Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio; Redesignation of the Ohio Portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta Area to Attainment of the 1997 Annual Standard for Fine Particulate Matter, 71383-71395 [2012-29012]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 231 / Friday, November 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0212; FRL–9756–7]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio;
Redesignation of the Ohio Portion of
the Parkersburg-Marietta Area to
Attainment of the 1997 Annual
Standard for Fine Particulate Matter
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
On February 29, 2012, the
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
submitted a request for EPA to approve
the redesignation of the Ohio portion of
the Parkersburg-Marietta West VirginiaOhio 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 determine that the
entire Parkersburg-Marietta area attains
the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard, based
on the most recent three years of
certified air quality data. 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 National Ambient Air
Quality Standard (NAAQS) through
2022 in the area. EPA is proposing to
approve a 2005 emissions inventory for
the Ohio portion of the ParkersburgMarietta 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
Parkersburg-Marietta PM2.5 area for
transportation conformity purposes;
EPA agrees with this finding and
proposes to determine the insignificance
of the 2022 motor vehicle emission
budget (MVEB) for the Ohio portion of
the Parkersburg-Marietta area for
transportation conformity purposes.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before December 31, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–
OAR–2012–0212, by one of the
following methods:
1. 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),
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:06 Nov 29, 2012
Jkt 229001
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–2012–
0212. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at
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 www.regulations.gov
or email. The 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 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 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
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
71383
either electronically in
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 Anthony
Maietta, Environmental Protection
Specialist, at (312) 353–8777 before
visiting the Region 5 office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Anthony Maietta, Environmental
Protection Specialist, Control Strategies
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J),
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–8777,
maietta.anthony@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
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—EPA may ask
you to respond to specific questions or
organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.
E:\FR\FM\30NOP1.SGM
30NOP1
71384
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 231 / Friday, November 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules
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.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
II. What actions is EPA proposing to
take?
EPA is proposing to take several
actions related to redesignation of the
Ohio portion of the ParkersburgMarietta area to attainment of the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS. In addition to
EPA’s December 2, 2011, determination
that the area attained the NAAQS for
PM2.5 by the applicable attainment date
based on quality-assured, certified
2007–2009 ambient air monitoring data
(76 FR 75464), we are proposing to
determine that the area continues to
attain the NAAQS for PM2.5, based on
quality-assured and certified ambient air
monitoring data for 2009–2011, the most
recent three years of quality-assured
data for the area. EPA is proposing to
find that Ohio meets the requirements
for redesignation of the ParkersburgMarietta 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 Parkersburg-Marietta area
from nonattainment to attainment of the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. This action
would not change the legal designation
of the West Virginia portion of the area,
which will be redesignated in a separate
rulemaking.
Second, EPA is proposing to approve
Ohio’s annual PM2.5 maintenance plan
for the Parkersburg-Marietta area as a
revision to the Ohio SIP, including the
insignificance determination for PM2.5
and NOX emissions for the mobile
source contribution of the Ohio portion
of the Parkersburg-Marietta area.
Finally, EPA is proposing to approve
the 2005 primary PM2.5, NOX and sulfur
dioxide (SO2) emissions inventories as
satisfying the requirement in section
172(c)(3) off the CAA for a current,
accurate and comprehensive emission
inventory.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:06 Nov 29, 2012
Jkt 229001
Therefore, EPA is proposing to
approve the request from the State of
Ohio to change the designation of
Washington County (the Ohio portion of
the Parkersburg-Marietta area) from
nonattainment to attainment of the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS. This action
would not change the legal designation
of the West Virginia portion of the area,
which would be redesignated in a
separate rulemaking.
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 ParkersburgMarietta 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
the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C.
Circuit) remanded this standard to EPA
for further consideration. See American
Farm Bureau Federation and National
Pork Producers Council, et al. v. EPA,
559 F.3d 512 (D.C. Cir. 2009). Since the
Parkersburg-Marietta area is designated
as nonattainment for the 1997 annual
PM2.5 standard, today’s proposed action
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
addresses redesignation to attainment
only for this standard.
On December 2, 2011, EPA issued a
final determination that the entire
Parkersburg-Marietta area has attained
the 1997 PM2.5 standard by the
applicable attainment date (76 FR
75464). Ohio’s original submittal
contained complete, quality-assured and
certified air monitoring data for years
through 2010. Based upon our review of
complete, quality-assured and certified
ambient air monitoring data from 2009–
2011, we are proposing to determine
that the area continues to attain the
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Further,
preliminary data for 2012 indicate that
the data will continue to show the area
in attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS.
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 SIP for the area under section
110(k) of the CAA; (3) the Administrator
determines that the improvement in air
quality is due to permanent and
enforceable 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
Parkersburg-Marietta 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 December 2, 2011, EPA
determined that the ParkersburgMarietta area had attained the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date. The basis and effect of
this determination were discussed in
E:\FR\FM\30NOP1.SGM
30NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 231 / Friday, November 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules
the proposed (76 FR 43634) and final
(76 FR 75464) actions. The
determination was based on qualityassured air quality monitoring data for
2007–2009 showing the area had met
the standard by the attainment date. The
data have been certified by West
Virginia, the state in which the monitors
for the area are located.
In this action, we are proposing to
determine that the Parkersburg-Marietta
area has attained the 1997 annual PM2.5
NAAQS based upon the most recent
three years of complete, certified and
quality-assured data, as required by
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. Under
EPA’s regulations at 40 CFR 50.7, the
annual primary and secondary PM2.5
standards are met when the annual
arithmetic mean concentration, as
determined in accordance with 40 CFR
part 50, appendix N, is less than or
equal to 15.0 mg/m3 at all relevant
monitoring sites in the area.
EPA has reviewed the ambient air
quality monitoring data in the
Parkersburg-Marietta area, consistent
with the requirements contained at 40
CFR part 50. EPA’s review focused on
data recorded in the EPA Air Quality
System (AQS) database for the
Parkersburg-Marietta PM2.5
nonattainment area from 2009–2011.
EPA also considered preliminary data
for 2012, which have not yet been
certified.
The Parkersburg-Marietta area has one
monitor located in Wood County, West
71385
Virginia, that reported a design value
from 2009–2011, the most recent three
years of data, for PM2.5 that measured
12.3 mg/m3 for the 1997 annual
standard. The monitor in the
Parkersburg-Marietta area recorded
complete data in accordance with
criteria set forth by EPA in 40 CFR part
50, appendix N, where a complete year
of air quality data comprises four
calendar quarters, with each quarter
containing data with at least 75 percent
capture of the scheduled sampling days.
Available data are considered to be
sufficient for comparison to the NAAQS
if three consecutive complete years of
data exist.
TABLE 1—THE 1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 DESIGN VALUES FOR THE PARKERSBURG-MARIETTA MONITOR WITH COMPLETE DATA
FOR THE 2007–2009, 2008–2010 AND 2009–2011 DESIGN VALUES 1 IN μg/m3
County
Monitor
Annual standard
design value
2007–2009
(μg/m3)
Annual standard
design value
2008–2010
(μg/m3)
Annual standard
design value
2009–2011
(μg/m3)
Wood, WV .................................................
Neale Elementary School 541071002 .....
13.7
13.1
12.3
EPA’s review of monitoring data from
the 2007–2009, 2008–2010 and 2009–
2011 monitoring periods supports EPA’s
determination that the ParkersburgMarietta area has monitored attainment
for each time period. Additionally,
because the preliminary monitoring data
for 2012 are consistent with the area’s
continued attainment, EPA proposes to
determine that the Parkersburg-Marietta
area has attained the 1997 annual PM2.5
standard.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
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 ParkersburgMarietta 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).
We are proposing to find that all
applicable requirements of the Ohio SIP
for purposes of redesignation have been,
in accordance with section
107(d)(3)(E)(ii). As discussed below, in
this action EPA is proposing to approve
Ohio’s 2005 emissions inventory as
1 As
defined in 40 CFR part 50 appendix N(1)(c).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:06 Nov 29, 2012
Jkt 229001
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 approved or will be approved
by the time of final rulemaking.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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
E:\FR\FM\30NOP1.SGM
30NOP1
71386
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 231 / Friday, November 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
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. The requirements of section
110(a)(2), however, are statewide
requirements that are not linked to the
PM2.5 nonattainment status of the
Parkersburg-Marietta 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 ParkersburgMarietta 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.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:06 Nov 29, 2012
Jkt 229001
For purposes of evaluating this
redesignation request, the applicable
section 172 SIP requirements for the
Ohio portion of the ParkersburgMarietta area are contained in section
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 we are
determining that the area has attained in
this action, no additional measures are
needed to provide for attainment, and
section 172(c)(1) requirements are no
longer considered to be applicable as
long as the area continues to attain the
standard until redesignation. (40 CFR
51.1004(c).)
