Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio and Indiana; Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH; Ohio and Indiana 1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan Revisions to Approved Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets, 6035-6041 [2013-01733]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 19 / Tuesday, January 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 8. Taking of Private Property This rule will not affect a taking of private property or otherwise have taking implications under Executive Order 12630, Governmental Actions and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights. 9. Civil Justice Reform This rule meets applicable standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform, to minimize litigation, eliminate ambiguity, and reduce burden. 10. Protection of Children We have analyzed this rule under Executive Order 13045, Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks. This rule is not an economically significant rule and will not create an environmental risk to health or risk to safety that may disproportionately affect children. 11. Indian Tribal Governments This rule does not have tribal implications under Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. 12. Energy Effects This action is not a ‘‘significant energy action’’ under Executive Order 13211, Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use. sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with 13. Technical Standards This rule does not use technical standards. Therefore, we did not consider the use of voluntary consensus standards. 14. Environment We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security Management Directive 023–01 and Commandant Instruction M16475.lD, which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have concluded this action is one of a category of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment. This rule involves establishing regulations for a safety zone. This rule is categorically excluded from further review under paragraph 34(g) of Figure 2–1 of the Commandant VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:39 Jan 28, 2013 Jkt 229001 Instruction. An environmental analysis checklist supporting this determination and a Categorical Exclusion Determination are available in the docket where indicated under ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or information that may lead to the discovery of a significant environmental impact from this rule. List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways. For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard is amending 33 CFR part 165 as follows: PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 33 U.S.C 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. Chapter 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0171.1. 2. Add § 165.T17–1088 to read as follows: ■ § 165.T17–1088 Safety Zone; MODU KULLUK, Ocean Bay, Sitkalidak Island and Shelikof Strait, Alaska. (a) Location. The following areas are safety zones: All navigable waters, from the surface to the seabed, within one nautical mile of the MODU KULLUK, a large ocean-going drill vessel, while it is aground in the vicinity of Ocean Bay and Partition Cove, Sitkalidak Island, Alaska, in approximate position 57 degrees, 05.4′ N; 153 degrees, 06.1′ W and all navigable waters, from surface to seabed, within 500 yards of the MODU KULLUK, once it is floating free from the seabed including times that it is under tow and at anchor in the vicinity of Kodiak Island and Kiliuda Bay, Alaska. (b) Effective date. The safety zone is effective beginning January 6, 2013, and terminates at 11:59 p.m. on March 31, 2013. Enforcement of this safety zone may end earlier if ordered by the Captain of the Port, Western Alaska. (c) Regulations. The general regulations governing safety zones contained in § 165.23 apply to all vessels operating within the areas described in paragraph (a). In addition to the general regulations, the following provisions apply to this safety zone: (1) All persons and vessels shall comply with the instructions of the Captain of the Port (COTP) or designated on-scene representative, consisting of commissioned, warrant, PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 6035 and petty officers of the Coast Guard. Upon being hailed by a U.S. Coast Guard vessel by siren, radio, flashing light or other means, the operator of a vessel shall proceed as directed by the COTP’s designated on-scene representative. (2) Entry into the safety zone is prohibited unless authorized by the COTP or his designated on-scene representative. Any persons desiring to enter the safety zone must contact the designated on-scene representative on VHF channel 16 (156.800 MHz) and receive permission prior to entering. (3) If permission is granted to transit within the safety zone, all persons and vessels must comply with the instructions of the designated on-scene representative. (4) The COTP will notify the maritime and general public by marine information broadcast during the period of time that the safety zones are in force including notification that the MODU KULLUK is free from the ocean bottom and the subsequent reduction in size of the safety zone by providing notice in accordance with 33 CFR 165.7. (d) Penalties. Persons and vessels violating this rule are subject to the penalties set forth in 33 U.S.C. 1232 and 50 U.S.C. 192. Dated: January 6, 2013. P. Mehler, III, Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, Western Alaska. [FR Doc. 2013–01794 Filed 1–28–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 9110–04–P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 52 [EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0648; EPA–R05– OAR–2012–0834; FRL–9773–5] Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio and Indiana; Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH; Ohio and Indiana 1997 8-Hour Ozone Maintenance Plan Revisions to Approved Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Direct final rule. AGENCY: EPA is approving the request by Ohio and Indiana to revise the Cincinnati-Hamilton 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance air quality State Implementation Plans (SIPs) to replace the previously approved motor vehicle emissions budgets (budgets) with budgets developed using EPA’s Motor SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\29JAR1.SGM 29JAR1 sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with 6036 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 19 / Tuesday, January 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES) emissions model. The Ohio and Indiana portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton area include the Ohio Counties of Butler, Clermont, Clinton, Hamilton and Warren, Ohio, and Lawrenceburg Township in Dearborn County, Indiana. Ohio submitted the SIP revision request to EPA on June 29, 2012. Indiana submitted the SIP revision request for parallel processing in a letter dated October 12, 2012, and followed up with a final submittal on December 11, 2012. Ohio and Indiana have submitted identical budgets which cover the Ohio and Indiana portions of the CincinnatiHamilton 1997 ozone maintenance area. DATES: This direct final rule will be effective April 1, 2013, unless EPA receives adverse comments by February 28, 2013. If adverse comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take effect. ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Nos. EPA–R05– OAR–2012–0648 for Ohio and EPA– R05–OAR–2012–0834 for Indiana, 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, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2012– 0648 and EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0834. 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 VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:39 Jan 28, 2013 Jkt 229001 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. 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: Throughout this document whenever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section is arranged as follows: I. What is EPA approving? II. What is the background for this action? a. SIP Budgets and Transportation Conformity b. Prior Approval of Budgets PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 c. The MOVES Emissions Model and Regional Transportation Conformity Grace Period d. Submission of New Budgets Based on MOVES2010a III. What are the criteria for approval? IV. What is EPA’s analysis of the State’s submittal? a. The Revised Inventories b. Approvability of the MOVES2010abased Budgets c. Applicability of MOBILE6.2-based Budgets V. What action is EPA taking? VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews I. What is EPA approving? EPA is approving new MOVES2010abased budgets for the Ohio and Indiana portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton, Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana, 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance area. The Ohio and Indiana portions of the CincinnatiHamilton area were redesignated to attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard effective May 11, 2010 (75 FR 26118), and MOBILE6.2-based budgets were approved in that action. The newly submitted MOVES2010a-based budgets will replace the existing MOBILE6.2based budgets in the Ohio and Indiana 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plans and must then be used in future transportation conformity analyses for the area. At that time, the previously approved MOBILE6.2 based budgets would no longer be applicable for transportation conformity purposes. The Ohio and Indiana portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance area must use the MOVES2010a-based budgets starting on the effective date of this rulemaking. See the official release of the MOVES2010 emissions model (75 FR 9411–9414, March 2, 2010) for background, and section II.