Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
On May 30, 2006, the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (IDEM) submitted a request for EPA approval of a redesignation of LaPorte County to attainment of the 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) and of an ozone maintenance plan for LaPorte County as a revision to the Indiana State Implementation Plan (SIP). EPA is proposing to approve Indiana's request and maintenance plan SIP revision. EPA is also proposing to approve the Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) and Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets (MVEBs) for LaPorte County, as supported by the ozone maintenance plan for this County, for purposes of conformity determinations.
Comments must be received on or before May 18, 2007.
Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0459, by one of the following methods:
- www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
- E-mail: email@example.com.
- Fax: (312) 886-5824.
- Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
- Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney, Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation, and special arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The Regional Office's official hours of operation are Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-2006-0459. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI, or otherwise protected, through www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov website is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters and any form of encryption, and should be free of any defects or viruses
Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hardcopy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hardcopy at the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding Federal holidays. It is recommended that you telephone Edward Doty, Environmental Scientist, at (312) 886-6057, before visiting the Region 5 office.Start Further Info
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Edward Doty, Environmental Scientist, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6057, firstname.lastname@example.org.End Further Info End Preamble Start Supplemental Information
Throughout this document whenever “we,” “us,” or “our” is used, we mean the EPA. This supplementary information section is arranged as follows:
I. What Action Is EPA Proposing To Take?
II. What Is the Background for This Action?
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?
IV. What Are EPA's Analyses of the State's Requests and What Are the Bases for EPA's Proposed Action?
V. Has Indiana Adopted Acceptable Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for the End of the 10-Year Maintenance Plan Which Can Be Used To Support Conformity Determinations?
VI. What Is the Effect of EPA's Proposed Action?
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Action Is EPA Proposing To Take?
We are proposing to take several related actions for LaPorte County. First, we are proposing to determine that LaPorte County has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on air quality for the period of 2003 through 2005. Second, we are proposing to approve Indiana's ozone maintenance plan for LaPorte County as a requested revision to the Indiana SIP. The maintenance plan is designed to keep LaPorte County in attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard for the next 14 years, through 2020. As supported by and consistent with the ozone maintenance plan, we are also proposing to approve the 2020 VOC and NOX MVEBs for LaPorte County for conformity purposes. Finally, we are proposing to approve the request from the State of Indiana to change the designation of LaPorte County from nonattainment to attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. We have determined that the State and LaPorte County have met the Start Printed Page 19425requirements for redesignation to attainment under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
II. What Is the Background for This Action?
A. General Background Information
EPA has determined that ground-level ozone is detrimental to human health. On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated an 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.08 parts per million parts of air (0.08 ppm) (80 parts per billion (ppb)) (62 FR 38856). This 8-hour ozone standard replaced a prior 1-hour ozone NAAQS, which had been promulgated on February 8, 1979 (44 FR 8202), and which EPA revoked on June 15, 2005 (69 FR 23858).
Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather, emitted NOX and VOC react in the presence of sunlight to form ground-level ozone along with other secondary compounds. NOX and VOC are referred to as “ozone precursors.” Control of ground-level ozone concentrations is achieved through controlling VOC and NOX emissions.
Section 107 of the CAA required EPA to designate as nonattainment any area that violates the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Federal Register notice promulgating the 8-hour ozone designations and classifications was published on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23857).
The CAA contains two sets of provisions—subpart 1 and subpart 2—that address planning and emission control requirements for nonattainment areas. Both are found in title I, part D of the CAA. Subpart 1 contains general, less prescriptive requirements for all nonattainment areas for any pollutant governed by a NAAQS. Subpart 2 contains more specific requirements for certain ozone nonattainment areas, and applies to ozone nonattainment areas classified under section 181 of the CAA.
In the April 30, 2004 designation rulemaking, EPA divided 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas into the categories of subpart 1 nonattainment (“basic” nonattainment) and subpart 2 nonattainment (“classified” nonattainment). EPA based this division on the areas 8-hour ozone design values (i.e., on the three-year averages of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone concentrations at the worst-case monitoring sites in the areas) and on their 1-hour ozone design values (i.e., on the fourth-highest daily maximum 1-hour ozone concentrations over the three-year period at the worst-case monitoring sites in the areas). EPA classified 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas with 1-hour ozone design values equaling or exceeding 121 ppb as subpart 2, classified nonattainment areas. EPA classified all other 8-hour nonattainment areas as subpart 1, basic nonattainment areas. The basis for area classification was defined in a separate April 30, 2004, final rule (the Phase 1 implementation rule) (69 FR 23951).
Emission control requirements for classified nonattainment areas are linked to area classifications. Areas with more serious ozone pollution problems are subject to more prescribed requirements and later attainment dates. The prescribed emission control requirements are designed to bring areas into attainment by their specified attainment dates.
In the April 30, 2004, ozone designation/classification rulemaking, EPA designated LaPorte County as a subpart 2 moderate nonattainment area for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. This designation was based on ozone data collected during the 2001-2003 period. On September 22, 2004 (69 FR 56697), EPA revised the designation of LaPorte County to subpart 2 marginal nonattainment.
On May 30, 2006, the State of Indiana requested redesignation of LaPorte County to attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on ozone data collected in LaPorte County during the 2003-2005 period. On August 24, 2006, IDEM submitted a summary of an ozone data review and supplementary ozone data to address a shortfall in the data supporting the ozone redesignation request.
B. What Is the Impact of the December 22, 2006 United States Court of Appeals Decision Regarding EPA's Phase 1 Implementation Rule?
On December 22, 2006, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the Court) vacated EPA's Phase 1 implementation rule (Phase 1 Rule) for the 8-hour ozone standard (69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004). South Coast Air Quality Management Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. Cir. 2006). The Court held that certain provisions of EPA's Phase 1 Rule were inconsistent with the requirements of the CAA. The Court rejected EPA's reasons for implementing the 8-hour ozone standard in nonattainment areas under subpart 1 in lieu of subpart 2 of Title I, part D of the CAA. The Court also held that EPA improperly failed to retain four measures required for 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas under the anti-backsliding provisions of the regulations: (1) Nonattainment area New Source Review (NSR) requirements based on an area's 1-hour nonattainment classification; (2) section 185 penalty fees for 1-hour severe or extreme ozone nonattainment areas; (3) measures to be implemented pursuant to section 172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9) of the CAA, on the contingency of an area not making reasonable further progress toward attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, or failing to attain that NAAQS; and, (4) conformity requirements for certain types of Federal actions. The Court upheld EPA's authority to revoke the 1-hour ozone standard provided that there were adequate anti-backsliding provisions.
