Approval, and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio; Redesignation of the Ohio Portion of the Huntington-Ashland Area to Attainment of the 1997 Annual Standard for Fine Particulate Matter, 79593-79604 [2011-32819]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 246 / Thursday, December 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
40 CFR Part 81
Air pollution control, Environmental
protection, National parks, Wilderness
areas.
Dated: December 14, 2011.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2011–32828 Filed 12–21–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0468; FRL–9610–4]
Approval, and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio;
Redesignation of the Ohio Portion of
the Huntington-Ashland Area to
Attainment of the 1997 Annual
Standard for Fine Particulate Matter
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
On May 4, 2011, the Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency
submitted a request for EPA to approve
the redesignation of the Ohio portion of
the Huntington-Ashland (OH-KY-WV)
nonattainment area to attainment of the
1997 annual standard for fine
particulate matter (PM2.5). EPA is
proposing to approve Ohio’s request.
EPA is proposing to approve several
additional related actions. EPA is
proposing to determine that the entire
Huntington-Ashland (OH-KY-WV) area
continues to attain the 1997 annual
PM2.5 standard. EPA is proposing to
approve, as revisions to the Ohio State
Implementation Plan (SIP), the state’s
plan for maintaining the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS through 2022 in the area.
EPA is proposing to approve the 2005
emissions inventory for the Ohio
portion of the Huntington-Ashland area
as meeting the comprehensive
emissions inventory requirement of the
Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). Ohio’s
maintenance plan submission includes
an insignificance finding for the mobile
source contribution of PM2.5 and
nitrogen oxides (NOX) to Ohio’s portion
of the Huntington-Ashland PM2.5 Area
for transportation conformity purposes.
EPA agrees with this finding. These
proposed actions are being taken in
accordance with the CAA and EPA’s
implementation regulation regarding the
1997 p.m.2.5 NAAQS.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before January 23, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:15 Dec 21, 2011
Jkt 226001
OAR–2011–0468, by one of the
following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
2. Email: blakley.pamela@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (312) 692–2450.
4. Mail: Pamela Blakley, Chief,
Control Strategies Section (AR–18J),
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,
Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley,
Chief, Control Strategies Section (AR–
18J), U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries
are only accepted during the Regional
Office normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information. The
Regional Office official hours of
business are Monday through Friday,
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal
holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2011–
0468. 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 email address
will be automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made
available on the Internet. If you submit
an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional instructions on
submitting comments, go to Section I of
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
of this document.
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
79593
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 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, Environmental Engineer, 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.
This
supplementary information section is
arranged as follows:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. What should I consider as I prepare my
comments for EPA?
II. What actions is EPA proposing to take?
III. What is the background for these actions?
IV. What are the criteria for redesignation to
attainment?
V. What is EPA’s analysis of the state’s
request?
1. Attainment
2. The Area Has Met All Applicable
Requirements Under Section 110 and
Part D and Has a Fully Approved SIP
Under Section 110(k) (Sections
107(d)(3)(E)(v) and 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)).
3. The Improvement in Air Quality Is Due
to Permanent and Enforceable
Reductions in Emissions Resulting From
Implementation of the SIP and
Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control
Regulations and Other Permanent and
Enforceable Reductions (Section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii))
4. Ohio Has a Fully Approved Maintenance
Plan Pursuant to Section 175A of the
CAA (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv))
5. Insignificance Determination for the
Mobile Source Contribution to PM2.5 and
NOX
6. 2005 Comprehensive Emissions
Inventory
7. Summary of Proposed Actions
VI. What are the effects of EPA’s proposed
actions?
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
E:\FR\FM\22DEP1.SGM
22DEP1
79594
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 246 / Thursday, December 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
I. What should I consider as I prepare
my comments for EPA?
When submitting comments,
remember to:
1. Identify the rulemaking by docket
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date and page number).
2. Follow directions—The EPA may
ask you to respond to specific questions
or organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.
3. Explain why you agree or disagree;
suggest alternatives and substitute
language for your requested changes.
4. Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information and/
or data that you used.
5. If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
6. Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns, and suggest
alternatives.
7. Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats.
8. Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
II. What actions is EPA proposing to
take?
EPA is proposing to take several
actions related to redesignation of the
Ohio portion of the Huntington-Ashland
area to attainment for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is proposing to find
that Ohio meets the requirements for
redesignation of the HuntingtonAshland area to attainment of the 1997
PM2.5 NAAQS under section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is thus
proposing to approve Ohio’s request to
change the legal designation of its
portion of the Huntington-Ashland area
from nonattainment to attainment for
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. This
action would not change the legal
designation of the Kentucky or West
Virginia portions of the area.
Second, EPA is proposing to approve
Ohio’s annual PM2.5 maintenance plan
for the Huntington-Ashland area as a
revision to the Ohio SIP, including the
insignificance determination for PM2.5
and NOX for the mobile source
contribution of the Ohio portion of the
Huntington-Ashland OH-KY-WV 1997
annual PM2.5 area. EPA’s analysis for
this proposed action is discussed in
Section V. of today’s proposed
rulemaking.
Finally, EPA is proposing to approve
the 2005 primary PM2.5, nitrogen oxide
and sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:15 Dec 21, 2011
Jkt 226001
inventories as satisfying the requirement
in section 172(c)(3) for a current,
accurate and comprehensive emission
inventory. Further discussion of the
basis for these actions is provided
below.
III. What is the background for these
actions?
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.
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 HuntingtonAshland (OH-KY-WV) area, as
nonattainment 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 of 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 Huntington-Ashland
area is designated as nonattainment for
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard, today’s
proposed action addresses redesignation
to attainment only for this standard.
On September 7, 2011, EPA issued a
final determination that the entire
Huntington-Ashland area has attained
the 1997 PM2.5 standard. 76 FR 55542.
IV. 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 for
redesignation provided that: (1) The
Administrator determines that the area
has attained the applicable NAAQS
based on current air quality data; (2) the
Administrator has fully approved an
applicable state implementation plan for
the area under section 110(k) of the
CAA; (3) the Administrator determines
that the improvement in air quality is
due to permanent and enforceable
emission reductions resulting from
implementation of the applicable SIP,
Federal air pollution control
regulations, and other permanent and
enforceable emission reductions; (4) the
Administrator has fully approved a
maintenance plan for the area meeting
the requirements of section 175A of the
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.
V. What is EPA’s analysis of the State’s
request?
EPA is proposing to approve the
redesignation of the Ohio portion of the
Huntington-Ashland area to attainment
of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and is
proposing to approve Ohio’s
maintenance plan for the area and other
related SIP revisions. The bases for
these actions follow.
1. Attainment
As noted above, in a rulemaking
published on September 7, 2011, EPA
determined that the HuntingtonAshland area has attained the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The basis and
effect of this determination were
discussed in the notices of proposed
and final rulemaking. The
determination was based on qualityassured air quality monitoring data for
2007–2009 and 2008–2010 showing the
area has met the standard. The data
have been certified by the respective
states.
Preliminary data for 2011 are
consistent with continued attainment,
and thus EPA proposes to determine
that the Huntington-Ashland area
E:\FR\FM\22DEP1.SGM
22DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 246 / Thursday, December 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
continues to attain the 1997 annual
PM2.5 standard.
2. The Area Has Met All Applicable
Requirements Under Section 110 and
Part D and Has a Fully Approved SIP
Under Section 110(k) (Sections
107(d)(3)(E)(v) and 107(d)(3)(E)(ii))
We believe that Ohio has met all
currently applicable SIP requirements
for purposes of redesignation for the
Ohio portion of the Huntington-Ashland
area under section 110 of the CAA
(general SIP requirements). We are also
proposing to find that the Ohio SIP
meets 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 are proposing to find that
all applicable requirements of the Ohio
SIP for purposes of redesignation have
been or will be approved, in accordance
with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). As
discussed below, in this action EPA is
proposing to approve Ohio’s 2005
emissions inventories as meeting the
section 172(c)(3) comprehensive
emissions inventory requirement.
In making these proposed
determinations, we have ascertained
which SIP requirements are applicable
for purposes of redesignation, and
concluded that there are SIP measures
meeting those requirements and that
they are or by the time of final
designation will be fully approved
under section 110(k) of the CAA.
a. Ohio Has Met All Applicable
Requirements for Purposes of
Redesignation of the Ohio Portion of the
Area Under Section 110 and Part D of
the CAA
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
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
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:15 Dec 21, 2011
Jkt 226001
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 the Ohio SIP and
have concluded that it meets 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’s SIP
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
79595
addressing section 110 requirements
(including provisions addressing
particulate matter), at 40 CFR 52.1870,
respectively).
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 14, 2011, at 76 FR
41075. EPA disapproved the element of
the September 4, 2009, submittal that
addresses section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) on
February 4, 2011 at 76 FR 92618, but
has not taken rulemaking action on the
remainder of the submittal.
