Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans, Ohio and Indiana; Redesignation of the Ohio and Indiana Portions Cincinnati-Hamilton Area to Attainment of the 1997 Annual Standard for Fine Particulate Matter, 64825-64838 [2011-26887]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the state, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
B. Submission to Congress and the
Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
64825
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by December 19,
2011. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of
this final rule does not affect the finality
of this action for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time
within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not
postpone the effectiveness of such rule
or action. Parties with objections to this
direct final rule are encouraged to file a
comment in response to the parallel
notice of proposed rulemaking for this
action published in the proposed rules
section of today’s Federal Register,
rather than file an immediate petition
for judicial review of this direct final
rule, so that EPA can withdraw this
direct final rule and address the
comment in the proposed rulemaking.
This action to approve the Virginia
Transportation Conformity Regulation
may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements.
(See CAA section 307(b)(2).)
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: October 3, 2011.
W.C. Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for 40 CFR
part 52 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart VV—Virginia
2. In § 52.2420, the table in paragraph
(c) is amended by revising the entries
for Sections 5–151–40 and 5–151–70 to
read as follows:
■
§ 52.2420
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(c) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED VIRGINIA REGULATIONS AND STATUTES
State citation
State effective
date
Title/subject
*
*
EPA approval date
*
*
9 VAC 5, Chapter 151
*
*
*
General ......................................
*
5–151–70 .....................
*
Consultation ...............................
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2011–26905 Filed 10–18–11; 8:45 am]
*
*
3/2/11
10/19/11 [Insert page number where the document
begins].
3/2/11
*
*
*
10/19/11 [Insert page number where the document
begins].
*
*
*
*
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0017; EPA–R05–
OAR–2011–0106; FRL–9480–6]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans, Ohio
and Indiana; Redesignation of the Ohio
and Indiana Portions CincinnatiHamilton Area to Attainment of the
1997 Annual Standard for Fine
Particulate Matter
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
AGENCY:
17:19 Oct 18, 2011
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
*
Section D.1.f. is amended.
*
ACTION:
*
Direct final rule.
EPA is approving, under the
Clean Air Act (CAA), Ohio’s and
Indiana’s requests to redesignate their
respective portions of the CincinnatiHamilton nonattainment area (for Ohio:
Butler, Clermont, Hamilton, and Warren
Counties, Ohio; for IN: a portion of
Dearborn County) to attainment for the
1997 annual National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS or standard)
for fine particulate matter (PM2.5). The
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
(Ohio EPA) submitted its request on
December 9, 2010, and the Indiana
SUMMARY:
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
*
Criteria and Procedures for Making Conformity Determinations
5–151–40 .....................
*
*
Transportation Conformity
Part III ..........................
*
Explanation [former SIP citation]
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
64826
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
Department of Environmental
Management (IDEM) submitted its
request on January 25, 2011. Kentucky’s
request to redesignate its portion of the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area, submitted to
EPA on January 27, 2011, will be
addressed in a separate rulemaking
action. EPA’s approvals here involve
several additional related actions. EPA
has determined that the entire
Cincinnati-Hamilton area has attained
the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard. EPA is
approving, as revisions to the Ohio and
Indiana State Implementation Plans
(SIPs), the states’ plans for maintaining
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS through
2021 in the area. EPA is approving the
2005 emissions inventories for the Ohio
and Indiana portions of the CincinnatiHamilton area as meeting the
comprehensive emissions inventory
requirement of the CAA. Finally, EPA
finds adequate and is approving Ohio
and Indiana’s Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)
and PM2.5 Motor Vehicle Emission
Budgets (MVEBs) for 2015 and 2021 for
the Cincinnati-Hamilton area.
DATES: This direct final rule will be
effective December 19, 2011, unless EPA
receives adverse comments by
November 18, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2011–0106 (Indiana) or EPA–R05–
OAR–2011–0017 (Ohio) by one of the
following methods:
• https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• E-mail: Aburano.Douglas@epa.gov.
• Fax: (312) 408–2279.
• Mail: Doug Aburano, Chief, Control
Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch
(AR–18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
• Hand Delivery: Doug Aburano,
Control Strategies Section, Air Programs
Branch, (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, 18th Floor, Chicago, Illinois
60604. Such deliveries are only
accepted during the Regional Office’s
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–2011–
0106, EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0017.
EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:51 Oct 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
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 email. 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 email 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
and viruses. For additional instructions
on submitting comments, go to section
I of 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 Carolyn Persoon at (312)
353–8290 before visiting the Region 5
office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Carolyn Persoon, Environmental
Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–8290,
persoon.carolyn@epa.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document whenever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean
EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. What actions is EPA taking?
II. What is the background for these actions?
III. What are the criteria for redesignation to
attainment?
IV. What is EPA’s analysis of the States’
requests?
A. Attainment Determination and
Redesignation
B. Adequacy of Ohio and Indiana’s MVEBs
C. 2005 Comprehensive Emissions
Inventory
V. Summary of Actions
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What actions is EPA taking?
EPA has previously determined that
the entire Cincinnati-Hamilton area is
attaining the 1997 annual PM2.5
standard and that the Ohio and Indiana
portions of the area have met the
requirements for redesignation under
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA through
a final determination made on
September 29, 2011. EPA is thus
approving the requests from the states of
Ohio and Indiana to change the legal
designation of their portions of the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area from
nonattainment to attainment for the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. This action
does not address the Kentucky portion
of the Cincinnati-Hamilton area. EPA is
also taking several additional actions
related to Ohio and Indiana’s PM2.5
redesignation requests, as discussed
below.
EPA is approving Indiana’s and
Ohio’s PM2.5 maintenance plans for the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area as revisions to
the Ohio and Indiana SIP (such
approval being one of the CAA criteria
for redesignation to attainment status).
The maintenance plans are designed to
keep the Cincinnati-Hamilton area in
attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS through 2021.
EPA is approving 2005 emissions
inventories for primary PM2.5,1 NOX,
and sulfur dioxide (SO2),2 documented
in Ohio and Indiana’s PM2.5
redesignation request supplemental
submittal. These emissions inventories
satisfy the requirement in section
172(c)(3) of the CAA for a
comprehensive, current emission
inventory.
Finally, EPA finds adequate and is
approving Ohio’s and Indiana’s 2015
1 Fine particulates directly emitted by sources
and not formed in a secondary manner through
chemical reactions or other processes in the
atmosphere.
2 NO and SO are precursors for fine particulates
X
2
through chemical reactions and other related
processes in the atmosphere.
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
and 2021 primary PM2.5 and NOX
MVEBs for the Cincinnati-Hamilton
area. These MVEBs will be used in
future transportation conformity
analyses for the area. Further discussion
of the basis for these actions is provided
below.
from SO2 emissions from power plants
and industrial facilities. Nitrates,
another common type of secondary
particulate, are formed from combustion
emissions of NOX from power plants,
mobile sources, and other combustion
sources.
II. 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 (mg/m3) of
ambient air, based on a three-year
average of the annual mean PM2.5
concentrations at each monitoring site.
In the same rulemaking, EPA
promulgated a 24-hour PM2.5 standard at
65 mg/m3, based on a three-year average
of the annual 98th percentile of 24-hour
PM2.5 concentrations at each monitoring
site.
On January 5, 2005, at 70 FR 944, EPA
published air quality area designations
for the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard
based on air quality data for calendar
years 2001–2003. In that rulemaking,
EPA designated the CincinnatiHamilton, area as nonattainment (for
Ohio: Butler, Clermont, Hamilton, and
Warren Counties, Ohio; for IN: a portion
of Dearborn County, and for Kentucky:
Boone, Campbell, and Kenton Counties)
for the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard.
On October 17, 2006, at 71 FR 61144,
EPA retained the annual PM2.5 standard
at 15 mg/m3 (2006 annual PM2.5
standard), but revised the 24-hour
standard to 35 mg/m3, based again on the
three-year average of the annual 98th
percentile of the 24-hour PM2.5
concentrations. In response to legal
challenges to the 2006 annual PM2.5
standard, the U.S. Court of Appeals for
District of Columbia Circuit (DC 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 (DC Cir. 2009). However,
given that the 1997 and 2006 annual
PM2.5 standards are essentially
identical, attainment of the 1997 annual
PM2.5 standard would also indicate
attainment of the remanded 2006 annual
standard. Since the Cincinnati-Hamilton
area is designated as nonattainment for
the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard, today’s
proposed action addresses redesignation
to attainment only for this standard.
Fine particulate pollution can be
emitted directly from a source (primary
PM2.5) or formed secondarily through
chemical reactions in the atmosphere
involving precursor pollutants emitted
from a variety of sources. Sulfates are a
type of secondary particulate formed
III. What are the criteria for
redesignation to attainment?
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:51 Oct 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
The CAA sets forth the requirements
for redesignating a nonattainment area
to attainment. Specifically, section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA allows
redesignation provided that: (1) The
Administrator determines that the area
has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2)
the Administrator has fully approved
the applicable SIP for the area under
section 110(k) of the CAA; (3) the
Administrator determines that the
improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions
in emissions resulting from the
implementation of the applicable SIP,
Federal emission 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
CAA; 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
CAA.
IV. What is EPA’s analysis of the States’
requests?
A. Attainment Determination and
Redesignation
EPA has determined that the entire
Cincinnati-Hamilton area has attained
the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard and that
the Ohio and Indiana portions of the
area have met all other applicable
redesignation criteria under CAA
section 107(d)(3)(E). The basis for EPA’s
approvals of the redesignation requests
is as follows:
1. The Area Has Attained the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS (Section
107(d)(3)(E)(i))
On June 3, 2011, EPA proposed to
determine that the entire CincinnatiHamilton area has attained the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS (76 FR 32110). No
adverse comments were received and
EPA’s Region 4 and Region 5 Regional
Administrators signed the final
determination of attainment for the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area on August 18,
2011 and September 12, 2011,
respectively and published in the
Federal Register on September 29, 2011.
Relevant discussion of the monitored
concentrations and sites can be found in
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
64827
the notices for the proposed and final
determinations that are referenced
above. EPA’s September 29, 2011 final
determination that the CincinnatiHamilton area has attained the 1997
annual PM2.5 standard fulfills the
requirement set forth in CAA section
107(d)(3)(E)(i).
2. The Area Has Met All Applicable
Requirements Under Section 110 and
Part D; and the Area Has a Fully
Approved SIP Under Section 110(k)
(Sections 107(d)(3)(E)(v) and
107(d)(3)(E)(ii))
We have determined that Ohio and
Indiana have met all currently
applicable SIP requirements for
purposes of redesignation of the Ohio
and Indiana portions of the CincinnatiHamilton area under section 110 of the
CAA (general SIP requirements). We are
also finding that the Ohio and Indiana
SIPs meet all SIP requirements currently
applicable for purposes of redesignation
under part D of title I of the CAA, in
accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v).
In addition, with the exception of the
emissions inventory under section
172(c)(3), we have approved all
applicable requirements of the Ohio and
Indiana SIPs for purposes of
redesignation, in accordance with
section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). As discussed
below, in this action EPA is approving
Ohio and Indiana’s 2005 emissions
inventories as meeting the section
172(c)(3) comprehensive emissions
inventory requirement.
In making these determinations, we
have ascertained which SIP
requirements are applicable for
purposes of redesignation, and have
determined that there are SIP measures
meeting those requirements and that
they are fully approved under section
110(k) of the CAA.
a. Ohio and Indiana Have Met All
Applicable Requirements for Purposes
of Redesignation of Their Portions of the
Area Under Section 110 and Part D of
the CAA
i. Section 110 General SIP Requirements
Section 110(a) of title I of the CAA
contains the general requirements for a
SIP. Section 110(a)(2) provides that the
implementation plan submitted by a
state must have been adopted by the
state after reasonable public notice and
hearing, and, among other things, must:
include enforceable emission
limitations and other control measures,
means or techniques necessary to meet
the requirements of the CAA; provide
for establishment and operation of
appropriate devices, methods, systems,
and procedures necessary to monitor
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
64828
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
ambient air quality; provide for
implementation of a source permit
program to regulate the modification
and construction of any stationary
source within the areas covered by the
plan; include provisions for the
implementation of part C, Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) and part
D, New Source Review (NSR) permit
programs; include criteria for stationary
source emission control measures,
monitoring, and reporting; include
provisions for air quality modeling; and
provide for public and local agency
participation in planning and emission
control rule development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA
requires that SIPs contain measures to
prevent sources in a state from
significantly contributing to air quality
problems in another state. EPA believes
that the requirements linked with a
particular nonattainment area’s
designation are the relevant measures to
evaluate in reviewing a redesignation
request. The transport SIP submittal
requirements, where applicable,
continue to apply to a state regardless of
the designation of any one particular
area in the state. Thus, we believe that
these requirements should not be
construed to be applicable requirements
for purposes of redesignation.
