Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Alaska; Anchorage Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan and State Implementation Plan Revisions, 11707-11711 [2014-04452]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 41 / Monday, March 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R10–OAR–2013–0421; FRL–9907–22Region 10]
Approval and Promulgation of State
Implementation Plans: Alaska;
Anchorage Carbon Monoxide Limited
Maintenance Plan and State
Implementation Plan Revisions
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The State of Alaska (the State)
submitted two State Implementation
Plan (SIP) revisions to the Anchorage
Transportation Control Program,
Anchorage Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Maintenance Plan. On September 20,
2011, the State submitted a SIP revision
(2011 Submittal) that updated
Anchorage’s CO motor vehicle
emissions budget (MVEB) in the
Anchorage CO maintenance area using
the EPA’s Motor Vehicle Emission
Simulator (MOVES) model. On April 22,
2013, the State submitted a SIP revision
(2013 Submittal) to satisfy the Clean Air
Act (CAA) section 175A(b) requirement
for a second 10-year maintenance plan
for the Anchorage CO maintenance area
in the form of a limited maintenance
plan (LMP). This LMP addresses
maintenance of the CO National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) for a second 10-year period,
beyond redesignation of the area to
attainment, through 2024. The EPA is
taking direct final action to approve
both the 2013 Submittal and portions of
the 2011 Submittal that are not
superseded by the 2013 Submittal. The
EPA is approving these SIP revisions
because the State has demonstrated that
they are consistent with the CAA.
DATES: This rule is effective on May 2,
2014, without further notice, unless the
EPA receives adverse comment by April
2, 2014. If the EPA receives adverse
comment, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register
informing the public that the rule will
not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R10–
OAR–2013–0421, by any of the
following methods:
• www.regulations.gov: Follow the
on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
• Email: R10-Public_Comments@
epa.gov
• Mail: Keith Rose, U.S. EPA Region
10, Office of Air, Waste and Toxics
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:16 Feb 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
(AWT–107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite
900, Seattle WA 98101
• Hand Delivery/Courier: U.S. EPA
Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite
900, Seattle WA 98101. Attention: Keith
Rose, Office of Air, Waste and Toxics,
AWT–107. Such deliveries are only
accepted during normal hours of
operation and special arrangements
should be made for deliveries of boxed
information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R10–OAR–2013–
0421. The 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
the disclosure of which 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 the 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 the 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, the 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 the EPA cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification,
the 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
the disclosure of which is restricted by
statute. Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
available only in hard copy. Publicly
available docket materials are available
either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy
during normal business hours at the
Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, U.S.
EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue,
Seattle, WA 98101.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
11707
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Keith Rose at: (206) 553–1949,
rose.keith@epa.gov, or the above EPA
Region 10 address.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document wherever
‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, it is
intended to refer to the EPA.
Information is organized as follows:
Table of Contents
I. What is the purpose of this action?
II. What is the background for this action?
III. What changes to the Alaska SIP were
submitted for the EPA’s approval?
IV. Evaluation of the Alaska Submittals
A. 2011 Submittal
B. 2013 Submittal
C. Revisions to 18 AAC 50.030
V. Transportation and General Conformity
VI. Final Action
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is the purpose of this action?
The EPA is taking direct final action
to approve a CO LMP for the Anchorage
CO maintenance area for the second 10year maintenance period. The CO LMP,
submitted by the State of Alaska to the
EPA on April 22, 2013, is designed to
keep the Anchorage CO maintenance
area in attainment for the CO standard
for a second 10-year period beyond
redesignation of this area to attainment,
through 2024.
The EPA is also taking direct final
action to approve some revisions to the
CO maintenance plan that were
submitted on September 20, 2011. The
2011 Submittal updates the approved
CO maintenance plan to reflect the use
of the EPA’s MOVES model. However,
the Submittal includes sections of the
plan that have been superseded by the
2013 Submittal that the EPA is
approving in this action. The EPA is
approving the most recently adopted
and submitted sections of the plan.
Further action on the earlier adopted
versions of these sections included in
the 2011 Submittal is not required
because they are no longer in effect and
have been superseded by the 2013
Submittal. These provisions are
identified below.
II. What is the background for this
action?
Anchorage, Alaska, was first
designated a nonattainment area for CO
and classified as moderate on January
27, 1978. The Municipality of
Anchorage prepared a plan to attain the
CO NAAQS by December 31, 1987,
although Anchorage failed to achieve
attainment by December 31, 1987. The
CAA was amended in 1990 and the EPA
designated Anchorage as a moderate
nonattainment area for CO and required
submission of a revised air quality plan
E:\FR\FM\03MRR1.SGM
03MRR1
11708
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 41 / Monday, March 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
to bring Anchorage into attainment by
December 31, 1995 (56 FR 56712,
November 6, 1991). The EPA approved
the plan in 1995, however, two
violations of the CO NAAQS in 1996
resulted in the EPA reclassifying
Anchorage to serious with an attainment
date of December 31, 2000 (61 FR
33676, June 12, 1998). The State
submitted a new attainment plan on
January 4, 2002, and on September 18,
2002, the EPA approved the Anchorage
CO attainment plan (67 FR 58711).
On February 18, 2004, the State
submitted a maintenance plan and a
redesignation request for the Anchorage
CO nonattainment area. The EPA
approved the plan on June 23, 2004 (69
FR 34935). The maintenance plan relied
on control strategies needed to assure
maintenance of the CO NAAQS. The
strategy focused on the Federal Motor
Vehicle Emission Control Program, a
motor vehicle inspection and
maintenance (I/M) program, expanded
wintertime transit service and
promotion of engine pre-heaters.
The State subsequently submitted two
revisions to the Alaska SIP relating to
the I/M program in Anchorage: A March
29, 2002, SIP revision that contained
minor revisions to the statewide I/M
program (approved by the EPA on
March 22, 2010, 75 FR 13436); and a
September 29, 2010, SIP revision that
discontinued the I/M program in
Anchorage as an active control measure
in the SIP and shifted it to a
contingency measure (approved by the
EPA on January 10, 2012, 77 FR 1414).
III. What changes to the Alaska SIP
were submitted for the EPA’s approval?
The 2011 Submittal updates the
Federally-approved Anchorage CO
maintenance plan with emissions
estimates calculated with the EPA’s
MOVES motor vehicle emissions model.