The Reasonable Further Progress
(RFP) requirement under section
172(c)(2) is defined as progress that
must be made toward attainment. This
requirement is not relevant for purposes
of redesignation because the
Parkersburg-Marietta 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 ParkersburgMarietta 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 request. As
discussed below in section V.6., EPA is
approving the 2005 base year inventory
as meeting the section 172(c)(3)
emissions inventory requirement for the
Ohio portion of the ParkersburgMarietta 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
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 ParkersburgMarietta 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 ParkersburgMarietta 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
E:\FR\FM\30NOP1.SGM
30NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 231 / Friday, November 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
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 ParkersburgMarietta 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
Parkersburg-Marietta 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:06 Nov 29, 2012
Jkt 229001
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 Parkersburg-Marietta
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 ParkersburgMarietta 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
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
Parkersburg-Marietta area are currently
disapproved, conditionally approved or
partially approved. If EPA approves
Ohio’s Parkersburg-Marietta 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 ParkersburgMarietta area is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions
resulting from implementation of the
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
71387
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 Parkersburg-Marietta area
as nonattainment, and 2008, one of the
years the Parkersburg-Marietta 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 Parkersburg-Marietta 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 less NOX with
the following percentage decreases:
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 fleetwide average emissions 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
E:\FR\FM\30NOP1.SGM
30NOP1
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
71388
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 231 / Friday, November 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules
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 in 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 PM2.5 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 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.
1. Control Measures in Contributing
Areas
Given the significance of sulfates and
nitrates in the Parkersburg-Marietta
area, the area’s air quality is strongly
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:06 Nov 29, 2012
Jkt 229001
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.
CAIR and the Transport Rule. On May
12, 2005, EPA published the Clean Air
Interstate Rule (CAIR), which requires
significant reductions in emissions of
SO2 and NOX from electric generating
units to limit the interstate transport of
these pollutants and the ozone and fine
particulate matter they form in the
atmosphere. See 76 FR 70093. The D.C.
Circuit initially vacated CAIR, North
Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir.
2008), but ultimately remanded the rule
to EPA without vacatur to preserve the
environmental benefits provided by
CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d
1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008). In response
to the court’s decision, EPA issued the
Transport Rule, also known as the
Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, to
address interstate transport of NOX and
SO2 in the eastern United States. See 76
FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). On August
21, 2012, the D.C. Circuit issued a
decision to vacate the Transport Rule. In
that decision, it also ordered EPA to
continue administering CAIR ‘‘pending
the promulgation of a valid
replacement.’’ EME Homer Generation,
L.P. v. EPA, No. 11–1302 (D.C. Cir.,
August 21, 2012).2
In light of these unique circumstances
and for the reasons explained below,
EPA proposes to approve the
redesignation request and the related
SIP revision for Washington County in
Ohio, including Ohio’s plan for
maintaining attainment of the PM2.5
standard in the Ohio portion of the
Parkersburg-Marietta Area. The air
quality modeling analysis conducted for
the Transport Rule demonstrates that
the Parkersburg-Marietta area would be
able to attain the PM2.5 standard even in
the absence of either CAIR or the
Transport Rule. See ‘‘Air Quality
Modeling Final Rule Technical Support
Document,’’ App. B, B–62 to B–134.
This modeling is available in the docket
for this proposed redesignation action.
In addition, CAIR remains in place
and enforceable until substituted by a
valid replacement rule. Ohio’s CAIR SIP
was approved on September 25, 2009
2 The court’s judgment is not final, as of October
31, 2012, as the mandate has not yet been issued.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(74 FR 48857). As a result of CAIR, EPA
projected that in 2009 emissions of NOX
would decrease from a baseline of
264,000 tons per year (tpy) to 93,000 tpy
while in 2010 emissions of SO2 would
decrease from a baseline of 1,373,000
tpy to 298,000 tpy within Ohio. And by
2015, we projected emissions of NOX
would decrease to 83,000 tpy while
emissions of SO2 would decrease to
208,000 tpy within Ohio (https://
www.epa.gov/CAIR/oh.html). The
monitoring data used to demonstrate the
area’s attainment of the 1997 Annual
PM2.5 NAAQS by the April 2010
attainment deadline was also impacted
by CAIR. To the extent that Ohio is
relying on CAIR in its maintenance
plan, the recent directive from the D.C.
Circuit in EME Homer ensures that the
reductions associated with CAIR will be
permanent and enforceable for the
necessary time period. EPA has been
ordered by the court to develop a new
rule and the opinion makes clear that
after promulgating that new rule EPA
must provide states an opportunity to
draft and submit SIPs to implement that
rule. CAIR thus cannot be replaced until
EPA has promulgated a final rule
through a notice-and-comment
rulemaking process, states have had an
opportunity to draft and submit SIPs,
EPA has reviewed the SIPs to determine
if they can be approved, and EPA has
taken action on the SIPs, including
promulgating a Federal Implementation
Plan (FIP) if appropriate. These steps
alone will take many years, even with
EPA and the states acting expeditiously.
The court’s clear instruction to EPA that
it must continue to administer CAIR
until a ‘‘valid replacement’’ exists
provides an additional backstop; by
definition, any rule that replaces CAIR
and meets the court’s direction would
require upwind states to have SIPs that
eliminate significant contributions to
downwind nonattainment and prevent
interference with maintenance in
downwind areas.
Further, in vacating the Transport
Rule and requiring EPA to continue
administering CAIR, the D.C. Circuit
emphasized that the consequences of
vacating CAIR ‘‘might be more severe
now in light of the reliance interests
accumulated over the intervening four
years.’’ EME Homer, slip op. at 60. The
accumulated reliance interests include
the interests of states who reasonably
assumed they could rely on reductions
associated with CAIR which brought
certain nonattainment areas into
attainment with the NAAQS. If EPA
were prevented from relying on
reductions associated with CAIR in
redesignation actions, states would be
E:\FR\FM\30NOP1.SGM
30NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 231 / Friday, November 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules
forced to impose additional, redundant
reductions on top of those achieved by
CAIR. EPA believes this is precisely the
type of irrational result the court sought
to avoid by ordering EPA to continue
administering CAIR. For these reasons
also, EPA believes it is appropriate to
allow states to rely on CAIR, and the
existing emissions reductions achieved
by CAIR, as sufficiently permanent and
enforceable for purposes such as
redesignation. Following promulgation
of the replacement rule, EPA will
review SIPs as appropriate to identify
whether there are any issues that need
to be addressed.
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 Parkersburg-Marietta area
monitored attainment of the standard.
Electric Generating Unit (EGU) SO2
and NOX emissions were derived from
EPA’s Clean Air Market’s acid rain
database. These emissions reflect Ohio
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 in the
Parkersburg-Marietta area for 2005 were
taken from periodic emissions
inventories.3 These 2005 area source
emission estimates were extrapolated to
2008. Source growth factors were
supplied by the Lake Michigan Air
Directors Consortium (LADCO).
Nonroad mobile source emissions
were extrapolated from nonroad mobile
source emissions reported in EPA’s
2005 National Emissions Inventory
(NEI). Contractors were employed by
LADCO to estimate emissions for
commercial marine vessels and
railroads.
71389
On-road mobile source emissions
were calculated using EPA’s mobile
source emission factor model,
MOVES2010a, in conjunction with
transportation model results developed
by the local Metropolitan Planning
Organization (MPO), the WoodWashington-Wirt Interstate Planning
Commission (WWW).
All emissions estimates discussed
below were documented in the
submittal and appendices of Ohio’s
redesignation request submittal from
February 29, 2012. 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 number
EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0212, which
includes digital copies of Ohio’s
submittal.
Emissions data in tpy for the entire
Parkersburg-Marietta area are shown in
Tables 2 and 3, below.
TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF 2005 EMISSIONS FOR THE ENTIRE PARKERSBURG-MARIETTA AREA BY SOURCE TYPE (TPY)
SO2
NOX
PM2.5
Point (EGU) ...............................................................................................................
Non-EGU ...................................................................................................................
On-road ......................................................................................................................
Nonroad .....................................................................................................................
Area ...........................................................................................................................
MAR ...........................................................................................................................
193,252.79
16,055.73
58.79
74.64
823.36
141.75
28,455.23
3,332.23
5,200.52
870.68
1,047.18
2,547.49
1,745.04
847.6
173.49
80.7
1,213.27
86.64
Total Parkersburg-Marietta .................................................................................
210,407.06
41,453.33
4,146.74
TABLE 3—COMPARISON OF 2005 EMISSIONS FROM THE NON-ATTAINMENT YEAR AND 2008 EMISSIONS FOR AN
ATTAINMENT YEAR FOR THE ENTIRE PARKERSBURG-MARIETTA AREA (TPY)
2005
2008
4,146.74
41,453.33
210,407.06
3,796.59
35,756.31
159,593.17
PM2.5 ..........................................................................................................................
NOX ............................................................................................................................
SO2 ............................................................................................................................
Table 3 shows that in the entire
Parkersburg-Marietta area reduced
direct PM2.5 emissions by 350.15 tons,
NOX emissions by 5,967.02 tons and
SO2 emissions by 50,813.89 tons
between 2005, a nonattainment year,
and 2008, an attainment year.
Net change
(2005–2008)
¥350.15
¥5,967.02
¥50,813.89
Emissions data in tpy for Washington
County, Ohio (the Ohio portion of the
Parkersburg-Marietta area) are shown in
Tables 4, and 5, below.
TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF 2005 NON-ATTAINMENT YEAR EMISSIONS FOR THE OHIO PORTION OF THE PARKERSBURGMARIETTA AREA BY SOURCE TYPE (TPY)
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
SO2
Point (EGU) .....................................................................................................................
Non-EGU .........................................................................................................................