This section sets forth EPA's views on the potential effect of the Court's ruling on this redesignation action. For the reasons set forth below, EPA does not believe that the Court's ruling alters any requirements relevant to this redesignation action so as to preclude redesignation, and does not prevent EPA from finalizing this redesignation. EPA believes that the Court's decision, as it currently stands or as it may be modified based on any petition for rehearing that has been filed, imposes no impediment to moving forward with redesignation of this area to attainment, because in either circumstance redesignation is appropriate under the relevant redesignation provisions of the CAA and longstanding policies regarding redesignation requests.
With respect to the 8-hour ozone standard, LaPorte County is classified as moderate nonattainment under subpart 2 of the CAA. We do not believe that any part of the Court's opinion would require that this subpart 2 classification be changed upon remand to EPA. However, even assuming for present purposes that LaPorte County would become subject to a different classification under a classification scheme created in a future rule in response to the Court's decision, this would not prevent EPA from finalizing a redesignation for this area. For the reasons set forth below, we believe that any additional requirements that might apply based on that different classification would not be applicable for purposes of evaluating the redesignation request.
This belief is based on: (1) EPA's longstanding policy of evaluating Start Printed Page 19426redesignation requests in accordance with only the requirements due at the time the complete redesignation request was submitted; and, (2) consideration of the inequity of retroactively applying any requirements that might be applied in the future.
First, at the time the complete redesignation request was submitted (May 30, 2006), LaPorte County was classified under subpart 2 and was required to meet the subpart 2 requirements. Under EPA's longstanding interpretation of section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, to qualify for redesignation, states requesting redesignation to attainment must meet only the relevant SIP requirements that came due prior to the submittal of complete redesignation requests. September 4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum (“Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,” Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division). See also: September 17, 1993 Shapiro memorandum (“State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) on or after November 15, 1992,” Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator, Air and Radiation Division); 60 FR 12459, 12465-12466 (March 7, 1995) (redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor); Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004), which upheld this interpretation; and, 68 FR 25418, 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of St. Louis). At the time the redesignation request for LaPorte County was submitted, the area was not classified under subpart 1 and no subpart 1 requirements were applicable for purposes of redesignation.
Second, it would be inequitable to retroactively apply any new SIP requirements that were not applicable at the time the complete redesignation request was submitted, but which might later become applicable. The D.C. Circuit has recognized the inequity of such retroactive rulemaking. See Sierra Club v. Whitman, 285 F.3d 63 (D.C. Cir. 2002), in which the D.C. Circuit upheld a District Court's ruling refusing to make retroactive an EPA determination of nonattainment that was past the statutory attainment deadline. Such a determination would have resulted in the imposition of additional requirements on the area. The Court stated: “Although EPA failed to make the nonattainment determination within the statutory time frame, Sierra Club's proposed solution only makes the situation worse. Retroactive relief would likely impose large costs on the States, which would face fines and suits for not implementing air pollution plans in 1997, even though they were not on notice at the time.” Id. at 68. Similarly, here it would be unfair to penalize the area by applying to it for purposes of redesignation additional requirements under subpart 1 that were not in effect at the time Indiana submitted its redesignation request, but that might apply in the future.
Because LaPorte County was designated as Unclassifiable/Attainment under the 1-hour ozone standard and was never designated nonattainment for the 1-hour ozone standard, there are no outstanding 1-hour nonattainment area requirements that LaPorte County would be required to meet. Thus, we find that the Court's ruling does not result in any additional 1-hour requirements for purposes of redesignation of LaPorte County.
III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation to Attainment?
The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA authorizes redesignation provided that: (1) The Administrator determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) the Administrator has fully approved an applicable state implementation plan for the area under section 110(k) of the CAA; (3) the Administrator determines that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable emission reductions resulting from implementation of the applicable SIP, Federal air pollution control regulations, and other permanent and enforceable emission reductions; (4) the Administrator has fully approved a maintenance plan for the area meeting the requirements of section 175A of the CAA; and, (5) the state containing the area has met all requirements applicable to the area under section 110 and part D of the CAA.
EPA provided guidance on redesignations in the General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I of the CAA Amendments of 1990 on April 16, 1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented this guidance on April 28, 1992 (57 FR 18070). The two main policy guidelines affecting the review of ozone redesignation requests are the following: “Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,” Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, September 4, 1992 (September 4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum); and, “Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard,” Memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, May 10, 1995. For additional policy guidelines used in the review of ozone redesignation requests, see our proposed rule for the redesignation of the Evansville, Indiana ozone nonattainment area at 70 FR 53606 (September 9, 2005).
IV. What Are EPA's Analyses of the State's Requests and What Are the Bases for EPA's Proposed Action?
EPA is proposing to: (1) Determine that LaPorte County has attained the 8-hour ozone standard; (2) approve the ozone maintenance plan for this County and the VOC and NOX MVEBs supported by this maintenance plan; and, (3) approve the redesignation of this County to attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The bases for our proposed determination and approvals follow.
1. LaPorte County Has Attained the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS
For ozone, an area may be considered to be attaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS if there are no violations of the NAAQS, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.10 and appendix I, based on the most recent three complete, consecutive calendar years of quality-assured air quality monitoring data at all ozone monitoring sites in the area and in its nearby downwind environs. To attain this standard, the average of the annual fourth-high daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations measured and recorded at each monitor (the monitoring site's ozone design value) within the area and in its nearby downwind environs over the three-year period must not exceed the ozone standard. Based on an ozone data rounding convention described in 40 CFR part 50, appendix I, the 8-hour standard is attained if the area's ozone design value  is 0.084 ppm (84 ppb) or lower. The data must be collected and quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and must be recorded in EPA's Air Quality System (AQS). The ozone monitors generally should have remained at the same locations for the duration of the monitoring period required to demonstrate attainment (for three years or more). The data supporting attainment of the standard Start Printed Page 19427must be complete in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, appendix I.
As part of the May 30, 2006 ozone redesignation request, IDEM submitted ozone monitoring data indicating the highest four daily maximum 8-hour ozone concentrations for each monitoring site in LaPorte County (the Michigan City and LaPorte ozone monitoring sites) for each year during the 2003-2005 period. These worst-case ozone concentrations are part of the quality-assured ozone data that have been entered into EPA's AQS. The annual fourth-high 8-hour daily maximum ozone concentrations, along with their three-year averages are summarized in Table 1.
These data show that the average fourth-high daily maximum 8-hour ozone concentrations for the monitoring sites in LaPorte County are all below the 85 ppb ozone standard violation cut-off. The data support the conclusion that LaPorte County did not experience a monitored violation of the 8-hour ozone standard during the 2003-2005 period.