The updates include a reanalysis of the
emissions inventory and maintenance
demonstration as well as changes to the
narrative. The 2011 Submittal replaces
the Anchorage Transportation Control
Program in its entirety and revises four
sections of the appendices. The control
strategies in the 2011 Submittal remain
the same as in the most recent
Federally-approved maintenance plan
for the Anchorage maintenance area that
was approved on January 10, 2012 (77
FR 1414).
The 2013 Submittal establishes a
second 10-year CO maintenance plan for
the Anchorage area, as required by CAA
section 175A(b). This plan demonstrates
that CO levels in the area will not
exceed the CO NAAQS standard during
its effective period and does not
institute additional CO control
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:16 Feb 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
measures. It revises three sections of the
Anchorage Transportation Control
Program and three sections of the
appendices. The revised sections of the
2013 Submittal supersede those sections
in the 2011 Submittal.
IV. Evaluation of the Alaska Submittals
A. 2011 Submittal
Alaska’s 2011 Submittal updates the
MVEB in the Anchorage CO
maintenance plan with the MOVES
model. The MOVES model is the 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
EPA’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 the
previous emissions model, MOBILE6.2.
The EPA announced the release of
MOVES2010 in March 2010 and
explained that MOVES2010 should be
used in SIP development as
expeditiously as possible outside of
California (75 FR 9411, March 2, 2010).
In addition, the notice started a two-year
grace period before MOVES2010 was
required to be used in new regional
emissions analyses for transportation.
The EPA extended that grace period
until March 2, 2013 (77 FR 11394,
February 27, 2012).
Following is the EPA’s evaluation of
the sections of the 2011 Submittal we
are taking action on in this rulemaking.
1. The Revised Emission Inventories
The 2011 Submittal revises only the
on-road mobile source inventories but
not the point, non-road and area source
inventories for the 2007 base year and
projections for the years 2009, 2011,
2012, 2013, 2015, 2019, and 2023. The
control strategies in the 2011 Submittal
remain the same as in the most recent
maintenance plan for the Anchorage
maintenance area that was approved on
January 10, 2012 (77 FR 1414). The State
updated the area-wide inventory and
the Turnagain micro-inventory for the
Anchorage maintenance area. The
Turnagain micro-inventory represents a
9 km2 area in a neighborhood in west
Anchorage that surrounds the Turnagain
monitoring station. The Turnagain
monitor exhibits the highest CO
concentrations of the current monitoring
network for the Anchorage maintenance
area and has shown approximately 20%
higher values than the next highest site.
In the 2007 Anchorage area-wide
inventory, motor vehicles accounted for
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
78.9% of the CO emissions on a typical
24-hour winter day. Motor vehicle start
emissions accounted for 53.4% of those
emissions. The total area-wide CO
emissions are projected to increase by
6.7% by 2023, from 159.3 tons per day
(tpd) in 2007 to 169.9 tpd in 2023. In the
2007 Turnagain micro-inventory, motor
vehicles accounted for about 84.4% of
the CO emissions on a typical 24-hour
winter day with motor vehicle start
emissions accounting for about 58.9% of
those emissions. In the Turnagain
micro-inventory area, total CO
emissions are projected to decrease by
about 5% through 2023, from 10.2 tpd
in 2007 to 9.71 tpd in 2023.
2. The Revised Maintenance
Demonstration
The State revised the maintenance
demonstration in the Anchorage CO
plan to include the emissions estimates
calculated with MOVES. The methods
used for the maintenance demonstration
in the 2011 Submittal are consistent
with those used previously and most
recently approved by the EPA on
January 10, 2012 (77 FR 1414). In the
2011 Submittal, the State used a
probabilistic roll-forward approach to
demonstrate maintenance with the CO
NAAQS through 2023.
Based on the revised maintenance
demonstration in the 2011 Submittal,
the probability of maintaining the CO
NAAQS was found to be 99% or greater
for all years from 2008 through 2023. In
addition, the State performed a
sensitivity analysis that assumed three
times higher rates of growth in vehicle
travel than projected and a 2% per
annum growth in wood burning. The
probability of compliance using the
higher rates was estimated to be greater
than 98% through 2023.
The EPA concludes that the emission
inventories and revised maintenance
demonstration in the 2011 Submittal are
consistent with EPA guidance and the
Anchorage CO maintenance plan
continues to demonstrate its purpose of
maintaining the CO NAAQS through the
year 2023. Therefore, the EPA is
approving the 2011 Submittal with the
exception of the following two sections
in Volume II: Section III.B.4, Carbon
Monoxide Monitoring Program and
Section III.B.10, Motor Vehicle
Emissions Budget, because these
sections have been superseded by the
State’s 2013 Submittal and no further
action by the EPA on these components
of the submission is required.
Although the EPA previously found
the MVEB to be adequate for conformity
purposes (77 FR 8252, February 14,
2012), we are not approving the MVEB
in the 2011 Submittal because it has
E:\FR\FM\03MRR1.SGM
03MRR1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 41 / Monday, March 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
been superseded by the 2013 Submittal.
The EPA is also not approving 18 AAC
50 as discussed below in section IV.C.
B. 2013 Submittal
In its 2013 Submittal, the State revises
the previous Anchorage Transportation
Control Program (2011 Submittal) by
adding a second ten-year maintenance
plan as required by section 175A(b) of
the CAA. The 2013 Submittal also
revises the transportation conformity
and CO monitoring program sections of
the plan and certain appendices of the
plan. The current Anchorage
Transportation Control Program is
comprised of both the 2011 and the
2013 Submittals. Following is the EPA’s
evaluation of the sections of the 2011
and 2013 Submittals we are acting on in
this rulemaking which support our
approval of the Anchorage second 10year maintenance plan. (See the table
‘‘Anchorage 2011 and 2013 CO
Maintenance Plan Submittals’’ in the
docket for a complete list of sections in
the Anchorage Transportation Control
Program that the EPA is approving in
this action.)