(c) below for details. II. What is the background for this action? a. SIP Budgets and Transportation Conformity Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), states are required to submit, at various times, control strategy SIP revisions and maintenance plans for nonattainment and maintenance areas for a given National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS). These emission control strategy SIP revisions (e.g., reasonable further progress (RFP) and attainment demonstration SIP revisions) and maintenance plans include budgets of on-road mobile source emissions for criteria pollutants and/or their precursors to address pollution from cars, trucks, and other on-road vehicles. These mobile source SIP budgets are the portions of the total emissions that are allocated to on-road vehicle use that, E:\FR\FM\29JAR1.SGM 29JAR1 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 19 / Tuesday, January 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with together with emissions from other sources in the area, will provide for attainment or maintenance if they are not exceeded. The budget serves as a ceiling on emissions from an area’s planned transportation system. For more information about budgets, see the preamble to the November 24, 1993, transportation conformity rule (58 FR 62188). Under section 176(c) of the CAA, transportation plans, Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs), and transportation projects must ‘‘conform’’ to (i.e., be consistent with) the SIP before they can be adopted or approved. Conformity to the SIP means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing air quality violations, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS or delay an interim milestone. The transportation conformity regulations can be found at 40 CFR part 51 subpart T, and part 93. In general, before budgets can be used in conformity determinations, EPA must affirmatively find the budgets adequate. However, budgets that are replacing approved budgets must be found adequate and approved before budgets can replace older budgets. If the submitted SIP budgets are meant to replace budgets for the same purpose, as is the case with Ohio’s and Indiana’s MOVES2010a 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan budgets, EPA must approve the revised SIP and budgets, and must affirm that they are adequate at the same time. Once EPA approves revised budgets into the SIP, they must be used by state and Federal agencies in determining whether transportation activities conform to the SIP as required by section 176(c) of the CAA. EPA’s substantive criteria for determining the adequacy of budgets are set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). b. Prior Approval of Budgets EPA had previously approved budgets for the Ohio and Indiana portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton, 8-hour ozone maintenance area for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) for the year 2015 and 2020 on May 11, 2010 (75 FR 26118). These budgets were based on EPA’s MOBILE6.2 emissions model. The ozone maintenance plan established 2015 and 2020 budgets for the Ohio and Indiana portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton, area. The 2015 approved budgets of 31.73 tons per day (tpd) for VOCs and 49.00 tpd for NOX and the 2020 budgets of 28.82 tpd VOCs and 34.39 tpd NOX were approved in the May 11, 2010, rulemaking. These budgets demonstrated a reduction in emissions VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:39 Jan 28, 2013 Jkt 229001 from the monitored attainment year and included a margin of safety. c. The MOVES Emissions Model and Regional Transportation Conformity Grace Period The MOVES model is EPA’s state of the art tool for estimating highway emissions. The model is based on analyses of millions of emission test results and considerable advances in the agency’s understanding of vehicle emissions. MOVES incorporates the latest emissions data, more sophisticated calculation algorithms, increased user flexibility, new software design, and significant new capabilities relative to those reflected in MOBILE6.2. EPA announced the release of MOVES2010 in March 2010 (75 FR 9411). EPA subsequently released two minor model revisions: MOVES2010a in September 2010 and MOVES2010b in April 2012. Both of these minor revisions enhance model performance and do not significantly affect the criteria pollutant emissions results from MOVES2010. MOVES will be required for new regional emissions analyses for transportation conformity determinations (‘‘regional conformity analyses’’) outside of California that begin after March 2, 2013, or when EPA approves MOVES-based budgets, whichever comes first.1 The MOVES grace period for regional conformity analyses applies to both the use of MOVES2010 and approved minor revisions (e.g., MOVES2010a and MOVES2010b). For more information, see EPA’s ‘‘Policy Guidance on the Use of MOVES2010 and Subsequent Minor Model Revisions for State Implementation Plan Development, Transportation Conformity, and Other Purposes’’ (April 2012), available online at: www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/ transconf/policy.htm#models. EPA has encouraged areas to examine how MOVES would affect future transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations so, if necessary, SIPs and budgets could be revised with MOVES or transportation plans and TIPs could be revised (as appropriate) prior to the end of the regional transportation conformity grace period. EPA has also encouraged state and local air agencies to consider how the release 1 Upon the release of MOVES2010, EPA established a two-year grace period before MOVES is required to be used for regional conformity analyses (75 FR 9411, March 2, 2010). EPA subsequently promulgated a final rule on February 27, 2012 to provide an additional year before MOVES is required for these analyses (77 FR 11394). In this case the grace period ends on March 2, 2013. PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 6037 of MOVES would affect analyses supporting SIP submissions under development (77 FR 9411, March 2, 2010 and 77 FR 11394, February 27, 2012). The Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana Regional Council of Governments (OKI), which is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the Cincinnati-Hamilton area, has used MOVES2010a emission rates with the transportation network information to estimate emissions in the years of the transportation plan and also for the SIP. The budgets have been revised using the latest planning assumptions including population and employment updates. In addition, newer vehicle registration data has been used to update the age distribution of the vehicle fleet. Since MOVES2010 (or a minor model revision) will be required for conformity analyses after the grace period ends, OKI has concluded that updating the budgets with MOVES2010a will prepare the area for the transition to using MOVES for conformity analyses and determinations. The interagency consultation group has had extensive consultation on the requirements and need for new budgets. d. Submission of New Budgets Based on MOVES2010a On June 29, 2012, Ohio submitted in final replacement budgets based on MOVES2010a that cover the Ohio portion of the Cincinnati-Hamilton area. Ohio received no comments during the public review and comment period. On October 12, 2012, Indiana submitted for parallel processing replacement budgets based on MOVES2010a that cover the Indiana portion of the CincinnatiHamilton area. Indiana received no comments during their subsequent public review and comment period. Indiana submitted the final SIP revision request to EPA on December 11, 2012. The MOVES2010a-based budgets will replace the prior approved MOBILE6.2based budgets and are for the same years and pollutants/precursors. The new MOVES2010a-based budgets are for the years 2015 and 2020 for both VOCs and NOX and are detailed in Table 3 of this notice. Ohio and Indiana have also provided total emissions including mobile emissions based on MOVES2010a, for the attainment year of 2005, the 2015 budget year, and the 2020 maintenance year. The safety margin is defined as the reduction in emissions from the base year (in this case the 2005 attainment year) to the final year of the maintenance plan (in this case the 2020 year). The total emissions include point, area, non-road mobile and on-road mobile sources. The E:\FR\FM\29JAR1.SGM 29JAR1 6038 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 19 / Tuesday, January 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations III. What are the criteria for approval? EPA requires that revisions to existing SIPs and budgets continue to meet TABLE 1—TABLE OF TOTAL EMISSIONS applicable requirements (e.g., RFP, WITH MOVES2010A MOBILE EMIS- attainment, or maintenance). States that revise their existing SIPs to include SIONS CINCINNATI-HAMILTON MOVES budgets must therefore show [Tons per summer day] that the SIP continues to meet Safety applicable requirements with the new Year 2005 2015 2020 Margin level of motor vehicle emissions contained in the budgets. The SIP must VOC .. 237.77 174.59 162.47 65.39 also meet any applicable SIP NOX .. 