We also note that the 8-hour ozone NAAQS continued to be attained in LaPorte County through 2006. Data in the AQS show that, in 2006, the Michigan City monitor recorded a daily maximum fourth-high 8-hour ozone concentration of 75 ppb, and the LaPorte monitor recorded a daily maximum fourth-high 8-hour ozone concentration of 69 ppb.
The State has committed to continue ozone monitoring in this area during the maintenance period, through 2020. IDEM also commits to consult with the EPA prior to making any changes in the existing monitoring network.
During our review of the LaPorte ozone monitoring data contained in EPA's AQS, we noted that the annual percentages of reported daily maximum 8-hour ozone concentrations for the LaPorte monitoring site during the 2003-2005 ozone seasons (April through September in Indiana) were the following: 90 percent in 2003; 65 percent in 2004; and 74 percent in 2005. This is not consistent with the three-year 90 percent annual average completeness requirement and the 75 percent annual minimum completeness requirement of 40 CFR part 50, appendix I. It should be noted, however, that appendix I provides for the consideration of surrounding ozone monitoring data to support alternative conclusions regarding data completeness. More specifically, it provides that, when computing whether the minimum data completeness requirements have been met, meteorological and ambient data may be sufficient to demonstrate that meteorological conditions on missing data days were not conducive to peak ozone concentrations above the level of the standard. Missing days assumed to have peak ozone concentrations less than the standard are counted for purposes of meeting the data completeness requirements as having valid maximum 8-hour ozone concentrations.
On August 24, 2006, IDEM submitted supplemental data and documentation to support the conclusion that all days in 2003, 2004, and 2005 with missing ozone data were days in which the ozone standard was likely to not have been exceeded at the LaPorte site. We believe that IDEM's analysis supports an assumption of data completeness for the LaPorte monitoring site and, therefore, agree that the LaPorte ozone data for 2003-2005 meet the data completeness requirements. IDEM has appropriately flagged the ozone data in the AQS for this monitoring site supporting this conclusion.
The data submitted by the State demonstrate that LaPorte County has attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Therefore, we propose to find that LaPorte County has attained the 8-hour ozone standard.
2. LaPorte County Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and Part D of the CAA and the Area Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) of the CAA
EPA has determined that Indiana has met all currently applicable SIP requirements for LaPorte County under section 110 of the CAA (general SIP requirements). EPA has also determined that the Indiana SIP meets currently applicable SIP requirements under part D of title I of the CAA (requirements specific to basic and subpart 2 ozone nonattainment areas). See section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) of the CAA. In addition, EPA has determined that the Indiana SIP is fully approved with respect to all applicable requirements. See section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) of the CAA. In making these determinations, EPA ascertained what requirements are applicable to the area, and determined that the applicable portions of the SIP meeting these requirements are fully approved under section 110(k) of the CAA. We note that SIPs must be fully approved only with respect to currently applicable requirements of the CAA, those CAA requirements applicable to LaPorte County at the time the State submitted the final, complete ozone redesignation request for this area.
a. LaPorte County Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and Part D of the CAA
The September 4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum describes EPA's interpretation of section 107(D)(3)(E) of the CAA. Under this interpretation, to qualify for redesignation of an area to attainment, the State and the area must meet the relevant CAA requirements that come due prior to the State's submittal of a complete redesignation request for the area. See also a September 17, 1993 memorandum from Michael Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, “State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) On or After November 15, 1992” and 66 FR 12459, 12465-12466 (March 7, 1995) (redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor, Michigan to attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS). Applicable requirements of the CAA that come due subsequent to the State's submittal of a complete redesignation request remain applicable until a redesignation to attainment of the standard is approved, but are not required as a prerequisite to redesignation. See section 175A(c) of the CAA. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also 68 FR 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of the St. Louis/East St. Louis area to attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS). Start Printed Page 19428
General SIP requirements: Section 110(a) of title I of the CAA contains the general requirements for a SIP, which include: enforceable emission limitations and other control measures, means, or techniques; provisions for the establishment and operation of appropriate devices necessary to collect data on ambient air quality; and programs to enforce the emission limitations. SIP elements and requirements are specified in section 110(a)(2) of title I, part A of the CAA. These requirements and SIP elements include, but are not limited to, the following: (a) Submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the State after reasonable public notice and a hearing; (b) provisions for establishment and operation of appropriate procedures needed to monitor ambient air quality; (c) implementation of a source permit program; (d) provisions for the implementation of new source part C requirements (Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)) and new source part D requirements (New Source Review (NSR)); (e) criteria for stationary source emission control measures, monitoring, and reporting; (f) provisions for air quality modeling; and, (g) provisions for public and local agency participation.
SIP requirements and elements are discussed in the following EPA documents: “Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,” Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, September 4, 1992; “State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response to Clean Air Act (CAA) Deadlines,” Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, October 28, 1992; and “State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) on or After November 15, 1992,” Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator, September 17, 1993. See also other guidance documents listed above.
Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA requires SIPs to contain certain measures to prevent sources in one state from significantly contributing to air quality problems in another state. To implement this provision, EPA required states to establish programs to address transport of air pollutants (NOX SIP call, Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)). EPA has also found, generally, that states have not submitted SIPs under section 110(a)(1) of the CAA to meet the interstate transport requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA (70 FR 21147, April 25, 2005). However, the section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a state are not linked with a particular nonattainment area's classification. EPA believes that the requirements linked with a particular nonattainment area's classification are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. The transport SIP submittal requirements, where applicable, continue to apply to a state regardless of the designation of any one particular area in the state.
We believe that these requirements should not be construed to be applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. Further, we believe that the other section 110 elements described above that are not connected with nonattainment plan submissions and that are not linked with an area's attainment status are also not applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation. A state remains subject to these requirements after an area is redesignated to attainment. We conclude that only the section 110 and part D requirements which are linked with an area's designation and classification are the relevant measures in evaluating this aspect of a redesignation request. This approach is consistent with EPA's existing policy on applicability of conformity and oxygenated fuels requirements for redesignation purposes, as well as with section 184 ozone transport requirements. See: Reading, Pennsylvania proposed and final rulemakings (61 FR 53174-53176, October 10, 1996 and 62 FR 24826, May 7, 1997); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida final rulemaking (60 FR 62748, December 7, 1995). See also the discussion on this issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio ozone redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 2000), and the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania ozone redesignation (66 FR 50399, October 19, 2001). In addition, Indiana's response to the CAIR rule was due in September 2006. Because this deadline had not yet passed when the State submitted the final, complete redesignation request, the State's CAIR submittal is also not an applicable requirement for redesignation purposes.
