Air Plan Approval; Reno, Nevada; Second 10-Year Carbon Monoxide Maintenance Plan, 59490-59499 [2016-20662]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
59490
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 168 / Tuesday, August 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
affect small governments, as described
in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Public Law 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).
The SIP is not approved to apply on
any Indian reservation land or in any
other area where EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has
jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal
implications as specified by Executive
Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000), nor will it 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 October 31, 2016. 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, Incorporation by
reference, Intergovernmental relations,
Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate
matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Volatile organic
compounds.
Dated: August 17, 2016.
Heather McTeer Toney,
Regional Administrator, Region 4.
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.
Subpart S—Kentucky
2. Section 52.920(d) is amended by
adding a new entry ‘‘LG & E Cane Run
Generating Station NOX RACT Plan
Amendment 2’’ at the end of the table
to read as follows:
■
§ 52.920
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(d) * * *
*
*
EPA-APPROVED KENTUCKY SOURCE-SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS
State
effective
date
Name of source
Permit No.
*
*
LG & E Cane Run Generating Station NOX RACT Plan Amendment
2.
*
*
N/A ...................................................
*
*
*
*
*
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
[EPA–R09–OAR–2016–0096; FRL–9951–48–
Region 9]
Air Plan Approval; Reno, Nevada;
Second 10-Year Carbon Monoxide
Maintenance Plan
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
16:58 Aug 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
*
*
8/30/2016, [Insert citation of publication].
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is taking direct final
action to approve a State
Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the State of Nevada. On
July 3, 2008, the EPA redesignated the
Truckee Meadows area, consisting
largely of the cities of Reno and Sparks
in Washoe County, Nevada, from
nonattainment to attainment for the
carbon monoxide (CO) National
Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) and approved the State’s plan
addressing the area’s maintenance of the
NAAQS for ten years. On November 7,
2014, the State of Nevada submitted to
the EPA a second maintenance plan for
the Truckee Meadows area that
addressed maintenance of the NAAQS
SUMMARY:
[FR Doc. 2016–20656 Filed 8–29–16; 8:45 am]
VerDate Sep<11>2014
7/18/2012
EPA approval date
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Explanations
*
through 2030. The EPA is now
approving this second maintenance
plan. The EPA is also finding adequate
and approving transportation
conformity motor vehicle emissions
budgets (MVEBs) for the years 2015,
2020, 2025 and 2030. We are taking
these actions under the Clean Air Act
(CAA or ‘‘the Act’’).
DATES: This rule is effective on October
31, 2016 without further notice, unless
the EPA receives adverse comments by
September 29, 2016. If we receive such
comments, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register to
notify the public that this direct final
rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09–
E:\FR\FM\30AUR1.SGM
30AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 168 / Tuesday, August 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
OAR–2016–0096 at https://
www.regulations.gov, or via email to
John Kelly, Air Planning Office at
kelly.johnj@epa.gov. For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments. Once submitted, comments
cannot be removed or edited from
Regulations.gov. For either manner of
submission, the EPA may publish any
comment received to its public docket.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Multimedia
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment.
The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include
discussion of all points you wish to
make. The EPA will generally not
consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary
submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or
other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, please
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section.
For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
John
Kelly, EPA Region IX, (415) 947–4151,
kelly.johnj@epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’
and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
B. 2014 Maintenance Plan
Eight years after an area is
redesignated to attainment, CAA section
175A(b) requires the State to submit a
subsequent maintenance plan to the
I. Background
A. Truckee Meadows Attainment Status
B. 2014 Maintenance Plan
C. Transportation Conformity
II. The EPA’s Evaluation of Nevada’s
Submittal
A. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data
B. Attainment Inventory
C. Maintenance Demonstration
D. Transportation Conformity
E. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring
Network
F. Verification of Continued Attainment
G. Contingency Plan
III. Public Comment and Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
I. Background
A. Truckee Meadows Attainment Status
Under the CAA Amendments of 1990,
the Truckee Meadows area (hereinafter
referred to as Truckee Meadows, the
Truckee Meadows area or the area),
which includes the Reno-Sparks
metropolitan area in Washoe County,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Aug 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
Nevada, was designated and classified
as a moderate CO nonattainment area.1
The primary CO NAAQS are attained
when ambient concentration design
values do not exceed either the 1-hour
35 parts per million (ppm) (or 10
milligrams per cubic meter) standard or
the 8-hour 9 ppm (or 40 milligrams per
cubic meter) standard more than once
per year. See 40 CFR 50.8(a). According
to monitoring data going back to 1980 in
the EPA’s 2 Air Quality System (AQS),
Truckee Meadows has not had a
violation of the 1-hour CO standard.3
Regarding the 8-hour standard, the area
has not had a violation since 1991.4 The
EPA determined in 2005 that the area
had attained the CO NAAQS by the
area’s December 31, 1995 attainment
deadline. See 70 FR 22803 (May 3,
2005). This determination did not affect
the designation of the area as
nonattainment or its classification as a
moderate area.
On November 4, 2005, the State of
Nevada (‘‘State’’ or ‘‘Nevada’’)
submitted a request to the EPA to
redesignate Truckee Meadows from
nonattainment to attainment for the CO
NAAQS. Along with this request, the
State submitted a CAA section 175A(a)
maintenance plan, which demonstrated
that the area would maintain the CO
NAAQS for the first 10 years following
our approval of the redesignation
request (‘‘2005 Maintenance Plan’’). We
approved the State’s redesignation
request and 10-year maintenance plan
on April 2, 2008. See 73 FR 38124 (July
3, 2008). For a detailed history of the CO
planning efforts in the area up to 2005,
please see the EPA’s proposal to
approve the 2005 Maintenance Plan. See
73 FR 1175 at 1177 (January 7, 2008).
1 For a detailed description of air quality planning
in the area, see the EPA’s proposal to approve the
first 10-year maintenance plan, published in the
Federal Register on January 7, 2008, 73 FR 1175 at
1177. The CO attainment table in 40 CFR 81.329
lists the area as ‘‘Reno Area: Washoe County (part)
Truckee Meadows Hydrographic Area 87.’’
2 The initials EPA, and the words ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or
‘‘our’’ mean or refer to the United States
Environmental Protection Agency.
3 See Truckee Meadows 1980–2016 1-Hour CO
Violation Day Count Report, data pulled from AQS
on August 1, 2016.
4 2014 Maintenance Plan, page 1. See also,
Truckee Meadows 1991–2016 8-Hour CO Violation
Day Count Report, data pulled from AQS on August
1, 2016, which verifies the District’s assertion in the
2014 Maintenance Plan that there have been no 8hour CO violations in the Truckee Meadows area
since 1991. This report also includes more recent
monitoring data (up through the first quarter of
2016) than the 2014 Maintenance Plan.
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
59491
EPA, covering a second 10-year period.5
The second maintenance plan must
demonstrate continued compliance with
the NAAQS during this second 10-year
period. To fulfill this requirement of the
CAA, Nevada submitted the second 10year update of the Truckee Meadows
area CO maintenance plan to the EPA
on November 7, 2014. The plan was
developed by the Washoe County
Health District’s (District) Air Quality
Management Division (AQMD) and is
titled ‘‘Second 10-Year Maintenance
Plan for the Truckee Meadows 8-Hour
Carbon Monoxide Attainment Area,
August 28, 2014’’ (hereinafter, ‘‘2014
Maintenance Plan’’ or ‘‘Plan’’). The 2014
Maintenance Plan was adopted by the
District’s Board of Health on August 28,
2014. See Washoe County Board of
Health Certificate of Adoption, August
28, 2014. Air quality planning and
monitoring in Truckee Meadows is the
responsibility of the District, which
administers air quality programs in
Washoe County through the AQMD. The
State Environmental Commission and
the Nevada Department of Motor
Vehicles are responsible for the motor
vehicle inspection and maintenance
program in Truckee Meadows.
C. Transportation Conformity
Section 176(c) of the Act defines
conformity as meeting the SIP’s purpose
of eliminating or reducing the severity
and number of violations of the NAAQS
and achieving expeditious attainment of
such standards. The Act further defines
transportation conformity to mean that
no Federal transportation activity will:
(1) Cause or contribute to any new
violation of any standard in any area; (2)
increase the frequency or severity of any
existing violation of any standard in any
area; or (3) delay timely attainment of
any standard or any required interim
emission reductions or other milestones
in any area. The federal transportation
conformity rule, 40 CFR part 93 subpart
A, sets forth the criteria and procedures
for demonstrating and assuring
conformity of transportation plans,
programs and projects which are
developed, funded or approved by the
U.S. Department of Transportation, and
by metropolitan planning organizations
or other recipients of Federal funds
under Title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal
Transit Laws.
The transportation conformity rule
applies within all nonattainment and
maintenance areas. As prescribed by the
transportation conformity rule, once an
5 In this case, the initial maintenance period
extends through 2018. Thus, the second 10-year
period must extend at least through 2028. The
District’s demonstration is for maintenance through
2030.
E:\FR\FM\30AUR1.SGM
30AUR1
59492
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 168 / Tuesday, August 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
area has an applicable SIP with MVEBs,
the expected emissions from planned
transportation activities must be
consistent with such established
budgets for that area.
II. The EPA’s Evaluation of Nevada’s
Submittal
area have been well below the level of
the NAAQS throughout the last decade.
TABLE 1—CO DESIGN VALUES FOR
TRUCKEE MEADOWS, NV, YEARS
2006–2015
A. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data
As noted above, the primary NAAQS
for CO are: 9 ppm (or 10 milligrams per
cubic meter) for an 8-hour average
concentration not to be exceeded more
than once per year and 35 ppm (or 40
milligrams per cubic meter) for a 1-hour
average concentration not to be
exceeded more than once per year. See
40 CFR 50.8(a).
The 2014 Maintenance Plan includes
a summary of 8-hour CO design values
for the years 2008 to 2013. See 2014
Maintenance Plan, Table 1–1, page 2. In
addition, the EPA examined monitoring
data for Truckee Meadows for the last
ten years, including a large portion of
the period covered by the first
maintenance plan. Table 1 shows the
complete, quality assured and certified
ambient air monitoring design values for
CO in the area for the years 2006 to 2015
and preliminary data for 2016. The first
maintenance plan covers the years
2008–2018. The year 2015 is the last
year for which we have complete,
quality assured and certified ambient air
monitoring design values for CO in the
area. The monitoring data show that CO
design values in the Truckee Meadows
Years
1-Hour
8-Hour
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Aug 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
2011 Inventory
(pounds per
day)
163,500
Total * ................................
372,522
* Totals may not add up due to rounding.
4.8
4.7
3.9
4.2
3.1
3.4
2.8
2.8
3.2
2.7
2.2
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
3.3
3.3
2.9
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.3
2.4
2.4
2.0
1.5
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
7 2016
B. Attainment Inventory
Due to the area’s status at the time as
moderate nonattainment for the CO
standards, the District developed a 1990
baseline emissions inventory and has
continued to update the inventory
pursuant to CAA requirements every
three years. The most recent inventory
at the time the state submitted the 2014
Maintenance Plan was for the year 2011.
The District is using the 2011 emissions
inventory, adjusted down due to
unusually high wildfire emissions that
occurred that year, as the attainment
inventory. The District refers to this
attainment inventory as the Truckee
Meadows maintenance emissions limit.
With the level of emissions that
occurred in 2011, the area still attained
the CO standards. Levels at or below the
downward-adjusted 2011 emissions
(that is, the Truckee Meadows
maintenance emissions limit) are
therefore expected to maintain the
standards. The unadjusted emissions
levels are presented in Table 2. The
District then adjusts the nonpoint
source category to reflect more
representative wildfire emissions, and
then uses the adjusted total emissions
for the area as the maintenance
emissions limit, as explained in section
III.C below.
