[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 121 (Friday, June 22, 2001)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 33505-33519]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-15748]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[KY-126-200113; IN-121-2; FRL-7001-4]
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation
of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; KY and IN
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On March 30, 2001, the Commonwealth of Kentucky's Natural
Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet submitted: a request to
redesignate the Kentucky portion of the Louisville moderate ozone
nonattainment area to attainment for the 1-hour ozone National Ambient
Air Quality Standard (NAAQS), a plan to maintain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
for at least the next 10 years, and the regional motor vehicle emission
budgets (MVEBs) for transportation conformity purposes. In addition, on
November 12, 1999, and May 23, 2001, Kentucky submitted source-specific
Board Orders adopted by the Air Pollution Control Board of Jefferson
County to control sources of nitrogen oxides ( NOX) at
eleven sources in Jefferson County, Kentucky. On April 11, 2001, the
State of Indiana's Department of Environmental Management submitted: a
request to redesignate the Indiana portion of the Louisville moderate
ozone nonattainment area to attainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, the
regional MVEBs for transportation conformity purposes, and a plan to
maintain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS for at least the next 10 years. The
Louisville moderate ozone nonattainment area (Louisville area) includes
Jefferson County and portions of Bullitt and Oldham Counties, Kentucky,
and Clark and Floyd Counties, Indiana.
Since Kentucky and Indiana had not completed public participation
requirements for the submittals of March 30, 2001 and April 11, 2001,
they requested that the EPA parallel process the redesignation
requests, maintenance plans, and associated regional MVEBs.
EPA is proposing to approve Kentucky's and Indiana's requests to
redesignate the Louisville area to attainment for the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS. In proposing to approve this request, the EPA is also proposing
to approve the States' plans for maintaining the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
through 2012, as revisions to the Kentucky and Indiana State
Implementation Plans (SIPs). EPA is also proposing to approve the MVEBs
for VOC and NOX in the submitted maintenance plans for
conformity purposes. Finally, the EPA is proposing to approve the
source-specific Board Orders to control NOX emissions from
eleven sources in Jefferson County, Kentucky.
DATES: Comments on the EPA's proposed action must be received by July
23, 2001.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to: Richard A. Schutt,
Acting Chief, Regulatory Planning Section, Air Planning Branch, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta,
Georgia 30303. J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief, Regulation Development Section,
Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77
West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604.
Copies of Kentucky's submittals, as well as other information, are
available for inspection during normal business hours at the following
locations. The interested persons wanting to examine these documents
should make an appointment at least 24 hours before the visiting day
and reference files KY-126. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Region 4, Air Planning Branch, Regulatory Planning Section, 61 Forsyth
Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303. Commonwealth of Kentucky, Division
for Air Quality, 803 Schenkel Lane, Frankfort, Kentucky 40601-1403. Air
Pollution Control District of Jefferson County, 850 Barret Avenue,
Louisville, Kentucky 40204.
Copies of Indiana's submittals, as well as other information, are
available for inspection during normal business hours at the following
locations. The interested persons wanting to examine these documents
should make an appointment at least 24 hours before the visiting day
and reference files IN-121-2. Regulation Development Section, Air
Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Indiana
Department of Environmental Management, Office of Air Quality, 100
North Senate Avenue, P.O. Box 6015, Indianapolis, Indiana 46206-6015.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Allison Humphris, Environmental
Scientist, or Raymond Gregory, Environmental Engineer, Regulatory
Planning Section, Air Planning Branch, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303, (404)
562-9030, (404) 562-9116, ([email protected])
([email protected]). Ryan Bahr, Environmental Engineer, Regulation
Development Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-4366,
([email protected]).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Determination of Attainment
[[Page 33506]]
II. Redesignation Request
A. What action is EPA proposing to take?
B. What would be the effect of the redesignation?
C. What is the background for this action?
D. What are the redesignation review criteria?
E. What is the EPA's analysis of the request?
F. Where is the public record and where do I send comments?
III. Administrative Requirements
I. Determination of Attainment
On May 17, 2001, (66 FR 27483) EPA proposed to determine that the
Louisville moderate ozone nonattainment area has attained the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS. On the basis of this determination, EPA also proposed to
determine that certain attainment demonstration requirements (section
172(c)(1)), along with certain other related requirements of part D of
Title I of the Clean Air Act (CAA), specifically the section 172(c)(9)
contingency measure requirement, the section 182(b)(1) attainment
demonstration requirement, and the section 182(j) multi-state
attainment demonstration requirement, are not applicable to the
Louisville area, as long as it continues to attain the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS. EPA did not propose to determine, however, that the regulations
submitted by Kentucky with its 15 percent plan were inapplicable, since
these regulations were adopted by Kentucky or the Air Pollution Control
District of Jefferson County (APCDJC) prior to 1998 and provided
permanent and enforceable reductions for the Louisville area during the
1998 to 2000 ozone seasons. EPA intends to approve these regulations in
a separate action. Likewise, the May 17, 2001, Federal Register action
also noted that previously-approved SIP revisions must continue to be
implemented and enforced, and are not affected by this action.
EPA based this proposed determination upon three years of complete,
quality-assured, ambient air monitoring data for the 1998, 1999, and
2000 ozone seasons that demonstrate that the 1-hour ozone NAAQS has
been attained in the entire Louisville area. This data is summarized in
Table 1. A complete discussion of the data and background that provides
the basis for this proposed action can be found in the above-cited May
17, 2001, Federal Register action.
Table 1.--1-hour Ozone NAAQS Exceedances in the Louisville, Kentucky-Indiana Area from 1998 to 2000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exceedances Expected
Site County Year measured exceedances
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charlestown.......................... Clark, IN...................... 1998 3 3.1
1999 0 0.0
2000 0 0.0
New Albany........................... Floyd, IN...................... 1998 2 2.0
1999 0 0.0
2000 0 0.0
Bates................................ Jefferson, KY.................. 1998 1 1.2
1999 0 0.0
2000 0 0.0
Buckner.............................. Oldham, KY..................... 1998 1 1.1
1999 1 1.2
2000 0 0.0
Sheperdsville........................ Bullitt, KY.................... 1998 0 0.0
1999 0 0.0
2000 0 0.0
Watson............................... Jefferson, KY.................. 1998 1 1.2
1999 0 0.0
2000 0 0.0
WLKY-TV.............................. Jefferson, KY.................. 1998 1 1.1
1999 0 0.0
2000 0 0.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As indicated in the May 17, 2001, Federal Register action, the
States must continue to operate appropriate air quality monitoring
networks, in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, to verify the attainment
status of the area. The air quality data relied upon to determine that
the area is attaining the 1-hour ozone NAAQS must be consistent with 40
CFR part 58 requirements and other relevant EPA guidance and recorded
in the EPA's Aerometric Information Retrieval System (AIRS).
As further indicated in the May 17, 2001, Federal Register action,
the proposed determination is not equivalent to redesignation of this
area to attainment. Attainment of the ozone 1-hour ozone NAAQS is only
one of the criteria set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) that must be
satisfied for an area to be redesignated to attainment. To be
redesignated, the State must submit and receive full approval of a
redesignation request for the area that satisfies all of the remaining
criteria of section 107(d)(3)(E), including a demonstration that: the
improvement in the area's air quality is due to permanent and
enforceable reductions; the area has a fully approved SIP under 110(k);
the State has met the applicable requirements under section 110 and
part D; and the area has a fully-approved maintenance plan.
II. Redesignation Request
A. What Action is EPA Proposing to Take?
EPA is proposing to approve Kentucky's and Indiana's requests to
redesignate the Louisville area to attainment for the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS, provided both States revise their maintenance plans to include
an enforceable commitment to revise the MVEBs using MOBILE6 (once it
becomes available) and to revise the VOC MVEB so that the area's 2012
projected emissions do not exceed the 1999 attainment year emissions.
In proposing to approve these requests, EPA is also proposing to
approve Kentucky's and Indiana's plans for maintaining the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS through 2012, as revisions to the
[[Page 33507]]
Kentucky and Indiana SIPs. The EPA is also proposing to approve the
MVEBs for VOC and NOX in the submitted maintenance plan as
adequate for conformity purposes. Final EPA approval of the maintenance
plan, including the MVEBs, is contingent on Kentucky's and Indiana's
final submittal of the above-cited revisions. Finally, the EPA is
proposing to approve the source-specific Board Orders submitted by
Kentucky to control NOX emissions from eleven sources in
Jefferson County, Kentucky, as fulfilling the remaining NOX
reasonably available control technology (RACT) requirements of section
182(f) of the CAA for the Kentucky portion of the Louisville area.
B. What Would be the Effect of the Redesignation?
The redesignation would change the official designation under 40
CFR 81.315 of the Louisville area, including the Kentucky Counties of
Jefferson, Bullitt and Oldham, and the Indiana Counties of Clark and
Floyd, from nonattainment to attainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. It
would also put into place plans for maintaining the 1-hour ozone NAAQS
through 2012. These plans include contingency measures to remedy any
future violations of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. These plans also include
the following MVEBs for 2012, which must be revised as indicated in
Table 2, before the EPA can take final action to approve the MVEBs, the
maintenance plans and redesignation requests.
Table 2.--Proposed 2012 MVEBs for Louisville Nonattainment Area
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012 MVEB
proposed
for
approval
provided
2012 MVEB States
as revise
Pollutant submitted their
by States maintenance
(Tons/day) plan
submittal
(see
analysis
for more
detail)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC........................................... 50.93 48.17
NOX........................................... 92.93 92.93
------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. What Is the Background for This Action?