Further, we believe that the other
section 110 elements described above
that are not connected with
nonattainment plan submissions and
not linked with an area’s attainment
status are also not applicable
requirements for purposes of
redesignation. A state remains subject to
these requirements after an area is
redesignated to attainment. We
conclude that only the section 110 and
part D requirements that are linked with
a particular area’s designation are the
relevant measures which we may
consider in evaluating a redesignation
request. This approach is consistent
with EPA’s existing policy on
applicability of conformity and
oxygenated fuels requirements for
redesignation purposes, as well as with
section 184 ozone transport
requirements. See Reading,
Pennsylvania, proposed and final
rulemakings (61 FR 53174–53176,
October 10, 1996, and 62 FR 24826, May
7, 1997); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio,
final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7,
1996); and Tampa, Florida, final
rulemaking (60 FR 62748, December 7,
1995). See also the discussion on this
issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio 1-hour
ozone redesignation (65 FR 37890, June
19, 2000), and in the Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania 1-hour ozone
redesignation (66 FR 50399, October 19,
2001).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:51 Oct 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
We have reviewed Ohio and Indiana’s
SIPs and have concluded that they meet
the general SIP requirements under
section 110 of the CAA to the extent
they are applicable for purposes of
redesignation. EPA has previously
approved provisions of Ohio and
Indiana’s SIPs addressing section 110
requirements (including provisions
addressing particulate matter, at 40 CFR
52.770 and 40 CFR 52.1870,
respectively).
On December 7, 2007, September 9,
2008, March 23, 2011, and April 7,
2011, Indiana made submittals
addressing ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’
elements required by section 110(a)(2)
of the CAA. EPA approved elements of
Indiana’s submittals on July 13, 2011, at
76 FR 41075.
On December 5, 2007, and September
4, 2009, Ohio made submittals
addressing ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’
elements required under CAA section
110(a)(2). EPA proposed approval of the
December 5, 2007, submittal on April
28, 2011, at 76 FR 23757 and published
final approval on July 13, 2011, at 76 FR
41075. EPA disapproved the element of
the September 4, 2009, submittal that
addresses section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) on July
20, 2011, at 76 FR 43175, but has not
taken rulemaking action on the
remainder of the submittal.
The remaining parts of the
infrastructure SIPs required by section
110(a)(2) are not relevant to this
redesignation, and are statewide
requirements that are not linked to the
PM2.5 nonattainment status of the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area. Therefore,
EPA believes that these SIP elements are
not applicable requirements for
purposes of review of the state’s PM2.5
redesignation request.
ii. Part D Requirements
EPA has determined that, upon
approval of the base year emissions
inventories discussed in section IV.C. of
this rulemaking, the Ohio and Indiana
SIPs will meet the SIP requirements for
the Cincinnati-Hamilton area applicable
for purposes of redesignation under part
D of the CAA. Subpart 1 of part D, found
in sections 172–176 of the CAA, sets
forth the basic nonattainment
requirements applicable to all
nonattainment areas.
Subpart 1—Section 172
Requirements.
For purposes of evaluating these
redesignation requests, the applicable
section 172 SIP requirements for the
Ohio and Indiana portions of the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area are contained
in sections 172(c)(1)–(9). A thorough
discussion of the requirements
contained in section 172 can be found
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
in the General Preamble for
Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498,
April 16, 1992).
Section 172(c)(1) requires the plans
for all nonattainment areas to provide
for the implementation of all
Reasonably Available Control Measures
(RACM) as expeditiously as practicable
and to provide for attainment of the
primary NAAQS. EPA interprets this
requirement to impose a duty on all
nonattainment areas to consider all
available control measures and to adopt
and implement such measures as are
reasonably available for implementation
in each area as components of the area’s
attainment demonstration. Because
attainment has been reached, no
additional measures are needed to
provide for attainment, and section
172(c)(1) requirements are no longer
considered to be applicable as long as
the area continues to attain the standard
until redesignation. (40 CFR 51.1004(c)).
The Reasonable Further Progress
(RFP) requirement under section
172(c)(2) is defined as progress that
must be made toward attainment. This
requirement is not relevant for purposes
of redesignation because the CincinnatiHamilton area has monitored attainment
of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
(General Preamble, 57 FR 13564). See
also 40 CFR 51.918. In addition, because
the Cincinnati-Hamilton area has
attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS
and is no longer subject to an RFP
requirement, the requirement to submit
the section 172(c)(9) contingency
measures is not applicable for purposes
of redesignation. Id.
Section 172(c)(3) requires submission
and approval of a comprehensive,
accurate and current inventory of actual
emissions. Ohio and Indiana submitted
2005 base year emissions inventories
along with their redesignation requests.
As discussed below in section IV.C.,
EPA is approving the 2005 base year
inventories as meeting the section
172(c)(3) emissions inventory
requirement for the Cincinnati-Hamilton
area.
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 approved
Ohio’s current NSR program on January
10, 2003 (68 FR 1366). EPA approved
Indiana’s current NSR program on
October 7, 1994 (59 FR 51108).
Nonetheless, since PSD requirements
will apply after redesignation, the area
need not have a fully-approved NSR
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
program for purposes of redesignation,
provided that the area demonstrates
maintenance of the NAAQS without
part D NSR. A 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 the Indianapolis area will be able to
maintain the standard without part D
NSR in effect; 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
Indianapolis area upon redesignation to
attainment. See rulemakings for Detroit,
Michigan (60 FR 12467–12468, March 7,
1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio
(61 FR 20458, 20469–20470, May 7,
1996); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR
53665, October 23, 2001); and Grand
Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31834–31837,
June 21, 1996).
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 Ohio and Indiana SIPs meet
the requirements of section 110(a)(2)
applicable for purposes of
redesignation.
Subpart 1—Section 176(c)(4)(D)
Conformity SIP Requirements.
The requirement to determine
conformity applies to transportation
plans, programs and projects developed,
funded or approved under title 23 of the
U.S. Code and the Federal Transit Act
(transportation conformity) as well as to
all other Federally-supported or funded
projects (general conformity).
Section 176(c) of the CAA was
amended by provisions contained in the
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users (SAFETEA–LU), which was
signed into law on August 10, 2005
(Public Law 109–59). Among the
changes Congress made to this section
of the CAA were streamlined
requirements for state transportation
conformity SIPs. State transportation
conformity regulations must be
consistent with Federal conformity
regulations and address three specific
requirements related to consultation,
enforcement, and enforceability.
EPA believes that it is reasonable to
interpret the transportation conformity
SIP requirements as not applying for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:51 Oct 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
purposes of evaluating the redesignation
request under section 107(d) for two
reasons. First, the requirement to submit
SIP revisions to comply with the
transportation conformity provisions of
the CAA 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 transportation 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).
Ohio and Indiana both have approved
transportation conformity SIPs (72 FR
20945 (Ohio) and 75 FR 50708
(Indiana)). Ohio and Indiana are in the
process of updating their approved
transportation conformity SIPs, and EPA
will review these when they are
submitted.
b. The Cincinnati-Hamilton Area Has a
Fully Approved Applicable SIP Under
Section 110(k) of the CAA
Upon final approval of Ohio and
Indiana’s comprehensive 2005
emissions inventories, EPA will have
fully approved the Ohio and Indiana SIP
for the Cincinnati-Hamilton area under
section 110(k) of the CAA for all
requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation. EPA may rely on prior
SIP approvals in approving a
redesignation request (See page 3 of the
September 4, 1992, memorandum from
John Calcagni, entitled ‘‘Procedures for
Processing Requests to Redesignate
Areas to Attainment,’’; Southwestern
Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v.
Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989–990 (6th
Cir. 1998); Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426
(6th Cir. 2001)) plus any additional
measures it may approve in conjunction
with a redesignation action. See 68 FR
25413, 25426 (May 12, 2003). Since the
passage of the CAA of 1970, Ohio and
Indiana have adopted and submitted,
and EPA has fully approved, provisions
addressing various required SIP
elements under particulate matter
standards. In this action, EPA is
approving Ohio and Indiana’s 2005 base
year emissions inventory for the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area as meeting the
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
64829
requirement of section 172(c)(3) of the
CAA.
3. The Improvement in Air Quality Is
Due to Permanent and Enforceable
Reductions in Emissions Resulting From
Implementation of the SIPs and
Applicable Federal Air Pollution
Control Regulations and Other
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions
(Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii))
EPA finds that Ohio and Indiana have
demonstrated that the observed air
quality improvement in the CincinnatiHamilton area is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions
resulting from implementation of the
SIPs, Federal measures, and other stateadopted measures.
In making this demonstration, Ohio
and Indiana have calculated the change
in emissions between 2005, one of the
years used to designate the CincinnatiHamilton area as nonattainment, and
2008, one of the years the CincinnatiHamilton area monitored attainment.
The reduction in emissions and the
corresponding improvement in air
quality over this time period can be
attributed to a number of regulatory
control measures that the CincinnatiHamilton area and upwind areas have
implemented in recent years.
a. Permanent and Enforceable Controls
Implemented
The following is a discussion of
permanent and enforceable measures
that have been implemented in the
areas:
i. Federal Emission Control Measures
Reductions in fine particle precursor
emissions have occurred statewide and
in upwind areas as a result of Federal
emission control measures, with
additional emission reductions expected
to occur in the future. Federal emission
control measures include the following.
Tier 2 Emission Standards for
Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur Standards.
These emission control and fuel
requirements result in lower NOX
emissions from new cars and light duty
trucks, including sport utility vehicles.
The Federal rules were phased in
between 2004 and 2009. The EPA has
estimated that, by the end of the phasein period, NOX emissions will be
reduced by 77 percent from new
passenger cars (light-duty vehicles), 86
percent from new light duty trucks,
minivans, and sports utility vehicles
and, 69 to 95 percent from new larger
sports utility vehicles, vans, and heavier
trucks. EPA expects fleet wide average
NOX emissions to decline as new
vehicles replace older vehicles each
year. The Tier 2 standards included the
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
64830
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
requirement to reduce the sulfur content
of gasoline to 30 parts per million (ppm)
by January 2006 primarily to improve
the durability and effectiveness of
vehicle emission control technology so
that new vehicles could comply with
these more stringent NOX emissions
standards.
The 2007 Heavy-Duty Highway Rule.
EPA issued this rule in December 2000.
This rule took effect in 2007. It reduced
fine particle and NOX emissions from
heavy-duty highway engines and
included requirements to reduce the
sulfur content of diesel fuel used by
highway vehicles to 15 ppm beginning
in mid-2006 in order to avoid damage to
the advanced PM and NOX controls that
are necessary to comply with stringent
emissions standards. The total program
is estimated to achieve a 90 percent
reduction in direct PM2.5 emissions and
a 95 percent reduction in NOX
emissions for these new engines using
low sulfur diesel, compared to existing
engines using higher sulfur content
diesel.
Nonroad Diesel Rule. In May 2004
EPA promulgated a new rule for large
nonroad diesel engines, such as those
used construction, agriculture, and
mining equipment, to be phased in
between 2008 and 2014. The rule
establishes stringent emissions
standards for NOX and PM for these
types of equipment and establishes
limits for the sulfur content of the diesel
fuel that they use. The requirement to
reduce sulfur levels in the nonroad
diesel fuel by as much 99 percent allows
advanced emission-control systems to
be used for the first time on the engines
used in these types of equipment. The
combined engine and fuel rules will
reduce NOX and PM emissions from
large nonroad diesel engines by over 90
percent, compared to current nonroad
engines using higher sulfur content
diesel. This rule achieved some
emission reductions by 2008 and was
fully implemented by 2010.
Control Measures in Upwind Areas
Given the significance of sulfates and
nitrates in the Cincinnati-Hamilton area,
the area’s air quality is strongly affected
by regulation of SO2 and NOX emissions
from power plants.
NOX SIP Call. On October 27, 1998
(63 FR 57356), EPA issued a NOX SIP
Call requiring the District of Columbia
and 22 states to reduce emissions of
NOX. Affected states were required to
comply with Phase I of the SIP Call
beginning in 2004, and Phase II
beginning in 2007. Emission reductions
resulting from regulations developed in
response to the NOX SIP Call are
permanent and enforceable.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:51 Oct 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). 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 United States. However, on
July 11, 2008, the United States Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit (DC Circuit or Court) issued its
decision to vacate and remand both
CAIR and the associated CAIR FIPs in
their entirety (North Carolina v. EPA,
531 F.3d 836 (DC Cir. 2008)). EPA
petitioned for a 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
(DC Cir. 2008)). The Court, thereby, left
CAIR in place in order to ‘‘temporarily
preserve the environmental values
covered by CAIR’’ until EPA replaced it
with a rule consistent with the Court’s
opinion (id. at 1178). The Court directed
EPA to ‘‘remedy CAIR’s flaws’’
consistent with the July 11, 2008,
opinion, but declined to impose a
schedule on EPA for completing this
action (id).
