Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; State of Utah; Logan Nonattainment Area Fine Particulate Matter State Implementation Plan for Attainment of 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 57183-57193 [2017-25960]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 231 / Monday, December 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
subject individuals and informing
individuals regarding information to be
collected about them, could present a
serious impediment to efforts to solve
crimes and improve national security.
Application of these provisions would
put the subject of an investigation on
notice of that fact and allow the subject
an opportunity to engage in conduct
intended to impede that activity or
avoid apprehension.
(6) From subsection (e)(4)(I), to the
extent that this subsection is interpreted
to require more detail regarding the
record sources in this system than has
already been published in the Federal
Register through the SORN
documentation. Should the subsection
be so interpreted, exemption from this
provision is necessary to protect the
sources of law enforcement and
intelligence information and to protect
the privacy and safety of witnesses and
informants and others who provide
information to the FBI.
(7) From subsection (e)(5) because in
the collection of information for
authorized law enforcement and
intelligence purposes it is impossible to
determine in advance what information
is accurate, relevant, timely, and
complete. With time, additional facts, or
analysis, information may acquire new
significance. The restrictions imposed
by subsection (e)(5) would limit the
ability of trained investigators and
intelligence analysts to exercise their
judgment in reporting on investigations
and impede the development of
criminal intelligence necessary for
effective law enforcement. Although the
FBI has claimed this exemption, it
continuously works with its federal,
state, local, tribal, and international
partners to maintain the accuracy of
records to the greatest extent
practicable. The FBI does so with
established policies and practices. The
criminal justice and national security
communities have a strong operational
interest in using up-to-date and accurate
records and will foster relationships
with partners to further this interest.
Dated: November 28, 2017.
Peter A. Winn,
Acting Chief Privacy and Civil Liberties
Officer, United States Department of Justice.
[FR Doc. 2017–25993 Filed 12–1–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–02–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Dec 01, 2017
Jkt 244001
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R08–OAR–2016–0585; FRL–9971–07–
Region 8]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; State of
Utah; Logan Nonattainment Area Fine
Particulate Matter State
Implementation Plan for Attainment of
2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate Matter
National Ambient Air Quality
Standards
57183
primary submission (i.e., on the Web,
cloud, or other file sharing system). For
additional submission methods, the full
EPA public comment policy,
information about CBI or multimedia
submissions, and general guidance on
making effective comments, please visit
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Crystal Ostigaard, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P–AR, 1595
Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado
80202–1129, (303) 312–6602,
ostigaard.crystal@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
I. General Information
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve
the emissions inventory, modeled
attainment demonstration,
determination for Major Stationary
Source Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT), determination for
On-Road Mobile Sources Reasonably
Available Control Measures (RACM),
determination for Cache County
Inspection and Maintenance (I/M)
Program as additional reasonable
measures, determination for Off-Road
Mobile Sources RACM, and the 2015
Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets
(MVEB) portions of the attainment plan
submitted by Utah on December 16,
2014, to address Clean Air Act (CAA or
the Act) requirements for the 2006 24hour fine particulate matter (PM2.5)
national ambient air quality standards
(NAAQS) in the Logan, UT–ID Moderate
PM2.5 nonattainment area. These actions
are being taken under section 110 of the
CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be
received on or before January 3, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R08–
OAR–2016–0585 at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
edited or removed from
www.regulations.gov. The EPA may
publish any comment received to the
public docket. Do not submit
electronically any information you
consider to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information,
the disclosure of which 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
What should I consider as I prepare my
comments for EPA?
a. Submitting CBI. Do not submit CBI
to the EPA through www.regulations.gov
or email. Clearly mark the part or all of
the information that you claim to be
CBI. For CBI information in a disk or CD
ROM that you mail to the EPA, mark the
outside of the disk or CD ROM as CBI
and then identify electronically within
the disk or CD ROM the specific
information that is claimed as CBI. In
addition to one complete version of the
comment that includes information
claimed as CBI, a copy of the comment
that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for
inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be
disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
b. Tips for Preparing Your Comments.
When submitting comments, remember
to:
1. Identify the rulemaking by docket
number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal
Register date and page number).
2. Follow directions—The agency may
ask you to respond to specific questions
or organize comments by referencing a
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part
or section number.
3. Explain why you agree or disagree;
suggest alternatives and substitute
language for your requested changes.
4. Describe any assumptions and
provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
5. If you estimate potential costs or
burdens, explain how you arrived at
your estimate in sufficient detail to
allow for it to be reproduced.
6. Provide specific examples to
illustrate your concerns, and suggest
alternatives.
7. Explain your views as clearly as
possible, avoiding the use of profanity
or personal threats.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
57184
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 231 / Monday, December 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
8. Make sure to submit your
comments by the comment period
deadline identified.
II. Background
On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144),
the EPA revised the level of the 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS, lowering the primary
and secondary standards from the 1997
standard of 65 micrograms per cubic
meter (mg/m3) to 35 mg/m3. On
November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688), the
EPA designated three nonattainment
areas in Utah for the 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS of 35 mg/m3. These are the Salt
Lake City, Utah (UT); Provo, UT; and
Logan, UT-Idaho (ID) nonattainment
areas.
The Logan, UT–ID PM2.5
nonattainment area, also called the
Cache Valley, is composed of portions
of Cache County, UT and Franklin
County, ID. The Cache Valley is an
isolated, bowl-shaped valley measuring
approximately 60 kilometers north to
south and 20 kilometers east to west and
almost entirely surrounded by mountain
ranges. The Wellsville Mountains lie to
the west, and on the east lie the Bear
River Mountains; both are northern
branches of the Wasatch Range. The
State considers topography as a barrier
to air movement during the conditions
which lead to elevated concentrations of
fine particulates and as the primary
factor in determining where the
population is located. The low-lying
valleys which trap air during wintertime temperature inversions are also the
regions within which people live.
Additional information pertaining to the
unique issues associated with the
Logan, UT–ID nonattainment area and
studies completed on inversions can be
found in the 9-factor analysis for Utah
and Idaho in the November 13, 2009 (74
FR 58688) action titled ‘‘Air Quality
Designations for the 2006 24-Hour Fine
Particulate (PM2.5) National Ambient
Air Quality Standards.’’
The EPA originally issued a rule in
2007 1 regarding implementation of the
PM2.5 NAAQS for the nonattainment
area requirements specified in CAA title
I, part D, subpart 1. Under subpart 1,
Utah was required to submit an
attainment plan for each area no later
than three years from the date of
nonattainment designation. These plans
needed to provide for the attainment of
the PM2.5 standards as expeditiously as
practicable, but no later than five years
from the date the areas were designated
nonattainment.
Following the November 13, 2009
designation of nonattainment for PM2.5,
Utah developed a draft PM2.5 attainment
1 72
FR 20586; April 25, 2007.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Dec 01, 2017
Jkt 244001
plan intended to meet the requirements
of subpart 1. The EPA submitted written
comments dated November 1, 2012, to
the Utah Division of Air Quality
(UDAQ) on the draft PM2.5 SIP,
technical support document (TSD), area
source rules, and point source rules
found in Section IX, Part H.2 Utah
submitted a revised PM2.5 attainment
plan for the Logan, UT–ID
nonattainment area on December 14,
2012.
On January 4, 2013, the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia
held that the EPA should have
implemented the 2006 PM2.5 24-hour
standards, as well as the other PM2.5
NAAQS, based on both CAA title I, part
D, subpart 1 and subpart 4. Under
subpart 4, all nonattainment areas are
initially classified as Moderate, and
Moderate area attainment plans must
address the requirements of subpart 4 as
well as subpart 1. Additionally, subpart
4 sets a different SIP submittal due date
and attainment year. For a Moderate
area, the attainment SIP is due 18
months after designation and the
attainment year is as expeditiously as
practicable, but no later than the end of
the sixth calendar year after designation.
On June 2, 2014 (79 FR 31566), the
EPA finalized the Identification of
Nonattainment Classification and
Deadlines for Submission of State
Implementation Plan (SIP) Provisions
for the 1997 Fine Particulate (PM2.5)
National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS) and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (‘‘the
Classification and Deadlines Rule’’).
This rule classified as Moderate the
areas that were designated in 2009 as
nonattainment, and set the attainment
SIP submittal due date for those areas at
December 31, 2014. Additionally, this
rule established the Moderate area
attainment date of December 31, 2015.
After the court’s 2013 decision, Utah
amended its attainment plan to address
the requirements of subpart 4. On
December 2, 2013, and October 30,
2014, the EPA provided comments on
Utah’s revised draft PM2.5 SIPs,
including the TSD and emissions limits
in Section IX, Part H. Subsequently, on
December 16, 2014, UDAQ withdrew all
prior Logan, UT–ID PM2.5 Moderate SIP
submissions and submitted a subpart 1
and subpart 4 PM2.5 Moderate SIP,
2 An ‘‘area source’’ is ‘‘any small residential,
governmental, institutional, commercial, or
industrial fuel combustion operation; onsite solid
waste disposal facility; motor vehicle], aircraft
vessel or other transportation facilit[y] or other
miscellaneous source identified’’ through specified
inventory techniques. 40 CFR 51.100(l). A ‘‘point
source’’ is any stationary source emitting above
certain thresholds. 40 CFR 51.100(k).
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
which is one of the submissions we are
proposing to act on today.3
On August 24, 2016, the EPA
finalized the Fine Particulate Matter
National Ambient Air Quality
Standards: State Implementation Plan
Requirements (‘‘PM2.5 Implementation
Rule’’), 81 FR 58010, which partially
addressed the January 4, 2013 court
ruling. The final PM2.5 Implementation
Rule details how air agencies can meet
the statutory SIP requirements under
subparts 1 and 4 that apply to areas
designated nonattainment for any PM2.5
NAAQS, such as: General requirements
for attainment plan due dates and
attainment demonstrations; provisions
for demonstrating reasonable further
progress (RFP); quantitative milestones;
contingency measures; Nonattainment
New Source Review (NNSR) permitting
programs; and RACM (including RACT).
The statutory attainment planning
requirements of subparts 1 and 4 were
established to ensure that the following
goals of the CAA are met: (i) That states
implement measures that provide for
attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS as
expeditiously as practicable; and, (ii)
that states adopt emissions reduction
strategies that will be the most effective
at reducing PM2.5 levels in
nonattainment areas.
On September 8, 2017 (82 FR 42447),
the EPA granted two, one-year
extensions of the Moderate attainment
date for the Logan, UT–ID Moderate
PM2.5 nonattainment area until
December 31, 2017.
III. Clean Air Act Requirements for
PM2.5 Moderate Nonattainment Area
Plans
A. PM2.5 Moderate Area Plan
Requirements
Upon designation as a Moderate
nonattainment area under subpart 1 and
subpart 4, the CAA requires the State to
submit the following Moderate area SIP
elements:
1. A comprehensive, accurate, current
inventory of actual emissions from all
sources of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in
the area (CAA section 172(c)(3));
2. Provisions to assure that RACM,
including RACT, for the control of
direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors shall
be implemented no later than four years
after the area is designated (CAA
sections 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C));
3. A demonstration (including air
quality modeling) that the plan provides
for attainment as expeditiously as
3 The Salt Lake City, UT and Provo, UT Moderate
PM2.5 SIPs attainment plans, including
requirements regarding RACM under CAA subparts
1 and 4 of part D, title I of the Act, will be acted
on separately.
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 231 / Monday, December 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
practicable but no later than the
Moderate area attainment date;
4. Plan provisions that require RFP
(CAA section 172(c)(2));
5. Quantitative milestones which are
to be achieved every three years until
the area is redesignated attainment and
which demonstrate RFP toward
attainment by the applicable date (CAA
section 189(c));
6. Provisions to assure that control
requirements applicable to major
stationary sources of PM2.5 also apply to
major stationary sources of PM2.5
precursors, except where the State
demonstrates to the EPA’s satisfaction
that such sources do not contribute
significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed
the standard in the area (CAA section
189(e));
7. Contingency measures to be
implemented if the area fails to meet
RFP or fails to attain by the applicable
attainment date (CAA section 172(c)(9));
and
8. A revision to the NNSR program to
set the applicable ‘‘major stationary
source’’ thresholds to 100 tons per year
(tpy) (CAA section 302(j)).
Moderate area PM2.5 plans must also
satisfy the general requirements
applicable to all SIP submissions under
section 110 of the CAA, including the
requirement to provide necessary
assurances that the implementing
agencies have adequate personnel,
funding and authority under CAA
section 110(a)(2)(E) and the
requirements concerning enforcement
provisions in CAA section 110(a)(2)(C).
The EPA interprets the CAA’s
requirements for particulate matter
plans under part D, title I of the Act in
the following documents: (1) ‘‘State
Implementation Plans; General
Preamble for the Implementation of
Title I of the CAA Amendments of
1990,’’ 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992)
(‘‘General Preamble’’); (2) ‘‘State
Implementation Plans; General
Preamble for the Implementation of
Title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990;
Supplemental,’’ 57 FR 18070 (April 28,
1992) (‘‘Supplement’’); (3) ‘‘State
Implementation Plans for Serious PM10
Nonattainment Areas, and Attainment
Date Waivers for PM10 Nonattainment
Areas Generally; Addendum to the
General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the CAA
Amendments of 1990,’’ 59 FR 41998
(August 16, 1994) (‘‘Addendum’’); and
(4) ‘‘Fine Particulate Matter National
Ambient Air Quality Standards: State
Implementation Plan Requirements,’’
August 24, 2016 (81 FR 58010) (‘‘PM2.5
Implementation Rule’’). We discuss
these interpretations of the Act as
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Dec 01, 2017
Jkt 244001
appropriate in our evaluation of the
Logan, UT–ID Moderate PM2.5 Plan.
B. Implementation of Reasonably
Available Control Measures
Section 172(c)(1) of the Act (from
subpart 1) requires that attainment
plans, in general, provide for the
implementation of all RACM (including
RACT) as expeditiously as practicable
and shall provide for attainment of the
national primary ambient air quality
standards. CAA section 189(a)(1)(C)
(from subpart 4) requires Moderate area
attainment plans to contain provisions
to assure that RACM is implemented no
later than four years after designation.
The EPA stated its interpretation of
the RACT and RACM requirements of
subparts 1 and 4 in the 1992 General
Preamble for the Implementation of
Title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990,
57 FR 13498 (Apr. 6, 1992). For RACT,
the EPA followed its ‘‘historic definition
of RACT as the lowest emission
limitation that a particular source is
capable of meeting by the application of
control technology that is reasonably
available considering technological and
economic feasibility.’’ 57 FR 13541. Like
RACT, the EPA has historically
considered RACM to consist of control
measures that are reasonably available,
considering technological and economic
feasibility. See PM2.5 Implementation
Rule, 81 FR 58010.