389.99 309.41 289.20 38.10 requirements under CAA section 110. In addition, the transportation OKI has added only a small portion of conformity rule (at 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(iv)) requires that ‘‘the the overall safety margin available for budgets, when considered together with NOX and VOCs to the budgets for 2015 all other emissions sources, is consistent and 2020. The submittal demonstrates with applicable requirements for RFP, how all emissions decline from the attainment, or maintenance (whichever attainment year of 2005. In 2005, the is relevant to the given implementation total estimated NOX emissions from all plan submission).’’ This and the other sources (including mobile, point, area, adequacy criteria found at 40 CFR and non-road sources) is 389.99 tpd and 93.118(e)(4) must be satisfied before the total VOC emissions, for the 2005 EPA can find submitted budgets attainment year, from all sources is adequate and approve them for 237.77 tpd. The 2020 estimated conformity purposes. emissions for total NOX from all sources In addition, areas can revise their is 289.20 tpd and the total VOC budgets and inventories using MOVES emissions from all sources is 162.47 tpd. without revising their entire SIP if (1) This reduction in emissions the SIP continues to meet applicable demonstrates that the area will continue requirements when the previous motor below the attainment level of emissions vehicle emissions inventories are and maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone replaced with MOVES base year and standard. The mobile source emissions, milestone, attainment, or maintenance when included with point, area, and year inventories, and (2) the state can non-road sources continue to document that growth and control strategy assumptions for non-motor demonstrate maintenance of the vehicle sources continue to be valid and attainment level of emissions in the any minor updates do not change the Ohio and Indiana portions of the overall conclusions of the SIP. For Cincinnati-Hamilton area. example, the first criterion could be No additional control measures were satisfied by demonstrating that the needed to maintain the 1997 ozone emissions reductions between the standard in the Cincinnati-Hamilton baseline/attainment year and area. An appropriate safety margin for maintenance year are the same or NOX and VOCs was decided by the greater using MOVES than they were interagency consultation group (the previously. The Ohio and Indiana interagency consultation group as submittals meet this requirement as required by the state conformity described below in section IV. agreement consists of representatives For more information, see EPA’s latest from the Federal Highway ‘‘Policy Guidance on the Use of Administration, Ohio Environmental MOVES2010 for SIP Development, Protection Agency (OEPA), Ohio Transportation Conformity, and Other Department of Transportation, Indiana Purposes’’ (April 2012), available online Department of Transportation, Indiana at: www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/ Department of Environmental transconf/policy.htm#models. Management (IDEM) and EPA). The IV. What is EPA’s analysis of the state’s submitted budgets for the Ohio and submittal? Indiana portions of the Cincinnatia. The Revised Inventories Hamilton area are 94.25 tpd for NOX and 56.06 tpd for VOCs in the year The Ohio SIP revision and the Indiana 2015; and 73.13 tpd for NOX and 42.81 SIP revision requests for the Cincinnatitpd for VOCs in the year 2020 (see Table Hamilton 1997 ozone maintenance 3). These budgets will continue to keep plans seek to revise only the on-road emissions in the Cincinnati-Hamilton mobile source inventories and not the area below the calculated attainment non-road inventories, area source year of emissions. inventories or point source inventories sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with available safety margin is shown in Table 1. VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:39 Jan 28, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 for the 2015 and 2020 years for which the SIP revises the budgets. OEPA and IDEM have certified that the control strategies remain the same as in the original SIP, and that no other control strategies are necessary. This is confirmed by the monitoring data for the Cincinnati-Hamilton area, which continues to monitor attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. Thus, the current control strategies are continuing to keep the area in attainment of the NAAQS. EPA has reviewed the emission estimates for point, area, and non-road sources and concluded that no major changes to the projections need to be made. Ohio and Indiana find that growth and control strategy assumptions for non-mobile sources (i.e., area, nonroad, and point) have not changed significantly from the original submittal for the years 2005, 2015, and 2020. As a result, the growth and control strategy assumptions for the non-mobile sources for the years 2005, 2015, and 2020 continue to be valid and do not affect the overall conclusions of the plan. Ohio’s and Indiana’s submissions confirm that the SIP continues to demonstrate its purpose of maintaining the 1997 ozone standard because the emissions are continuing to decrease from the attainment year to the final year of the maintenance plan. The total emissions in the revised SIP (which includes MOVES2010a emissions from mobile sources) are 389.99 tpd for NOX and 237.77 tpd for VOCs in the 2005 attainment year. The total emissions from all sources in the 2015 year are 309.41 tpd for NOX and 174.59 tpd for VOCs. These totals demonstrate that emissions in the Cincinnati-Hamilton area are continuing to decline and remain below the attainment levels. Ohio and Indiana have submitted MOVES2010a-based budgets for the Ohio and Indiana portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton area that are clearly identified in the submittals. The on-road budgets for 2015 are 94.25 tpd for NOX and 56.06 tpd for VOCs. The on-road budgets for 2020 are 73.13 tpd for NOX and 42.81 tpd for VOCs. The budgets are also displayed in Table 3. b. Approvability of the MOVES2010abased Budgets EPA is approving the MOVES2010abased budgets submitted by Ohio and Indiana for use in determining transportation conformity in the Ohio and Indiana portions of the CincinnatiHamilton 1997 ozone maintenance area. EPA is making this approval based on our evaluation of these budgets using the adequacy criteria found in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and our in-depth evaluation E:\FR\FM\29JAR1.SGM 29JAR1 6039 sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 19 / Tuesday, January 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations of the State’s submittals and SIP requirements. EPA has determined, based on its evaluation, that the area’s maintenance plans would continue to serve its intended purpose with the submitted MOVES2010a-based budgets and that the budgets themselves meet the adequacy criteria in the conformity rule at 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). The adequacy criteria found in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) are as follows: • The submitted SIP was endorsed by [the Governor/Governor’s designee] and was subject to a state public hearing (§ 93.118(e)(4)(i)); • Before the control strategy implementation plan was submitted to EPA, consultation among Federal, state, and local agencies occurred, and the state fully documented the submittal (§ 93.118(e)(4)(ii)); • The budgets are clearly identified and precisely quantified (§ 93.118(e)(4)(iii)); • The budgets, when considered together with all other emissions sources, are consistent with applicable requirements for RFP, attainment, or maintenance (§ 93.118(e)(4)(iv)); • The budgets are consistent with and clearly related to the emissions inventory and control measures in the control strategy implementation plan (§ 93.118(e)(4)(v); and • The revisions explain and document changes to the previous budgets, impacts on point and area source emissions and changes to established safety margins and reasons for the changes (including the basis for any changes related to emission factors or vehicle miles traveled) (§ 93.118(e)(4)(vi). We find that Ohio and Indiana have met all of the adequacy criteria. Public hearing materials were submitted with the formal SIP revision request. The interagency consultation group, which is composed of the state air agencies, state departments of transportation, Federal Highway Administration, EPA, and the MPO for the area, has discussed and reviewed the budgets developed with MOVES2010a and the safety margin allocation. The budgets are clearly identified and precisely quantified in the submittals. The budgets when considered with other emissions sources (point, area, nonroad) are consistent with continued maintenance of the 1997 ozone standard. The budgets are clearly related to the emissions inventory and control measures in the SIP. The changes from the previous budgets are clearly explained with the change in the model from MOBILE6.2 to MOVES2010a and the revised and updated planning assumptions. The inputs to the model VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:39 Jan 28, 2013 Jkt 229001 are detailed in the Appendix to the submittal. EPA has reviewed the inputs to the MOVES2010a modeling and participated in the consultation process. The Federal Highway Administration and the Ohio and Indiana Departments of Transportation have taken a lead role in working with the MPO to provide accurate, timely information and inputs to the MOVES2010a model runs. The OKI network model provided the vehicle miles of travel and other necessary data from the travel demand network model. The CAA requires that revisions to existing SIPs and budgets continue to meet applicable requirements (in this case, maintenance). Therefore, states that revise existing SIPs with MOVES must show that the SIP continues to meet applicable requirements