The requirements of section 110(a)(2),
however, are statewide requirements
that are not linked to the PM2.5
nonattainment status of the HuntingtonAshland 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 is proposing to determine that,
upon approval of the base year
emissions inventories discussed in
section V.6. of this rulemaking, the Ohio
SIP will meet the SIP requirements for
the Ohio portion of the HuntingtonAshland 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 this
redesignation requests, the applicable
section 172 SIP requirements for the
Ohio portion of the Huntington-Ashland
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 Achievable 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,
E:\FR\FM\22DEP1.SGM
22DEP1
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
79596
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 246 / Thursday, December 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
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
Huntington-Ashland 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 HuntingtonAshland 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 submitted a 2005 base
year emissions inventory along with
their redesignation requests. As
discussed below in section V.6., EPA is
approving the 2005 base year
inventories as meeting the section
172(c)(3) emissions inventory
requirement for the Ohio portion of the
Huntington-Ashland 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). Nonetheless,
since PSD requirements will apply after
redesignation, the area need not have a
fully-approved NSR 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.’’ Ohio has
demonstrated that the HuntingtonAshland 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 HuntingtonAshland area upon redesignation to
attainment. See rulemakings for Detroit,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:15 Dec 21, 2011
Jkt 226001
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’s SIP meets 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
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 has an approved transportation
conformity SIP (72 FR 20945). Ohio is
in the process of updating its approved
transportation conformity SIP, and EPA
will review its provisions when they are
submitted.
b. The Ohio Portion of the HuntingtonAshland Area Has a Fully Approved
Applicable SIP Under Section 110(k) of
the CAA
Upon final approval of Ohio’s
comprehensive 2005 emissions
inventory, EPA will have fully approved
the Ohio SIP for the Ohio portion of the
Huntington-Ashland area under section
110(k) of the CAA for all requirements
applicable for purposes of redesignation
to attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5
standard. EPA may rely on prior SIP
approvals in approving a redesignation
request (See page 3 of the September 4,
1992, John Calcagni memorandum
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 has
adopted and submitted, and EPA has
fully approved, provisions addressing
various required SIP elements under
particulate matter standards. In this
action, EPA is proposing to approve
Ohio’s 2005 base year emissions
inventory for the Huntington-Ashland
area as meeting the requirement of
section 172(c)(3) of the CAA for the
1997 annual PM2.5 standard.
c. Nonattainment Requirements
Under section 172, states with
nonattainment areas must submit plans
providing for timely attainment and
meeting a variety of other requirements.
On July 16, 2008 Ohio submitted a statewide attainment demonstration for
PM2.5, including the HuntingtonAshland area. However, pursuant to 40
CFR 51.1004(c) EPA’s determination
that the area has attained the 1997 PM2.5
annual standard suspends the
requirement to submit certain planning
SIPs related to attainment, including
attainment demonstration requirements,
the Reasonably Achievable Control
E:\FR\FM\22DEP1.SGM
22DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 246 / Thursday, December 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
Technology (RACT)–RACM requirement
of section 172(c)(1) of the CAA, the RFP
and attainment demonstration
requirements of sections 172(c)(2) and
(6) and 182(b)(1) of the CAA, and the
requirement for contingency measures
of section 172(c)(9) of the CAA).
As a result, the only remaining
requirement under section 172 to be
considered is the emissions inventory
required under section 172(c)(3). As
discussed in a later section, EPA is
proposing to approve the inventory that
Ohio submitted as part of its
maintenance plan as satisfying this
requirement.
No SIP provisions applicable for
redesignation of the Ohio portion of the
Huntington-Ashland area are currently
disapproved, conditionally approved, or
partially approved. If EPA approves
Ohio’s Huntington-Ashland area PM2.5
emissions inventories as proposed, Ohio
will have a fully approved SIP for all
requirements applicable for purposes of
redesignation.
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
3. The Improvement in Air Quality Is
Due to Permanent and Enforceable
Reductions in Emissions Resulting From
Implementation of the SIP and
Applicable Federal Air Pollution
Control Regulations and Other
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions
(Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii))
EPA believes that Ohio has
demonstrated that the observed air
quality improvement in the HuntingtonAshland area is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions
resulting from implementation of the
SIP, Federal measures, and other stateadopted measures.
In making this demonstration, Ohio
has calculated the change in emissions
between 2005, one of the years used to
designate the Huntington-Ashland area
as nonattainment, and 2008, one of the
years the Huntington-Ashland 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 Huntington-Ashland area and
contributing 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 area:
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:46 Dec 21, 2011
Jkt 226001
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 requirements
result in lower NOX and SO2 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,
new vehicles will emit the following
percentages less NOX: Passenger cars
(light duty vehicles)—77%; light duty
trucks, minivans, and sports utility
vehicles—86%; and, larger sports utility
vehicles, vans, and heavier trucks—69
to 95%. EPA expects fleet wide average
emissions to come to decline by similar
percentages as new vehicles replace
older vehicles. The Tier 2 standards also
reduced the sulfur content of gasoline to
30 parts per million (ppm) beginning in
January 2006. Most gasoline sold in
Ohio prior to January 2006 had a sulfur
content of about 500 ppm.
Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Rule. EPA
issued this rule in July 2000. This rule
includes standards limiting the sulfur
content of diesel fuel, which went into
effect in 2004. A second phase took
effect in 2007 which reduced fine
particle emissions from heavy-duty
highway engines and further reduced
the highway diesel fuel sulfur content to
15 ppm. The total program is estimated
to achieve a 90% reduction in direct
PM2.5 emissions and a 95% reduction in
NOX emissions for these new engines
using low sulfur diesel, compared to
existing engines using higher sulfur
content diesel. The reduction in fuel
sulfur content also yielded an
immediate reduction in sulfate particle
emissions from all diesel vehicles.
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 also
reduces the sulfur content in nonroad
diesel fuel by over 99%. Prior to 2006,
nonroad diesel fuel averaged
approximately 3,400 ppm sulfur. This
rule limited nonroad diesel sulfur
content to 500 ppm by 2006, with a
further reduction to 15 ppm by 2010.
The combined engine and fuel rules will
reduce NOX and PM emissions from
large nonroad diesel engines by over
90%, compared to current nonroad
engines using higher sulfur content
diesel. It is estimated that compliance
with this rule will cut NOX emissions
from nonroad diesel engines by up to
90%. This rule achieved some emission
reductions by 2008 and was fully
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
79597
implemented by 2010. The reduction in
fuel sulfur content also yielded an
immediate reduction in sulfate particle
emissions from all diesel vehicles.
Nonroad Large Spark-Ignition Engine
and Recreational Engine Standards. In
November 2002 EPA promulgated
emission standards for groups of
previously unregulated nonroad
engines. These engines include large
spark-ignition engines such as those
used in forklifts and airport groundservice equipment; recreational vehicles
using spark-ignition engines such as offhighway motorcycles, all-terrain
vehicles, and snowmobiles; and
recreational marine diesel engines.
Emission standards from large sparkignition engines were implemented in
two tiers, with Tier 1 starting in 2004
and Tier 2 in 2007. Recreational vehicle
emission standards are being phased in
from 2006 through 2012. Marine Diesel
engine standards were phased in from
2006 through 2009. With full
implementation of the entire nonroad
spark-ignition engine and recreational
engine standards an 80% reduction in
NOX expected by 2020. Some of these
emission reductions occurred by the
2008–2010 period used to demonstrate
attainment, and additional emission
reductions will occur during the
maintenance period.
i. Control Measures in Contributing
Areas
Given the significance of sulfates and
nitrates in the Huntington-Ashland 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
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,
E:\FR\FM\22DEP1.SGM
22DEP1
79598
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 246 / Thursday, December 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
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 (also known as the
Transport Rule) to address interstate
transport of emissions and resulting
secondary air pollutants and to replace
CAIR. The CAIR, among other things,
required NOX and SO2 emission
reductions that contributed to the air
quality improvement in the HuntingtonAshland nonattainment area. The CAIR
emission reduction requirements limit
emissions through 2011; the Transport
Rule requires similar or greater emission
reductions in the relevant areas in 2012
and beyond. The Transport Rule
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
Huntington-Ashland nonattainment
area. Because the emission reduction
requirements of CAIR are enforceable
through the 2011 control period, and
because the Transport Rule 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
Huntington-Ashland 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 developed emissions inventories
for NOX, direct PM2.5, and SO2 for 2005,
one of the years used to designate the
area as nonattainment, and 2008, one of
the years the Huntington-Ashland 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, Kentucky and West
Virginia NOX emission budgets resulting
from EPA’s NOX SIP call. The 2008
emissions from EGUs reflect Ohio’s
emission caps under CAIR. All other
point source emissions were obtained
from Ohio’s source facility emissions
reporting.
Area source emissions the
Huntington-Ashland area for 2005 were
taken from periodic emissions
inventories.1 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 local Metropolitan Planning
Organization (MPO), KYOVA.