TABLE 2—2011 CO INVENTORY
2011 Inventory
(pounds per
day)
Source category
6 Design values were derived from AQS. The EPA
notes that the 8-hour CO design value given in the
2014 Maintenance Plan for the year 2011 (i.e., 2.9
ppm) appears to be in error and should actually be
as shown (i.e., 2.6 ppm). For 1-hour CO design
values, see the Truckee Meadows 1-Hour CO 2006–
2016 Maximum Values Report, dated August 1,
2016. For 8-hour CO design values, see the Truckee
Meadows 8-Hour CO 2006–2016 Maximum Values
Report, dated August 1, 2016.
Source category
On-road .................................
Design Values (ppm) 6
The 2014 Maintenance Plan contains
the following major sections: (1) An
introductory section containing a
general discussion of plan approvals
and the area’s redesignation to
attainment; and (2) a maintenance plan
section including subsections on the
attainment emissions inventory, a
maintenance demonstration, MVEBs,
the area’s monitoring network,
verification of continued attainment,
and a contingency plan. See 2014
Maintenance Plan, Chapters 1 and 2.
Following is the EPA’s evaluation of
the 2014 Maintenance Plan under the
CAA, the EPA’s implementing
regulations and relevant guidance.
TABLE 2—2011 CO INVENTORY—
Continued
Point ......................................
Nonpoint ...............................
Non-road ...............................
3,361
154,956
50,706
7 Preliminary design values for 2016 through
March 31, 2016. See Truckee Meadows 2016 1-hour
Completeness Report, dated August 1, 2016.
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
The EPA finds that the 2011 inventory
information presented by the District is
acceptable and consistent with the
source category amounts and totals for
the 2011 National Emissions Inventory
for Washoe County, with one exception.
The District’s information does not
account for railroad (locomotive)
emissions. Locomotive emissions would
add 3.6 tons per year of CO emissions
to the area, or 19.7 pounds per day (lbs/
day). Compared to a total inventory of
372,522 lbs/day, however, the omission
of railroad emissions amounts to less
than 0.01% of the total CO emissions for
the area, and the EPA therefore does not
believe the omission to be significant.
C. Maintenance Demonstration
In general, a state may demonstrate
that an area will maintain the NAAQS
by showing that future emissions will
not exceed the level of the attainment
inventory.8 Attainment must be
demonstrated for the 10-year period
following the first ten years covered by
the initial maintenance plan. For the
Truckee Meadows area, the first
maintenance period ranges from 2008,
when the EPA approved the area’s
redesignation request and maintenance
plan, through the year 2018. In the 2014
Maintenance Plan, the District must also
demonstrate attainment for the 10-year
period following the first ten years. The
2014 Maintenance Plan covers a portion
of the first 10-year period (through
2018), as well as the second ten years,
2018 through 2028. In addition, a state
may go beyond the minimum
requirements of the CAA. The District
has elected to make the horizon year for
this Plan 2030 for the convenience of
transportation planning.
Although the 2005 Maintenance Plan
addresses maintenance through the year
2018, the emissions projections of the
2014 Maintenance Plan replace those
from the previous plan. The District’s
rationale is that there are now better
8 See the EPA’s September 4, 1992 John Calcagni
memorandum entitled ‘‘Procedures for Processing
Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’ at
page 9, available online at: https://www.epa.gov/
sites/production/files/2016-03/documents/
calcagni_memo_-_procedures_for_processing_
requests_to_redesignate_areas_to_attainment_
090492.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\30AUR1.SGM
30AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 168 / Tuesday, August 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
planning assumptions and improved
emissions calculation methodologies
that were not available in developing
the previous plan. Updated
methodologies include the change from
using MOBILE6 mobile source modeling
software, used for the 2005 Maintenance
Plan, to the MOVES model used for the
2014 Maintenance Plan.
As noted above, the District used its
2011 periodic emissions inventory 9 to
develop the baseline 2011 ‘‘maintenance
emissions limit’’ for the Truckee
Meadows area, which is then used to
compare future emissions inventories
for the purpose of verifying continued
attainment of the CO NAAQS as long as
those future emissions are lower than
the maintenance emissions limit.
As shown in Table 3, for most
emissions categories, the District simply
used emission levels from the 2011
periodic emissions inventory to develop
its 2011 maintenance emissions limit.
However, for wildfires, the District
noted that 2011 was an unusually active
year for wildfires, with corresponding
CO emissions of 105,092 lbs/day. To
approximate more typical wildfire
emissions for purposes of producing the
2011 Truckee Meadows maintenance
emissions limit, the District used the
average of wildfire emissions for the
four previous inventory years (1999,
2002, 2005, and 2008). That average is
217 lbs/day, which the District used to
adjust the nonpoint source category.
Due to this adjustment, total nonpoint
emissions for the nonpoint source
category are 50,081 lbs/day for the
maintenance emissions limit, as
compared with 154,956 lbs/day in the
2011 emissions inventory, as shown in
59493
Table 3. See 2014 Maintenance Plan,
Table 2–3.
2030 for each of the emissions source
categories, in order to demonstrate
continued maintenance with the CO
TABLE 3—TRUCKEE MEADOWS CO
NAAQS.
EMISSIONS INVENTORIES, IN POUNDS
1. Baseline Emissions Projections.
Washoe County’s 2030 population,
PER DAY
employment and vehicle miles travelled
2011
2011
(VMT) forecasts (2014 Maintenance
Plan, Appendix A) were used as
Source
Maintenance
Periodic
surrogates to project the 2030 emissions,
category
emissions
inventory
and were consistent with those used by
limit
(lbs/day)
(lbs/day)
the local metropolitan planning
organization.
Point ..................
3,361
3,361
2. EPA Models. Non-road and on-road
Nonpoint ...........
154,956
50,081
motor vehicle categories accounted for
Non-Road Mobile .................
50,706
50,706 approximately 59% of the 2011
On-Road Mobile
163,500
163,500 emissions inventory. To ensure
consistency throughout the maintenance
Total * ............
372,522
267,648 demonstration period, the same nonroad and on-road models were used to
* Totals may not add up due to rounding.
estimate the 2030 projected emissions
The District supports its use of
inventory.
267,648 lbs/day maintenance emissions
3. Emissions Category Surveys. The
limit as the attainment inventory
District uses surveys to estimate
because it uses the most accurate
emissions inventory methodologies, is a emissions from residential wood
combustion (RWC). The District applied
current and comprehensive emissions
an adjustment factor based on heating
inventory, identifies the level of
emissions in the Truckee Meadows area degree days to the most recent survey
sufficient to maintain the CO standards, (conducted in 2012–2013) to project
RWC emissions from 2015 through
and will be the emissions inventory
most consistent with the 2030 projected 2030. See 2014 Maintenance Plan,
Appendix A.1
inventory required for demonstrating
Table 4 lists the 2011 Truckee
maintenance of the CO standards. See
Meadows maintenance emissions limit
2014 CO Maintenance Plan, page 6.
The District used the following
and projected emissions for 2015, 2020,
methodologies or models, as described
2025 and 2030 for the four major CO
in EPA guidance,11 to project the 2011
emissions source categories in the area.
maintenance emissions limit (i.e. the
See 2014 Maintenance Plan, Table 2–4.
2011 periodic emissions inventory
The District provides a more detailed
adjusted to exclude unusually high
inventory for 2011 and projected future
wildfire emissions) out to future
years in the 2014 Maintenance Plan,
milestone years 2015, 2020, 2025 and
Appendix B.
TABLE 4—TRUCKEE MEADOWS CO MAINTENANCE EMISSIONS INVENTORIES (LBS/DAY)
Source category
2011 *
2015
2020
2025
2030
Point .....................................................................................
Nonpoint ...............................................................................
Non-Road .............................................................................
On-Road ...............................................................................
3,361
50,081
50,706
163,500
3,768
47,820
43,725
150,330
4,357
45,236
45,385
140,129
4,974
42,845
48,320
138,938
5,678
40,355
51,656
142,686
Total ** ...........................................................................
267,648
245,642
235,107
235,077
240,375
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
* Truckee Meadows maintenance emissions limit.
** Totals may not add up due to rounding.
9 See Washoe County, Nevada: 2011 Periodic
Emissions Inventory and Appendices A, B, and C.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Aug 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
10 See ‘‘Procedures for Preparing Emissions
Projections,’’ EPA–450/4–91–019, July 1991,
available online at https://www.epa.gov/nscep.
PO 00000
Frm 00069
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30AUR1.SGM
30AUR1
59494
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 168 / Tuesday, August 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
The District projects that population,
number of households, employment and
VMT will increase through 2030 and
beyond, but that federally enforceable
CO control programs targeting gasolinepowered motor vehicles, RWC and
diesel-powered motor vehicles will help
offset this growth. Because future
emissions are not projected to exceed
the level of the 2011 Truckee Meadows
maintenance emissions limit of 267,648
lbs/day, the District asserts that the CO
NAAQS will be maintained through the
maintenance demonstration period.11
The EPA agrees with the District’s
conclusion. Even with the growth
expected in the area in the future,
overall emissions of CO in the area are
declining and provide assurance that
the area will not violate the CO standard
in the future. With respect to wildfire
emissions, we find that the District’s
approach of adjusting both the
attainment inventory (i.e., the
maintenance emissions limit) and the
projected future year emissions
inventories to exclude unusually high
2011 wildfire emissions is reasonable.
D. Transportation Conformity
Transportation conformity is required
by section 176(c) of the CAA.
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. See
CAA section 176(c)(1)(B). The EPA’s
conformity rule at 40 CFR part 93,
subpart A requires that transportation
plans, programs and projects conform to
SIPs and establishes the criteria and
procedures for determining whether or
not they conform. To effectuate its
purpose, the conformity rule generally
requires a demonstration that emissions
from the Regional Transportation Plan
and the Transportation Improvement
Program are consistent with the MVEBs
contained in the applicable control
strategy SIP revision or maintenance
plan. See 40 CFR 93.101, 93.118, and
93.124. An MVEB is defined as the level
of mobile source emissions of a
pollutant relied upon in the attainment
or maintenance demonstration to show
compliance with the NAAQS in the
nonattainment or maintenance area.12
The EPA’s process for determining
adequacy of a MVEB consists of three
basic steps: (1) Notifying the public of
a SIP submission; (2) providing the
public the opportunity to comment on
the MVEB during a public comment
period; and, (3) making a finding of
adequacy or inadequacy. See 40 CR
93.118(f). In order for us to find an
MVEB adequate and approvable, the
submittal must meet the conformity
adequacy provisions of 40 CFR
93.118(e)(4) and (5). The 2005
Maintenance Plan established CO
MVEBs (in terms of pounds per typical
CO season day) of 330,678 pounds per
typical CO season day in year 2010 and
321,319 pounds per typical CO season
day in year 2016. The EPA found the CO
MVEBs adequate for transportation
conformity purposes effective March 30,
2006 (March 15, 2006, 71 FR 13386) 13
and approved the MVEBs on July 3,
2008 (73 FR 38124).
The 2014 Maintenance Plan
establishes new MVEBs for CO, as
shown in Table 5.
TABLE 5—TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS BUDGETS FOR THE TRUCKEE MEADOWS CO
MAINTENANCE AREA
[lbs/day]
Year
2015
CO MVEB ........................................................................................................
