NOX EMISSIONS FOR STATES IDENTIFIED IN THE PROPOSED TRANSPORT RULE AS SIGNIFICANTLY
CONTRIBUTING TO NONATTAINMENT OR INTERFERING WITH MAINTENANCE IN THE EVANSVILLE AREA
[Tons per year]
SO2 emissions
State
2012 (w/o
Transport
Rule)
2005
NOX emissions
2014 (w/
Transport
Rule)
2005
2012 (w/o
Transport
Rule)
2014 (w/
Transport
Rule)
1,047,371
592,389
748,020
516,950
221,877
572,424
490,190
421,979
1,276,270
1,173,296
388,191
535,586
263,615
986,601
461,314
674,183
866,376
250,930
780,885
415,042
570,575
1,076,470
1,119,680
708,905
645,431
181,760
396,403
296,138
214,726
304,834
182,875
182,630
300,560
315,283
361,138
303,071
218,065
184,341
159,927
614,861
443,748
577,858
773,276
312,015
435,837
638,546
505,195
816,239
704,936
471,705
294,016
358,787
505,039
360,357
405,825
542,886
251,632
345,073
478,625
353,407
552,864
566,301
338,154
206,630
257,290
386,251
280,763
337,889
480,743
221,442
247,270
410,319
317,092
453,167
454,248
270,171
144,970
228,637
Total ..............................................................
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Indiana .................................................................
Alabama ...............................................................
Georgia ................................................................
Illinois ...................................................................
Iowa ......................................................................
Kentucky ..............................................................
Michigan ...............................................................
Missouri ................................................................
Ohio ......................................................................
Pennsylvania ........................................................
Tennessee ...........................................................
West Virginia ........................................................
Wisconsin .............................................................
8,250,163
8,740,164
3,419,991
6,949,024
5,166,095
4,232,962
In Table 4, 2005 emissions represent
an approximation of emissions at which
Evansville attains the standard. Table 4
shows that, in comparison, the proposed
Transport Rule would establish
enforceable emission restrictions that
would be expected to result in
emissions in the most pertinent states
(as listed in Table 4) that for SO2 are
4,830,172 tons per year (59 percent)
lower and that for NOX are 2,716,062
tons per year (39 percent) lower. That is,
the proposed Transport Rule would
provide for permanent and enforceable
emission reductions in the Eastern
United States that are significantly
greater than the reductions needed to
assure maintenance in the Evansville
area.
Similar results are obtained by
comparing emission estimates in 2012
without the proposed Transport Rule to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
emission estimates in 2014 with the
proposed Transport Rule. In the
proposed Transport Rule, EPA
estimated that total emissions across
these states would reflect 5,320,173 tons
per year lower SO2 emissions and
933,133 tons per year lower NOX
emissions in the 2014 controlled case
than in the 2012 base case, i.e.,
emissions that are 61 percent and 18
percent lower, respectively. According
to EPA modeling for the proposed
Transport Rule, comparing
concentrations projected in 2014 with
the proposed Transport Rule in place
against concentrations projected in 2012
in the absence of a Transport Rule, the
Transport Rule achieves approximately
a 4 μg/m3 air quality improvement in
the Evansville area, yielding
concentrations well below the annual
PM2.5 NAAQS and below the
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
concentrations that have been achieved
by power plant emission reductions to
date.
The modeling for the proposed
Transport Rule also projects an
Evansville area concentration of about
11 μg/m3 in 2014 based on
implementation of the proposed
Transport Rule, whereas for purposes of
this proposed redesignation it is only
necessary for the Transport Rule to help
provide for the Evansville area to
maintain a concentration at or below 15
μg/m3.
This proposal is premised on the
expectation that the final Transport Rule
will be similarly effective as the
proposed Transport Rule would be in
providing for maintenance of the 1997
PM2.5 standard in the Evansville area.
Given the substantial margin by which
EPA expects the Evansville area to
maintain the standard, numerous details
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
of the final Transport Rule could differ
from corresponding features of the
proposed Transport Rule without
causing changes in the impact on
Evansville air quality that are significant
for purposes of this proposal to
redesignate the Evansville area. This
proposal to redesignate the Evansville
area is predicated on the final Transport
Rule being substantially equivalent for
purposes of air quality in the Evansville
area to the Transport Rule proposed on
August 2, 2010. In EPA’s view, this
premise will be met if the emission
levels expected under the final
Transport Rule in states most pertinent
to Evansville, and the associated
expected air quality benefits in
Evansville, are sufficiently similar to the
emission levels and associated
Evansville air quality benefits expected
under the proposed rule so as to provide
a comparable degree of confidence that
the Evansville area will maintain the
standard.
In summary, a limited set of
reductions of EGU emissions of SO2 and
NOX contributed significantly to the air
quality improvement in the Evansville
area. Given the remanded status of
CAIR, this air quality improvement
cannot be considered permanent.
However, the proposed Transport Rule
proposed to mandate even greater
reductions than have already occurred
and, more importantly, proposed to
mandate more reductions than are
needed to maintain the standard in the
Evansville area. Therefore, with the
final promulgation of a Transport Rule
that is substantially equivalent to the
proposed rule for purposes of
maintaining the standard in the
Evansville area, in combination with the
other measures cited by Indiana, EPA
believes that the emission reductions
that led the Evansville area to attain the
PM2.5 air quality standard could be
considered as permanent and
enforceable for purposes of section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii).
4. Maintenance Plan
Sections 107(d)(3)(E)(iv) and 175A
require that the State demonstrate that
the area to be redesignated will continue
to meet the PM2.5 NAAQS for at least a
ten-year maintenance period after
redesignation in 2011. Indiana’s
maintenance plan includes emission
inventories discussed in section V.2.c
above.
The sizeable reductions in SO2 and
NOX emissions by 2015 and 2022 shown
in Table 3 above are due in significant
part to restrictions mandated by EPA to
reduce power plant emissions of SO2
and NOX in the Eastern United States in
order to reduce pollutant transport in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
this region. In this inventory, Indiana
used emission projections premised on
the implementation of CAIR
requirements as an approximation of the
emissions levels the State projects to
occur following the promulgation of the
Transport Rule. As explained above, the
DC Circuit found CAIR unlawful and
remanded it to EPA. Because CAIR is
not in place permanently, and because
EPA has not completed final
promulgation of the Transport Rule,
EPA cannot currently grant final
approval to a maintenance plan that
relies in significant part on either of
these rules.
On the other hand, as noted above,
EPA’s recently proposed Transport Rule
would, if finalized, achieve substantial
regional reductions of SO2 and NOX
emissions. While EPA has not made
emission estimates for 2022 that are
premised on the implementation of the
proposed Transport Rule, Table 4 above
shows emission estimates that EPA has
made for 2014 that assume the
implementation of the proposed
Transport Rule. These emission
estimates show a substantial decline in
SO2 and NOX emissions comparable to
that shown in Indiana’s maintenance
plan. Given the substantial degree of
control of the various EGUs in the
Evansville area both currently and
projected into the future, EPA finds
Indiana’s projection of such emission
declines through 2022 to be appropriate
forecasts of future emissions, provided
EPA promulgates a final Transport Rule
whose requirements are substantially
equivalent to those in the proposed rule
with respect to continued maintenance
of the PM2.5 annual standard in the
Evansville area.
In conjunction with the projections
for dramatic declines in Evansville area
emissions of SO2 and NOX emissions,
Indiana’s maintenance plan shows an
increase in PM2.5 emissions. Therefore,
further evaluation is needed to judge
whether the increase in PM2.5 emissions,
in combination with the decreases in
SO2 and NOX emissions, is likely to
provide for maintenance of the
standard.
Each of these pollutants is
characterized by a different relationship
between emissions and air quality.
Therefore, simply summing up the
emissions of these various pollutants
does not provide a meaningful indicator
of the combined air quality impact of
these emission changes. Instead, a more
appropriate indicator is the percentage
change in emissions for each emitted
pollutant, weighted according to the air
quality impact for each.
For this purpose, EPA examined
speciation data available from its Air
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
29703
Explorer Web site for 2007 and 2008 for
the Evansville area. These data suggest
that PM2.5 in the Evansville area consists
of approximately 54 percent sulfate, 7
percent nitrate, 32 percent organic
particulate, 4 percent miscellaneous
inorganic particulate (sometime labeled
‘‘crustal particles’’), and 4 percent other
types of particulate matter.
EPA used a conservative approach
that assumes that the full ambient
concentration of organic particulate
matter plus miscellaneous inorganic
particulate matter will vary in
accordance with changes in total
nonattainment area emissions of
directly emitted PM2.5. This analysis
thus assumes that the entirety of this
component of ambient PM2.5 will
increase by the 24 percent that Indiana’s
maintenance plan projects that directly
emitted PM2.5 emissions will increase.
In this analysis, the baseline
concentration is conservatively assumed
to be 15.0 μg/m3, of which directly
emitted PM2.5 is estimated to include 32
plus 4 or 36 percent, or 5.4 μg/m3.