On August 8, 2011, at 76 FR 48208,
EPA promulgated the Cross-State Air
Pollution Rule (CSAPR) to address
interstate transport of emissions and
resulting secondary air pollutants and to
replace CAIR. CAIR, among other
things, required NOX and SO2 emission
reductions that contributed to the air
quality improvement in the CincinnatiHamilton nonattainment area. CAIR
emission reduction requirements limit
emissions through 2011; CSAPR
requires similar or greater emission
reductions in the relevant areas in 2012
and beyond. CSAPR requires substantial
reductions of SO2 and NOX emissions
from Electric Generating Units (EGUs or
power plants) across most of Eastern
United States, with implementation
beginning on January 1, 2012. In
particular, this rule requires reduction
of these emissions to levels well below
the levels that led to attainment of the
1997 annual PM2.5 standard in the
Cincinnati-Hamilton nonattainment
area. Because the emission reduction
requirements of CAIR are enforceable
through the 2011 control period, and
because CSAPR has now been
promulgated to address the
requirements previously addressed by
CAIR and gets similar or greater
reductions in the relevant areas in 2012
and beyond, EPA has determined that
the EGU emission reductions that
helped lead to attainment in the
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Cincinnati-Hamilton area can now be
considered permanent and enforceable
and that the requirement of CAA section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii) has now been met.
b. Emission Reductions
Ohio and Indiana developed
emissions inventories for NOX, direct
PM2.5, and SO2 for 2005, one of the years
used to designate the areas as
nonattainment, and 2008, one of the
years the Cincinnati-Hamilton area
monitored attainment of the standard.
EGU SO2 and NOX emissions were
derived from EPA’s Clean Air Market’s
acid rain database. These emissions
reflect Ohio and Indiana’s NOX
emission budgets resulting from EPA’s
NOX SIP call. The 2008 emissions from
EGUs reflect Ohio and Indiana’s
emission caps under CAIR. All other
point source emissions were obtained
from Ohio and Indiana’s source facility
emissions reporting.
Area source emissions for the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area for 2005 were
taken from Ohio and Indiana’s 2005
periodic emissions inventories.3 These
2005 area source emission estimates
were extrapolated to 2008. Source
growth factors were supplied by the
Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium
(LADCO).
Nonroad mobile source emissions
were extrapolated from nonroad mobile
source emissions reported in EPA’s
2005 National Emissions Inventory
(NEI). Contractors were employed by
LADCO to estimate emissions for
commercial marine vessels and
railroads.
On-road mobile source emissions
were calculated using EPA’s mobile
source emission factor model,
MOVES2010a, in conjunction with
transportation model results developed
by the Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional
Council of Governments (OKI).
All emissions estimates discussed
below were documented in the
submittals and Appendices of Ohio and
Indiana’s redesignation request
submittal from January 25, 2011, and
December 9, 2010, respectively. For
these data and additional emissions
inventory data, the reader is referred to
EPA’s digital docket for this rule,
https://www.regulations.gov, for docket
numbers EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0106
(Indiana) or EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0017
(Ohio), which include digital copies of
Ohio and Indiana’s submittals.
3 Periodic emission inventories are derived by
States every three years and reported to the EPA.
These periodic emission inventories are required by
the Federal Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule,
codified at 40 CFR Subpart A. EPA revised these
and other emission reporting requirements in a final
rule published on December 17, 2008, at 73 FR
76539.
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
64831
Emissions data for the entire
Cincinnati-Hamilton area (OH-IN-KY)
are shown in Tables 1 through 4 below.
TABLE 1—COMPARISON OF 2005 AND 2008 NOX EMISSION TOTALS BY SOURCE SECTOR (TPY) FOR THE CINCINNATIHAMILTON AREA (OH-IN-KY)
NOX
Sector
2005
Net change
2005–2008
2008
Point (Non-EGU) ..............................................................................................................
EGU .................................................................................................................................
Area .................................................................................................................................
Nonroad ...........................................................................................................................
On-road ............................................................................................................................
10,371.70
55,930.44
7,810.74
12,480.57
71,919.89
9,790.50
46,853.89
7,966.67
10,561.92
64,471.22
¥581.20
¥9,076.55
155.93
¥1,918.65
¥7,448.67
Total ..........................................................................................................................
158,513.34
139,644.20
¥18,869.14
TABLE 2—COMPARISON OF 2005 AND 2008 DIRECT PM2.5 EMISSION TOTALS BY SOURCE SECTOR (TPY) FOR THE
CINCINNATI-HAMILTON AREA (OH-IN-KY)
Direct PM2.5
Sector
2005
Net change
2005–2008
2008
Point (Non-EGU) ..............................................................................................................
EGU .................................................................................................................................
Area .................................................................................................................................
Nonroad ...........................................................................................................................
On-road ............................................................................................................................
1,352.79
2,062.91
1,828.55
4,469.27
2,810.30
1,458.52
1,633.15
1,864.80
3,807.04
2,679.85
105.73
¥429.76
36.25
¥662.23
¥130.45
Total ..........................................................................................................................
12,523.79
11,443.36
¥1080.46
TABLE 3—COMPARISON OF 2005 AND 2008 SO2 EMISSION TOTALS BY SOURCE SECTOR (TPY) FOR THE CINCINNATIHAMILTON AREA (OH-IN-KY)
SO2
Sector
2005
Net change
2005–2008
2008
Point (Non-EGU) ..............................................................................................................
EGU .................................................................................................................................
Area .................................................................................................................................
Nonroad ...........................................................................................................................
On-road ............................................................................................................................
15,532.09
218,395.56
3494.39
1,057.16
392.00
13,483.92
98,334.17
3520.77
416.87
277.59
¥2,048.17
¥150,061.39
26.38
¥640.29
¥114.41
Total ..........................................................................................................................
238,871.20
116,033.32
¥152,837.88
Table 1 shows that the entire
Cincinnati-Hamilton area reduced NOX
emissions by 18,869.14 tpy between
2005 and 2008. Table 2 shows that the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area reduced direct
PM2.5 emissions by 1,080.46 tpy
between 2005 and 2008. Table 3 shows
that the Cincinnati-Hamilton area
reduced SO2 emissions by 152,837.88
tpy between 2005 and 2008.
Because PM2.5 concentrations in the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area are
significantly impacted by the transport
of sulfates and nitrates, the area’s air
quality is strongly affected by regulation
of SO2 and NOX emissions from power
plants. Table 4, below, presents
statewide EGU emissions data compiled
by EPA’s Clean Air Markets Division for
the years 2002 and 2008. Emissions for
2008 reflect implementation of CAIR.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
TABLE 4—COMPARISON OF 2002 AND 2008 STATEWIDE EGU NOX AND SO2 EMISSIONS (TPY) FOR STATES IMPACTING
THE CINCINNATI-HAMILTON AREA
NOX
SO2
State
2002
Alabama ...................................................
Illinois .......................................................
Indiana .....................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:51 Oct 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
161,559
174,247
281,146
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Net change
2002–2008
2008
112,625
119,930
190,092
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
¥48,934
¥54,317
¥91,054
2002
2008
448,248
353,699
778,868
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
357,546
257,357
565,459
Net change
2002–2008
¥90,702
¥96,342
¥213,409
64832
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE 4—COMPARISON OF 2002 AND 2008 STATEWIDE EGU NOX AND SO2 EMISSIONS (TPY) FOR STATES IMPACTING
THE CINCINNATI-HAMILTON AREA—Continued
NOX
SO2
State
2002
Net change
2002–2008
2008
2002
2008
Net change
2002–2008
Kentucky ..................................................
Michigan ...................................................
Missouri ....................................................
Ohio ..........................................................
Pennsylvania ............................................
Tennessee ...............................................
West Virginia ............................................
Wisconsin .................................................
198,599
132,623
139,799
370,497
200,909
155,996
225,371
88,970
157,903
107,624
88,742
235,049
183,658
85,641
99,484
47,794
¥40,696
¥25,000
¥51,057
¥135,448
¥17,251
¥70,356
¥125,887
¥41,175
482,653
342,999
235,532
1,132,069
889,766
336,995
507,110
191,257
344,356
326,501
258,269
709,444
831,915
208,069
301,574
129,694
¥138,297
¥16,498
22,737
¥422,625
¥57,851
¥128,926
¥205,536
¥61,563
Total ..................................................
2,129,716
1,428,541
¥701,175
5,699,195
4,290,184
¥1,409,011
Table 4 shows that states impacting
the Cincinnati-Hamilton area reduced
NOX and SO2 emissions from EGUs by
701,175 tons per year (tpy) and
1,409,011 tpy, respectively, between
2002 and 2008.
Based on the information summarized
above, Ohio and Indiana have
adequately demonstrated that the
improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable emissions
reductions.
4. Ohio and Indiana Have Fully
Approved Maintenance Plans Pursuant
to Section 175A of the CAA (Section
107(d)(3)(E)(iv))
In conjunction with Ohio and
Indiana’s requests to redesignate the
Cincinnati-Hamilton nonattainment area
to attainment status, Ohio and Indiana
have submitted SIP revisions to provide
for maintenance of the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS in the area through 2021.
a. What is required in a maintenance
plan?
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth
the required elements of a maintenance
plan for areas seeking redesignation
from nonattainment to attainment.
Under section 175A, the plan must
demonstrate continued attainment of
the applicable NAAQS for at least ten
years after EPA approves a
redesignation to attainment. Eight years
after redesignation, the state must
submit a revised maintenance plan
which demonstrates that attainment will
continue to be maintained for ten years
following the initial ten-year
maintenance period. To address the
possibility of future NAAQS violations,
the maintenance plan must contain
contingency measures with a schedule
for implementation as EPA deems
necessary to assure prompt correction of
any future annual PM2.5 violations.
The September 4, 1992, John Calcagni
memorandum provides additional
guidance on the content of a
maintenance plan. The memorandum
states that a maintenance plan should
address the following items: The
attainment emissions inventories, a
maintenance demonstration showing
maintenance for the ten years of the
maintenance period, a commitment to
maintain the existing monitoring
network, factors and procedures to be
used for verification of continued
attainment of the NAAQS, and a
contingency plan to prevent or correct
future violations of the NAAQS.
b. Attainment Inventory
The states developed emissions
inventories for NOX, direct PM2.5, and
SO2 for 2008, one of the years used to
demonstrate monitored attainment of
the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard, as
described in section IV.A.3.b., above.
The attainment level of emissions is
summarized in Tables 1 through 4,
above.
c. Demonstration of Maintenance
Along with the redesignation request,
the two states submitted revisions to
their PM2.5 SIPs to include maintenance
plans for the Cincinnati-Hamilton area,
as required by section 175A of the CAA.
These demonstrations show
maintenance of the annual PM2.5
standard through 2021 by showing that
current and future emissions of NOX,
directly emitted PM2.5 and SO2 for the
area remain at or below attainment year
emission levels. A maintenance
demonstration need not be based on
modeling. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d
426 (6th Cir. 2001), Sierra Club v. EPA,
375 F. 3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also
66 FR 53094, 53099–53100 (October 19,
2001), 68 FR 25413, 25430–25432 (May
12, 2003).
Ohio and Indiana are using emissions
inventory projections for the years 2015,
and 2021 to demonstrate maintenance.
The projected emissions were estimated
by Ohio and Indiana, with assistance
from LADCO, and the local
Metropolitan Planning Organization
(MPO), OKI using the MOVES2010a
model. Emissions data are shown in
Table 5, below.
TABLE 5—COMPARISON OF 2008, 2015, AND 2021 NOX, DIRECT PM2.5, AND SO2 EMISSION TOTALS (TPY) FOR THE
CINCINNATI-HAMILTON AREA
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
2008
PM2.5 ................................................................................................
NOX ..................................................................................................
SO2 ..................................................................................................
Table 5 shows that the NOX emissions
in the Cincinnati-Hamilton area are
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:51 Oct 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
2015
8,904.64
148,706.15
117,016.14
8,634.55
105,712.02
112,250.26
69.887.02 tpy less in 2021, the
outermost year of the maintenance plan,
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
2021
8,202.63
78,819.13
88,510.27
Net change
(2008–2021)
¥702.01
¥69,887.02
¥28,505.87
than in attainment year 2008. Direct
PM2.5 emissions are 702.01 tpy lower in
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
2021 than in 2008, and SO2 emissions
are 28,505.87 tpy lower in 2021 than in
2008.
Because the PM2.5 concentrations in
the Cincinnati-Hamilton area are
significantly impacted by the transport
of sulfates and nitrates, the area’s air
quality is strongly affected by regulation
of SO2 and NOX emissions from power
plants. Table 6, below, presents
statewide EGU emissions data compiled
for 2008 and 2014 and beyond.
64833
Emissions for 2008 reflect
implementation of CAIR and an
attainment year, while 2014 emissions
reflect budgets established in the
CSAPR.
TABLE 6—COMPARISON OF 2008 AND 2014 AND BEYOND STATEWIDE EGU NOX AND SO2 EMISSIONS (TPY) FOR STATES
IMPACTING THE CINCINNATI-HAMILTON AREA
NOX
State
2008
SO2
2014 and
beyond
Net change
2008–2014
2014 and
beyond
2008
Net change
2008–2014
Alabama ...................................................
Illinois .......................................................
Indiana .....................................................
Kentucky ..................................................
Michigan ...................................................
Missouri ....................................................