We believe that section 110 elements not linked to the area's nonattainment status are not applicable for purposes of redesignation. Nonetheless, we also note that EPA has previously approved provisions in the Indiana SIP addressing section 110 elements under the 1-hour ozone standard. We have analyzed the Indiana SIP as codified in 40 CFR 52, subpart P, and have determined that it is consistent with the requirements of section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. The SIP, which has been adopted after reasonable public notice and hearing, contains enforceable emission limitations; requires monitoring, compiling, and analyzing ambient air quality data; requires preconstruction review of new major stationary sources and major modifications of existing sources; provides for adequate funding, staff, and associated resources necessary to implement its requirements; and, requires stationary source emissions monitoring and reporting, and otherwise satisfies the applicable requirements of section 110(a)(2).
Part D SIP requirements: EPA has determined that the Indiana SIP meets applicable SIP requirements under part D of the CAA. Under part D, an area's classification (marginal, moderate, serious, severe, and extreme) indicates the requirements to which it will be subject. Subpart 1 of part D, found in sections 172-176 of the CAA, sets forth the basic nonattainment area plan requirements applicable to all nonattainment areas. Subpart 2 of part D, found in section 182 of the CAA, establishes additional specific requirements depending on the area's nonattainment classification.
Part D, subpart 1 requirements: For purposes of evaluating this redesignation request, the applicable subpart 1 part D requirements for all nonattainment areas are contained in sections 172(c)(1)-(9) and 176. A thorough discussion of the requirements of section 172 can be found in the General Preamble for Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498). (See also 68 FR 4852-4853 in a St. Louis ozone redesignation notice of proposed rulemaking for a discussion of section 172 requirements.)
As noted in a previous section of this proposed rule, no requirements under part D of the CAA came due for LaPorte County prior to the State's May 30, 2006 submittal of a complete redesignation request. For example, the requirement for an ozone attainment demonstration, as contained in section 172(c)(1), was not yet applicable, nor were the requirements for Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) and Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) (section 172(c)(1)), Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) (section 172(c)(2)), and attainment plan and RFP contingency measures (section 172(c)(9)). All of these SIP elements were required for submittal after May 30, 2006. Therefore, none of the part D requirements are applicable to LaPorte County for purposes of redesignation. Start Printed Page 19429
Section 176 conformity requirements: Section 176(c) of the CAA requires states to establish criteria and procedures to ensure that federally-supported or funded activities, including highway projects, conform to the air planning goals in the applicable SIP. The requirement to determine conformity applies to transportation plans, programs, and projects developed, funded, or approved under Title 23 U.S.C. and the Federal Transit Act (transportation conformity) as well as to all other federally-supported or funded projects (general conformity). State conformity SIP revisions must be consistent with Federal conformity regulations that the CAA required the EPA to promulgate.
In addition to the fact that part D requirements did not become due prior to Indiana's submission of the complete ozone redesignation request for LaPorte County, and, therefore, are not applicable for redesignation purposes, EPA similarly believes that it is reasonable to interpret the conformity requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating the ozone redesignation request under section 107(d) of the CAA. In addition, please note that it is reasonable to interpret the conformity requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating the ozone redesignation request under section 107(d) of the CAA because state conformity rules are still required after redesignation of an area to attainment of a NAAQS and Federal conformity rules apply where state rules have not been approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001). See also 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995) (Tampa, Florida).
Part D, subpart 2 requirements: Similar to the subpart 1 requirements, EPA believes that the subpart 2 requirements that apply to LaPorte County do not apply to a consideration of Indiana's ozone redesignation request because the State submitted a complete ozone redesignation request for LaPorte County before any of the applicable subpart 2 requirements became due.
The May 10, 1995 Seitz memorandum (see “Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard,” Memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, May 10, 1995) states that certain SIP revisions need not be submitted for EPA to approve a redesignation request since the requirements would no longer be considered applicable requirements as long as the area continues to attain the standard. As set forth in this policy, EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the provisions regarding RFP and attainment demonstrations, along with certain other related provisions, as not requiring further state submissions to achieve attainment if an area is in fact attaining the standard. In the May 10, 1995 memorandum, EPA articulated in detail its interpretation that certain requirements of subparts 1 and 2 are not applicable once an area has attained the standard, for as long as it continues to do so.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit has upheld this interpretation, Sierra Club v. EPA, 99 F.3d 1551 (10th Cir. 1996), as has the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). In addition, EPA has explained in rulemaking actions on the 1-hour ozone standard its rationale for the reasonableness of this interpretation of the CAA. See: 67 FR 49600 (July 31, 2002); 65 FR 37879 (June 19, 2000); 65 FR 3630, 3631-32 (January 24, 2000) (Cincinnati-Hamilton, Ohio, Kentucky); 61 FR 20458 (May 7, 1996) (Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio); 66 FR 53094 (October 19, 2001) (Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley, Pennsylvania); 60 FR 37366 (July 20, 1995); 61 FR 31832-33 (June 21, 1996) (Grand Rapids, Michigan); 60 FR 36723 (July 18, 1995) (Salt Lake and Davis Counties, Utah); 68 FR 4847, 4848, 4851, 4855 (January 30, 2003); 68 FR 25418 (May 12, 2003) (St. Louis, Missouri); and, 66 FR 27484, 27486 (May 17, 2001) (Louisville, Kentucky).
EPA has also determined that areas being redesignated need not comply with the requirement that a New Source Review (NSR) program be approved prior to redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance of the standard without part D NSR, since Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) requirements will apply after redesignation. A more detailed rationale for this view is described in a memorandum from Mary Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, entitled, “Part D New Source Review Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.” Indiana has demonstrated that LaPorte County will be able to maintain the 8-hour ozone standard without part D NSR in effect, and, therefore, we conclude that the State need not have a fully approved part D NSR program prior to approval of the redesignation request. The State's PSD program will become effective in LaPorte County upon redesignation to attainment. See rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60 FR 12467-12468, March 7, 1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio (61 FR 20458, 20469-20470, May 7, 1996); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665, October 23, 2001); Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31834-31837, June 21, 1996).