Under section 107(d) of the 1977 CAA, EPA promulgated the ozone
attainment status for each geographic area of the country. The
Louisville area was designated as an ozone nonattainment area in March
1978 (43 FR 8962). On November 15, 1990, the CAA Amendments of 1990
were enacted. Under section 107(d)(4)(A), on November 6, 1991 (56 FR
56694), the Kentucky Counties of Jefferson, Bullitt and Oldham, and the
Indiana Counties of Clark and Floyd were designated as the Louisville
moderate ozone nonattainment area, as a result of monitored violations
of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS during the 1987-1989 time frame. On September
20, 1995, in response to a request by Kentucky, EPA published (60 FR
48653) corrections to the boundaries of the Louisville area for Bullitt
and Oldham Counties to include additional sources which contributed to
violation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
Since that time, Kentucky, Indiana and the APCDJC have adopted and
implemented programs required under the CAA for a moderate 1-hour ozone
nonattainment area to reduce emissions of VOC and NOX. These
programs include stationary source RACT, vehicle inspection and
maintenance (I/M) programs, mobile source conformity and other measures
(See EPA's analysis for specific measures in section II.E., below). As
a result of these programs, monitors in the Louisville area have
recorded three years of complete, quality-assured, ambient air quality
monitoring data for the 1998, 1999, and 2000 ozone seasons, thereby
demonstrating that the area has attained the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. On
March 30, 2001, Kentucky submitted: a request to redesignate the
Kentucky portion of the Louisville area to attainment for the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS, a plan to maintain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS through 2012,
and the regional MVEBs for transportation conformity purposes. On
November 12, 1999, and May 23, 2001, Kentucky submitted source-specific
Board Orders specifying NOX RACT requirements for eleven
sources in Jefferson County, Kentucky. On April 11, 2001, Indiana
submitted: a request to redesignate the Indiana portion of the
Louisville area to attainment for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, a plan to
maintain the 1-hour NAAQS through 2012, and the regional MVEBs for
transportation conformity purposes.
Both Kentucky and Indiana requested that EPA parallel process the
submittals. Since Kentucky and Indiana had not completed public
participation requirements at the time of submittal of the March 30,
2001, and April 11, 2001, redesignation requests, these submittals were
considered to be drafts. Kentucky and Indiana therefore requested that
the EPA parallel process the redesignation request, maintenance plans,
and associated regional MVEBs. The parallel processing provision of 40
CFR part 51, appendix V, allows EPA to propose action on the draft
revisions prior to submission of State-adopted SIP revisions. At the
time of final EPA action, the completed revisions must have been
submitted to EPA.
D. What Are the Redesignation Review Criteria?
The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating a nonattainment
area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) allows for
redesignation providing that: (1) The Administrator determines that the
area has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) The Administrator has fully
approved the applicable implementation plan for the area under section
110(k); (3) The Administrator determines that the improvement in air
quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions
resulting from implementation of the applicable SIP and applicable
federal air pollutant control regulations and other permanent and
enforceable reductions; (4) The Administrator has fully approved a
maintenance plan for the area as meeting the requirements of section
175(A); and, (5) The State containing such area has met all
requirements applicable to the area under section 110 and part D.
EPA provided guidance on redesignation 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). EPA has provided further guidance on processing
redesignation requests in the following documents:
1. ``Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for Areas
Requesting Redesignation to Attainment,'' Mary D. Nichols, Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14, 1994. (Nichols,
October 1994)
2. ``Use of Actual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for
Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment Areas,'' D. Kent Berry,
Acting Director, Air Quality Management Division, November 30, 1993.
3. ``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,'' Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant
Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17, 1993.
4. ``State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response
to Clean Air Act Deadlines,'' John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality
Management
[[Page 33508]]
Division, October 28, 1992. (Calcagni, October 1992)
5. ``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to
Attainment,'' John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division,
September 4, 1992.
6. ``Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Redesignations,'' G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs
Branch, June 1, 1992.
7. State Implementation Plans; General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (57
FR 13498), April 16, 1992.
E. What is the EPA's Analysis of the Request?
Criterion (1): The Area Must be Attaining the 1-hour Ozone NAAQS
For ozone, an area may be considered attaining the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS if there are no violations, as determined in accordance with 40
CFR 50.9 and Appendix H, based on three complete, consecutive calendar
years of quality-assured air quality monitoring data. A violation of
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS occurs when the annual average number of
expected daily exceedances is equal to or greater than 1.05 per year at
a monitoring site. A daily exceedance occurs when the maximum hourly
ozone concentration during a given day is 0.125 parts per million (ppm)
or higher. The data must be collected and quality-assured in accordance
with 40 CFR part 58, and recorded in AIRS. The monitors should have
remained at the same location for the duration of the monitoring period
required for demonstrating attainment.
EPA published a proposal on May 17, 2001 (66 FR 27483), to make a
Determination of Attainment for the Louisville area. This determination
is based on ozone air quality data for 1998, 1999, and 2000 which were
quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and recorded in
AIRS, and which showed attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the
Louisville area.
Criteria (2) and (5): The Area Must Have a Fully Approved SIP Under
Section 110(k); and the Area Must Have met all Applicable Requirements
Under Section 110 and Part D.
Before the Louisville area may be redesignated to attainment for
ozone, Kentucky and Indiana must have fulfilled the applicable
requirements of section 110 and part D. The Calcagni memorandum dated
September 4, 1992, provides that States requesting that areas be
redesignated to attainment have to fully adopt rules and programs that
come due prior to the submittal of a complete redesignation request.
However, based on the Seitz memorandum (see ``Reasonable Further
Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and Related Requirements for Ozone
Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards,'' John Seitz, Director, Office of Air Quality Standards, May
10, 1995.), and the May 17, 2001 (66 FR 27483), proposed determination
that the Louisville area has attained the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, SIP
revisions to address some of these requirements need not be submitted
for EPA to approve the request for redesignation of the Louisville
area, since they would no longer be considered applicable requirements
under section 107(d)(3)(E) for so long as the area continues to attain
the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. These requirements include reasonable further
progress (RFP) (see the general requirement of section 172(c)(2) and
the more specific requirement of section 182(b)(1) for a plan that
reduces VOC emissions by 15 percent), attainment demonstration (see the
general requirement of section 172(c)(1) and the specific requirement
of section 182(j) for a multi-state attainment demonstration) and
contingency measures (see the general requirement of section
172(c)(9)).
Since these elements are no longer required, EPA will not need to
act on the following: Indiana's Attainment Demonstration for the
Indiana Portion of the Louisville Nonattainment Area submitted November
15, 1999; the 3 percent contingency requirement associated with
Indiana's 15 percent Rate of Progress (ROP) requirements, submitted
December 20, 1993; Kentucky's Attainment Demonstration for the Kentucky
Portion of the Louisville Nonattainment Area submitted November 12,
1999; and the Kentucky 15 percent ROP planning SIP submitted on
November 12, 1993, and amended on April 5, 1994, June 30, 1997, and
March 21, 2000. A final redesignation action would permanently make
these requirements no longer applicable. However, all previously-
approved SIP revisions must continue to be implemented and enforced and
are not affected by this action. In addition, EPA will continue to
process any submittals that have not yet been approved and revise the
SIP to incorporate State- and locally-adopted rules and other legally-
enforceable requirements which have helped the area come into
attainment prior to the effective date for this rule. This will ensure
that the rules the area has depended on for attainment are permanent
and enforceable as part of the SIP.
If the area violates the 1-hour ozone NAAQS prior to final action
on the redesignation request, however, not only would the requirements
again become applicable, but the redesignation request could not be
approved because the area would no longer meet the criterion of having
attained the 1-hour NAAQS. (Seitz memorandum dated May 10, 1995)
Furthermore, requirements of the CAA that come due subsequent to
the area's submittal of a complete redesignation request would continue
to be applicable to the area until a redesignation is approved, but are
not required as a prerequisite for redesignation (see section 175A(c)).
If the redesignation were to be disapproved, the States remain
obligated to fulfill those requirements.
Section 110 Requirements
General SIP elements are delineated in section 110(a)(2) of Title
I, part A. These requirements include but are not limited to the
following: submittal of a SIP that has been adopted by the State after
reasonable notice and public hearing; provisions for establishment and
operation of appropriate apparatus, methods, systems and procedures
necessary to monitor ambient air quality; implementation of a permit
program; provisions for part C, Prevention of Significant Deterioration
(PSD); and part D, New Source Review (NSR) permit programs; criteria
for stationary source emission control measures, monitoring and
reporting; provisions for modeling; and provisions for public and local
agency participation. For purposes of redesignation, the Kentucky and
the Indiana SIPs were reviewed to ensure that all requirements under
the amended CAA were satisfied through previously-approved SIP
provisions or SIP revisions that are in the process of being reviewed
or on which the EPA is in the process of taking action. The EPA must
take final action on the required SIP revisions presently in the
process of EPA review or action, before this redesignation can be
approved.
The EPA is proposing to approve revisions submitted by Kentucky to
address the NOX RACT requirements of section 182(f) of the
CAA for the Jefferson County portion of the Louisville area in this
Federal Register action. These revisions are source-specific Board
Orders that establish NOX RACT requirements for eleven
sources in Jefferson County, Kentucky.
[[Page 33509]]
In a future Federal Register action, the EPA intends to propose action
on regulations submitted by Kentucky to address outstanding VOC RACT
requirements of section 182(b)(2) of the CAA for a specific source
category and a specific source. These regulations include a regulation
to address sources, located in Jefferson County, subject to the EPA's
Control Techniques Guideline (CTG) published May 1993 ``Control of
Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Reactor Processes and
Distillation Operations Processes in the Synthetic Organic Chemical
Manufacturing Industry'' (SOCMI) and source-specific requirements for a
lithographic printing operation, Publisher's Printing, Inc., located in
Bullitt County, Kentucky. EPA also intends to take final action on the
underlying regulations that were a part of the Kentucky 15 percent plan
and propose action on other miscellaneous revisions to update the
Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP.
