[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 108 (Tuesday, June 6, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 32448-32450]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-4986]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA-R05-OAR-2005-MI-0001; FRL-8176-6]
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans;
Michigan
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is approving a June 17, 2005, Michigan petition for
exemptions from the Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) and
New Source Review (NSR) requirements for major sources of nitrogen
oxides (NOX). The petition is for sources in six of
Michigan's eight-hour ozone nonattainment areas, which comprise eleven
counties. EPA proposed approval of the petition in a January 5, 2006
rulemaking action. Section 182(f) of the Clean Air Act allows this
exemption for areas where additional reductions in NOX will
not contribute to attainment of the ozone standard. The Grand Rapids,
Kalamazoo/Battle Creek, Lansing/East Lansing, Benzie County, Huron
County, and Mason County nonattainment areas will each receive an
exemption.
DATES: This final rule is effective on July 6, 2006.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2005-0001. All documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business
Information (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 through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at
the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation
Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This
facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding Federal holidays. We recommend that you telephone Matt Rau,
Environmental Engineer, at (312) 886-6524 before visiting the Region 5
office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Rau, Environmental Engineer,
Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6524, [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information
section is arranged as follows:
I. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Supporting Materials?
II. What Are the Environmental Effects of These Actions?
III. What Is EPA's Response to Comments?
IV. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
I. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Supporting Materials?
Michigan submitted the 2002-04 monitoring data for the six ozone
nonattainment areas. The eight-hour ozone concentrations for these
areas were all below the National Ambient Air Quality Standard
(NAAQS)for ozone. EPA records indicate the 2003-05 monitoring data is
also below the eight-hour ozone NAAQS for all six areas. Michigan has
not implemented NOX control provisions in the areas.
EPA's January 14, 2005 document, ``Guidance on Limiting Nitrogen
Oxides Requirements Related to 8-Hour Ozone Implementation'' gives the
requirements for demonstrating that further NOX reduction in
an ozone nonattainment area will not contribute to ozone attainment.
The guidance provides that three consecutive years of monitoring data
below the standard in areas that have not implemented NOX
controls adequately demonstrates that additional NOX
reductions will not aid attainment. EPA's approval of the petition is
granted on a contingent basis. Michigan must continue to monitor the
ozone levels in the areas. Each of the six areas receives its own
exemption. If an area violates the standard, EPA will remove the
exemption for that area.
II. What Are the Environmental Effects of These Actions?
Nitrogen oxides are a precursor in ozone formation. Volatile
organic compounds (VOC) are another ozone precursor. The photochemical
reactions that form ozone are complex. Reducing NOX (NO and
NO2) emissions will not always reduce ozone levels. When the
ratio of NO to VOC emissions is high, the NO will react with ozone
(O3) to form NO2 and oxygen (O2). In
this environment, the NO2 will react with hydroxyl (OH)
radicals instead of forming ozone. A decrease in NOX
emissions would cause an increase in ozone formation when these
conditions exist. This effect is usually localized.
Because of this chemical reaction, the section 182(f) exemptions
should not interfere with attainment of the standard NAAQS for ozone in
the six Michigan ozone nonattainment areas. The state demonstrated that
the areas were able to hold ozone levels under the NAAQS without
employing NOX controls. Thus, additional NOX
controls would not be expected to contribute to attainment. Ozone
levels are expected to remain below the standard which will protect
human health. If a violation occurs in one of the areas, EPA will
remove the exemption for that area and will require additional control
measures.
III. What Is EPA's Response to Comments?
EPA received one comment on the January 5, 2006 (71 FR 577-579),
proposed approval of Michigan's petition. That comment came from the
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (New York). New
York was concerned that EPA did not evaluate the impact of the
NOX waivers on its ozone nonattainment areas. It cited the
results of ozone contribution modeling from another EPA program, the
Clean Air Interstate Rule. The contribution modeling shows a link
between state-wide Michigan NOX and VOC emissions and
nineteen counties, including the New York ozone nonattainment counties
of Erie, Richmond, and Suffolk.
In considering this petition, EPA did not evaluate the impact of
the NOX waivers on downwind ozone nonattainment areas. This
is not a part of the process for evaluating section 182(f) waiver
requests. The NOX emission reductions required from Michigan
under other EPA programs are not affected by granting of the waivers.
Also, reductions of other ozone precursors, such as VOC, are unaffected
by this action. If called for under other programs, Michigan will be
required to reduce its state-wide emissions to address its contribution
to nonattainment counties in other states. The Clean Air Interstate
Rule will address the specific concern New York expressed by requiring
ozone precursor reductions in Michigan and other states
[[Page 32449]]
that contribute to the New York ozone nonattainment areas.
IV. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
EPA is approving a Michigan petition for exemptions from the RACT
and NSR requirements for major NOX sources in six of the
state's eight-hour ozone nonattainment areas. These nonattainment areas
encompass eleven counties. The Grand Rapids area includes Kent and
Ottawa counties. Calhoun, Kalamazoo, and Van Buren counties make up the
Kalamazoo/Battle Creek area. The Lansing/East Lansing area consists of
Clinton, Eaton, and Ingham counties. Benzie, Huron, and Mason counties
are all single county nonattainment areas.
Section 182(f) of the Clean Air Act allows this exemption for areas
where a state demonstrates that additional reductions in NOX
will not contribute to attainment of the NAAQS for ozone. Monitoring
data shows the ozone levels in the six areas are now below the NAAQS
without utilizing NOX controls. These exemptions from the
NOX requirements in section 182(f) are on a contingent
basis. The state used monitoring data to demonstrate that it meets the
requirements for the exemption. If an area's monitored level of ozone
violates the NAAQS in the future, EPA will remove its exemption.
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review
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.
Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
Because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866 or a ``significant energy action,'' this action
is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
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.).
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
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).
Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
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).
Executive Order 13132: Federalism
This action also does not have Federalism implications because it
does not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August
10, 1999). This action merely 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.
Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health
and Safety Risks
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.
National Technology Transfer Advancement Act
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.
Paperwork Reduction Act
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.).
Congressional Review Act
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 August 7, 2006. 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 in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone.
Dated: May 18, 2006.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.
0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, of title 40
of the Code of Federal Regulations is 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.
[[Page 32450]]
Subpart X--Michigan
0
2. Section 52.1174 is amended as follows:
0
A. The first paragraph designated as paragraph (c) is redesignated as
paragraph (c)(1).
0
B. The second paragraph designated as paragraph (c) is redesignated as
paragraph (c)(2).
0
C. Paragraph (w) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 52.1174 Control strategy: Ozone.
* * * * *
(w) Approval--On June 17, 2005, the Michigan Department of
Environmental Quality submitted a petition requesting the exemption
from Clean Air Act oxides of nitrogen control requirements in six 8-
hour ozone nonattainment areas. The Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo/Battle
Creek, Lansing/East Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason
County nonattainment areas each receive an exemption. Section 182(f) of
the 1990 amended Clean Air Act authorizes the exceptions. The exemption
will no longer apply in an area if it experiences a violation of the 8-
hour ozone standard.
[FR Doc. 06-4986 Filed 6-5-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P