On-road ............................................................................................................................
Nonroad ...........................................................................................................................
Area .................................................................................................................................
3 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
14:06 Nov 29, 2012
Jkt 229001
140,957.01
5,200.90
26.97
41.04
9.78
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 00033
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
NOX
16,137.09
1,748.86
2,687.09
425.97
168.44
PM2.5
384.81
472.37
90.45
35.53
148.43
rule published on December 17, 2008, at 73 FR
76539.
E:\FR\FM\30NOP1.SGM
30NOP1
71390
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 231 / Friday, November 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF 2005 NON-ATTAINMENT YEAR EMISSIONS FOR THE OHIO PORTION OF THE PARKERSBURGMARIETTA AREA BY SOURCE TYPE (TPY)—Continued
SO2
NOX
PM2.5
MAR .................................................................................................................................
44.48
500.78
11.76
Total Parkersburg-Marietta .......................................................................................
146,280.18
21,668.23
1,143.35
TABLE 5—COMPARISON OF 2005 EMISSIONS FROM THE NON-ATTAINMENT YEAR AND 2008 EMISSIONS FOR AN
ATTAINMENT YEAR FOR THE OHIO PORTION OF THE PARKERSBURG-MARIETTA AREA (TPY)
2005
2008
1,143.35
21,668.23
146,280.18
1,203.35
22,365.96
138,786.24
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
PM2.5 ................................................................................................................................
NOX ..................................................................................................................................
SO2 ..................................................................................................................................
Table 5 shows that while NOX and
PM2.5 emissions rose by 697.73 tpy and
60 tpy, respectively, the Ohio portion of
the Parkersburg-Marietta area reduced
SO2 emissions by 7,493.94 tpy between
2005, a nonattainment year and 2008, an
attainment year. Despite NOX and PM2.5
emissions increasing in the Ohio
portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta area
between 2005 and 2008, the area
demonstrated attainment of the NAAQS
in 2008, as the combined ParkersburgMarietta area reduced NOX emissions by
5,697 tpy and PM2.5 by 350.15 tpy
between 2005 and 2008. The state
submission includes multiple lines of
evidence to show that even with the
increase in NOX and PM2.5 the area has
still reached attainment of the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS and will continue
to maintain that designation into the
future due to multiple actions on the
state’s behalf. The weight of evidence
submitted by the state contains
modeling, monitoring and trend
analysis. The trend analysis for the area
shows a steady trend of declining PM2.5
monitored data, with a significant drop
in concentrations beginning in 2006.
Since meteorology can play a large part
in dispersion of PM2.5, which can
greatly affect monitored concentrations,
LADCO and the state have normalized
the data to remove meteorological
effects using a statistical analysis, the
state has shown in their submission that
the concentrations observed are due to
real reductions in PM2.5 and its
precursors, and not just meteorological
effects. In addition, control of emissions
from local power plants through local
and national programs have impacted
and will continue to impact the area, as
we will describe below.
In 2008, American Electric Power’s
Muskingum River Station in
Washington County, Ohio, implemented
the continuous operation of an
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:06 Nov 29, 2012
Jkt 229001
advanced NOX control device on their
largest of five units (unit #5), as part of
a federally-enforceable consent decree.
The Muskingum River Station is also
required to retire, repower or retrofit all
remaining units by 2015. Initial plans
provided by the Muskingum River
Station to Ohio indicate that unit #5
will also install a flue gas
desulfurization device in addition to its
consent decree-mandated NOX control
device. Another local power plant,
American Municipal Power’s R.H.
Gorsuch Station in Washington County,
permanently shut down at the end of
2010, and would require an approvable
permit to restart. This facility operated
four 53 megawatt (MW) units. The result
of federally-mandated consent decree
actions and the shutdown of a power
plant demonstrate that NOX reductions
from power plants in the ParkersburgMarietta area have occurred and will
continue to occur in the future.
Based on the information summarized
above, Ohio has adequately
demonstrated that the improvement in
air quality is due to permanent and
enforceable emissions reductions.
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
Parkersburg-Marietta 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
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Net change
(2005–2008)
+60.00
+697.73
¥7,493.94
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,’’
(Calcagni Memorandum) provides
additional guidance on the content of a
maintenance plan. The memorandum
states that a maintenance plan should
address the following items: the
attainment emissions inventories, a
maintenance demonstration showing
maintenance for the ten years of the
maintenance period, a commitment to
maintain the existing monitoring
network, factors and procedures to be
used for verification of continued
attainment of the NAAQS and a
contingency plan to prevent or correct
future violations of the NAAQS.
b. Attainment Inventory
Ohio developed emissions inventories
for NOX, direct PM2.5 and SO2 for 2008,
one of the years in the period during
which the Parkersburg-Marietta area
monitored attainment of the 1997
annual PM2.5 standard, as described
previously. The attainment levels of
emissions for the entire area, as well as
the attainment levels of emissions for
the Ohio portion of the area were
summarized in Tables 3 and 5, above.
E:\FR\FM\30NOP1.SGM
30NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 231 / Friday, November 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules
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 Parkersburg-Marietta area, as
required by section 175A of the CAA.
Section 175A requires a State seeking
redesignation to attainment to submit a
SIP revision to provide for the
maintenance of the NAAQS in the area
‘‘for at least 10 years after the
redesignation.’’ EPA has interpreted this
as a showing of maintenance ‘‘for a
period of ten years following
redesignation.’’ Calcagni Memorandum,
p. 9. Where the emissions inventory
method of showing maintenance is
used, its purpose is to show that
emissions during the maintenance
period will not increase over the
attainment year inventory. Calcagni
Memorandum, pp. 9–10.
As discussed in detail in the section
below, the state’s maintenance plan
submission expressly documents that
the area’s emissions inventories will
remain below the attainment year
inventories through 2022. In addition,
for the reasons set forth below, EPA
believes that the state’s submission, in
conjunction with additional supporting
information, further demonstrates that
the area will continue to maintain the
PM2.5 standard at least through 2023.
Thus, if EPA finalizes its proposed
approval of the redesignation request
and maintenance plans in 2013, it is
based on a showing, in accordance with
section 175A, that the state’s
maintenance plan provides for
maintenance for at least ten years after
redesignation.
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,
71391
375 F. 3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also
66 FR 53094, 53099–53100 (October 19,
2001), and 68 FR 25413, 25430–25432
(May 12, 2003).
Ohio’s submission uses emissions
inventory projections for the years 2015
and 2022 to demonstrate maintenance
for the Ohio portion of the ParkersburgMarietta area. The projected emissions
were estimated by Ohio, with assistance
from LADCO and WWW using the
MOVES2010a model. Projection 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 emissions
are based on emissions estimates from
the 2018 LADCO modeling. Table 7
shows the 2008 attainment base year
emission estimates and the 2015 and
2022 emission projections for the entire
tri-state Parkersburg-Marietta area that
Ohio provided in its February 29, 2012,
submission.
TABLE 6—COMPARISON OF 2008, 2015 AND 2022 NOX, DIRECT PM2.5 AND SO2 EMISSION TOTALS (TPY) FOR THE OHIO
PORTION OF THE PARKERSBURG-MARIETTA AREA
SO2
2008 (baseline) ..........................................................................................................
2015 ...........................................................................................................................
2022 ...........................................................................................................................
Change ......................................................................................................................
2008–2022 .................................................................................................................
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
1%
NOX
138,786.24
67,625.84
37,351.17
¥101,435.07
1 73
22,365.96
11,439.41
6,417.53
¥15,948.43
1 71
PM2.5
1,203.35
1,198.61
1,181.01
¥22.34
12
decrease.
Table 6 shows that the Ohio portion
of the Parkersburg-Marietta area will
reduce NOX emissions by 15,948.43 tpy
between 2008 and the maintenance
projection to 2022, direct PM2.5
emissions by 22.34 tpy, and reduced
SO2 emissions by 101,435.07 tpy
between 2008 and 2022. The 2022
projected emissions levels are
significantly below attainment year
inventory levels, and based on the rate
of decline, it is highly improbable that
any increases in these levels will occur
in 2023 and beyond.
EPA has done analysis of the areas
emissions, and has concluded that the
Parkersburg-Marietta area’s emissions
can be expected to stay well below the
level of emissions from their attainment
year emissions inventory. First, EPA has
determined that the overall net rate of
decline in emissions of PM2.5, NOX and
SO2 projected from the attainment year
2008 through 2022 are approximately
1.59 tpy, 1139.17 tpy and 7246.10 tpy,
respectively. EPA has also determined
that no control measures taken into
account in the projected analysis will
end in 2023, nor does EPA expect any
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:06 Nov 29, 2012
Jkt 229001
change in growth for the ParkersburgMarietta area for the maintenance year
2023. The net rates of decline, coupled
with continued control and growth
factors, indicate that emissions
inventory levels will not only
significantly decline between 2008 and
2022, but that the reductions will
continue into 2023 and beyond. Second,
EPA notes that the rate of emissions
decline is consistent with monitored
and projected air quality trends. As
Table 1 demonstrates, monitored PM2.5
design value concentrations in
Parkersburg-Marietta are well below the
NAAQS in the years beyond 2008, an
attainment year for the area. Further,
those values are trending downward as
time progresses. Based on the future
projections of emissions in 2015 and
2022 showing significant emissions
reductions in direct PM2.5, NOX and
SO2, it is very unlikely that monitored
PM2.5 values in 2023 and beyond will
show violations of the NAAQS.