All emissions estimates discussed
below were documented in the
submittal and appendices of Ohio’s
redesignation request submittal from
May 4, 2011. 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–2011–0468,
which include digital copies of Ohio’s
submittal.
Emissions data in tons per year (tpy)
for the entire Huntington-Ashland area
(OH-KY-WV) are shown in Tables 1, and
2, below.
TABLE 1—SUMMARY OF 2005 EMISSIONS FOR THE HUNTINGTON-ASHLAND (KY-OH-WV) AREA BY SOURCE TYPE
[tpy]
SO2
NOX
PM2.5
Point (EGU) .....................................................................................................................
Non-EGU .........................................................................................................................
On-road ............................................................................................................................
Nonroad ...........................................................................................................................
Area .................................................................................................................................
MAR .................................................................................................................................
357,165.49
11,039.74
192.92
127.85
2,836.09
927.29
121,991.60
11,854.66
12,813.39
1,566.88
2,034.76
12,221.82
5,005.11
1,686.15
500.72
158.65
1,829.08
404.61
Total Huntington-Ashland .........................................................................................
372,289.38
162,483.11
9,584.32
TABLE 2—COMPARISON OF 2005 EMISSIONS FROM THE NON-ATTAINMENT YEAR AND 2008 EMISSIONS FOR AN
ATTAINMENT YEAR FOR THE HUNTINGTON-ASHLAND (KY-OH-WV) AREA
[tpy]
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
2005
PM2.5 ................................................................................................................................
NOX ..................................................................................................................................
SO2 ..................................................................................................................................
1 Periodic emission inventories are derived by
States every three years and reported to the EPA.
These periodic emission inventories are required by
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:15 Dec 21, 2011
Jkt 226001
2008
9,584.32
162,483.11
372,289.38
10,253.89
146,972.25
234,901.09
the Federal Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule,
codified at 40 CFR Subpart A. EPA revised these
and other emission reporting requirements in a final
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Net change
(2005–2008)
669.48
¥15,510.86
¥137,388.63
rule published on December 17, 2008, at 73 FR
76539.
E:\FR\FM\22DEP1.SGM
22DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 246 / Thursday, December 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
79599
Because PM2.5 concentrations in the
Huntington-Ashland 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 3, below, present’s
statewide EGU emissions data compiled
by EPA’s Clean Air Markets Division for
the years 2002 and 2008 for the several
states that were found to contribute to
air quality in the Huntington-Ashland
area. Emissions for 2008 reflect
implementation of CAIR.
Table 3 shows that states impacting
the Huntington-Ashland area reduced
NOX and SO2 emissions from EGUs by
701,175 tpy and 1,409,011 tpy,
respectively, between 2002 and 2008.
Based on the information summarized
above, Ohio has adequately
demonstrated that the improvement in
air quality is due to permanent and
enforceable emissions reductions. While
these reductions were estimates of the
impact of CAIR, these reductions are
expected to continue and may be
considered permanent and enforceable
as a result of the Transport Rule being
promulgated.
maintenance of the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS in the area through 2022.
The September 4, 1992, memorandum
from John Calcagni, entitled
‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to
Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’
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.
4. Ohio Has a Fully Approved
Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section
175A of the CAA (Section
107(d)(3)(E)(iv))
In conjunction with Ohio’s request to
redesignate the Ohio portion of the
Huntington-Ashland nonattainment area
to attainment status, Ohio has submitted
a SIP revision to provide for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:15 Dec 21, 2011
Jkt 226001
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
b. Attainment Inventory
Ohio developed emissions inventories
for NOX, direct PM2.5, and SO2 for 2008,
one of the years in the period during
which the Huntington-Ashland area
monitored attainment of the 1997
annual PM2.5 standard, as described
E:\FR\FM\22DEP1.SGM
22DEP1
EP22DE11.079</GPH>
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Table 2 shows that the entire
Huntington-Ashland area reduced NOX
emissions by 15,510.86 tpy, and SO2
emissions by 137,388.63 tpy between
2005, a nonattainment year and 2008, an
attainment year.
79600
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 246 / Thursday, December 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
previously. The attainment level of
emissions is summarized in Tables 2
and 3, above.
c. Demonstration of Maintenance
Along with the redesignation request,
Ohio submitted a revision to its PM2.5
SIP to include a maintenance plan for
the Huntington-Ashland area, as
required by section 175A of the CAA.
Ohio’s plan demonstrates maintenance
of the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard
through 2022 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 uses emissions inventory
projections for the years 2015 and 2022
to demonstrate maintenance for the
entire Huntington-Ashland area. The
projected emissions were estimated by
Ohio, with assistance from LADCO and
KYOVA using the MOVES2010a model.
Projection modeling of inventory
emissions was done for the 2015 interim
year emissions using estimates based on
the 2009 and 2018 LADCO modeling
inventory, using LADCO’s growth
factors, for all sectors. The 2022
maintenance year is based on emissions
estimates from the 2018 LADCO
modeling. Table 4 shows the 2008
attainment base year emission estimates
and the 2015 and 2022 emission
projections for the entire tri-state
Huntington-Ashland area that Ohio
provided in its May 4, 2011,
submission.
TABLE 4—COMPARISON OF 2008, 2015 AND 2022 NOX, DIRECT PM2.5, AND SO2 EMISSION TOTALS (TPY) FOR THE
HUNTINGTON-ASHLAND AREA (OH-KY-WV)
SO2
2008 (baseline) ..........................................
2015 ...........................................................
2022 ...........................................................
Change .......................................................
2008–2022 .................................................
NOX
234,901.09 ................................
149,647.27 ................................
113,654.75 ................................
¥121,246.34 ............................
52% decrease ...........................
146,972.25 ................................
95,137.30 ..................................
71,097.29 ..................................
¥75,874.96 ..............................
52% decrease ...........................
Table 4 shows that the entire
Huntington-Ashland area reduced NOX
emissions by 75,874.96 tpy between
2008 and the maintenance projection to
2022, direct PM2.5 emissions by 324.95
tpy, and reduced SO2 emissions by
121,246.34 tpy between 2008 and 2022.
Thus the emissions inventories set forth
in Table 4 show that the area will
continue to maintain the annual PM2.5
standard during the maintenance
period.
Maintenance of the 1997 annual PM2.5
air quality standard in the HuntingtonAshland area is a function of regional as
well as local emissions trends. The
regional impacts are dominated by the
impacts of SO2 and NOX emissions. The
previous section showed that the
Transport Rule could be expected to
provide for substantial SO2 and NOX
emission reductions through 2014 for
Ohio, West Virginia, and Kentucky.
Regionally, multiple upwind states can
PM2.5
10,253.89.
10,100.29.
9,928.94.
¥324.95.
3% decrease.
contribute precursors to PM2.5 to the
Huntington-Ashland area; however,
projected emissions under the Transport
Rule for all the states contributing to
particulate matter concentrations this
area show emissions well below the
attainment year of 2008 (Table 5 and
Table 6). Table 5 and Table 6 show that
under the Transport Rule regional
emissions will not affect the
maintenance of the annual PM2.5
standard.
TABLE 5—COMPARISON OF 2008 AND 2014 AND BEYOND STATEWIDE EGU SO2 EMISSIONS (TPY) FOR PROJECTED
YEARS FROM STATES THAT IMPACT THE HUNTINGTON-ASHLAND AREA
Attainment
year 2008
State
Transport rule
2014 and
beyond
Net change
2008–2014
357,546
257,357
565,458
344,356
326,500
258,268
709,444
831,914
208,069
301,574
129,693
173,231
128,143
128,143
116,912
158,394
177,359
150,784
123,224
64,716
83,235
44,139
¥184,315
¥129,214
¥437,315
¥227,444
¥168,106
¥80,909
¥558,660
¥708,690
¥143,353
¥218,339
¥85,554
Total ......................................................................................................................................
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Alabama .......................................................................................................................................
Illinois ...........................................................................................................................................
Indiana .........................................................................................................................................
Kentucky ......................................................................................................................................
Michigan .......................................................................................................................................
Missouri ........................................................................................................................................
Ohio .............................................................................................................................................
Pennsylvania ................................................................................................................................
Tennessee ...................................................................................................................................
West Virginia ................................................................................................................................
Wisconsin .....................................................................................................................................
4,290,179
1,348,280
¥2,941,899
TABLE 6—COMPARISON OF 2008 AND 2014 AND BEYOND NOX EMISSIONS TOTALS (TPY) FROM EGUS FOR 2008
(ATTAINMENT) 2014 AND BEYOND FROM STATES IMPACTING THE HUNTINGTON-ASHLAND AREA
Attainment
year 2008
State
Alabama .......................................................................................................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:15 Dec 21, 2011
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
112,625
E:\FR\FM\22DEP1.SGM
22DEP1
Transport rule
2014 and
beyond
68,119
Net change
2008–2014
¥44,506
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 246 / Thursday, December 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
79601
TABLE 6—COMPARISON OF 2008 AND 2014 AND BEYOND NOX EMISSIONS TOTALS (TPY) FROM EGUS FOR 2008
(ATTAINMENT) 2014 AND BEYOND FROM STATES IMPACTING THE HUNTINGTON-ASHLAND AREA—Continued
Attainment
year 2008
State
Transport rule
2014 and
beyond
Net change
2008–2014
Illinois ...........................................................................................................................................