Ohio ..........................................................
Pennsylvania ............................................
Tennessee ...............................................
West Virginia ............................................
Wisconsin .................................................
112,625
119,930
190,092
157,903
107,624
88,742
235,049
183,658
85,641
99,484
47,794
69,192
49,162
110,740
76,088
60,907
52,103
89,753
118,981
20,512
53,975
33,537
¥43,433
¥70,767
¥79,352
¥81,815
¥46,717
¥36,639
¥145,296
¥64,676
¥65,129
¥45,509
¥14,257
357,547
257,357
565,459
344,356
326,501
258,269
709,444
831,915
208,069
301,574
129,694
173,566
132,647
195,046
116,927
162,632
186,899
178,975
125,545
64,721
84,344
50,137
¥183,981
¥124,710
¥370,413
¥227,429
¥163,869
¥71,370
¥530,469
¥706,370
¥143,348
¥217,230
¥79,557
Total ..................................................
1,428,541
734,951
¥693,590
4,290,185
1,471,439
¥2,818,746
Table 6 shows that NOX emissions
from EGUs are projected to decrease by
693,590 tpy from 2008 to 2014 and
beyond in states impacting the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area. Over that
same time period, SO2 emissions from
EGUs are projected to decrease by
2,818,746 in states impacting the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area.
Based on the information summarized
above, Ohio and Indiana have
adequately demonstrated maintenance
of the PM2.5 standard in this area for a
period extending in excess of ten years
from the date that EPA is completing
rulemaking on the state’s redesignation
request.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
d. Monitoring Network
Ohio currently operates nine monitors
for purposes of determining attainment
with the annual PM2.5 standard in the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area. Kentucky
currently operates one monitor for the
area. Currently, Indiana operates no
monitors for the Cincinnati-Hamilton
area since the state makes up only a
small portion of the non-attainment
area, and EPA has determined that the
monitors maintained by both Ohio and
Kentucky constitute an adequate
monitoring network. Ohio has
committed to continue to operate and
maintain its monitors and will consult
with EPA prior to making any changes
to the existing monitoring network.
Ohio remains obligated to continue to
quality-assure monitoring data in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and
enter all data into EPA’s Air Quality
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:51 Oct 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
System (AQS) database in accordance
with Federal guidelines.
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
Continued attainment of the annual
PM2.5 NAAQS in the CincinnatiHamilton area depends, in part, on the
state’s efforts toward tracking indicators
of continued attainment during the
maintenance period. Ohio and Indiana’s
plan for verifying continued attainment
of the annual PM2.5 standard in the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area consists of
continued ambient PM2.5 monitoring in
accordance with the requirements of 40
CFR part 58. The two states will also
continue to develop and submit
periodic emission inventories as
required by the Federal Consolidated
Emissions Reporting Rule (codified at
40 CFR 51 Subpart A) to track future
levels of emissions.
f. Contingency Plan
The contingency plan provisions are
designed to promptly correct or prevent
a violation of the NAAQS that might
occur after redesignation of an area to
attainment. Section 175A of the CAA
requires that a maintenance plan
include such contingency measures as
EPA deems necessary to assure that the
state will promptly correct a violation of
the NAAQS that occurs after
redesignation. The maintenance plan
should identify the contingency
measures to be adopted, a schedule and
procedure for adoption and
implementation of the contingency
measures, and a time limit for action by
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
the state. The state should also identify
specific indicators to be used to
determine when the contingency
measures need to be adopted and
implemented. The maintenance plan
must include a requirement that the
state will implement all measures with
respect to control of the pollutant(s) that
were contained in the SIP before
redesignation of the area to attainment.
See section 175A(d) of the CAA.
As required by section 175A of the
CAA, Ohio and Indiana have adopted
contingency plans for the CincinnatiHamilton area to address possible future
annual PM2.5 air quality problems.
Under Indiana’s plan, if a violation of
the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard occurs,
Indiana will implement an ‘‘Action
Level Response’’. Unless the violation is
due to an atypical unfavorable
meteorological condition, exceptional
event, malfunction or noncompliance
with a permit condition or rule
requirement, Indiana will adopt and
implement one or more of its
contingency measures. Indiana has
provided clarification that the state
considers the term ‘‘an atypical
unfavorable meteorological condition’’
to mean an exceptional event as
determined by EPA. EPA agrees with
and relies upon this clarification in
approving Indiana’s contingency
measures provisions. (See docket EPA–
R05–OAR–2011–0106 for clarification
communications).
If a violation occurs, it will trigger an
Action Level Response; that is, Indiana
will adopt and implement one or more
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
64834
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
control measures from its list of
candidate measures within 18 months
from the end of the year in which
monitored air quality triggering the
response occurs. Indiana’s candidate
contingency measures include the
following:
i. Alternative fuel and diesel retrofit
programs for fleet vehicle operations;
ii. NOX or SO2 controls on new minor
sources;
iii. Wood stove change out program;
iv. Idle restrictions; and
v. Broader geographic applicability of
existing measures.
Ohio’s contingency measures include
a Warning Level Response and an
Action Level Response. An initial
Warning Level Response is triggered
when the average weighted annual
mean for one year exceeds 15.5 mg/m3.
In that case, a study will be conducted
to determine if the emissions trends
show increases; if action is necessary to
reverse emissions increases, Ohio will
follow the same procedures for control
selection and implementation as for an
Action Level Response.
The Action Level Response will be
prompted by any one of the following:
A Warning Level Response study that
shows emissions increases, a weighted
annual mean over a two-year average
that exceeds the standard, or a violation
of the standard. If an Action Level
Response is triggered, Ohio will adopt
and implement appropriate control
measures within 18 months from the
end of the year in which monitored air
quality triggering a response occurs.
Ohio’s candidate contingency
measures include the following:
i. ICI Boilers—SO2 and NOX controls;
ii. Process heaters;
iii. EGUS;
iv. Internal combustion engines;
v. Combustion turbines;
vi. Other sources > 100 TPY;
vii. Fleet vehicles;
viii. Concrete manufacturers and;
ix. Aggregate processing plants.
Ohio and Indiana further commit to
conduct ongoing review of their data,
and if monitored concentrations or
emissions are trending upward, Ohio
and Indiana commit to take appropriate
steps to avoid a violation if possible.
Ohio and Indiana commit to continue
implementing SIP requirements upon
and after redesignation.
EPA believes that both Ohio and
Indiana’s contingency plans, as well as
the commitment to continue
implementing any SIP requirements,
satisfy the pertinent requirements of
section 175A(d).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:51 Oct 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
g. Provisions for Future Updates of the
Annual PM2.5 Maintenance Plan
As required by section 175A(b) of the
CAA, Ohio and Indiana have each
committed to submit to the EPA an
updated maintenance plan eight years
after redesignation of the CincinnatiHamilton area to attainment of the 1997
annual PM2.5 standard to cover an
additional ten-year period beyond the
initial ten-year maintenance period. As
required by section 175A of the CAA,
Ohio and Indiana have committed to
retain the control measures contained in
the SIP prior to redesignation, or submit
to EPA, as a SIP revision, any changes
to its rules or emission limits applicable
to SO2, NOX or direct PM2.5 sources as
required for maintenance of the annual
PM2.5 standard in the CincinnatiHamilton area.
EPA has concluded that the
maintenance plans adequately address
the requisite five basic components:
Attainment inventory, maintenance
demonstration, monitoring network,
verification of continued attainment,
and a contingency plan. Thus EPA is
fully approving the maintenance plan
SIP revisions submitted by Ohio and
Indiana for the Cincinnati-Hamilton
area as meeting the requirements of
section 175A of the CAA.
B. Adequacy of Ohio and Indiana’s
MVEBs
1. How are MVEBs developed and what
are the MVEBs for the CincinnatiHamilton area?
Under the CAA, states are required to
submit, at various times, control strategy
SIP revisions and maintenance plans for
PM2.5 nonattainment areas and for areas
seeking redesignations to attainment of
the PM2.5 standard. These emission
control strategy SIP revisions (e.g., RFP
and attainment demonstration SIP
revisions) and maintenance plans create
MVEBs based on on-road mobile source
emissions for criteria pollutants and/or
their precursors to address pollution
from on-road transportation sources.
The MVEBs are the portions of the total
allowable emissions that are allocated to
highway and transit vehicle use that,
together with emissions from other
sources in the area, will provide for
attainment, RFP or maintenance, as
applicable.
Under 40 CFR part 93, a MVEB for an
area seeking a redesignation to
attainment is established for the last
year of the maintenance plan and could
also be established for an interim year
or years. The MVEB serves as a ceiling
on emissions from an area’s planned
transportation system. The MVEB
concept is further explained in the
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
preamble to the November 24, 1993,
transportation conformity rule (58 FR
62188).
Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new
transportation plans and transportation
improvement programs (TIPs) must be
evaluated to determine if they conform
to the purpose of the area’s SIP.
Conformity to the SIP means that
transportation activities will not cause
new air quality violations, worsen
existing air quality violations, or delay
timely attainment of the NAAQS or any
required interim milestone. If a
transportation plan or TIP does not
conform, most new transportation
projects that would expand the capacity
of roadways cannot go forward.
Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth
EPA policy, criteria, and procedures for
demonstrating and assuring conformity
of such transportation activities to a SIP.
When reviewing SIP revisions
containing MVEBs, including
attainment strategies, rate-of-progress
plans, and maintenance plans, EPA
must affirmatively find adequate and/or
approve the MVEBs for use in
determining transportation conformity
before the MVEBs can be used. Once
EPA affirmatively approves and/or finds
the submitted MVEBs to be adequate for
transportation conformity purposes, the
MVEBs must be used by state and
Federal agencies in determining
whether proposed transportation plans
and TIPs conform to the SIP as required
by section 176(c) of the CAA. EPA’s
substantive criteria for determining the
adequacy of MVEBs are set out in 40
CFR 93.118(e)(4). Additionally, to
approve a motor vehicle emissions
budget EPA must complete a thorough
review of the SIP, in this case the PM2.5
maintenance plans, and conclude that
the SIP will achieve its overall purpose,
in this case providing for maintenance
of the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard in the
Indiana and Ohio portions of the
Cincinnati area.
EPA’s process for determining
adequacy of a MVEB consists of three
basic steps: (1) Providing public
notification of a SIP submission; (2)
providing the public the opportunity to
comment on the MVEB during a public
comment period; and, (3) EPA taking
action on the MVEB. The process for
determining the adequacy of submitted
SIP MVEBs is codified at 40 CFR 93.118.
The maintenance plans submitted by
Ohio and Indiana for the CincinnatiHamilton area contain new primary
PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for the area for
the years 2015 and 2021. The motor
vehicle emissions budgets were
calculated using MOVES2010(a). After
the adequacy finding and approval of
the budgets become effective, the
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
through this rulemaking, has found the
submitted budgets to be adequate for
use to determine transportation
conformity in the Indiana and Ohio
portions of the area, because EPA has
determined that the area can maintain
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the
relevant maintenance period with onroad mobile source emissions at the
levels of the MVEBs including the
requested safety margins. These budgets
must be used in conformity
determinations made on or after the
effective date of this direct final
rulemaking (40 CFR 93.118(f)(iii)).
Additionally, transportation conformity
determinations made after the effective
date of this notice must be based on
regional emissions analyses using
MOVES2010a or a more recent version
of MOVES that has been approved for
use in conformity determinations.5
64835
the state is requesting MVEBs that
exceed the projected on-road mobile
source emissions for 2015 and 2021
contained in the demonstration of
maintenance, the increase in on-road
mobile source emissions that can be
considered for transportation
conformity purposes is well within the
safety margins of the overall PM2.5
maintenance demonstration.
Therefore, EPA believes that the
requested budgets, including the
requested portion of the safety margins,
provide for a quantity of mobile source
emissions that would be expected to
maintain the PM2.5 standard. Once
allocated to mobile sources, these
portions of the safety margins will not
be available for use by other sources.
budgets will have to be used in future
conformity determinations and regional
emissions analyses prepared by the OKI,
will have to be based on the use of
MOVES2010a or the most recent version
of MOVES required to be used in
transportation conformity
determinations.4 The states have
determined the 2015 MVEBs for the
combined Ohio and Indiana portions of
Cincinnati-Hamilton area to be 1,678.60
tpy for primary PM2.5 and 35,723.83 tpy
for NOX. Ohio and Indiana have
determined the 2021 MVEBs for their
combined portions of the CincinnatiHamilton area to be 1,241.19 tpy for
primary PM2.5 and 21,747.71 tpy for
NOX. These MVEBs exceed the on-road
mobile source primary PM2.5 and NOX
emissions projected by the states for
2015 and 2021. Ohio and Indiana have
decided to include ‘‘safety margins’’ as
provided for in 40 CFR 93.124(a)
(described below) of 79.93 tpy and
112.84 tpy for primary PM2.5 and
4,659.63 tpy and 2,836.65 tpy for NOX
in the 2015 and 2021 MVEBs,
respectively, to provide for on-road
mobile source growth. Ohio and 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 on-road motor vehicles
are not significant contributors to the
area’s PM2.5 air quality problem.