Transport of Ozone Precursors to Downwind Areas
Modeling results utilizing the EPA's regional oxidant model
indicate that ozone precursor emissions from various States west and
southeast of the ozone transport region (OTR) in the Northeastern
United States contribute to increases in ozone concentrations in the
OTR. EPA issued a NOX SIP Call on October 27, 1998 (63 FR
57356), requiring the District of Columbia and 22 States, including
Indiana and Kentucky, to reduce their emissions of NOX in
order to reduce the transport of ozone and ozone precursors. EPA's
initial NOX SIP Call submittal date of September 1999, was
stayed by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit Court. The Court lifted this stay on June 22, 2000,
and established an October 30, 2000, date for the submittal of State
SIPs to address the NOX SIP Call requirements. Due to the
length of Kentucky's regulation promulgation process, the Commonwealth
of Kentucky was unable to meet this deadline, but submitted a
NOX SIP Call SIP for parallel processing on February 20,
2001. Similarly, while Indiana has been working on a rule in response
to the NOX SIP Call since July 1999, Indiana was unable to
submit a SIP to meet the deadline; however, Indiana submitted a draft
NOX SIP and requested parallel processing on March 30, 2001.
The States are in the process of finalizing NOX SIPs and
intend to submit final, adopted NOX SIPs by August 2001.
However, given that affected States are not required to implement the
NOX SIP Call until 2004 (i.e., well after the date on which
Kentucky and Indiana submitted redesignation requests), the EPA
believes that the requirement to submit a NOX SIP cannot
reasonably be considered a prerequisite for redesignation of the
Louisville area. NOX SIP Call controls have not yet been
implemented in this area. The fact that Louisville is monitoring
attainment of the 1-hour ozone standard, even though NOX SIP
Call controls have not been implemented, does not imply that
NOX SIP Call controls are not needed to allow other,
downwind areas to attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. Furthermore, this
analysis does not address to what extent the NOX SIP Call
controls may be needed to attain the new 8-hour ozone, promulgated July
18, 1997 (62 FR 38855), in any areas that may be designated
nonattainment under that standard. Therefore, EPA believes that
Kentucky and Indiana need not have final NOX SIP Call
regulations in place to qualify for redesignation.
EPA has determined that the Kentucky and Indiana SIPs for the
Louisville 1-hour ozone nonattainment area satisfy all of the section
110 SIP requirements of the CAA.
Part D: General Provisions for Nonattainment Areas
Before the Louisville area may be redesignated to attainment, it
must have fulfilled the applicable requirements of part D of the CAA.
Under part D, an area's classification determines the requirements to
which it is subject. Subpart 1 of part D sets forth the basic
nonattainment requirements applicable to all nonattainment areas.
Subpart 2 of part D establishes additional requirements for
nonattainment areas classified under Table 1 of section 181(a). As
described in the General Preamble for the Implementation of Title I,
specific requirements of subpart 2 may override subpart 1's general
provisions (57 FR 13501, April 16, 1992). The Louisville area was
classified as moderate ozone nonattainment. Therefore, in order to be
redesignated, Kentucky and Indiana must meet the applicable
requirements of subpart 1 of part D--specifically sections 172(c) and
176, as well as the applicable requirements of subpart 2 of part D.
Section 172(c) Requirements
EPA has determined that the redesignation requests received from
Kentucky and Indiana for the Louisville area have satisfied all of the
relevant submittal requirements under section 172(c) necessary for the
area to be redesignated to attainment. On May 17, 2001 (66 FR 27483),
the EPA proposed to determine that certain CAA requirements were no
longer needed because the area was attaining the ozone NAAQS. These
included a SIP revision providing a 15 percent VOC emission reduction
plan, an ozone attainment demonstration and the requirements of section
172(c)(9) concerning contingency measures for RFP or attainment to meet
the requirements of section 172(c)(1), 172(c)(2), 182(b)(1) and 182(j).
Kentucky has submitted an RFP plan. EPA intends to take final action on
the underlying regulations that were submitted with the RFP plan before
taking final action on this proposal, since emission reductions
resulting from implementation of these regulations occurred during the
1998 through 2000 period. Indiana submitted an RFP plan on December 20,
1993, and supplemented the submittal on July 12, 1995, for Clark and
Floyd Counties which the EPA approved on May 7, 1997 (62 FR 24815).
Since new submittals of these elements would no longer be required if
this action is finalized, a final approval action would mean that EPA
would not require Indiana to submit the 3 percent contingency
requirement associated with Indiana's 15 percent ROP requirements,
submitted December 20, 1993, and July 12, 1995. Furthermore, since the
area would be redesignated to attainment, the EPA approval of the
Kentucky 15 percent ROP planning SIP, which was submitted on November
12, 1993, and amended on April 5, 1994, June 30, 1997, and March 21,
2000, would also no longer be required.
Section 172(c)(3) requires submission and approval of a
comprehensive, accurate, and current inventory of actual emissions.
Kentucky submitted, on November 12, 1993 (amended April 5, 1994, and
June 30, 1997), an actual emission inventory under section 182(a)(1)
for the Kentucky counties of Jefferson, Bullitt and Oldham. The EPA
intends to take final action on this inventory in the same Federal
Register that addresses the underlying regulations submitted with the
RFP plan. Indiana submitted, on January 15, 1994, the 1990 base year
inventory for the Indiana Counties of Clark and Floyd, and EPA approved
the submittal on June 20, 1994 (59 FR 31544). EPA has determined that
upon final approval of Kentucky's actual emission inventory, the
requirement of 172(c)(3) for Kentucky and Indiana will be satisfied.
Section 172(c)(5) mandates that SIPs require permits for the
construction and operation of new and modified major stationary sources
anywhere in the nonattainment area. Section 182(b)(5)
[[Page 33510]]
requires all major new sources or modifications in a moderate
nonattainment area to achieve offsetting reductions of VOCs at a ratio
of at least 1.15 to 1.0. EPA has determined that areas being
redesignated to attainment do not need to comply with the requirement
that a NSR program be approved prior to redesignation, provided that
the area demonstrates maintenance of the applicable NAAQS without part
D NSR in effect. The rationale for this decision is described in a
memorandum from Mary Nichols dated October 14, 1994. See also the
discussion in the Grand Rapids, Michigan, action published on June 21,
1996 (61 FR 31834). The States have demonstrated that the Louisville
area will be able to maintain the 1-hour NAAQS without part D NSR in
effect, and, therefore, need not have fully-approved part D NSR
programs prior to approval of the redesignation request for the
Louisville area. Kentucky's and Indiana's PSD requirements will remain
enforceable after the redesignation of the Louisville area.
Section 176 Conformity Requirements
Section 176(c) of the CAA requires States to establish criteria and
procedures to ensure that federally supported or funded projects
conform to the air quality 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. of the Federal Transit Act (``transportation conformity''), as
well as to all other federally supported or funded projects (``general
conformity''). Section 176 further provides that State conformity
revisions must be consistent with federal conformity regulations that
the CAA required the EPA to promulgate. The EPA believes it is
reasonable to interpret the conformity requirements as not applying for
purposes of evaluating the redesignation request under section 107(d).
The rationale for this is based on a combination of two factors. First,
the requirement to submit SIP revisions to comply with the conformity
provisions of the CAA continues to apply to areas after redesignation
to attainment, since such areas would be subject to a section 175A
maintenance plan. Second, the EPA's federal conformity rules require
the performance of conformity analyses in the absence of federally
approved State rules. Therefore, because areas are subject to the
conformity requirements regardless of whether they are redesignated to
attainment and must implement conformity under federal rules if State
rules are not yet approved, the EPA believes it is reasonable to view
these requirements as not applying for purposes of evaluating a
redesignation request. Consequently, the EPA may approve the ozone
redesignation request for the Kentucky and Indiana portions of the
Louisville area without a fully-approved conformity SIP. See Detroit,
Michigan, carbon monoxide redesignation published on June 30, 1999 (64
FR 35017), Cleveland-Akron-Lorain ozone redesignation published on May
7, 1996 (61 FR 20458), and Tampa, Florida ozone redesignation published
on December 7, 1995 (60 FR 62748).
Subpart 2 Section 182 Requirements
The Louisville area is classified moderate nonattainment:
therefore, part D, subpart 2, section 182(b) requirements apply. In
accordance with the September 17, 1993, EPA guidance memorandum, the
requirements which came due prior to the submission of the request to
redesignate the area must be fully approved into the SIP before or at
the time of the request to redesignate the area to attainment. Those
requirements are discussed below.
1990 Base Year Inventory
The 1990 base year emissions inventory, as required by sections
172(c)(3) and 182(b)(1)(B), was due on November 15, 1992. Kentucky
submitted its 1990 base year emissions inventory on November 12, 1993,
and submitted revisions on April 5, 1994, and June 30, 1997. The EPA is
processing and intends to publish a final Federal Register action on
this inventory before taking final action approving today's proposal.
Indiana submitted its 1990 base year inventory on June 20, 1994 (59 FR
31544). The EPA approved this inventory, including the baseline for the
Indiana portion of the Louisville area, on January 4, 1995 (60 FR 375).
The EPA approved revisions to the 1990 base year inventory for the
Indiana portion of the Louisville area as part of its May 7, 1997,
approval of the 15 percent plan (62 FR 24815).
Periodic Emissions Inventory
Periodic inventories, as required by section 182(a)(3)(A), were due
on November 15, 1995, and November 15, 1998, providing an estimate of
emissions for 1993 and 1996, respectively. These inventories are not
considered SIP requirements, and therefore they do not need to be
approved into the SIP. Kentucky provided the EPA with periodic
emissions for 1993 and 1996 on November 3, 1996, and November 13, 1998,
respectively. Indiana also provided its estimates of periodic emissions
for 1996 on February 18, 1999.
Emission Statements
The emission statement SIP, as required by section 182(a)(3)(B),
was due on November 15, 1992. An emission statement SIP requires source
owners to submit information annually to the State concerning actual
emissions. Kentucky submitted its emission statement SIP on January 15,
1993, and supplemented the submittal on December 29, 1994, to satisfy
the federal requirements. The EPA published approval of the Kentucky
emission statement SIP on May 2, 1995 (60 FR 21445). Kentucky submitted
the emission statement SIP for Jefferson County on March 4, 1993, to
satisfy the same requirements. The EPA published approval of the
Jefferson County emission statement SIP on June 23, 1994 (59 FR 32343).