Indiana .........................................................................................................................................
Kentucky ......................................................................................................................................
Michigan .......................................................................................................................................
Missouri ........................................................................................................................................
Ohio .............................................................................................................................................
Pennsylvania ................................................................................................................................
Tennessee ...................................................................................................................................
West Virginia ................................................................................................................................
Wisconsin .....................................................................................................................................
119,929
190,092
157,902
107,623
88,745
235,048
183,657
85,640
99,483
47,794
48,533
109,392
76,026
57,311
48,888
84,126
116,994
20,490
53,335
29,688
¥71,396
¥80,700
¥81,876
¥50,312
¥39,857
¥150,922
¥66,663
¥65,150
¥46,148
¥18,106
Total ......................................................................................................................................
1,428,538
712,902
¥715,636
Tables 5 and 6 show that NOX
emissions from EGUs are projected to
decrease by 715,636 tpy from 2008 to
2014 and beyond and SO2 emissions
from EGUSs are projected to decrease by
2,941,899 tpy in states impacting the
Huntington-Ashland area.
Based on the information summarized
above, Ohio has adequately
demonstrated maintenance of the PM2.5
standard in this area for a period
extending in excess of ten years from
expected final action on Ohio’s
redesignation request.
d. Monitoring Network
Ohio’s maintenance plan includes
additional elements. Ohio’s plan
includes a commitment to continue to
operate its EPA-approved monitoring
network, as necessary to demonstrate
ongoing compliance with the NAAQS.
Ohio currently operates a PM2.5 monitor
in Lawrence County to monitor the
Huntington-Ashland area. Kentucky and
West Virginia are also currently
operating one monitor in each state for
the Huntington-Ashland area.
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
Ohio remains obligated to continue to
quality-assure monitoring data and enter
all data into the Air Quality System in
accordance with Federal guidelines.
Ohio will use these data, supplemented
with additional information as
necessary, to assure that the area
continues to attain the standard. Ohio
will also continue to develop and
submit periodic emission inventories as
required by the Federal Consolidated
Emissions Reporting Rule (67 FR 39602,
June 10, 2002) to track future levels of
emissions. Both of these actions will
help to verify continued attainment in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:15 Dec 21, 2011
Jkt 226001
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. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 further commits to conduct
ongoing review of its data, and if
monitored concentrations or emissions
are trending upward, Ohio commits to
take appropriate steps to avoid a
violation if possible. Ohio commits to
continue implementing SIP
requirements upon and after
redesignation.
EPA believes that Ohio’s contingency
measures, as well as the commitment to
continue implementing any SIP
requirements, satisfy the pertinent
requirements of section 175A(d).
As required by section 175A(b) of the
CAA, Ohio commits to submit to the
EPA an updated PM2.5 maintenance
plan eight years after redesignation of
the Huntington-Ashland area to cover
an additional ten-year period beyond
the initial ten-year maintenance period.
As required by section 175A of the
CAA, Ohio has also committed to retain
the PM2.5 control measures contained in
the SIP prior to redesignation.
For all of the reasons set forth above,
EPA is proposing to approve Ohio’s
1997 annual PM2.5 maintenance plan for
the Huntington-Ashland area as meeting
the requirements of CAA section 175A.
E:\FR\FM\22DEP1.SGM
22DEP1
79602
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 246 / Thursday, December 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
5. Insignificance Determination for the
Mobile Source Contribution to PM2.5 and
NOX
Under section 176(c) of the CAA,
transportation plans and transportation
improvement programs (TIPs) must
conform to applicable SIP goals. This
means that such actions will not: (1)
Cause or contribute to violations of a
NAAQS; (2) worsen the severity of an
existing violation; or (3) delay timely
attainment of a NAAQS or any interim
milestone. Actions involving Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA) or
Federal Transit Administration (FTA)
funding or approval are subject to the
transportation conformity rule (40 CFR
part 93 subpart A.) Under this rule,
MPOs in nonattainment and
maintenance areas coordinate with state
air quality and transportation agencies,
EPA, FHWA and FTA to demonstrate
that their metropolitan transportation
plans (‘‘plans’’) and TIPs conform to
applicable SIPs. This is typically
determined by showing that estimated
emissions from existing and planned
highway and transit systems are less
than or equal to the motor vehicle
emissions budgets (MVEBs) contained
in a SIP.
For budgets to be approvable, they
must meet, at a minimum, EPA’s
adequacy criteria (40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)).
However, the conformity rule at 40 CFR
93.109(m) allows areas to forgo
establishment of a budget(s) where it is
demonstrated that regional motor
vehicle emissions for a particular
pollutant or precursor pollutant are an
insignificant contributor to the air
quality problem in the area. The general
criteria for insignificance
determinations per 40 CFR 93.109(m)
are based on a number of factors,
including (1) The percentage of motor
vehicle emissions in context of the total
SIP inventory; (2) the current state of air
quality as determined by monitoring
data for that NAAQS; (3) the absence of
SIP motor vehicle control measures; and
(4) historical trends and future
projections of the growth of motor
vehicle emissions in the area.
EPA previously reviewed the
attainment demonstration that Ohio
submitted for its portion of the
Huntington-Ashland area and made an
insignificance finding through the
transportation conformity adequacy
process for NOX and directly emitted
PM2.5 for the Ohio portion of the
Huntington-Ashland PM2.5
nonattainment area on December 7,
2009 (74 FR 64075). That insignificance
finding was effective on December 22,
2009. As a result of EPA’s insignificance
finding, the Ohio portion of the
Huntington-Ashland PM2.5 area was no
longer required to perform regional
emissions analyses for either directly
emitted PM2.5 or NOX as part of future
PM2.5 conformity determinations for the
1997 PM2.5 NAAQS until such time as
EPA reviewed and took action on the
Huntington-Ashland PM2.5 area’s
attainment demonstration or acted on a
submitted maintenance plan for the
Ohio portion of the area (the subject of
today’s proposed action).
As part of the On May 4, 2011,
redesignation request and maintenance
plan Ohio EPA requested that EPA find
that on-road emissions of direct PM2.5
and NOX emissions are insignificant for
conformity purposes. On May 5, 2011,
EPA initiated an adequacy review of the
finding of insignificance that Ohio
included in its redesignation submittal.
As such, a notice of the submission of
this finding was posted on its adequacy
web page (https://www.epa.gov/otaq/
stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm).
The public comment period closed June
6, 2011. There were no public
comments. EPA is acting on making
these findings final.
Consistent with EPA’s adequacy
review of Ohio’s redesignation request
and maintenance plan and the Agency’s
thorough review of the entire SIP
submission, EPA is proposing to
approve Ohio’s insignificance
determination for the on-road motor
vehicle contribution of NOX and PM2.5
emissions to the overall PM2.5 emissions
in the Huntington-Ashland PM2.5 area.
Because EPA finds that Ohio’s
submitted maintenance plan and
redesignation request meets the criteria
in the conformity rule for an
insignificance finding for motor vehicle
emissions of NOX and PM2.5 in the Ohio
portion of the Huntington-Ashland
PM2.5 area, it is not necessary to
establish PM2.5 and NOX budgets for the
Ohio portion of the Huntington-Ashland
PM2.5 area. That is, EPA finds that the
submittal demonstrates that, for NOX
and PM2.5, regional motor vehicle
emissions are an insignificant
contributor to the annual PM2.5 air
quality problem in the Ohio portion of
the area. This finding is based on the
following: Ohio’s inventory shows that
on-road emissions in the Ohio portion
of the area are currently contribute to
3.21% of the total NOX, and 0.97%
PM2.5, as shown in Table 7.
TABLE 7—HUNTINGTON-ASHLAND AREA EMISSION PROJECTIONS FOR ON-ROAD MOBILE SOURCES (TPY)
NOX
PM2.5
On-road Mobile Source emissions for Ohio portion
2015 .................................................................................................
2022 .................................................................................................
1,824.73
924.15
56.65
32.23
56,838.94
37,858.02
5,837.13
5,758.93
Total Ohio portion emissions
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
2015 .................................................................................................
2022 .................................................................................................
Motor vehicle emissions in general,
for the maintenance period of 2015 and
2022, are low and declining in the Ohio
portion of the area, contributing only
2.44 and 0.56% of Ohio’s emissions for
NOX, and PM2.5, respectively, with the
decrease due to Federal regulations on
motor vehicle rules such as Heavy-duty
Highway Vehicle standards and Tier 2
vehicle and fuel standards. Also, there
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:15 Dec 21, 2011
Jkt 226001
have been no SIP requirements for
motor vehicle control measures for the
Ohio portion of the area and it is
unlikely that motor vehicle control
measures will be implemented for PM2.5
in this area in the future.