with the new level of motor vehicle emissions calculated by the new model. To that end, Ohio’s and Indiana’s submitted MOVES2010a based budgets meet EPA’s two criteria for revising budgets without revising the entire SIP: (1) The SIP continues to meet applicable requirements when the previous motor vehicle emissions inventories are replaced with MOVES2010a base year and milestone, attainment, or maintenance year inventories, and (2) The state can document that growth and control strategy assumptions for non-motor vehicle sources continue to be valid and any minor updates do not change the overall conclusions of the SIP. Indiana and Ohio have documented that growth and control strategy assumptions continue to be valid and do not change the overall conclusions of the maintenance plan. The emission estimates for point, area, and non-road sources have not changed. Indiana and Ohio find that growth and control strategy assumptions for non-mobile sources (i.e. area, non-road, and point) from the original submittal for the years 2005, 2015, and 2020 were developed before the downturn in the economy over the last several years. Because of this, the factors included in the original submittal may project more growth than actual into the future. As a result, the growth and control strategy assumptions for the non-mobile sources for the years 2005, 2015, and 2020 continue to be valid and do not affect the overall conclusions of the plan. Ohio’s and Indiana’s submissions confirm that the SIP continues to demonstrate its purpose of maintaining the 1997 ozone standard because the emissions are continuing to decrease from the attainment year to the final year of the maintenance plan. The total PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 emissions in the revised SIP (which includes MOVES2010a emissions for mobile sources) decrease from the 2005 attainment year to the year 2020 (the last year of the maintenance plan). These totals demonstrate that emissions in the Cincinnati-Hamilton area are continuing to decline and remain below the attainment levels. Table 2 displays total emissions in the Ohio and Indiana portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton area including point, area, non-road, and mobile sources and demonstrates the declining emissions from the 2005 attainment year. TABLE 2—TABLE OF TOTAL EMISSIONS WITH MOVES2010A MOBILE EMISSIONS [Tons per summer day] Year 2005 2015 2020 VOC .................. NOX .................. 237.77 389.99 174.59 309.41 162.47 289.20 The following table (Table 3) displays the submitted budgets (Ohio and Indiana submitted budgets that cover both the Ohio and Indiana portions of the area) that are proposed in the notice to be approved. The budgets include an appropriate margin of safety while still maintaining total emissions below the attainment level. TABLE 3—TABLE OF MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSION BUDGETS (MOVES) FOR THE OHIO AND INDIANA PORTIONS OF THE CINCINNATI-HAMILTON 1997 OZONE AREA [Tons per summer day] Year VOC .......................... NOX .......................... 2015 56.06 94.25 2020 42.81 73.13 Based on our review of the SIPs and the new budgets provided, EPA has determined that the SIPs will continue to meet the requirements if the revised motor vehicle emissions inventories are replaced with MOVES2010a inventories. c. Applicability of MOBILE6.2-based Budgets Pursuant to the state’s requests, EPA’s approval of the revised budgets means that the existing MOBILE6.2-based budgets will no longer be applicable for transportation conformity purposes upon the effective date of this approval. In addition, upon this EPA approval of the MOVES2010a-based budgets, the regional transportation conformity grace period for using MOBILE6 instead of MOVES2010 (and subsequent minor E:\FR\FM\29JAR1.SGM 29JAR1 6040 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 19 / Tuesday, January 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations revisions) for the pollutants included in these budgets ends for the Ohio and Indiana portions of the CincinnatiHamilton ozone maintenance area.2 V. What action is EPA taking? EPA is approving the 2015 and 2020 submitted budgets for the Ohio and Indiana portions of the CincinnatiHamilton 1997 ozone maintenance plans. We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse written comments are filed. This rule will be effective April 1, 2013 without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written comments by February 28, 2013. If we receive such comments, we will withdraw this action before the effective date by publishing a subsequent document that will withdraw the final action. All public comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule based on the proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. If we do not receive any comments, this action will be effective April 1, 2013. VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with Under the CAA, 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 2 For more information, see EPA’s ‘‘Policy Guidance on the Use of MOVES2010 and Subsequent Minor Revisions for State Implementation Plan Development, Transportation Conformity, and Other Purposes’’ (April 2012). VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:39 Jan 28, 2013 Jkt 229001 those imposed by state law. For that reason, this action: • Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993); • Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); • Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); • Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); • Does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999); • Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); • Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); • Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the CAA; and • Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law. The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and other PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register. This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by April 1, 2013. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules section of today’s Federal Register, rather than file an immediate petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Volatile organic compounds. Dated: January 11, 2013. Susan Hedman, Regional Administrator, Region 5. 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: PART 52—APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows: ■ Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 2. The table in § 52.770 paragraph (e) is amended by adding an entry in alphabetical order for ‘‘CincinnatiHamilton, OH–KY–IN 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan’’ to read as follows: ■ § 52.770 * Identification of plan. * * (e) * * * E:\FR\FM\29JAR1.SGM 29JAR1 * * 6041 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 19 / Tuesday, January 29, 2013 / Rules and Regulations EPA-APPROVED INDIANA NONREGULATORY AND QUASI-REGULATORY PROVISIONS Title Indiana date EPA Approval Explanation * * Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH–KY–IN 1997 8hour ozone maintenance plan. * ...................... * * 1/29/12, [INSERT PAGE NUMBER WHERE THE DOCUMENT BEGINS]. * * Revision to motor vehicle emission budgets. * * * 3. Section 52.777 is amended by redesignating paragraph (oo) as paragraph (oo)(1) and by adding paragraph (oo)(2) to read as follows: ■ § 52.777 Control strategy: photochemical oxidants (hydrocarbons). * * * * (oo)(1) * * * (2) Approval—On December 11, 2012, Indiana submitted a request to revise the approved MOBILE6.2 motor vehicle emission budgets (budgets) in the 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for the Indiana portion of the CincinnatiHamilton, OH–KY–IN maintenance area. The budgets are being revised with budgets developed with the sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with * VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:39 Jan 28, 2013 Jkt 229001 * * MOVES2010a model. The 2015 motor vehicle emissions budgets for the Ohio and Indiana portions are 56.06 tpd VOC and 94.25 tpd NOX. The 2020 motor vehicle emissions budgets for the Ohio and Indiana portions of the area are 42.81 tpd VOC and 73.13 tpd for NOX. 4. Section 52.1885 is amended by adding paragraph (ff)(12) to read as follows: ■ § 52.1885 Control strategy: Ozone. * * * * * (ff) * * * (12) Approval—On June 29, 2012, Ohio submitted a request to revise the approved MOBILE6.2 motor vehicle PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 9990 * * emission budgets (budgets) in the 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for the Ohio and Indiana portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH–KY–IN 8-hour ozone area. The budgets are being revised with budgets developed with the MOVES2010a model. The 2015 motor vehicle emissions budgets for the Ohio and Indiana portions are 56.06 tpd VOC and 94.25 tpd NOX. The 2020 motor vehicle emissions budgets for the Ohio and Indiana portions of the area are 42.81 tpd VOC and 73.13 tpd for NOX. * * * * * [FR Doc. 2013–01733 Filed 1–28–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560–50–P E:\FR\FM\29JAR1.SGM 29JAR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 19 (Tuesday, January 29, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 6035-6041]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-01733]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2012-0648; EPA-R05-OAR-2012-0834; FRL-9773-5]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Ohio and Indiana; Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH; Ohio and Indiana 1997 8-Hour 
Ozone Maintenance Plan Revisions to Approved Motor Vehicle Emissions 
Budgets