Indiana submitted its emission statement SIP on January 6, 1994, and
the EPA approved it on June 10, 1994 (59 FR 29953).
15 Percent Plan
As discussed above, EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret
certain provisions of the CAA, including section 182(b)(1)(A), as not
being required if an area is monitoring attainment of the 1-hour ozone
NAAQS (i.e., attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS is demonstrated with
three consecutive years of complete, quality-assured, air quality
monitoring data). Since it has now attained the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, the
15 percent VOC emission reduction plan is one of these requirements
that will not be applicable to the Louisville area. Indiana submitted
the Clark and Floyd County 15 percent plan on December 20, 1993. EPA
approved it as part of the SIP on May 7, 1997 (62 FR 24815). Kentucky
submitted its 15 percent plan on November 12, 1993, and amended this
plan on April 5, 1994, June 30, 1997, and March 21, 2000. For so long
as the area continues to attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, however, EPA
will not take action on the Kentucky submittals.
VOC RACT Requirements
SIP revisions requiring RACT for three classes of VOC sources are
required under section 182(b)(2). The categories are: (1) all sources
covered by a CTG document issued between November 15, 1990, and the
date of attainment; (2) all sources covered by a CTG issued prior to
November 15, 1990; and (3) all other major non-CTG stationary sources.
The non-CTG rules were due by November 15, 1992, and
[[Page 33511]]
apply to the Kentucky and Indiana submittals.
Section 183 of the CAA required EPA to issue CTGs for 13 source
categories by November 15, 1993. EPA published a CTG by this date for
the following source categories: Synthetic Organic Chemical
Manufacturing Industry (SOCMI) Reactors and Distillation, aerospace
manufacturing coating operation, shipbuilding and ship repair coating
operations, and wood furniture coating operation; however, EPA has not
completed the CTGs for the remaining source categories. The CAA
requires States to submit rules for sources covered by a post-enactment
CTG in accordance with a schedule specified in a CTG document. EPA
created a CTG document as appendix E to the General Preamble for the
Implementation of Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. (57
FR 18070, 18077, April 28, 1992). In appendix E, EPA interpreted the
CAA to allow a State to submit a non-CTG rule by November 15, 1992, or
to defer submittal of a RACT rule for sources that the State
anticipated would be covered by a post-enactment CTG, based on the list
of CTGs EPA expected to issue to meet the requirement in section 183.
Appendix E states that if EPA fails to issue a CTG by November 15, 1993
(which it failed to do for 11 source categories), the responsibility
shifts to the State to submit a non-CTG RACT rule or negative
declaration for those sources by November 15, 1994.
EPA approved certain VOC RACT rules as part of the Kentucky SIP on
January 25, 1980 (45 FR 6092), August 7, 1981 (46 FR 40188), February
7, 1990 (55 FR 4169), June 23, 1994, (59 FR 32344), and June 28, 1996
(61 FR 33674). EPA approved certain VOC RACT rules as part of the
Jefferson County portion of the Kentucky SIP on January 25, 1980 (45 FR
6092), June 9, 1982 (47 FR 25010), January 11, 1984 (49 FR 1341), April
27, 1989 (54 FR 18103), and October 22, 1993 (58 FR 54516). EPA is
processing and intends to take final action on certain revisions to
Jefferson County VOC RACT rules prior to taking final action on today's
proposal. For the Kentucky portion of the Louisville area, these
actions fulfilled the RACT ``fix up'' and ``catch up'' requirements
such that identified deficiencies in their pre-1990 RACT program were
addressed, satisfying requirement (2) above that RACT be established
for all sources covered by a CTG issued prior to November 15, 1990. EPA
intends to propose action on a source-specific non-CTG RACT
determination for Publisher's Printing, Inc., submitted by Kentucky on
April 16, 2001, and supplemented on May 4, 2001. This RACT
determination must receive final approval before today's action on this
redesignation can be finally approved by the EPA. Final approval of
this action will satisfy requirement (3) above for the Kentucky portion
of the Louisville area.
To satisfy the requirement of (1) above, Kentucky submitted a
negative declaration on December 14, 1999, for the CTG categories of
aerospace, SOCMI reactor and distillation processes, shipbuilding, and
wood furniture. The APCDJC submitted a negative declaration for
Jefferson County for all four CTG categories on February 26, 2001. The
APCDJC withdrew the negative declaration for the SOCMI category on May
1, 2001, and submitted a SOCMI regulation for parallel processing on
May 10, 2001. Before the EPA can take final action on today's proposal,
the APCDJC's SOCMI regulation must be approved by EPA.
Regarding the Indiana portion of the nonattainment area, EPA has
likewise taken numerous actions since the 1990 CAA Amendments approving
Indiana VOC RACT rules including March 6, 1992 (57 FR 8082), July 5,
1995 (60 FR 34857), and June 29, 1998 (63 FR 35141). For the Indiana
portion of the Louisville area, these actions fulfilled the RACT ``fix
up'' and ``catch up'' requirements such that identified deficiencies in
their pre-1990 RACT program were addressed, satisfying requirement (2)
above that RACT be established for all sources covered by a CTG issued
prior to November 15, 1990. The July 5, 1995, action also approved a
non-CTG RACT rule, partially fulfilling requirement (3) above. However,
Indiana's non-CTG RACT rule exempted the 13 categories for which EPA
had intended to develop CTGs (per section 183). Indiana subsequently
submitted rules for four of these categories: autobody refinishing,
shipbuilding, wood furniture, and volatile organic storage tanks. EPA
approved these rules as revisions to the SIP on June 13, 1996 (61 FR
29965), October 30, 1996 (61 FR 55889), January 17, 1997 (62 FR 2593),
and January 22, 1997 (62 FR 3216), respectively. For the remaining RACT
categories, Indiana submitted negative declarations on November 8,
1999. On June 8, 2000 (65 FR 36346), EPA approved these negative
declarations recognizing that, for the nine source categories
identified, there were no sources with the potential to emit 100 tons
or more of VOC on an annual basis.
As a result of these approved rules, rules on which EPA is in the
process of taking action, and negative declarations, Kentucky and
Indiana have addressed all sources covered by a CTG since November 15,
1990 (Requirement 1 above), all sources covered by a CTG issued prior
to November 15, 1990 (Requirement 2 above), and all other major non-CTG
stationary sources (requirement 3 above), thus fully satisfying the VOC
RACT requirements. Upon redesignation of the area, all new major VOC
sources locating in the Louisville area, and all major modifications to
existing major VOC sources in the Louisville area, will continue to be
subject to the RACT requirements.
Stage II Vapor Recovery
Section 182(b)(3) requires States to submit Stage II vapor recovery
rules no later than November 15, 1992. EPA originally approved Stage II
requirements for Jefferson County, Kentucky, on March 6, 1996 (61 FR
8875). EPA is currently reviewing and intends to take action on minor
revisions to Jefferson County's Stage II regulations prior to taking
final action on today's proposal. Indiana submitted Stage II vapor
recovery rules as a SIP revision on February 25, 1994. EPA approved
those rules on April 28, 1994 (59 FR 21942). Indiana submitted
amendments to its Stage II rules on April 6, 1999. EPA approved these
amendments as revisions to the SIP on November 3, 1999 (64 FR 59642).
The September 17, 1993, ``Enforcement Guidance for Stage II Vehicle
Refueling Control Programs,'' guidance memorandum states that once
onboard vapor recovery regulations are promulgated, the Stage II
regulations are no longer applicable for moderate ozone nonattainment
areas. EPA promulgated onboard vapor recovery rules in February 1994.
Therefore, under section 202(a)(6) of the CAA, Stage II would no longer
be required. However, both Kentucky and Indiana have opted to include
reductions in VOCs from the Stage II program as part of the submitted
maintenance plan.
Vehicle I/M
EPA's final I/M regulations in 40 CFR part 85 require the States to
submit a fully adopted I/M program by November 15, 1993. On September
11, 1998, Kentucky submitted its I/M program and the EPA approved the
program rule on December 8, 1998 (63 FR 67586). Kentucky also submitted
the Jefferson County I/M regulation for approval on November 12, 1993.
EPA approved this regulation on July 28, 1995 (60 FR 38700). EPA has
approved several additional revisions to the Jefferson County I/M
program, including actions taken on January 5, 1999 (64 FR 415),
[[Page 33512]]
and March 15, 1999 (64 FR 12749); and is in the process of taking
action on several additional minor revisions. Indiana submitted rules
for its improved basic I/M program on September 28, 1995, and EPA
published approval of the rules on March 19, 1996 (61 FR 11142).
NOX Requirements
Section 182(f) establishes NOX requirements for ozone
nonattainment areas which require the same provisions for major
stationary sources of NOX as apply to major stationary
sources of VOCs. One of the requirements for major sources of VOCs is
RACT. Therefore, pursuant to section 182(f) of the CAA, RACT is a
requirement for major sources of NOX in an ozone
nonattainment area.
On May 21, 1999, Kentucky submitted to EPA for approval APCDJC
Regulation 6.42, Reasonably Available Control Technology Requirements
for Major Volatile Organic Compound and Nitrogen Oxides-Emitting
Facilities. EPA is reviewing and intends to take a separate action on
Regulation 6.42 before taking final action on this proposal. Regulation
6.42 requires the establishment and implementation of RACT for the
major stationary sources of NOX in Jefferson County,
Kentucky. For the 11 major sources of NOX in Jefferson
County, Regulation 6.42 has been implemented by means of Board Orders
adopted by the Air Pollution Control Board of Jefferson County. A Board
Order is a regulatory instrument adopted by an air pollution control
board which specifies air pollution control limits or requirements for
a specific source or company. The following is a summary of the
NOX RACT requirements for each of the 11 Board Orders.
