[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 197 (Thursday, October 13, 2005)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 59657-59664]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-20418]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[R01-OAR-2005-CT-0003; A-1-FRL-7979-8]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Connecticut; Redesignation of City of New Haven PM10
Nonattainment Area to Attainment and Approval of the Limited
Maintenance Plan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The EPA is approving a State Implementation Plan (SIP)
revision submitted by the State of Connecticut. This revision approves
the Limited Maintenance Plan (LMP) for the New Haven PM10
nonattainment area (New Haven NAA) in the State of Connecticut and
grants a request by the State to redesignate the New Haven NAA to
attainment for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for
particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a
nominal 10 micrometers (PM10). EPA is approving this
redesignation and LMP because Connecticut has met the applicable
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA).
DATES: This direct final rule will be effective December 12, 2005,
unless EPA receives adverse comments by November 14, 2005. If adverse
comments are received, EPA will publish a timely withdrawal of the
direct final rule in the Federal Register informing the public that the
rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Regional Material in
EDocket (RME) ID Number R01-OAR-2005-CT-0003 by one of the following
methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
2. Agency Web site: http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/ Regional Material
in EDocket (RME), EPA's electronic public docket and comment system, is
EPA's preferred method for receiving comments. Once in the system,
select ``quick search,'' then key in the appropriate RME Docket
identification number. Follow the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
3. E-mail: [email protected].
4. Fax: (617) 918-1661.
5. Mail: ``RME ID Number R01-OAR-2005-CT-0003'', David Conroy, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One
Congress Street, Suite 1100 (mail code CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023.
6. Hand Delivery or Courier. Deliver your comments to: David
Conroy, Air Programs Branch Chief, Office of Ecosystem Protection, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional Office, One
Congress Street, 11th floor, (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours
of operation. The Regional Office's official hours of business are
Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding Federal holidays.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Regional Material in EDocket
(RME) ID Number R01-OAR-2005-CT-0003. EPA's policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public docket without change and may
be made available online at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, including
any
[[Page 59658]]
personal information provided, unless the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit
through Regional Material in EDocket (RME), regulations.gov, or e-mail,
information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected. The EPA
RME Web site and the federal regulations.gov Web site are ``anonymous
access'' systems, which means EPA will not know your identity or
contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through RME
or regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket
and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic
comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact
information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you
submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties
and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the
Regional Material in EDocket (RME) index at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly
available, i.e., CBI or other information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted
material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available
only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are
available either electronically in RME or in hard copy at the Office of
Ecosystem Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New
England Regional Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100, Boston, MA.
EPA requests that if at all possible, you contact the contact listed in
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your
inspection. The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday
through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30 excluding federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alison C. Simcox, Air Quality Planning
Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA New England Regional
Office, One Congress Street, Suite 1100 (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114-2023,
telephone number (617) 918-1684, fax number (617) 918-0684, e-mail
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. General Information
A. How Can I Get Copies of This Document and Other Related Information?
In addition to the publicly available docket materials available
for inspection electronically in Regional Material in EDocket, and the
hard copy available at the Regional Office, which are identified in the
ADDRESSES section above, copies of the State submittal and EPA's
technical support document are also available for public inspection
during normal business hours, by appointment at the Bureau of Air
Management, Department of Environmental Protection, State Office
Building, 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06106-1630.
II. Rulemaking Information
Organization of this document. The following outline is provided to
aid in locating information in this preamble.
A. Background and Purpose
B. Summary of Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan
C. Review of the Connecticut Submittal Addressing the Requirements
for Redesignation and Limited Maintenance Plans
A. Background and Purpose
On the date of enactment of the CAA Amendments of 1990, PM10 areas
meeting the qualifications of Section 107(d)(4)(B) of the CAA were
designated nonattainment by operation of law. [See generally, 42 U.S.C.
7407(d)(4)(B).] These areas included all former Group I areas and any
other areas violating the PM10 standards prior to January 1, 1989. On
October 31, 1990 (55 FR 45799), EPA redefined a Group I area for
Connecticut as the City of New Haven; the remainder of the State was
designated as Group III (areas with a strong likelihood of attaining
the PM10 NAAQS). Subsequently, after enactment of the CAA on
November 15, 1990, New Haven was designated moderate nonattainment for
PM10 in 56 FR 11101 (March 15, 1991).