We conclude that the State and LaPorte County have satisfied all applicable requirements under section 110 and part D of the CAA to the extent that the requirements apply for the purposes of reviewing the State's ozone redesignation request.
b. LaPorte County Has a Fully Approved Applicable SIP Under Section 110(k) of the CAA
EPA has fully approved the Indiana SIP for LaPorte County under section 110(k) of the CAA for all applicable requirements. EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a redesignation request (See the September 4, 1992 John Calcagni memorandum, page 3, Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989-990 (6th Cir. 1998), Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001)), plus any additional measures it may approve in conjunction with a redesignation action. See 68 FR 25426 (May 12, 2003). Since the passage of the CAA of 1970, Indiana has adopted and submitted, and EPA has fully approved, provisions addressing the various required SIP elements applicable to LaPorte County for purposes of redesignation. No LaPorte County SIP provisions are currently disapproved, conditionally approved, or partially approved. As indicated above, EPA believes that the section 110 elements not connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not linked to the area's nonattainment status are not applicable requirements for purposes of review of the State's redesignation request. EPA has concluded that the section 110 SIP submission approved under the 1-hour ozone standard will be adequate for purposes of attaining and maintaining the 8-hour standard. EPA also believes that since the part D requirements did not become due prior to Indiana's submission of a final, complete redesignation request, they also are not applicable requirements for purposes of redesignation.
3. The Air Quality Improvement in LaPorte County Is Due To Permanent and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions From Implementation of the SIP and Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control Regulations and Other Permanent and Enforceable Emission Reductions
EPA believes that the State of Indiana has demonstrated that the observed air Start Printed Page 19430quality improvement in LaPorte County is due to permanent and enforceable emission reductions resulting from implementation of the SIP, Federal measures, and other State-adopted measures.
The State has documented the changes in VOC and NOX emissions from anthropogenic (man-made or man-based) sources in LaPorte County between 1996 and 2004 and the changes in NOX emissions from Electric Generating Units (EGUs) in Northwest Indiana (Jasper, Lake, LaPorte, and Porter Counties) and statewide between 1999 and 2005. LaPorte County was monitored in violation of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS during the period of 1996 through 1999 and monitored in attainment with the NAAQS during the period of 2003 through 2005. The VOC and NOX emissions for LaPorte County for various years during the period of 1996 through 2004 are given in Table 2.
The NOX emissions trends for EGUs in Northwest Indiana and statewide for Table 3. The NOX emissions for LaPorte County and the EGU NOX emissions from Northwest Indiana and statewide have shown significant downward trends from 1996 and 1999, 8-hour standard violation years, to 2004 and 2005, attainment years (and from 2002, a violation year, to 2004, an attainment year). IDEM notes that the NOX emissions in Northwest Indiana and statewide declined significantly as a result of the implementation of the Indiana NOX SIP (in response to EPA's NOX SIP call) and acid rain control regulations, both of which led to permanent, enforceable emission reductions.
As noted in Table 2, the total VOC emissions in LaPorte County also declined between 1996 and 2004. IDEM notes that this emissions decline has resulted despite an increase in point source VOC emissions in this County due to source growth. VOC emission control measures have been implemented in LaPorte County constraining the impacts of new source growth in this County. The State's VOC rules were adopted in the mid-1990s, and include the following VOC control rules: 326 Indiana Administrative Code (IAC) 8-1-6 (Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for non-specific sources); 326 IAC 8-2 (surface coating emission limitations); 326 IAC (organic solvent degreasing operations); 326 IAC 8-4 (petroleum sources, including storage, transport, and marketing sources and petroleum refining); 326 IAC 8-5 (miscellaneous sources); and 326 IAC 8-6 (organic solvent emission limitations). These VOC control rules have been implemented statewide. Compliance with these rules has resulted in a decrease in point source VOC emissions in LaPorte County, offsetting some source growth, as well as decreasing VOC emissions in the remainder of Northwest Indiana and statewide. The VOC emission reductions resulting from the implementation of the VOC emission control rules are permanent and enforceable.
Since LaPorte County was not previously designated as a 1-hour ozone nonattainment area, no ozone precursor emission controls were specifically targeted at this County. Therefore, statewide and Federal emission control requirements have provided the majority of the VOC and NOX emission reductions in LaPorte County and in the surrounding area.
Besides the statewide VOC RACT rules and NOX emission control requirements, other Federal emission reduction requirements have resulted in decreased ozone precursor emissions in the Northwest Indiana area and/or will produce future emission reductions that will support maintenance of the ozone standard in LaPorte County (see a more detailed discussion on maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard in LaPorte County below). These emission reduction requirements include the following:
Tier 2 Emission Standards for Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur Standards. These emission control requirements result in lower emissions from new cars and light duty trucks, including sport utility vehicles. The Federal rules are being phased in between 2004 and 2009. The EPA has estimated that, by the end of the phase-in period, the following vehicle NOX emission reductions will occur nation-wide: passenger cars (light duty vehicles) (77 percent); light duty trucks, minivans, and sports utility vehicles (86 percent; and larger sports utility vehicles, vans, and heavier trucks (69 to 95 percent). VOC emission reductions are also expected to range from 12 to 18 percent, depending on vehicle class, over the same period. Although some of these emission reductions have already occurred by the 2004 attainment year, most of these emission reductions will occur during the maintenance period for LaPorte County.
Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines. In July 2000, EPA issued a final rule to control the emissions from highway heavy duty diesel engines, including low-sulfur diesel fuel standards. These emission reductions are being phased in between 2004 and 2007. This rule is expected to result in a 40 percent decrease in NOX emissions from heavy duty diesel vehicles.
Non-Road Diesel Rule. Issued in May 2004, this rule generally applies to new stationary diesel engines used in certain industries, including construction, agriculture, and mining. In addition to Start Printed Page 19431affecting engine design, this rule includes requirements for cleaner fuels. It is expected to reduce NOX emissions from these engines by up to 90 percent, and to significantly reduce particulate matter and sulfur emissions from these engines in addition to the NOX emission reduction. This rule did not affect 2004 emissions from these sources, but will limit emissions from new engines beginning in 2008.
Indiana commits to maintain all existing emission control measures that affect LaPorte County after this area is redesignated to attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. All changes in existing rules affecting LaPorte County and new rules subsequently needed to provide for the maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in LaPorte County will be submitted to the EPA for approval as SIP revisions.
4. LaPorte County Has a Fully Approvable Ozone Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 175A of the CAA
In conjunction with its request to redesignate LaPorte County to attainment of the ozone NAAQS, Indiana submitted a SIP revision request to provide for maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in LaPorte County for at least 10 years after the redesignation of this area to attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
a. What Is Required in an Ozone Maintenance Plan?