Finally, as described above, the area
has attained the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS and we are proposing to
approve the maintenance plan and
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
redesignation request for the Ohio
portion of the area. Therefore motor
vehicle emissions budgets for PM2.5 and
NOX are not required for the
Huntington-Ashland area to maintain
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is
proposing to approve the inventory and
the findings of insignificant
contribution by motor vehicles,
resulting in no proposed motor vehicle
E:\FR\FM\22DEP1.SGM
22DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 246 / Thursday, December 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
emissions budgets for the Ohio portion
of the Huntington-Ashland area for 2015
and 2022 projected maintenance years.
On-road emissions were calculated
using the EPA required MOVES2010a
model.
With regard to on-road emissions of
SO2, volatile organic compounds and
ammonia, Ohio did not provide
emission budgets (or an insignificance
demonstration) because it concluded,
consistent with EPA’s presumptions
regarding these PM2.5 precursors, that
emissions of these precursors from
motor vehicles are not significant
contributors to the area’s PM2.5 air
quality problem.
6. 2005 Comprehensive Emissions
Inventory
As discussed above, section 172(c)(3)
of the CAA requires areas to submit a
comprehensive emissions inventory.
Ohio submitted a 2005 base year
emissions inventories that meets 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
EPA’s Clean Air Market’s database. All
other point source emissions were
obtained from Ohio’s source facility
emissions reporting.
Area source emissions were
extrapolated from Ohio’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 KYOVA.
All emissions discussed in Table 1
were documented in the submittal and
the Appendices of Ohio’s redesignation
request submittal. EPA has reviewed
Ohio’s documentation of the emissions
inventory techniques and data sources
used for the derivation of the 2005
emissions estimates and has found that
Ohio has thoroughly documented the
derivation of these emissions
inventories. The submittal from the state
shows that the 2005 emissions
inventory is currently the most
complete emissions inventories for
PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in the
Huntington-Ashland area. Based upon
EPA’s review, we propose to find that
VerDate Mar<15>2010
19:15 Dec 21, 2011
Jkt 226001
the 2005 emissions inventories are as
complete and accurate as possible given
the input data available to the Ohio, and
we are proposing to approve them under
CAA section 172(c)(3).
7. Summary of Proposed Actions
EPA has previously determined that
the Huntington-Ashland area has
attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
EPA is proposing to determine that the
entire Huntington-Ashland area
continues to attain the 1997 annual
PM2.5 standard and that the Ohio
portion of the area has met the
requirements for redesignation under
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is
proposing to approve the request from
Ohio to change the legal designation of
the Ohio portion of the HuntingtonAshland area from nonattainment to
attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS. EPA is proposing to approve
Ohio’s PM2.5 maintenance plan for the
Huntington-Ashland area as a revision
to the Ohio SIP because the plan meets
the requirements of section 175A of the
CAA. EPA is proposing to approve the
2005 emissions inventories for primary
PM2.5, NOX, and SO2, documented in
Ohio’s May 4, 2011, submittal as
satisfying the requirement in section
172(c)(3) of the CAA for a
comprehensive, current emission
inventory. Finally, for transportation
conformity purposes EPA is also
proposing to approve Ohio’s
determination that on-road emissions of
PM2.5 and NOX are insignificant
contributors to PM2.5 concentrations in
the area.
VI. What are the effects of EPA’s
proposed actions?
If finalized, approval of the
redesignation request would change the
official designation of the Ohio portion
of the Huntington-Ashland area for the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, found at 40
CFR part 81, from nonattainment to
attainment. If finalized, EPA’s proposal
would approve as a revision to the Ohio
SIP for the Huntington-Ashland area,
the maintenance plan for the 1997
annual PM2.5 standard as well as the
2005 emissions inventories included
with the redesignation request.
VII. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
79603
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
Act and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this 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);
• 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 CAA; 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
E:\FR\FM\22DEP1.SGM
22DEP1
79604
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 246 / Thursday, December 22, 2011 / Proposed Rules
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Particulate matter.
40 CFR Part 81
Air pollution control, Environmental
protection, National Parks, Wilderness.
Dated: December 14, 2011.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2011–32819 Filed 12–21–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 131
[EPA–HQ–OW–2009–0596; FRL–9611–1]
RIN 2040–AF36
Effective Date for the Water Quality
Standards for the State of Florida’s
Lakes and Flowing Waters
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to extend the
March 6, 2012 effective date of the
‘‘Water Quality Standards for the State
of Florida’s Lakes and Flowing Waters;
Final Rule’’ (inland waters rule) for
ninety days to June 4, 2012. EPA’s
inland waters rule included an effective
date of March 6, 2012 for the entire
regulation except for the site-specific
alternative criteria provision, which
took effect on February 4, 2011. This
proposal to revise the effective date for
the inland waters rule does not affect or
change the February 4, 2011 effective
date for the site-specific alternative
criteria provision. In this proposal, EPA
is requesting comment on extending the
effective date for the ‘‘Water Quality
Standards for the State of Florida’s
Lakes and Flowing Waters; Final Rule.’’
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before January 23, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OW–2009–0596, by one of the following
methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
jlentini on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
2. Email: ow-docket@epa.gov.
3. Mail to: Water Docket, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Mail
code: 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania
Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20460,
Attention: Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW–
2009–0596.
4. Hand Delivery: EPA Docket Center,
EPA West Room 3334, 1301
Constitution Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20004, Attention Docket ID No.
EPA–HQ–OW–2009–0596. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW–2009–
0596. 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 email address
will be automatically captured and
included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made
available on the Internet. If you submit
an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses. For additional information
about EPA’s public docket visit EPA
Docket Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
An electronic version of the public
docket is available through EPA’s
electronic public docket and comment
system, EPA Dockets. You may use EPA
Dockets at https://www.regulations.gov to
Category
19:15 Dec 21, 2011
Jkt 226001
For
information concerning this rulemaking,
contact: Tracy Bone, U.S. EPA, Office of
Water, Mailcode 4305T, 1200
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington,
DC, 20460; telephone number (202)
564–5257; email address:
bone.tracy@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
Does this action apply to me?
Citizens concerned with water quality
in Florida may be interested in this
rulemaking. Entities discharging
nitrogen or phosphorus to lakes and
flowing waters of Florida could be
indirectly affected by this rulemaking
because water quality standards (WQS)
are used in determining National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit limits. Categories and
entities that may ultimately be affected
include:
Examples of potentially affected entities
Industry ...............................................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
view public comments, access the index
listing of the contents of the official
public docket, and to access those
documents in the public docket that are
available electronically. For additional
information about EPA’s public docket,
visit EPA Docket Center homepage at
https://www.epa.gov/epahome/
dockets.htm. Although listed in the
index, some information is not publicly
available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as copyright
material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in
hard copy form. Publicly available
docket materials are available either
electronically in https://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Docket Facility. The Office of Water
(OW) Docket Center is open from 8:30
a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, excluding legal holidays. The
OW Docket Center telephone number is
(202) 566–1744 and the Docket address
is OW Docket, EPA West, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20004. The Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone
number for the Public Reading Room is
(202) 566–1744.
PO 00000
Industries discharging pollutants to lakes and flowing waters in the State of Florida.
Frm 00057
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\22DEP1.SGM
22DEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 246 (Thursday, December 22, 2011)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 79593-79604]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-32819]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R05-OAR-2011-0468; FRL-9610-4]
Approval, and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Ohio; Redesignation of the Ohio Portion of the Huntington-Ashland Area
to Attainment of the 1997 Annual Standard for Fine Particulate Matter
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On May 4, 2011, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
submitted a request for EPA to approve the redesignation of the Ohio
portion of the Huntington-Ashland (OH-KY-WV) nonattainment area to
attainment of the 1997 annual standard for fine particulate matter
(PM2.5). EPA is proposing to approve Ohio's request. EPA is
proposing to approve several additional related actions. EPA is
proposing to determine that the entire Huntington-Ashland (OH-KY-WV)
area continues to attain the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard. EPA
is proposing to approve, as revisions to the Ohio State Implementation
Plan (SIP), the state's plan for maintaining the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS through 2022 in the area. EPA is proposing to
approve the 2005 emissions inventory for the Ohio portion of the
Huntington-Ashland area as meeting the comprehensive emissions
inventory requirement of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). Ohio's
maintenance plan submission includes an insignificance finding for the
mobile source contribution of PM2.5 and nitrogen oxides
(NOX) to Ohio's portion of the Huntington-Ashland
PM2.5 Area for transportation conformity purposes. EPA
agrees with this finding. These proposed actions are being taken in
accordance with the CAA and EPA's implementation regulation regarding
the 1997 p.m.2.5 NAAQS.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 23, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2011-0468, by one of the following methods:
1. https://www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
2. Email: blakley.pamela@epa.gov.
3. Fax: (312) 692-2450.
4. Mail: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Control Strategies Section (AR-
18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604.