The air quality in attainment or unclassifiable areas (Groups II
and III) are regulated under the prevention of significant
deterioration (PSD) program, under which an area's air quality is not
allowed to deteriorate beyond prescribed maximum allowable increases in
pollutant concentrations (i.e., increments). On February 27, 2003, EPA
approved revisions to Connecticut's SIP that implement CAA requirements
regarding the PSD program. See 68 FR 9009.
The PSD program, however, does not apply to nonattainment areas.
During the period that New Haven has been classified as nonattainment
for PM10, new major sources or major modifications proposing
to locate in New Haven have been required to comply with the
nonattainment provisions of Subsection 22a-174-3(l) (Permits
Requirements for Non-attainment Areas) of the Regulations of
Connecticut State Agencies.
On June 23, 2005, the State of Connecticut formally submitted a
redesignation request entitled ``Redesignation to Attainment and
Limited Maintenance Plan for the City of New Haven PM10
Nonattainment Area'' as a SIP revision. Upon the effective date of
today's action, the PM10 designation status for the City of
New Haven under 40 CFR part 81 will be revised to attainment, and
Connecticut's PSD program will become applicable in the New Haven
maintenance area. Sections below describe how Connecticut has
adequately addressed all of the requirements of the CAA for
redesignation of New Haven to attainment, and has qualified for use of
a LMP for the first 10-year period (2006 to 2015).
B. Summary of Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan
(1) How Can a Nonattainment Area Be Redesignated to Attainment?
Nonattainment areas can be redesignated to attainment after the
area has measured air quality data showing it has attained the NAAQS
and when certain planning requirements are met. Section 107(d)(3)(E) of
the CAA provides the criteria for redesignation. These criteria are
further clarified in a policy and guidance memorandum from John
Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, EPA Office of Air
Quality Planning and Standards dated September 4, 1992, Procedures for
Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment. The criteria
for redesignation are:
(a) The Administrator determines that the area has attained the
applicable NAAQS;
(b) The Administrator has fully approved the applicable SIP for
the area under section 110(k) of the CAA;
(c) The State containing the area has met all requirements
applicable to the area under Section 110 and part D of the CAA;
(d) The Administrator determines that the improvement in air
quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions
resulting from implementation of the applicable implementation plan,
applicable Federal air pollution control regulations, and other
permanent and enforceable reductions; and
[[Page 59659]]
(e) The Administrator has fully approved a maintenance plan for
the area as meeting the requirements of section 175A of the CAA.
(2) What Is the LMP Option for PM10 Nonattainment Areas
Seeking Redesignation to Attainment, and How Can an Area Qualify for
This Option?
On August 9, 2001, EPA issued guidance on streamlined maintenance
plan provisions for certain moderate PM10 nonattainment
areas seeking redesignation to attainment (Memo from Lydia Wegman,
Director, Air Quality Standards and Strategies Division, entitled
``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Moderate PM10
Nonattainment Areas'', hereafter called ``the Wegman memo''). The
policy described in this guidance includes a statistical demonstration
that areas meeting certain air quality criteria will, with a high
degree of probability, maintain the standard 10 years into the future.
Thus, EPA has already provided the maintenance demonstration for areas
that meet the air quality criteria outlined in the policy. It follows
that future-year emission inventories for these areas and some of the
standard analyses to determine transportation conformity with the SIP
are no longer necessary.
To qualify for the LMP option, the area should have attained the
PM10 NAAQS and the average PM10 design values for
the area, based upon the most recent five years of air quality data at
all monitors in the area, should be at or below the LMP requirement of
98 [mu]g/m\3\ for the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS and 40 [mu]g/m\3\
for the annual PM10 NAAQS. If an area cannot meet this test,
it still qualifies for the LMP option if the average design values
(ADVs) of a site are less than their respective site-specific critical
design value (CDV). A CDV is the highest possible ADV at which there is
a less than 10 percent risk of future violation of the PM10
NAAQS. At least five years of data from a monitoring site are required
to calculate the site's CDV. Given sufficient site data, a CDV can be
found by using a mathematical relationship between the NAAQS, ADV,
standard deviation of past design values (a measure of their
variability over time), and a selected risk factor (in this case, a 10
percent risk of violation of the PM10 NAAQS). For further
details about the CDV calculation method, see Attachment A of the
Wegman memo. Section 2.2 of the Connecticut SIP submittal shows
calculations used to derive the CDV for the Stiles Street monitoring
site in New Haven, which is the site currently used to assess whether
the city is in attainment with the PM10 NAAQS.