Additionally, the 2009–2011 design
value of 12.3 mg/m3 provides a sufficient
margin in the unlikely event emissions
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
rise slightly in the future. We are
proposing to find the mobile source
contribution to these emissions
insignificant (see section V(5) of this
action for further discussion), and the
mobile source contribution is expected
to remain insignificant in 2023 and
beyond because of fleet turnover and
engine emission standards in upcoming
years that will result in cleaner vehicles
and cleaner fuels.
As described in section V(3)(b) of this
action, the result of federally-mandated
consent decree actions and the
shutdown of a power plant demonstrate
that NOX reductions from power plants
in the Parkersburg-Marietta area have
occurred and are mandated to continue
to occur in 2023 and beyond. Thus, the
emissions inventories set forth in Table
6 show that the area will continue to
maintain the annual PM2.5 standard
during the maintenance period and at
least through 2023. These consent
decree actions are significant controls of
NOX and SO2, along with
implementation of Ohio’s SIP approved
CAIR controls for the area.
E:\FR\FM\30NOP1.SGM
30NOP1
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
71392
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 231 / Friday, November 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules
In light of the unique circumstances
surrounding CAIR and the Transport
Rule discussed in section V(3)(a)(i)(1) of
this action, and for the reasons
explained below, EPA proposes to
approve the redesignation request and
the related SIP revision for Washington
County in Ohio, including Ohio’s plan
for maintaining attainment of the PM2.5
standard in the Ohio portion of the
Parkersburg-Marietta Area. The air
quality modeling analysis conducted for
the Transport Rule demonstrates that
the Parkersburg-Marietta area would be
able to attain the PM2.5 standard even in
the absence of either CAIR or the
Transport Rule. See ‘‘Air Quality
Modeling Final Rule Technical Support
Document,’’ App. B, B–62 to B–134.
This modeling is available in the docket
for this proposed redesignation action.
In addition, CAIR remains in place
and enforceable until substituted by a
valid replacement rule. Ohio’s CAIR SIP
was approved on September 25, 2009
(74 FR 48857). As a result of CAIR, EPA
projected that in 2009 emissions of NOX
would decrease from a baseline of
264,000 tpy to 93,000 tpy while in 2010
emissions of SO2 would decrease from
a baseline of 1,373,000 tpy to 298,000
tpy within Ohio. And by 2015, we
project emissions of NOX will decrease
to 83,000 tpy while emissions of SO2
will decrease to 208,000 tpy within
Ohio (https://www.epa.gov/CAIR/
oh.html). The monitoring data used to
demonstrate the area’s attainment of the
1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the April
2010 attainment deadline was also
impacted by CAIR. To the extent that
Ohio is relying on CAIR in its
maintenance plan, the recent directive
from the D.C. Circuit in EME Homer
ensures that the reductions associated
with CAIR will be permanent and
enforceable for the necessary time
period. EPA has been ordered by the
court to develop a new rule and the
opinion makes clear that after
promulgating that new rule EPA must
provide states an opportunity to draft
and submit SIPs to implement that rule.
CAIR thus cannot be replaced until EPA
has promulgated a final rule through a
notice-and-comment rulemaking
process, states have had an opportunity
to draft and submit SIPs, EPA has
reviewed the SIPs to determine if they
can be approved, and EPA has taken
action on the SIPs, including
promulgating a FIP if appropriate. These
steps alone will take many years, even
with EPA and the states acting
expeditiously. The court’s clear
instruction to EPA that it must continue
to administer CAIR until a ‘‘valid
replacement’’ exists provides an
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:06 Nov 29, 2012
Jkt 229001
additional backstop; by definition, any
rule that replaces CAIR and meets the
court’s direction would require upwind
states to have SIPs that eliminate
significant contributions to downwind
nonattainment and prevent interference
with maintenance in downwind areas.
Further, in vacating the Transport
Rule and requiring EPA to continue
administering CAIR, the D.C. Circuit
emphasized that the consequences of
vacating CAIR ‘‘might be more severe
now in light of the reliance interests
accumulated over the intervening four
years.’’ EME Homer, slip op. at 60. The
accumulated reliance interests include
the interests of states who reasonably
assumed they could rely on reductions
associated with CAIR which brought
certain nonattainment areas into
attainment with the NAAQS. If EPA
were prevented from relying on
reductions associated with CAIR in
redesignation actions, states would be
forced to impose additional, redundant
reductions on top of those achieved by
CAIR. EPA believes this is precisely the
type of irrational result the court sought
to avoid by ordering EPA to continue
administering CAIR. For these reasons
also, EPA believes it is appropriate to
allow states to rely on CAIR, and the
existing emissions reductions achieved
by CAIR, as sufficiently permanent and
enforceable for purposes such as
redesignation. Following promulgation
of the replacement rule, EPA will
review SIPs as appropriate to identify
whether there are any issues that need
to be addressed.
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 plan includes a commitment to
continue working with West Virginia to
operate its EPA-approved monitoring
network, as necessary to demonstrate
ongoing compliance with the NAAQS.
Ohio currently does not operate a PM2.5
monitor in Washington County to
monitor the Ohio portion of the
Parkersburg-Marietta area. West Virginia
currently operates one monitor in Wood
County for the Parkersburg-Marietta
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
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
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 mg/m3. In that case, a
study will be conducted to determine if
the emissions trends show increases; if
action is necessary to reverse emissions
increases, Ohio will follow the same
procedures for control selection and
implementation as for an Action Level
Response.
The Action Level Response will be
prompted by any one of the following:
a Warning Level Response study that
shows emissions increases, a weighted
annual mean over a two-year average
that exceeds the standard or a violation
of the standard. If an Action Level
Response is triggered, Ohio will adopt
and implement appropriate control
measures within 18 months from the
end of the year in which monitored air
quality triggering a response occurs.
Ohio’s candidate contingency
measures include the following:
i. ICI Boilers—SO2 and NOX controls;
ii. Process heaters;
iii. EGUS;
E:\FR\FM\30NOP1.SGM
30NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 231 / Friday, November 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules
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 Parkersburg-Marietta 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 Parkersburg-Marietta area as meeting
the requirements of CAA section 175A.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
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 agencies and federal air 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 contained in a SIP.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:06 Nov 29, 2012
Jkt 229001
For budgets to be approvable, they
must meet, at a minimum, EPA’s
adequacy criteria (40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)).
However, the Transportation
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.
The redesignation request that Ohio
submitted for its portion of the
Parkersburg-Marietta area includes a
request for EPA to make an
insignificance finding for NOX and
directly emitted PM2.5 for the Ohio
portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta
PM2.5 nonattainment area. Pursuant to
Section 93.118(e)(4) and 93.109(k) of the
Transportation Conformity Rule, as part
of the review of Ohio’s redesignation
request and maintenance plan
submittal, we have reviewed Ohio’s
justification for the finding of
insignificance for direct PM2.5 and also
for NOX as a precursor of PM2.5 in the
Ohio portion of the ParkersburgMarietta area. EPA agrees with Ohio’s
conclusion that on-road emissions of
PM2.5 and NOX are insignificant for
transportation conformity purposes. We
base our finding on several factors:
—The fact that on December 7, 2009 (74
FR 64075), EPA found these budgets
to be insignificant as part of our
review of the state’s July 16, 2008,
PM2.5 attainment demonstration;
—The fact that the area has been
determined to attain the annual PM2.5
standard, and continues to attain the
standard with the most recent three
years of complete, quality assured
monitoring data;
—The absence of local on-road control
measures; and
—The continued downward trend of onroad NOX and PM2.5 emissions from
2005–2022.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
71393
vehicle contribution of NOX and PM2.5
emissions to the overall PM2.5 emissions
in the Ohio portion of the ParkersburgMarietta 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 Parkersburg-Marietta
PM2.5 area, it is not necessary to
establish PM2.5 and NOX budgets for the
Ohio portion of the ParkersburgMarietta 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. Motor vehicle emissions in
general, for the maintenance period of
2015 and 2022, are low and declining in
the Ohio portion of the area. In 2015 the
percentage contribution to emissions
from the Ohio portion of the area from
motor vehicles is 10.49% and 3.48% for
NOX and PM2.5, respectively. In 2022,
motor vehicles in the Ohio portion of
the area are projected to contribute only
8.92% and 2.14% of 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
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
redesignation request for the Ohio
portion of the area. Therefore motor
vehicle emissions budgets for PM2.5 and
NOX are not required for the
Parkersburg-Marietta 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
emissions budgets for the Ohio portion
of the Parkersburg-Marietta 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
E:\FR\FM\30NOP1.SGM
30NOP1
71394
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 231 / Friday, November 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
emissions of these precursors from
motor vehicles are not significant
contributors to the area’s PM2.5 air
quality problem.
As discussed in section V(4)(c) of this
action, EPA is proposing that if this
approval is finalized in 2013 the area
will continue to maintain the PM2.5
standard through at least 2023.
Consistent with this proposal, EPA is
proposing to determine the
insignificance of motor vehicle
emissions of NOX and PM2.5 as
submitted by the State in its February
29, 2012, maintenance plan for the Ohio
portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta area.