For the second 10-year maintenance
plan, the State chose the LMP Option as
described in an October 6, 1995, EPA
memorandum from Joseph Paisie, the
Group Leader of the Integrated Policy
and Strategies Group, titled, ‘‘Limited
Maintenance Plan Option for
Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment
Areas.’’ To qualify for the LMP Option,
the second highest CO value for an area,
based on the eight consecutive quarters
(two years of data) used to demonstrate
attainment, must be at or below 7.65
parts per million (ppm), which is 85
percent of the 8-hour CO NAAQS. The
EPA has determined that the LMP
Option for CO is also available to all
states as part of the 175A(b) update to
the maintenance plans, regardless of the
original nonattainment classification, or
lack thereof. Thus, the EPA observes
that although the Anchorage
maintenance area was designated as a
serious nonattainment area for the CO
NAAQS, redesignation to attainment
status in conjunction with meeting all
requirements of the October 6, 1995,
memorandum, allows the State to be
eligible to submit a LMP as the update
to its original maintenance plan per
section 175A(b) of the CAA.
The requirements for the LMP Option
and the EPA’s evaluation of how each
requirement has been met by the 2011
and 2013 Submittals are summarized
below.
1. Base Year Emission Inventory
A maintenance plan must contain an
attainment year emission inventory to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:16 Feb 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
identify a level of emissions in the area
that is sufficient to attain the CO
NAAQS. The Anchorage CO
maintenance plan contains an emission
inventory for the Anchorage
maintenance area for the base year 2007.
The emission inventory for the
Anchorage maintenance area is a list, by
source category, of the amount of CO
directly emitted by area, point and
mobile sources. Motor vehicle emission
estimates for the 2007 base year
inventory have been updated with the
EPA MOVES vehicle emission model
and were included in the 2011
Submittal which the EPA is approving
in this action (see discussion above).
The methods used to determine the
Anchorage CO emission inventory are
consistent with the EPA’s most recent
guidance on developing emission
inventories. Because violations of the
CO NAAQS are most likely to occur on
winter weekdays, the inventory
prepared is for a typical winter day. The
table below shows the estimated tons of
CO emitted per winter day by source
category.
11709
percent of the CO 8-hour NAAQS, the
continued applicability of prevention of
significant deterioration requirements,
the control measures already in the SIP,
and any Federal control measures in
place, should all provide adequate
assurance of maintenance over the 10year maintenance period. With the LMP
Option, there is no requirement to
project CO emission inventories over
the second 10-year maintenance period.
The second highest 8-hour CO
concentration for the Anchorage
maintenance area during the most
recent 8 quarters (2011–2012) was 5.5
ppm, which is below the LMP Option
requirement of 7.65 ppm. Therefore, the
EPA finds that Alaska has demonstrated
that the Anchorage maintenance area
qualifies for the LMP Option and has
satisfied the maintenance demonstration
requirement.
3. Monitoring Network and Verification
of Continued Attainment
To verify the attainment status of the
area over the maintenance period, the
LMP must contain provisions for
continued operation of an appropriate,
2007 ANCHORAGE EMISSION INVENEPA-approved monitoring network in
TORY, MAIN SOURCE CATEGORY accordance with 40 CFR Part 58. The
2013 Submittal includes a commitment
SUBTOTALS
to continue to operate an EPA-approved
CO emissions
monitoring network in Anchorage.
Main source category
tons per winter Alaska submits an annual air
day
monitoring network plan to the EPA for
Point Sources .....................
1.3 approval, and the Alaska air monitoring
Motor Vehicles ....................
125.6 network plan was most recently
approved by the EPA on October 25,
Anchorage International Airport Operations ...............
12.4 2012.
Wood Burning .....................
Space Heating-natural gas
Merrill Field Airport .............
Miscellaneous .....................
6.2
3.8
0.7
9.3
Total ................................
159.3
2. Demonstration of Maintenance
The 8-hour CO NAAQS is attained
when the second highest 8-hour average
CO concentration in a given year does
not exceed a concentration of 9.0 ppm.
The last monitored violation of the CO
NAAQS in Anchorage occurred in 1996
and monitored CO levels have been
steadily in decline ever since. The
second highest 8-hour CO concentration
in 2012 for the Anchorage maintenance
area was 5.5 ppm, which is in
attainment with the CO NAAQS.
The maintenance demonstration
requirement is considered to be satisfied
for areas that qualify for the LMP Option
if the second highest 8-hour CO
concentration during the most recent 8
quarters has been at or below 7.65 ppm
(85 percent of the NAAQS). The EPA
believes that if an area begins its
maintenance period at or below 85
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
4. Contingency Plan
Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires
that a maintenance plan include
contingency provisions that could be
implemented if a maintenance area fails
to attain the NAAQS. In the 2013
Submittal, Alaska committed to the
same six contingency measures for the
Anchorage maintenance area that were
included in the 2011 Submittal. These
contingency measures are summarized
in the LMP as follows:
(1) Increasing public awareness and
education, transit, carpool and vanpool
promotion efforts;
(2) curtailing or limiting the use of
fireplaces and woodstoves and other
wood burning appliances when high CO
is predicted;
(3) promoting an increase in transit
ridership among commuters by offering
reduced fares or free transit for
employees of companies that contribute
to the subsidy;
(4) reinstating the engine block heater
installation subsidy;
(5) reinstating the ethanol-blended
gasoline requirement; and
E:\FR\FM\03MRR1.SGM
03MRR1
11710
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 41 / Monday, March 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
(6) reinstating the Inspection and
Maintenance program.
As a result of its review, the EPA
finds that the 2011 and 2013 Submittals
adequately demonstrate that the
Anchorage CO maintenance area will
continue to maintain the CO NAAQS
through 2024, and that these submittals
contain all the necessary elements to
qualify the Anchorage CO maintenance
area for the LMP Option.
C. Revisions to 18 AAC 50.030
Both the 2011 and 2013 Submittals
included revisions to the appendices to
the Air Quality Control Program
(Volume III, 18 AAC 50 Air Quality
Control) by amending regulation 50.030
of title 18 of the Alaska Administrative
Code. The EPA is taking no action on 18
AAC 50.030, State Air Quality Control
Plan, which adopts by reference
Volumes II and III of the State Air
Quality Control Plan and other
documents (as a matter of State law)
because the referenced documents that
form the basis for the 2011 and 2013
Submittals are being individually
approved in this action. The EPA takes
action directly, as appropriate, on the
specific provisions in the State Air
Quality Control Plan that have been
submitted by the State, so it is
unnecessary for the EPA to approve 18
AAC 50.030. The EPA is only approving
those provisions related to the State’s
CO maintenance and limited
maintenance plans that are specifically
identified in the 2011 and 2013
Submittals and addressed in this action.