The CDV test was used to determine whether the New Haven NAA
qualifies for the LMP option because the 2003 24-hour ADVs for the
PM10 Federal Equivalent Method (FEM) monitor at the Stiles
Street site in New Haven exceeded 98 [mu]g/m\3\ for the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS. A CDV of 124 [mu]g/m\3\ for the 24-hour standard
was calculated for the Stiles Street site using over five years of data
from the FEM monitor and over 10 years of data from a Federal Reference
Method (FRM) monitor. All 24-hour ADVs for the Stiles Street site,
including the ADV for 2003, have remained below this CDV, indicating a
very low probability (less than 1 in 10 chance) of exceeding the 24-
hour PM10 NAAQS in the future. Therefore, this site passes
the CDV test and qualifies for the LMP option.
In addition to meeting design value criteria, an area qualifying
for the LMP option should expect only limited growth in on-road motor
vehicle PM10 emissions (including fugitive dust) and should
pass a motor vehicle regional emissions analysis test designed to show
that expected growth in vehicle miles traveled will not cause the area
to exceed the margin of safety for the relevant PM10
standard for a given area (in this case, the CDV for the 24-hour
PM10 NAAQS at the Stiles Street site). In addition to
meeting these requirements, the LMP must include an attainment-year
emission inventory, assurance of continued operation of an EPA-approved
air quality monitoring network, and contingency provisions (See pages
A-6 and A-7 of the Wegman memo). Sections below describe how the
Connecticut LMP meets each of these requirements.
(3) How Is Conformity Treated Under the LMP Option?
The transportation conformity rule (40 CFR parts 51 and 93) and the
general conformity rule (40 CFR parts 51 and 93) apply to nonattainment
areas and maintenance areas covered by an approved maintenance plan.
Under either conformity rule, an acceptable method of demonstrating
that a federal action conforms to the applicable SIP is to demonstrate
that expected emissions from planned actions are consistent with the
emissions budget for the area. While EPA's LMP policy does not exempt
an area from the need to affirm conformity, it explains that the area
may demonstrate conformity without submitting an emissions budget.
Emissions budgets in LMP areas are treated as essentially not
constraining for the length of the maintenance period because it is
unreasonable to expect that an area satisfying the LMP criteria will
experience so much growth during that period of time that a violation
of the PM10 NAAQS would result.
For transportation conformity purposes, EPA concludes that, as long
as the area qualifies for the LMP option, emissions in New Haven need
not be capped for the maintenance period and, therefore, a regional
emissions analysis is not required. Similarly, Federal actions subject
to the general conformity rule could be considered to satisfy the
``budget test'' specified in Sec. 93.158 (a)(5)(i)(A) of the rule for
the same reasons that the budgets are essentially considered to be
unlimited.
C. Review of the Connecticut Submittal Addressing the Requirements for
Redesignation and Limited Maintenance Plans
(1) Has the State Demonstrated That the New Haven NAA Has Attained the
Applicable NAAQS?
States must demonstrate that an area has attained the
PM10 NAAQS through analysis of ambient air quality data from
an ambient air monitoring network representing peak PM10
concentrations. The data should be stored in the EPA Air Quality System
(AQS) database.
The 24-hour PM10 NAAQS is 150 [mu]g/m\3\. An area has
attained the 24-hour standard when the average number of expected
exceedances per year is less than or equal to one when averaged over a
three-year period (40 CFR 50.6). To make this determination, three
consecutive years of complete ambient air quality data must be
collected in accordance with federal requirements (40 CFR part 58,
including appendices). Table 1 in the Connecticut SIP submittal lists
24-hour design values for 1999 through 2003. The 24-hour design value
is below 150 [mu]g/m\3\ for each of these years at all PM10
monitoring sites in Connecticut (range: 31-107 [mu]g/m\3\). There have
been no exceedances of the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS in the New
Haven NAA during the past five years. Thus, currently, the expected
number of days exceeding the 24-hour standard is zero, and the New
Haven NAA has attained the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS.