In the Ohio and Indiana portions of
the Cincinnati-Hamilton area, the motor
vehicle budgets including the safety
margins and motor vehicle emission
projections for both NOX and PM2.5 are
lower than the levels in the attainment
year.
EPA has reviewed the submitted
budgets for 2015 and 2021 including the
added safety margins using the
conformity rule’s adequacy criteria
found at 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and the
conformity rule’s requirements for
safety margins found at 40 CFR
93.124(a). EPA has also completed a
thorough review of the maintenance
plan for the Ohio and Indiana portions
of the Cincinnati-Hamilton area. Based
on the results of this review of the
budgets and the maintenance plans EPA
is approving the 2015 and 2021 direct
PM2.5 and NOX budgets including the
requested safety margins for the Ohio
and Indiana portions of the CincinnatiHamilton area. Additionally, EPA,
2. What is a safety margin?
A ‘‘safety margin’’ is the difference
between the attainment level of
emissions (from all sources) and the
projected level of emissions (from all
sources) in the maintenance plan. As
shown in Table 5, the combination of
the Ohio and Indiana portions of the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area is projected to
have safety margins for NOX and direct
PM2.5 of 42,994.13 tpy and 270.09 tpy in
2015, and 69,887.02 tpy and 702.01 tpy
for NOX and PM2.5 in 2021 (the
difference between the attainment year,
2008, emissions and the projected years
of 2015 and 2021 emissions for all
sources in the Cincinnati-Hamilton
area). Even if emissions exceeded
expectations by the full level of the
safety margin, the area would still
demonstrate maintenance since
emission levels would equal those in
the attainment year.
The transportation conformity rule
allows areas to allocate all or a portion
of a ‘‘safety margin’’ to the area’s motor
vehicle emissions budgets (40 CFR
92.124(a)). The MVEBs requested by
Ohio and Indiana contain NOX safety
margins for mobile sources in 2015 and
2021 and PM2.5 safety margins for
mobile sources in 2015 and 2021 are
much smaller than the allowable safety
margins reflected in the total emissions
for the Cincinnati-Hamilton area. The
state is not requesting allocation to the
MVEBs of the entire available safety
margins reflected in the demonstration
of maintenance. Therefore, even though
C. 2005 Comprehensive Emissions
Inventory
As discussed above in section
IV.A.2.a.ii., section 172(c)(3) of the CAA
requires areas to submit a
comprehensive emissions inventory.
Ohio and Indiana submitted 2005 base
year emissions inventories that meet
this requirement. Emissions contained
in the submittals cover the general
source categories of point sources, area
sources, on-road mobile sources, and
nonroad mobile sources.
For the point source sector, EGU SO2
and NOX emissions were derived from
4 EPA described the circumstances under which
an area would be required to use MOVES in
transportation conformity determinations in its
March 2, 2010, Federal Register notice officially
releasing MOVES2010 for use in SIPs and
transportation conformity determinations. (75 FR
9413)
5 EPA described the circumstances under which
an area would be required to use MOVES in
transportation conformity determinations in its
March 2, 2010 Federal Register notice officially
releasing MOVES2010 for use in SIPs and
transportation conformity determinations. (75 FR
9413)
6 EPA described the circumstances under which
an area would be required to use MOVES in
transportation conformity determinations in its
March 2, 2010, Federal Register notice officially
releasing MOVES2010 for use in SIPs and
transportation conformity determinations. (75 FR
9413)
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:51 Oct 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
3. What action is EPA taking on the
submitted motor vehicle emissions
budgets?
EPA, through this rulemaking, has
found adequate and is approving the
MVEBs for use to determine
transportation conformity in the Ohio
and Indiana portions of the CincinnatiHamilton area, because EPA has
determined that the area can maintain
attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS for the relevant maintenance
period with mobile source emissions at
the levels of the MVEBs including the
requested safety margins. These budgets
must be used in conformity
determinations made on or after the
effective date of this direct final
rulemaking, December 19, 2011. (40
CFR 93.118(f)(iii)) Additionally, the
determinations made after the effective
date of this notice must be based on
regional emissions analyses using
MOVES2010a or a more recent version
of MOVES that has been approved for
use in conformity determinations.6
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
64836
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
EPA’s Clean Air Market’s database. All
other point source emissions were
obtained from Ohio and Indiana’s
source facility emissions reporting.
Area source emissions were
extrapolated from Ohio and Indiana’s
2005 periodic emissions inventories.
Source growth factors were supplied by
LADCO.
Nonroad mobile source emissions
were extrapolated from nonroad mobile
source emissions reported in EPA’s
2005 NEI. LADCO estimated emissions
for commercial marine vessels and
railroads.
On-road mobile source emissions
were calculated using EPA’s mobile
source emission factor model,
MOVES2010a, in conjunction with
roadway network traffic information
prepared by OKI.
All emissions discussed in Table 1
were documented in the submittal and
the Appendices of Ohio and Indiana’s
redesignation request submittals. EPA
has reviewed Ohio and Indiana’s
documentation of the emissions
inventory techniques and data sources
used for the derivation of the 2005
emissions estimates and has found that
Ohio and Indiana have thoroughly
documented the derivation of these
emissions inventories. The submittals
for both the Ohio and Indiana state that
the 2005 emissions inventories are
currently the most complete emissions
inventories for PM2.5 and PM2.5
precursors in the Cincinnati-Hamilton
area. Based upon EPA’s review, we
conclude that the 2005 emissions
inventories areas complete and accurate
as possible given the input data
available to the states.
V. Summary of Actions
EPA has previously made the
determination that the CincinnatiHamilton area has attained the 1997
annual PM2.5 standard. EPA is
determining that the area continues to
attain the standard and that the Ohio
and Indiana portions of the area meet
the requirements for redesignation to
attainment of that standard under
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is
thus approving the requests from Ohio
and Indiana to change the legal
designation of their portions of the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area from
nonattainment to attainment for the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is
approving Ohio and Indiana’s 1997
annual PM2.5 maintenance plans for the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area as revisions to
the respective SIPs because the plans
meet the requirements of section 175A
of the CAA. EPA is approving the 2005
emissions inventories for primary PM2.5,
NOX, and SO2, documented in Indiana’s
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:51 Oct 18, 2011
Jkt 223001
and Ohio’s December 9, 2010, and
January 25, 2011, submittals as
satisfying the requirement in section
172(c)(3) of the CAA for a
comprehensive, current emission
inventory. Finally, EPA finds adequate
and is approving 2015 and 2021 primary
PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs submitted from
each state for the Ohio and Indiana
portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton
area. These MVEBs will be used in
future transportation conformity
analyses for the area after the effective
date for the adequacy finding and
approval.
VI. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
Under the CAA, 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 CAA 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
CAA 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 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);
• 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);
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
• 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.
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this action and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. A major rule
cannot take effect until 60 days after it
is published in the Federal Register.
These actions are not ‘‘major rules’’ as
defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,
petitions for judicial review of this
action must be filed in the United States
Court of Appeals for the appropriate
circuit by December 19, 2011. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the
Administrator of this final rule does not
affect the finality of these actions for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. Parties with
objections to this direct final rule are
encouraged to file a comment in
response to the parallel notice of
proposed rulemaking for this action
published in the proposed rules section
of today’s Federal Register, rather than
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
64837
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
§ 52.776
matter.
Control strategy: Particulate
*
*
*
*
(v) * * *
(3) The Cincinnati-Hamilton
nonattainment area (Dearborn County),
as submitted on December 9, 2010. The
maintenance plan establishes 2015
motor vehicle emissions budgets for the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area of 1,678.60
tpy for primary PM2.5 and 35,723.83 tpy
for NOX and 2021 motor vehicle
emissions budgets of 1,241.19 tpy for
primary PM2.5 and 21,747.71 tpy for
NOX.
(w) * * *
(3) Indiana’s 2005 NOx, directly
emitted PM2.5, and SO2 emissions
inventory satisfies the emission
inventory requirements of section
172(c)(3) of the Clean Air Act for the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area.
Hamilton, and Warren Counties), as
submitted on January 25, 2011. The
maintenance plan establishes 2015
motor vehicle emissions budgets for the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area of 1,678.60
tpy for primary PM2.5 and 35,723.83 tpy
for NOX and 2021 motor vehicle
emissions budgets of 1,241.19 tpy for
primary PM2.5 and 21,747.71 tpy for
NOX.
(2) [Reserved]
(q) Approval—The 1997 annual PM2.5
comprehensive emissions inventories
for the following areas have been
approved:
(1) Ohio’s 2005 NOx, directly emitted
PM2.5, and SO2 emissions inventory
satisfies the emission inventory
requirements of section 172(c)(3) for the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area.
(2) [Reserved]
Subpart KK—Ohio
PART 81—[AMENDED]
3. Section 52.1880 is amended by
adding paragraphs (p) and (q) to read as
follows:
■
§ 52.1880
matter.
file an immediate petition for judicial
review of this direct final rule, so that
EPA can withdraw these direct final
rules and address the comment in the
proposed rulemaking. These actions
may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce their
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
■
*
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Particulate matter.
40 CFR Part 81
Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: October 7, 2011.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 are amended
as follows:
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
■
Control strategy: Particulate
*
Subpart P—Indiana
2. Section 52.776 is amended by
adding paragraphs (v)(3) and (w)(3) to
read as follows:
■
*
*
*
*
(p) Approval—The 1997 annual PM2.5
maintenance plans for the following
areas have been approved:
(1) The Cincinnati-Hamilton
nonattainment area (Butler, Clermont,
4. The authority citation for part 81
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
5. Section 81.315 is amended by
revising the entry for CincinnatiHamilton, IN in the table entitled
‘‘Indiana PM2.5 (Annual NAAQS)’’ to
read as follows:
§ 81.315
*
*
Indiana.
*
*
*
INDIANA PM2.5
[Annual NAAQS]
Designation a
Designated area
Date 1
Type
*
*
*
*
*
*
Cincinnati-Hamilton, IN: Dearborn County ..............................................................................
December 19, 2011
*
*
*
*
*
*
Attainment.
*
*
a Includes
1 This
Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 6. Section 81.336 is amended by
revising the entry for Cincinnati-
Hamilton, OH in the table entitled
‘‘Ohio PM2.5 (Annual NAAQS)’’ to read
as follows:
§ 81.336
*
*
Ohio.
*
*
*
OHIO PM2.5
[Annual NAAQS]
Designation a
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Designated area
Date 1
*
Cincinnati-Hamilton, Ohio:
Butler County.
Clermont County.
Hamilton County.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
*
17:19 Oct 18, 2011
*
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
*
Frm 00057
Fmt 4700
*
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
Type
*
19OCR1
*
64838
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations
OHIO PM2.5—Continued
[Annual NAAQS]
Designation a
Designated area
Date 1
December 19, 2011
Warren County ..................................................................................................................
*
*
*
*
Type
Attainment.
*
*
a Includes
1 This
*
*
Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified.
date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted.
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2011–26887 Filed 10–18–11; 8:45 am]
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:19 Oct 18, 2011
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\19OCR1.SGM
19OCR1
*
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 202 (Wednesday, October 19, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64825-64838]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-26887]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R05-OAR-2011-0017; EPA-R05-OAR-2011-0106; FRL-9480-6]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans,
Ohio and Indiana; Redesignation of the Ohio and Indiana Portions
Cincinnati-Hamilton Area to Attainment of the 1997 Annual Standard for
Fine Particulate Matter
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving, under the Clean Air Act (CAA), Ohio's and
Indiana's requests to redesignate their respective portions of the
Cincinnati-Hamilton nonattainment area (for Ohio: Butler, Clermont,
Hamilton, and Warren Counties, Ohio; for IN: a portion of Dearborn
County) to attainment for the 1997 annual National Ambient Air Quality
Standard (NAAQS or standard) for fine particulate matter
(PM2.5). The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA)
submitted its request on December 9, 2010, and the Indiana
[[Page 64826]]
Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) submitted its request on
January 25, 2011. Kentucky's request to redesignate its portion of the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area, submitted to EPA on January 27, 2011, will be
addressed in a separate rulemaking action. EPA's approvals here involve
several additional related actions. EPA has determined that the entire
Cincinnati-Hamilton area has attained the 1997 annual PM2.5
standard. EPA is approving, as revisions to the Ohio and Indiana State
Implementation Plans (SIPs), the states' plans for maintaining the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS through 2021 in the area. EPA is
approving the 2005 emissions inventories for the Ohio and Indiana
portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton area as meeting the comprehensive
emissions inventory requirement of the CAA. Finally, EPA finds adequate
and is approving Ohio and Indiana's Nitrogen Oxides (NOX)
and PM2.5 Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEBs) for 2015
and 2021 for the Cincinnati-Hamilton area.
DATES: This direct final rule will be effective December 19, 2011,
unless EPA receives adverse comments by November 18, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2011-0106 (Indiana) or EPA-R05-OAR-2011-0017 (Ohio) by one of the
following methods:
https://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line
instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: Aburano.Douglas@epa.gov.