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

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

SUMMARY: EPA is approving the request by Ohio and Indiana to revise the 
Cincinnati-Hamilton 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance air quality State 
Implementation Plans (SIPs) to replace the previously approved motor 
vehicle emissions budgets (budgets) with budgets developed using EPA's 
Motor

[[Page 6036]]

Vehicle Emissions Simulator (MOVES) emissions model. The Ohio and 
Indiana portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton area include the Ohio 
Counties of Butler, Clermont, Clinton, Hamilton and Warren, Ohio, and 
Lawrenceburg Township in Dearborn County, Indiana. Ohio submitted the 
SIP revision request to EPA on June 29, 2012. Indiana submitted the SIP 
revision request for parallel processing in a letter dated October 12, 
2012, and followed up with a final submittal on December 11, 2012. Ohio 
and Indiana have submitted identical budgets which cover the Ohio and 
Indiana portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton 1997 ozone maintenance 
area.

DATES: This direct final rule will be effective April 1, 2013, unless 
EPA receives adverse comments by February 28, 2013. If adverse comments 
are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final 
rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the rule will 
not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID Nos. EPA-R05-
OAR-2012-0648 for Ohio and EPA-R05-OAR-2012-0834 for Indiana, 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, Air 
Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West 
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Control Strategies 
Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such 
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office normal hours of 
operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of 
boxed information. The Regional Office official hours of business are 
Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal 
holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2012-0648 and EPA-R05-OAR-2012-0834. 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.
    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: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION 
section is arranged as follows:

I. What is EPA approving?
II. What is the background for this action?
    a. SIP Budgets and Transportation Conformity
    b. Prior Approval of Budgets
    c. The MOVES Emissions Model and Regional Transportation 
Conformity Grace Period
    d. Submission of New Budgets Based on MOVES2010a
III. What are the criteria for approval?
IV. What is EPA's analysis of the State's submittal?
    a. The Revised Inventories
    b. Approvability of the MOVES2010a-based Budgets
    c. Applicability of MOBILE6.2-based Budgets
V. What action is EPA taking?
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What is EPA approving?

    EPA is approving new MOVES2010a-based budgets for the Ohio and 
Indiana portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton, Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana, 
1997 8-hour ozone maintenance area. The Ohio and Indiana portions of 
the Cincinnati-Hamilton area were redesignated to attainment of the 
1997 8-hour ozone standard effective May 11, 2010 (75 FR 26118), and 
MOBILE6.2-based budgets were approved in that action. The newly 
submitted MOVES2010a-based budgets will replace the existing MOBILE6.2-
based budgets in the Ohio and Indiana 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance 
plans and must then be used in future transportation conformity 
analyses for the area. At that time, the previously approved MOBILE6.2 
based budgets would no longer be applicable for transportation 
conformity purposes.
    The Ohio and Indiana portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton 1997 8-
hour ozone maintenance area must use the MOVES2010a-based budgets 
starting on the effective date of this rulemaking. See the official 
release of the MOVES2010 emissions model (75 FR 9411-9414, March 2, 
2010) for background, and section II.(c) below for details.

II. What is the background for this action?

a. SIP Budgets and Transportation Conformity

    Under the Clean Air Act (CAA), states are required to submit, at 
various times, control strategy SIP revisions and maintenance plans for 
nonattainment and maintenance areas for a given National Ambient Air 
Quality Standard (NAAQS). These emission control strategy SIP revisions 
(e.g., reasonable further progress (RFP) and attainment demonstration 
SIP revisions) and maintenance plans include budgets of on-road mobile 
source emissions for criteria pollutants and/or their precursors to 
address pollution from cars, trucks, and other on-road vehicles. These 
mobile source SIP budgets are the portions of the total emissions that 
are allocated to on-road vehicle use that,

[[Page 6037]]

together with emissions from other sources in the area, will provide 
for attainment or maintenance if they are not exceeded. The budget 
serves as a ceiling on emissions from an area's planned transportation 
system. For more information about budgets, see the preamble to the 
November 24, 1993, transportation conformity rule (58 FR 62188).
    Under section 176(c) of the CAA, transportation plans, 
Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs), and transportation projects 
must ``conform'' to (i.e., be consistent with) the SIP before they can 
be adopted or approved. Conformity to the SIP means that transportation 
activities will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing 
air quality violations, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS or 
delay an interim milestone. The transportation conformity regulations 
can be found at 40 CFR part 51 subpart T, and part 93.
    In general, before budgets can be used in conformity 
determinations, EPA must affirmatively find the budgets adequate. 
However, budgets that are replacing approved budgets must be found 
adequate and approved before budgets can replace older budgets. If the 
submitted SIP budgets are meant to replace budgets for the same 
purpose, as is the case with Ohio's and Indiana's MOVES2010a 1997 8-
hour ozone maintenance plan budgets, EPA must approve the revised SIP 
and budgets, and must affirm that they are adequate at the same time. 
Once EPA approves revised budgets into the SIP, they must be used by 
state and Federal agencies in determining whether transportation 
activities conform to the SIP as required by section 176(c) of the CAA. 
EPA's substantive criteria for determining the adequacy of budgets are 
set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4).