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the required elements of air quality maintenance plans for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment of a NAAQS. Under section 175A, a maintenance plan must demonstrate continued attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after the Administrator approves the redesignation to attainment. Eight years after the redesignation, the State must submit a revised maintenance plan which demonstrates maintenance of the standard for 10 years following the initial 10-year maintenance period. To address the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must contain such contingency measures, with a schedule for implementation, as EPA deems necessary, to assure prompt correction of any future NAAQS violations. The September 4, 1992 John Calcagni memorandum provides additional guidance on the content of maintenance plans. An ozone maintenance plan should, at minimum, address the following items: (1) The attainment VOC and NOX emissions inventories; (2) a maintenance demonstration showing maintenance for the 10 years of the maintenance period; (3) a commitment to maintain the existing monitoring network; (4) factors and procedures to be used for verification of continued attainment; and, (5) a contingency plan to prevent and/or correct a future violation of the NAAQS.
b. What Are the Attainment Emission Inventories for LaPorte County?
IDEM prepared comprehensive VOC and NOX emission inventories for LaPorte County, including point (significant stationary sources), area (smaller and widely-distributed stationary sources), mobile on-road, and mobile non-road sources for 2004 (the base year/attainment year). To develop the attainment year emission inventories, IDEM used the following approaches and sources of data:
Area Sources—Area source VOC and NOX emissions were projected from Indiana's 2002 periodic emissions inventory, which was previously submitted to the EPA.
Mobile On-Road Sources—Mobile source emissions were calculated using the MOBILE6 emission factor model and traffic data (vehicle miles traveled, vehicle speeds, and vehicle type and age distributions) extracted from the region's travel-demand model. IDEM has provided detailed data summaries to document the calculation of mobile on-road VOC and NOX emissions for 2004, as well as for the projection years of 2010 and 2020 (further discussed below).
Point Source Emissions—2004 point source emissions were compiled using IDEM's 2004 annual emissions statement database and the 2005 EPA Air Markets acid rain emissions inventory database.
Mobile Non-Road Emissions—Non-road mobile source emissions were estimated by the EPA and documented in the 2002 National Emissions Inventory (NEI). IDEM used these emissions estimates along with growth factors to grow the non-road mobile source emissions to 2004. To address concerns about the accuracy of some of the emissions for various source categories in EPA's non-road emissions model, the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium (LADCO) contracted with several companies to review the base data used by the EPA and to make recommendations for corrections to the model. Emissions were estimated for commercial marine vessels and railroads. Recreational motorboat population and spatial surrogates (used to assign emissions to each county) were updated. The populations for the construction equipment category were reviewed and updated based on surveys completed in the Midwest, and the temporal allocation for agricultural sources was also updated. Based on these and other updates, the EPA provided a revised non-road estimation model, which was used for the 2004 projected non-road mobile source emissions.
The 2004 attainment year VOC and NOX emissions for LaPorte County are summarized along with the 2010 and 2020 projected emissions for this County in Tables 4 and 5 below. They confirm that the State has acceptably derived and documented the attainment year VOC and NOX emissions for LaPorte County.
c. Demonstration of Maintenance
As part of the May 30, 2006 redesignation request submittal, IDEM included a requested revision to the SIP to incorporate a 10-year ozone maintenance plan as required under section 175A of the CAA. The maintenance plan contains a maintenance demonstration. This demonstration shows maintenance of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS by documenting current and projected VOC and NOX emissions and showing that future emissions of VOC and NOX remain at or below the attainment year emission levels. Note that a maintenance demonstration need not be based on modeling. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also 66 FR 53094, 53099-53100 (October 19, 2001) and 68 FR 25430-25432 (May 12, 2003).
Table 4 specifies the VOC emissions in LaPorte County for 2004, 2010, and 2020. IDEM chose 2020 as a projection year to meet the 10-year maintenance projection requirement, allowing several years for the State to complete its adoption of the ozone redesignation request and ozone maintenance plan and for the EPA to approve the redesignation request and maintenance plan. IDEM also chose 2010 as an interim year to demonstrate that VOC and NOX emissions will remain below the attainment levels throughout the 10-year maintenance period.
Table 5, similar to Table 4, specifies the NOX emissions in LaPorte County for 2004, 2010, and 2020. Together, Tables 4 and 5 demonstrate that LaPorte County should remain in attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS between 2004 and 2020, for more than 10 years after EPA is expected to approve the Start Printed Page 19432redesignation of LaPorte County to attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS.
IDEM also notes that the State's EGU NOX emission control rules stemming from EPA's NOX SIP call, implemented beginning in 2004, and CAIR will further lower NOX emissions in upwind areas, resulting in decreased ozone and ozone precursor transport into LaPorte County (the State did not project the emission decreases resulting from CAIR and did not document future NOX emissions in upwind Counties). This will also support maintenance of the ozone standard in LaPorte County.
The emission projections for LaPorte County coupled with the expected impacts of the State's EGU NOX rules and CAIR lead to the conclusion that LaPorte County should maintain the 8-hour ozone standard throughout the 10-year maintenance period. The decrease in local VOC and local and regional NOX emissions indicate that peak ozone levels in LaPorte County may actually further decline during the 10-year ozone maintenance period.
IDEM has documented some of the procedures used to project emissions. On-road mobile sources were projected using the MOBILE6 emission factor model and projected traffic data obtained from the Northwest Indiana Regional Planning Commission (NIRPC), who maintains a travel demand forecast model that is capable of projecting changes in total daily Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). Emissions for the other major source sectors were determined using projected source activity/growth data provided by LADCO, as well as major source emissions data obtained periodically for all major sources statewide. IDEM's data demonstrate that emissions projections for LaPorte County are consistent with the planning analyses being conducted to attain the 8-hour ozone and fine particle (PM2.5) standards throughout Indiana and throughout the Lake Michigan area.
Based on the comparison of the projected emissions and the attainment year emissions, we conclude that IDEM has successfully demonstrated that the 8-hour ozone standard should be maintained in LaPorte County. We believe that this is especially likely given the expected impacts of the NOX SIP call and CAIR. As noted by IDEM, this conclusion is further supported by the fact that other states in the eastern portion of the United States are expected to further reduce regional NOX emissions through implementation of their own NOX emission control rules for EGUs and other NOX sources and through implementation of CAIR, reducing ozone and NOX transport into LaPorte County.
d. Monitoring Network
IDEM commits to continue operating and maintaining an approved ozone monitoring network in LaPorte County in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 through the 10-year maintenance period. This will allow the confirmation of the maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard in this area and the triggering of contingency measures if needed.
