
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 231 (Friday, November 30, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 71383-71395]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-29012]



[[Page 71383]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[EPA-R05-OAR-2012-0212; FRL-9756-7]


Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Ohio; Redesignation of the Ohio Portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta 
Area to Attainment of the 1997 Annual Standard for Fine Particulate 
Matter

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On February 29, 2012, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency 
submitted a request for EPA to approve the redesignation of the Ohio 
portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta West Virginia-Ohio nonattainment 
area to attainment of the 1997 annual standard for fine particulate 
matter (PM2.5). EPA is proposing to approve Ohio's request. 
EPA is proposing to determine that the entire Parkersburg-Marietta area 
attains the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard, based on the most 
recent three years of certified air quality data. EPA is proposing to 
approve, as revisions to the Ohio State Implementation Plan (SIP), the 
state's plan for maintaining the 1997 annual PM2.5 National 
Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) through 2022 in the area. EPA is 
proposing to approve a 2005 emissions inventory for the Ohio portion of 
the Parkersburg-Marietta area as meeting the comprehensive emissions 
inventory requirement of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). Ohio's 
maintenance plan submission includes an insignificance finding for the 
mobile source contribution of PM2.5 and nitrogen oxides 
(NOX) to Ohio's portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta 
PM2.5 area for transportation conformity purposes; EPA 
agrees with this finding and proposes to determine the insignificance 
of the 2022 motor vehicle emission budget (MVEB) for the Ohio portion 
of the Parkersburg-Marietta area for transportation conformity 
purposes.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 31, 2012.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2012-0212, by one of the following methods:
    1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for 
submitting comments.
    2. Email: blakley.pamela@epa.gov.
    3. Fax: (312) 692-2450.
    4. Mail: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Control Strategies Section (AR-
18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 
Chicago, Illinois 60604.
    5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, Chief, Control Strategies Section 
(AR-18J), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries are only accepted 
during the Regional Office normal hours of operation, and special 
arrangements should be made for deliveries of boxed information. The 
Regional Office official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. excluding Federal holidays.
    Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R05-OAR-
2012-0212. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included 
in the public docket without change and may be made available online at 
www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, 
unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential 
Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is 
restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to 
be CBI or otherwise protected through www.regulations.gov or email. The 
www.regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which 
means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you 
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment 
directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov your email 
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. For additional 
instructions on submitting comments, go to Section I of the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.
    Docket: All documents in the docket are listed in the 
www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some 
information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information 
whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such 
as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. 
Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically 
in 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 Anthony Maietta, Environmental 
Protection Specialist, at (312) 353-8777 before visiting the Region 5 
office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Maietta, Environmental 
Protection Specialist, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch 
(AR-18J), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson 
Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353-8777, 
maietta.anthony@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This supplementary information section is 
arranged as follows:

I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?
II. What actions is EPA proposing to take?
III. What is the background for these actions?
IV. What are the criteria for redesignation to attainment?
V. What is EPA's analysis of the state's request?
    1. Attainment
    2. The Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 
110 and Part D and Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) 
(Sections 107(d)(3)(E)(v) and 107(d)(3)(E)(ii))
    3. The Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to Permanent and 
Enforceable Reductions in Emissions Resulting From Implementation of 
the SIP and Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control Regulations and 
Other Permanent and Enforceable Reductions (Section 
107(d)(3)(E)(iii))
    4. Ohio Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to 
Section 175A of the CAA (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv))
    5. Insignificance Determination for the Mobile Source 
Contribution to PM2.5 and NOX
    6. 2005 Comprehensive Emissions Inventory
    7. Summary of Proposed Actions
VI. What are the effects of EPA's proposed actions?
VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What should I consider as I prepare my comments for EPA?

    When submitting comments, remember to:
    1. Identify the rulemaking by docket number and other identifying 
information (subject heading, Federal Register date and page number).
    2. Follow directions--EPA may ask you to respond to specific 
questions or organize comments by referencing a Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR) part or section number.

[[Page 71384]]

    3. Explain why you agree or disagree; suggest alternatives and 
substitute language for your requested changes.
    4. Describe any assumptions and provide any technical information 
and/or data that you used.
    5. If you estimate potential costs or burdens, explain how you 
arrived at your estimate in sufficient detail to allow for it to be 
reproduced.
    6. Provide specific examples to illustrate your concerns, and 
suggest alternatives.
    7. Explain your views as clearly as possible, avoiding the use of 
profanity or personal threats.
    8. Make sure to submit your comments by the comment period deadline 
identified.