5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Control Strategies Section
(AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only accepted
during the Regional Office normal hours of operation, and special
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The
Regional Office official hours of business are Monday through Friday,
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2011-0468. 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 email address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA
may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of
any defects or viruses. For additional instructions on submitting
comments, go to Section I of 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 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,
Environmental Engineer, 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: This supplementary information section is
arranged as follows:
I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
II. What actions is EPA proposing to take?
III. What is the background for these actions?
IV. What are the criteria for redesignation to attainment?
V. What is EPA's analysis of the state's request?
1. Attainment
2. The Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section
110 and Part D and Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k)
(Sections 107(d)(3)(E)(v) and 107(d)(3)(E)(ii)).
3. The Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to Permanent and
Enforceable Reductions in Emissions Resulting From Implementation of
the SIP and Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control Regulations and
Other Permanent and Enforceable Reductions (Section
107(d)(3)(E)(iii))
4. Ohio Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to
Section 175A of the CAA (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv))
5. Insignificance Determination for the Mobile Source
Contribution to PM2.5 and NOX
6. 2005 Comprehensive Emissions Inventory
7. Summary of Proposed Actions
VI. What are the effects of EPA's proposed actions?
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
[[Page 79594]]
I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
When submitting comments, remember to:
1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
2. Follow directions--The EPA may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.
II. What actions is EPA proposing to take?
EPA is proposing to take several actions related to redesignation
of the Ohio portion of the Huntington-Ashland area to attainment for
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is proposing to find that
Ohio meets the requirements for redesignation of the Huntington-Ashland
area to attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS under section
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is thus proposing to approve Ohio's
request to change the legal designation of its portion of the
Huntington-Ashland area from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS. This action would not change the legal
designation of the Kentucky or West Virginia portions of the area.
Second, EPA is proposing to approve Ohio's annual PM2.5
maintenance plan for the Huntington-Ashland area as a revision to the
Ohio SIP, including the insignificance determination for
PM2.5 and NOX for the mobile source contribution
of the Ohio portion of the Huntington-Ashland OH-KY-WV 1997 annual
PM2.5 area. EPA's analysis for this proposed action is
discussed in Section V. of today's proposed rulemaking.
Finally, EPA is proposing to approve the 2005 primary
PM2.5, nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide (SO2)
emissions inventories as satisfying the requirement in section
172(c)(3) for a current, accurate and comprehensive emission inventory.
Further discussion of the basis for these actions is provided below.
III. What is the background for these actions?
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.
The first air quality standards for PM2.5 were
promulgated on July 18, 1997, at 62 FR 38652. EPA promulgated an annual
standard at a level of 15 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\) 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
[mu]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 Huntington-Ashland (OH-KY-WV) area, as nonattainment for
the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard.
On October 17, 2006, at 71 FR 61144, EPA retained the annual
PM2.5 standard at 15 [mu]g/m\3\ (2006 annual
PM2.5 standard), but revised the 24-hour standard to 35
[mu]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 of 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 Huntington-
Ashland area is designated as nonattainment for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 standard, today's proposed action addresses
redesignation to attainment only for this standard.
On September 7, 2011, EPA issued a final determination that the
entire Huntington-Ashland area has attained the 1997 PM2.5
standard. 76 FR 55542.
IV. 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 for redesignation provided that: (1) The Administrator
determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS based on
current air quality data; (2) the Administrator has fully approved an
applicable state implementation plan for the area under section 110(k)
of the CAA; (3) the Administrator determines that the improvement in
air quality is due to permanent and enforceable emission reductions
resulting from implementation of the applicable SIP, Federal air
pollution control regulations, and other permanent and enforceable
emission reductions; (4) the Administrator has fully approved a
maintenance plan for the area meeting the requirements of section 175A
of the 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.
V. What is EPA's analysis of the State's request?
EPA is proposing to approve the redesignation of the Ohio portion
of the Huntington-Ashland area to attainment of the 1997 annual
PM2.5 NAAQS and is proposing to approve Ohio's maintenance
plan for the area and other related SIP revisions. The bases for these
actions follow.
1. Attainment
As noted above, in a rulemaking published on September 7, 2011, EPA
determined that the Huntington-Ashland area has attained the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The basis and effect of this
determination were discussed in the notices of proposed and final
rulemaking. The determination was based on quality-assured air quality
monitoring data for 2007-2009 and 2008-2010 showing the area has met
the standard. The data have been certified by the respective states.
Preliminary data for 2011 are consistent with continued attainment,
and thus EPA proposes to determine that the Huntington-Ashland area
[[Page 79595]]
continues to attain the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard.
2. The Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and
Part D and Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) (Sections
107(d)(3)(E)(v) and 107(d)(3)(E)(ii))
We believe that Ohio has met all currently applicable SIP
requirements for purposes of redesignation for the Ohio portion of the
Huntington-Ashland area under section 110 of the CAA (general SIP
requirements). We are also proposing to find that the Ohio SIP meets
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 are proposing to find that all
applicable requirements of the Ohio SIP for purposes of redesignation
have been or will be approved, in accordance with section
107(d)(3)(E)(ii). As discussed below, in this action EPA is proposing
to approve Ohio's 2005 emissions inventories as meeting the section
172(c)(3) comprehensive emissions inventory requirement.
In making these proposed determinations, we have ascertained which
SIP requirements are applicable for purposes of redesignation, and
concluded that there are SIP measures meeting those requirements and
that they are or by the time of final designation will be fully
approved under section 110(k) of the CAA.
a. Ohio Has Met All Applicable Requirements for Purposes of
Redesignation of the Ohio Portion 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 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 the Ohio SIP and have concluded that it meets 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's SIP addressing section 110 requirements
(including provisions addressing particulate matter), at 40 CFR
52.1870, respectively).
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 14,
2011, at 76 FR 41075. EPA disapproved the element of the September 4,
2009, submittal that addresses section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) on February 4,
2011 at 76 FR 92618, but has not taken rulemaking action on the
remainder of the submittal.
The requirements of section 110(a)(2), however, are statewide
requirements that are not linked to the PM2.5 nonattainment
status of the Huntington-Ashland 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 is proposing to determine that, upon approval of the base year
emissions inventories discussed in section V.6. of this rulemaking, the
Ohio SIP will meet the SIP requirements for the Ohio portion of the
Huntington-Ashland 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 this redesignation requests, the
applicable section 172 SIP requirements for the Ohio portion of the
Huntington-Ashland 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 Achievable 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,
[[Page 79596]]
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 Huntington-Ashland 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 Huntington-Ashland 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
submitted a 2005 base year emissions inventory along with their
redesignation requests. As discussed below in section V.6., EPA is
approving the 2005 base year inventories as meeting the section
172(c)(3) emissions inventory requirement for the Ohio portion of the
Huntington-Ashland 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). Nonetheless, since PSD
requirements will apply after redesignation, the area need not have a
fully-approved NSR 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.'' Ohio has demonstrated that
the Huntington-Ashland 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 Huntington-Ashland 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's
SIP meets 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 has an approved transportation conformity SIP (72 FR 20945).
Ohio is in the process of updating its approved transportation
conformity SIP, and EPA will review its provisions when they are
submitted.
b. The Ohio Portion of the Huntington-Ashland Area Has a Fully Approved
Applicable SIP Under Section 110(k) of the CAA
Upon final approval of Ohio's comprehensive 2005 emissions
inventory, EPA will have fully approved the Ohio SIP for the Ohio
portion of the Huntington-Ashland area under section 110(k) of the CAA
for all requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation to
attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard. EPA may rely
on prior SIP approvals in approving a redesignation request (See page 3
of the September 4, 1992, John Calcagni memorandum 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 has adopted and submitted,
and EPA has fully approved, provisions addressing various required SIP
elements under particulate matter standards. In this action, EPA is
proposing to approve Ohio's 2005 base year emissions inventory for the
Huntington-Ashland area as meeting the requirement of section 172(c)(3)
of the CAA for the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard.
c. Nonattainment Requirements
Under section 172, states with nonattainment areas must submit
plans providing for timely attainment and meeting a variety of other
requirements. On July 16, 2008 Ohio submitted a state-wide attainment
demonstration for PM2.5, including the Huntington-Ashland
area. However, pursuant to 40 CFR 51.1004(c) EPA's determination that
the area has attained the 1997 PM2.5 annual standard
suspends the requirement to submit certain planning SIPs related to
attainment, including attainment demonstration requirements, the
Reasonably Achievable Control
[[Page 79597]]
Technology (RACT)-RACM requirement of section 172(c)(1) of the CAA, the
RFP and attainment demonstration requirements of sections 172(c)(2) and
(6) and 182(b)(1) of the CAA, and the requirement for contingency
measures of section 172(c)(9) of the CAA).
As a result, the only remaining requirement under section 172 to be
considered is the emissions inventory required under section 172(c)(3).