Indiana estimates that emissions of
directly emitted PM2.5 will increase by
24 percent from 2005. EPA’s assessment
assumes that this increase will cause a
corresponding increase in ambient
concentrations of PM2.5, which would
suggest an increase in the concentration
of this component by 1.3 μg/m3.
However, EPA believes that this
potential increase will be fully
compensated by a greater decrease in
sulfate and nitrate concentrations. The
precise decrease in sulfate and nitrate
concentrations is a complicated result of
emission reductions not just in the
Evansville area but also in many other
parts of the Eastern United States.
Nevertheless, modeling conducted by
EPA for the proposed Transport Rule
estimated that future Evansville area
concentrations with the Transport Rule
as proposed in place would be about 4
μg/m3 below the standard, and the
emission reductions that have already
occurred have already brought
Evansville area concentrations to about
13.0 μg/m3 (as shown in Table 4 above).
Therefore, the 1.3 μg/m3 increase in the
components associated with directly
emitted PM2.5 would not be expected to
yield concentrations above the standard.
That is, EPA expects that the trends in
direct emissions of PM2.5 in the
Evansville area will not prevent the area
from maintaining the standard.
Maintenance of the 1997 annual PM2.5
air quality standard in the Evansville
area is a function of regional as well as
local emissions trends. The regional
impacts are dominated by the impacts of
SO2 and NOX emissions. The previous
section (discussing permanent and
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
29704
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
enforceable emission reductions)
showed that the proposed Transport
Rule could be expected to provide for
substantial SO2 and NOX emission
reductions through 2014, reductions
that would be maintained throughout
and well beyond the period (through
2022) addressed in Indiana’s
maintenance plan. While EPA in its
Transport Rule rulemaking developed
emission projections extending to 2020
only for a scenario without regional
emission limitations and not for a
scenario with a Transport Rule in place,
the ongoing downward emission trend
evident in EPA’s 2020 emission
projections in absence of regional
emission limitations lends support to
Indiana’s projection that the scenario
with regional emission limitations in
place will continue to have low
emissions in 2022. With a Transport
Rule as proposed, the caps on emissions
of SO2 and NOX from the power sector
will ensure against growth in SO2 and
NOX emissions from these sources, and
in combination with motor vehicle rules
and other rules will assure a continuing
decline in SO2 and NOX emissions.
Therefore, EPA believes that available
emissions data indicate that, with a
Transport Rule substantially equivalent
to the one proposed, for purposes of
maintaining the standard in the
Evansville area, the Evansville area can
be expected to maintain the standard
through 2022.
Under section 175A of the Clean Air
Act, maintenance plans must
demonstrate attainment through at least
10 years beyond the date of EPA
approval of a state’s redesignation
request. Indiana’s maintenance plan,
demonstrating maintenance through
2022, satisfies this requirement.
EPA also has modeling evidence
indicating that the Evansville area will
continue to attain the PM2.5 NAAQS
well into the future, provided that EPA
promulgates a Transport Rule
substantially equivalent for purposes of
demonstrating maintenance in the
Evansville area to its recently proposed
rule. The first modeling evidence is the
modeling analysis, referenced above,
that Indiana has submitted. As
discussed above, EPA disputes Indiana’s
contention that its modeling
demonstrates attainment in the
Evansville area in the absence of CAIR,
insofar as the analysis was predicated
on 2007 emission levels that already
include a set of emission reductions
attributable to CAIR. However, EPA
believes that Indiana’s modeling
analysis, showing attainment with
implementation of a subset of the
emission reductions expected from
CAIR, supports the conclusion that
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
implementation of the full set of
reductions that were expected from
CAIR (or a relatively similar set of
reductions from a Transport Rule) will
also assure that the standard is
maintained.
EPA has also conducted its own
modeling, provided in support of the
Transport Rule proposed rulemaking.
This modeling projects that the
Evansville area will achieve a PM2.5
concentration of 11.1 μg/m3 by 2014 if
the Transport Rule as proposed is made
final. Although EPA did not perform
modeling for years later than 2014, the
Transport Rule as proposed would
provide for utility emissions in 2022 to
be similar and in fact slightly lower than
emissions in 2014, and more generally
EPA expects total emissions to be
similar or slightly lower in 2022 than in
2014, so that air quality in 2022 is likely
to be similar or slightly better than air
quality in 2014 as well. Therefore, these
two modeling analyses support the
conclusion that should EPA finalize a
transport rule that provides for
relatively similar air quality in the
Evansville area, the Evansville area will
maintain the PM2.5 standard throughout
the maintenance plan period.
Indiana’s maintenance plan includes
additional elements. These include a
commitment to continue to operate an
EPA-approved monitoring network, as
necessary to demonstrate ongoing
compliance with the NAAQS. Indiana
currently operates six PM2.5 monitors in
the Evansville area. Indiana remains
obligated to continue to quality assure
monitoring data in accordance with 40
CFR part 58 and enter all data into the
Air Quality System in accordance with
Federal guidelines. Indiana will use
these data, supplemented with
additional information if necessary, to
assure that the area continues to attain
the standard. Indiana will also continue
to develop and submit periodic
emission inventories as required by the
Federal Consolidated Emissions
Reporting Rule (codified at 40 CFR part
51 subpart A) to track future levels of
emissions.
Indiana’s maintenance plan also
includes a contingency plan as required
by section 175A(d). The contingency
plan provisions are designed to correct
promptly or to prevent a violation of the
NAAQS that might occur after
redesignation. Section 175A of the
Clean Air Act requires that a
maintenance plan include such
contingency measures as EPA deems
necessary to assure that the state will
promptly correct a violation of the
NAAQS that occurs after redesignation,
including all measures that were in the
plan prior to redesignation. Under
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Indiana’s plan, if a violation occurs,
Indiana will implement an ‘‘Action
Level Response’’ to evaluate what
measures are warranted to address the
violation, in particular considering
implementing one or more measures
from a list of candidate measures given
in the plan. Indiana’s candidate
contingency measures include diesel
retrofit projects, idling restrictions, a
wood stove change out program,
additional transportation control
measures, and additional NOX and SO2
emission controls. Under Indiana’s plan,
control measures are to be adopted and
implemented within 18 months from
the end of the season in which air
quality triggering the Action Level
Response occurred. Indiana further
commits to conduct ongoing review of
its monitored data, and if monitored
concentrations or emissions are trending
upward, Indiana commits to take
appropriate steps to avoid a violation if
possible. EPA believes that Indiana’s
contingency plan satisfies the pertinent
requirements of section 175A(d).
As required by section 175A(b) of the
Clean Air Act, Indiana commits to
submit to the EPA an updated PM2.5
maintenance plan eight years after
redesignation of the Evansville area to
assure maintenance for an additional
ten-year period beyond the initial
maintenance plan. As required by
section 175A of the Clean Air Act,
Indiana has also committed to retain the
PM2.5 control measures contained in the
SIP prior to redesignation.
For all of the reasons outlined above,
EPA is proposing to approve Indiana’s
maintenance plan for the Evansville
area following the establishment of
requirements substantially equivalent to
the requirements of EPA’s proposed
Transport Rule for purposes of
maintaining the 1997 annual PM2.5
standard in the Evansville area.
5. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets
Under section 176(c) of the Clean Air
Act, transportation plans and
transportation improvement programs
(TIPs) must be evaluated for conformity
with State Implementation Plans.
Consequently, Indiana’s redesignation
request provides MVEBs, conformance
with which will assure that motor
vehicle emissions are at or below levels
that can be expected to provide for
attainment and maintenance of the
PM2.5 NAAQS. Indiana’s submittal of
April 2008 included emission budgets
for NOX and PM2.5 for 2010 and 2020.
EPA initiated an adequacy review of the
budgets that Indiana included in its
April 2008 submittal. As such, a notice
of the submission of these budgets was
posted on its adequacy web page (http:
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
29705
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
//www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/
transconf/currsips.htm). The public
comment period closed on July 2, 2008.
There were no public comments.
However, Indiana then submitted a
replacement set of budgets in its
submittals of January and April 2011.
These updated budgets address the
years 2015 and 2022. (See section V.2.c
of this proposal for a discussion related
to the development of the onroad
inventory for 2022.) Since these budgets
replace the budgets submitted in April
2008, EPA will no longer conduct
rulemaking on the April 2008 budgets.
Table 5 shows the updated budgets as
well as the 2005, 2015, and 2022
emission projections on which these
budgets are based. Indiana did not
provide emission budgets for SO2,
VOCs, and ammonia because it
concluded, consistent with EPA’s
presumptions regarding these
precursors, that emissions of these
precursors from motor vehicles are not
significant contributors to the area’s
PM2.5 air quality problem.
TABLE 5—MOBILE SOURCE EMISSION PROJECTIONS
[Tons per year]
NOX
Emissions
estimate
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
2005 .................................................................................................................................
2015 .................................................................................................................................
2022 .................................................................................................................................
Table 5 shows substantial decreases
in on-road NOX and PM2.5 emissions
from 2005 to 2015 and additional
reductions between 2015 and 2022. The
emission reductions are expected
because newer vehicles, subject to more
stringent emission standards, are
continually replacing older, dirtier
vehicles. Indiana provided emission
budgets that for 2015 include a safety
margin of 5 percent above projected
levels and that for 2022 include a safety
margin of 10 percent above projected
levels.