II. What actions is EPA proposing to take?

    EPA is proposing to take several actions related to redesignation 
of the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta area to attainment of 
the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. In addition to EPA's December 
2, 2011, determination that the area attained the NAAQS for 
PM2.5 by the applicable attainment date based on quality-
assured, certified 2007-2009 ambient air monitoring data (76 FR 75464), 
we are proposing to determine that the area continues to attain the 
NAAQS for PM2.5, based on quality-assured and certified 
ambient air monitoring data for 2009-2011, the most recent three years 
of quality-assured data for the area. EPA is proposing to find that 
Ohio meets the requirements for redesignation of the Parkersburg-
Marietta area to attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS under 
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is thus proposing to approve 
Ohio's request to change the legal designation of its portion of the 
Parkersburg-Marietta area from nonattainment to attainment of the 1997 
annual PM2.5 NAAQS. This action would not change the legal 
designation of the West Virginia portion of the area, which will be 
redesignated in a separate rulemaking.
    Second, EPA is proposing to approve Ohio's annual PM2.5 
maintenance plan for the Parkersburg-Marietta area as a revision to the 
Ohio SIP, including the insignificance determination for 
PM2.5 and NOX emissions for the mobile source 
contribution of the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta area.
    Finally, EPA is proposing to approve the 2005 primary 
PM2.5, NOX and sulfur dioxide (SO2) 
emissions inventories as satisfying the requirement in section 
172(c)(3) off the CAA for a current, accurate and comprehensive 
emission inventory.
    Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve the request from the State 
of Ohio to change the designation of Washington County (the Ohio 
portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta area) from nonattainment to 
attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. This action would 
not change the legal designation of the West Virginia portion of the 
area, which would be redesignated in a separate rulemaking.

III. What is the background for these actions?

    Fine particulate pollution can be emitted directly from a source 
(primary PM2.5) or formed secondarily through chemical 
reactions in the atmosphere involving precursor pollutants emitted from 
a variety of sources. Sulfates are a type of secondary particulate 
formed from SO2 emissions from power plants and industrial 
facilities. Nitrates, another common type of secondary particulate, are 
formed from combustion emissions of NOX from power plants, 
mobile sources and other combustion sources.
    The first air quality standards for PM2.5 were 
promulgated on July 18, 1997, at 62 FR 38652. EPA promulgated an annual 
standard at a level of 15 micrograms per cubic meter ([mu]g/m\3\) of 
ambient air, based on a three-year average of the annual mean 
PM2.5 concentrations at each monitoring site. In the same 
rulemaking, EPA promulgated a 24-hour PM2.5 standard at 65 
[mu]g/m\3\, based on a three-year average of the annual 98th percentile 
of 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations at each monitoring site.
    On January 5, 2005, at 70 FR 944, EPA published air quality area 
designations for the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard based on air 
quality data for calendar years 2001-2003. In that rulemaking, EPA 
designated the Parkersburg-Marietta area as nonattainment for the 1997 
annual PM2.5 standard.
    On October 17, 2006, at 71 FR 61144, EPA retained the annual 
PM2.5 standard at 15 [mu]g/m\3\ (2006 annual 
PM2.5 standard), but revised the 24-hour standard to 35 
[mu]g/m\3\, based again on the three-year average of the annual 98th 
percentile of the 24-hour PM2.5 concentrations. In response 
to legal challenges of the 2006 annual PM2.5 standard, the 
U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. 
Circuit) remanded this standard to EPA for further consideration. See 
American Farm Bureau Federation and National Pork Producers Council, et 
al. v. EPA, 559 F.3d 512 (D.C. Cir. 2009). Since the Parkersburg-
Marietta area is designated as nonattainment for the 1997 annual 
PM2.5 standard, today's proposed action addresses 
redesignation to attainment only for this standard.
    On December 2, 2011, EPA issued a final determination that the 
entire Parkersburg-Marietta area has attained the 1997 PM2.5 
standard by the applicable attainment date (76 FR 75464). Ohio's 
original submittal contained complete, quality-assured and certified 
air monitoring data for years through 2010. Based upon our review of 
complete, quality-assured and certified ambient air monitoring data 
from 2009-2011, we are proposing to determine that the area continues 
to attain the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Further, preliminary 
data for 2012 indicate that the data will continue to show the area in 
attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS.

IV. What are the criteria for redesignation to attainment?

    The CAA sets forth the requirements for redesignating a 
nonattainment area to attainment. Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of 
the CAA allows for redesignation provided that: (1) The Administrator 
determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS based on 
current air quality data; (2) the Administrator has fully approved an 
applicable SIP for the area under section 110(k) of the CAA; (3) the 
Administrator determines that the improvement in air quality is due to 
permanent and enforceable emission reductions resulting from 
implementation of the applicable SIP, Federal air pollution control 
regulations and other permanent and enforceable emission reductions; 
(4) the Administrator has fully approved a maintenance plan for the 
area meeting the requirements of section 175A of the CAA; and (5) the 
state containing the area has met all requirements applicable to the 
area for purposes of redesignation under section 110 and part D of the 
CAA.

V. What is EPA's analysis of the state's request?

    EPA is proposing to approve the redesignation of the Ohio portion 
of the Parkersburg-Marietta area to attainment of the 1997 annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS and is proposing to approve Ohio's maintenance 
plan for the area and other related SIP revisions. The bases for these 
actions follow.