IV. EPA’s Evaluation of the Logan, UT–
ID PM2.5 Moderate Plan
The EPA is proposing to act on the
following portions of the Logan
Moderate PM2.5 SIP: The emissions
inventory, modeled attainment
demonstration, determination for Major
Stationary Source RACT, determination
for On-Road Mobile Sources RACM,
determination for Cache County I/M
Program as additional reasonable
measures, determination for Off-Road
Mobile Sources RACM, and 2015
MVEB.
A. Emissions Inventory
1. Requirements for Emissions
Inventories
CAA section 172(c)(3) requires that
each SIP include a ‘‘comprehensive,
accurate, current inventory of actual
emissions from all sources of the
relevant pollutant or pollutants in [the]
area. . . .’’ By requiring an accounting
of actual emissions from all sources of
the relevant pollutants in the area, this
section provides for the base year
inventory to include all emissions that
contribute to the formation of a
particular NAAQS pollutant. For the
2006 PM2.5 standards, this includes
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
57185
direct PM2.5 as well as the precursor
emissions to the formation of secondary
PM2.5: Nitrogen oxide (NOX), sulfur
dioxide (SO2), volatile organic
compounds (VOC), and ammonia (NH3).
Direct PM2.5 includes condensable and
filterable particulate matter.
Additionally, a state must include in its
SIP submission documentation
explaining how the emissions data were
calculated. In estimating mobile source
emissions, a state should use the latest
emissions models and planning
assumptions available at the time the
SIP is developed.
In addition to the base year inventory
submitted to meet the requirements of
CAA section 172(c)(3), the State must
also submit future inventories for the
projected attainment year and any other
year of significance for meeting
applicable CAA requirements. By
attainment projected inventories, we
mean the projected emissions
inventories for future years that account
for, among other things, the ongoing
effects of economic growth and adopted
emissions control requirements. The SIP
should include documentation to
explain how the emissions projections
were calculated.
2. Emissions Inventories in the Logan,
UT–ID PM2.5 Moderate Plan
The base year inventory should
represent typical conditions at a recent
point in time, and becomes the basis for
comparisons with all projections into
the future. The foundation that UDAQ
used for each of these specific
inventories is the 2008 triennial
inventory, which was the most recent
comprehensive inventory submitted to
the EPA under subpart A of 40 CFR part
51. Utah used the 2008 inventory to
back-cast and adjust for certain episodic
conditions, and forecast a representation
of more typical conditions to develop
the projected inventories.
The Logan, UT–ID nonattainment area
emissions inventory includes emissions
estimates from point sources, area
sources, on-road mobile sources, and
off-road mobile sources. The
methodologies used to derive the 2010
base year inventory for PM2.5 are as
follows:
• The point source emissions
inventory is based on the 2008 triennial
National Emissions Inventory (NEI) data
of actual emissions reported by all
permitted facilities. UDAQ used data
from the Regional Economic Models,
Inc. (REMI) to project the 2008 actual
point source emissions to 2010.
• Activity data was used to calculate
emissions for area source categories.
This data includes population,
employment, vehicle miles traveled
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
57186
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 231 / Monday, December 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
(VMT), fuel usage, agriculture, and other
estimates covering a wide range of
activities, in conjunction with the 2008
triennial NEI.
• The inventory for the on-road
mobile source category includes
emissions for mobile sources such as
trucks, cars, buses, and motorcycles. It
was prepared by UDAQ using the EPA’s
Motor Vehicle Emissions Simulator
(MOVES2010a), the most current
version of the model available at the
time the inventory was prepared, in
conjunction with information generated
by travel demand models such as
vehicle speeds and miles traveled.
• The non-road mobile source
category includes miscellaneous nonroad engines, aircraft, and locomotives.
Miscellaneous non-road emissions were
computed by using the EPA NONROAD
Model, version 2008.1.0. Locomotive
emissions were estimated by applying
the EPA emission factors to the total
amount of fuel used by locomotives.
Aircraft emissions were estimated by
applying aircraft specific activity data
and the Emissions Dispersion Modeling
System (EDMS), version 5.1.2.
• Paved road emissions (coarse
particulate matter (PM10) and PM2.5
fugitive dust) were estimated by UDAQ
based on the EPA’s January 2011
version of AP–42, Section 13.2.1.
Table 1 below provides a summary of
winter daily average inventories of
source categories for direct PM2.5 and
PM2.5 precursors for the 2010 base year
and 2015 projected year. The base year
inventory provides the basis for the
control measure analysis in the Logan,
UT–ID Moderate PM2.5 SIP and the
projected year inventory provides the
model projection for emission
reductions found in the Logan, UT–ID
Moderate PM2.5 SIP.
TABLE 1—LOGAN, UT–ID TYPICAL WINTER INVERSION WEEKDAY IN TONS PER DAY (tpd) OF SOURCE CATEGORIES FOR
DIRECT PM2.5 AND PM2.5 PRECURSORS FOR THE 2010 BASELINE YEAR AND 2015 PROJECTED YEAR
2010
Source category
Direct
PM2.5
SO2
NOX
2015
VOC
NH3
Direct
PM2.5
NOX
SO2
VOC
NH3
Area Sources ...........
Mobile Sources ........
Non-Road Mobile
Sources .................
Point Sources ...........
0.54
0.67
1.63
6.48
0.26
0.04
4.16
4.99
4.31
0.12
0.40
0.32
1.59
4.49
0.27
0.03
3.75
3.36
4.08
0.10
0.13
0.00
1.15
0.02
0.02
0.00
2.28
0.63
0.00
0.00
0.10
0.00
0.81
0.00
0.01
0.00
1.77
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total * ................
1.35
9.28
0.32
12.06
4.43
0.82
6.89
0.31
8.88
4.19
* Totals might have slight deviations from the sum of the source categories due to rounding.
The composition of the Area Source
Category in the table above includes:
Agriculture—livestock waste; bulk
gasoline terminals; commercial cooking;
dust—construction dust; fuel
combination—commercial/
institutional—coal, natural gas, oil, and
other; fuel combination—residential—
oil, other, and wood; gas stations,
industrial processes—not elsewhere
classified (NEC); miscellaneous nonindustrial NEC; mobile—non-road
equipment—diesel; solvent—consumer
and commercial solvent use, degreasing,
dry cleaning, graphic arts, industrial
surface coating and solvent use, nonindustrial surface coating; and waste
disposal.
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
3. The EPA’s Evaluation and Proposed
Action: Base Year and Projected
Emissions Inventories
The PM2.5 Implementation Rule sets
forth several requirements for the base
year inventory and projected year
inventory for Moderate area attainment
plans. 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(1) and 40 CFR
51.1008(a)(2), respectively. The EPA has
also issued guidance for the preparation
of emissions inventories for
implementation of the PM2.5 and ozone
standards, along with regional haze
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Dec 01, 2017
Jkt 244001
requirements.4 We propose to determine
that the base year and projected year
inventories meet the requirements in the
CAA and PM2.5 Implementation Rule
and was prepared consistently with the
recommendations in the guidance.
Specifically, the base year inventory
satisfies each requirement found in 40
CFR 51.1008(a)(1). First, the base year of
2010 was not one of the three years
(2006–2008) used for designation of the
area as nonattainment. See 40 CFR
51.1008(a)(1)(i). However, the state has
justified 2010 as a technically
appropriate inventory year, and the use
of a later year is consistent with the
statutory requirement in section
172(c)(3) to use a ‘‘current’’ inventory.
Second, the inventory represents actual,
average season-day emissions. 40 CFR
51.1008(a)(1)(ii) and (a)(1)(iii). Third,
the inventory provides emissions of all
precursors of PM2.5. 40 CFR
51.1008(a)(1)(iv). Fourth, emissions of
point sources are reported according to
thresholds found in 40 CFR part 51,
subpart A. 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(1)(v).
The projected year inventory satisfies
each requirement in 40 CFR
4 ‘‘Emissions Inventory Guidance for
Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)
and Regional Haze Regulations,’’ Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards, EPA–454/R–05–
001 (August 2005).
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
51.1008(a)(2). First, the 2015 projected
year inventory was the most expeditious
year that showed modeled PM2.5
concentrations below the 24-hour PM2.5
NAAQS. 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(2)(i).
Second, the projected emission values
were derived from the same sources
included in the base year inventory and
included projected emissions based on
growth and contraction pertaining to
controls and other potential causes. 40
CFR 51.1008(a)(2)(ii). Third, the
temporal period of projected emissions
was the same as the base year inventory,
average season-day. 40 CFR
51.1008(a)(2)(iii). Fourth, the inventory
provides emissions of all precursors of
PM2.5. 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(2)(iv). Fifth,
all sources (point, stationary nonpoint,
and mobile sources) were included in
the projected inventory at the same level
of detail found in the base year
inventory. 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(2)(v) and
(a)(2)(vi).
The base year inventory in the Logan,
UT–ID Moderate PM2.5 SIP is based on
the most current and accurate
information available to the State at the
time the SIP was being developed.
Additionally, the base year and
projected inventories met all minimum
requirements found in 40 CFR
51.1008(a)(1) and (2), and the
inventories addressed all source
categories in the Logan, UT–ID
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 231 / Monday, December 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
nonattainment area and were developed
consistent with the EPA’s inventory
guidance.5 For these reasons, we are
proposing to approve the 2010 base year
emissions inventory and the 2015
projected emissions inventory in the
Logan, UT–ID PM2.5 SIP as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3).
We are also proposing to find that the
base year and projected inventories in
the SIP provide an adequate basis for
development of the Logan, UT–ID
Moderate PM2.5 SIP.
B. Modeled Attainment Demonstration
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
1. Requirements for the Modeled
Attainment Demonstration
Air quality modeling is used to
establish emissions attainment targets,
the combination of emissions of PM2.5
and PM2.5 precursors that the area can
accommodate and still attain the
standard, and to assess whether the
proposed control strategy will result in
attainment of the standard. Air quality
modeling is performed for a base year
and compared to air quality monitoring
data collected during that year in order
to determine model performance. Once
the model performance is determined to
be acceptable, future year changes to the
emissions inventory are simulated with
the model to determine the relationship
between emissions reductions and
changes in ambient air quality. To
project future design values (FDVs), the
model response to emission reductions,
in the form of Relative Response Factors
(RRFs), is applied to monitored design
values from the base year.
At the time the Logan, UT–ID
Moderate PM2.5 SIP was developed, the
EPA’s recommendations for model
input preparation, model performance
evaluation, use of the model output for
the attainment demonstration and
modeling documentation were
described in Guidance on the Use of
Models and Other Analyses for
Demonstrating Attainment of Air
Quality Goals for Ozone, PM2.5, and
Regional Haze, EPA–454/B–07–002,
5 Utah Moderate PM
2.5 SIP TSD, Chapter 1—
Inventory General, Section b—Inventory
Preparation Plan. The scope for UDAQ’s PM2.5
Emission Inventory Preparation Plan includes:
EPA’s ‘‘Emission Inventory Improvement Program,’’
‘‘Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation
of Ozone and Particulate Matter National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze
Regulations’’ dated August 2005, ‘‘Guidance on the
Use of Models and Other Analyses for
Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals for
Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional Haze’’ dated April 2007,
and ‘‘Guidance for Creating Annual On-Road
Mobile Source Emission Inventories for PM2.5
Nonattainment Areas for Use in SIPs and
Conformity’’ dated August 2005. These documents
helped to facilitate the collection of point, area,
mobile, biogenic, and geogenic emission inventory
data.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Dec 01, 2017
Jkt 244001
April 2007 (‘‘Modeling Guidance
Update’’).6
The EPA recommends that states
prepare a modeling protocol as part of
their modeled attainment
demonstration, and the Modeling
Guidance describes the topics to be
addressed in the modeling protocol. A
modeling protocol should detail and
formalize the procedures for conducting
all phases of the modeling analysis,
such as describing the background and
objectives, creating a schedule and
organizational structure, developing the
input data, conducting model
performance evaluations, interpreting
modeling results, describing procedures
for using the model to demonstrate
whether proposed strategies are
sufficient to attain the applicable
standard, and producing documentation
to be submitted for the EPA Regional
Office review and approval prior to
actual modeling.
In addition to a modeled attainment
demonstration, which focuses on
locations with an air quality monitor,
EPA’s Guidance describes an
Unmonitored Area Analysis (UAA).
This analysis is intended to ensure that
a control strategy leads to reductions in
PM2.5 at other locations that have no
monitor but that might have base year
and future baseline (projection year)
ambient PM2.5 levels exceeding the
standard.
Under the PM2.5 Implementation
Rule, the attainment demonstration
must show that the projected attainment
date is as expeditious as practicable. 40
CFR 51.1392(a)(1). The demonstration
must meet the general modeling
requirements in Appendix W to part 51
and must include the emission
inventory data, modeling results, and
emission reduction analyses that were
used in the demonstration. 40 CFR
51.1392(a)(2). The base year for the
emissions inventory must be one of the
three years used for designation or
another technically appropriate year
that the state has justified. 40 CFR
51.1392(a)(3). Finally, the attainment
demonstration must be consistent with
the control strategy in the attainment
plan. 40 CFR 51.1392(a)(4).
57187
emissions inventories, meteorological
data, and the application and evaluation
of a regional photochemical model.
UDAQ’s air quality analyses were
conducted using the Community
Multiscale Air Quality (CMAQ) Model
version 4.7.1, with emissions inputs
generated using the Sparse Matrix
Operator Kernel Emissions (SMOKE)
processing system, and meteorological
inputs developed using the Weather
Research and Forecasting (WRF) model.
The modeling protocol for the
Moderate PM2.5 SIP is contained in the
docket for this action and includes
descriptions of the photochemical
modeling. Additional description of the
photochemical modeling is covered in
the Weight of Evidence Analysis
(WOEA).7 The protocol was reviewed by
the EPA and covers all of the topics
recommended in the Modeling
Guidance Update.
The air quality modeling and results
are summarized in Chapter 5—
Attainment Demonstration of the Logan,
UT–ID PM2.5 SIP and in Chapter 4—Air
Quality Modeling of the TSD.
Additionally, the Logan, UT–ID PM2.5
SIP included a UAA in Chapter 4 of the
TSD within the WOEA (section 1.5).
3. Evaluation of the Air Quality
Modeling in the Logan, UT–ID PM2.5 SIP
As mentioned above, the attainment
demonstration must show that the
Moderate nonattainment area will attain
the standard as expeditiously as
practicable but no later than the end of
the sixth calendar year after the area’s
designation. The Logan, UT–ID
Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment area
attainment date was December 31, 2015.