In the Evansville area, the motor
vehicle budgets and motor vehicle
emission projections for both NOX and
PM2.5 are lower than base year levels,
but the overall emissions of PM2.5
summed across all source types is
projected to increase. This requires
further examination of the question of
whether an increase in PM2.5 emissions
by the amounts requested by Indiana as
safety margins would still provide for
maintenance of the PM2.5 standard.
The discussion of the maintenance
plan above describes EPA’s rationale for
believing that the impact of the
projected increase in PM2.5 emissions
will be more than compensated by the
projected decreases in emissions of SO2
and NOX. EPA examined whether the
same conclusion would apply if the
Evansville area used the entire safety
margin, i.e., if mobile source PM2.5
emissions were higher than projected
levels by an amount equal to the safety
margin. Using the first approach above,
EPA found that if mobile source PM2.5
are five tons per year higher than
baseline projections, the expected
impact of the overall PM2.5 emissions
increase still rounds to 1.3 μg/m3, which
EPA again believes is more than
compensated by the decrease in sulfate
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
6,528.04
2,503.19
1,699.86
and nitrate concentrations resulting
from reductions in SO2 and NOX
emissions. Similar results are obtained
from the second approach for assessing
the impact of PM2.5 emission trends
discussed above. Therefore, EPA
believes that the requested budgets,
including the requested safety margins,
provide for a quantity of mobile source
emissions that would be expected to
maintain the PM2.5 standard.
EPA has posted Indiana’s more
recently submitted recommended
budgets (for 2015 and 2022) on its
adequacy findings web page, to provide
parallel opportunities for review of
these budgets. These budgets have been
submitted by IDEM with the intent that
these budgets replace the budgets
submitted in 2008 that were subject to
previous adequacy review. See (https://
www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/
transconf/currsips.htm).
EPA is not able to complete its
adequacy review for the Evansville
MVEBs for 2015 and 2022 at this time
because EPA has not yet taken final
action on the proposed Transport Rule.
In the absence of a final Transport Rule,
we cannot determine if other emissions
sources and the budgets, when
considered together, are consistent with
applicable requirements for
maintenance as required by 40 CFR
93.118(e)(4)(iv). Therefore, EPA cannot
at this time find the MVEBs adequate.
However, EPA is proposing to approve
the Evansville MVEBs into the Indiana
SIP because, based on our review of the
submitted maintenance plan, we have
determined that the maintenance plan
and motor vehicle emissions budgets
will be approvable if the Transport Rule
as finalized is substantially equivalent
to the proposed rule in terms of its
impact on the maintenance of the
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
PM2.5
Budget
....................
2628.35
1869.84
Emissions
estimate
117.67
54.33
48.93
Budget
....................
57.05
53.83
standard in the Evansville area. This is
consistent with EPA’s intentions for
acting on the rest of the maintenance
plan as described above in this
proposal.
The budgets that Indiana submitted
were calculated using the MOBILE6.2
motor vehicle emissions model. EPA is
proposing to approve the inventory and
the conformity budgets calculated using
this model because this model was the
most current model available at the time
Indiana was performing its analysis.
Separate from today’s proposal, EPA has
issued an updated motor vehicle
emissions model known as the Motor
Vehicle Emission Simulator or MOVES.
In its announcement of this model, EPA
established a two-year grace period for
continued use of MOBILE6.2 in
transportation conformity
determinations for transportation plans
and TIPs (extending to March 2, 2012),
after which states and metropolitan
planning organizations (other than
California) must use MOVES for
transportation plan and TIP conformity
determinations. (See 75 FR 9411, March
2, 2010.)
Additional information on the use of
MOVES in SIPs and conformity
determinations can be found in the
December 2009 Policy Guidance on the
Use of MOVES2010 for State
Implementation Plan Development,
Transportation Conformity, and Other
Purposes. This guidance document is
available at: https://www.epa.gov/otaq/
models/moves/420b09046.pdf. During
the conformity grace period, the State
and MPO(s) should use the interagency
consultation process to examine how
MOVES2010 will impact their future
transportation plan and TIP conformity
determinations, including regional
emissions analyses. For example, an
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
29706
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 99 / Monday, May 23, 2011 / Proposed Rules
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with PROPOSALS
increase in emission estimates due to
the use of MOVES2010 may affect an
area’s ability to demonstrate conformity
for its transportation plan and/or TIP.
Therefore, state and local planners
should carefully consider whether the
SIP and motor vehicle emissions
budget(s) should be revised with
MOVES2010 or if transportation plans
and TIPs should be revised before the
end of the conformity grace period,
since doing so may be necessary to
ensure conformity determinations in the
future.
We would expect that states and
metropolitan planning organizations
would work closely with EPA and the
local Federal Highway Administration
and Federal Transit Administration
offices to determine an appropriate
course of action to address this type of
situation if it is expected to occur. If
Indiana chooses to revise the Evansville
maintenance plan, it should consult
Question 7 of the December 2009 Policy
Guidance on the Use of MOVES2010 for
State Implementation Plan
Development, Transportation
Conformity, and Other Purposes for
information on requirements related to
such revisions.
6. Summary of Proposed Actions
In its rulemaking of November 27,
2009, EPA determined that the
Evansville area is attaining the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA’s review of
more recent data indicates that the area
continues to attain this standard. Thus
EPA is proposing to determine that the
area continues to attain the 1997 annual
PM2.5 standard. EPA is proposing to
approve Indiana’s maintenance plan,
provided EPA promulgates a final
Transport Rule substantially equivalent
to the Transport Rule as proposed with
respect to maintenance of the standard
in the Evansville area. EPA proposes to
approve the emissions inventory
included in Indiana’s maintenance plan
as satisfying the requirement in section
172(c)(3) for a comprehensive emission
inventory. With respect to two criteria
for redesignation–-permanent
enforceable emissions reductions and a
fully approvable maintenance plan—
EPA believes that Indiana is currently
relying on CAIR for a significant portion
of the air quality improvement leading
to attainment and a significant portion
of the reductions needed to maintain the
standard. EPA believes, however, that
these two prerequisites for redesignation
will be satisfied if and when the
Transport Rule that EPA proposed on
August 2, 2010 is finalized in a form
that is substantially equivalent to the
rule as proposed, for purposes of
maintenance of the annual PM2.5
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:40 May 20, 2011
Jkt 223001
standard in Evansville. Therefore, EPA
proposes that the Evansville area will
qualify for redesignation to attainment
at such time as the Transport Rule in
such a form is finalized and takes effect.
Finally, EPA is proposing to approve
motor vehicle emission budgets for the
Evansville area.
VI. What are the effects of EPA’s
proposed actions?
If finalized, approval of the
redesignation request would change the
legal designation of the Evansville area
for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS,
found at 40 CFR part 81, from
nonattainment to attainment. EPA is
also proposing to approve several
revisions to the Indiana SIP for the
Evansville area, including the
maintenance plans, the emission
inventory submitted with the
maintenance plan, and the 2015 and
2022 MVEBs. EPA is proposing to take
these actions if and when EPA
promulgates the Transport Rule limiting
SO2 and NOX emissions in the Eastern
United States to an extent substantially
equivalent in pertinent respects to the
Transport Rule proposed August 2, 2010
for purposes of maintaining air quality
in Evansville.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the Clean Air Act,
redesignation of an area to attainment
and the accompanying approval of a
maintenance plan under section
107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the
status of a geographical area and do not
impose any additional regulatory
requirements on sources beyond those
imposed by state law. A redesignation to
attainment does not in and of itself
create any new requirements, but rather
results in the applicability of
requirements contained in the Clean Air
Act for areas that have been
redesignated to attainment. Moreover,
the Administrator is required to approve
a SIP submission that complies with the
provisions of the Act and applicable
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k);
40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve
state choices, provided that they meet
the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely
approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose
additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason,
these actions:
• Are not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
• Do not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Are 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.);
• Do 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);
• Do not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• Are not economically significant
regulatory actions based on health or
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• Are not significant regulatory
actions subject to Executive Order
13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
• Are 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
• Do 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.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Particulate matter.
Dated: May 6, 2011.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2011–12609 Filed 5–20–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\23MYP1.SGM
23MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 99 (Monday, May 23, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29695-29706]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-12609]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R05-OAR-2008-0396; FRL-9307-1]
Approval, and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Indiana; Redesignation of the Evansville Area to Attainment of the Fine
Particulate Matter Standard
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On April 3, 2008, the Indiana Department of Environmental
Management (IDEM) submitted a request for EPA to approve the
redesignation of the Evansville, Indiana nonattainment area to
attainment of the 1997 annual fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) standard. The air quality improvement in this area
and maintenance of the standard in this area is attributable in
substantial part to power plant emission reductions in the Eastern
United States prompted by the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). The
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
(D.C. Circuit) has remanded CAIR, but EPA has proposed a replacement
rule known as the Transport Rule. The Evansville area has attained the
standard with only a fraction of the reductions that the proposed
Transport Rule proposed to require. Therefore, EPA is proposing to
approve the redesignation request for the Evansville area, along with
related SIP revisions, if and when EPA takes final action to promulgate
the Transport Rule, provided that the final Transport Rule requires
emission reductions that are at least substantially equivalent to those
of the proposed Transport Rule for purposes of maintaining the standard
in the Evansville area.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before June 22, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2008-0396, by one of the following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (312) 692-2551.
4. Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney, Chief, Air Programs Branch (AR-
18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only accepted during the
Regional Office normal hours of operation, and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office
official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30
p.m. excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2008-0396. 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 information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through https://www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without
going through https://www.regulations.gov your e-mail address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional instructions on submitting
comments, go to Section I of
[[Page 29696]]
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the https://www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy.
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically
in https://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal
holidays. We recommend that you telephone John Summerhays,
Environmental Scientist, at (312) 886-6067 before visiting the Region 5
office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Summerhays, Environmental
Scientist, Attainment Planning and Maintenance Section, Air Programs
Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6067,
summerhays.john@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This supplementary information section is
arranged as follows:
I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
II. What actions is EPA proposing to take?
III. What is the background for this action?
IV. What are the criteria for redesignation to attainment?
V. What is EPA's analysis of the State's request?
1. Attainment
2. Fully Approved SIP Meeting All Pertinent Requirements
a. General Requirements
b. Section 110(a) Requirements
c. Emission Inventories
d. Other Nonattainment Area Requirements
3. Permanent and Enforceable Emission Reductions
4. Maintenance Plan
5. Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets
6. Summary of Proposed Actions
VI. What are the effects of EPA's proposed actions?
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
When submitting comments, remember to:
1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date, and page number).
2. Follow directions--The EPA may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.
II. What actions is EPA proposing to take?
On November 27, 2009, at 74 FR 62243, EPA made a final
determination that the Evansville area has attained the 1997 annual
PM2.5 national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). EPA
here is proposing to determine that the area continues to attain that
standard. EPA is also proposing to take several additional actions
related to Indiana's request to redesignate the area to attainment for
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
First, EPA is proposing to approve Indiana's 1997 annual
PM2.5 maintenance plan for the Evansville area as a revision
to the Indiana SIP, subject to the proviso that EPA promulgates a final
Transport Rule requiring power plant emission reductions substantially
equivalent for purposes of maintaining the PM2.5 standard in
Evansville to those proposed in EPA's Transport Rule proposal. Since
maintenance of the standard in Evansville is based in large part on
maintaining substantial control of power plant emissions, promulgation
of such a Transport Rule is necessary to help make recent reductions in
power plant emissions (or equivalent reductions at other power plants)
permanent and enforceable.
Second, EPA is proposing to approve the 2005 emission inventory in
Indiana's maintenance plan as satisfying the requirement of section
172(c)(3) for a comprehensive emission inventory.
Third, EPA is proposing to find that, subject to final approval of
the emissions inventory and the proviso set forth above with respect to
EPA's proposed Transport Rule, Indiana meets the requirements for
redesignation of the Evansville area to attainment of the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act.
Because CAIR was remanded, the reductions associated with that rule
cannot be considered permanent and enforceable. For this reason, the
submissions from Indiana do not currently demonstrate satisfaction of
the requirement of section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii), that the area's air
quality improvement be due to permanent and enforceable measures.
However, EPA proposes that this requirement will be met if and when EPA
finalizes a Transport Rule which, for purposes of this action, is
substantially equivalent to the Transport Rule that EPA proposed on
August 2, 2010. Therefore, subject to this proviso, EPA is proposing to
approve the request from the State of Indiana to change the designation
of the Evansville area, consisting of Dubois, Vanderburgh, and Warrick
Counties along with Montgomery Township in Gibson County, Ohio Township
in Spencer County, and Washington Township in Pike County, from
nonattainment to attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.
Finally, EPA is proposing to approve the 2015 and 2022 motor
vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) for the Evansville area into the
Indiana SIP. EPA proposes to take final action on this and the other
proposed actions delineated in this section if and when EPA takes final
action promulgating a Transport Rule substantially equivalent for
purposes of air quality in the Evansville area to the Transport Rule
proposed on August 2, 2010.
III. What is the background for these actions?
The first air quality standards for PM2.5 were
promulgated on July 18, 1997, at 62 FR 38652. EPA promulgated an annual
standard at a level of 15 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\),
based on a three-year average of annual mean PM2.5
concentrations. In the same rulemaking, EPA promulgated a 24-hour
standard of 65 [mu]g/m\3\, based on a three-year average of the 98th
percentile of 24-hour concentrations. On October 17, 2006, at 71 FR
61144, EPA retained the annual average standard at 15 [mu]g/m\3\ but
revised the 24-hour standard to 35 [mu]g/m\3\, based again on the
three-year average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour concentrations.
On January 5, 2005, at 70 FR 944, as supplemented on April 14,
2005, at 70 FR 19844, EPA designated the Evansville area as
nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 air quality standards. In
that action, EPA defined the Evansville nonattainment area to include
the entirety of Dubois, Vanderburgh, and Warrick Counties and portions
of three other counties, specifically including
[[Page 29697]]
Montgomery Township in Gibson County, Ohio Township in Spencer County,
and Washington Township in Pike County. On November 13, 2009, at 74 FR
58688, EPA promulgated designations for the 24-hour standard set in
2006, designating the Evansville area as attaining this standard. In
that action, EPA also clarified the designations for the NAAQS
promulgated in 1997, stating that the Evansville area remained
designated nonattainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard,
but was designated attainment for the 1997 24-hour standard. Thus
today's action does not address attainment of either the 1997 or the
2006 24-hour standards.
In response to legal challenges of the annual standard promulgated
in 2006, the D.C. Circuit remanded this standard to EPA for further
consideration. See American Farm Bureau Federation and National Pork
Producers Council, et al. v. EPA, 559 F.3d 512 (D.C. Cir. 2009).
However, given that the 1997 and 2006 annual standards are essentially
identical, attainment of the 1997 annual standard would also indicate
attainment of the remanded 2006 annual standard. Since the Evansville
area is designated nonattainment only for the annual standard
promulgated in 1997, today's action addresses redesignation to
attainment only for this standard.
Indiana has provided multiple submittals in support of its request
for redesignation of the Evansville area. On April 3, 2008, Indiana
submitted its original request that EPA redesignate the Evansville area
to attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard. This
request was based on 2004 to 2006 monitoring data indicating that no
monitor violated the annual standard. A public hearing was held on
March 27, 2008, and the comment period closed on March 31, 2008.
Indiana completed the redesignation request by submitting documentation
of the public hearing conducted by the State for the PM2.5
redesignation request and additional regional air quality analysis on
October 20, 2008. On March 6, 2009, Indiana provided updated monitoring
data for the 2006 to 2008 period. On April 7, 2009, Indiana submitted
supplemental information on regional emissions. On December 7, 2009,
Indiana submitted modeling intended to show that the Evansville area
would attain and maintain the standard even in the absence of the
emission reductions prompted by CAIR. On January 28, 2011, Indiana
submitted updated emissions data (including updated MVEBs) to show that
maintenance extended further into the future, to 2022. On April 8,
2011, Indiana resubmitted the information submitted on January 28,
2011, in conjunction with evidence that the State provided a public
comment period and held a public hearing on the information and
received no public comments.
Fine particle pollution can be emitted directly or formed
secondarily through chemical reactions in the atmosphere. Sulfates are
a type of secondary particle formed from sulfur dioxide
(SO2) emissions from power plants and industrial facilities.
Nitrates, another common type of secondary particle, are formed from
emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOX) from power plants,
automobiles, and other combustion sources.
Given the significance of sulfates and nitrates in the Evansville
area, the area's air quality is strongly affected by regulations of
SO2 and NOX emissions from power plants. EPA
proposed CAIR on January 30, 2004, at 69 FR 4566, promulgated CAIR on
May 12, 2005, at 70 FR 25162, and promulgated associated federal
implementation plans (FIPs) on April 28, 2006, at 71 FR 25328, in order
to reduce SO2 and NOX emissions and improve air
quality in many areas across the eastern part of the United States.
However, on July 11, 2008, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a
decision to vacate and remand both CAIR and the associated CAIR FIPs in
their entirety (North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 836 (D.C. Cir. 2008)).
EPA petitioned for rehearing, and the court issued an order remanding
CAIR and the CAIR FIPs to EPA without vacatur (North Carolina v. EPA,
550 F.3d 1176 (D.C. Cir. 2008)). The Court, thereby, left CAIR in place
in order to ``temporarily preserve the environmental values covered by
CAIR'' until EPA replaces it with a rule consistent with the court's
opinion. Id. at 1178. The court directed EPA to ``remedy CAIR's flaws''
consistent with its July 11, 2008, opinion, but declined to impose a
schedule on EPA for completing that action. Id. As a result of these
court rulings, the power plant emission reductions that have resulted
from the development, promulgation, and implementation of CAIR, and the
associated air quality improvement that has occurred in the Evansville
area and elsewhere, cannot be considered permanent.
On August 2, 2010, EPA published its proposal of the Transport Rule
to address interstate transport of emissions with respect to the 1997
ozone and the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS, to replace CAIR.