The EPA is not approving any
regulatory provision of 18 AAC 50.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
V. Transportation and General
Conformity
Transportation conformity is required
by section 176(c) of the CAA. The EPA’s
conformity rule requires that
transportation plans, programs and
projects that are funded under 23 U.S.C.
or the Federal Transit Act conform to
SIPs. Conformity to a SIP means that
transportation activities will not
produce new air quality violations,
worsen existing violations, or delay
timely attainment of the NAAQS.
The transportation conformity rule
(40 CFR Parts 51 and 93) and the general
conformity rule (40 CFR Parts 51 and
93) apply to nonattainment areas and
maintenance areas covered by an
approved maintenance plan. Under
either conformity rule, an acceptable
method of demonstrating that a Federal
action conforms to the applicable SIP is
to demonstrate that expected emissions
from the planned action are consistent
with the emissions budget for the area.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:16 Feb 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
While the EPA’s LMP Option does not
exempt an area from the need to affirm
conformity, it explains that the area may
demonstrate conformity without
submitting an emissions budget. Under
the LMP Option, emissions budgets are
treated as essentially not constraining
for the length of the maintenance period
because it is unreasonable to expect that
the qualifying areas would experience
so much growth in that period that a
violation of the CO NAAQS would
result. Similarly, Federal actions subject
to the general conformity rule could be
considered to satisfy the ‘‘budget test’’
specified in section 93.158(a)(5)(i)(A) for
the same reasons that the budgets are
essentially considered to be unlimited.
While areas with maintenance plans
approved under the LMP Option are not
subject to the budget test, the areas
remain subject to other transportation
conformity requirements of 40 CFR Part
93, subpart A. Thus, the metropolitan
planning organization (MPO) in the area
or the State must document and ensure
that:
a. Transportation plans and projects
provide for timely implementation of
SIP transportation control measures in
accordance with 40 CFR 93.113;
b. Transportation plans and projects
comply with the fiscal constraint
element per 40 CFR 93.108;
c. The MPO’s interagency
consultation procedures meet applicable
requirements of 40 CFR 93.105;
d. Conformity of transportation plans
is determined no less frequently than
every four years, and conformity of plan
amendments and transportation projects
is demonstrated in accordance with the
timing requirements specified in 40 CFR
93.104;
e. The latest planning assumptions
and emissions model are used as set
forth in 40 CFR 93.110 and 40 CFR
93.111;
f. Projects do not cause or contribute
to any new localized carbon monoxide
or particulate matter violations, in
accordance with procedures specified in
40 CFR 93.123; and
g. Project sponsors and/or operators
provide written commitments as
specified in 40 CFR 93.125.
The EPA confers regularly with the
Anchorage Metropolitan Area
Transportation System technical and
policy committees, the Alaska
Department of Environmental
Conservation, the Alaska Department of
Transportation & Public Facilities, the
Federal Highway Administration and
the Federal Transit Administration to
review the Transportation Improvement
Plan for the Anchorage maintenance
area to determine if the area is meeting
the transportation conformity
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
requirements under 40 CFR Part 93,
subpart A. The EPA finds that the
Anchorage maintenance area currently
meets the requirements of 40 CFR Part
93, subpart A.
VI. Final Action
The EPA is taking direct final action
to approve the revised sections of the
Anchorage Transportation Control
Program (Volume II, Section III.B) in the
Alaska SIP Submittal of September 20,
2011, that are not superseded by the
Submittal of April 22, 2013.
In accordance with the requirements
of the CAA, the EPA is approving the
CO LMP (Limited Maintenance Plan for
2014–2024, Volume II, Section III.B.12
of the State Air Quality Control Plan,
adopted February 22, 2013) for the
second 10-year period for the Anchorage
maintenance area in Alaska’s SIP
Submittal of April 22, 2013, because the
State’s LMP adequately demonstrates
that the Anchorage maintenance area
qualifies for the LMP Option and will
maintain the CO NAAQS through the
second 10-year maintenance period, and
is consistent with EPA guidance.
VII. 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, the
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);
E:\FR\FM\03MRR1.SGM
03MRR1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 41 / Monday, March 3, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
• 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 the 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 the 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. The 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 May 2, 2014. 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. This action may not be
challenged later in proceedings to
enforce its requirements. (See section
307(b)(2)).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:16 Feb 28, 2014
Jkt 232001
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: February 13, 2014.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, title 40, chapter I of the Code
of Federal Regulations is amended as
follows:
PART 52—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 52
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
2. Section 52.73 is amended by adding
paragraphs (a)(1)(iii) and (iv) to read as
follows:
■
Approval of plans.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(iii) The EPA approves the following
revised sections of the Anchorage
Transportation Control Program,
Anchorage CO Maintenance Plan
(Volume II, Section III.B) of the Alaska
SIP Submittal adopted July 13, 2011,
and submitted on September 20, 2011:
Planning Process (Section III.B.1),
Maintenance Area Boundary (Section
III.B.2), Nature of the CO Problem—
Causes and Trends (Section III.B.3),
Transportation Control Strategies
(Section III.B.5), Modeling and
Projections (Section III.B.6),
Contingency Plan (Section III.B.7),
Anchorage Emergency Episode Plan
(Section III.B.8), Assurance of Adequacy
(Section III.B.9) and Redesignation
Request (Section III.B.11). The EPA also
approves the following revised sections
of the Appendices (Volume III):
Anchorage Assembly Resolution No.
2011–133 (Appendix III.B.1), Anchorage
2007 Carbon Monoxide Emission
Inventory and 2007–2023 Emission
Projections (Appendix III.B.3), Analysis
of Probability of Complying with the
National Ambient Air Quality Standard
for Carbon Monoxide in Anchorage
between 2007 and 2023 (Appendix
III.B.6) and Affidavit of Oral Hearing
(Appendix III.B.10).
(iv) The EPA approves the following
revised sections of the Anchorage
Transportation Control Program,
Anchorage CO Limited Maintenance
Plan (Volume II, Section III.B), of the
Alaska SIP Submittal adopted February
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
22, 2013, and submitted on April 22,
2013: Carbon Monoxide Monitoring
Program (Section III.B.4) Air Quality
Conformity Procedures (Section
III.B.10), Limited Maintenance Plan for
2014–2024 (Section III.B.12). In this
action, the EPA also approves the
following revised sections of the
Appendices (Volume III): Anchorage
Assembly Resolution No. 2013–20
(Appendix III.B.1) and Affidavit of Oral
Hearing (Appendix III.B.10).