172,336
2020
2025
172,670
171,509
2030
169,959
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
The District developed these MVEBs
using emissions inventory projections
for the years 2015 through 2030. The
MVEBs include on-road vehicles, heavy
duty diesel vehicle idling, and a safety
margin. The latter is the excess
emissions between the total projected
emissions for a specific year and the
2011 maintenance emissions limit. We
note that the MVEBs in the 2014
Maintenance Plan differ from those
contained for similar years in the 2005
Maintenance Plan. These differences are
due to the use of the latest planning
assumptions for the transportation
network, including VMT, vehicle speeds
and vehicle population for passenger
cars and trucks, in the development of
the Washoe County 2011 periodic
emissions inventory. As in previous
periodic emissions inventories, these
planning assumptions were consistent
with those used by the local
metropolitan planning organization for
their transportation plans.
We are not announcing the
availability of these MVEBs through the
EPA’s Adequacy Web site and providing
a separate comment period on the
adequacy of the MVEBs. Instead, we are
reviewing the adequacy of the MVEBs
simultaneously with our review of the
2014 Maintenance Plan itself. See 40
CFR 93.118(f)(2). In order to determine
whether these MVEBs are adequate and
approvable, we have evaluated whether
the MVEBs meet the conformity
adequacy provisions of 40 CFR
93.118(e)(4) and (5) and have
determined that the MVEBs meet the
applicable criteria. These criteria
include, for example, that the MVEBs
are clearly identified and precisely
quantified, that the Plan shows a clear
relationship among the emissions
budgets, control measures and the total
emissions inventory, among other
criteria. The details of the EPA’s
evaluation of the MVEBs are provided
in a memo to file for this rulemaking.14
In accordance with the State’s request
and the EPA’s evaluation, with this
action the EPA finds adequate and
approves CO MVEBs for the years 2015,
2020, 2025 and 2030. Upon the effective
date of this action, the Washoe County
Regional Transportation Commission
and the U.S. Department of
Transportation must use these budgets
in future conformity analyses. Any and
all comments on the adequacy and
approvability of the 2015, 2020, 2025 or
2030 MVEBs should be submitted
11 Although the summary paragraph following
Table 2–4 in the plan compares future year
projections shown in the table to the ‘‘2011 Truckee
Meadows maintenance emissions inventory,’’ EPA
believes that the District clearly intended to make
the comparison to the ‘‘Truckee Meadows
Maintenance Emissions Limit,’’ as the District
stated in this single-asterisk (*) note to the table.
See 2014 Maintenance Plan, page 7.
12 Further information concerning the EPA’s
interpretations regarding MVEBs can be found in
the preamble to the EPA’s November 24, 1993,
transportation conformity rule (see 58 FR 62193–
62196).
13 See also letter from Deborah Jordan, Director,
U.S. EPA Region 9 Air Division, to Leo M. Drozdoff,
P.E., Director, Nevada Division of Environmental
Protection, dated February 14, 2006, available
online at: https://www3.epa.gov/otaq/statere
sources/transconf/adequacy/ltrs/
truckee033006.pdf.
14 See memo from John J. Kelly, Air Planning
Office, EPA Region 9, to Docket EPA–R09–OAR–
2016–0096, dated August 5, 2016.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Aug 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30AUR1.SGM
30AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 168 / Tuesday, August 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
during the comment period stated in the
DATES section of this document.
E. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring
Network
The District has maintained an
ambient air quality monitoring network
in Washoe County, including the
Truckee Meadows area, in accordance
with the EPA’s ambient air quality
monitoring network regulations in 40
CFR part 58. Monitors are operated by
the District, and they submit an Annual
Network Plans (ANPs) for the County to
the EPA.
The EPA is currently reviewing the
2016 ANP submitted by the District.15
The EPA approved the District’s
previous ANPs, the most recent three of
which were submitted to the EPA by the
District in 2013,16 2014 17 and 2015.18
The docket to this action includes these
approvals and the associated ANPs, as
well as the ANP currently under review.
In addition to reviewing the District’s
ANPs, the EPA performs Technical
Systems Audits (TSAs) of ambient air
monitoring programs in accordance
with 40 CFR part 58, appendix A,
section 2.5, which requires that the EPA
conduct a TSA of each primary quality
assurance organization (PQAO) every
three years. A PQAO is an organization
that is responsible for a set of stations
that monitor the same pollutant and for
which data quality assessments can be
pooled. The District is the PQAO for CO
monitoring in Washoe County, which
includes the Truckee Meadows area. See
40 CFR 58.1.
The most recent TSA for the District
was conducted by the EPA in 2016, but
the report for that TSA has not yet been
finalized. The most recent TSA for
which the final report is available was
conducted in 2013. The EPA found that
the District’s air monitoring program
was robust and met the EPA’s
requirements. There were no findings
that were cause for data invalidation.19
In the 2014 Maintenance Plan, the
District commits to continued operation
of its CO monitoring network, in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58, to
verify the attainment status of the
Truckee Meadows area. See 2014
Maintenance Plan, page 8. In addition,
the District will continue to review the
Washoe County CO monitoring network
pursuant to 40 CFR 58.10 to ensure the
network meets the monitoring objectives
defined in 40 CFR part 58, appendix D.
59495
Funding for the monitoring network to
meet its objectives has been derived in
the past primarily from CAA section 105
grants and the State’s Department of
Motor Vehicles. The District commits to
maintaining these funding sources. See
2014 Maintenance Plan, page 8.
The District commits to the
continuation of collecting and qualityassuring ambient CO monitoring data in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and to
providing the data to the EPA’s AQS.
The data will therefore be available for
public review. See 2014 Maintenance
Plan, page 9.
Table 6 lists the active Washoe
County CO monitoring sites identified
in the Plan. See 2014 Maintenance Plan,
page 9, Table 2–7. As noted in the
footnotes to the table, two of the
monitoring sites have since
discontinued CO monitoring (i.e., South
Reno and Galletti), and the District has
indicated that it intends to submit to the
EPA a request to shut down two more
sites (i.e., Toll and Lemmon Valley).
The EPA notes that the Lemmon Valley
monitoring site is within Washoe
County but is not located in the Truckee
Meadows area.
TABLE 6—ACTIVE WASHOE COUNTY CO MONITORING SITES
Site ID
Site name
Site address
32–031–0016
32–031–0020
32–031–0022
32–031–0025
32–031–1005
32–031–2009
Reno3 .................................................................................
South Reno * ......................................................................
Galletti * ..............................................................................
Toll ** ..................................................................................
Sparks ................................................................................
Lemmon Valley ** ...............................................................
301A State Street ...............................................................
4110 DeLucchi Lane ..........................................................
305 Galletti Way .................................................................
684A State Route 341 ........................................................
750 4th Street .....................................................................
325 W. Patrician Drive .......................................................
City
Reno.
Reno.
Reno.
Reno.
Sparks.
Reno.
* The District discontinued CO monitoring at the South Reno and Galletti monitoring sites in 2014. Details of these network modifications, as
well as copies of the EPA’s approval letters, can be found in the District’s 2015 ANP (Appendices A and B).
** In its 2016 ANP, the District indicates it will seek EPA approval to discontinue CO monitoring at the Toll and Lemmon Valley monitoring
sites, but will not discontinue monitoring at these locations without such approval. See the District’s 2016 ANP.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
The District is required to maintain a
CO monitor at the Reno3 site. See 40
CFR part 58, appendix D, section 3.
Other CO monitoring sites are not
required for Washoe County by the
EPA’s minimum monitoring
requirements. See 40 CFR part 58,
appendix D, section 4.2.
Based on the information in the 2014
Maintenance Plan, as well as recent
ANPs and the 2013 TSA report, the EPA
has determined that the area’s air
quality monitoring network meets the
requirements of the CAA and
implementing regulations in 40 CFR
part 58.
To support the District’s continued
operation and maintenance of the
Washoe County ambient CO monitoring
network, the District also commits to
tracking actual CO emissions, in order
to identify potential increases in
ambient CO concentration. The District
has three existing mechanisms to track
CO emissions.
1. Periodic Emissions Inventories. The
District commits to continuing to
prepare and submit to the EPA a
15 ‘‘Washoe County Health District Air Quality
Management Division 2016 Ambient Air
Monitoring Network Plan,’’ dated July 1, 2016.
16 ‘‘Washoe County Health District Air Quality
Management Division 2013 Ambient Air
Monitoring Network Plan,’’ dated July 1, 2013 and
our approval, letter from Meredith Kurpius,
Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, U.S. EPA
Region 9 to Daniel Inouye, Chief, Monitoring and
Planning Branch, Air Quality Management
Division, Washoe County Health District, dated
December 11, 2013.
17 ‘‘Washoe County Health District Air Quality
Management Division 2014 Ambient Air
Monitoring Network Plan,’’ dated July 1, 2014 and
our approval, letter from Meredith Kurpius,
Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, U.S. EPA
Region 9 to Daniel Inouye, Chief, Monitoring and
Planning, Air Quality Management Division,
Washoe County Health District, dated October 29,
2014.
18 ‘‘Washoe County Health District Air Quality
Management Division 2015 Ambient Air
Monitoring Network Plan,’’ dated July 1, 2015 and
our approval, letter from Meredith Kurpius,
Manager, Air Quality Analysis Office, U.S. EPA
Region 9 to Daniel Inouye, Chief, Monitoring and
Planning, Air Quality Management Division,
Washoe County Health District, dated October 21,
2015.
19 See letter from Deborah Jordan, Director, U.S.
EPA Region 9 Air Division, to Charlene Albee,
Director, Air Quality Management Division, Washoe
County Health District, dated August 19, 2014,
transmitting a report titled ‘‘Technical System
Audit Report, Washoe County Health District Air
Quality Management Division Ambient Air
Monitoring Program (September 4–6, 2013).’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Aug 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
F. Verification of Continued Attainment
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30AUR1.SGM
30AUR1
59496
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 168 / Tuesday, August 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
comprehensive periodic CO emissions
inventory on a triennial schedule. Prior
to submittal of the 2014 Maintenance
Plan, the last periodic emissions
inventory prepared was for the year
2011. See 2014 Maintenance Plan, page
9. In addition, the District has prepared
and submitted to the EPA a periodic
emissions inventory for the area for
2014.
2. Consolidated Emissions Reporting
Rule (CERR) and Air Emissions
Reporting Rule (AERR). The EPA’s
AERR (40 CFR part 51 subpart A),
which incorporates the former CERR,
requires regular updates of point and
area emissions sources within Washoe
County. The District commits to
continued compliance with the CERR
and AERR. See 2014 Maintenance Plan,
page 10.
3. Residential Wood Use Survey. RWC
is a significant source of CO emissions
during the winter in Truckee Meadows.
Between 1993 and 2013, the District
completed nine residential wood use
surveys. These surveys estimated the
device (i.e., fireplace, woodstove and
pellet stove) population, the amount of
wood burned, and CO emissions from
RWC in Washoe County. As part of the
2014 Maintenance Plan, the District
renews the commitment it made in the
2005 Maintenance Plan to conduct a
residential wood use survey at least
once every three years. See 2014
Maintenance Plan, page 10.
The EPA agrees with the District that
continued ambient air monitoring and
emissions tracking will ensure
verification of continued attainment and
maintenance of the 8-hour CO NAAQS
within the Truckee Meadows area.
G. Contingency Plan
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
Section 175A of the CAA requires that
a maintenance plan include contingency
provisions, as necessary, to promptly
correct any violation of a NAAQS that
occurs after the redesignation to
attainment of an area for that NAAQS.
As a maintenance area for CO, this
requirement applies to Truckee
Meadows. According to the EPA’s
guidance,20 the contingency plan for a
20 EPA’s September 4, 1992 memorandum
entitled ‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to
Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’ at page 12,
available online at: https://www.epa.gov/sites/
production/files/2016-03/documents/calcagni_
memo_-_procedures_for_processing_requests_to_
redesignate_areas_to_attainment_090492.pdf.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Aug 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
maintenance area should clearly
identify the following:
• Specific indicators or triggers that will
be used to determine when
contingency measures need to be
implemented;
• contingency measures to be adopted;
• schedule and procedures for adoption
and implementation; and
• specific time limit for action.