Fax: (312) 408-2279.
Mail: Doug Aburano, Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Hand Delivery: Doug Aburano, Control Strategies Section,
Air Programs Branch, (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, 18th Floor, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's 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-
2011-0106, EPA-R05-OAR-2011-0017. 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 email. 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 email 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 and viruses. For additional instructions on submitting
comments, go to section I of 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 Carolyn Persoon at (312) 353-
8290 before visiting the Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carolyn Persoon, Environmental
Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J),
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-8290, persoon.carolyn@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. What actions is EPA taking?
II. What is the background for these actions?
III. What are the criteria for redesignation to attainment?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of the States' requests?
A. Attainment Determination and Redesignation
B. Adequacy of Ohio and Indiana's MVEBs
C. 2005 Comprehensive Emissions Inventory
V. Summary of Actions
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What actions is EPA taking?
EPA has previously determined that the entire Cincinnati-Hamilton
area is attaining the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard and that
the Ohio and Indiana portions of the area have met the requirements for
redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA through a final
determination made on September 29, 2011. EPA is thus approving the
requests from the states of Ohio and Indiana to change the legal
designation of their portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton area from
nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
This action does not address the Kentucky portion of the Cincinnati-
Hamilton area. EPA is also taking several additional actions related to
Ohio and Indiana's PM2.5 redesignation requests, as
discussed below.
EPA is approving Indiana's and Ohio's PM2.5 maintenance
plans for the Cincinnati-Hamilton area as revisions to the Ohio and
Indiana SIP (such approval being one of the CAA criteria for
redesignation to attainment status). The maintenance plans are designed
to keep the Cincinnati-Hamilton area in attainment of the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS through 2021.
EPA is approving 2005 emissions inventories for primary
PM2.5,\1\ NOX, and sulfur dioxide
(SO2),\2\ documented in Ohio and Indiana's PM2.5
redesignation request supplemental submittal. These emissions
inventories satisfy the requirement in section 172(c)(3) of the CAA for
a comprehensive, current emission inventory.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Fine particulates directly emitted by sources and not formed
in a secondary manner through chemical reactions or other processes
in the atmosphere.
\2\ NOX and SO2 are precursors for fine
particulates through chemical reactions and other related processes
in the atmosphere.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, EPA finds adequate and is approving Ohio's and Indiana's
2015
[[Page 64827]]
and 2021 primary PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area. These MVEBs will be used in future
transportation conformity analyses for the area. Further discussion of
the basis for these actions is provided below.
II. 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 ([micro]g/m\3\) of
ambient air, based on a three-year average of the annual mean
PM2.5 concentrations at each monitoring site. In the same
rulemaking, EPA promulgated a 24-hour PM2.5 standard at 65
[micro]g/m\3\, based on a three-year average of the annual 98th
percentile of 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations at each
monitoring site.
On January 5, 2005, at 70 FR 944, EPA published air quality area
designations for the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard based on air
quality data for calendar years 2001-2003. In that rulemaking, EPA
designated the Cincinnati-Hamilton, area as nonattainment (for Ohio:
Butler, Clermont, Hamilton, and Warren Counties, Ohio; for IN: a
portion of Dearborn County, and for Kentucky: Boone, Campbell, and
Kenton Counties) for the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard.
On October 17, 2006, at 71 FR 61144, EPA retained the annual
PM2.5 standard at 15 [micro]g/m\3\ (2006 annual
PM2.5 standard), but revised the 24-hour standard to 35
[micro]g/m\3\, based again on the three-year average of the annual 98th
percentile of the 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations. In response
to legal challenges to the 2006 annual PM2.5 standard, the
U.S. Court of Appeals for District of Columbia Circuit (DC 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 (DC Cir. 2009). However, given that the 1997 and 2006
annual PM2.5 standards are essentially identical, attainment
of the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard would also indicate
attainment of the remanded 2006 annual standard. Since the Cincinnati-
Hamilton area is designated as nonattainment for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 standard, today's proposed action addresses
redesignation to attainment only for this standard.
Fine particulate pollution can be emitted directly from a source
(primary PM2.5) or formed secondarily through chemical
reactions in the atmosphere involving precursor pollutants emitted from
a variety of sources. Sulfates are a type of secondary particulate
formed from SO2 emissions from power plants and industrial
facilities. Nitrates, another common type of secondary particulate, are
formed from combustion emissions of NOX from power plants,
mobile sources, and other combustion sources.
III. What are the criteria for redesignation to attainment?
The CAA sets forth the requirements for redesignating a
nonattainment area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of
the CAA allows redesignation provided that: (1) The Administrator
determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) the
Administrator has fully approved the applicable SIP for the area under
section 110(k) of the CAA; (3) the Administrator determines that the
improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions resulting from the implementation of the
applicable SIP, Federal emission 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 CAA; 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 CAA.
IV. What is EPA's analysis of the States' requests?
A. Attainment Determination and Redesignation
EPA has determined that the entire Cincinnati-Hamilton area has
attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard and that the Ohio
and Indiana portions of the area have met all other applicable
redesignation criteria under CAA section 107(d)(3)(E). The basis for
EPA's approvals of the redesignation requests is as follows:
1. The Area Has Attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS
(Section 107(d)(3)(E)(i))
On June 3, 2011, EPA proposed to determine that the entire
Cincinnati-Hamilton area has attained the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS (76 FR 32110). No adverse comments were received and EPA's Region
4 and Region 5 Regional Administrators signed the final determination
of attainment for the Cincinnati-Hamilton area on August 18, 2011 and
September 12, 2011, respectively and published in the Federal Register
on September 29, 2011. Relevant discussion of the monitored
concentrations and sites can be found in the notices for the proposed
and final determinations that are referenced above. EPA's September 29,
2011 final determination that the Cincinnati-Hamilton area has attained
the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard fulfills the requirement set
forth in CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(i).
2. The Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and
Part D; and the Area Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k)
(Sections 107(d)(3)(E)(v) and 107(d)(3)(E)(ii))
We have determined that Ohio and Indiana have met all currently
applicable SIP requirements for purposes of redesignation of the Ohio
and Indiana portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton area under section 110
of the CAA (general SIP requirements). We are also finding that the
Ohio and Indiana SIPs meet all SIP requirements currently applicable
for purposes of redesignation under part D of title I of the CAA, in
accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, with the
exception of the emissions inventory under section 172(c)(3), we have
approved all applicable requirements of the Ohio and Indiana SIPs for
purposes of redesignation, in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii).
As discussed below, in this action EPA is approving Ohio and Indiana's
2005 emissions inventories as meeting the section 172(c)(3)
comprehensive emissions inventory requirement.
In making these determinations, we have ascertained which SIP
requirements are applicable for purposes of redesignation, and have
determined that there are SIP measures meeting those requirements and
that they are fully approved under section 110(k) of the CAA.
a. Ohio and Indiana Have Met All Applicable Requirements for Purposes
of Redesignation of Their Portions of the Area Under Section 110 and
Part D of the CAA
i. Section 110 General SIP Requirements
Section 110(a) of title I of the CAA contains the general
requirements for a SIP. Section 110(a)(2) provides that the
implementation plan submitted by a state must have been adopted by the
state after reasonable public notice and hearing, and, among other
things, must: include enforceable emission limitations and other
control measures, means or techniques necessary to meet the
requirements of the CAA; provide for establishment and operation of
appropriate devices, methods, systems, and procedures necessary to
monitor
[[Page 64828]]
ambient air quality; provide for implementation of a source permit
program to regulate the modification and construction of any stationary
source within the areas covered by the plan; include provisions for the
implementation of part C, Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
and part D, New Source Review (NSR) permit programs; include criteria
for stationary source emission control measures, monitoring, and
reporting; include provisions for air quality modeling; and provide for
public and local agency participation in planning and emission control
rule development.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA requires that SIPs contain measures
to prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air
quality problems in another state. EPA believes that the requirements
linked with a particular nonattainment area's designation are the
relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. The
transport SIP submittal requirements, where applicable, continue to
apply to a state regardless of the designation of any one particular
area in the state. Thus, we believe that these requirements should not
be construed to be applicable requirements for purposes of
redesignation.
Further, we believe that the other section 110 elements described
above that are not connected with nonattainment plan submissions and
not linked with an area's attainment status are also not applicable
requirements for purposes of redesignation. A state remains subject to
these requirements after an area is redesignated to attainment. We
conclude that only the section 110 and part D requirements that are
linked with a particular area's designation are the relevant measures
which we may consider in evaluating a redesignation request. This
approach is consistent with EPA's existing policy on applicability of
conformity and oxygenated fuels requirements for redesignation
purposes, as well as with section 184 ozone transport requirements. See
Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final rulemakings (61 FR 53174-
53176, October 10, 1996, and 62 FR 24826, May 7, 1997); Cleveland-
Akron-Lorain, Ohio, final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7, 1996); and
Tampa, Florida, final rulemaking (60 FR 62748, December 7, 1995). See
also the discussion on this issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio 1-hour ozone
redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 2000), and in the Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania 1-hour ozone redesignation (66 FR 50399, October 19,
2001).
We have reviewed Ohio and Indiana's SIPs and have concluded that
they meet the general SIP requirements under section 110 of the CAA to
the extent they are applicable for purposes of redesignation. EPA has
previously approved provisions of Ohio and Indiana's SIPs addressing
section 110 requirements (including provisions addressing particulate
matter, at 40 CFR 52.770 and 40 CFR 52.1870, respectively).
On December 7, 2007, September 9, 2008, March 23, 2011, and April
7, 2011, Indiana made submittals addressing ``infrastructure SIP''
elements required by section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. EPA approved
elements of Indiana's submittals on July 13, 2011, at 76 FR 41075.
On December 5, 2007, and September 4, 2009, Ohio made submittals
addressing ``infrastructure SIP'' elements required under CAA section
110(a)(2). EPA proposed approval of the December 5, 2007, submittal on
April 28, 2011, at 76 FR 23757 and published final approval on July 13,
2011, at 76 FR 41075. EPA disapproved the element of the September 4,
2009, submittal that addresses section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) on July 20,
2011, at 76 FR 43175, but has not taken rulemaking action on the
remainder of the submittal.
The remaining parts of the infrastructure SIPs required by section
110(a)(2) are not relevant to this redesignation, and are statewide
requirements that are not linked to the PM2.5 nonattainment
status of the Cincinnati-Hamilton area. Therefore, EPA believes that
these SIP elements are not applicable requirements for purposes of
review of the state's PM2.5 redesignation request.
ii. Part D Requirements
EPA has determined that, upon approval of the base year emissions
inventories discussed in section IV.C. of this rulemaking, the Ohio and
Indiana SIPs will meet the SIP requirements for the Cincinnati-Hamilton
area applicable for purposes of redesignation under part D of the CAA.
Subpart 1 of part D, found in sections 172-176 of the CAA, sets forth
the basic nonattainment requirements applicable to all nonattainment
areas.
Subpart 1--Section 172 Requirements.
For purposes of evaluating these redesignation requests, the
applicable section 172 SIP requirements for the Ohio and Indiana
portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton area are contained in sections
172(c)(1)-(9). A thorough discussion of the requirements contained in
section 172 can be found in the General Preamble for Implementation of
Title I (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992).
Section 172(c)(1) requires the plans for all nonattainment areas to
provide for the implementation of all Reasonably Available Control
Measures (RACM) as expeditiously as practicable and to provide for
attainment of the primary NAAQS. EPA interprets this requirement to
impose a duty on all nonattainment areas to consider all available
control measures and to adopt and implement such measures as are
reasonably available for implementation in each area as components of
the area's attainment demonstration. Because attainment has been
reached, no additional measures are needed to provide for attainment,
and section 172(c)(1) requirements are no longer considered to be
applicable as long as the area continues to attain the standard until
redesignation. (40 CFR 51.1004(c)).
The Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) requirement under section
172(c)(2) is defined as progress that must be made toward attainment.
This requirement is not relevant for purposes of redesignation because
the Cincinnati-Hamilton area has monitored attainment of the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS. (General Preamble, 57 FR 13564). See
also 40 CFR 51.918. In addition, because the Cincinnati-Hamilton area
has attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and is no longer
subject to an RFP requirement, the requirement to submit the section
172(c)(9) contingency measures is not applicable for purposes of
redesignation. Id.
Section 172(c)(3) requires submission and approval of a
comprehensive, accurate and current inventory of actual emissions. Ohio
and Indiana submitted 2005 base year emissions inventories along with
their redesignation requests. As discussed below in section IV.C., EPA
is approving the 2005 base year inventories as meeting the section
172(c)(3) emissions inventory requirement for the Cincinnati-Hamilton
area.
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 approved Ohio's current NSR
program on January 10, 2003 (68 FR 1366). EPA approved Indiana's
current NSR program on October 7, 1994 (59 FR 51108). Nonetheless,
since PSD requirements will apply after redesignation, the area need
not have a fully-approved NSR
[[Page 64829]]
program for purposes of redesignation, provided that the area
demonstrates maintenance of the NAAQS without part D NSR. A 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 the
Indianapolis area will be able to maintain the standard without part D
NSR in effect; 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 Indianapolis area upon
redesignation to attainment. See rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60
FR 12467-12468, March 7, 1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio (61 FR
20458, 20469-20470, May 7, 1996); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665,
October 23, 2001); and Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31834-31837, June
21, 1996).