As discussed in a later section, EPA is proposing to approve the
inventory that Ohio submitted as part of its maintenance plan as
satisfying this requirement.
No SIP provisions applicable for redesignation of the Ohio portion
of the Huntington-Ashland area are currently disapproved, conditionally
approved, or partially approved. If EPA approves Ohio's Huntington-
Ashland area PM2.5 emissions inventories as proposed, Ohio
will have a fully approved SIP for all requirements applicable for
purposes of redesignation.
3. The Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to Permanent and Enforceable
Reductions in Emissions Resulting From Implementation of the SIP and
Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control Regulations and Other
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii))
EPA believes that Ohio has demonstrated that the observed air
quality improvement in the Huntington-Ashland area is due to permanent
and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation
of the SIP, Federal measures, and other state-adopted measures.
In making this demonstration, Ohio has calculated the change in
emissions between 2005, one of the years used to designate the
Huntington-Ashland area as nonattainment, and 2008, one of the years
the Huntington-Ashland 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 Huntington-Ashland area and contributing 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 area:
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 requirements result in lower
NOX and SO2 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, new vehicles will emit the following
percentages less NOX: Passenger cars (light duty vehicles)--
77%; light duty trucks, minivans, and sports utility vehicles--86%;
and, larger sports utility vehicles, vans, and heavier trucks--69 to
95%. EPA expects fleet wide average emissions to come to decline by
similar percentages as new vehicles replace older vehicles. The Tier 2
standards also reduced the sulfur content of gasoline to 30 parts per
million (ppm) beginning in January 2006. Most gasoline sold in Ohio
prior to January 2006 had a sulfur content of about 500 ppm.
Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Rule. EPA issued this rule in July 2000.
This rule includes standards limiting the sulfur content of diesel
fuel, which went into effect in 2004. A second phase took effect in
2007 which reduced fine particle emissions from heavy-duty highway
engines and further reduced the highway diesel fuel sulfur content to
15 ppm. The total program is estimated to achieve a 90% reduction in
direct PM2.5 emissions and a 95% reduction in NOX
emissions for these new engines using low sulfur diesel, compared to
existing engines using higher sulfur content diesel. The reduction in
fuel sulfur content also yielded an immediate reduction in sulfate
particle emissions from all diesel vehicles.
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 also reduces the sulfur content in nonroad diesel fuel
by over 99%. Prior to 2006, nonroad diesel fuel averaged approximately
3,400 ppm sulfur. This rule limited nonroad diesel sulfur content to
500 ppm by 2006, with a further reduction to 15 ppm by 2010. The
combined engine and fuel rules will reduce NOX and PM
emissions from large nonroad diesel engines by over 90%, compared to
current nonroad engines using higher sulfur content diesel. It is
estimated that compliance with this rule will cut NOX
emissions from nonroad diesel engines by up to 90%. This rule achieved
some emission reductions by 2008 and was fully implemented by 2010. The
reduction in fuel sulfur content also yielded an immediate reduction in
sulfate particle emissions from all diesel vehicles.
Nonroad Large Spark-Ignition Engine and Recreational Engine
Standards. In November 2002 EPA promulgated emission standards for
groups of previously unregulated nonroad engines. These engines include
large spark-ignition engines such as those used in forklifts and
airport ground-service equipment; recreational vehicles using spark-
ignition engines such as off-highway motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles,
and snowmobiles; and recreational marine diesel engines. Emission
standards from large spark-ignition engines were implemented in two
tiers, with Tier 1 starting in 2004 and Tier 2 in 2007. Recreational
vehicle emission standards are being phased in from 2006 through 2012.
Marine Diesel engine standards were phased in from 2006 through 2009.
With full implementation of the entire nonroad spark-ignition engine
and recreational engine standards an 80% reduction in NOX
expected by 2020. Some of these emission reductions occurred by the
2008-2010 period used to demonstrate attainment, and additional
emission reductions will occur during the maintenance period.
i. Control Measures in Contributing Areas
Given the significance of sulfates and nitrates in the Huntington-
Ashland 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
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,
[[Page 79598]]
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 (also known as the Transport Rule) to address
interstate transport of emissions and resulting secondary air
pollutants and to replace CAIR. The CAIR, among other things, required
NOX and SO2 emission reductions that contributed
to the air quality improvement in the Huntington-Ashland nonattainment
area. The CAIR emission reduction requirements limit emissions through
2011; the Transport Rule requires similar or greater emission
reductions in the relevant areas in 2012 and beyond. The Transport Rule
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 Huntington-Ashland
nonattainment area. Because the emission reduction requirements of CAIR
are enforceable through the 2011 control period, and because the
Transport Rule 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 Huntington-
Ashland 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 developed emissions inventories for NOX, direct
PM2.5, and SO2 for 2005, one of the years used to
designate the area as nonattainment, and 2008, one of the years the
Huntington-Ashland 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, Kentucky and West Virginia NOX emission budgets
resulting from EPA's NOX SIP call. The 2008 emissions from
EGUs reflect Ohio's emission caps under CAIR. All other point source
emissions were obtained from Ohio's source facility emissions
reporting.
Area source emissions the Huntington-Ashland area for 2005 were
taken from periodic emissions inventories.\1\ These 2005 area source
emission estimates were extrapolated to 2008. Source growth factors
were supplied by the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 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 local Metropolitan Planning
Organization (MPO), KYOVA.
All emissions estimates discussed below were documented in the
submittal and appendices of Ohio's redesignation request submittal from
May 4, 2011. 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-2011-0468, which
include digital copies of Ohio's submittal.
Emissions data in tons per year (tpy) for the entire Huntington-
Ashland area (OH-KY-WV) are shown in Tables 1, and 2, below.
Table 1--Summary of 2005 Emissions for the Huntington-Ashland (KY-OH-WV) Area by Source Type
[tpy]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2 NOX PM2.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point (EGU)............................................... 357,165.49 121,991.60 5,005.11
Non-EGU................................................... 11,039.74 11,854.66 1,686.15
On-road................................................... 192.92 12,813.39 500.72
Nonroad................................................... 127.85 1,566.88 158.65
Area...................................................... 2,836.09 2,034.76 1,829.08
MAR....................................................... 927.29 12,221.82 404.61
-----------------------------------------------------
Total Huntington-Ashland.............................. 372,289.38 162,483.11 9,584.32
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2--Comparison of 2005 Emissions From the Non-Attainment Year and 2008 Emissions for an Attainment Year for
the Huntington-Ashland (KY-OH-WV) Area
[tpy]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net change
2005 2008 (2005-2008)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5..................................................... 9,584.32 10,253.89 669.48
NOX....................................................... 162,483.11 146,972.25 -15,510.86
SO2....................................................... 372,289.38 234,901.09 -137,388.63
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 79599]]
Table 2 shows that the entire Huntington-Ashland area reduced
NOX emissions by 15,510.86 tpy, and SO2 emissions
by 137,388.63 tpy between 2005, a nonattainment year and 2008, an
attainment year.
Because PM2.5 concentrations in the Huntington-Ashland
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 3,
below, present's statewide EGU emissions data compiled by EPA's Clean
Air Markets Division for the years 2002 and 2008 for the several states
that were found to contribute to air quality in the Huntington-Ashland
area. Emissions for 2008 reflect implementation of CAIR.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP22DE11.079
Table 3 shows that states impacting the Huntington-Ashland area
reduced NOX and SO2 emissions from EGUs by
701,175 tpy and 1,409,011 tpy, respectively, between 2002 and 2008.
Based on the information summarized above, Ohio has adequately
demonstrated that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent
and enforceable emissions reductions. While these reductions were
estimates of the impact of CAIR, these reductions are expected to
continue and may be considered permanent and enforceable as a result of
the Transport Rule being promulgated.
4. Ohio Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 175A
of the CAA (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv))
In conjunction with Ohio's request to redesignate the Ohio portion
of the Huntington-Ashland nonattainment area to attainment status, Ohio
has submitted a SIP revision to provide for maintenance of the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the area through 2022.
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, memorandum from John Calcagni, entitled
``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' 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
Ohio developed emissions inventories for NOX, direct
PM2.5, and SO2 for 2008, one of the years in the
period during which the Huntington-Ashland area monitored attainment of
the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard, as described
[[Page 79600]]
previously. The attainment level of emissions is summarized in Tables 2
and 3, above.
c. Demonstration of Maintenance
Along with the redesignation request, Ohio submitted a revision to
its PM2.5 SIP to include a maintenance plan for the
Huntington-Ashland area, as required by section 175A of the CAA. Ohio's
plan demonstrates maintenance of the 1997 annual PM2.5
standard through 2022 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 uses emissions inventory projections for the years 2015 and
2022 to demonstrate maintenance for the entire Huntington-Ashland area.