The following is the EPA’s analysis of
the 2014 CO Maintenance Plan’s
contingency plan regarding the above
four criteria:
The 2014 Maintenance Plan identifies
significant sources that contribute to the
highest CO concentrations during the
winter CO season months, November
through January. The 2014 Maintenance
Plan includes a two-tiered contingency
plan based on ambient air monitoring
data.
As part of the EPA’s approval into the
SIP of the 2005 Maintenance Plan, we
approved a contingency plan for the
area. Part of the contingency plan (‘‘Tier
1’’), as discussed in greater detail below,
relies entirely on the area’s emergency
episode plan. Such plans are required
under CAA section 110(a)(2)(G). We
approved the District’s emergency
episode plan on June 18, 2007 (72 FR
33397).
1. Contingency Plan Tier 1
a. Specific Indicators or Triggers Which
Will Be Used To Determine When
Contingency Measures Need To Be
Implemented
The Tier 1 trigger mechanism is a
single exceedance of the 8-hour CO
standard, that is, a monitored
concentration greater than or equal to 9
ppm (9.5 ppm to adjust for rounding),
at any State and Local Air Monitoring
Station (SLAMS), Special Purpose
Monitoring (SPM) or national Core
Multi-Pollutant Monitoring Station
(NCore) site operated within Washoe
County. The EPA notes that this trigger
is protective of the 8-hour CO NAAQS
in three respects.
First, it takes two non-overlapping CO
exceedances to violate the standard. The
CAA requires that, at a minimum,
contingency measures be triggered when
the standard is violated. In the 2014
Maintenance Plan, the District is
committing to triggering this Tier 1
portion of its contingency plan with a
single exceedance. This entails
implementation of a contingency
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
measure upon an exceedance of the CO
NAAQS, before the NAAQS is violated.
Second, the trigger for Tier 1 can
occur at any monitor in the County.
This is more protective of the CO
NAAQS than would otherwise be
required by the Act in that the District
is required to trigger Tier 1 using an
exceedance of any monitor in Washoe
County, rather than relying only on the
monitors within the Truckee Meadows
maintenance area within the County.
Third, implementation of Tier 1
would occur in the entire jurisdiction of
the District, that is, County-wide.
Controls related to the Stage 1 Alert
episode would be implemented in the
entire County, which could benefit the
Truckee Meadows area within the
County.
b. The Contingency Measures To Be
Adopted
As we noted above, the EPA has
already approved the District’s
emergency episode plan into the SIP.
This emergency plan currently is
triggered, independent of any
contingency plan, during any monitored
or predicted concentration at a level of
9.4 ppm or above. Once the emergency
plan is triggered, the duration of its
implementation depends on the
circumstances of the episode, regarding
monitored and predicted levels of CO.
In the Tier 1 contingency measure, the
District will initiate a rulemaking to
permanently lower the County-wide
Stage 1 Alert activation level from 9.4
ppm down to 9.0 ppm. The District will
initiate this rulemaking if a monitored
CO concentration is above 9.4 ppm (i.e.,
9.5 ppm or above). Monitors that can
activate Tier 1 include any monitor in
the entire County, that is, not just
within the Truckee Meadows area. For
informational purposes, Table 7 lists the
actions the District takes once a Stage 1
Alert level is either recorded or
predicted for the County. See 2014
Maintenance Plan, page 11. When Tier
1 is triggered, the District will initiate a
specific rulemaking change for adoption
by the District’s Board of Health
(WCDBOH). In the event Tier 1 is
triggered, the District would initiate
revision of WCDBOH Regulation
050.001, Emergency Episode Plan
(adopted March 23, 2006). The rule
revision would revise the Stage 1 Alert
level from the current level of 9.4 ppm
down to the lower level of 9.0 ppm.
E:\FR\FM\30AUR1.SGM
30AUR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 168 / Tuesday, August 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
59497
TABLE 7—STAGE 1 ALERT EPISODE ACTIONS
Stage 1 alert episode action description
WCDBOH regulation No.
Terminate open burning ................................................................................................................................................
Terminate use of incinerators subject to District operating permits ..............................................................................
Curtailment of unnecessary motor vehicle use through the District’s public outreach program ..................................
Prohibition of the burning of solid fuel in any commercial or residential stoves and/or fireplaces with the Truckee
Meadows area.
Curtailment of all District permitted sources that have the potential to emit 50 tons or more of CO per year with
the Truckee Meadows area.
c. A Schedule and Procedures for
Adoption and Implementation
to be adopted and implemented before
the next CO season.
The implementation schedule the
District identifies in the 2014
Maintenance Plan is meant to begin the
rulemaking process promptly. The rule
revision must be adopted by the
WCDBOH and implemented before the
next CO season (i.e., November,
December and January).
The District also commits to notify the
EPA Region 9 office within 45 days of
the triggering of tier 1. See 2014
Maintenance Plan, page 11.
2. Contingency Plan Tier 2
d. A Specific Time Limit for Action
The schedule discussed above
provides a specific time limit for action
by the Board in that the rule revision is
a. Specific Indicators or Triggers Which
Will Be Used To Determine When
Contingency Measures Need To Be
Implemented
The Tier 2 trigger mechanism is a
second, non-overlapping exceedance of
the 8-hour CO standard (i.e., greater
than or equal to 9.5 ppm to adjust for
rounding) at any SLAMS, SPM or NCore
site operated within Washoe County.
The EPA notes that only a second nonoverlapping exceedance at the same
monitor would constitute a violation of
the 8-hour CO NAAQS, so this approach
is more protective of the standard than
is required by the form of the standard
040.035 and 050.001.
050.001.
050.001.
040.051 and 050.001.
050.001.
itself. Also, the EPA notes that this
trigger is also more protective of the CO
NAAQS than is required because it goes
beyond the boundary of the Truckee
Meadows area and encompasses the
entire Washoe County District.
b. The Contingency Measures To Be
Adopted
For Tier 2, the District will maintain
a list of potential contingency measures
and provide recommendations to the
WCDBOH. The District’s
recommendations to the Board will
include a timeline for adoption and
implementation to promptly correct any
violation of the CO NAAQS. The list of
Tier 2 potential contingency measures
are shown in Table 8. See 2014 CO
Maintenance Plan, Table 2–8.
TABLE 8—TIER 2 POTENTIAL CONTINGENCY MEASURES
Emission category
Potential contingency measure
Residential Wood Combustion .................................................................
Mobile Sources .........................................................................................
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
c. A Schedule and Procedures for
Adoption and Implementation
16:58 Aug 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
Increase one-acre lot size exemption.
Mandatory curtailment at lower CO concentrations.
Change-out program to cleaner-burning devices.
Strengthen inspection and maintenance smog check program.
Reinstate oxygenated fuels program.
Non-road and on-road diesel engine repowers and rebuilds.
Truck Stop Electrification systems.
Fleet modernization.
Strengthen maximum idling time for diesel vehicles.
d. A Specific Time Limit for Action
The implementation schedule the
District identifies in the 2014
Maintenance Plan is meant to begin the
rulemaking process promptly. No later
than 45 days after Tier 2 is triggered,
recommendations shall be presented to
the Board at its next regularly scheduled
meeting. The District commits to review
and update as necessary the list of
potential Tier 2 contingency measures at
least once every three years. See 2014
Maintenance Plan, page 12. The District
also commits to notify the EPA Region
9 office within 45 days of the triggering
of Tier 2. See 2014 CO Maintenance
Plan, page 12.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The schedule discussed above for Tier
2 implementation provides a specific
time limit for action by the Board. Rule
revision recommendations are to be
presented to the Board within a set time
frame, and the Board will review and
update the recommendations, as
necessary, but not less than once every
three years. Further, the time frame for
the District to provide recommendations
to the Board requires the District to
present at the Board’s next scheduled
meeting, but no later than 45 days after
triggering Tier 2. The Board typically
meets every month.
Tier 2 also involves a regular review
of CO control measures by the District
and the Board. This review occurs at
least once every three years regardless of
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
whether there is an exceedance of the
CO NAAQS.
3. Contingency Plan Conclusion
The EPA agrees with the District that
prompt action and implementation of
Tier 1 and Tier 2 contingency measures
may prevent future exceedances and
violations of the 8-hour CO NAAQS.
The EPA believes the District’s twotiered contingency plan will promptly
address violations if they do occur.
Triggering contingency measures at
monitored concentration levels that
exceed, but do not violate the standard,
is an important component of this
approach.
III. Public Comment and Final Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of
the Act, the EPA is fully approving the
State of Nevada’s second 10-year
E:\FR\FM\30AUR1.SGM
30AUR1
59498
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 168 / Tuesday, August 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
maintenance plan, titled ‘‘Second 10Year Maintenance Plan for the Truckee
Meadows 8-Hour Carbon Monoxide
Attainment Area, August 28, 2014.’’ We
are also approving MVEBs for the years
2015, 2020, 2025 and 2030.
We do not think anyone will object to
these approvals, so we are finalizing
them without proposing them in
advance. However, in the Proposed
Rules section of this Federal Register,
we are simultaneously proposing
approval of the same submitted Plan
and MVEBs. If we receive adverse
comments by September 29, 2016, we
will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register to notify the public
that the direct final approval will not
take effect and we will address the
comments in a subsequent final action
based on the proposal. If we do not
receive timely adverse comments, the
direct final approval will be effective
without further notice on October 31,
2016. This will incorporate this plan
into the federally enforceable SIP and
require use of the new MVEBs in all
future CO conformity analyses.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
Under the CAA, the Administrator is
required to approve a SIP submission
that complies with the provisions of the
Act and applicable federal regulations.
42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 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 Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR
3821, January 21, 2011);
• 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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Aug 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
•
•
•
•
•
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 Clean Air Act; 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, the SIP is not approved
to apply on any Indian reservation land
or in any other area where the EPA or
an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have
tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal
governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
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 Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by October 31, 2016.
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
the 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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: August 15, 2016.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of
Federal Regulations 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.
Subpart DD—Nevada
2. Section 52.1470, paragraph (e) is
amended by adding, under the table
heading ‘‘Air Quality Implementation
Plan for the State of Nevada’’ a new
entry after the entry ‘‘Redesignation
Request and Maintenance Plan for the
Truckee Meadows Carbon Monoxide
Non-Attainment Area (September 2005),
excluding appendices B, C, and D’’ to
read as follows:
■
§ 52.1470
*
Identification of plan.
*
*
(e) * * *
E:\FR\FM\30AUR1.SGM
30AUR1
*
*
59499
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 168 / Tuesday, August 30, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
EPA-APPROVED NEVADA NONREGULATORY PROVISIONS AND QUASI-REGULATORY MEASURES
Applicable geographic or nonattainment area
Name of SIP
provision
State submittal date
EPA approval date
Explanation
Air Quality Implementation Plan for the State of Nevada 1
*
*
Second 10-Year Maintenance
Plan for the Truckee Meadows 8-Hour Carbon Monoxide Attainment Area, August 28, 2014.
*
*
Truckee Meadows,
Washoe County.
*
11/7/14
*
*
*
[INSERT Federal Register
CITATION] (8/30/16).
*
*
*
Fulfills requirement for second ten-year
maintenance plan. Includes motor vehicle emissions budgets for 2015,
2020, 2025 and 2030.