As the Moderate PM2.5 attainment plan
for the Logan, UT–ID nonattainment
area was due December 31, 2014 (79 FR
31566; June 2, 2014), one year before the
six-year mark, the EPA proposes to
determine that the projected attainment
date of December 31, 2015, was as
expeditious as practicable. We also note
that one of the control measure
implemented in the Logan, UT–ID
nonattainment area, the I/M program,
was not fully implemented until 2015.
This supports the conclusion that the
attainment date, December 31, 2015,
2. Modeled Attainment Demonstration
was as expeditiously as practicable.
The EPA proposes to approve the
in the Logan, UT–ID PM2.5 Moderate
attainment demonstration as meeting
Plan
general modeling requirements in
UDAQ conducted a technical analysis
Appendix W. The joint Utah and Idaho
to support the development of the
modeling included in Chapter 4 of the
Logan, UT–ID Moderate PM2.5 SIP. Their
TSD and Chapter 5 of the Logan, UT–
analyses included preparation of
ID Moderate PM2.5 SIP followed
applicable EPA modeling guidance in
6 The EPA Modeling Guidance and Modeling
Guidance Update are available on EPA’s SCRAM
Web site, Web page: https://www.epa.gov/scram001/
guidance_sip.htm.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
7 Chapter 4—Air Quality Modeling of the Logan,
UT–ID Moderate PM2.5 SIP TSD.
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
57188
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 231 / Monday, December 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
predicting that state and federal control
measures to address point sources, area
sources, on-road mobile sources, and
off-road mobile sources would bring
PM2.5 concentrations below 35 mg/m3 by
December 31, 2015, in the Logan, UT–
ID nonattainment area. The air quality
model performance appears generally
acceptable and usually within stated
performance goals; speciation and
composition of the modeled PM2.5
matches the observed speciation, with
good agreement in the magnitude of
PM2.5 and good replication of the
episodic buildup and clear out of PM2.5;
however, the meteorological model does
not always accurately simulate the
intensity and persistence of cold air
pool inversion conditions, and as a
result, the model sometimes clears out
the simulated PM2.5 too early at the end
of an episode.
We note that the PM2.5
Implementation Rule provides that a
state’s modeled attainment
demonstration must establish that an
area will attain the NAAQS by the
projected attainment date. However, for
purposes of modeling, a state may elect
to demonstrate that the area will meet
the numerical level of the NAAQS for
the attainment year (81 FR 58010, at
page 58054). The EPA authorizes this
approach because of the potential
availability of extensions of the
Moderate area attainment date under
relevant provisions section 188(d) of the
CAA. In other words, if ambient data
show attainment-level concentrations in
the applicable statutory attainment year,
the state may be eligible for up to two
one-year extensions of the attainment
date. See 40 CFR 51.1005. Using this
provision, a state may be able to attain
the NAAQS by the extended attainment
date, even if the measured design value
(a three-year average) for an area does
not meet the NAAQS by the end of the
6th calendar year after designation. For
this reason, the PM2.5 Implementation
Rule indicates that it is acceptable for a
state to model air quality levels for the
final statutory attainment year in which
the area is required to attain the
standard, in this case, 2015. In the
Logan, UT–ID nonattainment area, both
measured and modeled PM2.5
concentrations in 2015 were consistent
with meeting the numerical level of the
NAAQS in both Utah and Idaho, thus
confirming the attainment
demonstration.8
Additionally, UDAQ included a UAA
in the WOEA found in Chapter 4 of the
8 The Logan, UT–ID Moderate PM
2.5
nonattainment area monitor located in Logan, UT,
recorded a valid 2015 98th percentile of 29.0 mg/
m3. See the document titled ‘‘May 8, 2017 Logan,
UT–ID PM2.5 Memo’’ in the docket to this action.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Dec 01, 2017
Jkt 244001
TSD. The UAA showed that five gridcells north of the Franklin, ID monitor
had calculated future design values
(FDVs) over 35.5 mg/m3. UDAQ was not
sure why the predicted peak PM2.5
concentrations were high because there
were no large point sources in the
county, or any other emissions sources
that could produce the level of
emissions in the specific grid-cells to
cause this concentration. The WOEA
explains that the uncertainty in UDAQ’s
UAA method may be responsible for the
high values north/northwest of the
Franklin, ID monitor. EPA modeling
guidance 9 suggests using the Model
Attainment Test Software (MATS) postprocessor to perform a UAA. However,
the MATS version 2.5.1 that was
available when the Logan, UT–ID
Moderate PM2.5 SIP was developed did
not have the ability to perform a UAA
for daily average PM2.5. As a result,
UDAQ attempted to implement a UAA
methodology for the Logan, UT–ID
Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment area
UAA that was comparable to what was
recommended by the EPA guidance, but
the gradient adjustment and speciation
techniques were necessarily simpler.
The EPA worked with UDAQ to
develop the methodology for the UAA
in the Logan, UT–ID Moderate PM2.5
nonattainment area and agrees with
UDAQ’s conclusion that there were no
large point sources within the high
concentration grid-cells and the
potentially high values north/northwest
of the Franklin, ID monitor are possibly
due to the uncertainty inherent in
UDAQ’s UAA method. Additionally, the
EPA reviewed available monitoring data
for 2015 at the Logan and Franklin
monitors for which the 98th percentiles
are 29.0 mg/m3 and 18.8 mg/m3,
respectively. The monitoring data
indicates that the high values in the
UAA grid cells north/northwest of the
Franklin monitor are likely an anomaly
and the EPA will continue to work with
UDAQ to refine their UAA method for
future use.
The EPA is therefore proposing to
approve the attainment demonstration
portion of the Logan, UT–ID Moderate
PM2.5 SIP.
9 April 2007; EPA–454/B–07–002; Guidance on
the Use of Models and Other Analyses for
Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals for
Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional Haze.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
C. Reasonably Available Control
Measures/Reasonably Available Control
Technology and Additional Reasonable
Measures
1. Requirements for the RACM/RACT
and Additional Measures
As mentioned above, section 172(c)(1)
of the Act (from subpart 1) requires that
attainment plans, in general, provide for
the implementation of all RACM
(including RACT) as expeditiously as
practicable. Section 189(a)(1)(C) (from
subpart 4) requires Moderate area plans
to include provisions to assure that
RACM is implemented no later than
four years after designation. The Logan,
UT–ID area was designated
nonattainment for the 2006 24-hour
PM2.5 NAAQS on November 13, 2009
(74 FR 58688). However, the Logan, UT–
ID nonattainment area was not classified
as Moderate under subpart 4 until the
EPA published the Classification and
Deadlines Rule on June 2, 2014 (79 FR
31566). Because the EPA designated the
Logan, UT–ID nonattainment area
effective December 14, 2009, the area
was required to implement RACM/
RACT no later than December 14, 2013.
The PM2.5 Implementation Rule
defines RACM (including RACT) as any
technologically and economically
feasible measure that can be
implemented in whole or in part within
four years after the effective date of
designation of a PM2.5 nonattainment
area and that achieves permanent and
enforceable reductions in direct PM2.5
emissions and/or PM2.5 precursor
emissions from sources in the area.
Under the PM2.5 Implementation
Rule, the state must first identify all
sources of emissions of direct PM2.5 and
all PM2.5 precursors (NOX, SO2, VOC,
and NH3) in the nonattainment area, in
accordance with the emission inventory
requirements described above. 40 CFR
51.1010(a)(1). The state must then
identify all potential control measures
to reduce emissions from those source
categories, except for source categories
or major stationary sources for which
the state submits an acceptable
precursor demonstration. 40 CFR
51.1010(a)(2). The state next determines
whether the identified potential control
measures are technologically feasible
and whether any of the identified
technologically feasible control
measures are economically feasible. 40
CFR 51.1010(a)(3). The state must
provide a detailed written justification
for any potential control measure that
has been excluded as technologically or
economically infeasible. 40 CFR
51.1010(a)(3)(iii). The state may also
eliminate potential control measures
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
57189
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 231 / Monday, December 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
that would take longer than six years to
implement. 40 CFR 51.1010(a)(3)(i).
Section 172(c)(6) of the Act requires
states to implement ‘‘other measures’’
necessary to provide for timely
attainment in an area. The PM2.5
Implementation Rule interprets this
provision to require ‘‘additional
reasonable measures,’’ which are those
measures and technologies that can be
applied at sources in the nonattainment
area that are otherwise technologically
and economically feasible but can only
be implemented in whole or in part later
than four years after designation.10
2. RACM/RACT in the Logan, UT–ID
PM2.5 Moderate Plan
nonattainment area for the PM2.5
NAAQS, or 70 tpy or more of direct
PM2.5 or any PM2.5 precursor in any
Serious nonattainment area for the PM2.5
NAAQS.’’ 11 UDAQ used the Moderate
threshold for emissions of direct PM2.5
and all PM2.5 precursors for all major
stationary sources in the modeling
domain. Additionally, UDAQ applied
the 100 tpy threshold to the sources’
potential to emit as well as their actual
emissions. UDAQ determined that
according to Moderate area threshold,
Pepperidge Farm Inc., was the only
source included on this list that is
located in the Logan-UT–ID
nonattainment area. Table 2 provides
actual emission totals in tpy for the
Pepperidge Farm Inc., plant for 2008.
a. Major Stationary Sources
In developing the emissions
inventories underlying the SIP, UDAQ
used the criteria of 40 CFR part 51,
subpart A for air emissions reporting
requirements to establish a 100 tons per
year (tpy) threshold for identifying a
sub-group of major stationary sources
that would be evaluated individually for
the establishment of emissions limits.
Under 40 CFR 51.1000, the definition
for major stationary source means ‘‘Any
stationary source of air pollutant(s) that
emits, or has the potential to emit, 100
tpy or more of direct PM2.5 or any PM2.5
precursor in any Moderate
TABLE 2—PEPPERIDGE FARM INCORPORATED 2008 CRITERIA POLLUTANT INVENTORY
Process
PM2.5
SO2
NOX
VOC
NH3
2008 Plantwide Emission Totals (tpy)
Process & Fuel Emissions .......................................................................
Evaporative Emissions .............................................................................
Engines ....................................................................................................
Bakery ......................................................................................................
0.48
....................
0.02
....................
0.03
....................
0.01
....................
5.20
....................
0.13
....................
0.29
0.32
0.01
149.58
0.03
....................
0.00
....................
Totals ................................................................................................
0.50
0.04
5.33
150.20
0.03
UDAQ determined that data from the
REMI would be used to project the 2008
actual major stationary source emissions
to 2010. On March 23, 2012, Pepperidge
Farm Inc., applied to be designated as
a synthetic minor source and on May
21, 2012, UDAQ concurred and issued
a construction permit that restricted
emissions below the major stationary
source threshold. Specifically, VOC
emissions were limited to 93.81 tpy per
rolling 12-month period. Since
Pepperidge Farm Inc. was designated as
a synthetic minor source in 2012, the
source was not included in the 2015
projection inventory as a major
stationary source, but in the area source
inventory. Table 3 below shows
emissions in tons per day for the 2010
baseline and projected 2015 inventories.
TABLE 3—PEPPERIDGE FARM INCORPORATED BASELINE 2010 AND PROJECTED 2015 EMISSIONS INVENTORIES OF
TYPICAL WINTER INVERSION DAY (tpd) AS A MAJOR STATIONARY SOURCE
2010
2015
PM2.5
Pepperidge Farms Inc. ....................................
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
For the Logan, UT–ID Moderate PM2.5
SIP, UDAQ concluded that there were
no major stationary sources with actual
emissions or potential to emit 100 tpy
of PM2.5 or any PM2.5 plan precursors.
As stated above, this conclusion is due
to Pepperidge Farm Inc., reducing their
emissions to be designated as a
synthetic minor source.
b. On-Road Mobile Sources
Through the course of the
development of the Logan, UT–ID PM2.5
SIP, UDAQ identified a motor vehicle I/
M program as RACM to achieve
reductions of PM2.5 precursor emissions
10 81
FR 58010, 58043; August 24, 2016.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Dec 01, 2017
Jkt 244001
NOX
VOC
SO2
PM2.5
NOX
VOC
SO2
0.00
0.02
0.63
0.00
................
................
................
................
of NOX and VOC. Subsequently, the
EPA approved the revisions involving
amendments to Utah’s SIP Section X,
Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance
Program, Part A, General Requirements
and Applicability; the addition of
Section X, Vehicle Inspection and
Maintenance Program, Part F, Cache
County in Utah’s SIP; and revisions to
Utah’s Administrative Rules on
September 9, 2015 (80 FR 54237).
The EPA noted in the September 9,
2015, final rule that under subparts 1
and 4 of the CAA, Cache County’s I/M
program is not a CAA mandatory or
required I/M program; and is therefore,
11 81
PO 00000
not held to the same level of
applicability requirements as found in
40 CFR part 51, subpart S, I/M program
requirements. Within Utah’s SIP, Part F
of Section X, in conjunction with Part
A of Section X, were designed by the
County and the State to meet the
minimum applicable I/M provisions and
requirements set forth in 40 CFR 51,
subpart S. It is also noted in Part F of
Utah’s SIP that although only a portion
of Cache County was designated as
nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 24hour NAAQS, the mandatory I/M
program will be implemented countywide. The I/M program began operation
FR 58010, 58152; August 24, 2016.
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
57190
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 231 / Monday, December 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
on January 1, 2014, where motor
vehicles are subject to a mandatory
biennial emissions inspection.
Emissions inspections were required in
odd-numbered years for vehicles with
an odd-numbered model year and evennumbered years for vehicles with an
even-numbered model year.
The EPA is not revisiting the
September 9, 2015 (80 FR 54237)
approval of Cache County’s I/M program
with this action but is only acting on
UDAQ’s RACM analysis pertaining to
this program. Within Chapter 5 of the
TSD, UDAQ provides their review of
several control measures and their final
RACM conclusions for mobile sources
in the Logan, UT–ID nonattainment
area.
The potential control measures
identified and evaluated by UDAQ
include: (1) A mandatory I/M program
in Logan where such a program did not
previously exist; (2) reducing the Reid
vapor pressure (RVP) of gasoline to
control VOC emissions; and (3)
implementing a bundle of voluntary
control measures (e.g., trip reduction,
curtailing of operations/activities and
driving on ‘‘yellow’’ and ‘‘red’’ air
quality days, diesel retrofits and
replacement of gasoline vehicles with
alternate-fuel vehicles such as those
running on compressed natural gas
(CNG) or electricity, and gasoline/
electric hybrids). UDAQ modeled these
potential control measures but found
that the only measure that provided any
significant emission benefit was to
include a mandatory I/M program for
the Utah portion of the Logan, UT–ID
nonattainment area and to implement
the program throughout Cache
County.12
The preliminary cost analysis for
extending the I/M program to the Logan,
UT–ID nonattainment area shows a cost
effectiveness of approximately $6,000 to
$8,000 per ton of emissions reduced per
year. UDAQ concluded that this was
within the range of costs associated with
other control measures which were
under consideration for inclusion in the
Logan, UT–ID PM2.5 SIP; therefore, it
was economically feasible. Furthermore,
similar programs have been successfully
operated in Utah, Salt Lake, Davis, and
Weber Counties and have proven to be
both technologically and economically
feasible.