The annual PM10 NAAQS is 50 [mu]g/m\3\. To determine
attainment at a monitoring site, the standard is compared to the
expected annual average, which is calculated by averaging the
arithmetic average from the previous three years. Table 2 in the
Connecticut SIP submittal lists annual average design values for 1999
through 2003. These values are below 50 [mu]g/m\3\ for each of these
years at all PM10 monitoring sites in
[[Page 59660]]
Connecticut (range: 11-37 [mu]g/m\3\). Thus, the three year annual
average is below 50 [mu]g/m\3\, and the New Haven NAA has attained the
annual PM10 NAAQS.
(2) Does the New Haven NAA Have a Fully Approved SIP Under Section
110(k) of the Clean Air Act?
To qualify for redesignation, the SIP for the area must be fully
approved under section 110(k) of the CAA, and must satisfy all
requirements that apply to the area. EPA approved Connecticut's
PM10 Attainment Plan for New Haven on September 11, 1995 (60
FR 47076). Connecticut's PM10 attainment plan demonstrated
that the implementation of reasonably available control technology and
reasonably available control measures (RACT/RACM), as embodied in seven
consent orders, is sufficient to attain and maintain the
PM10 NAAQS. Thus, the area has a fully approved
nonattainment area SIP under section 110(k) of the CAA.
(3) Has the State Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and
Part D of the Clean Air Act?
Section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) of the CAA requires that a state containing
a nonattainment area must meet all applicable requirements under
section 110 and Part D of the CAA. EPA interprets this to mean the
state must meet all requirements that applied to the area prior to, and
at the time of, the submission of a complete redesignation request. The
following is a summary of how Connecticut meets these requirements.
(a) Clean Air Act Section 110 Requirements
Section 110(a)(2) of the CAA contains general requirements for
state implementation plans. These requirements include, but are not
limited to, 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, EPA's review of the
Connecticut SIP shows that the State has satisfied all requirements
under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA.
(b) Part D Requirements
Part D contains general requirements applicable to all areas
designated nonattainment. The general requirements are followed by a
series of subparts specific to each pollutant. All PM10
nonattainment areas must meet the general provisions of Subpart 1 and
the specific PM10 provisions in Subpart 4, ``Additional
Provisions for Particulate Matter Nonattainment Areas.'' The following
paragraphs discuss these requirements as they apply to the New Haven
area.
(c) Subpart 1, Section 172(c)
Subpart 1, section 172(c) contains general requirements for
nonattainment area plans. A thorough discussion of these requirements
may be found in the General Preamble. See 57 FR 13538 (April 16, 1992).
The requirements for reasonable further progress and other measures
needed for attainment were satisfied with the approved PM10 Attainment
Plan for New Haven. See 60 FR 47076 (September 11, 1995).
(d) Section 172(c)(3)--Emissions Inventory
Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires a comprehensive, accurate,
current inventory of actual emissions from all sources in the New Haven
PM10 NAA. The PM10 Attainment Plan for New Haven
that was approved by EPA in 1995 (60 FR 47076) included an emissions
inventory for base year 1990. As described in the Attainment Plan, CT
DEP determined that the PM10 nonattainment problem in New
Haven was a local problem in the area around the Stiles Street and
Yankee Gas monitoring sites, primarily due to re-entrainment of mud and
dirt from the unpaved areas by local traffic. To estimate
PM10 emissions from all source sectors, CT DEP used the 1999
National Emissions Inventory (NEI). This inventory represents the level
of emissions in the New Haven area during the five-year time period
(1999-2003) used to demonstrate that the area qualifies for the LMP
option. This inventory shows that fugitive dust sources were the
primary contributor to PM10 in New Haven County, with lesser
contributions from on-road, non-road, area (other than fugitive dust),
and point sources. EPA is satisfied that the inventory contained in the
Attainment Plan and in the NEI is sufficiently accurate and
comprehensive to meet the requirement for an emission inventory.
(e) Section 172(c)(5)--New Source Review (NSR)
The CAA Amendments of 1990 contained revisions to the new source
review (NSR) program requirements for the construction and operation of
new and modified major stationary sources located in nonattainment
areas. The CAA requires states to amend their SIPs to reflect these
revisions, but does not require submittal of this element along with
the other SIP elements. The CAA established June 30, 1992 as the
submittal date for the revised NSR programs (Section 189 of the CAA).