EPA is proposing that the proposed
finding insignificance of these
emissions is consistent with
maintenance of the Ohio portion of the
Parkersburg-Marietta area through 2023.
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 inventory 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 WWW.
All emissions discussed in Table 4
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:06 Nov 29, 2012
Jkt 229001
complete emissions inventories for
PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in the
Parkersburg-Marietta area. Based upon
EPA’s review, we propose to find that
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 Parkersburg-Marietta area has
attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
EPA is proposing to determine that the
entire Parkersburg-Marietta area
continues to attain the 1997 annual
PM2.5 standard using the latest three
years of certified, quality-assured data,
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
Parkersburg-Marietta 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 ParkersburgMarietta 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 February 29, 2012, 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 Parkersburg-Marietta 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 Parkersburg-Marietta 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
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
maintenance plan under section
107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the
status of a geographical area and do not
impose any additional regulatory
requirements on sources beyond those
imposed by state law. A redesignation to
attainment does not in and of itself
create any new requirements, but rather
results in the applicability of
requirements contained in the CAA for
areas that have been redesignated to
attainment. Moreover, the Administrator
is required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
CAA and applicable Federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions,
EPA’s role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of
the CAA. Accordingly, this action
merely approves state law as meeting
Federal requirements and does not
impose additional requirements beyond
those imposed by state law. For that
reason, these actions:
• Are not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993);
• Do not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
• Are certified as not having a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
• Do not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4);
• Do not have Federalism
implications as specified in Executive
Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10,
1999);
• 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).
E:\FR\FM\30NOP1.SGM
30NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 231 / Friday, November 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules
In addition, this rule does not have
tribal implications as specified by
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000), because the SIP is
not approved to apply in Indian country
located in the state, and EPA notes that
it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt
tribal law.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Particulate matter.
40 CFR Part 81
Air pollution control, Environmental
protection, National Parks, Wilderness.
Dated: November 15, 2012.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2012–29012 Filed 11–29–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 271 and 272
[EPA–R06–RCRA–2012–0473; FRL–9744–9]
Texas: Final Authorization of Stateinitiated Changes and Incorporation by
Reference of State Hazardous Waste
Management Program
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with
AGENCY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:06 Nov 29, 2012
Jkt 229001
ACTION:
Proposed rule.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
In the
‘‘Rules and Regulations’’ section of this
Federal Register, the EPA is authorizing
the changes to the Texas program, and
codifying and incorporating by
reference the State’s hazardous waste
program as a direct final rule. The EPA
did not make a proposal prior to the
direct final rule because we believe
these actions are not controversial and
do not expect comments that oppose
them. We have explained the reasons for
this authorization and incorporation by
reference in the preamble to the direct
final rule. Unless we get written
comments which oppose this
authorization and incorporation by
reference during the comment period,
the direct final rule will become
effective on the date it establishes, and
we will not take further action on this
proposal. If we get comments that
oppose these actions, we will withdraw
the direct final rule and it will not take
effect. We will then respond to public
comments in a later final rule based on
this proposal. You may not have another
opportunity for comment. If you want to
comment on this action, you must do so
at this time.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
During a review of Texas’
regulations, the EPA identified a variety
of State-initiated changes to Texas’
hazardous waste program under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act, as amended (RCRA), for which the
State had not previously sought
authorization. The EPA proposes to
authorize the State for the program
changes. In addition, the EPA proposes
to codify in the regulations entitled
‘‘Approved State Hazardous Waste
Management Programs’’, Texas’
authorized hazardous waste program.
The EPA will incorporate by reference
into the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) those provisions of the State
regulations that are authorized and that
the EPA will enforce under RCRA.
DATES: Send written comments by
December 31, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Send written comments to
Alima Patterson, Region 6, Regional
Authorization Coordinator, or Julia
Banks, Codification Coordinator, State/
Tribal Oversight Section (6PD–O),
Multimedia Planning and Permitting
Division, EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross
Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202–2733.
Phone number: (214) 665–8533 or (214)
665–8178. You may also submit
comments electronically or through
hand delivery/courier; please follow the
detailed instructions in the ADDRESSES
section of the direct final rule which is
located in the Rules section of this
Federal Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Alima Patterson, (214) 665–8533.
SUMMARY:
71395
Authority: This action is issued under the
authority of sections 2002(a), 3006, and
7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, and
6974(b).
Dated: October 11, 2012.
Samuel Coleman,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2012–28322 Filed 11–29–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
E:\FR\FM\30NOP1.SGM
30NOP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 231 (Friday, November 30, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 71383-71395]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29012]
[[Page 71383]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[EPA-R05-OAR-2012-0212; FRL-9756-7]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Ohio; Redesignation of the Ohio Portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta
Area to Attainment of the 1997 Annual Standard for Fine Particulate
Matter
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On February 29, 2012, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
submitted a request for EPA to approve the redesignation of the Ohio
portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta West Virginia-Ohio 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 determine that the entire Parkersburg-Marietta area
attains the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard, based on the most
recent three years of certified air quality data. 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 National
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) through 2022 in the area. EPA is
proposing to approve a 2005 emissions inventory for the Ohio portion of
the Parkersburg-Marietta 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 Parkersburg-Marietta
PM2.5 area for transportation conformity purposes; EPA
agrees with this finding and proposes to determine the insignificance
of the 2022 motor vehicle emission budget (MVEB) for the Ohio portion
of the Parkersburg-Marietta area for transportation conformity
purposes.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 31, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2012-0212, by one of the following methods:
1. 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-
2012-0212. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at
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 www.regulations.gov or email. The
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 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
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 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 Anthony Maietta, Environmental
Protection Specialist, at (312) 353-8777 before visiting the Region 5
office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Maietta, Environmental
Protection Specialist, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch
(AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-8777,
maietta.anthony@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
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--EPA may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
[[Page 71384]]
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 Parkersburg-Marietta area to attainment of
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. In addition to EPA's December
2, 2011, determination that the area attained the NAAQS for
PM2.5 by the applicable attainment date based on quality-
assured, certified 2007-2009 ambient air monitoring data (76 FR 75464),
we are proposing to determine that the area continues to attain the
NAAQS for PM2.5, based on quality-assured and certified
ambient air monitoring data for 2009-2011, the most recent three years
of quality-assured data for the area. EPA is proposing to find that
Ohio meets the requirements for redesignation of the Parkersburg-
Marietta 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
Parkersburg-Marietta area from nonattainment to attainment of the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS. This action would not change the legal
designation of the West Virginia portion of the area, which will be
redesignated in a separate rulemaking.
Second, EPA is proposing to approve Ohio's annual PM2.5
maintenance plan for the Parkersburg-Marietta area as a revision to the
Ohio SIP, including the insignificance determination for
PM2.5 and NOX emissions for the mobile source
contribution of the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta area.
Finally, EPA is proposing to approve the 2005 primary
PM2.5, NOX and sulfur dioxide (SO2)
emissions inventories as satisfying the requirement in section
172(c)(3) off the CAA for a current, accurate and comprehensive
emission inventory.
Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve the request from the State
of Ohio to change the designation of Washington County (the Ohio
portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta area) from nonattainment to
attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. This action would
not change the legal designation of the West Virginia portion of the
area, which would be redesignated in a separate rulemaking.
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 Parkersburg-Marietta 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 the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C.
Circuit) remanded this standard to EPA for further consideration. See
American Farm Bureau Federation and National Pork Producers Council, et
al. v. EPA, 559 F.3d 512 (D.C. Cir. 2009). Since the Parkersburg-
Marietta 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 December 2, 2011, EPA issued a final determination that the
entire Parkersburg-Marietta area has attained the 1997 PM2.5
standard by the applicable attainment date (76 FR 75464). Ohio's
original submittal contained complete, quality-assured and certified
air monitoring data for years through 2010. Based upon our review of
complete, quality-assured and certified ambient air monitoring data
from 2009-2011, we are proposing to determine that the area continues
to attain the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Further, preliminary
data for 2012 indicate that the data will continue to show the area in
attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.
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 SIP for the area under section 110(k) of the CAA; (3) the
Administrator determines that the improvement in air quality is due to
permanent and enforceable 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 Parkersburg-Marietta 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 December 2, 2011, EPA
determined that the Parkersburg-Marietta area had attained the 1997
annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date. The
basis and effect of this determination were discussed in
[[Page 71385]]
the proposed (76 FR 43634) and final (76 FR 75464) actions. The
determination was based on quality-assured air quality monitoring data
for 2007-2009 showing the area had met the standard by the attainment
date. The data have been certified by West Virginia, the state in which
the monitors for the area are located.
In this action, we are proposing to determine that the Parkersburg-
Marietta area has attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS based
upon the most recent three years of complete, certified and quality-
assured data, as required by section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. Under
EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 50.7, the annual primary and secondary
PM2.5 standards are met when the annual arithmetic mean
concentration, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR part 50,
appendix N, is less than or equal to 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ at all relevant
monitoring sites in the area.
EPA has reviewed the ambient air quality monitoring data in the
Parkersburg-Marietta area, consistent with the requirements contained
at 40 CFR part 50. EPA's review focused on data recorded in the EPA Air
Quality System (AQS) database for the Parkersburg-Marietta
PM2.5 nonattainment area from 2009-2011. EPA also considered
preliminary data for 2012, which have not yet been certified.