*
*
*
1 The
organization of this table generally follows from the organization of the State of Nevada’s original 1972 SIP, which was divided into 12
sections. Nonattainment and maintenance plans, among other types of plans, are listed under Section 5 (Control Strategy). Lead SIPs and Small
Business Stationary Source Technical and Environmental Compliance Assistance SIPs are listed after Section 12 followed by nonregulatory or
quasi-regulatory statutory provisions approved into the SIP. Regulatory statutory provisions are listed in 40 CFR 52.1470(c).
*
*
*
*
178 (see also Unit I.C. of the
*
[FR Doc. 2016–20662 Filed 8–29–16; 8:45 am]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION).
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ADDRESSES:
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2016–0034; FRL–9947–19]
Citrus tristeza Virus Expressing
Spinach Defensin Proteins 2, 7, and 8;
Temporary Exemption From the
Requirement of a Tolerance
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This regulation establishes a
temporary exemption from the
requirement of a tolerance for residues
of the Citrus tristeza virus expressing
spinach defensin proteins 2, 7, and 8
alone or in various combinations on
citrus fruit (Citrus spp., Fortunella spp.,
Crop Group 10–10) when applied/used
as a microbial pesticide in accordance
with the terms of Experimental Use
Permit (EUP) No. 88232–EUP–2.
Southern Gardens Citrus submitted a
petition to EPA under the Federal Food,
Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA),
requesting the temporary tolerance
exemption. This regulation eliminates
the need to establish a maximum
permissible level for residues of Citrus
tristeza virus expressing spinach
defensin proteins 2, 7, and 8 alone or in
various combinations. The temporary
tolerance exemption expires on August
31, 2020.
DATES: This regulation is effective
August 30, 2016. Objections and
requests for hearings must be received
on or before October 31, 2016, and must
be filed in accordance with the
instructions provided in 40 CFR part
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:58 Aug 29, 2016
Jkt 238001
The docket for this action,
identified by docket identification (ID)
number EPA–HQ–OPP–2016–0034, is
available at https://www.regulations.gov
or at the Office of Pesticide Programs
Regulatory Public Docket (OPP Docket)
in the Environmental Protection Agency
Docket Center (EPA/DC), West William
Jefferson Clinton Bldg., Rm. 3334, 1301
Constitution Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460–0001. The Public Reading Room
is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, excluding legal
holidays. The telephone number for the
Public Reading Room is (202) 566–1744,
and the telephone number for the OPP
Docket is (703) 305–5805. Please review
the visitor instructions and additional
information about the docket available
at https://www.epa.gov/dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Robert McNally, Biopesticides and
Pollution Prevention Division (7511P),
Office of Pesticide Programs,
Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington,
DC 20460–0001; main telephone
number: (703) 305–7090; email address:
BPPDFRNotices@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. Does this action apply to me?
You may be potentially affected by
this action if you are an agricultural
producer, food manufacturer, or
pesticide manufacturer. The following
list of North American Industrial
Classification System (NAICS) codes is
not intended to be exhaustive, but rather
provides a guide to help readers
determine whether this document
applies to them. Potentially affected
entities may include:
• Crop production (NAICS code 111).
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
B. How can I get electronic access to
other related information?
You may access a frequently updated
electronic version of 40 CFR part 180
through the Government Printing
Office’s e-CFR site at https://
www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/textidx?&c=ecfr&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/
40tab_02.tpl.
C. How can I file an objection or hearing
request?
Under FFDCA section 408(g), 21
U.S.C. 346a, any person may file an
objection to any aspect of this regulation
and may also request a hearing on those
objections. You must file your objection
or request a hearing on this regulation
in accordance with the instructions
provided in 40 CFR part 178. To ensure
proper receipt by EPA, you must
identify docket ID number EPA–HQ–
OPP–2016–0034 in the subject line on
the first page of your submission. All
objections and requests for a hearing
must be in writing, and must be
received by the Hearing Clerk on or
before October 31, 2016. Addresses for
mail and hand delivery of objections
and hearing requests are provided in 40
CFR 178.25(b).
In addition to filing an objection or
hearing request with the Hearing Clerk
as described in 40 CFR part 178, please
submit a copy of the filing (excluding
any Confidential Business Information
(CBI)) for inclusion in the public docket.
Information not marked confidential
pursuant to 40 CFR part 2 may be
disclosed publicly by EPA without prior
notice. Submit the non-CBI copy of your
objection or hearing request, identified
E:\FR\FM\30AUR1.SGM
30AUR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 168 (Tuesday, August 30, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 59490-59499]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-20662]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0096; FRL-9951-48-Region 9]
Air Plan Approval; Reno, Nevada; Second 10-Year Carbon Monoxide
Maintenance Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is taking direct
final action to approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision
submitted by the State of Nevada. On July 3, 2008, the EPA redesignated
the Truckee Meadows area, consisting largely of the cities of Reno and
Sparks in Washoe County, Nevada, from nonattainment to attainment for
the carbon monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
and approved the State's plan addressing the area's maintenance of the
NAAQS for ten years. On November 7, 2014, the State of Nevada submitted
to the EPA a second maintenance plan for the Truckee Meadows area that
addressed maintenance of the NAAQS through 2030. The EPA is now
approving this second maintenance plan. The EPA is also finding
adequate and approving transportation conformity motor vehicle
emissions budgets (MVEBs) for the years 2015, 2020, 2025 and 2030. We
are taking these actions under the Clean Air Act (CAA or ``the Act'').
DATES: This rule is effective on October 31, 2016 without further
notice, unless the EPA receives adverse comments by September 29, 2016.
If we receive such comments, we will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register to notify the public that this direct final rule will
not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R09-
[[Page 59491]]
OAR-2016-0096 at https://www.regulations.gov, or via email to John
Kelly, Air Planning Office at kelly.johnj@epa.gov. For comments
submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the online instructions for
submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot be removed or
edited from Regulations.gov. For either manner of submission, the EPA
may publish any comment received to its public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted
by statute. Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be
accompanied by a written comment. The written comment is considered the
official comment and should include discussion of all points you wish
to make. The EPA will generally not consider comments or comment
contents located outside of the primary submission (i.e., on the web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For additional submission
methods, please contact the person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the full EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general guidance
on making effective comments, please visit https://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Kelly, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-
4151, kelly.johnj@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, ``we,'' ``us,''
and ``our'' refer to the EPA.
Table of Contents
I. Background
A. Truckee Meadows Attainment Status
B. 2014 Maintenance Plan
C. Transportation Conformity
II. The EPA's Evaluation of Nevada's Submittal
A. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data
B. Attainment Inventory
C. Maintenance Demonstration
D. Transportation Conformity
E. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Network
F. Verification of Continued Attainment
G. Contingency Plan
III. Public Comment and Final Action
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. Background
A. Truckee Meadows Attainment Status
Under the CAA Amendments of 1990, the Truckee Meadows area
(hereinafter referred to as Truckee Meadows, the Truckee Meadows area
or the area), which includes the Reno-Sparks metropolitan area in
Washoe County, Nevada, was designated and classified as a moderate CO
nonattainment area.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For a detailed description of air quality planning in the
area, see the EPA's proposal to approve the first 10-year
maintenance plan, published in the Federal Register on January 7,
2008, 73 FR 1175 at 1177. The CO attainment table in 40 CFR 81.329
lists the area as ``Reno Area: Washoe County (part) Truckee Meadows
Hydrographic Area 87.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The primary CO NAAQS are attained when ambient concentration design
values do not exceed either the 1-hour 35 parts per million (ppm) (or
10 milligrams per cubic meter) standard or the 8-hour 9 ppm (or 40
milligrams per cubic meter) standard more than once per year. See 40
CFR 50.8(a). According to monitoring data going back to 1980 in the
EPA's \2\ Air Quality System (AQS), Truckee Meadows has not had a
violation of the 1-hour CO standard.\3\ Regarding the 8-hour standard,
the area has not had a violation since 1991.\4\ The EPA determined in
2005 that the area had attained the CO NAAQS by the area's December 31,
1995 attainment deadline. See 70 FR 22803 (May 3, 2005). This
determination did not affect the designation of the area as
nonattainment or its classification as a moderate area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The initials EPA, and the words ``we,'' ``us,'' or ``our''
mean or refer to the United States Environmental Protection Agency.
\3\ See Truckee Meadows 1980-2016 1-Hour CO Violation Day Count
Report, data pulled from AQS on August 1, 2016.
\4\ 2014 Maintenance Plan, page 1. See also, Truckee Meadows
1991-2016 8-Hour CO Violation Day Count Report, data pulled from AQS
on August 1, 2016, which verifies the District's assertion in the
2014 Maintenance Plan that there have been no 8-hour CO violations
in the Truckee Meadows area since 1991. This report also includes
more recent monitoring data (up through the first quarter of 2016)
than the 2014 Maintenance Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 4, 2005, the State of Nevada (``State'' or ``Nevada'')
submitted a request to the EPA to redesignate Truckee Meadows from
nonattainment to attainment for the CO NAAQS. Along with this request,
the State submitted a CAA section 175A(a) maintenance plan, which
demonstrated that the area would maintain the CO NAAQS for the first 10
years following our approval of the redesignation request (``2005
Maintenance Plan''). We approved the State's redesignation request and
10-year maintenance plan on April 2, 2008. See 73 FR 38124 (July 3,
2008). For a detailed history of the CO planning efforts in the area up
to 2005, please see the EPA's proposal to approve the 2005 Maintenance
Plan. See 73 FR 1175 at 1177 (January 7, 2008).
B. 2014 Maintenance Plan
Eight years after an area is redesignated to attainment, CAA
section 175A(b) requires the State to submit a subsequent maintenance
plan to the EPA, covering a second 10-year period.\5\ The second
maintenance plan must demonstrate continued compliance with the NAAQS
during this second 10-year period. To fulfill this requirement of the
CAA, Nevada submitted the second 10-year update of the Truckee Meadows
area CO maintenance plan to the EPA on November 7, 2014. The plan was
developed by the Washoe County Health District's (District) Air Quality
Management Division (AQMD) and is titled ``Second 10-Year Maintenance
Plan for the Truckee Meadows 8-Hour Carbon Monoxide Attainment Area,
August 28, 2014'' (hereinafter, ``2014 Maintenance Plan'' or ``Plan'').
The 2014 Maintenance Plan was adopted by the District's Board of Health
on August 28, 2014. See Washoe County Board of Health Certificate of
Adoption, August 28, 2014. Air quality planning and monitoring in
Truckee Meadows is the responsibility of the District, which
administers air quality programs in Washoe County through the AQMD. The
State Environmental Commission and the Nevada Department of Motor
Vehicles are responsible for the motor vehicle inspection and
maintenance program in Truckee Meadows.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ In this case, the initial maintenance period extends through
2018. Thus, the second 10-year period must extend at least through
2028. The District's demonstration is for maintenance through 2030.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Transportation Conformity
Section 176(c) of the Act defines conformity as meeting the SIP's
purpose of eliminating or reducing the severity and number of
violations of the NAAQS and achieving expeditious attainment of such
standards. The Act further defines transportation conformity to mean
that no Federal transportation activity will: (1) Cause or contribute
to any new violation of any standard in any area; (2) increase the
frequency or severity of any existing violation of any standard in any
area; or (3) delay timely attainment of any standard or any required
interim emission reductions or other milestones in any area. The
federal transportation conformity rule, 40 CFR part 93 subpart A, sets
forth the criteria and procedures for demonstrating and assuring
conformity of transportation plans, programs and projects which are
developed, funded or approved by the U.S. Department of Transportation,
and by metropolitan planning organizations or other recipients of
Federal funds under Title 23 U.S.C. or the Federal Transit Laws.
The transportation conformity rule applies within all nonattainment
and maintenance areas. As prescribed by the transportation conformity
rule, once an
[[Page 59492]]
area has an applicable SIP with MVEBs, the expected emissions from
planned transportation activities must be consistent with such
established budgets for that area.