The EPA’s motor vehicle emissions
model, MOVES2010a, was used to
identify the effectiveness of the I/M
program in the Logan, UT–ID
nonattainment area. For 2015, MOVES
predicted emission reductions of 0.21
tpd for NOX, and 0.21 tpd for VOC.
UDAQ concluded that the I/M program
met RACM and was retained as part of
the overall control strategy for the area.
Additionally, UDAQ provided
information for On-Road Mobile
programs that were promulgated at the
federal level. The Tier 2 program was
promulgated by the EPA on April 10,
2000 (65 FR 6698; February 10, 2000)
and was phased in between 2004 and
2008. Tier 2 set a single set of standards
for all light duty vehicles and required
refiners to reduce gasoline sulfur levels
nationwide. UDAQ provided estimates
provided by the EPA that the Tier 2
program would reduce oxides of
nitrogen emission by at least 2,220,000
tpy nationwide in 2020.13 Tier 2 has
also contributed in reducing VOC and
direct PM emissions from light duty
vehicles. Additional on-road mobile
source emissions improvements that
UDAQ highlights are from federal
regulations for heavy-duty diesel
vehicles. The Highway Diesel Rule,
which aimed at reducing pollution from
heavy-duty diesel highway vehicles,
was finalized on January 18, 2001 (66
FR 5002). Under the rule, beginning in
2007, (with a phase-in through 2010)
heavy-duty diesel highway vehicle
emissions were required to be reduced
by as much as 90 percent with a goal of
complete fleet replacement by 2030. In
order to enable the updated emission
reduction technologies necessitated by
the rule, beginning in 2006 (with a
phase-in through 2009) refiners were
required to begin producing cleanerburning ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel.
Specifically, the rule required a 97
percent reduction in sulfur content from
500 parts per million (ppm) to 15 ppm.
This program was estimated to reduce
PM and oxides of nitrogen from heavy
duty engines by 90 percent and 95
percent below current standard levels
set out in the rule, respectively.14 Table
4 below shows emissions in tons per
day for the 2010 baseline and projected
2015 inventories.
TABLE 4—ON-ROAD MOBILE SOURCE BASELINE 2010 AND PROJECTED 2015 EMISSIONS INVENTORIES OF TYPICAL
WINTER INVERSION DAY (tpd)
2010
2015
PM2.5
Cache County, UT ...........................................
c. Off-Road Mobile Sources
UDAQ did not consider any
additional SIP controls for off-road
mobile sources beyond those already
promulgated at the federal level.
NOX
VOC
SO2
PM2.5
NOX
VOC
SO2
0.37
6.48
4.99
0.04
0.28
4.49
3.35
0.03
Emission reductions from these federal
controls were taken indirectly because
their effectiveness has been
incorporated into the NONROAD
model. Table 5 below summarizes the
2010 base year and 2015 projection year
annual emissions from non-road mobile
sources in Cache County which contains
the Logan, UT–ID Moderate PM2.5
nonattainment area.
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
TABLE 5—2010 BASE YEAR AND 2015 PROJECTION YEAR NON-ROAD MOBILE, AIRCRAFT, LOCOMOTIVES EMISSIONS
INVENTORY (tpy)
2010
2015
PM2.5
Cache County ..................................................
12 Chapter 5—Control Strategies of the Utah
Moderate PM2.5 SIP TSD.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Dec 01, 2017
Jkt 244001
NOX
VOC
SO2
PM2.5
NOX
VOC
SO2
492.47
1,144.85
61.99
8.55
360.63
901.09
49.21
2.88
13 65
PO 00000
FR 6698; February 10, 2000.
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
14 66
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
FR 5002; January 18, 2001.
04DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 231 / Monday, December 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
Chapter 5 of UDAQ’s TSD provides a
detailed description of what control
measures were included in the
modeling.
3. EPA’s Evaluation of the RACM/RACT
Regulations
The EPA is proposing to approve
UDAQ’s determination that a RACT
analysis for the Pepperidge Farms
facility was not necessary, as the SIP
demonstrates attainment based on the
other control measures included in the
SIP. The EPA agrees with UDAQ’s
underlying justification for including
the I/M program in the Logan, UT–ID
attainment plan. UDAQ analyzed the
measure as technologically and
economically feasible and therefore
RACM; however, the measure was
implemented in the fifth and sixth year
after designation. UDAQ did not have
the benefit of the EPA’s distinction in
the PM2.5 Implementation Rule between
RACM and additional reasonable
measures at the time the RACM analysis
for the I/M program was developed. We
therefore consider the I/M program to be
an additional reasonable measure and
we are proposing to approve it as such.
The EPA notes that, with the exception
of timing of control measure
implementation, the standard for the
two types of control measures is the
same: technological and economic
feasibility. Additionally, the EPA agrees
with UDAQ’s reliance on federal onroad mobile regulations for other onroad mobile emission reductions in the
Logan, UT–ID PM2.5 SIP and is
proposing to approve UDAQ’s
determination. We are also proposing to
approve UDAQ’s determination that
additional off-road measures are not
necessary given that the federal
measures will provide further emission
reductions for the Logan, UT–ID
Moderate PM2.5 SIP. The EPA is not
proposing to determine whether the
Logan, UT–ID Moderate PM2.5
attainment SIP has fully met all
requirements for RACM/RACT found in
CAA subparts 1 and 4. This
determination will be made at a later
date.
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
D. Transportation Conformity and
Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets
1. Requirements for Transportation
Conformity and MVEBs
Transportation conformity is required
by section 176(c) of the CAA. The EPA’s
conformity rule at 40 CFR 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. Conformity to a SIP
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Dec 01, 2017
Jkt 244001
means that transportation activities will
not produce new air quality violations,
worsen existing violations, or delay
timely attainment of the NAAQS or any
interim milestone. To effectuate its
purpose, the EPA’s conformity rule
requires a demonstration that emissions
from a Metropolitan Planning
Organization’s (MPO) Regional
Transportation Plan (RTP) and
Transportation Improvement Program
(TIP), involving Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) or Federal
Transit Administration (FTA) funding
or approval, are consistent with the
MVEB(s) contained in a control strategy
SIP revision or maintenance plan (40
CFR 93.101, 93.118, and 93.124). A
MVEB is defined as the level of mobile
source emissions of a pollutant relied
upon in the attainment, RFP or
maintenance demonstration to attain or
maintain compliance with the NAAQS
in the nonattainment or maintenance
area. 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 notes that PM2.5 attainment
plans should identify MVEBs for direct
PM2.5, NOX and all other PM2.5
precursors where on-road mobile source
emissions are determined to
significantly contribute to PM2.5 levels
in the nonattainment area. For the
Logan, UT–ID PM2.5 SIP, UDAQ
identified mobile source VOC emissions
as a significant contributor to the
formation of PM2.5 in the Logan, UT–ID
PM2.5 nonattainment area. For direct
PM2.5 SIP MVEBs, the MVEB should
include direct PM2.5 motor vehicle
emissions from tailpipes, brake wear,
and tire wear. In addition, a state must
also consider whether re-entrained road
dust is a significant contributor and
should be included in the direct PM2.5
MVEB.15 With respect to this
requirement, the EPA reviewed
information, data, and an analysis from
the UDAQ that sufficiently documented
that re-entrained road dust emissions
were negligible and meet the criteria of
40 CFR 93.102(b)(3) for not needing to
be included in the direct PM2.5 MVEB.
2. MVEBs Identified in the Logan, UT–
ID Moderate PM2.5 SIP
Utah’s Logan, UT–ID PM2.5 SIP
Section IX. Part A.23 was submitted to
meet the requirements of part D of title
I of the CAA, subparts 1 and 4 for
‘‘Moderate’’ PM2.5 nonattainment areas.
15 40 CFR 93.102(b) and 93.122(f); see also
conformity rule preamble at 69 FR 40004, 40031–
40036 (July 1, 2004).
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
57191
The State’s attainment plan specified
the maximum mobile source emissions
of PM2.5, NOX and VOC allowed in
2015, the attainment year. These mobile
source emissions were then identified
by the State as the SIP’s MVEBs and are
to be used by the Cache MPO to
demonstrate transportation conformity
for the Cache MPO’s RTP and TIP. The
attainment plan’s 2015 MVEBs include
direct PM2.5, NOX, and VOC emissions
from vehicle exhaust/evaporation, tire
wear and brake wear. The identified
MVEBs were included in Table 7.1 of
the SIP and are identified as: Direct
PM2.5 is 0.32 tpd, NOX is 4.49 tpd, and
VOC is 3.23 tpd.
We note that prior to December 31,
2015, the EPA had found the Logan,
UT–ID PM2.5 MVEBs were adequate as
described in the transportation
conformity adequacy provisions of 40
CFR 93.118(e). Under 40 CFR
93.118(e)(4)(iv), we review a submitted
plan to determine whether the MVEBs,
when considered together with all other
emissions sources, are consistent with
applicable requirements for RFP,
attainment, or maintenance (whichever
is relevant to a given SIP submission).
We described our process for
determining the adequacy of submitted
SIP MVEBs in our July 1, 2004,
Transportation Conformity Rule
Amendments (69 FR 40004). We used
these resources in making our adequacy
determination.
On March 23, 2015, we announced
receipt of the Logan, UT–ID PM2.5
attainment plan at the EPA’s Office of
Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ)
adequacy Web site and requested public
comment on the adequacy of the MVEBs
by April 22, 2015. We did not receive
any comments during the comment
period. We sent a letter to the UDAQ on
June 17, 2015, stating that the submitted
Logan, UT–ID PM2.5 attainment plan SIP
revision MVEBs were adequate for
transportation conformity purposes. We
announced our adequacy finding in the
Federal Register on September 11, 2015
(80 FR 54788); effective September 28,
2015.
3. MVEB Trading, for Purposes of
Demonstrating Transportation
Conformity, in the Logan, UT–ID PM2.5
SIP
The EPA’s transportation conformity
rule allows for trading between direct
PM2.5 and NOX and VOC precursor
MVEBs, so long as the SIP establishes an
appropriate mechanism for such
trades.16
As discussed in section 7.6
‘‘Transportation Conformity PM2.5
16 40
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
CFR 93.124(b).
04DEP1
57192
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 231 / Monday, December 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
Budgets’’ of the Logan UT–ID PM2.5
attainment plan, the SIP revision
establishes a MVEB trading mechanism
to allow for future increases in on-road
mobile sources direct PM2.5 emissions to
be offset by future decreases in NOX and
VOC precursor emissions from on-road
mobile sources. These ratios were
developed from data from the air quality
attainment plan’s dispersion modeling.
Section 7.6 of the SIP and the Logan
UT–ID PM2.5 attainment plan’s
Technical Support Documentation
Weight-of-Evidence information 17
provide the following modeling-derived
trading ratios: Future increases in onroad mobile sources direct PM2.5
emissions may be offset with future
decreases in NOX emissions from onroad mobile sources at a NOX to PM2.5
ratio of 13.66 to 1 and/or future
decreases in VOC emissions from onroad mobile sources at a VOC to PM2.5
ratio of 22.84 to 1.
The SIP notes that this trading
mechanism will only be used by the
Cache MPO for transportation
conformity determination analyses for
years after 2015. The SIP further notes
that to ensure that the trading
mechanism does not impact the ability
to meet the NOX or VOC budgets, the
NOX emission reductions available to
supplement the direct PM2.5 MVEB shall
only be those remaining after the 2015
NOX MVEB has been met. Also, the
VOC emissions reductions available to
supplement the direct PM2.5 budget
shall only be those remaining after the
2015 VOC MVEB has been met. The SIP
further articulates that clear
documentation of the calculations used
in the MVEB trading are to be included
in the conformity determination
analysis as prepared by the Cache MPO.
4. Evaluation and Proposed Action
The EPA has evaluated the Logan,
UT–ID PM2.5 attainment plan’s emission
inventories and attainment
demonstration modeling as described in
sections above. Based on our evaluation,
we have determined that the direct
PM2.5, NOX, and VOC MVEBs are
appropriately derived from the SIP and
are acceptable. We have also evaluated
the description and derivation of the
MVEB trading mechanism and the
supporting data from the SIP’s
attainment demonstration modeling/
Weight-Of-Evidence information and
find those acceptable. Therefore, we are
proposing to approve the Logan UT–ID
PM2.5 attainment plan’s MVEBs of direct
PM2.5 of 0.32 tpd, NOX of 4.49 tpd, and
17 ‘‘PM
2.5 State Implementation Plan Weight-OfEvidence to the Model Attainment Test,’’ section
1.9, pages 64 and 65.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:46 Dec 01, 2017
Jkt 244001
VOC of 3.23 tpd. In addition, we are
also proposing to approve the MVEB
trading mechanism as documented in
section 7.6 of the SIP.
V. Summary of the EPA’s Proposed
Action
For the reasons discussed in section
IV above, under CAA section 110(k)(3),
the EPA is proposing to approve the
emissions inventory, modeled
attainment demonstration,
determination for Major Stationary
Source RACT, determination for OnRoad Mobile Sources RACM,
determination of Cache County I/M
program as additional reasonable
measures, determination for Off-Road
Mobile Sources RACM, and 2015 MVEB
for the Logan, UT–ID PM2.5 Moderate
SIP.
A. Proposed Approval
1. The EPA is proposing the following
actions on the Logan, UT–ID PM2.5 SIP:
a. Approve the 2010 base year and
2015 projection year emissions
inventories;
b. Approve the modeled attainment
demonstration;
c. Approve the RACM/RACT and
additional reasonable measure
demonstrations for on-road mobile,
Cache County I/M Program, off-road
mobile and point sources; and
d. Approve the 2015 direct PM2.5,
NOX and VOC MVEBs and the MVEB
trading mechanism.
VI. Consideration of Section 110(l) of
the CAA
Under section 110(l) of the CAA, the
EPA cannot approve a SIP revision if the
revision would interfere with any
applicable requirements concerning
attainment and RFP toward attainment
of the NAAQS, or any other applicable
requirement of the Act. The EPA
proposes to determine that the portions
of the Logan UT–ID PM2.5 SIP that we
are acting on are consistent with the
applicable requirements of the Act.