(See 75 FR 45210.) This rule, as proposed, would require substantial
reductions of SO2 and NOX emissions from electric
generating units (EGUs) across most of the Eastern United States. In
particular, it would require reductions of these emissions to levels
well below the levels that led to attainment in the Evansville area.
The proposed Transport Rule proposed to establish permanent and
enforceable limits on EGU emissions across most of the Eastern United
States. Since the Transport Rule as proposed would require EGU
emissions to be well below the levels that have led to attainment in
the Evansville area. If EPA finalizes a Transport Rule that similarly
requires EGU emissions to be below the levels that led to attainment in
the Evansville area, that rule would provide support for a
determination that the air quality improvement may be considered
permanent and enforceable.
IV. What are the criteria for redesignation to attainment?
The Clean Air Act sets forth the requirements for redesignating a
nonattainment area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of
the Clean Air Act allows for redesignation provided that: (1) The
Administrator determines that the area has attained the applicable
NAAQS based on current air quality data; (2) the Administrator has
fully approved an applicable state implementation plan for the area
under section 110(k) of the Clean Air Act; (3) the Administrator
determines that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and
enforceable emission reductions resulting from implementation of the
applicable SIP, Federal air pollution control regulations, and other
permanent and enforceable emission reductions; (4) the Administrator
has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area meeting the
requirements of section 175A of the Clean Air Act; and (5) the state
containing the area has met all requirements applicable to the area for
purposes of redesignation under section 110 and part D of the Clean Air
Act.
V. What is EPA's analysis of the State's request?
EPA is proposing to approve the redesignation of the Evansville
area to attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and is
proposing to approve the maintenance plan for the area and other
related SIP revisions, subject to the provisos discussed in this
notice. The bases for these proposed actions follow.
1. Attainment
As noted above, in a final rulemaking dated November 27, 2009, at
74 FR 62243, EPA determined that the Evansville area is attaining the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Further
[[Page 29698]]
discussion of pertinent air quality issues underlying this
determination was provided in the notice of proposed rulemaking,
published on September 24, 2009, at 74 FR 49690. This determination was
based primarily on air quality data from 2006 to 2008.
EPA has reviewed more recent data, including certified, quality-
assured data for 2009 and data for all of 2010. These data show that
the Evansville area continues to attain the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. Table 1 provides an historical summary of air
quality data for the area. This summary is based on quality assured
data that have been entered into the EPA Air Quality System, though the
data for 2010 have not yet been certified.
Table 1--PM2.5 Design Values for Evansville Area Sites
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
County Site name Site No. 2004-2006 2006-2008 2007-2009 2008-2010
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dubois (ended 2008).............. Jasper Sport....... 180370004 *13.6 *13.4 *13.4 .........
Dubois (ended 2008).............. Jasper Golf........ 180370005 *13.7 13.7 *13.7 .........
Dubois........................... 6th Street......... 180372001 15.0 13.6 *13.3 12.1
Gibson (began 2009).............. Oakland City....... 180510012 ......... ......... ......... 12.2
Spencer.......................... Dale............... 181470009 13.9 13.0 12.6 13.0
Vanderburgh (ended 2009)......... Civic Center....... 181630006 14.5 13.4 *12.8 .........
Vanderburgh...................... West Mill Road..... 181630012 14.6 13.7 *13.0 .........
Vanderburgh...................... U. of Evansville... 181630016 14.8 13.6 13.1 12.8
Vanderburgh...................... Post Office........ 181630020 ......... ......... ......... *12.9
Vanderburgh...................... Buena Vista........ 181630021 ......... ......... ......... *13.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Less than 75 percent complete data in at least one quarter.
Several of these sites had less than 75 percent complete data for
one or more of the applicable recent quarters. From 2008 to 2009, four
monitoring sites ended operation, and three new sites began operating.
In its prior determination of attainment, EPA determined that prior to
ending operation, these monitoring sites recorded data indicating
attainment of the annual PM2.5 standard.
From 2008 to 2009, three additional sites began operating: Site 18-
051-0012 in Gibson County starting in 2008, and sites 18-163-0020 and
18-163-0021 in Vanderburgh County starting in 2009. As a result of
their short operating history, these monitors have incomplete data for
purposes of comparison to the NAAQS, but the data that are available,
summarized in Table 1 above, indicate concentrations well below the
NAAQS, consistent with other data showing continued attainment in the
area.
Although the monitoring network was in flux during this latter
period, the area has been and continues to be monitored at numerous
locations addressing the range of locations in the area with potential
to violate the standard. EPA has approved these various revisions to
Indiana's monitoring network, including approval most recently on
October 29, 2010, reflecting its belief that the revised network
remains adequate to assess air quality in the Evansville area.
For this and related reasons, EPA proposes to approve the use of
these incomplete data, pursuant to Subpart 4.1(c) of 40 CFR part 50,
Appendix N, as supplemental evidence for evaluating whether the
Evansville area is attaining the standard.
Indiana's request to redesignate the Evansville area was predicated
on monitoring data from 2004 to 2006 showing that the area meets the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. Subsequently, EPA determined that the area
is meeting the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, based primarily on 2006 to
2008 data. According to more recent data, average concentrations for
all sites, including these sites with incomplete data as well as the
sites with complete data, remain well below the PM2.5 NAAQS.
Indeed, EPA believes that the Evansville area has been attaining the
PM2.5 NAAQS for five consecutive three-year periods.
Therefore, EPA proposes to determine that the Evansville area continues
to meet the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
2. Fully Approved SIP Meeting All Pertinent Requirements
a. General Requirements
Sections 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and 107(d)(3)(E)(v) set forth related
requirements for the State to have a fully approved SIP meeting all
pertinent requirements, and the following discussion addresses
Indiana's satisfaction of both of these portions of section
107(d)(3)(E). Since the passage of the Clean Air Act in 1970, Indiana
has adopted and submitted, and EPA has fully approved, provisions
addressing the various required SIP elements addressing particulate
matter in the Evansville area and elsewhere in Indiana. Indiana
submitted the ``State of Indiana Air Pollution Control Implementation
Plan,'' its SIP, on January 31, 1972. EPA approved Indiana's SIP on May
31, 1972, at 37 FR 10863. These rules addressed total suspended
particulate (TSP), reflecting the particulate size range regulated
under the 1971 standards. EPA designated Evansville as nonattainment
for TSP on March 3, 1978, at 43 FR 8962. Indiana submitted general TSP
Reasonably Available Control Technology emission limits and regulations
for process sources on October 6, 1980. On January 29, 1981, Indiana
submitted its source specific limits for Vanderburgh County with
amendments on October 28, 1981. These elements were approved into the
Indiana SIP on July 16, 1982. On July 1, 1987, EPA replaced the TSP
standard with a standard for finer-sized particulate matter,
specifically for particles up to a nominal aerodynamic diameter of ten
micrometers, a set of particles known as PM10. EPA
promulgated designations under the PM10 NAAQS on March 15,
1991, at 56 FR 11101. The Evansville area was designated as attaining
the PM10 standards. Consequently, Indiana had no obligation
to submit PM10 attainment plans for the Evansville area.
b. Section 110(a) Requirements
EPA believes that the section 110 elements not connected with
nonattainment plan submissions and not linked to the area's
nonattainment status are not applicable requirements for purposes of
review of the State's redesignation request.
On December 7, 2007, September 19, 2008, and October 20, 2009,
Indiana made submittals addressing ``infrastructure SIP'' elements
required under Clean Air Act section 110(a)(2). EPA has published
proposed rulemaking on these submittals
[[Page 29699]]
(published on April 28, 2011, at 76 FR 23757), but has not completed
final rulemaking on these submittals. However, the requirements of
section 110(a)(2) are statewide requirements that are not linked to the
PM2.5 nonattainment status of or requirements for the
Evansville area. EPA believes that section 110 elements not linked to
an area's nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of
redesignation. See the Reading, Pennsylvania proposed and final
rulemakings (October 10, 1996, at 61 FR 53174-53176, and May 7, 1997,
at 62 FR 24826), the Cleveland-Akron-Loraine, Ohio final rulemaking
(May 7, 1996, at 61 FR 20458), and the Tampa, Florida final rulemaking
(December 7, 1995, at 60 FR 62748). Therefore, notwithstanding the fact
that EPA has not yet completed rulemaking on Indiana's submittals for
the ``infrastructure SIP'' elements of section 110(a)(2), EPA believes
that these elements are not applicable requirements for purposes of
review of the State's redesignation request.
c. Emission Inventories
Under section 172(c)(3), Indiana is required to submit a
comprehensive, accurate and current inventory of actual emissions. As
part of Indiana's redesignation request for the Evansville area, the
State submitted a maintenance plan that included emissions inventories
for the area for SO2 and NOX (which are
precursors for secondarily formed PM2.5) and for directly
emitted PM2.5 for 2005, 2015, 2020, and 2022. The
inventories for 2005 address the requirement under section 172(c)(3)
for a base year emission inventory, and the other inventories help
address the requirement for a demonstration that the area can expect to
maintain the standard for at least 10 years after approval of a
redesignation.