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2014–04452 Filed 2–28–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R10–OAR–2013–0418, FRL–9907–30Region 10]
Subpart C—Alaska
§ 52.73
11711
Sfmt 4700
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Idaho
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is partially approving the
May 9, 2013, State Implementation Plan
(SIP) submittal from Idaho to revise the
SIP to update the incorporation by
reference of Federal air quality
regulations into the SIP and make minor
edits and clarifications. The EPA is
granting limited approval, as SIP
strengthening, to a portion of the
submittal that incorporates by reference
updates to the Federal nonattainment
new source review (nonattainment NSR)
requirements that have been recently
remanded to the EPA by a court. In
addition, the EPA is partially
disapproving Idaho’s incorporation by
reference of two provisions of the
Federal prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) permitting rules that
have been recently vacated in a separate
decision by a court. Finally we are
taking no action on Idaho’s
incorporation by reference of another
provision of the Federal PSD permitting
rules that has also been the subject of a
court action. Upon the effective date of
this action, the Idaho SIP will
incorporate by reference certain Federal
regulations as of July 1, 2012.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
April 2, 2014.
ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA–R10–OAR–
2013–0418. All documents in the docket
are listed on the https://
www.regulations.gov Web site. Although
E:\FR\FM\03MRR1.SGM
03MRR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 41 (Monday, March 3, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11707-11711]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-04452]
[[Page 11707]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R10-OAR-2013-0421; FRL-9907-22-Region 10]
Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Alaska;
Anchorage Carbon Monoxide Limited Maintenance Plan and State
Implementation Plan Revisions
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The State of Alaska (the State) submitted two State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revisions to the Anchorage Transportation
Control Program, Anchorage Carbon Monoxide (CO) Maintenance Plan. On
September 20, 2011, the State submitted a SIP revision (2011 Submittal)
that updated Anchorage's CO motor vehicle emissions budget (MVEB) in
the Anchorage CO maintenance area using the EPA's Motor Vehicle
Emission Simulator (MOVES) model. On April 22, 2013, the State
submitted a SIP revision (2013 Submittal) to satisfy the Clean Air Act
(CAA) section 175A(b) requirement for a second 10-year maintenance plan
for the Anchorage CO maintenance area in the form of a limited
maintenance plan (LMP). This LMP addresses maintenance of the CO
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for a second 10-year
period, beyond redesignation of the area to attainment, through 2024.
The EPA is taking direct final action to approve both the 2013
Submittal and portions of the 2011 Submittal that are not superseded by
the 2013 Submittal. The EPA is approving these SIP revisions because
the State has demonstrated that they are consistent with the CAA.
DATES: This rule is effective on May 2, 2014, without further notice,
unless the EPA receives adverse comment by April 2, 2014. If the EPA
receives adverse comment, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public that the rule will not take
effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R10-
OAR-2013-0421, by any of the following methods:
www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for
submitting comments.
Email: R10-Public_Comments@epa.gov
Mail: Keith Rose, U.S. EPA Region 10, Office of Air, Waste
and Toxics (AWT-107), 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle WA 98101
Hand Delivery/Courier: U.S. EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth
Avenue, Suite 900, Seattle WA 98101. Attention: Keith Rose, Office of
Air, Waste and Toxics, AWT-107. Such deliveries are only accepted
during normal hours of operation and special arrangements should be
made for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R10-OAR-
2013-0421. The 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 the
disclosure of which 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 the 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 the 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, the 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 the EPA cannot read your comment due
to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, the
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
the disclosure of which is restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet
and will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available
docket materials are available either electronically in
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy during normal business hours at the
Office of Air, Waste and Toxics, U.S. EPA Region 10, 1200 Sixth Avenue,
Seattle, WA 98101.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Keith Rose at: (206) 553-1949,
rose.keith@epa.gov, or the above EPA Region 10 address.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document wherever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, it is intended to refer to the EPA.
Information is organized as follows:
Table of Contents
I. What is the purpose of this action?
II. What is the background for this action?
III. What changes to the Alaska SIP were submitted for the EPA's
approval?
IV. Evaluation of the Alaska Submittals
A. 2011 Submittal
B. 2013 Submittal
C. Revisions to 18 AAC 50.030
V. Transportation and General Conformity
VI. Final Action
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What is the purpose of this action?
The EPA is taking direct final action to approve a CO LMP for the
Anchorage CO maintenance area for the second 10-year maintenance
period. The CO LMP, submitted by the State of Alaska to the EPA on
April 22, 2013, is designed to keep the Anchorage CO maintenance area
in attainment for the CO standard for a second 10-year period beyond
redesignation of this area to attainment, through 2024.
The EPA is also taking direct final action to approve some
revisions to the CO maintenance plan that were submitted on September
20, 2011. The 2011 Submittal updates the approved CO maintenance plan
to reflect the use of the EPA's MOVES model. However, the Submittal
includes sections of the plan that have been superseded by the 2013
Submittal that the EPA is approving in this action. The EPA is
approving the most recently adopted and submitted sections of the plan.
Further action on the earlier adopted versions of these sections
included in the 2011 Submittal is not required because they are no
longer in effect and have been superseded by the 2013 Submittal. These
provisions are identified below.
II. What is the background for this action?
Anchorage, Alaska, was first designated a nonattainment area for CO
and classified as moderate on January 27, 1978. The Municipality of
Anchorage prepared a plan to attain the CO NAAQS by December 31, 1987,
although Anchorage failed to achieve attainment by December 31, 1987.
The CAA was amended in 1990 and the EPA designated Anchorage as a
moderate nonattainment area for CO and required submission of a revised
air quality plan
[[Page 11708]]
to bring Anchorage into attainment by December 31, 1995 (56 FR 56712,
November 6, 1991). The EPA approved the plan in 1995, however, two
violations of the CO NAAQS in 1996 resulted in the EPA reclassifying
Anchorage to serious with an attainment date of December 31, 2000 (61
FR 33676, June 12, 1998). The State submitted a new attainment plan on
January 4, 2002, and on September 18, 2002, the EPA approved the
Anchorage CO attainment plan (67 FR 58711).