The Parkersburg-Marietta area has one monitor located in Wood
County, West Virginia, that reported a design value from 2009-2011, the
most recent three years of data, for PM2.5 that measured
12.3 [mu]g/m\3\ for the 1997 annual standard. The monitor in the
Parkersburg-Marietta area recorded complete data in accordance with
criteria set forth by EPA in 40 CFR part 50, appendix N, where a
complete year of air quality data comprises four calendar quarters,
with each quarter containing data with at least 75 percent capture of
the scheduled sampling days. Available data are considered to be
sufficient for comparison to the NAAQS if three consecutive complete
years of data exist.
Table 1--The 1997 Annual PM2.5 Design Values for the Parkersburg-Marietta Monitor With Complete Data for the
2007-2009, 2008-2010 and 2009-2011 Design Values \1\ in [mu]g/m\3\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual standard Annual standard Annual standard
design value 2007- design value 2008- design value 2009-
County Monitor 2009 ([mu]g/m\3\) 2010 ([mu]g/m\3\) 2011 ([mu]g/m\3\)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wood, WV......................... Neale Elementary 13.7 13.1 12.3
School 541071002.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA's review of monitoring data from the 2007-2009, 2008-2010 and
2009-2011 monitoring periods supports EPA's determination that the
Parkersburg-Marietta area has monitored attainment for each time
period. Additionally, because the preliminary monitoring data for 2012
are consistent with the area's continued attainment, EPA proposes to
determine that the Parkersburg-Marietta area has attained the 1997
annual PM2.5 standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ As defined in 40 CFR part 50 appendix N(1)(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Parkersburg-Marietta 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). We are proposing to find that all applicable
requirements of the Ohio SIP for purposes of redesignation have been,
in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). As discussed below, in
this action EPA is proposing to approve Ohio's 2005 emissions inventory
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 approved or will be approved by the time of final
rulemaking.
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
[[Page 71386]]
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. The requirements of section 110(a)(2),
however, are statewide requirements that are not linked to the
PM2.5 nonattainment status of the Parkersburg-Marietta 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
Parkersburg-Marietta 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 request, the
applicable section 172 SIP requirements for the Ohio portion of the
Parkersburg-Marietta area are contained in section 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 we are determining that
the area has attained in this action, no additional measures are needed
to provide for attainment, and section 172(c)(1) requirements are no
longer considered to be applicable as long as the area continues to
attain the standard until redesignation. (40 CFR 51.1004(c).)
The Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) requirement under section
172(c)(2) is defined as progress that must be made toward attainment.
This requirement is not relevant for purposes of redesignation because
the Parkersburg-Marietta 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 Parkersburg-Marietta 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 request. As discussed below in section V.6., EPA is
approving the 2005 base year inventory as meeting the section 172(c)(3)
emissions inventory requirement for the Ohio portion of the
Parkersburg-Marietta 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 Parkersburg-Marietta 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 Parkersburg-Marietta 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
[[Page 71387]]
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 Parkersburg-Marietta 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 Parkersburg-Marietta 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 Parkersburg-
Marietta 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 Parkersburg-Marietta
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 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 Parkersburg-Marietta area are currently disapproved,
conditionally approved or partially approved. If EPA approves Ohio's
Parkersburg-Marietta 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 Parkersburg-Marietta 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
Parkersburg-Marietta area as nonattainment, and 2008, one of the years
the Parkersburg-Marietta 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 Parkersburg-Marietta 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 less NOX with
the following percentage decreases: 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 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
[[Page 71388]]
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 in 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
PM2.5 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.
1. Control Measures in Contributing Areas
Given the significance of sulfates and nitrates in the Parkersburg-
Marietta 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.
CAIR and the Transport Rule. On May 12, 2005, EPA published the
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), which requires significant reductions
in emissions of SO2 and NOX from electric
generating units to limit the interstate transport of these pollutants
and the ozone and fine particulate matter they form in the atmosphere.
See 76 FR 70093. The D.C. Circuit initially vacated CAIR, North
Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008), but ultimately remanded
the rule to EPA without vacatur to preserve the environmental benefits
provided by CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir.
2008). In response to the court's decision, EPA issued the Transport
Rule, also known as the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, to address
interstate transport of NOX and SO2 in the
eastern United States. See 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). On August 21,
2012, the D.C. Circuit issued a decision to vacate the Transport Rule.
In that decision, it also ordered EPA to continue administering CAIR
``pending the promulgation of a valid replacement.'' EME Homer
Generation, L.P. v. EPA, No. 11-1302 (D.C. Cir., August 21, 2012).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The court's judgment is not final, as of October 31, 2012,
as the mandate has not yet been issued.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In light of these unique circumstances and for the reasons
explained below, EPA proposes to approve the redesignation request and
the related SIP revision for Washington County in Ohio, including
Ohio's plan for maintaining attainment of the PM2.5 standard
in the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta Area. The air quality
modeling analysis conducted for the Transport Rule demonstrates that
the Parkersburg-Marietta area would be able to attain the
PM2.5 standard even in the absence of either CAIR or the
Transport Rule. See ``Air Quality Modeling Final Rule Technical Support
Document,'' App. B, B-62 to B-134. This modeling is available in the
docket for this proposed redesignation action.
In addition, CAIR remains in place and enforceable until
substituted by a valid replacement rule. Ohio's CAIR SIP was approved
on September 25, 2009 (74 FR 48857). As a result of CAIR, EPA projected
that in 2009 emissions of NOX would decrease from a baseline
of 264,000 tons per year (tpy) to 93,000 tpy while in 2010 emissions of
SO2 would decrease from a baseline of 1,373,000 tpy to
298,000 tpy within Ohio. And by 2015, we projected emissions of
NOX would decrease to 83,000 tpy while emissions of
SO2 would decrease to 208,000 tpy within Ohio (https://www.epa.gov/CAIR/oh.html). The monitoring data used to demonstrate the
area's attainment of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the
April 2010 attainment deadline was also impacted by CAIR. To the extent
that Ohio is relying on CAIR in its maintenance plan, the recent
directive from the D.C. Circuit in EME Homer ensures that the
reductions associated with CAIR will be permanent and enforceable for
the necessary time period. EPA has been ordered by the court to develop
a new rule and the opinion makes clear that after promulgating that new
rule EPA must provide states an opportunity to draft and submit SIPs to
implement that rule. CAIR thus cannot be replaced until EPA has
promulgated a final rule through a notice-and-comment rulemaking
process, states have had an opportunity to draft and submit SIPs, EPA
has reviewed the SIPs to determine if they can be approved, and EPA has
taken action on the SIPs, including promulgating a Federal
Implementation Plan (FIP) if appropriate. These steps alone will take
many years, even with EPA and the states acting expeditiously. The
court's clear instruction to EPA that it must continue to administer
CAIR until a ``valid replacement'' exists provides an additional
backstop; by definition, any rule that replaces CAIR and meets the
court's direction would require upwind states to have SIPs that
eliminate significant contributions to downwind nonattainment and
prevent interference with maintenance in downwind areas.
Further, in vacating the Transport Rule and requiring EPA to
continue administering CAIR, the D.C. Circuit emphasized that the
consequences of vacating CAIR ``might be more severe now in light of
the reliance interests accumulated over the intervening four years.''
EME Homer, slip op. at 60. The accumulated reliance interests include
the interests of states who reasonably assumed they could rely on
reductions associated with CAIR which brought certain nonattainment
areas into attainment with the NAAQS. If EPA were prevented from
relying on reductions associated with CAIR in redesignation actions,
states would be
[[Page 71389]]
forced to impose additional, redundant reductions on top of those
achieved by CAIR. EPA believes this is precisely the type of irrational
result the court sought to avoid by ordering EPA to continue
administering CAIR. For these reasons also, EPA believes it is
appropriate to allow states to rely on CAIR, and the existing emissions
reductions achieved by CAIR, as sufficiently permanent and enforceable
for purposes such as redesignation. Following promulgation of the
replacement rule, EPA will review SIPs as appropriate to identify
whether there are any issues that need to be addressed.
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
Parkersburg-Marietta area monitored attainment of the standard.
Electric Generating Unit (EGU) SO2 and NOX
emissions were derived from EPA's Clean Air Market's acid rain
database. These emissions reflect Ohio 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 in the Parkersburg-Marietta area for 2005
were taken from periodic emissions inventories.\3\ These 2005 area
source emission estimates were extrapolated to 2008. Source growth
factors were supplied by the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium
(LADCO).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Periodic emission inventories are derived by states every
three years and reported to the EPA. These periodic emission
inventories are required by the Federal Consolidated Emissions
Reporting Rule, codified at 40 CFR Subpart A. EPA revised these and
other emission reporting requirements in a final rule published on
December 17, 2008, at 73 FR 76539.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nonroad mobile source emissions were extrapolated from nonroad
mobile source emissions reported in EPA's 2005 National Emissions
Inventory (NEI). Contractors were employed by LADCO to estimate
emissions for commercial marine vessels and railroads.
On-road mobile source emissions were calculated using EPA's mobile
source emission factor model, MOVES2010a, in conjunction with
transportation model results developed by the local Metropolitan
Planning Organization (MPO), the Wood-Washington-Wirt Interstate
Planning Commission (WWW).