The projected emissions were estimated by Ohio, with assistance from
LADCO and KYOVA using the MOVES2010a model. Projection modeling of
inventory emissions was done for the 2015 interim year emissions using
estimates based on the 2009 and 2018 LADCO modeling inventory, using
LADCO's growth factors, for all sectors. The 2022 maintenance year is
based on emissions estimates from the 2018 LADCO modeling. Table 4
shows the 2008 attainment base year emission estimates and the 2015 and
2022 emission projections for the entire tri-state Huntington-Ashland
area that Ohio provided in its May 4, 2011, submission.
Table 4--Comparison of 2008, 2015 and 2022 NOX, Direct PM2.5, and SO2 Emission Totals (tpy) for the Huntington-
Ashland Area (OH-KY-WV)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2 NOX PM2.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008 (baseline)...................... 234,901.09............. 146,972.25............. 10,253.89.
2015................................. 149,647.27............. 95,137.30.............. 10,100.29.
2022................................. 113,654.75............. 71,097.29.............. 9,928.94.
Change............................... -121,246.34............ -75,874.96............. -324.95.
2008-2022............................ 52% decrease........... 52% decrease........... 3% decrease.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4 shows that the entire Huntington-Ashland area reduced
NOX emissions by 75,874.96 tpy between 2008 and the
maintenance projection to 2022, direct PM2.5 emissions by
324.95 tpy, and reduced SO2 emissions by 121,246.34 tpy
between 2008 and 2022. Thus the emissions inventories set forth in
Table 4 show that the area will continue to maintain the annual
PM2.5 standard during the maintenance period.
Maintenance of the 1997 annual PM2.5 air quality
standard in the Huntington-Ashland area is a function of regional as
well as local emissions trends. The regional impacts are dominated by
the impacts of SO2 and NOX emissions. The
previous section showed that the Transport Rule could be expected to
provide for substantial SO2 and NOX emission
reductions through 2014 for Ohio, West Virginia, and Kentucky.
Regionally, multiple upwind states can contribute precursors to
PM2.5 to the Huntington-Ashland area; however, projected
emissions under the Transport Rule for all the states contributing to
particulate matter concentrations this area show emissions well below
the attainment year of 2008 (Table 5 and Table 6). Table 5 and Table 6
show that under the Transport Rule regional emissions will not affect
the maintenance of the annual PM2.5 standard.
Table 5--Comparison of 2008 and 2014 and Beyond Statewide EGU SO2 Emissions (tpy) for Projected Years From
States That Impact the Huntington-Ashland Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transport rule
State Attainment 2014 and Net change
year 2008 beyond 2008-2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama......................................................... 357,546 173,231 -184,315
Illinois........................................................ 257,357 128,143 -129,214
Indiana......................................................... 565,458 128,143 -437,315
Kentucky........................................................ 344,356 116,912 -227,444
Michigan........................................................ 326,500 158,394 -168,106
Missouri........................................................ 258,268 177,359 -80,909
Ohio............................................................ 709,444 150,784 -558,660
Pennsylvania.................................................... 831,914 123,224 -708,690
Tennessee....................................................... 208,069 64,716 -143,353
West Virginia................................................... 301,574 83,235 -218,339
Wisconsin....................................................... 129,693 44,139 -85,554
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 4,290,179 1,348,280 -2,941,899
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6--Comparison of 2008 and 2014 and Beyond NOX Emissions Totals (tpy) From EGUs for 2008 (Attainment) 2014
and Beyond From States Impacting the Huntington-Ashland Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transport rule
State Attainment 2014 and Net change
year 2008 beyond 2008-2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama......................................................... 112,625 68,119 -44,506
[[Page 79601]]
Illinois........................................................ 119,929 48,533 -71,396
Indiana......................................................... 190,092 109,392 -80,700
Kentucky........................................................ 157,902 76,026 -81,876
Michigan........................................................ 107,623 57,311 -50,312
Missouri........................................................ 88,745 48,888 -39,857
Ohio............................................................ 235,048 84,126 -150,922
Pennsylvania.................................................... 183,657 116,994 -66,663
Tennessee....................................................... 85,640 20,490 -65,150
West Virginia................................................... 99,483 53,335 -46,148
Wisconsin....................................................... 47,794 29,688 -18,106
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 1,428,538 712,902 -715,636
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tables 5 and 6 show that NOX emissions from EGUs are
projected to decrease by 715,636 tpy from 2008 to 2014 and beyond and
SO2 emissions from EGUSs are projected to decrease by
2,941,899 tpy in states impacting the Huntington-Ashland area.
Based on the information summarized above, Ohio has adequately
demonstrated maintenance of the PM2.5 standard in this area
for a period extending in excess of ten years from expected final
action on Ohio's redesignation request.
d. Monitoring Network
Ohio's maintenance plan includes additional elements. Ohio's plan
includes a commitment to continue to operate its EPA-approved
monitoring network, as necessary to demonstrate ongoing compliance with
the NAAQS. Ohio currently operates a PM2.5 monitor in
Lawrence County to monitor the Huntington-Ashland area. Kentucky and
West Virginia are also currently operating one monitor in each state
for the Huntington-Ashland area.
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
Ohio remains obligated to continue to quality-assure monitoring
data and enter all data into the Air Quality System in accordance with
Federal guidelines. Ohio will use these data, supplemented with
additional information as necessary, to assure that the area continues
to attain the standard. Ohio will also continue to develop and submit
periodic emission inventories as required by the Federal Consolidated
Emissions Reporting Rule (67 FR 39602, June 10, 2002) to track future
levels of emissions. Both of these actions will help to verify
continued attainment in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.
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. 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 further commits to conduct ongoing review of its data, and if
monitored concentrations or emissions are trending upward, Ohio commits
to take appropriate steps to avoid a violation if possible. Ohio
commits to continue implementing SIP requirements upon and after
redesignation.
EPA believes that Ohio's contingency measures, as well as the
commitment to continue implementing any SIP requirements, satisfy the
pertinent requirements of section 175A(d).
As required by section 175A(b) of the CAA, Ohio commits to submit
to the EPA an updated PM2.5 maintenance plan eight years
after redesignation of the Huntington-Ashland area to cover an
additional ten-year period beyond the initial ten-year maintenance
period. As required by section 175A of the CAA, Ohio has also committed
to retain the PM2.5 control measures contained in the SIP
prior to redesignation.
For all of the reasons set forth above, EPA is proposing to approve
Ohio's 1997 annual PM2.5 maintenance plan for the
Huntington-Ashland area as meeting the requirements of CAA section
175A.
[[Page 79602]]
5. Insignificance Determination for the Mobile Source Contribution to
PM2.5 and NOX
Under section 176(c) of the CAA, transportation plans and
transportation improvement programs (TIPs) must conform to applicable
SIP goals. This means that such actions will not: (1) Cause or
contribute to violations of a NAAQS; (2) worsen the severity of an
existing violation; or (3) delay timely attainment of a NAAQS or any
interim milestone. Actions involving Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) or Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding or approval are
subject to the transportation conformity rule (40 CFR part 93 subpart
A.) Under this rule, MPOs in nonattainment and maintenance areas
coordinate with state air quality and transportation agencies, EPA,
FHWA and FTA to demonstrate that their metropolitan transportation
plans (``plans'') and TIPs conform to applicable SIPs. This is
typically determined by showing that estimated emissions from existing
and planned highway and transit systems are less than or equal to the
motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs) contained in a SIP.
For budgets to be approvable, they must meet, at a minimum, EPA's
adequacy criteria (40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)). However, the conformity rule
at 40 CFR 93.109(m) allows areas to forgo establishment of a budget(s)
where it is demonstrated that regional motor vehicle emissions for a
particular pollutant or precursor pollutant are an insignificant
contributor to the air quality problem in the area. The general
criteria for insignificance determinations per 40 CFR 93.109(m) are
based on a number of factors, including (1) The percentage of motor
vehicle emissions in context of the total SIP inventory; (2) the
current state of air quality as determined by monitoring data for that
NAAQS; (3) the absence of SIP motor vehicle control measures; and (4)
historical trends and future projections of the growth of motor vehicle
emissions in the area.
EPA previously reviewed the attainment demonstration that Ohio
submitted for its portion of the Huntington-Ashland area and made an
insignificance finding through the transportation conformity adequacy
process for NOX and directly emitted PM2.5 for
the Ohio portion of the Huntington-Ashland PM2.5
nonattainment area on December 7, 2009 (74 FR 64075). That
insignificance finding was effective on December 22, 2009. As a result
of EPA's insignificance finding, the Ohio portion of the Huntington-
Ashland PM2.5 area was no longer required to perform
regional emissions analyses for either directly emitted
PM2.5 or NOX as part of future PM2.5
conformity determinations for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS until
such time as EPA reviewed and took action on the Huntington-Ashland
PM2.5 area's attainment demonstration or acted on a
submitted maintenance plan for the Ohio portion of the area (the
subject of today's proposed action).
As part of the On May 4, 2011, redesignation request and
maintenance plan Ohio EPA requested that EPA find that on-road
emissions of direct PM2.5 and NOX emissions are
insigni