II. The EPA's Evaluation of Nevada's Submittal
The 2014 Maintenance Plan contains the following major sections:
(1) An introductory section containing a general discussion of plan
approvals and the area's redesignation to attainment; and (2) a
maintenance plan section including subsections on the attainment
emissions inventory, a maintenance demonstration, MVEBs, the area's
monitoring network, verification of continued attainment, and a
contingency plan. See 2014 Maintenance Plan, Chapters 1 and 2.
Following is the EPA's evaluation of the 2014 Maintenance Plan
under the CAA, the EPA's implementing regulations and relevant
guidance.
A. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Data
As noted above, the primary NAAQS for CO are: 9 ppm (or 10
milligrams per cubic meter) for an 8-hour average concentration not to
be exceeded more than once per year and 35 ppm (or 40 milligrams per
cubic meter) for a 1-hour average concentration not to be exceeded more
than once per year. See 40 CFR 50.8(a).
The 2014 Maintenance Plan includes a summary of 8-hour CO design
values for the years 2008 to 2013. See 2014 Maintenance Plan, Table 1-
1, page 2. In addition, the EPA examined monitoring data for Truckee
Meadows for the last ten years, including a large portion of the period
covered by the first maintenance plan. Table 1 shows the complete,
quality assured and certified ambient air monitoring design values for
CO in the area for the years 2006 to 2015 and preliminary data for
2016. The first maintenance plan covers the years 2008-2018. The year
2015 is the last year for which we have complete, quality assured and
certified ambient air monitoring design values for CO in the area. The
monitoring data show that CO design values in the Truckee Meadows area
have been well below the level of the NAAQS throughout the last decade.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Design values were derived from AQS. The EPA notes that the
8-hour CO design value given in the 2014 Maintenance Plan for the
year 2011 (i.e., 2.9 ppm) appears to be in error and should actually
be as shown (i.e., 2.6 ppm). For 1-hour CO design values, see the
Truckee Meadows 1-Hour CO 2006-2016 Maximum Values Report, dated
August 1, 2016. For 8-hour CO design values, see the Truckee Meadows
8-Hour CO 2006-2016 Maximum Values Report, dated August 1, 2016.
\7\ Preliminary design values for 2016 through March 31, 2016.
See Truckee Meadows 2016 1-hour Completeness Report, dated August 1,
2016.
Table 1--CO Design Values for Truckee Meadows, NV, Years 2006-2015
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Design Values (ppm) \6\
------------------------------------------------------------ Years
1-Hour 8-Hour
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.8........................................... 3.3 2006
4.7........................................... 3.3 2007
3.9........................................... 2.9 2008
4.2........................................... 2.6 2009
3.1........................................... 2.6 2010
3.4........................................... 2.6 2011
2.8........................................... 2.3 2012
2.8........................................... 2.4 2013
3.2........................................... 2.4 2014
2.7........................................... 2.0 2015
2.2........................................... 1.5 \7\ 2016
------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Attainment Inventory
Due to the area's status at the time as moderate nonattainment for
the CO standards, the District developed a 1990 baseline emissions
inventory and has continued to update the inventory pursuant to CAA
requirements every three years. The most recent inventory at the time
the state submitted the 2014 Maintenance Plan was for the year 2011.
The District is using the 2011 emissions inventory, adjusted down due
to unusually high wildfire emissions that occurred that year, as the
attainment inventory. The District refers to this attainment inventory
as the Truckee Meadows maintenance emissions limit. With the level of
emissions that occurred in 2011, the area still attained the CO
standards. Levels at or below the downward-adjusted 2011 emissions
(that is, the Truckee Meadows maintenance emissions limit) are
therefore expected to maintain the standards. The unadjusted emissions
levels are presented in Table 2. The District then adjusts the nonpoint
source category to reflect more representative wildfire emissions, and
then uses the adjusted total emissions for the area as the maintenance
emissions limit, as explained in section III.C below.
Table 2--2011 CO Inventory
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011 Inventory
Source category (pounds per
day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point................................................... 3,361
Nonpoint................................................ 154,956
Non-road................................................ 50,706
On-road................................................. 163,500
---------------
Total *............................................... 372,522
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Totals may not add up due to rounding.
The EPA finds that the 2011 inventory information presented by the
District is acceptable and consistent with the source category amounts
and totals for the 2011 National Emissions Inventory for Washoe County,
with one exception. The District's information does not account for
railroad (locomotive) emissions. Locomotive emissions would add 3.6
tons per year of CO emissions to the area, or 19.7 pounds per day (lbs/
day). Compared to a total inventory of 372,522 lbs/day, however, the
omission of railroad emissions amounts to less than 0.01% of the total
CO emissions for the area, and the EPA therefore does not believe the
omission to be significant.
C. Maintenance Demonstration
In general, a state may demonstrate that an area will maintain the
NAAQS by showing that future emissions will not exceed the level of the
attainment inventory.\8\ Attainment must be demonstrated for the 10-
year period following the first ten years covered by the initial
maintenance plan. For the Truckee Meadows area, the first maintenance
period ranges from 2008, when the EPA approved the area's redesignation
request and maintenance plan, through the year 2018. In the 2014
Maintenance Plan, the District must also demonstrate attainment for the
10-year period following the first ten years. The 2014 Maintenance Plan
covers a portion of the first 10-year period (through 2018), as well as
the second ten years, 2018 through 2028. In addition, a state may go
beyond the minimum requirements of the CAA. The District has elected to
make the horizon year for this Plan 2030 for the convenience of
transportation planning.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See the EPA's September 4, 1992 John Calcagni memorandum
entitled ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas
to Attainment,'' at page 9, available online at: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-03/documents/calcagni_memo_-_procedures_for_processing_requests_to_redesignate_areas_to_attainment_090492.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although the 2005 Maintenance Plan addresses maintenance through
the year 2018, the emissions projections of the 2014 Maintenance Plan
replace those from the previous plan. The District's rationale is that
there are now better
[[Page 59493]]
planning assumptions and improved emissions calculation methodologies
that were not available in developing the previous plan. Updated
methodologies include the change from using MOBILE6 mobile source
modeling software, used for the 2005 Maintenance Plan, to the MOVES
model used for the 2014 Maintenance Plan.
As noted above, the District used its 2011 periodic emissions
inventory \9\ to develop the baseline 2011 ``maintenance emissions
limit'' for the Truckee Meadows area, which is then used to compare
future emissions inventories for the purpose of verifying continued
attainment of the CO NAAQS as long as those future emissions are lower
than the maintenance emissions limit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See Washoe County, Nevada: 2011 Periodic Emissions Inventory
and Appendices A, B, and C.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As shown in Table 3, for most emissions categories, the District
simply used emission levels from the 2011 periodic emissions inventory
to develop its 2011 maintenance emissions limit. However, for
wildfires, the District noted that 2011 was an unusually active year
for wildfires, with corresponding CO emissions of 105,092 lbs/day. To
approximate more typical wildfire emissions for purposes of producing
the 2011 Truckee Meadows maintenance emissions limit, the District used
the average of wildfire emissions for the four previous inventory years
(1999, 2002, 2005, and 2008). That average is 217 lbs/day, which the
District used to adjust the nonpoint source category. Due to this
adjustment, total nonpoint emissions for the nonpoint source category
are 50,081 lbs/day for the maintenance emissions limit, as compared
with 154,956 lbs/day in the 2011 emissions inventory, as shown in Table
3. See 2014 Maintenance Plan, Table 2-3.
Table 3--Truckee Meadows CO Emissions Inventories, in Pounds per Day
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011 2011
-------------------------
Maintenance
Source category Periodic emissions
inventory limit (lbs/
(lbs/day) day)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point......................................... 3,361 3,361
Nonpoint...................................... 154,956 50,081
Non-Road Mobile............................... 50,706 50,706
On-Road Mobile................................ 163,500 163,500
-------------------------
Total *..................................... 372,522 267,648
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Totals may not add up due to rounding.
The District supports its use of 267,648 lbs/day maintenance
emissions limit as the attainment inventory because it uses the most
accurate emissions inventory methodologies, is a current and
comprehensive emissions inventory, identifies the level of emissions in
the Truckee Meadows area sufficient to maintain the CO standards, and
will be the emissions inventory most consistent with the 2030 projected
inventory required for demonstrating maintenance of the CO standards.
See 2014 CO Maintenance Plan, page 6.
The District used the following methodologies or models, as
described in EPA guidance,\11\ to project the 2011 maintenance
emissions limit (i.e. the 2011 periodic emissions inventory adjusted to
exclude unusually high wildfire emissions) out to future milestone
years 2015, 2020, 2025 and 2030 for each of the emissions source
categories, in order to demonstrate continued maintenance with the CO
NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See ``Procedures for Preparing Emissions Projections,''
EPA-450/4-91-019, July 1991, available online at https://www.epa.gov/nscep.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Baseline Emissions Projections. Washoe County's 2030 population,
employment and vehicle miles travelled (VMT) forecasts (2014
Maintenance Plan, Appendix A) were used as surrogates to project the
2030 emissions, and were consistent with those used by the local
metropolitan planning organization.
2. EPA Models. Non-road and on-road motor vehicle categories
accounted for approximately 59% of the 2011 emissions inventory. To
ensure consistency throughout the maintenance demonstration period, the
same non-road and on-road models were used to estimate the 2030
projected emissions inventory.
3. Emissions Category Surveys. The District uses surveys to
estimate emissions from residential wood combustion (RWC). The District
applied an adjustment factor based on heating degree days to the most
recent survey (conducted in 2012-2013) to project RWC emissions from
2015 through 2030. See 2014 Maintenance Plan, Appendix A.1
Table 4 lists the 2011 Truckee Meadows maintenance emissions limit
and projected emissions for 2015, 2020, 2025 and 2030 for the four
major CO emissions source categories in the area. See 2014 Maintenance
Plan, Table 2-4. The District provides a more detailed inventory for
2011 and projected future years in the 2014 Maintenance Plan, Appendix
B.
Table 4--Truckee Meadows CO Maintenance Emissions Inventories (lbs/day)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source category 2011 * 2015 2020 2025 2030
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point........................... 3,361 3,768 4,357 4,974 5,678
Nonpoint........................ 50,081 47,820 45,236 42,845 40,355
Non-Road........................ 50,706 43,725 45,385 48,320 51,656
On-Road......................... 163,500 150,330 140,129 138,938 142,686
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total **.................... 267,648 245,642 235,107 235,077 240,375
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Truckee Meadows maintenance emissions limit.
** Totals may not add up due to rounding.
[[Page 59494]]
The District projects that population, number of households,
employment and VMT will increase through 2030 and beyond, but that
federally enforceable CO control programs targeting gasoline-powered
motor vehicles, RWC and diesel-powered motor vehicles will help offset
this growth. Because future emissions are not projected to exceed the
level of the 2011 Truckee Meadows maintenance emissions limit of
267,648 lbs/day, the District asserts that the CO NAAQS will be
maintained through the maintenance demonstration period.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Although the summary paragraph following Table 2-4 in the
plan compares future year projections shown in the table to the
``2011 Truckee Meadows maintenance emissions inventory,'' EPA
believes that the District clearly intended to make the comparison
to the ``Truckee Meadows Maintenance Emissions Limit,'' as the
District stated in this single-asterisk (*) note to the table. See
2014 Maintenance Plan, page 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA agrees with the District's conclusion. Even with the growth
expected in the area in the future, overall emissions of CO in the area
are declining and provide assurance that the area will not violate the
CO standard in the future. With respect to wildfire emissions, we find
that the District's approach of adjusting both the attainment inventory
(i.e., the maintenance emissions limit) and the projected future year
emissions inventories to exclude unusually high 2011 wildfire emissions
is reasonable.