All emissions estimates discussed below were documented in the
submittal and appendices of Ohio's redesignation request submittal from
February 29, 2012. 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 number EPA-R05-OAR-2012-0212,
which includes digital copies of Ohio's submittal.
Emissions data in tpy for the entire Parkersburg-Marietta area are
shown in Tables 2 and 3, below.
Table 2--Summary of 2005 Emissions for the Entire Parkersburg-Marietta Area by Source Type (tpy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2 NOX PM2.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point (EGU)............................................ 193,252.79 28,455.23 1,745.04
Non-EGU................................................ 16,055.73 3,332.23 847.6
On-road................................................ 58.79 5,200.52 173.49
Nonroad................................................ 74.64 870.68 80.7
Area................................................... 823.36 1,047.18 1,213.27
MAR.................................................... 141.75 2,547.49 86.64
--------------------------------------------------------
Total Parkersburg-Marietta......................... 210,407.06 41,453.33 4,146.74
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3--Comparison of 2005 Emissions From the Non-Attainment Year and 2008 Emissions for an Attainment Year for
the Entire Parkersburg-Marietta Area (tpy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net change (2005-
2005 2008 2008)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5.................................................. 4,146.74 3,796.59 -350.15
NOX.................................................... 41,453.33 35,756.31 -5,967.02
SO2.................................................... 210,407.06 159,593.17 -50,813.89
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3 shows that in the entire Parkersburg-Marietta area reduced
direct PM2.5 emissions by 350.15 tons, NOX
emissions by 5,967.02 tons and SO2 emissions by 50,813.89
tons between 2005, a nonattainment year, and 2008, an attainment year.
Emissions data in tpy for Washington County, Ohio (the Ohio portion
of the Parkersburg-Marietta area) are shown in Tables 4, and 5, below.
Table 4--Summary of 2005 Non-Attainment Year Emissions for the Ohio Portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta Area by
Source Type (tpy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2 NOX PM2.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point (EGU)............................................... 140,957.01 16,137.09 384.81
Non-EGU................................................... 5,200.90 1,748.86 472.37
On-road................................................... 26.97 2,687.09 90.45
Nonroad................................................... 41.04 425.97 35.53
Area...................................................... 9.78 168.44 148.43
[[Page 71390]]
MAR....................................................... 44.48 500.78 11.76
-----------------------------------------------------
Total Parkersburg-Marietta............................ 146,280.18 21,668.23 1,143.35
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 5--Comparison of 2005 Emissions From the Non-Attainment Year and 2008 Emissions for an Attainment Year for
the Ohio Portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta Area (tpy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net change (2005-
2005 2008 2008)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5..................................................... 1,143.35 1,203.35 +60.00
NOX....................................................... 21,668.23 22,365.96 +697.73
SO2....................................................... 146,280.18 138,786.24 -7,493.94
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 5 shows that while NOX and PM2.5
emissions rose by 697.73 tpy and 60 tpy, respectively, the Ohio portion
of the Parkersburg-Marietta area reduced SO2 emissions by
7,493.94 tpy between 2005, a nonattainment year and 2008, an attainment
year. Despite NOX and PM2.5 emissions increasing
in the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta area between 2005 and
2008, the area demonstrated attainment of the NAAQS in 2008, as the
combined Parkersburg-Marietta area reduced NOX emissions by
5,697 tpy and PM2.5 by 350.15 tpy between 2005 and 2008. The
state submission includes multiple lines of evidence to show that even
with the increase in NOX and PM2.5 the area has
still reached attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and
will continue to maintain that designation into the future due to
multiple actions on the state's behalf. The weight of evidence
submitted by the state contains modeling, monitoring and trend
analysis. The trend analysis for the area shows a steady trend of
declining PM2.5 monitored data, with a significant drop in
concentrations beginning in 2006. Since meteorology can play a large
part in dispersion of PM2.5, which can greatly affect
monitored concentrations, LADCO and the state have normalized the data
to remove meteorological effects using a statistical analysis, the
state has shown in their submission that the concentrations observed
are due to real reductions in PM2.5 and its precursors, and
not just meteorological effects. In addition, control of emissions from
local power plants through local and national programs have impacted
and will continue to impact the area, as we will describe below.
In 2008, American Electric Power's Muskingum River Station in
Washington County, Ohio, implemented the continuous operation of an
advanced NOX control device on their largest of five units
(unit 5), as part of a federally-enforceable consent decree.
The Muskingum River Station is also required to retire, repower or
retrofit all remaining units by 2015. Initial plans provided by the
Muskingum River Station to Ohio indicate that unit 5 will also
install a flue gas desulfurization device in addition to its consent
decree-mandated NOX control device. Another local power
plant, American Municipal Power's R.H. Gorsuch Station in Washington
County, permanently shut down at the end of 2010, and would require an
approvable permit to restart. This facility operated four 53 megawatt
(MW) units. The result of federally-mandated consent decree actions and
the shutdown of a power plant demonstrate that NOX
reductions from power plants in the Parkersburg-Marietta area have
occurred and will continue to occur in the future.
Based on the information summarized above, Ohio has adequately
demonstrated that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent
and enforceable emissions reductions.
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 Parkersburg-Marietta 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,'' (Calcagni Memorandum) provides additional guidance on the
content of a maintenance plan. The memorandum states that a maintenance
plan should address the following items: the attainment emissions
inventories, a maintenance demonstration showing maintenance for the
ten years of the maintenance period, a commitment to maintain the
existing monitoring network, factors and procedures to be used for
verification of continued attainment of the NAAQS and a contingency
plan to prevent or correct future violations of the NAAQS.
b. Attainment Inventory
Ohio developed emissions inventories for NOX, direct
PM2.5 and SO2 for 2008, one of the years in the
period during which the Parkersburg-Marietta area monitored attainment
of the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard, as described previously.
The attainment levels of emissions for the entire area, as well as the
attainment levels of emissions for the Ohio portion of the area were
summarized in Tables 3 and 5, above.
[[Page 71391]]
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
Parkersburg-Marietta area, as required by section 175A of the CAA.
Section 175A requires a State seeking redesignation to attainment to
submit a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of the NAAQS in
the area ``for at least 10 years after the redesignation.'' EPA has
interpreted this as a showing of maintenance ``for a period of ten
years following redesignation.'' Calcagni Memorandum, p. 9. Where the
emissions inventory method of showing maintenance is used, its purpose
is to show that emissions during the maintenance period will not
increase over the attainment year inventory. Calcagni Memorandum, pp.
9-10.
As discussed in detail in the section below, the state's
maintenance plan submission expressly documents that the area's
emissions inventories will remain below the attainment year inventories
through 2022. In addition, for the reasons set forth below, EPA
believes that the state's submission, in conjunction with additional
supporting information, further demonstrates that the area will
continue to maintain the PM2.5 standard at least through
2023. Thus, if EPA finalizes its proposed approval of the redesignation
request and maintenance plans in 2013, it is based on a showing, in
accordance with section 175A, that the state's maintenance plan
provides for maintenance for at least ten years after redesignation.
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), and 68 FR 25413, 25430-25432 (May 12, 2003).
Ohio's submission uses emissions inventory projections for the
years 2015 and 2022 to demonstrate maintenance for the Ohio portion of
the Parkersburg-Marietta area. The projected emissions were estimated
by Ohio, with assistance from LADCO and WWW using the MOVES2010a model.
Projection 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 emissions are based on emissions estimates from the
2018 LADCO modeling. Table 7 shows the 2008 attainment base year
emission estimates and the 2015 and 2022 emission projections for the
entire tri-state Parkersburg-Marietta area that Ohio provided in its
February 29, 2012, submission.
Table 6--Comparison of 2008, 2015 and 2022 NOX, Direct PM2.5 and SO2 Emission Totals (tpy) for the Ohio Portion
of the Parkersburg-Marietta Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO2 NOX PM2.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008 (baseline)........................................ 138,786.24 22,365.96 1,203.35
2015................................................... 67,625.84 11,439.41 1,198.61
2022................................................... 37,351.17 6,417.53 1,181.01
Change................................................. -101,435.07 -15,948.43 -22.34
2008-2022.............................................. \1\ 73 \1\ 71 \1\ 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ % decrease.
Table 6 shows that the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta
area will reduce NOX emissions by 15,948.43 tpy between 2008
and the maintenance projection to 2022, direct PM2.5
emissions by 22.34 tpy, and reduced SO2 emissions by
101,435.07 tpy between 2008 and 2022. The 2022 projected emissions
levels are significantly below attainment year inventory levels, and
based on the rate of decline, it is highly improbable that any
increases in these levels will occur in 2023 and beyond.
EPA has done analysis of the areas emissions, and has concluded
that the Parkersburg-Marietta area's emissions can be expected to stay
well below the level of emissions from their attainment year emissions
inventory. First, EPA has determined that the overall net rate of
decline in emissions of PM2.5, NOX and
SO2 projected from the attainment year 2008 through 2022 are
approximately 1.59 tpy, 1139.17 tpy and 7246.10 tpy, respectively. EPA
has also determined that no control measures taken into account in the
projected analysis will end in 2023, nor does EPA expect any change in
growth for the Parkersburg-Marietta area for the maintenance year 2023.