Furthermore, these portions do not relax
any previously approved SIP provision;
thus they do not otherwise interfere
with attainment and maintenance of the
NAAQS. In addition, section 110(l)
requires that each revision to an
implement plan submitted by a state
shall be adopted by the state after
reasonable notice and opportunity for
public hearing. On September 3, 2014,
the Air Quality Board proposed for
public comment the Logan, UT–ID
Moderate PM2.5 attainment plan. The
public comment period was held from
October 1 to October 31, 2014, with a
public hearing being held on October
20, 2014. On December 3, 2014, the Air
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Quality Board adopted the Logan, UT–
ID Moderate PM2.5 attainment plan and
became effective on December 4, 2014.
Therefore, CAA section 110(l)
requirements are satisfied.
VII. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, the EPA is proposing to
include in a final EPA rule regulatory
text that includes incorporation by
reference. In accordance with
requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is
proposing to incorporate by reference
the approval of portions of the Logan,
UT–ID PM2.5 Moderate SIP submitted by
the state of Utah as discussed in section
IV of this preamble. The EPA has made,
and will continue to make, these
materials generally available through
www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA
Region 8 Office (please contact the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
preamble for more information).
VIII. 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 proposed
action approves state law as meeting
federal requirements. For that reason,
this proposed action:
• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ subject to review by the Office
of Management and Budget under
Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735,
October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821,
January 21, 2011);
• is not an Executive Order 13771 (82
FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory
action because SIP approvals are
exempted under Executive Order 12866;
• 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
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 231 / Monday, December 4, 2017 / Proposed Rules
safety risks subject to Executive Order
13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);
• is not a significant regulatory action
subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR
28355, May 22, 2001);
• is not subject to requirements of
Section 12(d) of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because
application of those requirements would
be inconsistent with the CAA; and
• does not provide the EPA with the
discretionary authority to address, as
appropriate, disproportionate human
health or environmental effects, using
practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898
(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, 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).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 180
[EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0314; FRL–9970–76]
Receipt of a Pesticide Petition Filed for
α-Methyl Mannoside for Residues of
Pesticide Chemicals in or on Various
Commodities
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice of filing of petition and
request for comment.
ethrower on DSK3G9T082PROD with PROPOSALS
AGENCY:
This document announces
EPA’s receipt of an initial filing of a
pesticide petition requesting the
establishment or modification of
regulations for residues of pesticide
chemicals in or on various commodities.
Jkt 244001
Submit your comments,
identified by Docket Identification (ID)
Number EPA–HQ–OPP–2017–0314, by
one of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute.
• Mail: OPP Docket, Environmental
Protection Agency Docket Center (EPA/
DC), (28221T), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave.
NW., Washington, DC 20460–0001.
• Hand Delivery: To make special
arrangements for hand delivery or
delivery of boxed information, please
follow the instructions at https://
www.epa.gov/dockets/contacts.html.
Additional instructions on commenting
or visiting the docket, along with more
information about dockets generally, is
available at https://www.epa.gov/
dockets.
1. Submitting CBI. Do not submit this
information to EPA through
regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark
the part or all of the information that
you claim to be CBI. For CBI
information in a disk or CD–ROM that
you mail to EPA, mark the outside of the
disk or CD–ROM as CBI and then
identify electronically within the disk or
CD–ROM the specific information that
is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that
includes information claimed as CBI, a
copy of the comment that does not
contain the information claimed as CBI
must be submitted for inclusion in the
public docket. Information so marked
will not be disclosed except in
accordance with procedures set forth in
40 CFR part 2.
2. Tips for preparing your comments.
When preparing and submitting your
comments, see the commenting tips at
https://www.epa.gov/dockets/
comments.html.
3. Environmental justice. EPA seeks to
achieve environmental justice, the fair
treatment and meaningful involvement
of any group, including minority and/or
low-income populations, in the
development, implementation, and
enforcement of environmental laws,
regulations, and policies. To help
address potential environmental justice
issues, EPA seeks information on any
groups or segments of the population
who, as a result of their location,
cultural practices, or other factors, may
have atypical or disproportionately high
and adverse human health impacts or
environmental effects from exposure to
the pesticide discussed in this
document, compared to the general
population.
ADDRESSES:
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.
A. Does this action apply to me?
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
16:46 Dec 01, 2017
B. What should I consider as I prepare
my comments for EPA?
I. General Information
[FR Doc. 2017–25960 Filed 12–1–17; 8:45 am]
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Comments must be received on
or before January 3, 2018.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: November 21, 2017.
Debra H. Thomas,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
SUMMARY:
DATES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Ammonia,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur
dioxide, Volatile organic compounds.
57193
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).
• Animal production (NAICS code
112).
• Food manufacturing (NAICS code
311).
• Pesticide manufacturing (NAICS
code 32532).
If you have any questions regarding
the applicability of this action to a
particular entity, consult the person
listed under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
II. What action is EPA taking?
EPA is announcing receipt of a
pesticide petition filed under section
408 of the Federal Food, Drug, and
Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a,
requesting the establishment or
modification of regulations in 40 CFR
part 180 for residues of pesticide
chemicals in or on various food
commodities. EPA is taking public
comment on the request before
responding to the petitioner. EPA is not
proposing any particular action at this
time. EPA has determined that the
pesticide petition described in this
document contains data or information
prescribed in FFDCA section 408(d)(2),
21 U.S.C. 346a(d)(2); however, EPA has
not fully evaluated the sufficiency of the
submitted data at this time or whether
the data supports granting of the
E:\FR\FM\04DEP1.SGM
04DEP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 231 (Monday, December 4, 2017)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 57183-57193]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-25960]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R08-OAR-2016-0585; FRL-9971-07-Region 8]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
State of Utah; Logan Nonattainment Area Fine Particulate Matter State
Implementation Plan for Attainment of 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate
Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve the emissions inventory, modeled attainment demonstration,
determination for Major Stationary Source Reasonably Available Control
Technology (RACT), determination for On-Road Mobile Sources Reasonably
Available Control Measures (RACM), determination for Cache County
Inspection and Maintenance (I/M) Program as additional reasonable
measures, determination for Off-Road Mobile Sources RACM, and the 2015
Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEB) portions of the attainment plan
submitted by Utah on December 16, 2014, to address Clean Air Act (CAA
or the Act) requirements for the 2006 24-hour fine particulate matter
(PM2.5) national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) in
the Logan, UT-ID Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment area. These
actions are being taken under section 110 of the CAA.
DATES: Written comments must be received on or before January 3, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R08-
OAR-2016-0585 at https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from www.regulations.gov. The EPA may publish any
comment received to the public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information, the disclosure of which 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, the full EPA
public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions,
and general guidance on making effective comments, please visit https://www.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Crystal Ostigaard, Air Program, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Region 8, Mailcode 8P-AR, 1595
Wynkoop Street, Denver, Colorado 80202-1129, (303) 312-6602,
ostigaard.crystal@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
a. Submitting CBI. Do not submit CBI to the EPA through
www.regulations.gov or email. Clearly mark the part or all of the
information that you claim to be CBI. For CBI information in a disk or
CD ROM that you mail to the EPA, mark the outside of the disk or CD ROM
as CBI and then identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the
specific information that is claimed as CBI. In addition to one
complete version of the comment that includes information claimed as
CBI, a copy of the comment that does not contain the information
claimed as CBI must be submitted for inclusion in the public docket.
Information so marked will not be disclosed except in accordance with
procedures set forth in 40 CFR part 2.
b. Tips for Preparing Your Comments. When submitting comments,
remember to:
1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
2. Follow directions--The agency may ask you to respond to specific
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.
3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and
substitute language for your requested changes.
4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information
and/or data that you used.
5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be
reproduced.
6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and
suggest alternatives.
7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of
profanity or personal threats.
[[Page 57184]]
8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline
identified.
II. Background
On October 17, 2006 (71 FR 61144), the EPA revised the level of the
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, lowering the primary and secondary
standards from the 1997 standard of 65 micrograms per cubic meter
([micro]g/m\3\) to 35 [micro]g/m\3\. On November 13, 2009 (74 FR
58688), the EPA designated three nonattainment areas in Utah for the
24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS of 35 [micro]g/m\3\. These are the Salt
Lake City, Utah (UT); Provo, UT; and Logan, UT-Idaho (ID) nonattainment
areas.
The Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 nonattainment area, also called
the Cache Valley, is composed of portions of Cache County, UT and
Franklin County, ID. The Cache Valley is an isolated, bowl-shaped
valley measuring approximately 60 kilometers north to south and 20
kilometers east to west and almost entirely surrounded by mountain
ranges. The Wellsville Mountains lie to the west, and on the east lie
the Bear River Mountains; both are northern branches of the Wasatch
Range. The State considers topography as a barrier to air movement
during the conditions which lead to elevated concentrations of fine
particulates and as the primary factor in determining where the
population is located. The low-lying valleys which trap air during
winter-time temperature inversions are also the regions within which
people live. Additional information pertaining to the unique issues
associated with the Logan, UT-ID nonattainment area and studies
completed on inversions can be found in the 9-factor analysis for Utah
and Idaho in the November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688) action titled ``Air
Quality Designations for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particulate
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards.''
The EPA originally issued a rule in 2007 \1\ regarding
implementation of the PM2.5 NAAQS for the nonattainment area
requirements specified in CAA title I, part D, subpart 1. Under subpart
1, Utah was required to submit an attainment plan for each area no
later than three years from the date of nonattainment designation.
These plans needed to provide for the attainment of the
PM2.5 standards as expeditiously as practicable, but no
later than five years from the date the areas were designated
nonattainment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 72 FR 20586; April 25, 2007.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following the November 13, 2009 designation of nonattainment for
PM2.5, Utah developed a draft PM2.5 attainment
plan intended to meet the requirements of subpart 1. The EPA submitted
written comments dated November 1, 2012, to the Utah Division of Air
Quality (UDAQ) on the draft PM2.5 SIP, technical support
document (TSD), area source rules, and point source rules found in
Section IX, Part H.\2\ Utah submitted a revised PM2.5
attainment plan for the Logan, UT-ID nonattainment area on December 14,
2012.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ An ``area source'' is ``any small residential, governmental,
institutional, commercial, or industrial fuel combustion operation;
onsite solid waste disposal facility; motor vehicle], aircraft
vessel or other transportation facilit[y] or other miscellaneous
source identified'' through specified inventory techniques. 40 CFR
51.100(l). A ``point source'' is any stationary source emitting
above certain thresholds. 40 CFR 51.100(k).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 4, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia held that the EPA should have implemented the 2006
PM2.5 24-hour standards, as well as the other
PM2.5 NAAQS, based on both CAA title I, part D, subpart 1
and subpart 4. Under subpart 4, all nonattainment areas are initially
classified as Moderate, and Moderate area attainment plans must address
the requirements of subpart 4 as well as subpart 1. Additionally,
subpart 4 sets a different SIP submittal due date and attainment year.
For a Moderate area, the attainment SIP is due 18 months after
designation and the attainment year is as expeditiously as practicable,
but no later than the end of the sixth calendar year after designation.
On June 2, 2014 (79 FR 31566), the EPA finalized the Identification
of Nonattainment Classification and Deadlines for Submission of State
Implementation Plan (SIP) Provisions for the 1997 Fine Particulate
(PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) and
2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (``the Classification and Deadlines
Rule''). This rule classified as Moderate the areas that were
designated in 2009 as nonattainment, and set the attainment SIP
submittal due date for those areas at December 31, 2014. Additionally,
this rule established the Moderate area attainment date of December 31,
2015.
After the court's 2013 decision, Utah amended its attainment plan
to address the requirements of subpart 4. On December 2, 2013, and
October 30, 2014, the EPA provided comments on Utah's revised draft
PM2.5 SIPs, including the TSD and emissions limits in
Section IX, Part H. Subsequently, on December 16, 2014, UDAQ withdrew
all prior Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 Moderate SIP submissions and
submitted a subpart 1 and subpart 4 PM2.5 Moderate SIP,
which is one of the submissions we are proposing to act on today.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The Salt Lake City, UT and Provo, UT Moderate
PM2.5 SIPs attainment plans, including requirements
regarding RACM under CAA subparts 1 and 4 of part D, title I of the
Act, will be acted on separately.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 24, 2016, the EPA finalized the Fine Particulate Matter
National Ambient Air Quality Standards: State Implementation Plan
Requirements (``PM2.5 Implementation Rule''), 81 FR 58010,
which partially addressed the January 4, 2013 court ruling. The final
PM2.5 Implementation Rule details how air agencies can meet
the statutory SIP requirements under subparts 1 and 4 that apply to
areas designated nonattainment for any PM2.5 NAAQS, such as:
General requirements for attainment plan due dates and attainment
demonstrations; provisions for demonstrating reasonable further
progress (RFP); quantitative milestones; contingency measures;
Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) permitting programs; and RACM
(including RACT). The statutory attainment planning requirements of
subparts 1 and 4 were established to ensure that the following goals of
the CAA are met: (i) That states implement measures that provide for
attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS as expeditiously as
practicable; and, (ii) that states adopt emissions reduction strategies
that will be the most effective at reducing PM2.5 levels in
nonattainment areas.
On September 8, 2017 (82 FR 42447), the EPA granted two, one-year
extensions of the Moderate attainment date for the Logan, UT-ID
Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment area until December 31, 2017.
III. Clean Air Act Requirements for PM2.5 Moderate
Nonattainment Area Plans
A. PM2.5 Moderate Area Plan Requirements
Upon designation as a Moderate nonattainment area under subpart 1
and subpart 4, the CAA requires the State to submit the following
Moderate area SIP elements:
1. A comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions
from all sources of PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in
the area (CAA section 172(c)(3));
2. Provisions to assure that RACM, including RACT, for the control
of direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors shall be
implemented no later than four years after the area is designated (CAA
sections 172(c)(1) and 189(a)(1)(C));
3. A demonstration (including air quality modeling) that the plan
provides for attainment as expeditiously as
[[Page 57185]]
practicable but no later than the Moderate area attainment date;
4. Plan provisions that require RFP (CAA section 172(c)(2));
5. Quantitative milestones which are to be achieved every three
years until the area is redesignated attainment and which demonstrate
RFP toward attainment by the applicable date (CAA section 189(c));
6. Provisions to assure that control requirements applicable to
major stationary sources of PM2.5 also apply to major
stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors, except where the
State demonstrates to the EPA's satisfaction that such sources do not
contribute significantly to PM2.5 levels that exceed the
standard in the area (CAA section 189(e));
7. Contingency measures to be implemented if the area fails to meet
RFP or fails to attain by the applicable attainment date (CAA section
172(c)(9)); and
8. A revision to the NNSR program to set the applicable ``major
stationary source'' thresholds to 100 tons per year (tpy) (CAA section
302(j)).
Moderate area PM2.5 plans must also satisfy the general
requirements applicable to all SIP submissions under section 110 of the
CAA, including the requirement to provide necessary assurances that the
implementing agencies have adequate personnel, funding and authority
under CAA section 110(a)(2)(E) and the requirements concerning
enforcement provisions in CAA section 110(a)(2)(C).