b. Prior Approval of Budgets

    EPA had previously approved budgets for the Ohio and Indiana 
portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton, 8-hour ozone maintenance area for 
volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) 
for the year 2015 and 2020 on May 11, 2010 (75 FR 26118). These budgets 
were based on EPA's MOBILE6.2 emissions model. The ozone maintenance 
plan established 2015 and 2020 budgets for the Ohio and Indiana 
portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton, area. The 2015 approved budgets of 
31.73 tons per day (tpd) for VOCs and 49.00 tpd for NOX and 
the 2020 budgets of 28.82 tpd VOCs and 34.39 tpd NOX were 
approved in the May 11, 2010, rulemaking. These budgets demonstrated a 
reduction in emissions from the monitored attainment year and included 
a margin of safety.

c. The MOVES Emissions Model and Regional Transportation Conformity 
Grace Period

    The MOVES model is EPA's state of the art tool for estimating 
highway emissions. The model is based on analyses of millions of 
emission test results and considerable advances in the agency's 
understanding of vehicle emissions. MOVES incorporates the latest 
emissions data, more sophisticated calculation algorithms, increased 
user flexibility, new software design, and significant new capabilities 
relative to those reflected in MOBILE6.2.
    EPA announced the release of MOVES2010 in March 2010 (75 FR 9411). 
EPA subsequently released two minor model revisions: MOVES2010a in 
September 2010 and MOVES2010b in April 2012. Both of these minor 
revisions enhance model performance and do not significantly affect the 
criteria pollutant emissions results from MOVES2010. MOVES will be 
required for new regional emissions analyses for transportation 
conformity determinations (``regional conformity analyses'') outside of 
California that begin after March 2, 2013, or when EPA approves MOVES-
based budgets, whichever comes first.\1\ The MOVES grace period for 
regional conformity analyses applies to both the use of MOVES2010 and 
approved minor revisions (e.g., MOVES2010a and MOVES2010b). For more 
information, see EPA's ``Policy Guidance on the Use of MOVES2010 and 
Subsequent Minor Model Revisions for State Implementation Plan 
Development, Transportation Conformity, and Other Purposes'' (April 
2012), available online at: www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/policy.htm#models.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Upon the release of MOVES2010, EPA established a two-year 
grace period before MOVES is required to be used for regional 
conformity analyses (75 FR 9411, March 2, 2010). EPA subsequently 
promulgated a final rule on February 27, 2012 to provide an 
additional year before MOVES is required for these analyses (77 FR 
11394). In this case the grace period ends on March 2, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has encouraged areas to examine how MOVES would affect future 
transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations so, if necessary, 
SIPs and budgets could be revised with MOVES or transportation plans 
and TIPs could be revised (as appropriate) prior to the end of the 
regional transportation conformity grace period. EPA has also 
encouraged state and local air agencies to consider how the release of 
MOVES would affect analyses supporting SIP submissions under 
development (77 FR 9411, March 2, 2010 and 77 FR 11394, February 27, 
2012).
    The Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana Regional Council of Governments (OKI), 
which is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the 
Cincinnati-Hamilton area, has used MOVES2010a emission rates with the 
transportation network information to estimate emissions in the years 
of the transportation plan and also for the SIP. The budgets have been 
revised using the latest planning assumptions including population and 
employment updates. In addition, newer vehicle registration data has 
been used to update the age distribution of the vehicle fleet. Since 
MOVES2010 (or a minor model revision) will be required for conformity 
analyses after the grace period ends, OKI has concluded that updating 
the budgets with MOVES2010a will prepare the area for the transition to 
using MOVES for conformity analyses and determinations. The interagency 
consultation group has had extensive consultation on the requirements 
and need for new budgets.

d. Submission of New Budgets Based on MOVES2010a

    On June 29, 2012, Ohio submitted in final replacement budgets based 
on MOVES2010a that cover the Ohio portion of the Cincinnati-Hamilton 
area. Ohio received no comments during the public review and comment 
period. On October 12, 2012, Indiana submitted for parallel processing 
replacement budgets based on MOVES2010a that cover the Indiana portion 
of the Cincinnati-Hamilton area. Indiana received no comments during 
their subsequent public review and comment period. Indiana submitted 
the final SIP revision request to EPA on December 11, 2012.
    The MOVES2010a-based budgets will replace the prior approved 
MOBILE6.2-based budgets and are for the same years and pollutants/
precursors. The new MOVES2010a-based budgets are for the years 2015 and 
2020 for both VOCs and NOX and are detailed in Table 3 of 
this notice. Ohio and Indiana have also provided total emissions 
including mobile emissions based on MOVES2010a, for the attainment year 
of 2005, the 2015 budget year, and the 2020 maintenance year. The 
safety margin is defined as the reduction in emissions from the base 
year (in this case the 2005 attainment year) to the final year of the 
maintenance plan (in this case the 2020 year). The total emissions 
include point, area, non-road mobile and on-road mobile sources. The

[[Page 6038]]

available safety margin is shown in Table 1.

   Table 1--Table of Total Emissions With MOVES2010a Mobile Emissions
                           Cincinnati-Hamilton
                          [Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                  Safety
                Year                    2005     2015     2020    Margin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC.................................   237.77   174.59   162.47    65.39
NOX.................................   389.99   309.41   289.20    38.10
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    OKI has added only a small portion of the overall safety margin 
available for NOX and VOCs to the budgets for 2015 and 2020. 
The submittal demonstrates how all emissions decline from the 
attainment year of 2005. In 2005, the total estimated NOX 
emissions from all sources (including mobile, point, area, and non-road 
sources) is 389.99 tpd and the total VOC emissions, for the 2005 
attainment year, from all sources is 237.77 tpd. The 2020 estimated 
emissions for total NOX from all sources is 289.20 tpd and 
the total VOC emissions from all sources is 162.47 tpd. This reduction 
in emissions demonstrates that the area will continue below the 
attainment level of emissions and maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone 
standard. The mobile source emissions, when included with point, area, 
and non-road sources continue to demonstrate maintenance of the 
attainment level of emissions in the Ohio and Indiana portions of the 
Cincinnati-Hamilton area.
    No additional control measures were needed to maintain the 1997 
ozone standard in the Cincinnati-Hamilton area. An appropriate safety 
margin for NOX and VOCs was decided by the interagency 
consultation group (the interagency consultation group as required by 
the state conformity agreement consists of representatives from the 
Federal Highway Administration, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency 
(OEPA), Ohio Department of Transportation, Indiana Department of 
Transportation, Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) 
and EPA). The submitted budgets for the Ohio and Indiana portions of 
the Cincinnati-Hamilton area are 94.25 tpd for NOX and 56.06 
tpd for VOCs in the year 2015; and 73.13 tpd for NOX and 
42.81 tpd for VOCs in the year 2020 (see Table 3). These budgets will 
continue to keep emissions in the Cincinnati-Hamilton area below the 
calculated attainment year of emissions.