D. Transportation Conformity
Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the CAA.
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. See CAA section 176(c)(1)(B). The
EPA's conformity rule at 40 CFR part 93, subpart A requires that
transportation plans, programs and projects conform to SIPs and
establishes the criteria and procedures for determining whether or not
they conform. To effectuate its purpose, the conformity rule generally
requires a demonstration that emissions from the Regional
Transportation Plan and the Transportation Improvement Program are
consistent with the MVEBs contained in the applicable control strategy
SIP revision or maintenance plan. See 40 CFR 93.101, 93.118, and
93.124. An MVEB is defined as the level of mobile source emissions of a
pollutant relied upon in the attainment or maintenance demonstration to
show compliance with the NAAQS in the nonattainment or maintenance
area.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Further information concerning the EPA's interpretations
regarding MVEBs can be found in the preamble to the EPA's November
24, 1993, transportation conformity rule (see 58 FR 62193-62196).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA's process for determining adequacy of a MVEB consists of
three basic steps: (1) Notifying the public of a SIP submission; (2)
providing the public the opportunity to comment on the MVEB during a
public comment period; and, (3) making a finding of adequacy or
inadequacy. See 40 CR 93.118(f). In order for us to find an MVEB
adequate and approvable, the submittal must meet the conformity
adequacy provisions of 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and (5). The 2005
Maintenance Plan established CO MVEBs (in terms of pounds per typical
CO season day) of 330,678 pounds per typical CO season day in year 2010
and 321,319 pounds per typical CO season day in year 2016. The EPA
found the CO MVEBs adequate for transportation conformity purposes
effective March 30, 2006 (March 15, 2006, 71 FR 13386) \13\ and
approved the MVEBs on July 3, 2008 (73 FR 38124).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ See also letter from Deborah Jordan, Director, U.S. EPA
Region 9 Air Division, to Leo M. Drozdoff, P.E., Director, Nevada
Division of Environmental Protection, dated February 14, 2006,
available online at: https://www3.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/adequacy/ltrs/truckee033006.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2014 Maintenance Plan establishes new MVEBs for CO, as shown in
Table 5.
Table 5--Transportation Conformity Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for the Truckee Meadows CO Maintenance Area
[lbs/day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Year 2015 2020 2025 2030
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CO MVEB......................................... 172,336 172,670 171,509 169,959
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The District developed these MVEBs using emissions inventory
projections for the years 2015 through 2030. The MVEBs include on-road
vehicles, heavy duty diesel vehicle idling, and a safety margin. The
latter is the excess emissions between the total projected emissions
for a specific year and the 2011 maintenance emissions limit. We note
that the MVEBs in the 2014 Maintenance Plan differ from those contained
for similar years in the 2005 Maintenance Plan. These differences are
due to the use of the latest planning assumptions for the
transportation network, including VMT, vehicle speeds and vehicle
population for passenger cars and trucks, in the development of the
Washoe County 2011 periodic emissions inventory. As in previous
periodic emissions inventories, these planning assumptions were
consistent with those used by the local metropolitan planning
organization for their transportation plans.
We are not announcing the availability of these MVEBs through the
EPA's Adequacy Web site and providing a separate comment period on the
adequacy of the MVEBs. Instead, we are reviewing the adequacy of the
MVEBs simultaneously with our review of the 2014 Maintenance Plan
itself. See 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2). In order to determine whether these
MVEBs are adequate and approvable, we have evaluated whether the MVEBs
meet the conformity adequacy provisions of 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and (5)
and have determined that the MVEBs meet the applicable criteria. These
criteria include, for example, that the MVEBs are clearly identified
and precisely quantified, that the Plan shows a clear relationship
among the emissions budgets, control measures and the total emissions
inventory, among other criteria. The details of the EPA's evaluation of
the MVEBs are provided in a memo to file for this rulemaking.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See memo from John J. Kelly, Air Planning Office, EPA
Region 9, to Docket EPA-R09-OAR-2016-0096, dated August 5, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with the State's request and the EPA's evaluation,
with this action the EPA finds adequate and approves CO MVEBs for the
years 2015, 2020, 2025 and 2030. Upon the effective date of this
action, the Washoe County Regional Transportation Commission and the
U.S. Department of Transportation must use these budgets in future
conformity analyses. Any and all comments on the adequacy and
approvability of the 2015, 2020, 2025 or 2030 MVEBs should be submitted
[[Page 59495]]
during the comment period stated in the DATES section of this document.
E. Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Network
The District has maintained an ambient air quality monitoring
network in Washoe County, including the Truckee Meadows area, in
accordance with the EPA's ambient air quality monitoring network
regulations in 40 CFR part 58. Monitors are operated by the District,
and they submit an Annual Network Plans (ANPs) for the County to the
EPA.
The EPA is currently reviewing the 2016 ANP submitted by the
District.\15\ The EPA approved the District's previous ANPs, the most
recent three of which were submitted to the EPA by the District in
2013,\16\ 2014 \17\ and 2015.\18\ The docket to this action includes
these approvals and the associated ANPs, as well as the ANP currently
under review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ ``Washoe County Health District Air Quality Management
Division 2016 Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan,'' dated July 1,
2016.
\16\ ``Washoe County Health District Air Quality Management
Division 2013 Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan,'' dated July 1,
2013 and our approval, letter from Meredith Kurpius, Manager, Air
Quality Analysis Office, U.S. EPA Region 9 to Daniel Inouye, Chief,
Monitoring and Planning Branch, Air Quality Management Division,
Washoe County Health District, dated December 11, 2013.
\17\ ``Washoe County Health District Air Quality Management
Division 2014 Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan,'' dated July 1,
2014 and our approval, letter from Meredith Kurpius, Manager, Air
Quality Analysis Office, U.S. EPA Region 9 to Daniel Inouye, Chief,
Monitoring and Planning, Air Quality Management Division, Washoe
County Health District, dated October 29, 2014.
\18\ ``Washoe County Health District Air Quality Management
Division 2015 Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan,'' dated July 1,
2015 and our approval, letter from Meredith Kurpius, Manager, Air
Quality Analysis Office, U.S. EPA Region 9 to Daniel Inouye, Chief,
Monitoring and Planning, Air Quality Management Division, Washoe
County Health District, dated October 21, 2015.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to reviewing the District's ANPs, the EPA performs
Technical Systems Audits (TSAs) of ambient air monitoring programs in
accordance with 40 CFR part 58, appendix A, section 2.5, which requires
that the EPA conduct a TSA of each primary quality assurance
organization (PQAO) every three years. A PQAO is an organization that
is responsible for a set of stations that monitor the same pollutant
and for which data quality assessments can be pooled. The District is
the PQAO for CO monitoring in Washoe County, which includes the Truckee
Meadows area. See 40 CFR 58.1.
The most recent TSA for the District was conducted by the EPA in
2016, but the report for that TSA has not yet been finalized. The most
recent TSA for which the final report is available was conducted in
2013. The EPA found that the District's air monitoring program was
robust and met the EPA's requirements. There were no findings that were
cause for data invalidation.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See letter from Deborah Jordan, Director, U.S. EPA Region 9
Air Division, to Charlene Albee, Director, Air Quality Management
Division, Washoe County Health District, dated August 19, 2014,
transmitting a report titled ``Technical System Audit Report, Washoe
County Health District Air Quality Management Division Ambient Air
Monitoring Program (September 4-6, 2013).''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the 2014 Maintenance Plan, the District commits to continued
operation of its CO monitoring network, in accordance with 40 CFR part
58, to verify the attainment status of the Truckee Meadows area. See
2014 Maintenance Plan, page 8. In addition, the District will continue
to review the Washoe County CO monitoring network pursuant to 40 CFR
58.10 to ensure the network meets the monitoring objectives defined in
40 CFR part 58, appendix D. Funding for the monitoring network to meet
its objectives has been derived in the past primarily from CAA section
105 grants and the State's Department of Motor Vehicles. The District
commits to maintaining these funding sources. See 2014 Maintenance
Plan, page 8.
The District commits to the continuation of collecting and quality-
assuring ambient CO monitoring data in accordance with 40 CFR part 58
and to providing the data to the EPA's AQS. The data will therefore be
available for public review. See 2014 Maintenance Plan, page 9.
Table 6 lists the active Washoe County CO monitoring sites
identified in the Plan. See 2014 Maintenance Plan, page 9, Table 2-7.
As noted in the footnotes to the table, two of the monitoring sites
have since discontinued CO monitoring (i.e., South Reno and Galletti),
and the District has indicated that it intends to submit to the EPA a
request to shut down two more sites (i.e., Toll and Lemmon Valley). The
EPA notes that the Lemmon Valley monitoring site is within Washoe
County but is not located in the Truckee Meadows area.
Table 6--Active Washoe County CO Monitoring Sites
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Site ID Site name Site address City
------------------------------------------------------------------------
32-031-0016........ Reno3............. 301A State Street Reno.
32-031-0020........ South Reno *...... 4110 DeLucchi Reno.
Lane.
32-031-0022........ Galletti *........ 305 Galletti Way. Reno.
32-031-0025........ Toll **........... 684A State Route Reno.
341.
32-031-1005........ Sparks............ 750 4th Street... Sparks.
32-031-2009........ Lemmon Valley **.. 325 W. Patrician Reno.
Drive.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The District discontinued CO monitoring at the South Reno and Galletti
monitoring sites in 2014. Details of these network modifications, as
well as copies of the EPA's approval letters, can be found in the
District's 2015 ANP (Appendices A and B).
** In its 2016 ANP, the District indicates it will seek EPA approval to
discontinue CO monitoring at the Toll and Lemmon Valley monitoring
sites, but will not discontinue monitoring at these locations without
such approval. See the District's 2016 ANP.
The District is required to maintain a CO monitor at the Reno3
site. See 40 CFR part 58, appendix D, section 3. Other CO monitoring
sites are not required for Washoe County by the EPA's minimum
monitoring requirements. See 40 CFR part 58, appendix D, section 4.2.
Based on the information in the 2014 Maintenance Plan, as well as
recent ANPs and the 2013 TSA report, the EPA has determined that the
area's air quality monitoring network meets the requirements of the CAA
and implementing regulations in 40 CFR part 58.
F. Verification of Continued Attainment
To support the District's continued operation and maintenance of
the Washoe County ambient CO monitoring network, the District also
commits to tracking actual CO emissions, in order to identify potential
increases in ambient CO concentration. The District has three existing
mechanisms to track CO emissions.
1. Periodic Emissions Inventories. The District commits to
continuing to prepare and submit to the EPA a
[[Page 59496]]
comprehensive periodic CO emissions inventory on a triennial schedule.
Prior to submittal of the 2014 Maintenance Plan, the last periodic
emissions inventory prepared was for the year 2011. See 2014
Maintenance Plan, page 9. In addition, the District has prepared and
submitted to the EPA a periodic emissions inventory for the area for
2014.
2. Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule (CERR) and Air Emissions
Reporting Rule (AERR). The EPA's AERR (40 CFR part 51 subpart A), which
incorporates the former CERR, requires regular updates of point and
area emissions sources within Washoe County. The District commits to
continued compliance with the CERR and AERR. See 2014 Maintenance Plan,
page 10.
3. Residential Wood Use Survey. RWC is a significant source of CO
emissions during the winter in Truckee Meadows. Between 1993 and 2013,
the District completed nine residential wood use surveys. These surveys
estimated the device (i.e., fireplace, woodstove and pellet stove)
population, the amount of wood burned, and CO emissions from RWC in
Washoe County. As part of the 2014 Maintenance Plan, the District
renews the commitment it made in the 2005 Maintenance Plan to conduct a
residential wood use survey at least once every three years. See 2014
Maintenance Plan, page 10.