On February 18, 2004, the State submitted a maintenance plan and a
redesignation request for the Anchorage CO nonattainment area. The EPA
approved the plan on June 23, 2004 (69 FR 34935). The maintenance plan
relied on control strategies needed to assure maintenance of the CO
NAAQS. The strategy focused on the Federal Motor Vehicle Emission
Control Program, a motor vehicle inspection and maintenance (I/M)
program, expanded wintertime transit service and promotion of engine
pre-heaters.
The State subsequently submitted two revisions to the Alaska SIP
relating to the I/M program in Anchorage: A March 29, 2002, SIP
revision that contained minor revisions to the statewide I/M program
(approved by the EPA on March 22, 2010, 75 FR 13436); and a September
29, 2010, SIP revision that discontinued the I/M program in Anchorage
as an active control measure in the SIP and shifted it to a contingency
measure (approved by the EPA on January 10, 2012, 77 FR 1414).
III. What changes to the Alaska SIP were submitted for the EPA's
approval?
The 2011 Submittal updates the Federally-approved Anchorage CO
maintenance plan with emissions estimates calculated with the EPA's
MOVES motor vehicle emissions model. The updates include a reanalysis
of the emissions inventory and maintenance demonstration as well as
changes to the narrative. The 2011 Submittal replaces the Anchorage
Transportation Control Program in its entirety and revises four
sections of the appendices. The control strategies in the 2011
Submittal remain the same as in the most recent Federally-approved
maintenance plan for the Anchorage maintenance area that was approved
on January 10, 2012 (77 FR 1414).
The 2013 Submittal establishes a second 10-year CO maintenance plan
for the Anchorage area, as required by CAA section 175A(b). This plan
demonstrates that CO levels in the area will not exceed the CO NAAQS
standard during its effective period and does not institute additional
CO control measures. It revises three sections of the Anchorage
Transportation Control Program and three sections of the appendices.
The revised sections of the 2013 Submittal supersede those sections in
the 2011 Submittal.
IV. Evaluation of the Alaska Submittals
A. 2011 Submittal
Alaska's 2011 Submittal updates the MVEB in the Anchorage CO
maintenance plan with the MOVES model. The MOVES model is the 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 EPA'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 the
previous emissions model, MOBILE6.2. The EPA announced the release of
MOVES2010 in March 2010 and explained that MOVES2010 should be used in
SIP development as expeditiously as possible outside of California (75
FR 9411, March 2, 2010). In addition, the notice started a two-year
grace period before MOVES2010 was required to be used in new regional
emissions analyses for transportation. The EPA extended that grace
period until March 2, 2013 (77 FR 11394, February 27, 2012).
Following is the EPA's evaluation of the sections of the 2011
Submittal we are taking action on in this rulemaking.
1. The Revised Emission Inventories
The 2011 Submittal revises only the on-road mobile source
inventories but not the point, non-road and area source inventories for
the 2007 base year and projections for the years 2009, 2011, 2012,
2013, 2015, 2019, and 2023. The control strategies in the 2011
Submittal remain the same as in the most recent maintenance plan for
the Anchorage maintenance area that was approved on January 10, 2012
(77 FR 1414). The State updated the area-wide inventory and the
Turnagain micro-inventory for the Anchorage maintenance area. The
Turnagain micro-inventory represents a 9 km\2\ area in a neighborhood
in west Anchorage that surrounds the Turnagain monitoring station. The
Turnagain monitor exhibits the highest CO concentrations of the current
monitoring network for the Anchorage maintenance area and has shown
approximately 20% higher values than the next highest site.
In the 2007 Anchorage area-wide inventory, motor vehicles accounted
for 78.9% of the CO emissions on a typical 24-hour winter day. Motor
vehicle start emissions accounted for 53.4% of those emissions. The
total area-wide CO emissions are projected to increase by 6.7% by 2023,
from 159.3 tons per day (tpd) in 2007 to 169.9 tpd in 2023. In the 2007
Turnagain micro-inventory, motor vehicles accounted for about 84.4% of
the CO emissions on a typical 24-hour winter day with motor vehicle
start emissions accounting for about 58.9% of those emissions. In the
Turnagain micro-inventory area, total CO emissions are projected to
decrease by about 5% through 2023, from 10.2 tpd in 2007 to 9.71 tpd in
2023.
2. The Revised Maintenance Demonstration
The State revised the maintenance demonstration in the Anchorage CO
plan to include the emissions estimates calculated with MOVES. The
methods used for the maintenance demonstration in the 2011 Submittal
are consistent with those used previously and most recently approved by
the EPA on January 10, 2012 (77 FR 1414). In the 2011 Submittal, the
State used a probabilistic roll-forward approach to demonstrate
maintenance with the CO NAAQS through 2023.
Based on the revised maintenance demonstration in the 2011
Submittal, the probability of maintaining the CO NAAQS was found to be
99% or greater for all years from 2008 through 2023. In addition, the
State performed a sensitivity analysis that assumed three times higher
rates of growth in vehicle travel than projected and a 2% per annum
growth in wood burning. The probability of compliance using the higher
rates was estimated to be greater than 98% through 2023.
The EPA concludes that the emission inventories and revised
maintenance demonstration in the 2011 Submittal are consistent with EPA
guidance and the Anchorage CO maintenance plan continues to demonstrate
its purpose of maintaining the CO NAAQS through the year 2023.
Therefore, the EPA is approving the 2011 Submittal with the exception
of the following two sections in Volume II: Section III.B.4, Carbon
Monoxide Monitoring Program and Section III.B.10, Motor Vehicle
Emissions Budget, because these sections have been superseded by the
State's 2013 Submittal and no further action by the EPA on these
components of the submission is required.
Although the EPA previously found the MVEB to be adequate for
conformity purposes (77 FR 8252, February 14, 2012), we are not
approving the MVEB in the 2011 Submittal because it has
[[Page 11709]]
been superseded by the 2013 Submittal. The EPA is also not approving 18
AAC 50 as discussed below in section IV.C.
B. 2013 Submittal
In its 2013 Submittal, the State revises the previous Anchorage
Transportation Control Program (2011 Submittal) by adding a second ten-
year maintenance plan as required by section 175A(b) of the CAA. The
2013 Submittal also revises the transportation conformity and CO
monitoring program sections of the plan and certain appendices of the
plan. The current Anchorage Transportation Control Program is comprised
of both the 2011 and the 2013 Submittals. Following is the EPA's
evaluation of the sections of the 2011 and 2013 Submittals we are
acting on in this rulemaking which support our approval of the
Anchorage second 10-year maintenance plan. (See the table ``Anchorage
2011 and 2013 CO Maintenance Plan Submittals'' in the docket for a
complete list of sections in the Anchorage Transportation Control
Program that the EPA is approving in this action.)