III. What are the criteria for approval?

    EPA requires that revisions to existing SIPs and budgets continue 
to meet applicable requirements (e.g., RFP, attainment, or 
maintenance). States that revise their existing SIPs to include MOVES 
budgets must therefore show that the SIP continues to meet applicable 
requirements with the new level of motor vehicle emissions contained in 
the budgets. The SIP must also meet any applicable SIP requirements 
under CAA section 110.
    In addition, the transportation conformity rule (at 40 CFR 
93.118(e)(4)(iv)) requires that ``the budgets, when considered together 
with all other emissions sources, is consistent with applicable 
requirements for RFP, attainment, or maintenance (whichever is relevant 
to the given implementation plan submission).'' This and the other 
adequacy criteria found at 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) must be satisfied before 
EPA can find submitted budgets adequate and approve them for conformity 
purposes.
    In addition, areas can revise their budgets and inventories using 
MOVES without revising their entire SIP if (1) the SIP continues to 
meet applicable requirements when the previous motor vehicle emissions 
inventories are replaced with MOVES base year and milestone, 
attainment, or maintenance year inventories, and (2) the state can 
document that growth and control strategy assumptions for non-motor 
vehicle sources continue to be valid and any minor updates do not 
change the overall conclusions of the SIP. For example, the first 
criterion could be satisfied by demonstrating that the emissions 
reductions between the baseline/attainment year and maintenance year 
are the same or greater using MOVES than they were previously. The Ohio 
and Indiana submittals meet this requirement as described below in 
section IV.
    For more information, see EPA's latest ``Policy Guidance on the Use 
of MOVES2010 for SIP Development, Transportation Conformity, and Other 
Purposes'' (April 2012), available online at: www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/policy.htm#models.

IV. What is EPA's analysis of the state's submittal?

a. The Revised Inventories

    The Ohio SIP revision and the Indiana SIP revision requests for the 
Cincinnati-Hamilton 1997 ozone maintenance plans seek to revise only 
the on-road mobile source inventories and not the non-road inventories, 
area source inventories or point source inventories for the 2015 and 
2020 years for which the SIP revises the budgets. OEPA and IDEM have 
certified that the control strategies remain the same as in the 
original SIP, and that no other control strategies are necessary. This 
is confirmed by the monitoring data for the Cincinnati-Hamilton area, 
which continues to monitor attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone 
standard. Thus, the current control strategies are continuing to keep 
the area in attainment of the NAAQS.
    EPA has reviewed the emission estimates for point, area, and non-
road sources and concluded that no major changes to the projections 
need to be made. Ohio and Indiana find that growth and control strategy 
assumptions for non-mobile sources (i.e., area, non-road, and point) 
have not changed significantly from the original submittal for the 
years 2005, 2015, and 2020. As a result, the growth and control 
strategy assumptions for the non-mobile sources for the years 2005, 
2015, and 2020 continue to be valid and do not affect the overall 
conclusions of the plan.
    Ohio's and Indiana's submissions confirm that the SIP continues to 
demonstrate its purpose of maintaining the 1997 ozone standard because 
the emissions are continuing to decrease from the attainment year to 
the final year of the maintenance plan. The total emissions in the 
revised SIP (which includes MOVES2010a emissions from mobile sources) 
are 389.99 tpd for NOX and 237.77 tpd for VOCs in the 2005 
attainment year. The total emissions from all sources in the 2015 year 
are 309.41 tpd for NOX and 174.59 tpd for VOCs. These totals 
demonstrate that emissions in the Cincinnati-Hamilton area are 
continuing to decline and remain below the attainment levels.
    Ohio and Indiana have submitted MOVES2010a-based budgets for the 
Ohio and Indiana portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton area that are 
clearly identified in the submittals. The on-road budgets for 2015 are 
94.25 tpd for NOX and 56.06 tpd for VOCs. The on-road 
budgets for 2020 are 73.13 tpd for NOX and 42.81 tpd for 
VOCs. The budgets are also displayed in Table 3.

b. Approvability of the MOVES2010a-based Budgets

    EPA is approving the MOVES2010a-based budgets submitted by Ohio and 
Indiana for use in determining transportation conformity in the Ohio 
and Indiana portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton 1997 ozone maintenance 
area. EPA is making this approval based on our evaluation of these 
budgets using the adequacy criteria found in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and 
our in-depth evaluation

[[Page 6039]]

of the State's submittals and SIP requirements. EPA has determined, 
based on its evaluation, that the area's maintenance plans would 
continue to serve its intended purpose with the submitted MOVES2010a-
based budgets and that the budgets themselves meet the adequacy 
criteria in the conformity rule at 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4).
    The adequacy criteria found in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) are as follows:
     The submitted SIP was endorsed by [the Governor/Governor's 
designee] and was subject to a state public hearing (Sec.  
93.118(e)(4)(i));
     Before the control strategy implementation plan was 
submitted to EPA, consultation among Federal, state, and local agencies 
occurred, and the state fully documented the submittal (Sec.  
93.118(e)(4)(ii));
     The budgets are clearly identified and precisely 
quantified (Sec.  93.118(e)(4)(iii));
     The budgets, when considered together with all other 
emissions sources, are consistent with applicable requirements for RFP, 
attainment, or maintenance (Sec.  93.118(e)(4)(iv));
     The budgets are consistent with and clearly related to the 
emissions inventory and control measures in the control strategy 
implementation plan (Sec.  93.118(e)(4)(v); and
     The revisions explain and document changes to the previous 
budgets, impacts on point and area source emissions and changes to 
established safety margins and reasons for the changes (including the 
basis for any changes related to emission factors or vehicle miles 
traveled) (Sec.  93.118(e)(4)(vi).
    We find that Ohio and Indiana have met all of the adequacy 
criteria. Public hearing materials were submitted with the formal SIP 
revision request. The interagency consultation group, which is composed 
of the state air agencies, state departments of transportation, Federal 
Highway Administration, EPA, and the MPO for the area, has discussed 
and reviewed the budgets developed with MOVES2010a and the safety 
margin allocation. The budgets are clearly identified and precisely 
quantified in the submittals. The budgets when considered with other 
emissions sources (point, area, non-road) are consistent with continued 
maintenance of the 1997 ozone standard. The budgets are clearly related 
to the emissions inventory and control measures in the SIP. The changes 
from the previous budgets are clearly explained with the change in the 
model from MOBILE6.2 to MOVES2010a and the revised and updated planning 
assumptions. The inputs to the model are detailed in the Appendix to 
the submittal. EPA has reviewed the inputs to the MOVES2010a modeling 
and participated in the consultation process. The Federal Highway 
Administration and the Ohio and Indiana Departments of Transportation 
have taken a lead role in working with the MPO to provide accurate, 
timely information and inputs to the MOVES2010a model runs. The OKI 
network model provided the vehicle miles of travel and other necessary 
data from the travel demand network model.
    The CAA requires that revisions to existing SIPs and budgets 
continue to meet applicable requirements (in this case, maintenance). 
Therefore, states that revise existing SIPs with MOVES must show that 
the SIP continues to meet applicable requirements with the new level of 
motor vehicle emissions calculated by the new model.
    To that end, Ohio's and Indiana's submitted MOVES2010a based 
budgets meet EPA's two criteria for revising budgets without revising 
the entire SIP:
    (1) The SIP continues to meet applicable requirements when the 
previous motor vehicle emissions inventories are replaced with 
MOVES2010a base year and milestone, attainment, or maintenance year 
inventories, and
    (2) The state can document that growth and control strategy 
assumptions for non-motor vehicle sources continue to be valid and any 
minor updates do not change the overall conclusions of the SIP.
    Indiana and Ohio have documented that growth and control strategy 
assumptions continue to be valid and do not change the overall 
conclusions of the maintenance plan. The emission estimates for point, 
area, and non-road sources have not changed. Indiana and Ohio find that 
growth and control strategy assumptions for non-mobile sources (i.e. 
area, non-road, and point) from the original submittal for the years 
2005, 2015, and 2020 were developed before the downturn in the economy 
over the last several years. Because of this, the factors included in 
the original submittal may project more growth than actual into the 
future. As a result, the growth and control strategy assumptions for 
the non-mobile sources for the years 2005, 2015, and 2020 continue to 
be valid and do not affect the overall conclusions of the plan.
    Ohio's and Indiana's submissions confirm that the SIP continues to 
demonstrate its purpose of maintaining the 1997 ozone standard because 
the emissions are continuing to decrease from the attainment year to 
the final year of the maintenance plan. The total emissions in the 
revised SIP (which includes MOVES2010a emissions for mobile sources) 
decrease from the 2005 attainment year to the year 2020 (the last year 
of the maintenance plan). These totals demonstrate that emissions in 
the Cincinnati-Hamilton area are continuing to decline and remain below 
the attainment levels. Table 2 displays total emissions in the Ohio and 
Indiana portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton area including point, area, 
non-road, and mobile sources and demonstrates the declining emissions 
from the 2005 attainment year.