The EPA agrees with the District that continued ambient air
monitoring and emissions tracking will ensure verification of continued
attainment and maintenance of the 8-hour CO NAAQS within the Truckee
Meadows area.
G. Contingency Plan
Section 175A of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include
contingency provisions, as necessary, to promptly correct any violation
of a NAAQS that occurs after the redesignation to attainment of an area
for that NAAQS. As a maintenance area for CO, this requirement applies
to Truckee Meadows. According to the EPA's guidance,\20\ the
contingency plan for a maintenance area should clearly identify the
following:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ EPA's September 4, 1992 memorandum entitled ``Procedures
for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' at
page 12, available online at: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-03/documents/calcagni_memo_-_procedures_for_processing_requests_to_redesignate_areas_to_attainment_090492.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specific indicators or triggers that will be used to determine
when contingency measures need to be implemented;
contingency measures to be adopted;
schedule and procedures for adoption and implementation; and
specific time limit for action.
The following is the EPA's analysis of the 2014 CO Maintenance
Plan's contingency plan regarding the above four criteria:
The 2014 Maintenance Plan identifies significant sources that
contribute to the highest CO concentrations during the winter CO season
months, November through January. The 2014 Maintenance Plan includes a
two-tiered contingency plan based on ambient air monitoring data.
As part of the EPA's approval into the SIP of the 2005 Maintenance
Plan, we approved a contingency plan for the area. Part of the
contingency plan (``Tier 1''), as discussed in greater detail below,
relies entirely on the area's emergency episode plan. Such plans are
required under CAA section 110(a)(2)(G). We approved the District's
emergency episode plan on June 18, 2007 (72 FR 33397).
1. Contingency Plan Tier 1
a. Specific Indicators or Triggers Which Will Be Used To Determine When
Contingency Measures Need To Be Implemented
The Tier 1 trigger mechanism is a single exceedance of the 8-hour
CO standard, that is, a monitored concentration greater than or equal
to 9 ppm (9.5 ppm to adjust for rounding), at any State and Local Air
Monitoring Station (SLAMS), Special Purpose Monitoring (SPM) or
national Core Multi-Pollutant Monitoring Station (NCore) site operated
within Washoe County. The EPA notes that this trigger is protective of
the 8-hour CO NAAQS in three respects.
First, it takes two non-overlapping CO exceedances to violate the
standard. The CAA requires that, at a minimum, contingency measures be
triggered when the standard is violated. In the 2014 Maintenance Plan,
the District is committing to triggering this Tier 1 portion of its
contingency plan with a single exceedance. This entails implementation
of a contingency measure upon an exceedance of the CO NAAQS, before the
NAAQS is violated.
Second, the trigger for Tier 1 can occur at any monitor in the
County. This is more protective of the CO NAAQS than would otherwise be
required by the Act in that the District is required to trigger Tier 1
using an exceedance of any monitor in Washoe County, rather than
relying only on the monitors within the Truckee Meadows maintenance
area within the County.
Third, implementation of Tier 1 would occur in the entire
jurisdiction of the District, that is, County-wide. Controls related to
the Stage 1 Alert episode would be implemented in the entire County,
which could benefit the Truckee Meadows area within the County.
b. The Contingency Measures To Be Adopted
As we noted above, the EPA has already approved the District's
emergency episode plan into the SIP. This emergency plan currently is
triggered, independent of any contingency plan, during any monitored or
predicted concentration at a level of 9.4 ppm or above. Once the
emergency plan is triggered, the duration of its implementation depends
on the circumstances of the episode, regarding monitored and predicted
levels of CO.
In the Tier 1 contingency measure, the District will initiate a
rulemaking to permanently lower the County-wide Stage 1 Alert
activation level from 9.4 ppm down to 9.0 ppm. The District will
initiate this rulemaking if a monitored CO concentration is above 9.4
ppm (i.e., 9.5 ppm or above). Monitors that can activate Tier 1 include
any monitor in the entire County, that is, not just within the Truckee
Meadows area. For informational purposes, Table 7 lists the actions the
District takes once a Stage 1 Alert level is either recorded or
predicted for the County. See 2014 Maintenance Plan, page 11. When Tier
1 is triggered, the District will initiate a specific rulemaking change
for adoption by the District's Board of Health (WCDBOH). In the event
Tier 1 is triggered, the District would initiate revision of WCDBOH
Regulation 050.001, Emergency Episode Plan (adopted March 23, 2006).
The rule revision would revise the Stage 1 Alert level from the current
level of 9.4 ppm down to the lower level of 9.0 ppm.
[[Page 59497]]
Table 7--Stage 1 Alert Episode Actions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stage 1 alert episode action description WCDBOH regulation No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Terminate open burning.......................... 040.035 and 050.001.
Terminate use of incinerators subject to 050.001.
District operating permits.
Curtailment of unnecessary motor vehicle use 050.001.
through the District's public outreach program.
Prohibition of the burning of solid fuel in any 040.051 and 050.001.
commercial or residential stoves and/or
fireplaces with the Truckee Meadows area.
Curtailment of all District permitted sources 050.001.
that have the potential to emit 50 tons or more
of CO per year with the Truckee Meadows area.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. A Schedule and Procedures for Adoption and Implementation
The implementation schedule the District identifies in the 2014
Maintenance Plan is meant to begin the rulemaking process promptly. The
rule revision must be adopted by the WCDBOH and implemented before the
next CO season (i.e., November, December and January).
The District also commits to notify the EPA Region 9 office within
45 days of the triggering of tier 1. See 2014 Maintenance Plan, page
11.
d. A Specific Time Limit for Action
The schedule discussed above provides a specific time limit for
action by the Board in that the rule revision is to be adopted and
implemented before the next CO season.
2. Contingency Plan Tier 2
a. Specific Indicators or Triggers Which Will Be Used To Determine When
Contingency Measures Need To Be Implemented
The Tier 2 trigger mechanism is a second, non-overlapping
exceedance of the 8-hour CO standard (i.e., greater than or equal to
9.5 ppm to adjust for rounding) at any SLAMS, SPM or NCore site
operated within Washoe County. The EPA notes that only a second non-
overlapping exceedance at the same monitor would constitute a violation
of the 8-hour CO NAAQS, so this approach is more protective of the
standard than is required by the form of the standard itself. Also, the
EPA notes that this trigger is also more protective of the CO NAAQS
than is required because it goes beyond the boundary of the Truckee
Meadows area and encompasses the entire Washoe County District.
b. The Contingency Measures To Be Adopted
For Tier 2, the District will maintain a list of potential
contingency measures and provide recommendations to the WCDBOH. The
District's recommendations to the Board will include a timeline for
adoption and implementation to promptly correct any violation of the CO
NAAQS. The list of Tier 2 potential contingency measures are shown in
Table 8. See 2014 CO Maintenance Plan, Table 2-8.
Table 8--Tier 2 Potential Contingency Measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emission category Potential contingency measure
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Residential Wood Combustion............ Increase one-acre lot
size exemption.
Mandatory curtailment
at lower CO concentrations.
Change-out program to
cleaner-burning devices.
Mobile Sources......................... Strengthen inspection
and maintenance smog check
program.
Reinstate oxygenated
fuels program.
Non-road and on-road
diesel engine repowers and
rebuilds.
Truck Stop
Electrification systems.
Fleet modernization.
Strengthen maximum
idling time for diesel
vehicles.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. A Schedule and Procedures for Adoption and Implementation
The implementation schedule the District identifies in the 2014
Maintenance Plan is meant to begin the rulemaking process promptly. No
later than 45 days after Tier 2 is triggered, recommendations shall be
presented to the Board at its next regularly scheduled meeting. The
District commits to review and update as necessary the list of
potential Tier 2 contingency measures at least once every three years.
See 2014 Maintenance Plan, page 12. The District also commits to notify
the EPA Region 9 office within 45 days of the triggering of Tier 2. See
2014 CO Maintenance Plan, page 12.
d. A Specific Time Limit for Action
The schedule discussed above for Tier 2 implementation provides a
specific time limit for action by the Board. Rule revision
recommendations are to be presented to the Board within a set time
frame, and the Board will review and update the recommendations, as
necessary, but not less than once every three years. Further, the time
frame for the District to provide recommendations to the Board requires
the District to present at the Board's next scheduled meeting, but no
later than 45 days after triggering Tier 2. The Board typically meets
every month.
Tier 2 also involves a regular review of CO control measures by the
District and the Board. This review occurs at least once every three
years regardless of whether there is an exceedance of the CO NAAQS.
3. Contingency Plan Conclusion
The EPA agrees with the District that prompt action and
implementation of Tier 1 and Tier 2 contingency measures may prevent
future exceedances and violations of the 8-hour CO NAAQS. The EPA
believes the District's two-tiered contingency plan will promptly
address violations if they do occur. Triggering contingency measures at
monitored concentration levels that exceed, but do not violate the
standard, is an important component of this approach.
III. Public Comment and Final Action
As authorized in section 110(k)(3) of the Act, the EPA is fully
approving the State of Nevada's second 10-year
[[Page 59498]]
maintenance plan, titled ``Second 10-Year Maintenance Plan for the
Truckee Meadows 8-Hour Carbon Monoxide Attainment Area, August 28,
2014.'' We are also approving MVEBs for the years 2015, 2020, 2025 and
2030.
We do not think anyone will object to these approvals, so we are
finalizing them without proposing them in advance. However, in the
Proposed Rules section of this Federal Register, we are simultaneously
proposing approval of the same submitted Plan and MVEBs. If we receive
adverse comments by September 29, 2016, we will publish a timely
withdrawal in the Federal Register to notify the public that the direct
final approval will not take effect and we will address the comments in
a subsequent final action based on the proposal. If we do not receive
timely adverse comments, the direct final approval will be effective
without further notice on October 31, 2016. This will incorporate this
plan into the federally enforceable SIP and require use of the new
MVEBs in all future CO conformity analyses.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, 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 Orders 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
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 Clean Air Act; 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, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where the EPA or an Indian tribe
has demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of
Indian country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not
impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal
law as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9,
2000).
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 Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by October 31, 2016. 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 the 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, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: August 15, 2016.
Alexis Strauss,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region IX.
Chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations 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.
Subpart DD--Nevada
0
2. Section 52.1470, paragraph (e) is amended by adding, under the table
heading ``Air Quality Implementation Plan for the State of Nevada'' a
new entry after the entry ``Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan
for the Truckee Meadows Carbon Monoxide Non-Attainment Area (September
2005), excluding appendices B, C, and D'' to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1470 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
[[Page 59499]]
EPA-Approved Nevada Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicable State
Name of SIP provision geographic or submittal EPA approval date Explanation
nonattainment area date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air Quality Implementation Plan for the State of Nevada \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Second 10-Year Maintenance Plan Truckee Meadows, 11/7/14 [INSERT Federal Fulfills requirement
for the Truckee Meadows 8-Hour Washoe County. Register CITATION] for second ten-year
Carbon Monoxide Attainment (8/30/16). maintenance plan.
Area, August 28, 2014. Includes motor vehicle
emissions budgets for
2015, 2020, 2025 and
2030.
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The organization of this table generally follows from the organization of the State of Nevada's original
1972 SIP, which was divided into 12 sections. Nonattainment and maintenance plans, among other types of plans,
are listed under Section 5 (Control Strategy). Lead SIPs and Small Business Stationary Source Technical and
Environmental Compliance Assistance SIPs are listed after Section 12 followed by nonregulatory or quasi-
regulatory statutory provisions approved into the SIP. Regulatory statutory provisions are listed in 40 CFR
52.1470(c).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2016-20662 Filed 8-29-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