1. American Synthetic Rubber Company, LLC (ASRC): The Board Order
submitted to the EPA on May 23, 2001, contains the following
NOX RACT requirements:
(a) The NOX emissions from Boiler #1 and Boiler #2 are
not to exceed 0.50 pound per million Btu of heat input, based upon a
30-day rolling average.
(b) The ASRC is required to have continuous emission monitoring
system (CEMS) for measuring NOX emissions from Boiler #1 and
Boiler #2.
(c) The ASRC is required to maintain the records listed in 40 CFR
60.49b (g) for Boiler #1 and Boiler #2.
(d) The NOX emissions from each of Boiler #3 and Boiler
#4 are not to exceed 0.20 pound per million Btu of heat input. Neither
boiler is to combust a fuel other than natural gas except that Boiler
#4 may also combust No. 2 fuel oil.
(e) The ASRC is required to conduct a periodic performance test for
NOX for each of Boiler #3 and Boiler #4.
(f) The ASRC is required to keep a record identifying all
deviations from the requirements of the NOX RACT Plan and is
required to submit to the APCDJC a written report of all deviations
that occurred during the preceding semi-annual period.
2. E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Company (DuPont): The Board Order
submitted on November 12, 1999, contains the following NOX
RACT requirements:
(a) The NOX emissions from Boiler #4 and Boiler #5 are
not to exceed 0.20 pound per million Btu of heat input, based upon a
30-day rolling average.
(b) DuPont is required to install, calibrate, maintain, and operate
a CEMS, and record the output of the system, for measuring
NOX emissions from each boiler.
(c) DuPont is required to maintain records listed in 40 CFR
Sec. 60.49b(g).
(d) DuPont is required to submit to the APCDJC excess emission
reports for any excess emissions that occurred during the reporting
period.
3. Ford Louisville Assembly Plant (Ford LAP): The Board Order
originally submitted on November 12, 1999, amended and resubmitted on
May 23, 2001, contains the following NOX RACT requirements:
(a) The NOX emissions from each of Boiler #4 and Boiler
#5 are not to exceed 0.20 pound per million Btu of heat input.
(b) Ford LAP is required to conduct a periodic performance test for
NOX for each of Boiler #4 and Boiler #5.
(c) Ford LAP is required each year to perform and make a record of
the following non-routine boiler maintenance activities for Boiler #4
and Boiler #5: inspect the fuel combustion system, adjust the system to
minimize total emissions of NOX and carbon monoxide (CO),
minimize excess air and maximize boiler efficiency, and make any needed
adjustments or repairs to improve boiler efficiency.
(d) Ford LAP was required to submit to the APCDJC a one-time
written description of daily activities and procedures that may be
conducted by the boiler operators to ensure optimum operating
efficiency of Boiler #4 and Boiler #5.
(e) Ford LAP is required to ensure that Boiler #1, Boiler #2, and
Boiler #3 comply with the following requirements: No boiler is to have
a monthly capacity factor greater than 10.0 percent for any month
during the period March 1 to October 31, and no boiler is to combust a
fuel other than natural gas, distillate oil, or residual oil.
(f) Ford LAP is required to make a record of the type and amount of
fuel combusted during each day of operation of Boiler #1, Boiler #2, or
Boiler #3 during the period March 1 to October 31.
(g) Ford LAP is required to keep a record identifying all
deviations from the requirements of the NOX RACT Plan and is
required to submit to the APCDJC a written report of all deviations
that occurred during the preceding semi-annual period as well as a
summary of the non-routine boiler maintenance activities for Boiler #4
and Boiler #5.
4. General Electric Company (GE Appliances): The Board Order
originally submitted on November 12, 1999, amended and resubmitted on
May 23, 2001, contains the following NOX RACT requirements:
(a) The NOX emissions from each of Boiler #6 and Boiler
#7 are not to exceed 0.20 pound per million Btu of heat input.
(b) If either of Boiler #6 or Boiler #7 has a seasonal capacity
factor greater than 15.0 percent, then GE Appliances is required, prior
to operating that boiler during any subsequent ozone control season, to
conduct a performance test for NOX for that boiler.
(c) Each boiler of the group Boiler #1, Boiler #2, Boiler #3,
Boiler #4, and Boiler #5 shall comply with one of the following
options: Option 1: The boiler shall not have a seasonal capacity factor
greater than 10.0 percent, or Option 2: The NOX emissions
from the boiler are not to exceed 0.70 pound per million Btu of heat
input. If one of these boilers has a seasonal capacity factor greater
than 10.0 percent, then GE Appliances is required, prior to operating
that boiler during any subsequent ozone control season, to conduct a
performance test for NOX.
(d) GE Appliances was required to submit to the APCDJC a written
description of daily activities and procedures that may be conducted by
the boiler operators to ensure optimum operating efficiency of the
boilers used during the ozone control season.
(e) GE Appliances is required to make a record of the type, heat
content, and amount of fuel combusted during each day of operation
during the ozone control season of each boiler identified above. GE
Appliances is required to keep a record identifying all deviations from
the requirements of this NOX RACT Plan and is required to
submit to the APCDJC a written report of all deviations that occurred
during the preceding semi-annual period as well as a summary of the
non-routine boiler
[[Page 33513]]
maintenance activities for Boiler #6 and the designated primary backup
boiler.
5. Kosmos Cement Company (Kosmos): The Board Order originally
submitted on November 12, 1999, amended and resubmitted on May 23,
2001, contains the following NOX RACT requirements:
(a) The NOX emissions from the cement kiln shall not
exceed 6.6 pounds per ton of clinker produced by the kiln, based upon a
rolling 30-day average.
(b) Kosmos is required to install, calibrate, maintain, and operate
a NOX CEMS for the cement kiln. Kosmos is required to keep
records and submit required CEMS reports.
(c) Kosmos is required to keep a record identifying all deviations
from these requirements and is required to submit a written report of
all deviations to the APCDJC.
6. Louisville Gas and Electric Company, Cane Run Generating Station
(LG&E/CRGS): The Board Order originally submitted on November 12, 1999,
amended and resubmitted on May 23, 2001, contains the following
NOX RACT requirements:
(a) The NOX emissions from each utility boiler are
required to be below the rate as specified in the following, based upon
a rolling 30-day average: Unit 4, 0.52 lb/mmBtu of heat input; Unit 5,
0.52 lb/mmBtu of heat input; and Unit 6, 0.47 lb/mmBtu of heat input.
(b) LG&E/CRGS is required to install, maintain, and operate a
NOX CEMS for each utility boiler and is required to keep
records and submit reports and other notifications as specified in the
approved Board Order.
(c) The GT-11 turbine is not to be operated for more than 500 hours
per calendar year. LG&E/CRGS is required to make a record of the hours
of operation during each day of operation and submit a quarterly report
summarizing the monthly and calendar-year-to-date hours of operation.
(d) LG&E/CRGS is required to keep a record identifying all
deviations and submit to the APCDJC a written report of all deviations
that occurred during the preceding calendar quarter.
7. Louisville Gas and Electric Company, Mill Creek Generating
Station (LG&E/MCGS): The Board Order originally submitted on November
12, 1999, amended and resubmitted on May 23, 2001, contains the
following NOX RACT requirements:
(a) The NOX emissions from each utility boiler are
required to be below the rate as specified in the following, based upon
a rolling 30-day average: Unit 1, 0.47 lb/mmBtu of heat input; Unit 2,
0.47 lb/mmBtu of heat input; Unit 3, 0.52 lb/mmBtu of heat input; and
Unit 4, 0.52 lb/mmBtu of heat input.
(b) LG&E/MCGS is required to install, maintain, and operate a
NOX CEMS for each utility boiler and shall keep records and
submit reports and other notifications as specified in the approved
Board Order.
(c) LG&E/MCGS is required to keep a record identifying all
deviations and submit to the APCDJC a written report of all deviations
that occurred during the preceding calendar quarter.
8. Louisville Medical Center Steam Plant (Medical Center): The
Board Order submitted on November 12, 1999, amended and resubmitted on
May 23, 2001, contains the following NOX RACT requirements:
(a) The NOX emissions from each of Boiler #2, Boiler #4,
and Boiler #5 while natural gas is combusted in that boiler are not to
exceed 0.20 pound per million Btu of heat input.
(b) The NOX emissions from each of Boiler #4, Boiler #5,
and Boiler #6 while coal is combusted in that boiler are not to exceed
0.50 pound per million Btu of heat input.
(c) The Medical Center is required to conduct a periodic
performance test for NOX for each of Boiler #2, Boiler #4,
Boiler #5, and Boiler #6.
(d) The Medical Center is required annually to perform and make a
record of non-routine boiler maintenance activities for Boiler #2,
Boiler #4, Boiler #5, and Boiler #6. Also, the Medical Center was
required to submit to the APCDJC a one-time written description of
daily activities and procedures that may be conducted by the boiler
operators to ensure optimum operating efficiency of Boiler #2, Boiler
#4, Boiler #5, and Boiler #6.
(e) Neither Boiler #1 nor Boiler #3 is to have a seasonal capacity
factor greater than 10.0 percent. Also, the Medical Center is required
to make a record of the type and amount of fuel combusted during each
day of operation of Boiler #1 or Boiler #3 during the period April 1
through October 31.
(f) The Medical Center is required to keep a record identifying all
deviations from the requirements of these NOX RACT
requirements and is required to submit to the District a written report
of all deviations.
9. Oxy Vinyls, LP (Oxy Vinyls): The Board Order originally
submitted on November 12, 1999, amended and resubmitted on May 23,
2001, contains the following NOX RACT requirements:
(a) The NOX emissions from Boiler #4 are not to exceed
0.60 pound per million Btu of heat input.