   Table 2--Table of Total Emissions With MOVES2010a Mobile Emissions
                          [Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Year                        2005     2015     2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC..........................................   237.77   174.59   162.47
NOX..........................................   389.99   309.41   289.20
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The following table (Table 3) displays the submitted budgets (Ohio 
and Indiana submitted budgets that cover both the Ohio and Indiana 
portions of the area) that are proposed in the notice to be approved. 
The budgets include an appropriate margin of safety while still 
maintaining total emissions below the attainment level.

  Table 3--Table of Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MOVES) for the Ohio
     and Indiana Portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton 1997 Ozone Area
                          [Tons per summer day]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                       Year                            2015       2020
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC...............................................      56.06      42.81
NOX...............................................      94.25      73.13
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on our review of the SIPs and the new budgets provided, EPA 
has determined that the SIPs will continue to meet the requirements if 
the revised motor vehicle emissions inventories are replaced with 
MOVES2010a inventories.

c. Applicability of MOBILE6.2-based Budgets

    Pursuant to the state's requests, EPA's approval of the revised 
budgets means that the existing MOBILE6.2-based budgets will no longer 
be applicable for transportation conformity purposes upon the effective 
date of this approval.
    In addition, upon this EPA approval of the MOVES2010a-based 
budgets, the regional transportation conformity grace period for using 
MOBILE6 instead of MOVES2010 (and subsequent minor

[[Page 6040]]

revisions) for the pollutants included in these budgets ends for the 
Ohio and Indiana portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton ozone maintenance 
area.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ For more information, see EPA's ``Policy Guidance on the Use 
of MOVES2010 and Subsequent Minor Revisions for State Implementation 
Plan Development, Transportation Conformity, and Other Purposes'' 
(April 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

V. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA is approving the 2015 and 2020 submitted budgets for the Ohio 
and Indiana portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton 1997 ozone maintenance 
plans. We are publishing this action without prior proposal because we 
view this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipate no adverse 
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal 
Register publication, we are publishing a separate document that will 
serve as the proposal to approve the state plan if relevant adverse 
written comments are filed. This rule will be effective April 1, 2013 
without further notice unless we receive relevant adverse written 
comments by February 28, 2013. If we receive such comments, we will 
withdraw this action before the effective date by publishing a 
subsequent document that will withdraw the final action. All public 
comments received will then be addressed in a subsequent final rule 
based on the proposed action. EPA will not institute a second comment 
period. Any parties interested in commenting on this action should do 
so at this time. Please note that if EPA receives adverse comment on an 
amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that provision may 
be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt as final those 
provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an adverse comment. 
If we do not receive any comments, this action will be effective April 
1, 2013.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, 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, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in 
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review 
of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for 
the appropriate circuit by April 1, 2013. Filing a petition for 
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect 
the finality of this action for the purposes of judicial review nor 
does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may 
be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or 
action. Parties with objections to this direct final rule are 
encouraged to file a comment in response to the parallel notice of 
proposed rulemaking for this action published in the proposed rules 
section of today's Federal Register, rather than file an immediate 
petition for judicial review of this direct final rule, so that EPA can 
withdraw this direct final rule and address the comment in the proposed 
rulemaking. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to 
enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: January 11, 2013.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
    40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.


0
2. The table in Sec.  52.770 paragraph (e) is amended by adding an 
entry in alphabetical order for ``Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN 1997 8-
hour ozone maintenance plan'' to read as follows:


Sec.  52.770  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

[[Page 6041]]



                                           EPA-Approved Indiana Nonregulatory and Quasi-Regulatory Provisions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 Title                         Indiana date              EPA Approval                                Explanation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN 1997 8-   .........................  1/29/12, [INSERT PAGE     Revision to motor vehicle emission budgets.
 hour ozone maintenance plan.                                       NUMBER WHERE THE
                                                                    DOCUMENT BEGINS].
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



0
3. Section 52.777 is amended by redesignating paragraph (oo) as 
paragraph (oo)(1) and by adding paragraph (oo)(2) to read as follows:


Sec.  52.777  Control strategy: photochemical oxidants (hydrocarbons).

* * * * *
    (oo)(1) * * *
    (2) Approval--On December 11, 2012, Indiana submitted a request to 
revise the approved MOBILE6.2 motor vehicle emission budgets (budgets) 
in the 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for the Indiana portion of 
the Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN maintenance area. The budgets are 
being revised with budgets developed with the MOVES2010a model. The 
2015 motor vehicle emissions budgets for the Ohio and Indiana portions 
are 56.06 tpd VOC and 94.25 tpd NOX. The 2020 motor vehicle 
emissions budgets for the Ohio and Indiana portions of the area are 
42.81 tpd VOC and 73.13 tpd for NOX.


0
4. Section 52.1885 is amended by adding paragraph (ff)(12) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  52.1885  Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (ff) * * *
    (12) Approval--On June 29, 2012, Ohio submitted a request to revise 
the approved MOBILE6.2 motor vehicle emission budgets (budgets) in the 
1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for the Ohio and Indiana portions of 
the Cincinnati-Hamilton, OH-KY-IN 8-hour ozone area. The budgets are 
being revised with budgets developed with the MOVES2010a model. The 
2015 motor vehicle emissions budgets for the Ohio and Indiana portions 
are 56.06 tpd VOC and 94.25 tpd NOX. The 2020 motor vehicle 
emissions budgets for the Ohio and Indiana portions of the area are 
42.81 tpd VOC and 73.13 tpd for NOX.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-01733 Filed 1-28-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P