For each of the applicable pollutants and years, Indiana prepared
emission estimates by county and by five source types, namely onroad
mobile sources, nonroad mobile sources, area sources, EGUs, and other
point sources. Onroad and nonroad mobile source emissions were
estimated by the Evansville Metropolitan Planning Organization and by
the Indiana Department of Transportation. The onroad emission estimates
were derived using EPA's MOBILE6.2 emission model. When Indiana
submitted updated emissions data on April 8, 2011, which showed that
the area continued to maintain the annual PM2.5 standard to
2022, it continued to use MOBILE6.2 rather than MOVES2010a to estimate
the onroad emissions.\1\ EPA is proposing to approve Indiana's
continued use of MOBILE6.2 in this maintenance plan. Air quality data
indicates that the area has attained the annual PM2.5 standard and
large emissions reductions are expected in the coming years, which will
allow the area to continue to meet the annual PM2.5 standard. If
MOVES2010a had been used to estimate onroad emissions for the new last
year of this maintenance plan, it would not change this conclusion. In
addition, the recent submittal only extended the maintenance period by
two years and it was not necessary for the submittal to revisit earlier
years of the maintenance period. This extension was necessary because
EPA could not act on the submittal at an earlier date due to issues
related to the remand of the CAIR rule and the Clean Air Act's
requirement that maintenance plans address a period that covers 10
years after EPA approves the submitted maintenance plan. Also,
consistent with Question 5 in EPA's ``Policy Guidance on the Use of
MOVES 2010 for State Implementation Plan Development, Transportation
Conformity, and Other Purposes'' (https://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/moves/420b09046.pdf) we believe that since the bulk of the work on the
maintenance plan was performed in 2008, which well before MOVES2010 was
released, the continued use of MOBILE6.2 in this maintenance plan is
warranted. Even the supplemental work performed by Indiana to support
the April 2011 revision was done relatively soon after MOVES was
officially released for use in SIPs on March 2, 2010, at 75 FR 9411. It
is also worth noting that the area has been attaining the standard for
several years, and future anticipated emissions reductions will ensure
that the area will continue to maintain the standard through the
maintenance period. Based on all of these factors we believe that
Indiana's continued use of MOBILE6.2 is justified because it avoids an
adverse impact on state resources as is also described in Question 5 of
the MOVES SIP and Conformity guidance document.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ MOVES2010a is EPA's most recent model for estimating on-road
mobile source emissions. It was officially released for use in SIPs
and regional transportation conformity determinations on March 2,
2010, at 75 FR 9411.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Most of the nonroad emission estimates were derived using EPA's
NONROAD model. Nonroad activity levels reflect information compiled by
the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO), described at https://www.ladco.org/reports/technical_support_document/references/round_5_emissions_summary-february_2008.pdf. In addition, the inventory
includes emission estimates for marine and railroad sources under
contract to LADCO. Area source emissions were developed using local
activity level estimates and EPA emission factors as reflected in the
2005 National Emissions Inventory.
Base year emissions for EGUs for SO2 and NOX
were obtained from continuously monitored emission data that the
facilities reported to EPA's Clean Air Markets Division. Projections of
these emissions were based on simulations using the Integrated Planning
Model (IPM) premised on implementation of CAIR and the associated
allowance allocations and trading programs. Indiana's April 2011
submittal states that these emission projections rely on an expectation
that the Transport Rule that EPA proposed on August 2, 2010, will
require EGUs to achieve a similar set of reductions as has been
required by CAIR. EGU emissions of PM2.5 were estimated
using the same information on activity levels (i.e., baseline heat
inputs reported to EPA and projected heat inputs forecast by IPM) in
conjunction with EPA emission factors and current emission control
levels. For other point sources, baseline emissions were obtained from
routine source reports to the State, and projections were based on
growth factors developed by LADCO based on appropriate economic
indicators.
Table 2 summarizes the 2005 base year emissions estimates,
subdivided by source type, that Indiana provided in its maintenance
plan as submitted on January 28, 2011. The area has a modest number of
people--the 2009 population estimate for the Evansville Metropolitan
Statistical Area according to the U.S. Census Bureau is 351,911. The
PM2.5 nonattainment area includes several large power plants
that serve a broad area within the industrial Midwest and beyond.
Therefore, point sources (in particular power plants) emit a very high
fraction of the area's emissions. Indeed, point sources are estimated
to emit over 99 percent of the area's SO2 emissions, about
86 percent of the area's NOX emissions, and about 71 percent
of the area's PM2.5 emissions, and most of the point source
emissions are from power plants. EPA proposes to find that
[[Page 29700]]
the inventory satisfies the requirements of section 172(c)(3).
Table 2--Summary of 2005 Emissions Estimates for the Evansville Area by
Source Type
[Tons per year]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2 NOX PM2.5
------------------------------------------------------------------------
EGUs................................ 360,822 85,320 8,240
Point............................... 3,685 774 1,427
On-road............................. 237 6,528 118
Non-road............................ 537 5,676 337
Area................................ 674 1,624 37
-----------------------------------
Total........................... 365,954 99,922 10,160
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3 shows the 2005 base year emission estimates and the 2015
and 2022 emission projections for the Evansville area that Indiana
provided in its April 8, 2011, submission.
Table 3--Evansville Area Emission Projections
[Ions per year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2 NOX PM2.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2005............................ 365,954.................. 99,922................... 10,160.
2015............................ 117,830.................. 59,897................... 13,892.
2022............................ 94,627................... 51,885................... 12,604.
Change 2005-2022................ -271,327................. -48,037.................. +2,444.
74% decrease............. 48% decrease............. 24% increase.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Other Nonattainment Area Requirements
EPA is proposing to determine that, if EPA issues final approval of
the emission inventories discussed above, the Indiana SIP will meet the
SIP requirements for the Evansville area applicable for purposes of
redesignation under Part D of the Clean Air Act. Subpart 1 of Part D,
sections 172 to 176 of the Clean Air Act, set forth the basic
nonattainment plan requirements applicable to PM2.5
nonattainment areas.
Under section 172, states with nonattainment areas must submit
plans providing for timely attainment and meeting a variety of other
requirements. However, pursuant to 40 CFR 51.1004(c), EPA's November
27, 2009, determination that the Evansville area is attaining the
PM2.5 standard suspended Indiana's obligation to submit most
of the attainment planning requirements that would otherwise apply.
Specifically, the determination of attainment suspended Indiana's
obligation to submit an attainment demonstration, and requirements to
provide for reasonable further progress, reasonable available control
measures, and contingency measures under section 172(c)(9).
The General Preamble for Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498,
April 16, 1992) also discusses the evaluation of these requirements in
the context of EPA's consideration of a redesignation request. The
General Preamble sets forth EPA's view of applicable requirements for
purposes of evaluating redesignation requests when an area is attaining
the standard. General Preamble for Implementation of Title I (57 FR
13498, April 16, 1992).
Because attainment has been reached, no additional measures are
needed to provide for attainment, and section 172(c)(1) requirements
for an attainment demonstration and RACM are no longer considered to be
applicable for purposes of redesignation as long as the area continues
to attain the standard until redesignation. See also 40 CFR 51.1004(c).
The RFP requirement under section 172(c)(2) and contingency measures
requirement under section 172(c)(9) are similarly not relevant for
purposes of redesignation.
Section 172(c)(3) requires submission and approval of a
comprehensive, accurate and current inventory of actual emissions. As
part of Indiana's redesignation request for the Evansville area, the
State submitted a 2005 emissions inventory. As discussed above, EPA is
proposing to approve this inventory as meeting the section 172(c)(3)
emissions inventory requirement.
Section 172(c)(4) requires the identification and quantification of
allowable emissions for major new and modified stationary sources in an
area, and section 172(c)(5) requires source permits for the
construction and operation of new and modified major stationary sources
anywhere in the nonattainment area. EPA has determined that, since
prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) requirements will apply
after redesignation, areas being redesignated need not comply with the
requirement that a nonattainment new source review (NSR) program be
approved prior to redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates
maintenance of the NAAQS without part D NSR. A more detailed rationale
for this view is described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled,
``Part D New Source Review Requirements for Areas Requesting
Redesignation to Attainment.'' Indiana has demonstrated that emissions
will remain sufficiently low even without part D NSR in effect for the
Evansville area to be able to maintain the standard; therefore, the
State need not have a fully approved part D NSR program prior to
approval of the redesignation request. The State's PSD program will
become effective in the Evansville area upon redesignation to
attainment. See rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (March 7, 1995, at 60
FR 12467-12468); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio (May 7,
[[Page 29701]]
1996, at 61 FR 20458, 20469-20470); Louisville, Kentucky (October 23,
2001, at 66 FR 53665); and Grand Rapids, Michigan (June 21, 1996, at 61
FR 31834-31837).
Section 172(c)(6) requires the SIP to contain control measures
necessary to provide for attainment of the standard. Because attainment
has been reached, no additional measures are needed to provide for
attainment.
Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to meet the applicable
provisions of section 110(a)(2). As noted above, we believe the Indiana
SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2) applicable for purposes
of redesignation.