In the New Haven Area, the requirements of the Part D NSR program will
be replaced by the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
program and the maintenance area NSR program upon the effective date of
redesignation. Revisions to the Part D NSR rules for nonattainment
areas and to PSD rules for attainment areas in Connecticut were
approved by EPA on February 27, 2003 (68 FR 9009) and can be found in
Subsection 22a-174 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies.
(f) Section 172(c)(7) Compliance With CAA Section 110(a)(2): Air
Quality Monitoring Requirements.
Once an area is redesignated, the state must continue to operate an
appropriate air monitoring network in accordance with 40 CFR part 58 to
verify attainment status of the area. Connecticut currently (as of
December 2004) maintains seven PM10 monitoring sites.
Monitors at these sites are operating in accordance with 40 CFR part
58. The State has committed to continue operating a PM10
monitoring network, and has agreed (in Hearing Report in Connecticut
SIP submittal, DEP Response to Comment 3, p. 4) to maintain a
continuous PM10 FEM or FRM monitor at the Criscuolo Park
site, which will replace the Stiles Street site about October 2005 due
to highway construction. If Crisuolo Park site becomes unsuitable, a
monitor will be maintained at an alternate site agreeable to EPA and CT
DEP. This monitor must be maintained over the maintenance period to
verify compliance with the PM10 NAAQS in the New Haven area.
To continue to qualify for the LMP option, Connecticut must ensure
that the ADV of the Criscuolo Park PM10 monitor remains
below the monitor's CDV. Connecticut has agreed (in Hearing Report in
Connecticut SIP submittal, DEP Response to Comment 4, p. 4) to
calculate the ADV for this monitor on an annual basis and to report
this value to EPA. When five years of data are available, Connecticut
will calculate the CDV for the monitoring site and compare this to the
five-year ADV; CDV and ADV values will be reported to EPA annually over
the maintenance period.
[[Page 59661]]
(g) Section 172(c)(9) Contingency Measures
The CAA requires that contingency measures take effect if the area
fails to meet reasonable further progress (RFP) requirements or fails
to attain the NAAQS by the applicable attainment date. EPA approved
Connecticut's PM10 Attainment Plan and Contingency Measures
for New Haven on September 11, 1995 (60 FR 47076). Contingency
provisions are also required for maintenance plans under Section
175(a)(d). Connecticut provided contingency measures in their LMP.
These measures are described below.
(h) Part D Subpart 4
Part D Subpart 4, Section 189(a), (c) and (e) requirements apply to
any moderate nonattainment area before the area can be redesignated to
attainment. The requirements which were applicable prior to the
submission of the request to redesignate the area must be fully
approved into the SIP before redesignating the area to attainment.
These requirements include: (i) Provisions to assure that RACM was
implemented by December 10, 1993; (ii) Either a demonstration that the
plan provided for attainment as expeditiously as practicable but not
later than December 31, 1994, or a demonstration that attainment by
that date was impracticable;
(iii) Quantitative milestones which were achieved every 3 years and
which demonstrate reasonable further progress (RFP) toward attainment
by December 31, 1994; and
(iv) Provisions to assure that the control requirements applicable
to major stationary sources of PM10 also apply to major
stationary sources of PM10 precursors except where the
Administrator determined that such sources do not contribute
significantly to PM10 levels which exceed the NAAQS in the
area. These provisions were fully approved into the SIP upon EPA
approval of the PM10 Attainment Plan for New Haven on
September 11, 1995 (60 FR 47076).
(4) Has the State Demonstrated That the Air Quality Improvement Is Due
to Permanent and Enforceable Reductions?
The state must be able to reasonably attribute the improvement in
air quality to permanent and enforceable emission reductions. In making
this showing, the state must demonstrate that air quality improvements
are the result of actual enforceable emission reductions. This showing
should consider emission rates, production capacities, and other
related information. The analysis should assume that sources are
operating at permitted levels (or historic peak levels) unless evidence
is presented that such an assumption is unrealistic. EPA believes that
areas that qualify for the LMP will meet the NAAQS even under worst
case meteorological conditions.