For the second 10-year maintenance plan, the State chose the LMP
Option as described in an October 6, 1995, EPA memorandum from Joseph
Paisie, the Group Leader of the Integrated Policy and Strategies Group,
titled, ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO
Nonattainment Areas.'' To qualify for the LMP Option, the second
highest CO value for an area, based on the eight consecutive quarters
(two years of data) used to demonstrate attainment, must be at or below
7.65 parts per million (ppm), which is 85 percent of the 8-hour CO
NAAQS. The EPA has determined that the LMP Option for CO is also
available to all states as part of the 175A(b) update to the
maintenance plans, regardless of the original nonattainment
classification, or lack thereof. Thus, the EPA observes that although
the Anchorage maintenance area was designated as a serious
nonattainment area for the CO NAAQS, redesignation to attainment status
in conjunction with meeting all requirements of the October 6, 1995,
memorandum, allows the State to be eligible to submit a LMP as the
update to its original maintenance plan per section 175A(b) of the CAA.
The requirements for the LMP Option and the EPA's evaluation of how
each requirement has been met by the 2011 and 2013 Submittals are
summarized below.
1. Base Year Emission Inventory
A maintenance plan must contain an attainment year emission
inventory to identify a level of emissions in the area that is
sufficient to attain the CO NAAQS. The Anchorage CO maintenance plan
contains an emission inventory for the Anchorage maintenance area for
the base year 2007. The emission inventory for the Anchorage
maintenance area is a list, by source category, of the amount of CO
directly emitted by area, point and mobile sources. Motor vehicle
emission estimates for the 2007 base year inventory have been updated
with the EPA MOVES vehicle emission model and were included in the 2011
Submittal which the EPA is approving in this action (see discussion
above). The methods used to determine the Anchorage CO emission
inventory are consistent with the EPA's most recent guidance on
developing emission inventories. Because violations of the CO NAAQS are
most likely to occur on winter weekdays, the inventory prepared is for
a typical winter day. The table below shows the estimated tons of CO
emitted per winter day by source category.
2007 Anchorage Emission Inventory, Main Source Category Subtotals
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CO emissions
Main source category tons per winter
day
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point Sources.......................................... 1.3
Motor Vehicles......................................... 125.6
Anchorage International Airport Operations............. 12.4
Wood Burning........................................... 6.2
Space Heating-natural gas.............................. 3.8
Merrill Field Airport.................................. 0.7
Miscellaneous.......................................... 9.3
----------------
Total................................................ 159.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Demonstration of Maintenance
The 8-hour CO NAAQS is attained when the second highest 8-hour
average CO concentration in a given year does not exceed a
concentration of 9.0 ppm. The last monitored violation of the CO NAAQS
in Anchorage occurred in 1996 and monitored CO levels have been
steadily in decline ever since. The second highest 8-hour CO
concentration in 2012 for the Anchorage maintenance area was 5.5 ppm,
which is in attainment with the CO NAAQS.
The maintenance demonstration requirement is considered to be
satisfied for areas that qualify for the LMP Option if the second
highest 8-hour CO concentration during the most recent 8 quarters has
been at or below 7.65 ppm (85 percent of the NAAQS). The EPA believes
that if an area begins its maintenance period at or below 85 percent of
the CO 8-hour NAAQS, the continued applicability of prevention of
significant deterioration requirements, the control measures already in
the SIP, and any Federal control measures in place, should all provide
adequate assurance of maintenance over the 10-year maintenance period.
With the LMP Option, there is no requirement to project CO emission
inventories over the second 10-year maintenance period. The second
highest 8-hour CO concentration for the Anchorage maintenance area
during the most recent 8 quarters (2011-2012) was 5.5 ppm, which is
below the LMP Option requirement of 7.65 ppm. Therefore, the EPA finds
that Alaska has demonstrated that the Anchorage maintenance area
qualifies for the LMP Option and has satisfied the maintenance
demonstration requirement.
3. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
To verify the attainment status of the area over the maintenance
period, the LMP must contain provisions for continued operation of an
appropriate, EPA-approved monitoring network in accordance with 40 CFR
Part 58. The 2013 Submittal includes a commitment to continue to
operate an EPA-approved monitoring network in Anchorage. Alaska submits
an annual air monitoring network plan to the EPA for approval, and the
Alaska air monitoring network plan was most recently approved by the
EPA on October 25, 2012.
4. Contingency Plan
Section 175A(d) of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include
contingency provisions that could be implemented if a maintenance area
fails to attain the NAAQS. In the 2013 Submittal, Alaska committed to
the same six contingency measures for the Anchorage maintenance area
that were included in the 2011 Submittal. These contingency measures
are summarized in the LMP as follows:
(1) Increasing public awareness and education, transit, carpool and
vanpool promotion efforts;
(2) curtailing or limiting the use of fireplaces and woodstoves and
other wood burning appliances when high CO is predicted;
(3) promoting an increase in transit ridership among commuters by
offering reduced fares or free transit for employees of companies that
contribute to the subsidy;
(4) reinstating the engine block heater installation subsidy;
(5) reinstating the ethanol-blended gasoline requirement; and
[[Page 11710]]
(6) reinstating the Inspection and Maintenance program.
As a result of its review, the EPA finds that the 2011 and 2013
Submittals adequately demonstrate that the Anchorage CO maintenance
area will continue to maintain the CO NAAQS through 2024, and that
these submittals contain all the necessary elements to qualify the
Anchorage CO maintenance area for the LMP Option.
C. Revisions to 18 AAC 50.030
Both the 2011 and 2013 Submittals included revisions to the
appendices to the Air Quality Control Program (Volume III, 18 AAC 50
Air Quality Control) by amending regulation 50.030 of title 18 of the
Alaska Administrative Code. The EPA is taking no action on 18 AAC
50.030, State Air Quality Control Plan, which adopts by reference
Volumes II and III of the State Air Quality Control Plan and other
documents (as a matter of State law) because the referenced documents
that form the basis for the 2011 and 2013 Submittals are being
individually approved in this action. The EPA takes action directly, as
appropriate, on the specific provisions in the State Air Quality
Control Plan that have been submitted by the State, so it is
unnecessary for the EPA to approve 18 AAC 50.030. The EPA is only
approving those provisions related to the State's CO maintenance and
limited maintenance plans that are specifically identified in the 2011
and 2013 Submittals and addressed in this action. The EPA is not
approving any regulatory provision of 18 AAC 50.