Section 176(c) of the CAA requires states to establish criteria and
procedures to ensure that Federally-supported or funded activities,
including highway projects, conform to the air quality planning goals
in the applicable SIPs.
EPA believes that it is reasonable to interpret the conformity SIP
requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating the
redesignation request under section 107(d) for two reasons. First, the
requirement to submit SIP revisions to comply with the conformity
provisions of the CLEAN AIR ACT continues to apply to areas after
redesignation to attainment, since such areas would be subject to a
section 175A maintenance plan. Second, EPA's Federal conformity rules
require the performance of conformity analyses in the absence of
Federally-approved state rules. Therefore, because areas are subject to
the conformity requirements regardless of whether they are redesignated
to attainment and, because they must implement conformity under Federal
rules if state rules are not yet approved, EPA believes it is
reasonable to view these requirements as not applying for purposes of
evaluating a redesignation request. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th
Cir. 2001), upholding this interpretation. See also 60 FR 62748, 62749-
62750 (Dec. 7, 1995) (Tampa, Florida).
EPA approved Indiana's general and transportation conformity SIPs
on January 14, 1998, at 63 FR 2146, and August 17, 2010, at 75 FR
50730, respectively. Indiana has submitted onroad motor vehicle budgets
for the Evansville area for 2015 and 2022. The area must use the MVEBs
from the maintenance plan in any conformity determination that is
effective on or after the effective date of the maintenance plan
approval.
No SIP provisions relevant to the Evansville area are currently
disapproved, conditionally approved, or partially approved. If EPA
approves the Evansville area emission inventory as proposed, EPA
believes that Indiana will have a fully approved SIP for all
requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation.
3. Permanent and Enforceable Emission Reductions
Indiana's original redesignation submission cited a number of
regulatory programs that it believed resulted in the air quality
improvement in the Evansville area between the period that was the
basis of the area's 1997 PM2.5 nonattainment designation
(2002 to 2004), and the period that the Evansville area began attaining
the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard (2004 to 2006). These
programs included the EPA NOX Budget Trading Program, the
acid rain program, mobile source rules such as Heavy-duty Highway
Vehicle standards and Non-road Diesel Engine standards, and CAIR.
Indiana subsequently supplemented its request with submittals
intended to demonstrate that the Evansville area could be expected to
continue to attain the standard even if the emission reductions
associated with the promulgation of CAIR did not continue. In
particular, on December 7, 2009, Indiana submitted the results of
modeling purporting to show PM2.5 concentrations that
Indiana estimated would occur in the Evansville area in the absence of
CAIR. For most power plants, this modeling was based on projections
derived from actual emission rates for 2007. For the power plants
within the Evansville nonattainment area, this modeling used the
highest emission rates from 2000 to 2007. Indiana's modeling showed
that these emission rates yielded Evansville area concentrations below
the PM2.5 NAAQS.
EPA has reviewed Indiana's submission and believes that Indiana's
modeling does not properly reflect power plant emissions that would
occur in the absence of CAIR. Although the compliance deadlines in CAIR
were 2009 for the first phase of NOX reductions and 2010 for
the first phase of SO2 reductions, CAIR provided significant
incentives for earlier emission reductions. Indeed, especially for
SO2, a comparison of 2007 emissions for states in the CAIR
region against 2003 emissions shows a significant decline in emissions.
For example, according to continuous emission monitoring data submitted
by EGUs to EPA's Clean Air Markets Division, EGU emissions of
SO2 in Indiana declined from 804,800 tons per year in 2003
to 714,500 tons per year in 2007, a decline of 93,000 tons per year.
Similarly, according to the same set of data, EGU emissions of
NOX in Indiana declined from 261,000 tons per year to
196,600 tons per year, a decline of 64,400 tons per year. Similar
declines occur in other states influencing Evansville area air quality.
These declines can reasonably be attributed to the incentives of CAIR,
such that even the 2004 to 2006 air quality data underlying Indiana's
request would reflect benefits from EPA's development, proposal, and
promulgation of CAIR.
Given that the DC Circuit has now remanded CAIR to EPA, it will not
remain in force indefinitely. As a consequence, the emission reductions
associated with CAIR cannot be considered to be permanent.
EPA's proposed Transport Rule would, in a manner consistent with
the D.C. Circuit opinion on CAIR, among other things identify emission
reductions in the Eastern United States necessary to address
significant interference with attainment and maintenance pursuant to
section 110(a)(2)(d)(i)(I) of the Clean Air Act with respect to the
1997 ozone and 1997 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS. The comment period
on this proposed rule closed on October 1, 2010. EPA is reviewing all
comments received. EPA may not prejudge the requirements of the final
Transport Rule, and so cannot complete final rulemaking on Indiana's
redesignation request in a manner that relies on Transport Rule
requirements unless and until EPA has promulgated a final Transport
Rule.
In the proposed Transport Rule, EPA proposed to quantify the
reductions needed in specific states to address each covered state's
significant contribution to nonattainment and interference with
maintenance of specific NAAQS. In that action, EPA also proposed to
establish FIPs to ensure that the significant contribution to
nonattainment and interference with maintenance identified by EPA is
prohibited.
The Evansville area is notable for having several sizable electric
generating facilities, and most of these facilities are operating with
new or upgraded SO2 and NOX controls for their
coal-fired units. Vectron's A.B. Brown facility operates a dual alkali
system for SO2 control and select catalytic reduction (SCR)
of NOX. Alcoa's Warrick Power Plant uses wet lime scrubbing
to control SO2 emissions and combustion controls, and uses
SCR for one unit and low NOX burners (LNB) and over-fire air
(OFA) for all units to limit its NOX emissions. Vectron's
F.B. Culley generating station uses wet limestone scrubbing for
SO2 control and SCR with LNB for NOX control at
its two
[[Page 29702]]
units. Hoosier Energy uses LNB to reduce NOX emissions from
both Frank E. Ratts Generating Station units. Duke Energy's Gibson
plant uses wet limestone scrubbing with SCR, LNB, and OFA on all five
units. Indianapolis Power and Light operates wet limestone scrubbers
along with SCR, LNB, and OFA on the four units of its Petersburg power
plant. Indiana-Michigan Power uses LNB on the two coal-fired units at
the Rockport plant.
These emission controls, along with similar controls at many other
plants in the Eastern United States, are providing substantial air
quality benefits. As explained above, some of the reductions were
associated with the now-remanded CAIR. The proposed Transport Rule, if
finalized, would similarly require reductions in NOX and
SO2 from EGUs. The reductions associated with the Transport
Rule, if and when it is finalized, may be considered permanent and
enforceable.
The modeling for the proposed Transport Rule identified 13 states,
including Indiana, that have emissions that significantly affect
Evansville area air quality. Table 4 shows state-wide emission
estimates for SO2 and NOX for 2005, 2012, and
2014 for these states. The values for 2005 reflect base year emissions
estimates. Given the timing of attainment in the Evansville area, these
values reflect an approximation of statewide emission levels at which
the Evansville area attained the PM2.5 standard. The values
for 2012 reflect estimates for a scenario in which neither CAIR nor a
replacement Transport Rule is in effect, reflecting a baseline that EPA
used in developing its proposed rule. The values for 2014 reflect
estimates for a scenario in which the proposed Transport Rule is
finalized as proposed. These estimates are taken from Tables 6-1
(NOX) and 6-2 (SO2) of the emissions technical
support document for the proposed Transport Rule, available at https://www.epa.gov/airquality/transport/pdfs/TR_Proposal_Emissions_TSD.pdf.
These estimates exclude emissions from fires, which are a small
fraction of the inventory (well under 0.1 percent) that is projected to
remain constant and does not materially affect the comparison here.
Table 4--SO2 and NOX Emissions for States Identified in the Proposed Transport Rule as Significantly
Contributing to Nonattainment or Interfering With Maintenance in the Evansville Area
[Tons per year]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2 emissions NOX emissions
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State 2012 (w/o 2014 (w/ 2012 (w/o 2014 (w/
2005 Transport Transport 2005 Transport Transport
Rule) Rule) Rule) Rule)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indiana..................... 1,047,371 986,601 396,403 614,861 505,039 386,251
Alabama..................... 592,389 461,314 296,138 443,748 360,357 280,763
Georgia..................... 748,020 674,183 214,726 577,858 405,825 337,889
Illinois.................... 516,950 866,376 304,834 773,276 542,886 480,743
Iowa........................ 221,877 250,930 182,875 312,015 251,632 221,442
Kentucky.................... 572,424 780,885 182,630 435,837 345,073 247,270
Michigan.................... 490,190 415,042 300,560 638,546 478,625 410,319
Missouri.................... 421,979 570,575 315,283 505,195 353,407 317,092
Ohio........................ 1,276,270 1,076,470 361,138 816,239 552,864 453,167
Pennsylvania................ 1,173,296 1,119,680 303,071 704,936 566,301 454,248
Tennessee................... 388,191 708,905 218,065 471,705 338,154 270,171
West Virginia............... 535,586 645,431 184,341 294,016 206,630 144,970
Wisconsin................... 263,615 181,760 159,927 358,787 257,290 228,637
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................... 8,250,163 8,740,164 3,419,991 6,949,024 5,166,095 4,232,962
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In Table 4, 2005 emissions represent an approximation of emissions
at which Evansville attains the standard. Table 4 shows that, in
comparison, the proposed Transport Rule would establish enforceable
emission restrictions that would be expected to result in emissions in
the most pertinent states (as listed in Table 4) that for
SO2 are 4,830,172 tons per year (59 percent) lower and that
for NOX are 2,716,062 tons per year (39 percent) lower. That
is, the proposed Transport Rule would provide for permanent and
enforceable emission reductions in the Eastern United States that are
significantly greater than the reductions needed to assure maintenance
in the Evansville area.