(b) The NOX emissions from Boiler #6 are not to exceed
0.70 pound per million Btu of heat input.
(c) Oxy Vinyls is required to conduct a periodic performance test
for NOX for each of Boiler #4 and Boiler #6.
(d) Oxy Vinyls is required to include in each related report to the
APCDJC a summary of non-routine boiler maintenance activities for
Boiler #4 and Boiler #6, and submit a one-time written description of
daily activities and procedures conducted by the boiler operators to
ensure optimum operating efficiency of Boiler #4 and Boiler #6.
(e) Boiler #1 is required to comply with the following
requirements: Boiler #1 is not to have an annual capacity factor
greater than 10.0 percent for any consecutive 12-month period, and
Boiler #1 is not to combust a fuel other than natural gas, distillate
oil, or residual oil.
(f) Oxy Vinyls is required to make a record of the type, heat
content, and amount of fuel combusted during each day of operation of
Boiler #1.
(g) The NOX emissions from Boiler #5 are not to exceed
0.20 pound per million Btu of heat input. Oxy Vinyls is required to
make a record of the type, heat content, and amount of fuel combusted
during each day of operation of Boiler #5.
(h) Oxy Vinyls is required to keep a record identifying all
deviations from the requirements of the NOX RACT Plan and is
required to submit to the APCDJC a written report of all deviations
that occurred during the preceding semi-annual period.
10. Rohm and Haas Company (Rohm & Haas): The Board Order submitted
on November 12, 1999, contains the following NOX RACT
requirements:
(a) When fossil fuel (natural gas or distillate fuel oil) alone is
combusted, the NOX emissions from Boiler No. 100 are not to
exceed 0.20 pounds per million Btu of heat input, based upon a 30-day
rolling average.
(b) When fossil fuel (natural gas or distillate fuel oil) and
chemical by-product waste are simultaneously combusted in Boiler No.
100, NOX emissions from the boiler are not to exceed 1.1
pounds per million Btu of heat input, based upon a 30-day rolling
average.
(c) Rohm & Haas was required to install, calibrate, maintain, and
operate a CEMS, and record the output of the system, for measuring
NOX emissions from Boiler No. 100 and submit the performance
evaluation of the CEMS for Boiler No. 100.
(d) Boiler No. 500 is required to either have an annual capacity
factor not greater than 10.0 percent for any
[[Page 33514]]
consecutive 12-month period and keep a record of the type and amount of
fuel combusted during each day of operation, or to not have the
NOX emissions exceed 0.20 pound per million Btu of heat
input, based upon a 30-day rolling average.
(e) Rohm & Haas is required to submit excess emission reports to
the APCDJC.
11. Texas Gas Transmission (Texas Gas): The Board Order submitted
on November 12, 1999, amended and resubmitted on May 23, 2001, contains
the following NOX RACT requirements:
(a) The NOX emissions from each of Internal Combustion
(IC) Engines #1 through #9 are not to exceed 3 grams per brake-
horsepower-hour (g/bhp-hr), according to the following schedule: four
IC engines by no later than November 15, 2001, and the other five IC
engines by no later than November 15, 2002. Until an individual IC
engine is subject to the 3 g/bhp-hr NOX emissions limit,
Texas Gas is required to restrict the operation of that IC engine to
less than or equal to 1350 brake horsepower during the time period of
May 1 through September 30 each year.
(b) Until October 1, 2004, the NOX emissions from
Turbine T-1 are not to exceed 100 pounds per hour, and the exhaust
temperature is not to exceed 1006 deg.F. On and after October 1, 2004,
the NOX emissions from Turbine T-1 is not to exceed 75 parts
per million by volume on a dry gas basis (ppmvd) corrected to 15
percent O2. Additionally, Texas Gas is required to submit a
construction permit application for Turbine T-1 by March 1, 2003, for
Dry Low NOX (DLN) controls and begin operation of DLN
controls by October 1, 2004.
(c) The NOX emissions from the Emergency Generator
Engine are not to exceed 2.6 grams per brake horsepower-hour.
(d) Texas Gas is required to monitor and record the operational
parameters for each IC engine, the Emergency Generator Engine, and
Turbine T-1, and conduct NOX performance tests as follows:
annually one IC engine from the group of IC Engines #1 through #6
(alternating such that each IC engine in this group has been tested in
a six-year period), annually one IC engine from the group of IC Engines
#7 through #9 (alternating such that each IC engine in this group has
been tested in a three-year period), and periodically, starting in
2005, Turbine T-1.
(e) Texas Gas is required to keep a record identifying all
deviations from the requirements of the NOX RACT Plan and is
required to submit to the APCDJC a written report of all deviations
that occurred during the preceding semi-annual period.
The EPA is proposing today to approve the eleven Board Orders
discussed above. These Board Orders are necessary to satisfy the
requirements of section 182(f) for the Kentucky's portion of the
Louisville area. Kentucky made a negative declaration in the
redesignation request that there were no major sources of
NOX in the nonattainment portions of Bullitt and Oldham
Counties.
Indiana submitted the required NOX RACT rules on August
26, 1996. In addition, on April 30, 1997, Indiana submitted a negative
declaration that there were no remaining major sources of
NOX in Clark and Floyd Counties. The EPA approved Indiana's
NOX revisions as meeting the requirements of section 182(f)
for the Indiana portion of the Louisville area on June 3, 1997 (62 FR
30253).
Final action approving all items needed to satisfy the requirements
identified above will enable Kentucky and Indiana to have a fully-
approved SIP under section 110(k), and to meet met all applicable
requirements under section 110 and part D.
Criterion (3): The Improvement in Air Quality Must Be Due to Permanent
and Enforceable Reductions in Emissions
The improvement in air quality must be due to permanent and
enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from the SIP, federal
measures, and other State-adopted measures. VOC emissions in the
Kentucky portion of the Louisville area were reduced by 4.93 tons per
day between 1996 and 1999. Regulatory programs which contributed to
these emission reductions include: rule effectiveness (APCDJC
Regulation 1.18); stage II gasoline vapor recovery and control (APCDJC
Regulation 6.40), VOC emission reduction (APCDJC Regulation 6.43),
performance standards for existing solid waste land fills (APCDJC
Regulation 6.45), an improved vehicle I/M program (APCDJC Regulations
8.01, 802, and 8.03), a ban on most types of open burning (401 KAR
63:005), federal rules for Architectural Coatings, Traffic Paints, Auto
Body Refinishing, and Commercial/Consumer Products; Kentucky and APCDJC
opt-in to the federally-enforceable reformulated gasoline program,
federal rules establishing maximum allowable Reid Vapor Pressure, and
the Federal Motor Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP).
In the Indiana portion of the nonattainment area, VOC emissions
were reduced by 4.4 tons per day between 1996 and 1999. Regulatory
programs contributing to the reductions in emissions in the Indiana
portion of the Louisville area include the volatile organic storage
tanks rule (326 IAC 8-9), the shipbuilding and ship repair rule (326
IAC 8-12), the wood furniture coating rule (326 IAC 8-11), the
automobile refinishing rule (326 IAC 8-10), the stage II gasoline vapor
recovery rule (326 IAC 8-4-6), lower Reid Vapor Pressure gasoline rule
(326 IAC 13-3), a ban on residential open burning (326 IAC 4-1),
installation of gas collection and combustion equipment at municipal
solid waste landfills (326 IAC 8-8), an improved vehicle I/M program
(326 IAC 13-1), a ridesharing program and, the installation of thermal
incinerators at a printing facility in Clark County. The 15 percent
plan and all of the reductions in the above list have been approved
into the SIP. Federal programs contributing to reductions include: the
FMVCP, the federal architectural and industrial maintenance coatings
rule, and VOC (326 IAC 8-7) and NOX RACT (326 IAC 10-1)
regulations.
Based on the listed programs, Kentucky and Indiana have shown that
the improvement in air quality is based on permanent and enforceable
reductions in emissions, thus meeting this requirement.
Criterion (4): The Area Must Have a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan
Meeting the Requirements of Section 175A
Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the elements of a maintenance
plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to attainment.
The maintenance plan is a SIP revision that provides for maintenance of
the relevant NAAQS in the area for at least 10 years after
redesignation. The Calcagni memorandum dated September 4, 1992,
provides additional guidance on the required content of a maintenance
plan. An ozone maintenance plan should address the following five
areas: the attainment emissions inventory, maintenance demonstration,
monitoring network, verification of continued attainment, and a
contingency plan. The attainment emissions inventory identifies the
emissions level in the area that is sufficient to attain the 1-hour
ozone NAAQS, based on emissions during a three year period which had no
monitored violations. Maintenance is demonstrated by showing that
future emissions will not exceed the level established by the
attainment inventory. Provisions for continued operation of an
appropriate air quality monitoring network are to be included in the
maintenance plan. The State must show how it will track and verify the
progress
[[Page 33515]]
of the maintenance plan. Finally, the maintenance plan must include a
list of potential contingency measures which ensure prompt correction
of any violation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.
Kentucky and Indiana, in their submittals, included their 1999
emissions inventories as their attainment year inventories. Both
Kentucky's and Indiana's maintenance plans provided emissions estimates
from 1999 to 2012 for VOCs and NOX, and indicate that these
emissions in the Louisville area are projected to decrease from 1999
levels. Considering only the projected emissions, the results of this
analysis show that the area is expected to maintain the air quality
standard for at least 10 years into the future after redesignation.
However, as shown in tables 7 and 8, Kentucky and Indiana also chose to
include a safety margin, in addition to projected emissions, for both
the VOC and NOX MVEBs.