The maintenance demonstration is considered satisfied for New Haven
because the area meets the air-quality criteria in the Wegman memo
(pages A-4 and A-5 of the memo) and, thus, has a very low probability
(1 in 10) of exceeding the NAAQS in the future. These criteria are met
when ADVs for monitoring sites are less than CDVs for those sites with
little variability in data over the years, the area expects only
limited growth in on-road motor vehicle PM10 emissions
(including fugitive dust), and the area passes a motor vehicle regional
emissions analysis test. A more detailed description of the LMP
qualifying criteria and how the New Haven area meets these criteria is
provided in Section (6).
(5) Does the Area Have a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to
Section 175A of the Clean Air Act?
In this action, EPA is proposing to fully approve the maintenance
plan as allowed by the LMP guidance described in Section 6 below.
(6) Has the State Demonstrated That the New Haven NAA Qualifies for the
LMP Option?
The Wegman memo explains the requirements for an area to qualify
for the LMP option. First, the area should be attaining the NAAQS.
Section 2.0 of the Connecticut SIP submittal summarizes quality-assured
ambient monitoring data showing that the New Haven area met both the
24-hour and annual PM10 NAAQS for the period 1999-2003 and
continues to do so. As stated above in Section C(1), EPA has determined
that the New Haven area is in attainment with the PM10
NAAQS.
Second, the design value at each PM10 monitor for the
past five years must be either (1) at or below the margin of safety
levels of 98 [mu]g/m\3\ for the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS and 40
[mu]g/m\3\ for the annual PM10 NAAQS, or (2) be less than
the site-specific CDV, indicating that the site has a very low
probability (1 in 10) of exceeding the NAAQS in the future. EPA's
review of AQS data for 1999-2003 shows that New Haven qualifies for the
LMP option using the second option. The CDV test is appropriate
because, in 2003, one PM10 monitor (of two) at the New Haven
Stiles Street site had a 24-hour design value above 98 [mu]g/m\3\ (107
[mu]g/m\3\). Section B (2) above describes how this site passes the CDV
test and qualifies for the LMP option.
Third, the area must meet the motor vehicle regional emissions
analysis test. This test determines whether increased emissions from
on-road mobile sources could, in the next 10 years, increase
concentrations in the area and threaten the assumption of maintenance
under the LMP option. Section 3.0 of the Connecticut SIP submittal
demonstrates that when adjusted for future on-road mobile emissions,
New Haven passes a motor vehicle emissions analysis test with a design
value of 102 [mu]g/m\3\, which is less than the (Stiles Street) CDV of
124 [mu]g/m\3\ for the 24-hour NAAQS. Thus Connecticut has shown that
New Haven qualifies for the LMP option as described in the Wegman memo.
(7) Does the State Have an Approved Attainment Plan That Includes an
Emissions Inventory Which Can Be Used To Demonstrate Attainment of the
NAAQS?
The PM10 Attainment Plan for New Haven that was approved
in 1995 (60 FR 47076) includes an emissions inventory which was used to
demonstrate attainment of the NAAQS. As described in the Attainment
Plan, CT DEP determined that the PM10 nonattainment problem
in New Haven was a local problem in the area around the Stiles Street
and Yankee Gas monitoring sites, primarily due to re-entrainment of mud
and dirt from the unpaved areas by local traffic. These areas have
since been paved.
To estimate PM10 emissions from all source sectors, CT
DEP used the 1999 National Emissions Inventory (NEI). This inventory
represents the level of emissions in the New Haven area during the
five-year time period (1999-2003) used to demonstrate that the area
qualifies for the LMP option. This inventory shows that fugitive dust
sources were the primary contributor to PM10 in New Haven
County, with lesser contributions from on-road, non-road, area (other
than fugitive dust), and point sources. EPA is satisfied that the
inventory contained in the Attainment Plan and in the NEI is
sufficiently accurate and comprehensive to meet the requirement for an
emission inventory that can be used to demonstrate attainment of the
NAAQS
(8) Does the LMP Include an Assurance of Continued Operation of an
Appropriate EPA-Approved Air Quality Monitoring Network in Accordance
With 40 CFR Part 58?
In Section 5.0 of the Connecticut SIP submittal, the CT DEP states
that it will continue to maintain a PM10 network to
[[Page 59662]]
verify continued compliance with the PM10 NAAQS in the New
Haven maintenance area. Connecticut has specifically committed to
maintaining a FEM monitor for PM10 at Criscuolo Park
(Hearing Report in Connecticut SIP submittal, DEP Response to Comment
3, p. 4). This site will replace the Stiles Street site about October
2005 due to highway construction.