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
Continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in LaPorte County depends on the State's efforts toward tracking applicable indicators during the maintenance period. The State's plan for verifying continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard in LaPorte County consists, in part, of a plan to continue ambient ozone monitoring in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR part 58. In addition, IDEM will periodically revise and review the VOC and NOX emissions inventories for LaPorte County to assure that emissions growth is not threatening the continued attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard in this area. Revised emission inventories for this area will be prepared for 2005, 2008, and 2011 as necessary to comply with the emission inventory reporting requirements established in the CAA. The revised emissions will be compared with the 2004 attainment emissions and the 2020 projected maintenance year emissions to assure continued maintenance of the ozone standard.
f. Contingency Plan
The contingency plan provisions of the CAA are designed to result in prompt correction or prevention of violations of the NAAQS that might occur after redesignation of an area to Start Printed Page 19433attainment of the NAAQS. Section 175A of the CAA requires that a maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems necessary to assure that the State will promptly correct a violation of the NAAQS that might occur after redesignation. The maintenance plan must identify the contingency measures to be considered for possible adoption, a schedule and procedure for adoption and implementation of the selected contingency measures, and a time limit for action by the State. The State should also identify specific indicators to be used to determine when the contingency measures need to be adopted and implemented. The maintenance plan must include a requirement that the State will implement all measures with respect to control of the pollutant(s) that were controlled in the SIP before the redesignation of the area to attainment. See section 175A(d) of the CAA.
As required by section 175A of the CAA, Indiana has adopted a contingency plan to address a possible future ozone air quality problem. The contingency plan has two levels of actions/responses depending on whether a violation of the 8-hour ozone standard is only threatened (Warning Level Response) or has actually occurred (Action Level Response).
A Warning Level Response will be prompted whenever an annual (1-year) fourth-high monitored daily peak 8-hour ozone concentration of 89 ppb (or greater) occurs at any monitor in LaPorte County, or a 2-year averaged annual fourth-high daily peak 8-hour ozone concentration of 85 ppb or greater occurs at any monitor in LaPorte County. A Warning Level Response will consist of a study to determine whether the monitored ozone level indicates a trend toward higher ozone levels or whether emissions are increasing, threatening a future violation of the ozone NAAQS. The study will evaluate whether the trend, if any, is likely to continue, and, if so, emission control measures necessary to reverse the trend will be adopted, taking into consideration the ease and timing of implementation, as well as economic and social considerations. Implementation of necessary controls will take place as expeditiously as possible, but in no event later than 12 months from the conclusion of the most recent ozone season. If new emission controls are needed to reverse the adverse ozone trend, the procedures for emission control selection under the Action Level Response will be followed.
An Action Level Response will be triggered when a violation of the 8-hour ozone standard is monitored at any of the monitors in LaPorte County (when a 3-year average annual fourth-high monitored daily peak 8-hour ozone concentration of 85 ppb or higher is recorded at any monitor in LaPorte County). In this situation, IDEM will determine the additional emission control measures needed to assure future attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. IDEM will focus on emission control measures that can be implemented within 18 months from the close of the ozone season in which the ozone standard violation is monitored.
Adoption of any additional emission control measures prompted by either of the two response levels will be subject to the necessary administrative and legal processes dictated by State law. This process will include publication of public notices, providing the opportunity for a public hearing, and other measures required by Indiana law for rulemaking by State environmental boards. If a new emission control measure is already promulgated and scheduled for implementation at the Federal or State level, and that emission control measure is determined to be sufficient to address the air quality problem or adverse trend, additional local emission control measures may be determined to be unnecessary. IDEM will submit to the EPA an analysis to demonstrate that the proposed emission control measures or existing emission control measures are adequate to provide for future attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS in LaPorte County.
Contingency measures contained in the maintenance plan are those emission controls or other measures that the State may choose to adopt and implement to correct existing or possible air quality problems in LaPorte County. These include, but are not limited to, the following:
i. Lower Reid vapor pressure gasoline requirements;
ii. Broader geographic applicability of existing emission control measures;
iii. Tightened RACT requirements on existing sources covered by EPA Control Technique Guidelines (CTGs) issued in response to the 1999 CAA amendments;
iv. Application of RACT to smaller existing sources;
v. Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance (I/M);
vi. One or more Transportation Control Measure (TCM) sufficient to achieve at least a 0.5 percent reduction in actual area-wide VOC emissions, to be selected from the following:
A. Trip reduction programs, including, but not limited to, employer-based transportation management plans, area-wide rideshare programs, work schedule programs, and telecommuting;
B. Transit improvement;
C. Traffic flow improvements; and,
D. Other new or innovative transportation measures not yet in widespread use that affect State and local governments as deemed appropriate;
vii. Alternative fuel and diesel retrofit programs for fleet vehicle operations;
viii. Controls on consumer products consistent with those adopted elsewhere in the United States;
ix. VOC or NOX emission offsets for new or modified major sources;
x. VOC or NOX emission offsets for new or modified minor sources;
xi. Increased ratio of emission offset required for new sources; and,
xii. VOC or NOX emission controls on new minor sources (with VOC or NOX emissions less than 100 tons per year).
g. Provisions for a Future Update of the Ozone Maintenance Plan
As required by section 175A(b) of the CAA, the State commits to submit to the EPA an update of the ozone maintenance plan eight years after redesignation of LaPorte County to attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The updated maintenance plan will provide for maintenance of the 8-hour ozone standard in LaPorte County for an additional 10 years beyond the period covered by the initial ozone maintenance plan.
V. Has Indiana Adopted Acceptable Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for the End of the 10-Year Maintenance Plan Which Can Be Used To Support Conformity Determinations?
A. How Are the Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets Developed and What Are the Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for LaPorte County?
Under the CAA, states are required to submit, at various times, SIP revisions and ozone maintenance plans for applicable areas (for ozone nonattainment areas and for areas seeking redesignations to attainment of the ozone standard or revising existing ozone maintenance plans). These emission control SIP revisions (e.g., reasonable further progress and attainment demonstration SIP revisions), including ozone maintenance plans, must create MVEBs based on on-road mobile source emissions allocated to highway and transit vehicle use that, together with emissions from other sources in the area, will provide for attainment or maintenance of the ozone NAAQS.
Under 40 CFR part 93, MVEBs for an area seeking a redesignation to Start Printed Page 19434attainment of the NAAQS are established for the last year of the maintenance plan. The MVEBs serve as ceilings on emissions from an area's planned transportation system. The MVEB concept is further explained in the preamble to the November 24, 1993 transportation conformity rule (58 FR 62188). The preamble also describes how to establish the MVEBs in the SIP and how to revise the MVEBs if needed.
Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new transportation projects, such as the construction of new highways, must “conform” to (i.e., be consistent with) the part of the SIP that addresses emissions from cars and trucks. Conformity to the SIP means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality standard violations, or delay timely attainment of the NAAQS. If a transportation plan does not conform, most new transportation projects that would expand the capacity of roadways cannot go forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth EPA's policy, criteria, and procedures for demonstrating and assuring conformity of transportation activities to a SIP.