The net rates of decline, coupled with continued control and growth
factors, indicate that emissions inventory levels will not only
significantly decline between 2008 and 2022, but that the reductions
will continue into 2023 and beyond. Second, EPA notes that the rate of
emissions decline is consistent with monitored and projected air
quality trends. As Table 1 demonstrates, monitored PM2.5
design value concentrations in Parkersburg-Marietta are well below the
NAAQS in the years beyond 2008, an attainment year for the area.
Further, those values are trending downward as time progresses. Based
on the future projections of emissions in 2015 and 2022 showing
significant emissions reductions in direct PM2.5,
NOX and SO2, it is very unlikely that monitored
PM2.5 values in 2023 and beyond will show violations of the
NAAQS. Additionally, the 2009-2011 design value of 12.3 [mu]g/m\3\
provides a sufficient margin in the unlikely event emissions rise
slightly in the future. We are proposing to find the mobile source
contribution to these emissions insignificant (see section V(5) of this
action for further discussion), and the mobile source contribution is
expected to remain insignificant in 2023 and beyond because of fleet
turnover and engine emission standards in upcoming years that will
result in cleaner vehicles and cleaner fuels.
As described in section V(3)(b) of this action, the result of
federally-mandated consent decree actions and the shutdown of a power
plant demonstrate that NOX reductions from power plants in
the Parkersburg-Marietta area have occurred and are mandated to
continue to occur in 2023 and beyond. Thus, the emissions inventories
set forth in Table 6 show that the area will continue to maintain the
annual PM2.5 standard during the maintenance period and at
least through 2023. These consent decree actions are significant
controls of NOX and SO2, along with
implementation of Ohio's SIP approved CAIR controls for the area.
[[Page 71392]]
In light of the unique circumstances surrounding CAIR and the
Transport Rule discussed in section V(3)(a)(i)(1) of this action, and
for the reasons explained below, EPA proposes to approve the
redesignation request and the related SIP revision for Washington
County in Ohio, including Ohio's plan for maintaining attainment of the
PM2.5 standard in the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-
Marietta Area. The air quality modeling analysis conducted for the
Transport Rule demonstrates that the Parkersburg-Marietta area would be
able to attain the PM2.5 standard even in the absence of
either CAIR or the Transport Rule. See ``Air Quality Modeling Final
Rule Technical Support Document,'' App. B, B-62 to B-134. This modeling
is available in the docket for this proposed redesignation action.
In addition, CAIR remains in place and enforceable until
substituted by a valid replacement rule. Ohio's CAIR SIP was approved
on September 25, 2009 (74 FR 48857). As a result of CAIR, EPA projected
that in 2009 emissions of NOX would decrease from a baseline
of 264,000 tpy to 93,000 tpy while in 2010 emissions of SO2
would decrease from a baseline of 1,373,000 tpy to 298,000 tpy within
Ohio. And by 2015, we project emissions of NOX will decrease
to 83,000 tpy while emissions of SO2 will decrease to
208,000 tpy within Ohio (https://www.epa.gov/CAIR/oh.html). The
monitoring data used to demonstrate the area's attainment of the 1997
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the April 2010 attainment deadline was
also impacted by CAIR. To the extent that Ohio is relying on CAIR in
its maintenance plan, the recent directive from the D.C. Circuit in EME
Homer ensures that the reductions associated with CAIR will be
permanent and enforceable for the necessary time period. EPA has been
ordered by the court to develop a new rule and the opinion makes clear
that after promulgating that new rule EPA must provide states an
opportunity to draft and submit SIPs to implement that rule. CAIR thus
cannot be replaced until EPA has promulgated a final rule through a
notice-and-comment rulemaking process, states have had an opportunity
to draft and submit SIPs, EPA has reviewed the SIPs to determine if
they can be approved, and EPA has taken action on the SIPs, including
promulgating a FIP if appropriate. These steps alone will take many
years, even with EPA and the states acting expeditiously. The court's
clear instruction to EPA that it must continue to administer CAIR until
a ``valid replacement'' exists provides an additional backstop; by
definition, any rule that replaces CAIR and meets the court's direction
would require upwind states to have SIPs that eliminate significant
contributions to downwind nonattainment and prevent interference with
maintenance in downwind areas.
Further, in vacating the Transport Rule and requiring EPA to
continue administering CAIR, the D.C. Circuit emphasized that the
consequences of vacating CAIR ``might be more severe now in light of
the reliance interests accumulated over the intervening four years.''
EME Homer, slip op. at 60. The accumulated reliance interests include
the interests of states who reasonably assumed they could rely on
reductions associated with CAIR which brought certain nonattainment
areas into attainment with the NAAQS. If EPA were prevented from
relying on reductions associated with CAIR in redesignation actions,
states would be forced to impose additional, redundant reductions on
top of those achieved by CAIR. EPA believes this is precisely the type
of irrational result the court sought to avoid by ordering EPA to
continue administering CAIR. For these reasons also, EPA believes it is
appropriate to allow states to rely on CAIR, and the existing emissions
reductions achieved by CAIR, as sufficiently permanent and enforceable
for purposes such as redesignation. Following promulgation of the
replacement rule, EPA will review SIPs as appropriate to identify
whether there are any issues that need to be addressed.
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 plan includes a commitment to continue working with West
Virginia to operate its EPA-approved monitoring network, as necessary
to demonstrate ongoing compliance with the NAAQS. Ohio currently does
not operate a PM2.5 monitor in Washington County to monitor
the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta area. West Virginia
currently operates one monitor in Wood County for the Parkersburg-
Marietta 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;
[[Page 71393]]
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 Parkersburg-Marietta 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
Parkersburg-Marietta area as meeting the requirements of CAA section
175A.
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 agencies and federal air 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 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 Transportation
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.
The redesignation request that Ohio submitted for its portion of
the Parkersburg-Marietta area includes a request for EPA to make an
insignificance finding for NOX and directly emitted
PM2.5 for the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta
PM2.5 nonattainment area. Pursuant to Section 93.118(e)(4)
and 93.109(k) of the Transportation Conformity Rule, as part of the
review of Ohio's redesignation request and maintenance plan submittal,
we have reviewed Ohio's justification for the finding of insignificance
for direct PM2.5 and also for NOX as a precursor
of PM2.5 in the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta
area. EPA agrees with Ohio's conclusion that on-road emissions of
PM2.5 and NOX are insignificant for
transportation conformity purposes. We base our finding on several
factors:
--The fact that on December 7, 2009 (74 FR 64075), EPA found these
budgets to be insignificant as part of our review of the state's July
16, 2008, PM2.5 attainment demonstration;
--The fact that the area has been determined to attain the annual
PM2.5 standard, and continues to attain the standard with
the most recent three years of complete, quality assured monitoring
data;
--The absence of local on-road control measures; and
--The continued downward trend of on-road NOX and
PM2.5 emissions from 2005-2022.
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 Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-
Marietta 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 Parkersburg-Marietta
PM2.5 area, it is not necessary to establish
PM2.5 and NOX budgets for the Ohio portion of the
Parkersburg-Marietta 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. Motor vehicle emissions in general, for the maintenance
period of 2015 and 2022, are low and declining in the Ohio portion of
the area. In 2015 the percentage contribution to emissions from the
Ohio portion of the area from motor vehicles is 10.49% and 3.48% for
NOX and PM2.5, respectively. In 2022, motor
vehicles in the Ohio portion of the area are projected to contribute
only 8.92% and 2.14% of 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 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 redesignation request for the Ohio portion of the area.
Therefore motor vehicle emissions budgets for PM2.5 and
NOX are not required for the Parkersburg-Marietta 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 emissions
budgets for the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta 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
[[Page 71394]]
emissions of these precursors from motor vehicles are not significant
contributors to the area's PM2.5 air quality problem.
As discussed in section V(4)(c) of this action, EPA is proposing
that if this approval is finalized in 2013 the area will continue to
maintain the PM2.5 standard through at least 2023.
Consistent with this proposal, EPA is proposing to determine the
insignificance of motor vehicle emissions of NOX and
PM2.5 as submitted by the State in its February 29, 2012,
maintenance plan for the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta area.
EPA is proposing that the proposed finding insignificance of these
emissions is consistent with maintenance of the Ohio portion of the
Parkersburg-Marietta area through 2023.
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 inventory 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 WWW.
All emissions discussed in Table 4 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
Parkersburg-Marietta area. Based upon EPA's review, we propose to find
that 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 Parkersburg-Marietta area
has attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is proposing
to determine that the entire Parkersburg-Marietta area continues to
attain the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard using the latest three
years of certified, quality-assured data, 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
Parkersburg-Marietta 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 Parkersburg-Marietta 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 February 29, 2012, 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 Parkersburg-
Marietta 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
Parkersburg-Marietta 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 attainment does not in and of
itself create any new requirements, but rather results in the
applicability of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have
been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions
of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40
CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to
approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, these actions:
Are not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
Do not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
Are certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
Do not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
Do not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
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).
[[Page 71395]]
In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000),
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter.
40 CFR Part 81
Air pollution control, Environmental protection, National Parks,
Wilderness.
Dated: November 15, 2012.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2012-29012 Filed 11-29-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