(9) Does the Plan Meet the Clean Air Act Requirements for Contingency
Provisions?
Section 175A of the CAA states that a maintenance plan must include
contingency measures, as necessary, to promptly correct any violation
of the NAAQS which may occur after redesignation of the area to
attainment. As explained in the Wegman memo, these contingency measures
do not have to be fully adopted at the time of redesignation. The New
Haven PM10 LMP contains a Contingency Plan (Section 6.0 of
the Connecticut SIP submittal). This plan incorporates contingency
measures in the approved Attainment Plan (60 FR 47076) plus procedures
that CT DEP will follow if a measured violation of the PM10
NAAQS occurs after redesignation.
The contingency plan would be activated in the event of a potential
violation of the PM10 NAAQS, which under the LMP option is
40 [mu]g/m\3\ for the annual PM10 NAAQS and 98 [mu]g/m\3\
for the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS. These limits will be effective
until five years of PM10 FEM monitoring data are available
for the Criscuolo Park site, which is scheduled to replace the Stiles
Street site about October 2005. When five years of data are available,
CDVs can be calculated for the PM10 annual and 24-hour NAAQS
for Criscuolo Park. If ADVs exceed these new CDV, the New Haven
PM10 maintenance area would no longer qualify for the LMP
option, and a full maintenance would be required.
If a measured violation of the PM10 NAAQS occurs, CT DEP
will ``immediately'' (defined as within several working days in Hearing
Report in Connecticut SIP submittal, DEP Response to Comment 5, p. 5)
determine the validity of data by verifying all monitor operating
parameters and quality assurance procedures. Once the violation is
confirmed, the CT DEP will examine all activities in the vicinity of
the site, such as traffic patterns and meteorological conditions, and
determine the likely cause of the violation. CT DEP will then consult
with the appropriate local, regional or state agency to design and
implement a control remedy.
If the control remedy is ineffectual (i.e., another verified
exceedance of the PM10 NAAQS occurs), CT DEP will undertake
a full emission inventory of the area and do modeling studies to
identify additional control measures, and to estimate future
PM10 reductions and expected air quality at the violating
monitor.
EPA concludes that these measures and commitments meet the
requirement for contingency provisions of CAA Section 175A(d).
(10) Has the State Met Conformity Requirements?
(a) Transportation Conformity
Under the LMP policy, emissions budgets are treated as essentially
not constraining for the maintenance period because it is unreasonable
to expect that qualifying areas would experience so much growth in that
period that a NAAQS violation would result. While areas with
maintenance plans approved under the LMP option are not subject to the
budget test, the areas remain subject to other transportation
conformity requirements of 40 CFR part 93, subpart A. Thus, the
metropolitan planning organization (MPO) in the area or the state will
still need to document and ensure that: (a) Transportation plans and
projects provide for timely implementation of SIP transportation
control measures (TCMs) in accordance with 40 CFR 93.113; (b)
transportation plans and projects comply with the fiscal constraint
element per 40 CFR 93.108; (c) the MPO's interagency consultation
procedures meet applicable requirements of 40 CFR 93.105; (d)
conformity of transportation plans is determined no less frequently
than every three years, and conformity of plan amendments and
transportation projects is demonstrated in accordance with the timing
requirements specified in 40 CFR 93.104; (e) the latest planning
assumptions and emissions model are used as set forth in 40 CFR 93.110
and 40 CFR 93.111; (6) projects do not cause or contribute to any new
localized carbon monoxide or particulate matter violations, in
accordance with procedures specified in 40 CFR 93.123; and (7) project
sponsors and/or operators provide written commitments as specified in
40 CFR 93.125.
(b) General Conformity
As noted above, under the LMP policy, emissions budgets are treated
as essentially not constraining for the maintenance period because it
is unreasonable to expect that qualifying areas would experience so
much growth in that period that a NAAQS violation would result. As long
as the New Haven area qualifies for the LMP option, federal actions
subject to the general conformity rule are considered to satisfy the
``budget test'' specified in Sec. 93.158(a)(5)(i)(A) of the rule.