The EPA interprets the CAA's requirements for particulate matter
plans under part D, title I of the Act in the following documents: (1)
``State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the Implementation
of Title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990,'' 57 FR 13498 (April 16,
1992) (``General Preamble''); (2) ``State Implementation Plans; General
Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the CAA Amendments of
1990; Supplemental,'' 57 FR 18070 (April 28, 1992) (``Supplement'');
(3) ``State Implementation Plans for Serious PM10
Nonattainment Areas, and Attainment Date Waivers for PM10
Nonattainment Areas Generally; Addendum to the General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990,'' 59 FR 41998
(August 16, 1994) (``Addendum''); and (4) ``Fine Particulate Matter
National Ambient Air Quality Standards: State Implementation Plan
Requirements,'' August 24, 2016 (81 FR 58010) (``PM2.5
Implementation Rule''). We discuss these interpretations of the Act as
appropriate in our evaluation of the Logan, UT-ID Moderate
PM2.5 Plan.
B. Implementation of Reasonably Available Control Measures
Section 172(c)(1) of the Act (from subpart 1) requires that
attainment plans, in general, provide for the implementation of all
RACM (including RACT) as expeditiously as practicable and shall provide
for attainment of the national primary ambient air quality standards.
CAA section 189(a)(1)(C) (from subpart 4) requires Moderate area
attainment plans to contain provisions to assure that RACM is
implemented no later than four years after designation.
The EPA stated its interpretation of the RACT and RACM requirements
of subparts 1 and 4 in the 1992 General Preamble for the Implementation
of Title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990, 57 FR 13498 (Apr. 6, 1992).
For RACT, the EPA followed its ``historic definition of RACT as the
lowest emission limitation that a particular source is capable of
meeting by the application of control technology that is reasonably
available considering technological and economic feasibility.'' 57 FR
13541. Like RACT, the EPA has historically considered RACM to consist
of control measures that are reasonably available, considering
technological and economic feasibility. See PM2.5
Implementation Rule, 81 FR 58010.
IV. EPA's Evaluation of the Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 Moderate Plan
The EPA is proposing to act on the following portions of the Logan
Moderate PM2.5 SIP: The emissions inventory, modeled
attainment demonstration, determination for Major Stationary Source
RACT, determination for On-Road Mobile Sources RACM, determination for
Cache County I/M Program as additional reasonable measures,
determination for Off-Road Mobile Sources RACM, and 2015 MVEB.
A. Emissions Inventory
1. Requirements for Emissions Inventories
CAA section 172(c)(3) requires that each SIP include a
``comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of actual emissions from
all sources of the relevant pollutant or pollutants in [the] area. . .
.'' By requiring an accounting of actual emissions from all sources of
the relevant pollutants in the area, this section provides for the base
year inventory to include all emissions that contribute to the
formation of a particular NAAQS pollutant. For the 2006
PM2.5 standards, this includes direct PM2.5 as
well as the precursor emissions to the formation of secondary
PM2.5: Nitrogen oxide (NOX), sulfur dioxide
(SO2), volatile organic compounds (VOC), and ammonia
(NH3). Direct PM2.5 includes condensable and
filterable particulate matter. Additionally, a state must include in
its SIP submission documentation explaining how the emissions data were
calculated. In estimating mobile source emissions, a state should use
the latest emissions models and planning assumptions available at the
time the SIP is developed.
In addition to the base year inventory submitted to meet the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3), the State must also submit
future inventories for the projected attainment year and any other year
of significance for meeting applicable CAA requirements. By attainment
projected inventories, we mean the projected emissions inventories for
future years that account for, among other things, the ongoing effects
of economic growth and adopted emissions control requirements. The SIP
should include documentation to explain how the emissions projections
were calculated.
2. Emissions Inventories in the Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 Moderate
Plan
The base year inventory should represent typical conditions at a
recent point in time, and becomes the basis for comparisons with all
projections into the future. The foundation that UDAQ used for each of
these specific inventories is the 2008 triennial inventory, which was
the most recent comprehensive inventory submitted to the EPA under
subpart A of 40 CFR part 51. Utah used the 2008 inventory to back-cast
and adjust for certain episodic conditions, and forecast a
representation of more typical conditions to develop the projected
inventories.
The Logan, UT-ID nonattainment area emissions inventory includes
emissions estimates from point sources, area sources, on-road mobile
sources, and off-road mobile sources. The methodologies used to derive
the 2010 base year inventory for PM2.5 are as follows:
The point source emissions inventory is based on the 2008
triennial National Emissions Inventory (NEI) data of actual emissions
reported by all permitted facilities. UDAQ used data from the Regional
Economic Models, Inc. (REMI) to project the 2008 actual point source
emissions to 2010.
Activity data was used to calculate emissions for area
source categories. This data includes population, employment, vehicle
miles traveled
[[Page 57186]]
(VMT), fuel usage, agriculture, and other estimates covering a wide
range of activities, in conjunction with the 2008 triennial NEI.
The inventory for the on-road mobile source category
includes emissions for mobile sources such as trucks, cars, buses, and
motorcycles. It was prepared by UDAQ using the EPA's Motor Vehicle
Emissions Simulator (MOVES2010a), the most current version of the model
available at the time the inventory was prepared, in conjunction with
information generated by travel demand models such as vehicle speeds
and miles traveled.
The non-road mobile source category includes miscellaneous
non-road engines, aircraft, and locomotives. Miscellaneous non-road
emissions were computed by using the EPA NONROAD Model, version
2008.1.0. Locomotive emissions were estimated by applying the EPA
emission factors to the total amount of fuel used by locomotives.
Aircraft emissions were estimated by applying aircraft specific
activity data and the Emissions Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS),
version 5.1.2.
Paved road emissions (coarse particulate matter
(PM10) and PM2.5 fugitive dust) were estimated by
UDAQ based on the EPA's January 2011 version of AP-42, Section 13.2.1.
Table 1 below provides a summary of winter daily average
inventories of source categories for direct PM2.5 and
PM2.5 precursors for the 2010 base year and 2015 projected
year. The base year inventory provides the basis for the control
measure analysis in the Logan, UT-ID Moderate PM2.5 SIP and
the projected year inventory provides the model projection for emission
reductions found in the Logan, UT-ID Moderate PM2.5 SIP.
Table 1--Logan, UT-ID Typical Winter Inversion Weekday in Tons per Day (tpd) of Source Categories for Direct PM2.5 and PM2.5 Precursors for the 2010
Baseline Year and 2015 Projected Year
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010 2015
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source category Direct Direct
PM2.5 NOX SO2 VOC NH3 PM2.5 NOX SO2 VOC NH3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Area Sources.............................. 0.54 1.63 0.26 4.16 4.31 0.40 1.59 0.27 3.75 4.08
Mobile Sources............................ 0.67 6.48 0.04 4.99 0.12 0.32 4.49 0.03 3.36 0.10
Non-Road Mobile Sources................... 0.13 1.15 0.02 2.28 0.00 0.10 0.81 0.01 1.77 0.00
Point Sources............................. 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total *............................... 1.35 9.28 0.32 12.06 4.43 0.82 6.89 0.31 8.88 4.19
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Totals might have slight deviations from the sum of the source categories due to rounding.
The composition of the Area Source Category in the table above
includes: Agriculture--livestock waste; bulk gasoline terminals;
commercial cooking; dust--construction dust; fuel combination--
commercial/institutional--coal, natural gas, oil, and other; fuel
combination--residential--oil, other, and wood; gas stations,
industrial processes--not elsewhere classified (NEC); miscellaneous
non-industrial NEC; mobile--non-road equipment--diesel; solvent--
consumer and commercial solvent use, degreasing, dry cleaning, graphic
arts, industrial surface coating and solvent use, non-industrial
surface coating; and waste disposal.
3. The EPA's Evaluation and Proposed Action: Base Year and Projected
Emissions Inventories
The PM2.5 Implementation Rule sets forth several
requirements for the base year inventory and projected year inventory
for Moderate area attainment plans. 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(1) and 40 CFR
51.1008(a)(2), respectively. The EPA has also issued guidance for the
preparation of emissions inventories for implementation of the
PM2.5 and ozone standards, along with regional haze
requirements.\4\ We propose to determine that the base year and
projected year inventories meet the requirements in the CAA and
PM2.5 Implementation Rule and was prepared consistently with
the recommendations in the guidance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ ``Emissions Inventory Guidance for Implementation of Ozone
and Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards
(NAAQS) and Regional Haze Regulations,'' Office of Air Quality
Planning and Standards, EPA-454/R-05-001 (August 2005).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Specifically, the base year inventory satisfies each requirement
found in 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(1). First, the base year of 2010 was not one
of the three years (2006-2008) used for designation of the area as
nonattainment. See 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(1)(i). However, the state has
justified 2010 as a technically appropriate inventory year, and the use
of a later year is consistent with the statutory requirement in section
172(c)(3) to use a ``current'' inventory. Second, the inventory
represents actual, average season-day emissions. 40 CFR
51.1008(a)(1)(ii) and (a)(1)(iii). Third, the inventory provides
emissions of all precursors of PM2.5. 40 CFR
51.1008(a)(1)(iv). Fourth, emissions of point sources are reported
according to thresholds found in 40 CFR part 51, subpart A. 40 CFR
51.1008(a)(1)(v).
The projected year inventory satisfies each requirement in 40 CFR
51.1008(a)(2). First, the 2015 projected year inventory was the most
expeditious year that showed modeled PM2.5 concentrations
below the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(2)(i).
Second, the projected emission values were derived from the same
sources included in the base year inventory and included projected
emissions based on growth and contraction pertaining to controls and
other potential causes. 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(2)(ii). Third, the temporal
period of projected emissions was the same as the base year inventory,
average season-day. 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(2)(iii). Fourth, the inventory
provides emissions of all precursors of PM2.5. 40 CFR
51.1008(a)(2)(iv). Fifth, all sources (point, stationary nonpoint, and
mobile sources) were included in the projected inventory at the same
level of detail found in the base year inventory. 40 CFR
51.1008(a)(2)(v) and (a)(2)(vi).
The base year inventory in the Logan, UT-ID Moderate
PM2.5 SIP is based on the most current and accurate
information available to the State at the time the SIP was being
developed. Additionally, the base year and projected inventories met
all minimum requirements found in 40 CFR 51.1008(a)(1) and (2), and the
inventories addressed all source categories in the Logan, UT-ID
[[Page 57187]]
nonattainment area and were developed consistent with the EPA's
inventory guidance.\5\ For these reasons, we are proposing to approve
the 2010 base year emissions inventory and the 2015 projected emissions
inventory in the Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 SIP as meeting the
requirements of CAA section 172(c)(3). We are also proposing to find
that the base year and projected inventories in the SIP provide an
adequate basis for development of the Logan, UT-ID Moderate
PM2.5 SIP.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Utah Moderate PM2.5 SIP TSD, Chapter 1--Inventory
General, Section b--Inventory Preparation Plan. The scope for UDAQ's
PM2.5 Emission Inventory Preparation Plan includes: EPA's
``Emission Inventory Improvement Program,'' ``Emissions Inventory
Guidance for Implementation of Ozone and Particulate Matter National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and Regional Haze
Regulations'' dated August 2005, ``Guidance on the Use of Models and
Other Analyses for Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals for
Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional Haze'' dated April 2007, and
``Guidance for Creating Annual On-Road Mobile Source Emission
Inventories for PM2.5 Nonattainment Areas for Use in SIPs
and Conformity'' dated August 2005. These documents helped to
facilitate the collection of point, area, mobile, biogenic, and
geogenic emission inventory data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Modeled Attainment Demonstration
1. Requirements for the Modeled Attainment Demonstration
Air quality modeling is used to establish emissions attainment
targets, the combination of emissions of PM2.5 and
PM2.5 precursors that the area can accommodate and still
attain the standard, and to assess whether the proposed control
strategy will result in attainment of the standard. Air quality
modeling is performed for a base year and compared to air quality
monitoring data collected during that year in order to determine model
performance. Once the model performance is determined to be acceptable,
future year changes to the emissions inventory are simulated with the
model to determine the relationship between emissions reductions and
changes in ambient air quality. To project future design values (FDVs),
the model response to emission reductions, in the form of Relative
Response Factors (RRFs), is applied to monitored design values from the
base year.
At the time the Logan, UT-ID Moderate PM2.5 SIP was
developed, the EPA's recommendations for model input preparation, model
performance evaluation, use of the model output for the attainment
demonstration and modeling documentation were described in Guidance on
the Use of Models and Other Analyses for Demonstrating Attainment of
Air Quality Goals for Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional Haze, EPA-
454/B-07-002, April 2007 (``Modeling Guidance Update'').\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The EPA Modeling Guidance and Modeling Guidance Update are
available on EPA's SCRAM Web site, Web page: https://www.epa.gov/scram001/guidance_sip.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA recommends that states prepare a modeling protocol as part
of their modeled attainment demonstration, and the Modeling Guidance
describes the topics to be addressed in the modeling protocol. A
modeling protocol should detail and formalize the procedures for
conducting all phases of the modeling analysis, such as describing the
background and objectives, creating a schedule and organizational
structure, developing the input data, conducting model performance
evaluations, interpreting modeling results, describing procedures for
using the model to demonstrate whether proposed strategies are
sufficient to attain the applicable standard, and producing
documentation to be submitted for the EPA Regional Office review and
approval prior to actual modeling.
In addition to a modeled attainment demonstration, which focuses on
locations with an air quality monitor, EPA's Guidance describes an
Unmonitored Area Analysis (UAA). This analysis is intended to ensure
that a control strategy leads to reductions in PM2.5 at
other locations that have no monitor but that might have base year and
future baseline (projection year) ambient PM2.5 levels
exceeding the standard.
Under the PM2.5 Implementation Rule, the attainment
demonstration must show that the projected attainment date is as
expeditious as practicable. 40 CFR 51.1392(a)(1). The demonstration
must meet the general modeling requirements in Appendix W to part 51
and must include the emission inventory data, modeling results, and
emission reduction analyses that were used in the demonstration. 40 CFR
51.1392(a)(2). The base year for the emissions inventory must be one of
the three years used for designation or another technically appropriate
year that the state has justified. 40 CFR 51.1392(a)(3). Finally, the
attainment demonstration must be consistent with the control strategy
in the attainment plan. 40 CFR 51.1392(a)(4).
2. Modeled Attainment Demonstration in the Logan, UT-ID
PM2.5 Moderate Plan
UDAQ conducted a technical analysis to support the development of
the Logan, UT-ID Moderate PM2.5 SIP. Their analyses included
preparation of emissions inventories, meteorological data, and the
application and evaluation of a regional photochemical model. UDAQ's
air quality analyses were conducted using the Community Multiscale Air
Quality (CMAQ) Model version 4.7.1, with emissions inputs generated
using the Sparse Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions (SMOKE) processing
system, and meteorological inputs developed using the Weather Research
and Forecasting (WRF) model.