When reviewing SIP revisions containing MVEBs, including attainment strategies, rate-of-progress plans, and maintenance plans, EPA must affirmatively find that the MVEBs are “adequate” for use in determining transportation conformity. Once EPA affirmatively finds the submitted MVEBs to be adequate for transportation conformity purposes, the MVEBs are used by state and Federal agencies in determining whether proposed transportation projects conform to the SIPs as required by section 176(c) of the CAA. EPA's substantive criteria for determining the adequacy of MVEBs are specified in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4).
EPA's process for determining adequacy of MVEBs consists of three basic steps: (1) Providing public notification of a SIP submission; (2) providing the public the opportunity to comment on the MVEBs during a public comment period; and, (3) making a finding of adequacy. The process of determining the adequacy of submitted SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in EPA's May 14, 1999 guidance, “Conformity Guidance on Implementation of March 2, 1999, Conformity Court Decision.” This guidance was finalized in the Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for the “New 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Miscellaneous Revisions for Existing Areas: Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments—Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Change” published on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). EPA follows this guidance and rulemaking in making its adequacy determinations.
The Transportation Conformity Rule, in 40 CFR 93.118(f), provides for MVEB adequacy findings through two mechanisms. First, section 93.118(f)(1) provides for posting a notice to the EPA conformity Web site at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/adequacy.htm and providing a 30-day public comment period. Second, a mechanism is described in 40 CFR 93.118(f)(2) which provides that EPA can review the adequacy of an implementation plan MVEB simultaneously with its review of the implementation plan itself.
The LaPorte County 10-year maintenance plan contains VOC and NOX MVEBs for 2020. EPA has reviewed the submittal and the proposed VOC and NOX MVEBs for LaPorte County and finds that the MVEBs meet the adequacy criteria in the Transportation Conformity Rule. Any and all comments on the approvability of the MVEBs should be submitted during the comment period stated in the DATES section of this notice.
EPA, through this rulemaking, is proposing to approve the MVEBs for use to determine transportation conformity in LaPorte County because EPA has determined that the budgets are consistent with the control measures in the SIP and that LaPorte County can maintain attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS for the relevant required 10-year period with mobile source emissions at the levels of the MVEBs. IDEM has determined the 2020 MVEBs for LaPorte County to be 3.40 tons per day for VOC and 6.50 tons per day for NOX. It should be noted that these MVEBs exceed the on-road mobile source VOC and NOX emissions projected by IDEM for 2020, as summarized in Tables 4 and 5 above (“On-Road Mobile” source sector). Through discussions with all organizations involved in transportation planning for LaPorte County, IDEM decided to include safety margins of 0.31 tons per day for VOC and 0.59 tons per day for NOX in the MVEBs to provide for mobile source growth not anticipated in the projected 2020 emissions. Indiana has demonstrated that LaPorte County can maintain the 8-hour ozone NAAQS with mobile source emissions of 3.40 tons per day of VOC and 6.50 tons per day of NOX in 2020 since total source emissions with the increased mobile source emissions will remain under the attainment year levels.
B. What Is a Safety Margin?
A “safety margin” is the difference between the attainment level of emissions (from all sources) and the projected level of emissions (from all sources) in the maintenance plan. As noted in Tables 4 and 5, LaPorte County emissions are projected to have safety margins of 7.03 tons per day for VOC and 37.20 tons per day for NOX in 2020, the difference between the 2004, attainment year, and 2020 VOC and NOX emissions for all sources in LaPorte County.
The MVEBs requested by IDEM contain mobile source safety margins (selected by the State) significantly smaller than the safety margins reflected in the total emissions for LaPorte County. The State is not requesting allocation of the entire available safety margins actually reflected in the demonstration of maintenance (in Tables 4 and 5). Therefore, even though the State is requesting MVEBs that exceed the on-road mobile source emissions for 2020 contained in the demonstration of maintenance, the increase in on-road mobile source emissions that can be considered for transportation conformity purposes is well within the safety margins of the ozone maintenance demonstration.
C. Are the MVEBs Approvable?
The VOC and NOX MVEBs for LaPorte County are approvable because they maintain the total emissions for LaPorte County at or below the attainment year emission inventory levels, as required by the transportation conformity regulations.
VI. What Is the Effect of EPA's Proposed Action?
Approval of the redesignation request would change the official designation of LaPorte County for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, found at 40 CFR part 81, from nonattainment to attainment. It would also incorporate into the Indiana SIP a plan for maintaining the ozone NAAQS through 2020. The maintenance plan includes contingency measures to remedy possible future violations of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and establishes MVEBs of 3.40 tons per day for VOC and 6.50 tons per day for NOX.
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, September 30, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and, therefore, is not subject to review Start Printed Page 19435by the Office of Management and Budget.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
This proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Because this rule proposes to approve pre-existing requirements under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by state law, it 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).
Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action also does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the relationship between the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely proposes to approve a state rule implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air Act.
Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
This proposed rule also does not have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health and Safety Risks
This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.
Executive Order 13211: Actions That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
Because it is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866 or a “significant regulatory action,” this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).
National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (NTTAA), 15 U.S.C. 272, requires Federal agencies to use technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus to carry out policy objectives, so long as such standards are not inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Absent a prior existing requirement for the state to use voluntary consensus standards, EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use such standards, and it would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA to use voluntary consensus standards in place of a program submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Therefore, the requirements of section 12(d) of the NTTAA do not apply.Start List of Subjects
List of Subjects
- Environmental protection
- Air pollution control
- Intergovernmental relations
- Nitrogen dioxide
- Volatile organic compounds
End List of Subjects Start Signature
Dated: April 6, 2007.
Walter W. Kovalick,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
1. This standard is violated in an area when any ozone monitor in the area (or in its impacted downwind environs) records 8-hour ozone concentrations with an average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone concentrations over a three-year period equaling or exceeding 85 ppb. See 40 CFR 50.10.Back to Citation
2. The 8-hour ozone design value and the 1-hour ozone design value for each area were not necessarily recorded at the same monitoring site. The worst-case monitoring site for each ozone concentration averaging time was considered for each area.Back to Citation
3. The worst-case monitoring site-specific ozone design value in the area or in its affected downwind environs.Back to Citation
4. The attainment year can be any of the three consecutive years in which the area has clean (below violation level) air quality data (2003, 2004, or 2005 for LaPorte County).Back to Citation
[FR Doc. E7-7348 Filed 4-17-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P