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 Ohio
and Indiana SIPs meet the requirements of section 110(a)(2) applicable
for purposes of redesignation.
Subpart 1--Section 176(c)(4)(D) Conformity SIP Requirements.
The requirement to determine conformity applies to transportation
plans, programs and projects developed, funded or approved under title
23 of the U.S. Code and the Federal Transit Act (transportation
conformity) as well as to all other Federally-supported or funded
projects (general conformity).
Section 176(c) of the CAA was amended by provisions contained in
the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), which was signed into law on August 10,
2005 (Public Law 109-59). Among the changes Congress made to this
section of the CAA were streamlined requirements for state
transportation conformity SIPs. State transportation conformity
regulations must be consistent with Federal conformity regulations and
address three specific requirements related to consultation,
enforcement, and enforceability.
EPA believes that it is reasonable to interpret the transportation
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
transportation conformity provisions of the CAA 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 transportation 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).
Ohio and Indiana both have approved transportation conformity SIPs
(72 FR 20945 (Ohio) and 75 FR 50708 (Indiana)). Ohio and Indiana are in
the process of updating their approved transportation conformity SIPs,
and EPA will review these when they are submitted.
b. The Cincinnati-Hamilton Area Has a Fully Approved Applicable SIP
Under Section 110(k) of the CAA
Upon final approval of Ohio and Indiana's comprehensive 2005
emissions inventories, EPA will have fully approved the Ohio and
Indiana SIP for the Cincinnati-Hamilton area under section 110(k) of
the CAA for all requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation.
EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a redesignation
request (See page 3 of the September 4, 1992, memorandum from John
Calcagni, entitled ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate
Areas to Attainment,''; Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v.
Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989-990 (6th Cir. 1998); Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d
426 (6th Cir. 2001)) plus any additional measures it may approve in
conjunction with a redesignation action. See 68 FR 25413, 25426 (May
12, 2003). Since the passage of the CAA of 1970, Ohio and Indiana have
adopted and submitted, and EPA has fully approved, provisions
addressing various required SIP elements under particulate matter
standards. In this action, EPA is approving Ohio and Indiana's 2005
base year emissions inventory for the Cincinnati-Hamilton area as
meeting the requirement of section 172(c)(3) of the CAA.
3. The Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to Permanent and Enforceable
Reductions in Emissions Resulting From Implementation of the SIPs and
Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control Regulations and Other
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii))
EPA finds that Ohio and Indiana have demonstrated that the observed
air quality improvement in the Cincinnati-Hamilton area is due to
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from
implementation of the SIPs, Federal measures, and other state-adopted
measures.
In making this demonstration, Ohio and Indiana have calculated the
change in emissions between 2005, one of the years used to designate
the Cincinnati-Hamilton area as nonattainment, and 2008, one of the
years the Cincinnati-Hamilton area monitored attainment. The reduction
in emissions and the corresponding improvement in air quality over this
time period can be attributed to a number of regulatory control
measures that the Cincinnati-Hamilton area and upwind areas have
implemented in recent years.
a. Permanent and Enforceable Controls Implemented
The following is a discussion of permanent and enforceable measures
that have been implemented in the areas:
i. Federal Emission Control Measures
Reductions in fine particle precursor emissions have occurred
statewide and in upwind areas as a result of Federal emission control
measures, with additional emission reductions expected to occur in the
future. Federal emission control measures include the following.
Tier 2 Emission Standards for Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur
Standards. These emission control and fuel requirements result in lower
NOX emissions from new cars and light duty trucks, including
sport utility vehicles. The Federal rules were phased in between 2004
and 2009. The EPA has estimated that, by the end of the phase-in
period, NOX emissions will be reduced by 77 percent from new
passenger cars (light-duty vehicles), 86 percent from new light duty
trucks, minivans, and sports utility vehicles and, 69 to 95 percent
from new larger sports utility vehicles, vans, and heavier trucks. EPA
expects fleet wide average NOX emissions to decline as new
vehicles replace older vehicles each year. The Tier 2 standards
included the
[[Page 64830]]
requirement to reduce the sulfur content of gasoline to 30 parts per
million (ppm) by January 2006 primarily to improve the durability and
effectiveness of vehicle emission control technology so that new
vehicles could comply with these more stringent NOX
emissions standards.
The 2007 Heavy-Duty Highway Rule. EPA issued this rule in December
2000. This rule took effect in 2007. It reduced fine particle and
NOX emissions from heavy-duty highway engines and included
requirements to reduce the sulfur content of diesel fuel used by
highway vehicles to 15 ppm beginning in mid-2006 in order to avoid
damage to the advanced PM and NOX controls that are
necessary to comply with stringent emissions standards. The total
program is estimated to achieve a 90 percent reduction in direct
PM2.5 emissions and a 95 percent reduction in NOX
emissions for these new engines using low sulfur diesel, compared to
existing engines using higher sulfur content diesel.
Nonroad Diesel Rule. In May 2004 EPA promulgated a new rule for
large nonroad diesel engines, such as those used construction,
agriculture, and mining equipment, to be phased in between 2008 and
2014. The rule establishes stringent emissions standards for
NOX and PM for these types of equipment and establishes
limits for the sulfur content of the diesel fuel that they use. The
requirement to reduce sulfur levels in the nonroad diesel fuel by as
much 99 percent allows advanced emission-control systems to be used for
the first time on the engines used in these types of equipment. The
combined engine and fuel rules will reduce NOX and PM
emissions from large nonroad diesel engines by over 90 percent,
compared to current nonroad engines using higher sulfur content diesel.
This rule achieved some emission reductions by 2008 and was fully
implemented by 2010.
Control Measures in Upwind Areas
Given the significance of sulfates and nitrates in the Cincinnati-
Hamilton area, the area's air quality is strongly affected by
regulation of SO2 and NOX emissions from power
plants.
NOX SIP Call. On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA
issued a NOX SIP Call requiring the District of Columbia and
22 states to reduce emissions of NOX. Affected states were
required to comply with Phase I of the SIP Call beginning in 2004, and
Phase II beginning in 2007. Emission reductions resulting from
regulations developed in response to the NOX SIP Call are
permanent and enforceable.
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). 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 United States. However, on July 11, 2008, the United States
Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (DC Circuit or
Court) issued its decision to vacate and remand both CAIR and the
associated CAIR FIPs in their entirety (North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d
836 (DC Cir. 2008)). EPA petitioned for a 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 (DC Cir. 2008)). The Court,
thereby, left CAIR in place in order to ``temporarily preserve the
environmental values covered by CAIR'' until EPA replaced it with a
rule consistent with the Court's opinion (id. at 1178). The Court
directed EPA to ``remedy CAIR's flaws'' consistent with the July 11,
2008, opinion, but declined to impose a schedule on EPA for completing
this action (id).
On August 8, 2011, at 76 FR 48208, EPA promulgated the Cross-State
Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) to address interstate transport of emissions
and resulting secondary air pollutants and to replace CAIR. CAIR, among
other things, required NOX and SO2 emission
reductions that contributed to the air quality improvement in the
Cincinnati-Hamilton nonattainment area. CAIR emission reduction
requirements limit emissions through 2011; CSAPR requires similar or
greater emission reductions in the relevant areas in 2012 and beyond.
CSAPR requires substantial reductions of SO2 and
NOX emissions from Electric Generating Units (EGUs or power
plants) across most of Eastern United States, with implementation
beginning on January 1, 2012. In particular, this rule requires
reduction of these emissions to levels well below the levels that led
to attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard in the
Cincinnati-Hamilton nonattainment area. Because the emission reduction
requirements of CAIR are enforceable through the 2011 control period,
and because CSAPR has now been promulgated to address the requirements
previously addressed by CAIR and gets similar or greater reductions in
the relevant areas in 2012 and beyond, EPA has determined that the EGU
emission reductions that helped lead to attainment in the Cincinnati-
Hamilton area can now be considered permanent and enforceable and that
the requirement of CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) has now been met.
b. Emission Reductions
Ohio and Indiana developed emissions inventories for
NOX, direct PM2.5, and SO2 for 2005,
one of the years used to designate the areas as nonattainment, and
2008, one of the years the Cincinnati-Hamilton area monitored
attainment of the standard.
EGU SO2 and NOX emissions were derived from
EPA's Clean Air Market's acid rain database. These emissions reflect
Ohio and Indiana's NOX emission budgets resulting from EPA's
NOX SIP call. The 2008 emissions from EGUs reflect Ohio and
Indiana's emission caps under CAIR. All other point source emissions
were obtained from Ohio and Indiana's source facility emissions
reporting.
Area source emissions for the Cincinnati-Hamilton area for 2005
were taken from Ohio and Indiana's 2005 periodic emissions
inventories.\3\ These 2005 area source emission estimates were
extrapolated to 2008. Source growth factors were supplied by the Lake
Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Periodic emission inventories are derived by States every
three years and reported to the EPA. These periodic emission
inventories are required by the Federal Consolidated Emissions
Reporting Rule, codified at 40 CFR Subpart A. EPA revised these and
other emission reporting requirements in a final rule published on
December 17, 2008, at 73 FR 76539.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nonroad mobile source emissions were extrapolated from nonroad
mobile source emissions reported in EPA's 2005 National Emissions
Inventory (NEI). Contractors were employed by LADCO to estimate
emissions for commercial marine vessels and railroads.
On-road mobile source emissions were calculated using EPA's mobile
source emission factor model, MOVES2010a, in conjunction with
transportation model results developed by the Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana
Regional Council of Governments (OKI).
All emissions estimates discussed below were documented in the
submittals and Appendices of Ohio and Indiana's redesignation request
submittal from January 25, 2011, and December 9, 2010, respectively.
For these data and additional emissions inventory data, the reader is
referred to EPA's digital docket for this rule, https://www.regulations.gov, for docket numbers EPA-R05-OAR-2011-0106 (Indiana)
or EPA-R05-OAR-2011-0017 (Ohio), which include digital copies of Ohio
and Indiana's submittals.
[[Page 64831]]
Emissions data for the entire Cincinnati-Hamilton area (OH-IN-KY)
are shown in Tables 1 through 4 below.
Table 1--Comparison of 2005 and 2008 NOX Emission Totals by Source Sector (tpy) for the Cincinnati-Hamilton Area
(OH-IN-KY)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX
-----------------------------------------------------
Sector Net change 2005-
2005 2008 2008
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point (Non-EGU)........................................... 10,371.70 9,790.50 -581.20
EGU....................................................... 55,930.44 46,853.89 -9,076.55
Area...................................................... 7,810.74 7,966.67 155.93
Nonroad................................................... 12,480.57 10,561.92 -1,918.65
On-road................................................... 71,919.89 64,471.22 -7,448.67
-----------------------------------------------------
Total................................................. 158,513.34 139,644.20 -18,869.14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2--Comparison of 2005 and 2008 Direct PM2.5 Emission Totals by Source Sector (tpy) for the Cincinnati-
Hamilton Area (OH-IN-KY)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct PM2.5
-----------------------------------------------------
Sector Net change 2005-
2005 2008 2008
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point (Non-EGU)........................................... 1,352.79 1,458.52 105.73
EGU....................................................... 2,062.91 1,633.15 -429.76
Area...................................................... 1,828.55 1,864.80 36.25
Nonroad................................................... 4,469.27 3,807.04 -662.23
On-road................................................... 2,810.30 2,679.85 -130.45
-----------------------------------------------------
Total................................................. 12,523.79 11,443.36 -1080.46
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3--Comparison of 2005 and 2008 SO2 Emission Totals by Source Sector (tpy) for the Cincinnati-Hamilton Area
(OH-IN-KY)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2
-----------------------------------------------------
Sector Net change 2005-
2005 2008 2008
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point (Non-EGU)........................................... 15,532.09 13,483.92 -2,048.17
EGU....................................................... 218,395.56 98,334.17 -150,061.39
Area...................................................... 3494.39 3520.77 26.38
Nonroad................................................... 1,057.16 416.87 -640.29
On-road................................................... 392.00 277.59 -114.41
-----------------------------------------------------
Total................................................. 238,871.20 116,033.32 -152,837.88
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 1 shows that the entire Cincinnati-Hamilton area reduced
NOX emissions by 18,869.14 tpy between 2005 and 2008. Table
2 shows that the Cincinnati-Hamilton area reduced direct
PM2.5 emissions by 1,080.46 tpy between 2005 and 2008. Table
3 shows that the Cincinnati-Hamilton area reduced SO2
emissions by 152,837.88 tpy between 2005 and 2008.
Because PM2.5 concentrations in the Cincinnati-Hamilton
area are significantly impacted by the transport of sulfates and
nitrates, the area's air quality is strongly affected by regulation of
SO2 and NOX emissions from power plants. Table 4,
below, presents statewide EGU emissions data compiled by EPA's Clean
Air Markets Division for the years 2002 and 2008. Emissions for 2008
reflect implementation of CAIR.