The modeling protocol for the Moderate PM2.5 SIP is
contained in the docket for this action and includes descriptions of
the photochemical modeling. Additional description of the photochemical
modeling is covered in the Weight of Evidence Analysis (WOEA).\7\ The
protocol was reviewed by the EPA and covers all of the topics
recommended in the Modeling Guidance Update.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Chapter 4--Air Quality Modeling of the Logan, UT-ID Moderate
PM2.5 SIP TSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The air quality modeling and results are summarized in Chapter 5--
Attainment Demonstration of the Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 SIP and
in Chapter 4--Air Quality Modeling of the TSD. Additionally, the Logan,
UT-ID PM2.5 SIP included a UAA in Chapter 4 of the TSD
within the WOEA (section 1.5).
3. Evaluation of the Air Quality Modeling in the Logan, UT-ID
PM2.5 SIP
As mentioned above, the attainment demonstration must show that the
Moderate nonattainment area will attain the standard as expeditiously
as practicable but no later than the end of the sixth calendar year
after the area's designation. The Logan, UT-ID Moderate
PM2.5 nonattainment area attainment date was December 31,
2015. As the Moderate PM2.5 attainment plan for the Logan,
UT-ID nonattainment area was due December 31, 2014 (79 FR 31566; June
2, 2014), one year before the six-year mark, the EPA proposes to
determine that the projected attainment date of December 31, 2015, was
as expeditious as practicable. We also note that one of the control
measure implemented in the Logan, UT-ID nonattainment area, the I/M
program, was not fully implemented until 2015. This supports the
conclusion that the attainment date, December 31, 2015, was as
expeditiously as practicable.
The EPA proposes to approve the attainment demonstration as meeting
general modeling requirements in Appendix W. The joint Utah and Idaho
modeling included in Chapter 4 of the TSD and Chapter 5 of the Logan,
UT-ID Moderate PM2.5 SIP followed applicable EPA modeling
guidance in
[[Page 57188]]
predicting that state and federal control measures to address point
sources, area sources, on-road mobile sources, and off-road mobile
sources would bring PM2.5 concentrations below 35 [micro]g/
m\3\ by December 31, 2015, in the Logan, UT-ID nonattainment area. The
air quality model performance appears generally acceptable and usually
within stated performance goals; speciation and composition of the
modeled PM2.5 matches the observed speciation, with good
agreement in the magnitude of PM2.5 and good replication of
the episodic buildup and clear out of PM2.5; however, the
meteorological model does not always accurately simulate the intensity
and persistence of cold air pool inversion conditions, and as a result,
the model sometimes clears out the simulated PM2.5 too early
at the end of an episode.
We note that the PM2.5 Implementation Rule provides that
a state's modeled attainment demonstration must establish that an area
will attain the NAAQS by the projected attainment date. However, for
purposes of modeling, a state may elect to demonstrate that the area
will meet the numerical level of the NAAQS for the attainment year (81
FR 58010, at page 58054). The EPA authorizes this approach because of
the potential availability of extensions of the Moderate area
attainment date under relevant provisions section 188(d) of the CAA. In
other words, if ambient data show attainment-level concentrations in
the applicable statutory attainment year, the state may be eligible for
up to two one-year extensions of the attainment date. See 40 CFR
51.1005. Using this provision, a state may be able to attain the NAAQS
by the extended attainment date, even if the measured design value (a
three-year average) for an area does not meet the NAAQS by the end of
the 6th calendar year after designation. For this reason, the
PM2.5 Implementation Rule indicates that it is acceptable
for a state to model air quality levels for the final statutory
attainment year in which the area is required to attain the standard,
in this case, 2015. In the Logan, UT-ID nonattainment area, both
measured and modeled PM2.5 concentrations in 2015 were
consistent with meeting the numerical level of the NAAQS in both Utah
and Idaho, thus confirming the attainment demonstration.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The Logan, UT-ID Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment
area monitor located in Logan, UT, recorded a valid 2015 98th
percentile of 29.0 [micro]g/m\3\. See the document titled ``May 8,
2017 Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 Memo'' in the docket to this
action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, UDAQ included a UAA in the WOEA found in Chapter 4 of
the TSD. The UAA showed that five grid-cells north of the Franklin, ID
monitor had calculated future design values (FDVs) over 35.5 [micro]g/
m\3\. UDAQ was not sure why the predicted peak PM2.5
concentrations were high because there were no large point sources in
the county, or any other emissions sources that could produce the level
of emissions in the specific grid-cells to cause this concentration.
The WOEA explains that the uncertainty in UDAQ's UAA method may be
responsible for the high values north/northwest of the Franklin, ID
monitor. EPA modeling guidance \9\ suggests using the Model Attainment
Test Software (MATS) post-processor to perform a UAA. However, the MATS
version 2.5.1 that was available when the Logan, UT-ID Moderate
PM2.5 SIP was developed did not have the ability to perform
a UAA for daily average PM2.5. As a result, UDAQ attempted
to implement a UAA methodology for the Logan, UT-ID Moderate
PM2.5 nonattainment area UAA that was comparable to what was
recommended by the EPA guidance, but the gradient adjustment and
speciation techniques were necessarily simpler.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ April 2007; EPA-454/B-07-002; Guidance on the Use of Models
and Other Analyses for Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals
for Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional Haze.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EPA worked with UDAQ to develop the methodology for the UAA in
the Logan, UT-ID Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment area and
agrees with UDAQ's conclusion that there were no large point sources
within the high concentration grid-cells and the potentially high
values north/northwest of the Franklin, ID monitor are possibly due to
the uncertainty inherent in UDAQ's UAA method. Additionally, the EPA
reviewed available monitoring data for 2015 at the Logan and Franklin
monitors for which the 98th percentiles are 29.0 [micro]g/m\3\ and 18.8
[micro]g/m\3\, respectively. The monitoring data indicates that the
high values in the UAA grid cells north/northwest of the Franklin
monitor are likely an anomaly and the EPA will continue to work with
UDAQ to refine their UAA method for future use.
The EPA is therefore proposing to approve the attainment
demonstration portion of the Logan, UT-ID Moderate PM2.5
SIP.
C. Reasonably Available Control Measures/Reasonably Available Control
Technology and Additional Reasonable Measures
1. Requirements for the RACM/RACT and Additional Measures
As mentioned above, section 172(c)(1) of the Act (from subpart 1)
requires that attainment plans, in general, provide for the
implementation of all RACM (including RACT) as expeditiously as
practicable. Section 189(a)(1)(C) (from subpart 4) requires Moderate
area plans to include provisions to assure that RACM is implemented no
later than four years after designation. The Logan, UT-ID area was
designated nonattainment for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS on
November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688). However, the Logan, UT-ID
nonattainment area was not classified as Moderate under subpart 4 until
the EPA published the Classification and Deadlines Rule on June 2, 2014
(79 FR 31566). Because the EPA designated the Logan, UT-ID
nonattainment area effective December 14, 2009, the area was required
to implement RACM/RACT no later than December 14, 2013.
The PM2.5 Implementation Rule defines RACM (including
RACT) as any technologically and economically feasible measure that can
be implemented in whole or in part within four years after the
effective date of designation of a PM2.5 nonattainment area
and that achieves permanent and enforceable reductions in direct
PM2.5 emissions and/or PM2.5 precursor emissions
from sources in the area.
Under the PM2.5 Implementation Rule, the state must
first identify all sources of emissions of direct PM2.5 and
all PM2.5 precursors (NOX, SO2, VOC,
and NH3) in the nonattainment area, in accordance with the
emission inventory requirements described above. 40 CFR 51.1010(a)(1).
The state must then identify all potential control measures to reduce
emissions from those source categories, except for source categories or
major stationary sources for which the state submits an acceptable
precursor demonstration. 40 CFR 51.1010(a)(2). The state next
determines whether the identified potential control measures are
technologically feasible and whether any of the identified
technologically feasible control measures are economically feasible. 40
CFR 51.1010(a)(3). The state must provide a detailed written
justification for any potential control measure that has been excluded
as technologically or economically infeasible. 40 CFR
51.1010(a)(3)(iii). The state may also eliminate potential control
measures
[[Page 57189]]
that would take longer than six years to implement. 40 CFR
51.1010(a)(3)(i).
Section 172(c)(6) of the Act requires states to implement ``other
measures'' necessary to provide for timely attainment in an area. The
PM2.5 Implementation Rule interprets this provision to
require ``additional reasonable measures,'' which are those measures
and technologies that can be applied at sources in the nonattainment
area that are otherwise technologically and economically feasible but
can only be implemented in whole or in part later than four years after
designation.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 81 FR 58010, 58043; August 24, 2016.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. RACM/RACT in the Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 Moderate Plan
a. Major Stationary Sources
In developing the emissions inventories underlying the SIP, UDAQ
used the criteria of 40 CFR part 51, subpart A for air emissions
reporting requirements to establish a 100 tons per year (tpy) threshold
for identifying a sub-group of major stationary sources that would be
evaluated individually for the establishment of emissions limits. Under
40 CFR 51.1000, the definition for major stationary source means ``Any
stationary source of air pollutant(s) that emits, or has the potential
to emit, 100 tpy or more of direct PM2.5 or any
PM2.5 precursor in any Moderate nonattainment area for the
PM2.5 NAAQS, or 70 tpy or more of direct PM2.5 or
any PM2.5 precursor in any Serious nonattainment area for
the PM2.5 NAAQS.'' \11\ UDAQ used the Moderate threshold for
emissions of direct PM2.5 and all PM2.5
precursors for all major stationary sources in the modeling domain.
Additionally, UDAQ applied the 100 tpy threshold to the sources'
potential to emit as well as their actual emissions. UDAQ determined
that according to Moderate area threshold, Pepperidge Farm Inc., was
the only source included on this list that is located in the Logan-UT-
ID nonattainment area. Table 2 provides actual emission totals in tpy
for the Pepperidge Farm Inc., plant for 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 81 FR 58010, 58152; August 24, 2016.
Table 2--Pepperidge Farm Incorporated 2008 Criteria Pollutant Inventory
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Process PM2.5 SO2 NOX VOC NH3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008 Plantwide Emission Totals (tpy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Process & Fuel Emissions....................... 0.48 0.03 5.20 0.29 0.03
Evaporative Emissions.......................... ........... ........... ........... 0.32 ...........
Engines........................................ 0.02 0.01 0.13 0.01 0.00
Bakery......................................... ........... ........... ........... 149.58 ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------
Totals..................................... 0.50 0.04 5.33 150.20 0.03
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
UDAQ determined that data from the REMI would be used to project
the 2008 actual major stationary source emissions to 2010. On March 23,
2012, Pepperidge Farm Inc., applied to be designated as a synthetic
minor source and on May 21, 2012, UDAQ concurred and issued a
construction permit that restricted emissions below the major
stationary source threshold. Specifically, VOC emissions were limited
to 93.81 tpy per rolling 12-month period. Since Pepperidge Farm Inc.
was designated as a synthetic minor source in 2012, the source was not
included in the 2015 projection inventory as a major stationary source,
but in the area source inventory. Table 3 below shows emissions in tons
per day for the 2010 baseline and projected 2015 inventories.
Table 3--Pepperidge Farm Incorporated Baseline 2010 and Projected 2015 Emissions Inventories of Typical Winter Inversion Day (tpd) as a Major Stationary
Source
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5 NOX VOC SO2 PM2.5 NOX VOC SO2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pepperidge Farms Inc.................................... 0.00 0.02 0.63 0.00 .......... .......... .......... ..........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the Logan, UT-ID Moderate PM2.5 SIP, UDAQ concluded
that there were no major stationary sources with actual emissions or
potential to emit 100 tpy of PM2.5 or any PM2.5
plan precursors. As stated above, this conclusion is due to Pepperidge
Farm Inc., reducing their emissions to be designated as a synthetic
minor source.
b. On-Road Mobile Sources
Through the course of the development of the Logan, UT-ID
PM2.5 SIP, UDAQ identified a motor vehicle I/M program as
RACM to achieve reductions of PM2.5 precursor emissions of
NOX and VOC. Subsequently, the EPA approved the revisions
involving amendments to Utah's SIP Section X, Vehicle Inspection and
Maintenance Program, Part A, General Requirements and Applicability;
the addition of Section X, Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance Program,
Part F, Cache County in Utah's SIP; and revisions to Utah's
Administrative Rules on September 9, 2015 (80 FR 54237).
The EPA noted in the September 9, 2015, final rule that under
subparts 1 and 4 of the CAA, Cache County's I/M program is not a CAA
mandatory or required I/M program; and is therefore, not held to the
same level of applicability requirements as found in 40 CFR part 51,
subpart S, I/M program requirements. Within Utah's SIP, Part F of
Section X, in conjunction with Part A of Section X, were designed by
the County and the State to meet the minimum applicable I/M provisions
and requirements set forth in 40 CFR 51, subpart S. It is also noted in
Part F of Utah's SIP that although only a portion of Cache County was
designated as nonattainment for the 2006 PM2.5 24-hour
NAAQS, the mandatory I/M program will be implemented county-wide. The
I/M program began operation
[[Page 57190]]
on January 1, 2014, where motor vehicles are subject to a mandatory
biennial emissions inspection. Emissions inspections were required in
odd-numbered years for vehicles with an odd-numbered model year and
even-numbered years for vehicles with an even-numbered model year.
The EPA is not revisiting the September 9, 2015 (80 FR 54237)
approval of Cache County's I/M program with this action but is only
acting on UDAQ's RACM analysis pertaining to this program. Within
Chapter 5 of the TSD, UDAQ provides their review of several control
measures and their final RACM conclusions for mobile sources in the
Logan, UT-ID nonattainment area.
The potential control measures identified and evaluated by UDAQ
include: (1) A mandatory I/M program in Logan where such a program did
not previously exist; (2) reducing the Reid vapor pressure (RVP) of
gasoline to control VOC emissions; and (3) implementing a bundle of
voluntary control measures (e.g., trip reduction, curtailing of
operations/activities and driving on ``yellow'' and ``red'' air quality
days, diesel retrofits and replacement of gasoline vehicles with
alternate-fuel vehicles such as those running on compressed natural gas
(CNG) or electricity, and gasoline/electric hybrids). UDAQ modeled
these potential control measures but found that the only measure that
provided any significant emission benefit was to include a mandatory I/
M program for the Utah portion of the Logan, UT-ID nonattainment area
and to implement the program throughout Cache County.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Chapter 5--Control Strategies of the Utah Moderate
PM2.5 SIP TSD.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The preliminary cost analysis for extending the I/M program to the
Logan, UT-ID nonattainment area shows a cost effectiveness of
approximately $6,000 to $8,000 per ton of emissions reduced per year.