V. Transportation and General Conformity
Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the CAA.
The EPA's conformity rule requires that transportation plans, programs
and projects that are funded under 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Act
conform to SIPs. Conformity to a SIP means that transportation
activities will not produce new air quality violations, worsen existing
violations, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS.
The transportation conformity rule (40 CFR Parts 51 and 93) and the
general conformity rule (40 CFR Parts 51 and 93) apply to nonattainment
areas and maintenance areas covered by an approved maintenance plan.
Under either conformity rule, an acceptable method of demonstrating
that a Federal action conforms to the applicable SIP is to demonstrate
that expected emissions from the planned action are consistent with the
emissions budget for the area.
While the EPA's LMP Option does not exempt an area from the need to
affirm conformity, it explains that the area may demonstrate conformity
without submitting an emissions budget. Under the LMP Option, emissions
budgets are treated as essentially not constraining for the length of
the maintenance period because it is unreasonable to expect that the
qualifying areas would experience so much growth in that period that a
violation of the CO NAAQS would result. Similarly, Federal actions
subject to the general conformity rule could be considered to satisfy
the ``budget test'' specified in section 93.158(a)(5)(i)(A) for the
same reasons that the budgets are essentially considered to be
unlimited.
While areas with maintenance plans approved under the LMP Option
are not subject to the budget test, the areas remain subject to other
transportation conformity requirements of 40 CFR Part 93, subpart A.
Thus, the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) in the area or the
State must document and ensure that:
a. Transportation plans and projects provide for timely
implementation of SIP transportation control measures in accordance
with 40 CFR 93.113;
b. Transportation plans and projects comply with the fiscal
constraint element per 40 CFR 93.108;
c. The MPO's interagency consultation procedures meet applicable
requirements of 40 CFR 93.105;
d. Conformity of transportation plans is determined no less
frequently than every four years, and conformity of plan amendments and
transportation projects is demonstrated in accordance with the timing
requirements specified in 40 CFR 93.104;
e. The latest planning assumptions and emissions model are used as
set forth in 40 CFR 93.110 and 40 CFR 93.111;
f. Projects do not cause or contribute to any new localized carbon
monoxide or particulate matter violations, in accordance with
procedures specified in 40 CFR 93.123; and
g. Project sponsors and/or operators provide written commitments as
specified in 40 CFR 93.125.
The EPA confers regularly with the Anchorage Metropolitan Area
Transportation System technical and policy committees, the Alaska
Department of Environmental Conservation, the Alaska Department of
Transportation & Public Facilities, the Federal Highway Administration
and the Federal Transit Administration to review the Transportation
Improvement Plan for the Anchorage maintenance area to determine if the
area is meeting the transportation conformity requirements under 40 CFR
Part 93, subpart A. The EPA finds that the Anchorage maintenance area
currently meets the requirements of 40 CFR Part 93, subpart A.
VI. Final Action
The EPA is taking direct final action to approve the revised
sections of the Anchorage Transportation Control Program (Volume II,
Section III.B) in the Alaska SIP Submittal of September 20, 2011, that
are not superseded by the Submittal of April 22, 2013.
In accordance with the requirements of the CAA, the EPA is
approving the CO LMP (Limited Maintenance Plan for 2014-2024, Volume
II, Section III.B.12 of the State Air Quality Control Plan, adopted
February 22, 2013) for the second 10-year period for the Anchorage
maintenance area in Alaska's SIP Submittal of April 22, 2013, because
the State's LMP adequately demonstrates that the Anchorage maintenance
area qualifies for the LMP Option and will maintain the CO NAAQS
through the second 10-year maintenance period, and is consistent with
EPA guidance.
VII. 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, the 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);
[[Page 11711]]
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 the 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 the 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. The 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 May 2, 2014. 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. 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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: February 13, 2014.
Dennis J. McLerran,
Regional Administrator, Region 10.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, title 40, chapter I of the
Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for Part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart C--Alaska
0
2. Section 52.73 is amended by adding paragraphs (a)(1)(iii) and (iv)
to read as follows:
Sec. 52.73 Approval of plans.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(iii) The EPA approves the following revised sections of the
Anchorage Transportation Control Program, Anchorage CO Maintenance Plan
(Volume II, Section III.B) of the Alaska SIP Submittal adopted July 13,
2011, and submitted on September 20, 2011: Planning Process (Section
III.B.1), Maintenance Area Boundary (Section III.B.2), Nature of the CO
Problem--Causes and Trends (Section III.B.3), Transportation Control
Strategies (Section III.B.5), Modeling and Projections (Section
III.B.6), Contingency Plan (Section III.B.7), Anchorage Emergency
Episode Plan (Section III.B.8), Assurance of Adequacy (Section III.B.9)
and Redesignation Request (Section III.B.11). The EPA also approves the
following revised sections of the Appendices (Volume III): Anchorage
Assembly Resolution No. 2011-133 (Appendix III.B.1), Anchorage 2007
Carbon Monoxide Emission Inventory and 2007-2023 Emission Projections
(Appendix III.B.3), Analysis of Probability of Complying with the
National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Carbon Monoxide in Anchorage
between 2007 and 2023 (Appendix III.B.6) and Affidavit of Oral Hearing
(Appendix III.B.10).
(iv) The EPA approves the following revised sections of the
Anchorage Transportation Control Program, Anchorage CO Limited
Maintenance Plan (Volume II, Section III.B), of the Alaska SIP
Submittal adopted February 22, 2013, and submitted on April 22, 2013:
Carbon Monoxide Monitoring Program (Section III.B.4) Air Quality
Conformity Procedures (Section III.B.10), Limited Maintenance Plan for
2014-2024 (Section III.B.12). In this action, the EPA also approves the
following revised sections of the Appendices (Volume III): Anchorage
Assembly Resolution No. 2013-20 (Appendix III.B.1) and Affidavit of
Oral Hearing (Appendix III.B.10).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2014-04452 Filed 2-28-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P