Table 4--Comparison of 2002 and 2008 Statewide EGU NOX and SO2 Emissions (tpy) for States Impacting the Cincinnati-Hamilton Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX SO2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Net change Net change
2002 2008 2002-2008 2002 2008 2002-2008
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama................................................. 161,559 112,625 -48,934 448,248 357,546 -90,702
Illinois................................................ 174,247 119,930 -54,317 353,699 257,357 -96,342
Indiana................................................. 281,146 190,092 -91,054 778,868 565,459 -213,409
[[Page 64832]]
Kentucky................................................ 198,599 157,903 -40,696 482,653 344,356 -138,297
Michigan................................................ 132,623 107,624 -25,000 342,999 326,501 -16,498
Missouri................................................ 139,799 88,742 -51,057 235,532 258,269 22,737
Ohio.................................................... 370,497 235,049 -135,448 1,132,069 709,444 -422,625
Pennsylvania............................................ 200,909 183,658 -17,251 889,766 831,915 -57,851
Tennessee............................................... 155,996 85,641 -70,356 336,995 208,069 -128,926
West Virginia........................................... 225,371 99,484 -125,887 507,110 301,574 -205,536
Wisconsin............................................... 88,970 47,794 -41,175 191,257 129,694 -61,563
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................................... 2,129,716 1,428,541 -701,175 5,699,195 4,290,184 -1,409,011
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4 shows that states impacting the Cincinnati-Hamilton area
reduced NOX and SO2 emissions from EGUs by
701,175 tons per year (tpy) and 1,409,011 tpy, respectively, between
2002 and 2008.
Based on the information summarized above, Ohio and Indiana have
adequately demonstrated that the improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable emissions reductions.
4. Ohio and Indiana Have Fully Approved Maintenance Plans Pursuant to
Section 175A of the CAA (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv))
In conjunction with Ohio and Indiana's requests to redesignate the
Cincinnati-Hamilton nonattainment area to attainment status, Ohio and
Indiana have submitted SIP revisions to provide for maintenance of the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the area through 2021.
a. What is required in a maintenance plan?
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the required elements of a
maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to
attainment. Under section 175A, the plan must demonstrate continued
attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least ten years after EPA
approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after
redesignation, the state must submit a revised maintenance plan which
demonstrates that attainment will continue to be maintained for ten
years following the initial ten-year maintenance period. To address the
possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must
contain contingency measures with a schedule for implementation as EPA
deems necessary to assure prompt correction of any future annual
PM2.5 violations.
The September 4, 1992, John Calcagni memorandum provides additional
guidance on the content of a maintenance plan. The memorandum states
that a maintenance plan should address the following items: The
attainment emissions inventories, a maintenance demonstration showing
maintenance for the ten years of the maintenance period, a commitment
to maintain the existing monitoring network, factors and procedures to
be used for verification of continued attainment of the NAAQS, and a
contingency plan to prevent or correct future violations of the NAAQS.
b. Attainment Inventory
The states developed emissions inventories for NOX,
direct PM2.5, and SO2 for 2008, one of the years
used to demonstrate monitored attainment of the 1997 annual
PM2.5 standard, as described in section IV.A.3.b., above.
The attainment level of emissions is summarized in Tables 1 through 4,
above.
c. Demonstration of Maintenance
Along with the redesignation request, the two states submitted
revisions to their PM2.5 SIPs to include maintenance plans
for the Cincinnati-Hamilton area, as required by section 175A of the
CAA. These demonstrations show maintenance of the annual
PM2.5 standard through 2021 by showing that current and
future emissions of NOX, directly emitted PM2.5
and SO2 for the area remain at or below attainment year
emission levels. A maintenance demonstration need not be based on
modeling. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), Sierra Club v.
EPA, 375 F. 3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also 66 FR 53094, 53099-53100
(October 19, 2001), 68 FR 25413, 25430-25432 (May 12, 2003).
Ohio and Indiana are using emissions inventory projections for the
years 2015, and 2021 to demonstrate maintenance. The projected
emissions were estimated by Ohio and Indiana, with assistance from
LADCO, and the local Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), OKI
using the MOVES2010a model. Emissions data are shown in Table 5, below.
Table 5--Comparison of 2008, 2015, and 2021 NOX, Direct PM2.5, and SO2 Emission Totals (tpy) for the Cincinnati-
Hamilton Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net change
2008 2015 2021 (2008-2021)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5................................... 8,904.64 8,634.55 8,202.63 -702.01
NOX..................................... 148,706.15 105,712.02 78,819.13 -69,887.02
SO2..................................... 117,016.14 112,250.26 88,510.27 -28,505.87
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 5 shows that the NOX emissions in the Cincinnati-
Hamilton area are 69.887.02 tpy less in 2021, the outermost year of the
maintenance plan, than in attainment year 2008. Direct PM2.5
emissions are 702.01 tpy lower in
[[Page 64833]]
2021 than in 2008, and SO2 emissions are 28,505.87 tpy lower
in 2021 than in 2008.
Because the PM2.5 concentrations in the Cincinnati-
Hamilton area are significantly impacted by the transport of sulfates
and nitrates, the area's air quality is strongly affected by regulation
of SO2 and NOX emissions from power plants. Table
6, below, presents statewide EGU emissions data compiled for 2008 and
2014 and beyond. Emissions for 2008 reflect implementation of CAIR and
an attainment year, while 2014 emissions reflect budgets established in
the CSAPR.
Table 6--Comparison of 2008 and 2014 and Beyond Statewide EGU NOX and SO2 Emissions (tpy) for States Impacting the Cincinnati-Hamilton Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOX SO2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State 2014 and Net change 2014 and Net change
2008 beyond 2008-2014 2008 beyond 2008-2014
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama................................... 112,625 69,192 -43,433 357,547 173,566 -183,981
Illinois.................................. 119,930 49,162 -70,767 257,357 132,647 -124,710
Indiana................................... 190,092 110,740 -79,352 565,459 195,046 -370,413
Kentucky.................................. 157,903 76,088 -81,815 344,356 116,927 -227,429
Michigan.................................. 107,624 60,907 -46,717 326,501 162,632 -163,869
Missouri.................................. 88,742 52,103 -36,639 258,269 186,899 -71,370
Ohio...................................... 235,049 89,753 -145,296 709,444 178,975 -530,469
Pennsylvania.............................. 183,658 118,981 -64,676 831,915 125,545 -706,370
Tennessee................................. 85,641 20,512 -65,129 208,069 64,721 -143,348
West Virginia............................. 99,484 53,975 -45,509 301,574 84,344 -217,230
Wisconsin................................. 47,794 33,537 -14,257 129,694 50,137 -79,557
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................. 1,428,541 734,951 -693,590 4,290,185 1,471,439 -2,818,746
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6 shows that NOX emissions from EGUs are projected
to decrease by 693,590 tpy from 2008 to 2014 and beyond in states
impacting the Cincinnati-Hamilton area. Over that same time period,
SO2 emissions from EGUs are projected to decrease by
2,818,746 in states impacting the Cincinnati-Hamilton area.
Based on the information summarized above, Ohio and Indiana have
adequately demonstrated maintenance of the PM2.5 standard in
this area for a period extending in excess of ten years from the date
that EPA is completing rulemaking on the state's redesignation request.
d. Monitoring Network
Ohio currently operates nine monitors for purposes of determining
attainment with the annual PM2.5 standard in the Cincinnati-
Hamilton area. Kentucky currently operates one monitor for the area.
Currently, Indiana operates no monitors for the Cincinnati-Hamilton
area since the state makes up only a small portion of the non-
attainment area, and EPA has determined that the monitors maintained by
both Ohio and Kentucky constitute an adequate monitoring network. Ohio
has committed to continue to operate and maintain its monitors and will
consult with EPA prior to making any changes to the existing monitoring
network. Ohio remains obligated to continue to quality-assure
monitoring data in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and enter all data
into EPA's Air Quality System (AQS) database in accordance with Federal
guidelines.
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
Continued attainment of the annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area depends, in part, on the state's efforts
toward tracking indicators of continued attainment during the
maintenance period. Ohio and Indiana's plan for verifying continued
attainment of the annual PM2.5 standard in the Cincinnati-
Hamilton area consists of continued ambient PM2.5 monitoring
in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR part 58. The two states
will also continue to develop and submit periodic emission inventories
as required by the Federal Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule
(codified at 40 CFR 51 Subpart A) to track future levels of emissions.
f. Contingency Plan
The contingency plan provisions are designed to promptly correct or
prevent a violation of the NAAQS that might occur after redesignation
of an area to attainment. Section 175A of the CAA requires that a
maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems
necessary to assure that the state will promptly correct a violation of
the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The maintenance plan should
identify the contingency measures to be adopted, a schedule and
procedure for adoption and implementation of the contingency measures,
and a time limit for action by the state. The state should also
identify specific indicators to be used to determine when the
contingency measures need to be adopted and implemented. The
maintenance plan must include a requirement that the state will
implement all measures with respect to control of the pollutant(s) that
were contained in the SIP before redesignation of the area to
attainment. See section 175A(d) of the CAA.
As required by section 175A of the CAA, Ohio and Indiana have
adopted contingency plans for the Cincinnati-Hamilton area to address
possible future annual PM2.5 air quality problems.
Under Indiana's plan, if a violation of the 1997 annual
PM2.5 standard occurs, Indiana will implement an ``Action
Level Response''. Unless the violation is due to an atypical
unfavorable meteorological condition, exceptional event, malfunction or
noncompliance with a permit condition or rule requirement, Indiana will
adopt and implement one or more of its contingency measures. Indiana
has provided clarification that the state considers the term ``an
atypical unfavorable meteorological condition'' to mean an exceptional
event as determined by EPA. EPA agrees with and relies upon this
clarification in approving Indiana's contingency measures provisions.
(See docket EPA-R05-OAR-2011-0106 for clarification communications).
If a violation occurs, it will trigger an Action Level Response;
that is, Indiana will adopt and implement one or more
[[Page 64834]]
control measures from its list of candidate measures within 18 months
from the end of the year in which monitored air quality triggering the
response occurs. Indiana's candidate contingency measures include the
following:
i. Alternative fuel and diesel retrofit programs for fleet vehicle
operations;
ii. NOX or SO2 controls on new minor sources;
iii. Wood stove change out program;
iv. Idle restrictions; and
v. Broader geographic applicability of existing measures.
Ohio's contingency measures include a Warning Level Response and an
Action Level Response. An initial Warning Level Response is triggered
when the average weighted annual mean for one year exceeds 15.5 [mu]g/
m\3\. In that case, a study will be conducted to determine if the
emissions trends show increases; if action is necessary to reverse
emissions increases, Ohio will follow the same procedures for control
selection and implementation as for an Action Level Response.
The Action Level Response will be prompted by any one of the
following: A Warning Level Response study that shows emissions
increases, a weighted annual mean over a two-year average that exceeds
the standard, or a violation of the standard. If an Action Level
Response is triggered, Ohio will adopt and implement appropriate
control measures within 18 months from the end of the year in which
monitored air quality triggering a response occurs.
Ohio's candidate contingency measures include the following:
i. ICI Boilers--SO2 and NOX controls;
ii. Process heaters;
iii. EGUS;
iv. Internal combustion engines;
v. Combustion turbines;
vi. Other sources > 100 TPY;
vii. Fleet vehicles;
viii. Concrete manufacturers and;
ix. Aggregate processing plants.
Ohio and Indiana further commit to conduct ongoing review of their
data, and if monitored concentrations or emissions are trending upward,
Ohio and Indiana commit to take appropriate steps to avoid a violation
if possible. Ohio and Indiana commit to continue implementing SIP
requirements upon and after redesignation.
EPA believes that both Ohio and Indiana's contingency plans, as
well as the commitment to continue implementing any SIP requirements,
satisfy the pertinent requirements of section 175A(d).
g. Provisions for Future Updates of the Annual PM2.5
Maintenance Plan
As required by section 175A(b) of the CAA, Ohio and Indiana have
each committed to submit to the EPA an updated maintenance plan eight
years after redesignation of the Cincinnati-Hamilton area to attainment
of the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard to cover an additional
ten-year period beyond the initial ten-year maintenance period. As
required by section 175A of the CAA, Ohio and Indiana have committed to
retain the control measures contained in the SIP prior to
redesignation, or submit to EPA, as a SIP revision, any changes to its
rules or emission limits applicable to SO2, NOX
or direct PM2.5 sources as required for maintenance of the
annual PM2.5 standard in the Cincinnati-Hamilton area.
EPA has concluded that the maintenance plans adequately address the
requisite five basic components: Attainment inventory, maintenance
demonstration, monitoring network, verification of continued
attainment, and a contingency plan. Thus EPA is fully approving the
maintenance plan SIP revisions submitted by Ohio and Indiana for the
Cincinnati-Hamilton area as meeting the r