The transportation conformity regulations allow for a safety margin
to be allocated to a MVEB to the extent that the projected emissions
are less than the attainment year emissions. However, when the VOC
safety margin calculated by the States is included in the 2012
projections in these draft plans, the 2012 projected VOC emissions will
exceed the 1999 emissions by 2.76 tons/day. The total projected 2012
emissions, taking the safety margin into account, total 148.40 tons/
day, or 2.76 tons/day more than the 1999 emissions. Therefore, the
draft maintenance plans must be revised to control VOC emissions such
that the 2012 projected inventories, including the safety margin being
used for the VOC MVEB, are 2.76 tons/day less than shown in the draft
maintenance plans. To remedy this issue, Indiana submitted a letter on
May 29, 2001, and Kentucky submitted a letter on May 17, 2001,
indicating their intent to revise the draft maintenance plans so that
the final maintenance plans will include a VOC MVEB of 48.17 tons/day,
2.76 tons/day less than the MVEB included in the draft. For a more
detailed discussion of the revision to the VOC MVEB, please see the
following section on MVEBs. EPA is proposing to approve the maintenance
plan as long as the final plan is revised so that the projected 2012
VOC emissions, including the VOC MVEB safety margin, do not exceed the
1999 attainment year emissions.
Table 3 and Table 4 provide the emissions summary for VOCs and
NOX for the Indiana portion and Table 5 and Table 6 provide
the emission summary for VOCs and NOX for the Kentucky
portion of the Louisville area. Table 7 and Table 8, respectively,
provide the emissions summary for VOCs and NOX for the
entire Louisville area.
Table 3.--VOC Emissions in Tons Per Summer Day for Indiana Counties
(Clark and Floyd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999 2005 2012
attainment projected projected
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point................................. 4.16 4.49 4.88
Area.................................. 17.67 17.11 18.12
Mobile................................ 9.80 8.58 8.81
Non-Highway........................... 7.36 7.70 8.09
---------------------------------
Totals.............................. 38.99 37.88 39.90
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4.--NOX Emissions in Tons Per Summer Day for Indiana Counties
(Clark and Floyd)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999 2005 2012
attainment projected projected
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point................................. 26.04 12.35 12.38
Area.................................. 8.39 8.78 9.23
Mobile................................ 19.33 16.66 12.82
Non-Highway........................... 6.25 6.46 6.71
---------------------------------
Totals.............................. 60.01 44.25 41.15
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 5.--VOC Emissions in Tons Per Summer Day for Kentucky Counties (Jefferson, and Nonattainment Portions of Bullitt and Oldham)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999 attainment 2002 projected 2005 projected 2008 projected 2012 projected
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point.................................................... 31.52 31.93 31.93 31.83 31.52
Area..................................................... 18.94 19.10 19.27 19.47 19.64
Mobile................................................... 41.13 36.38 30.50 28.02 27.23
Non-Highway.............................................. 15.07 15.12 15.15 15.20 15.22
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals............................................. 106.66 102.53 96.85 94.52 93.61
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 6.--NOX Emissions in Tons Per Summer Day for Kentucky Counties (Jefferson, and Nonattainment Portions of Bullitt and Oldham)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1999 attainment 2002 projected 2005 projected 2008 projected 2012 projected
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point.................................................... 116.86 99.08 46.37 47.78 47.99
Area..................................................... 0.81 0.81 0.82 0.82 0.82
Mobile................................................... 73.60 67.70 59.22 52.64 44.19
Non-Highway.............................................. 19.95 19.87 19.74 19.63 19.41
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals............................................. 211.22 187.46 126.15 120.87 112.41
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 7.--VOC Emissions in Tons Per Summer Day for the Entire Louisville Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012 projected
(including
States'
Total VOC (tons/day) 1999 attainment 2005 projected 2012 projected calculated 14.89
mobile source
``safety
margin'')
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point............................... 35.68 36.42 36.40 36.40
Area................................ 36.61 36.38 37.76 37.76
Mobile.............................. 50.93 39.08 36.04 50.93
[[Page 33516]]
Non-Highway......................... 22.43 22.85 23.31 23.31
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals........................ 145.65 134.73 133.51 148.40
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 8.--NOX Emissions in Tons Per Summer Day for the Entire Louisville area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012 projected
(including
States'
Total NOX (tons/day) 1999 attainment 2005 projected 2012 projected calculated 35.92
mobile source
``safety
margin'')
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point............................... 142.90 58.72 60.37 60.37
Area................................ 9.20 9.60 10.05 10.05
Mobile.............................. 92.93 75.88 57.01 92.93
Non-Highway......................... 26.20 26.20 26.12 26.12
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals........................ 271.23 170.40 \1\ 153.56 \1\ 189.48
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Slight differences due to rounding.
Kentucky and Indiana have addressed the maintenance plan
requirements for monitoring and emissions inventories. Both have
committed to continue the operation of the monitors in the area in
accordance with 40 CFR Part 58. Kentucky and Indiana will accomplish
verification of continued attainment by regularly updating the
emissions inventory for the area.
The contingency plan for the Kentucky portion of the Louisville
area contains four major components: a commitment to submit a revised
plan eight years after redesignation, attainment tracking, triggers to
start the implementation of the contingency measures, and contingency
measures to be implemented in the event that a trigger is activated.
Section 175A(b) of the CAA requires States to submit a revision of the
SIP eight years after the original redesignation request is approved to
provide for maintenance of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS for an additional ten
years following the first ten-year period. Kentucky and Indiana have
committed to submit the revision to the SIP eight years after
redesignation of the Louisville area. Attainment tracking will include
triennial reviews of actual emissions for the redesignated areas which
will be performed using the latest emission factors, models, and
methodologies. Kentucky will begin the triennial assessments in 2003
for calendar year 2002. At the time of this periodic inventory,
Kentucky will review the assumptions made for the purpose of the
maintenance demonstration concerning projected growth of activity
levels. If any of these assumptions appear to have changed
substantially, Kentucky will re-project the emissions.
In the event of a monitored violation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in
the Louisville area, Kentucky commits to adopt within nine months, and
implement the regulatory programs within 18 months, one or more of the
following contingency measures to re-attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS:
1. A program to require additional emission reductions at
stationary sources, either for specific types of processes or an
across-the-board reduction for the larger stationary sources.
2. More restrictive new source review requirements.
3. A more rigorous vehicle emissions testing program or an increase
the area subject to the current programs.
4. Restriction of certain roads or lanes to, or construction of
such roads or lanes for use by, passenger buses or high-occupancy
vehicles.
5. Trip-reduction ordinances.
6. Employer-based transportation management plans, including
incentives.
7. Programs to limit or restrict vehicle use in downtown areas, or
other areas of emission concentration, particularly during periods of
peak use.
8. Programs for new construction and major reconstructions of paths
or tracks for use by pedestrians or by non-motorized vehicles when
economically feasible and in the public interest.
Kentucky also reserves the right to implement other contingency
measures if new control programs should be developed and deemed more
advantageous for the area. In addition, the occurrence of either of the
following two events will trigger Kentucky to evaluate existing control
measures to see if any further emission reduction measures should be
implemented: (1) if exceedances of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS are measured
in any portion of the Louisville area, or (2) if a periodic emission
inventory update reveals excessive or unanticipated growth greater than
10 percent in ozone precursor emissions.
The contingency plan for the Indiana portion of the Louisville area
contains four major components: a commitment to submit a revised plan
eight years after redesignation, attainment tracking, triggers to start
the implementation of the contingency measures, and contingency
measures to be implemented in the event that a trigger is activated.
Attainment tracking will include triennial reviews of actual emissions
for the redesignated areas which will be performed using the latest
emission factors, models, and methodologies. Indiana will begin the
triennial assessments in 2003 for calendar year 2002. At the time of
this periodic inventory, Indiana will review the assumptions made for
the purpose of the maintenance demonstration concerning projected
growth of activity levels. If any of these assumptions appear to have
changed substantially, then emissions will be re-projected.
Indiana used a two-tiered approach in its maintenance plan to
determine the appropriate level of response to ensure
[[Page 33517]]
maintenance of the NAAQS. As specified in the submittal, a ``Level
Two'' response is implemented in the event that an ozone monitor
records an ozone concentration of 0.12 ppm or more, or the level of VOC
or NOX for the entire Louisville area increases above the
1999 baseline. In the case of one of these triggers, a Level Two
response would consist of a study to determine whether the noted trends
are likely to continue and, if so, the control measures necessary to
reverse the trend. Implementation of these Level Two controls would
take place as expeditiously as possible, and in no case later than 18
months after Indiana is aware of a trigger being exceeded. A Level One
response is activated in the event of a monitored violation of the 1-
hour ozone NAAQS in the Louisville area. With a violation, Indiana
commits to implement measures within 18 months. Indiana will select
contingency measures from the following list, or any other measure
deemed appropriate and effective at that time:
1. Reformulated gasoline program.
2. Broader geographic applicability of existing measures.
3. Tightening of RACT on existing sources covered by EPA Control
Techniques Guidelines issued in response to the CAA.
4. Application of RACT to smaller existing sources.
5. A fully-enhanced I/M program.
6. One or more transportation control measures sufficient to
achieve at least 0.5 percent reduction in actual area-wide VOC
emissions. Transportation measures will be selected from the following,
based upon the factors listed above after consultation with affected
local governments:
(a) Trip reduction programs, including, but not limited to,
employer-based transportation management plans, area-wide rideshare
programs, work schedule changes, and telecommuting.
(b) Transit improvements.
(c) Traffic flow improvements.
(d) Other heretofore ``undiscovered'' transportation measures not
yet in widespread use.
7. Alternative fuels programs for fleet vehicle operations.
8. Controls on consumer products consistent with those adopted
elsewhere in the United States.
9. VOC or NOX emission offsets for new and modified
major sources.
10. VOC or NOX emission offsets for new and modified
minor sources.
11. An increase in the ratio of emission offsets required for new
sources.
12. VOC or NOX controls on new minor sources (less than
100 tons).
Kentucky's and Indiana's submittals adequately address the five
basic components which comprise a maintenance plan (attainment
inventory, maintenance demonstration, monitoring network, verification
of continued attainment, and a contingency plan) and, therefore,
satisfy the maintenance plan requirement.
Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets
In addition to meeting the criteria for redesignation, as a control
strategy SIP, the maintenance plans must contain motor vehicle
emissions budgets that, in conjunction with emissions from all other
sources, are consistent with attainment and maintenance. Kentucky,
Indiana, and APCDJC developed MVEBs for the maintenance plan year of
2012. The MVEBs are for both VOC and NOX as precursors to
ozone formation and would be applicable for the entire Louisville area
upon the effective date of a final approval or a MVEB adequacy finding.
In order to develop the MVEBs, motor vehicle emissions were
projected to 2012 using the MOBILE5b emission factor model and
associated modeling tools. The transportation conformity regulations
also allow for a safety margin to be allocated to a MVEB to the extent
that the total projected emissions are less than the total attainment
year emissions. The States calculated draft safety margins for both
NOX and VOC using a slightly different methodology than
indicated in the definition of a safety margin in the conformity rule.
The States calculated the difference between the 1999 attainment year
on-road mobile source inventory and the 2012 projected on-road mobile
source emissions. This methodology produces an acceptable
NOX MVEB. However, as discussed above, the 2012 projected
VOC emissions, including the draft VOC MVEB, exceed the 1999 attainment
year VOC emissions. The States' draft maintenance plan provides for a
VOC MVEB of 50.93 tons/day (the 2012 projected motor vehicle emissions,
36.04 tons/day, plus a safety margin of 14.89 tons/day). Since this
MVEB, along with the other emissions projected for 2012, would exceed
the 1999 emissions, the maintenance plans must be revised prior to
final submission. In response to this concern, Kentucky and Indiana
submitted letters indicating their intent to revise the draft
maintenance plans so that the final maintenance plans will include a
VOC MVEB of 48.17 tons/day, 2.76 tons/day less than the MVEB included
in the draft. This MVEB is comprised of the 2012 projected motor
vehicle emissions, 36.04 tons/day, and a safety margin of 12.13 tons/
day (2.76 tons/day less than the draft safety margin). Based on this
change that the States intend to make in their final submittals, EPA is
proposing to approve the maintenance plans and MVEBs as long as the
final plan is revised to include a VOC MVEB of no more than 48.17 tons/
day.
Table 9.--Proposed 2012 MVEB for the Louisville Nonattainment Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2012 projected State draft State draft 2012
Pollutant emissions (tons/ safety margin projected MVEB Allowable safety Allowable 2012
day) (tons/day) (tons/day) margin (tons/day) MVEB (tons/day)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOC...................................................... 36.04 14.89 50.93 12.13 48.17
NOX...................................................... 57.01 35.92 92.93 35.92 92.93
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
One of the control programs the States considered in developing
their MVEBs is the Tier II emission standards for vehicles and the low
sulfur gasoline (Tier II/Low Sulfur) reductions that will be
implemented beginning in 2004. The Tier II/Low Sulfur standards were
promulgated as federal rules February 10, 2000 (65 FR 6697). The rules
require more stringent emission limitations for vehicles on a grams per
mile of NOX basis. The rules also require that the sulfur
levels in gasoline be significantly less than current levels.
The States estimated the reduction provided by the Tier II/Low
Sulfur gasoline program by using ``Information Sheet #8 Tier II
Benefits Using MOBILE 5b'', an EPA-supplied information sheet, to
adjust the MOBILE5b emission factors for 2012. This information sheet
notes that users need to be aware of the serious limitations of the
information in certain situations. The model used to derive the
estimates of Tier II reductions incorporates changes proposed for
MOBILE6 that are unrelated to the Tier
[[Page 33518]]
II program and, as a result, produces baseline emissions estimates that
are different from those produced by MOBILE5. In the absence of
MOBILE6, users will apply these reductions to baseline emissions
calculated using versions of MOBILE5. As a result, the final
inventories estimated using this method may be substantially different
from what will be estimated once MOBILE6 becomes available.
For this reason, when this information sheet is used to estimate
the reductions achieved by the Tier II/Low Sulfur program, EPA has
required a commitment from affected areas that the MVEBs will be
recalculated after the release of MOBILE6. This commitment is discussed
in more detail in a November 8, 1999, memorandum entitled ``1-Hour
Ozone Attainment Demonstrations and Tier 2/Sulfur Rulemaking'' from
Lydia N. Wegman, Director, Air Quality Strategies and Standards
Division, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards and Merrylin
Zaw-Mon, Director, Fuels and Energy Division, Office of Mobile Sources
to EPA Regions I--VI Air Directors. This memorandum requires areas that
rely in whole or in part on the Tier II/Low Sulfur program emission
reductions to help demonstrate attainment to commit to recalculate and
resubmit MVEBs, as a formal SIP revision, within 1 year after the
release of MOBILE6. Subsequently, in a July 28, 2000 Federal Register
action (65 FR 46383), EPA proposed to provide 1-hour ozone
nonattainment areas classified as serious and severe an option, under
which States could commit to revise their MVEBs 2 years following the
release of MOBILE6, provided that conformity is not determined without
adequate MOBILE6 SIP MVEBs during the second year.
While this memorandum and Federal Register proposal specifically
address attainment demonstrations for the 1-hour ozone nonattainment
areas classified as serious and severe, EPA believes that the
commitment is applicable to any area that has estimated the reductions
from the Tier II/Low Sulfur program and is depending on those
reductions for attainment or maintenance. Indiana and Kentucky did not
include this commitment in their draft submittal but have submitted
letters stating their intent to include, in their final documents, a
commitment to revise their MVEBs 2 years following the release of
MOBILE6, recognizing that conformity may not be determined without
adequate MOBILE6 SIP MVEBs during the second year. EPA can only take
final approval action on this redesignation request if the States make
this commitment in their final submittals. If this commitment is made,
but either State fails to meet it, the EPA could make a finding of
failure to implement the SIP, which would start a sanctions clock under
CAA section 179.
Indiana's and Kentucky's letters also indicate that they intend to
revise the VOC MVEB, reducing the safety margin, so that the 2012
projected emission inventory is less than the 1999 attainment year.
Provided the States appropriately revise the VOC MVEB and submit
enforceable commitments to revise their MVEBs using MOBILE6, the EPA is
proposing to approve their maintenance plans, redesignation requests
and MVEBs.
EPA is also proposing to clarify what will occur if the EPA
finalizes approval of these MVEBs based on the States' commitments to
revise the budgets in the future. If this occurs, the approved SIP
MVEBs will apply for conformity purposes only until the revised MVEBs
have been submitted and the EPA has found the submitted MVEBs to be
adequate for conformity purposes.
In other words, when the States fulfill their commitment to submit
revised MVEBs, if the EPA finds those MVEBs to be adequate for
conformity purposes, those revised MVEBs will apply for conformity
purposes as soon as affirmative adequacy findings are effective.
Provided these revised MVEBs are submitted as revisions to the
maintenance plans' 2012 MVEBs, they would also replace the MVEBs in the
approved maintenance plans at the time that the affirmative adequacy
findings are effective.
Since the EPA is proposing to approve the MVEBs that were submitted
with their redesignation request only because the States have committed
to revise these MVEBs, EPA wants its approval of these MVEBs to last
only until adequate revised MVEBs are submitted pursuant to the
commitments. EPA believes the revised MVEBs should apply as soon as
they are found adequate. EPA does not believe it is necessary to wait
until they have been approved as revisions to the maintenance plan.
This is because EPA knows now that if the revised MVEBs are found
adequate, they will be more appropriate than the originally approved
budgets for conformity purposes.
EPA also recognizes that an accurate estimate of the benefits of
the Tier II/Low Sulfur program cannot be made until the MOBILE6 model
is released. EPA is proposing to approve MVEBs based on interim
approximations of Tier II/Low Sulfur benefits only because the States
are committing to recalculate the MVEBs using MOBILE6 in a timely
fashion. According to this proposal, revised MVEBs could be used for
conformity after the EPA has completed the adequacy review process,
provided the submitted MVEBs are deemed adequate.
If revised MVEBs raise issues about the sufficiency of the
maintenance demonstration, EPA will work with the States on a case-by-
case basis. If the revised MVEBs show that MVEBs are lower than EPA is
proposing to approve today, a reassessment of the maintenance plans
must be done before the States can reallocate any of the emission
reductions or assign them to an MVEB as a safety margin. In other
words, the States must assess how their original maintenance plan is
impacted by using MOBILE6 vs. MOBILE5 before they reallocate any
apparent motor vehicle emission reductions resulting from the use of
MOBILE6.
This Federal Register action does not propose any change to the
existing transportation conformity rule or to the way it is normally
implemented with respect to other submitted and approved SIPs, which do
not contain commitments to revise the MVEBs.
F. Where Is the Public Record and Where Do I Send Comments?
The official record for this proposed rule has been established
under SIP submittal numbers KY-126 and IN-121-2 and is located at the
addresses in the ADDRESSES section at the beginning of this document.
The addresses for sending comments are also provided in the ADDRESSES
section at the beginning of this document.
Public comments are solicited on the EPA's proposed rulemaking
action. Public comments received in writing by July 23, 2001 will be
considered in the development of the EPA's final rulemaking action.
III. Administrative Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. This 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.). Because this proposed rule to approve pre-existing requirements
under State law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty
beyond that required by State law,
[[Page 33519]]
it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4). This proposed rule also does not have a
substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it 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), because it
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 CAA. This proposed rule
also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23,
1997), because it is not economically significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve State
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. In this
context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the State
to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), the EPA has no authority to
disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for the EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. As required by section 3 of
Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing this
proposed rule, the EPA has taken the necessary steps to eliminate
drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation, and
provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct. EPA has complied
with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by examining
the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the ``Attorney
General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk and
Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the executive order.
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.).
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile
organic compounds.
40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q.
Dated: June 7, 2001.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
Dated: June 14, 2001.
David A. Ullrich,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 01-15748 Filed 6-21-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P