UDAQ concluded that this was within the range of costs associated with
other control measures which were under consideration for inclusion in
the Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 SIP; therefore, it was economically
feasible. Furthermore, similar programs have been successfully operated
in Utah, Salt Lake, Davis, and Weber Counties and have proven to be
both technologically and economically feasible.
The EPA's motor vehicle emissions model, MOVES2010a, was used to
identify the effectiveness of the I/M program in the Logan, UT-ID
nonattainment area. For 2015, MOVES predicted emission reductions of
0.21 tpd for NOX, and 0.21 tpd for VOC. UDAQ concluded that
the I/M program met RACM and was retained as part of the overall
control strategy for the area.
Additionally, UDAQ provided information for On-Road Mobile programs
that were promulgated at the federal level. The Tier 2 program was
promulgated by the EPA on April 10, 2000 (65 FR 6698; February 10,
2000) and was phased in between 2004 and 2008. Tier 2 set a single set
of standards for all light duty vehicles and required refiners to
reduce gasoline sulfur levels nationwide. UDAQ provided estimates
provided by the EPA that the Tier 2 program would reduce oxides of
nitrogen emission by at least 2,220,000 tpy nationwide in 2020.\13\
Tier 2 has also contributed in reducing VOC and direct PM emissions
from light duty vehicles. Additional on-road mobile source emissions
improvements that UDAQ highlights are from federal regulations for
heavy-duty diesel vehicles. The Highway Diesel Rule, which aimed at
reducing pollution from heavy-duty diesel highway vehicles, was
finalized on January 18, 2001 (66 FR 5002). Under the rule, beginning
in 2007, (with a phase-in through 2010) heavy-duty diesel highway
vehicle emissions were required to be reduced by as much as 90 percent
with a goal of complete fleet replacement by 2030. In order to enable
the updated emission reduction technologies necessitated by the rule,
beginning in 2006 (with a phase-in through 2009) refiners were required
to begin producing cleaner-burning ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel.
Specifically, the rule required a 97 percent reduction in sulfur
content from 500 parts per million (ppm) to 15 ppm. This program was
estimated to reduce PM and oxides of nitrogen from heavy duty engines
by 90 percent and 95 percent below current standard levels set out in
the rule, respectively.\14\ Table 4 below shows emissions in tons per
day for the 2010 baseline and projected 2015 inventories.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 65 FR 6698; February 10, 2000.
\14\ 66 FR 5002; January 18, 2001.
Table 4--On-Road Mobile Source Baseline 2010 and Projected 2015 Emissions Inventories of Typical Winter Inversion Day (tpd)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5 NOX VOC SO2 PM2.5 NOX VOC SO2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cache County, UT........................................ 0.37 6.48 4.99 0.04 0.28 4.49 3.35 0.03
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
c. Off-Road Mobile Sources
UDAQ did not consider any additional SIP controls for off-road
mobile sources beyond those already promulgated at the federal level.
Emission reductions from these federal controls were taken indirectly
because their effectiveness has been incorporated into the NONROAD
model. Table 5 below summarizes the 2010 base year and 2015 projection
year annual emissions from non-road mobile sources in Cache County
which contains the Logan, UT-ID Moderate PM2.5 nonattainment
area.
Table 5--2010 Base Year and 2015 Projection Year Non-Road Mobile, Aircraft, Locomotives Emissions Inventory (tpy)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010 2015
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5 NOX VOC SO2 PM2.5 NOX VOC SO2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cache County............................................ 492.47 1,144.85 61.99 8.55 360.63 901.09 49.21 2.88
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 57191]]
Chapter 5 of UDAQ's TSD provides a detailed description of what
control measures were included in the modeling.
3. EPA's Evaluation of the RACM/RACT Regulations
The EPA is proposing to approve UDAQ's determination that a RACT
analysis for the Pepperidge Farms facility was not necessary, as the
SIP demonstrates attainment based on the other control measures
included in the SIP. The EPA agrees with UDAQ's underlying
justification for including the I/M program in the Logan, UT-ID
attainment plan. UDAQ analyzed the measure as technologically and
economically feasible and therefore RACM; however, the measure was
implemented in the fifth and sixth year after designation. UDAQ did not
have the benefit of the EPA's distinction in the PM2.5
Implementation Rule between RACM and additional reasonable measures at
the time the RACM analysis for the I/M program was developed. We
therefore consider the I/M program to be an additional reasonable
measure and we are proposing to approve it as such. The EPA notes that,
with the exception of timing of control measure implementation, the
standard for the two types of control measures is the same:
technological and economic feasibility. Additionally, the EPA agrees
with UDAQ's reliance on federal on-road mobile regulations for other
on-road mobile emission reductions in the Logan, UT-ID PM2.5
SIP and is proposing to approve UDAQ's determination. We are also
proposing to approve UDAQ's determination that additional off-road
measures are not necessary given that the federal measures will provide
further emission reductions for the Logan, UT-ID Moderate
PM2.5 SIP. The EPA is not proposing to determine whether the
Logan, UT-ID Moderate PM2.5 attainment SIP has fully met all
requirements for RACM/RACT found in CAA subparts 1 and 4. This
determination will be made at a later date.
D. Transportation Conformity and Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets
1. Requirements for Transportation Conformity and MVEBs
Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the CAA.
The EPA's conformity rule at 40 CFR 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. 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 or any interim
milestone. To effectuate its purpose, the EPA's conformity rule
requires a demonstration that emissions from a Metropolitan Planning
Organization's (MPO) Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), involving Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) or Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding
or approval, are consistent with the MVEB(s) contained in a control
strategy SIP revision or maintenance plan (40 CFR 93.101, 93.118, and
93.124). A MVEB is defined as the level of mobile source emissions of a
pollutant relied upon in the attainment, RFP or maintenance
demonstration to attain or maintain compliance with the NAAQS in the
nonattainment or maintenance area. 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 notes that PM2.5 attainment plans should
identify MVEBs for direct PM2.5, NOX and all
other PM2.5 precursors where on-road mobile source emissions
are determined to significantly contribute to PM2.5 levels
in the nonattainment area. For the Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 SIP,
UDAQ identified mobile source VOC emissions as a significant
contributor to the formation of PM2.5 in the Logan, UT-ID
PM2.5 nonattainment area. For direct PM2.5 SIP
MVEBs, the MVEB should include direct PM2.5 motor vehicle
emissions from tailpipes, brake wear, and tire wear. In addition, a
state must also consider whether re-entrained road dust is a
significant contributor and should be included in the direct
PM2.5 MVEB.\15\ With respect to this requirement, the EPA
reviewed information, data, and an analysis from the UDAQ that
sufficiently documented that re-entrained road dust emissions were
negligible and meet the criteria of 40 CFR 93.102(b)(3) for not needing
to be included in the direct PM2.5 MVEB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 40 CFR 93.102(b) and 93.122(f); see also conformity rule
preamble at 69 FR 40004, 40031-40036 (July 1, 2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. MVEBs Identified in the Logan, UT-ID Moderate PM2.5 SIP
Utah's Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 SIP Section IX. Part A.23 was
submitted to meet the requirements of part D of title I of the CAA,
subparts 1 and 4 for ``Moderate'' PM2.5 nonattainment areas.
The State's attainment plan specified the maximum mobile source
emissions of PM2.5, NOX and VOC allowed in 2015,
the attainment year. These mobile source emissions were then identified
by the State as the SIP's MVEBs and are to be used by the Cache MPO to
demonstrate transportation conformity for the Cache MPO's RTP and TIP.
The attainment plan's 2015 MVEBs include direct PM2.5,
NOX, and VOC emissions from vehicle exhaust/evaporation,
tire wear and brake wear. The identified MVEBs were included in Table
7.1 of the SIP and are identified as: Direct PM2.5 is 0.32
tpd, NOX is 4.49 tpd, and VOC is 3.23 tpd.
We note that prior to December 31, 2015, the EPA had found the
Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 MVEBs were adequate as described in the
transportation conformity adequacy provisions of 40 CFR 93.118(e).
Under 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)(iv), we review a submitted plan to determine
whether the MVEBs, when considered together with all other emissions
sources, are consistent with applicable requirements for RFP,
attainment, or maintenance (whichever is relevant to a given SIP
submission). We described our process for determining the adequacy of
submitted SIP MVEBs in our July 1, 2004, Transportation Conformity Rule
Amendments (69 FR 40004). We used these resources in making our
adequacy determination.
On March 23, 2015, we announced receipt of the Logan, UT-ID
PM2.5 attainment plan at the EPA's Office of Transportation
and Air Quality (OTAQ) adequacy Web site and requested public comment
on the adequacy of the MVEBs by April 22, 2015. We did not receive any
comments during the comment period. We sent a letter to the UDAQ on
June 17, 2015, stating that the submitted Logan, UT-ID PM2.5
attainment plan SIP revision MVEBs were adequate for transportation
conformity purposes. We announced our adequacy finding in the Federal
Register on September 11, 2015 (80 FR 54788); effective September 28,
2015.
3. MVEB Trading, for Purposes of Demonstrating Transportation
Conformity, in the Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 SIP
The EPA's transportation conformity rule allows for trading between
direct PM2.5 and NOX and VOC precursor MVEBs, so
long as the SIP establishes an appropriate mechanism for such
trades.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ 40 CFR 93.124(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed in section 7.6 ``Transportation Conformity
PM2.5
[[Page 57192]]
Budgets'' of the Logan UT-ID PM2.5 attainment plan, the SIP
revision establishes a MVEB trading mechanism to allow for future
increases in on-road mobile sources direct PM2.5 emissions
to be offset by future decreases in NOX and VOC precursor
emissions from on-road mobile sources. These ratios were developed from
data from the air quality attainment plan's dispersion modeling.
Section 7.6 of the SIP and the Logan UT-ID PM2.5 attainment
plan's Technical Support Documentation Weight-of-Evidence information
\17\ provide the following modeling-derived trading ratios: Future
increases in on-road mobile sources direct PM2.5 emissions
may be offset with future decreases in NOX emissions from
on-road mobile sources at a NOX to PM2.5 ratio of
13.66 to 1 and/or future decreases in VOC emissions from on-road mobile
sources at a VOC to PM2.5 ratio of 22.84 to 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ ``PM2.5 State Implementation Plan Weight-Of-
Evidence to the Model Attainment Test,'' section 1.9, pages 64 and
65.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SIP notes that this trading mechanism will only be used by the
Cache MPO for transportation conformity determination analyses for
years after 2015. The SIP further notes that to ensure that the trading
mechanism does not impact the ability to meet the NOX or VOC
budgets, the NOX emission reductions available to supplement
the direct PM2.5 MVEB shall only be those remaining after
the 2015 NOX MVEB has been met. Also, the VOC emissions
reductions available to supplement the direct PM2.5 budget
shall only be those remaining after the 2015 VOC MVEB has been met. The
SIP further articulates that clear documentation of the calculations
used in the MVEB trading are to be included in the conformity
determination analysis as prepared by the Cache MPO.
4. Evaluation and Proposed Action
The EPA has evaluated the Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 attainment
plan's emission inventories and attainment demonstration modeling as
described in sections above. Based on our evaluation, we have
determined that the direct PM2.5, NOX, and VOC
MVEBs are appropriately derived from the SIP and are acceptable. We
have also evaluated the description and derivation of the MVEB trading
mechanism and the supporting data from the SIP's attainment
demonstration modeling/Weight-Of-Evidence information and find those
acceptable. Therefore, we are proposing to approve the Logan UT-ID
PM2.5 attainment plan's MVEBs of direct PM2.5 of
0.32 tpd, NOX of 4.49 tpd, and VOC of 3.23 tpd. In addition,
we are also proposing to approve the MVEB trading mechanism as
documented in section 7.6 of the SIP.
V. Summary of the EPA's Proposed Action
For the reasons discussed in section IV above, under CAA section
110(k)(3), the EPA is proposing to approve the emissions inventory,
modeled attainment demonstration, determination for Major Stationary
Source RACT, determination for On-Road Mobile Sources RACM,
determination of Cache County I/M program as additional reasonable
measures, determination for Off-Road Mobile Sources RACM, and 2015 MVEB
for the Logan, UT-ID PM2.5 Moderate SIP.
A. Proposed Approval
1. The EPA is proposing the following actions on the Logan, UT-ID
PM2.5 SIP:
a. Approve the 2010 base year and 2015 projection year emissions
inventories;
b. Approve the modeled attainment demonstration;
c. Approve the RACM/RACT and additional reasonable measure
demonstrations for on-road mobile, Cache County I/M Program, off-road
mobile and point sources; and
d. Approve the 2015 direct PM2.5, NOX and VOC
MVEBs and the MVEB trading mechanism.
VI. Consideration of Section 110(l) of the CAA
Under section 110(l) of the CAA, the EPA cannot approve a SIP
revision if the revision would interfere with any applicable
requirements concerning attainment and RFP toward attainment of the
NAAQS, or any other applicable requirement of the Act. The EPA proposes
to determine that the portions of the Logan UT-ID PM2.5 SIP
that we are acting on are consistent with the applicable requirements
of the Act. Furthermore, these portions do not relax any previously
approved SIP provision; thus they do not otherwise interfere with
attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS. In addition, section 110(l)
requires that each revision to an implement plan submitted by a state
shall be adopted by the state after reasonable notice and opportunity
for public hearing. On September 3, 2014, the Air Quality Board
proposed for public comment the Logan, UT-ID Moderate PM2.5
attainment plan. The public comment period was held from October 1 to
October 31, 2014, with a public hearing being held on October 20, 2014.
On December 3, 2014, the Air Quality Board adopted the Logan, UT-ID
Moderate PM2.5 attainment plan and became effective on
December 4, 2014. Therefore, CAA section 110(l) requirements are
satisfied.
VII. Incorporation by Reference
In this rule, the EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, the EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the approval of portions of the Logan, UT-ID PM2.5
Moderate SIP submitted by the state of Utah as discussed in section IV
of this preamble. The EPA has made, and will continue to make, these
materials generally available through www.regulations.gov and/or at the
EPA Region 8 Office (please contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this preamble for more
information).
VIII. 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
proposed action approves state law as meeting federal requirements. For
that reason, this proposed action:
Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21,
2011);
is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2,
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under
Executive Order 12866;
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
[[Page 57193]]
safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997);
is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
does not provide the EPA with the discretionary authority
to address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or
environmental effects, using practicable and legally permissible
methods, under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
In addition, 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).
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Ammonia,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen
dioxide, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Sulfur dioxide, Volatile organic compounds.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Dated: November 21, 2017.
Debra H. Thomas,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 8.
[FR Doc. 2017-25960 Filed 12-1-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