III. Final Action
EPA is approving the LMP for the New Haven PM10
nonattainment area (New Haven NAA) in the State of Connecticut, and is
granting a request by the State to redesignate the New Haven NAA to
attainment for the NAAQS for particulate matter with an aerodynamic
diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers
(PM10).
The EPA is publishing this action without prior proposal because
the Agency views this as a noncontroversial amendment and anticipates
no adverse comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this
Federal Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document
that will serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should
relevant adverse comments be filed. This rule will be effective
December 12, 2005 without further notice unless the Agency receives
relevant adverse comments by November 14, 2005.
If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a notice
withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in
a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not
institute a second comment period on the proposed rule. Any parties
interested in commenting on the proposed rule should do so at this
time. If no such comments are received, the public is advised that this
rule will be effective on December 12, 2005 and no further action will
be taken on the proposed rule. Please note that if EPA receives adverse
comment on an amendment, paragraph, or section of this rule and if that
provision may be severed from the remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
as final those provisions of the rule that are not the subject of an
adverse comment.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
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. For this
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211,
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May
[[Page 59663]]
22, 2001). This action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that
this 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 rule approves pre-existing requirements
under state law and does not impose any additional enforceable duty
beyond that required by state law, it does not contain any unfunded
mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as
described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have federalism
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the
states, on the relationship between the national government and the
states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64
FR 43255, August 10, 1999), because it merely approves a state rule
implementing a federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean
Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically
significant.
In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the
state to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no authority
to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus be
inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP
submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. 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. This 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.)
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by December 12, 2005. Interested
parties should comment in response to the proposed rule rather than
petition for judicial review, unless the objection arises after the
comment period allowed for in the proposal. Filing a petition for
reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect
the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial review nor does
it extend the time within which a petition for judicial review may be
filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action.
This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its
requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, PM10,
Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
40 CFR Part 81
Air pollution control, National parks, Wilderness areas.
Dated: September 26, 2005.
Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator, EPA New England.
0
Parts 52 and 81 of chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations are amended as follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
0
2. A new Sec. 52.378 is added to subpart H to read as follows:
Sec. 52.378 Control strategy: PM10
(a) Approval--On June 23, 2005, the Connecticut Department of
Environmental Protection submitted a request to redesignate the City of
New Haven PM10 nonattainment area to attainment for
PM10. The redesignation request and the initial ten-year
maintenance plan (2006-2015) meet the redesignation requirements in
sections 107(d)(3)(E) and 175A of the Act as amended in 1990,
respectively.
(b) Approval--On June 23, 2005, the Connecticut Department of
Environmental Protection (CT DEP) submitted a request to establish a
Limited Maintenance Plan (LMP) for the City of New Haven
PM10 attainment area for the area's initial ten-year
maintenance plan (2006-2015). The State of Connecticut has committed
to: maintain a PM10 monitoring network in the New Haven
PM10 maintenance area; implement contingency measures in the
event of an exceedance of the PM10 National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) in the maintenance area; coordinate with EPA
in the event the PM10 design value in the maintenance area
exceeds 98 [mu]g/m3 for the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS or
40 [mu]g/m3 for the annual PM10 NAAQS; and to
verify the validity of the data and, if warranted based on the data
review, develop a full maintenance plan for the maintenance area. The
LMP satisfies all applicable requirements of section 175A of the Clean
Air Act. Approval of the LMP is conditioned on maintaining levels of
ambient PM10 below a PM10 design value criteria
of 98 [mu]g/m3 for the 24-hour PM10 NAAQS and 40
[mu]g/m3 for the annual PM10 NAAQS. For the
Criscuolo Park site, Connecticut still qualifies for the LMP option if,
based on five years of site data, the average design values (ADVs) of
the continuous PM10 monitor are less than the site-specific
critical design value (CDV). If the LMP criteria are no longer
satisfied, Connecticut must develop a full maintenance plan to meet
Clean Air Act requirements.
PART 81--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.
0
2. In Sec. 81.307, the ``Connecticut-PM-10'' table is amended by
revising the entry for ``New Haven County City of New Haven'' to read
as follows:
Sec. 81.307 Connecticut.
* * * * *
[[Page 59664]]
Connecticut--PM-10
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation Classification
Designated area ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Type Date Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Haven County City of New 12/12/05 Attainment.......................
Haven.
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 05-20418 Filed 10-12-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P