Similar results are obtained by comparing emission estimates in
2012 without the proposed Transport Rule to emission estimates in 2014
with the proposed Transport Rule. In the proposed Transport Rule, EPA
estimated that total emissions across these states would reflect
5,320,173 tons per year lower SO2 emissions and 933,133 tons
per year lower NOX emissions in the 2014 controlled case
than in the 2012 base case, i.e., emissions that are 61 percent and 18
percent lower, respectively. According to EPA modeling for the proposed
Transport Rule, comparing concentrations projected in 2014 with the
proposed Transport Rule in place against concentrations projected in
2012 in the absence of a Transport Rule, the Transport Rule achieves
approximately a 4 [mu]g/m\3\ air quality improvement in the Evansville
area, yielding concentrations well below the annual PM2.5
NAAQS and below the concentrations that have been achieved by power
plant emission reductions to date.
The modeling for the proposed Transport Rule also projects an
Evansville area concentration of about 11 [mu]g/m\3\ in 2014 based on
implementation of the proposed Transport Rule, whereas for purposes of
this proposed redesignation it is only necessary for the Transport Rule
to help provide for the Evansville area to maintain a concentration at
or below 15 [mu]g/m\3\.
This proposal is premised on the expectation that the final
Transport Rule will be similarly effective as the proposed Transport
Rule would be in providing for maintenance of the 1997 PM2.5
standard in the Evansville area. Given the substantial margin by which
EPA expects the Evansville area to maintain the standard, numerous
details
[[Page 29703]]
of the final Transport Rule could differ from corresponding features of
the proposed Transport Rule without causing changes in the impact on
Evansville air quality that are significant for purposes of this
proposal to redesignate the Evansville area. This proposal to
redesignate the Evansville area is predicated on the final Transport
Rule being substantially equivalent for purposes of air quality in the
Evansville area to the Transport Rule proposed on August 2, 2010. In
EPA's view, this premise will be met if the emission levels expected
under the final Transport Rule in states most pertinent to Evansville,
and the associated expected air quality benefits in Evansville, are
sufficiently similar to the emission levels and associated Evansville
air quality benefits expected under the proposed rule so as to provide
a comparable degree of confidence that the Evansville area will
maintain the standard.
In summary, a limited set of reductions of EGU emissions of
SO2 and NOX contributed significantly to the air
quality improvement in the Evansville area. Given the remanded status
of CAIR, this air quality improvement cannot be considered permanent.
However, the proposed Transport Rule proposed to mandate even greater
reductions than have already occurred and, more importantly, proposed
to mandate more reductions than are needed to maintain the standard in
the Evansville area. Therefore, with the final promulgation of a
Transport Rule that is substantially equivalent to the proposed rule
for purposes of maintaining the standard in the Evansville area, in
combination with the other measures cited by Indiana, EPA believes that
the emission reductions that led the Evansville area to attain the
PM2.5 air quality standard could be considered as permanent
and enforceable for purposes of section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii).
4. Maintenance Plan
Sections 107(d)(3)(E)(iv) and 175A require that the State
demonstrate that the area to be redesignated will continue to meet the
PM2.5 NAAQS for at least a ten-year maintenance period after
redesignation in 2011. Indiana's maintenance plan includes emission
inventories discussed in section V.2.c above.
The sizeable reductions in SO2 and NOX
emissions by 2015 and 2022 shown in Table 3 above are due in
significant part to restrictions mandated by EPA to reduce power plant
emissions of SO2 and NOX in the Eastern United
States in order to reduce pollutant transport in this region. In this
inventory, Indiana used emission projections premised on the
implementation of CAIR requirements as an approximation of the
emissions levels the State projects to occur following the promulgation
of the Transport Rule. As explained above, the DC Circuit found CAIR
unlawful and remanded it to EPA. Because CAIR is not in place
permanently, and because EPA has not completed final promulgation of
the Transport Rule, EPA cannot currently grant final approval to a
maintenance plan that relies in significant part on either of these
rules.
On the other hand, as noted above, EPA's recently proposed
Transport Rule would, if finalized, achieve substantial regional
reductions of SO2 and NOX emissions. While EPA
has not made emission estimates for 2022 that are premised on the
implementation of the proposed Transport Rule, Table 4 above shows
emission estimates that EPA has made for 2014 that assume the
implementation of the proposed Transport Rule. These emission estimates
show a substantial decline in SO2 and NOX
emissions comparable to that shown in Indiana's maintenance plan. Given
the substantial degree of control of the various EGUs in the Evansville
area both currently and projected into the future, EPA finds Indiana's
projection of such emission declines through 2022 to be appropriate
forecasts of future emissions, provided EPA promulgates a final
Transport Rule whose requirements are substantially equivalent to those
in the proposed rule with respect to continued maintenance of the
PM2.5 annual standard in the Evansville area.
In conjunction with the projections for dramatic declines in
Evansville area emissions of SO2 and NOX
emissions, Indiana's maintenance plan shows an increase in
PM2.5 emissions. Therefore, further evaluation is needed to
judge whether the increase in PM2.5 emissions, in
combination with the decreases in SO2 and NOX
emissions, is likely to provide for maintenance of the standard.
Each of these pollutants is characterized by a different
relationship between emissions and air quality. Therefore, simply
summing up the emissions of these various pollutants does not provide a
meaningful indicator of the combined air quality impact of these
emission changes. Instead, a more appropriate indicator is the
percentage change in emissions for each emitted pollutant, weighted
according to the air quality impact for each.
For this purpose, EPA examined speciation data available from its
Air Explorer Web site for 2007 and 2008 for the Evansville area. These
data suggest that PM2.5 in the Evansville area consists of
approximately 54 percent sulfate, 7 percent nitrate, 32 percent organic
particulate, 4 percent miscellaneous inorganic particulate (sometime
labeled ``crustal particles''), and 4 percent other types of
particulate matter.
EPA used a conservative approach that assumes that the full ambient
concentration of organic particulate matter plus miscellaneous
inorganic particulate matter will vary in accordance with changes in
total nonattainment area emissions of directly emitted
PM2.5. This analysis thus assumes that the entirety of this
component of ambient PM2.5 will increase by the 24 percent
that Indiana's maintenance plan projects that directly emitted
PM2.5 emissions will increase. In this analysis, the
baseline concentration is conservatively assumed to be 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\,
of which directly emitted PM2.5 is estimated to include 32
plus 4 or 36 percent, or 5.4 [mu]g/m\3\. Indiana estimates that
emissions of directly emitted PM2.5 will increase by 24
percent from 2005. EPA's assessment assumes that this increase will
cause a corresponding increase in ambient concentrations of
PM2.5, which would suggest an increase in the concentration
of this component by 1.3 [mu]g/m\3\. However, EPA believes that this
potential increase will be fully compensated by a greater decrease in
sulfate and nitrate concentrations. The precise decrease in sulfate and
nitrate concentrations is a complicated result of emission reductions
not just in the Evansville area but also in many other parts of the
Eastern United States. Nevertheless, modeling conducted by EPA for the
proposed Transport Rule estimated that future Evansville area
concentrations with the Transport Rule as proposed in place would be
about 4 [mu]g/m\3\ below the standard, and the emission reductions that
have already occurred have already brought Evansville area
concentrations to about 13.0 [mu]g/m\3\ (as shown in Table 4 above).
Therefore, the 1.3 [mu]g/m\3\ increase in the components associated
with directly emitted PM2.5 would not be expected to yield
concentrations above the standard. That is, EPA expects that the trends
in direct emissions of PM2.5 in the Evansville area will not
prevent the area from maintaining the standard.
Maintenance of the 1997 annual PM2.5 air quality
standard in the Evansville area is a function of regional as well as
local emissions trends. The regional impacts are dominated by the
impacts of SO2 and NOX emissions. The previous
section (discussing permanent and
[[Page 29704]]
enforceable emission reductions) showed that the proposed Transport
Rule could be expected to provide for substantial SO2 and
NOX emission reductions through 2014, reductions that would
be maintained throughout and well beyond the period (through 2022)
addressed in Indiana's maintenance plan. While EPA in its Transport
Rule rulemaking developed emission projections extending to 2020 only
for a scenario without regional emission limitations and not for a
scenario with a Transport Rule in place, the ongoing downward emission
trend evident in EPA's 2020 emission projections in absence of regional
emission limitations lends support to Indiana's projection that the
scenario with regional emission limitations in place will continue to
have low emissions in 2022. With a Transport Rule as proposed, the caps