1. Attainment

    As noted above, in a rulemaking published on December 2, 2011, EPA 
determined that the Parkersburg-Marietta area had attained the 1997 
annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable attainment date. The 
basis and effect of this determination were discussed in

[[Page 71385]]

the proposed (76 FR 43634) and final (76 FR 75464) actions. The 
determination was based on quality-assured air quality monitoring data 
for 2007-2009 showing the area had met the standard by the attainment 
date. The data have been certified by West Virginia, the state in which 
the monitors for the area are located.
    In this action, we are proposing to determine that the Parkersburg-
Marietta area has attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS based 
upon the most recent three years of complete, certified and quality-
assured data, as required by section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. Under 
EPA's regulations at 40 CFR 50.7, the annual primary and secondary 
PM2.5 standards are met when the annual arithmetic mean 
concentration, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR part 50, 
appendix N, is less than or equal to 15.0 [mu]g/m\3\ at all relevant 
monitoring sites in the area.
    EPA has reviewed the ambient air quality monitoring data in the 
Parkersburg-Marietta area, consistent with the requirements contained 
at 40 CFR part 50. EPA's review focused on data recorded in the EPA Air 
Quality System (AQS) database for the Parkersburg-Marietta 
PM2.5 nonattainment area from 2009-2011. EPA also considered 
preliminary data for 2012, which have not yet been certified.
    The Parkersburg-Marietta area has one monitor located in Wood 
County, West Virginia, that reported a design value from 2009-2011, the 
most recent three years of data, for PM2.5 that measured 
12.3 [mu]g/m\3\ for the 1997 annual standard. The monitor in the 
Parkersburg-Marietta area recorded complete data in accordance with 
criteria set forth by EPA in 40 CFR part 50, appendix N, where a 
complete year of air quality data comprises four calendar quarters, 
with each quarter containing data with at least 75 percent capture of 
the scheduled sampling days. Available data are considered to be 
sufficient for comparison to the NAAQS if three consecutive complete 
years of data exist.

  Table 1--The 1997 Annual PM2.5 Design Values for the Parkersburg-Marietta Monitor With Complete Data for the
                       2007-2009, 2008-2010 and 2009-2011 Design Values \1\ in [mu]g/m\3\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          Annual standard    Annual standard    Annual standard
                                                         design value 2007- design value 2008- design value 2009-
              County                      Monitor        2009 ([mu]g/m\3\)  2010 ([mu]g/m\3\)  2011 ([mu]g/m\3\)
 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wood, WV.........................  Neale Elementary                  13.7               13.1               12.3
                                    School 541071002.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA's review of monitoring data from the 2007-2009, 2008-2010 and 
2009-2011 monitoring periods supports EPA's determination that the 
Parkersburg-Marietta area has monitored attainment for each time 
period. Additionally, because the preliminary monitoring data for 2012 
are consistent with the area's continued attainment, EPA proposes to 
determine that the Parkersburg-Marietta area has attained the 1997 
annual PM2.5 standard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ As defined in 40 CFR part 50 appendix N(1)(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. The Area Has Met All Applicable Requirements Under Section 110 and 
Part D and Has a Fully Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) (Sections 
107(d)(3)(E)(v) and 107(d)(3)(E)(ii))

    We believe that Ohio has met all currently applicable SIP 
requirements for purposes of redesignation for the Ohio portion of the 
Parkersburg-Marietta area under section 110 of the CAA (general SIP 
requirements). We are also proposing to find that the Ohio SIP meets 
all SIP requirements currently applicable for purposes of redesignation 
under part D of title I of the CAA, in accordance with section 
107(d)(3)(E)(v). We are proposing to find that all applicable 
requirements of the Ohio SIP for purposes of redesignation have been, 
in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). As discussed below, in 
this action EPA is proposing to approve Ohio's 2005 emissions inventory 
as meeting the section 172(c)(3) comprehensive emissions inventory 
requirement.
    In making these proposed determinations, we have ascertained which 
SIP requirements are applicable for purposes of redesignation, and 
concluded that there are SIP measures meeting those requirements and 
that they are approved or will be approved by the time of final 
rulemaking.
a. Ohio Has Met All Applicable Requirements for Purposes of 
Redesignation of the Ohio Portion of the Area Under Section 110 and 
Part D of the CAA
i. Section 110 General SIP Requirements
    Section 110(a) of title I of the CAA contains the general 
requirements for a SIP. Section 110(a)(2) provides that the 
implementation plan submitted by a state must have been adopted by the 
state after reasonable public notice and hearing, and, among other 
things, must: include enforceable emission limitations and other 
control measures, means or techniques necessary to meet the 
requirements of the CAA; provide for establishment and operation of 
appropriate devices, methods, systems and procedures necessary to 
monitor ambient air quality; provide for implementation of a source 
permit program to regulate the modification and construction of any 
stationary source within the areas covered by the plan; include 
provisions for the implementation of part C, Prevention of Significant 
Deterioration (PSD) and part D, New Source Review (NSR) permit 
programs; include criteria for stationary source emission control 
measures, monitoring and reporting; include provisions for air quality 
modeling; and provide for public and local agency participation in 
planning and emission control rule development.
    Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA requires that SIPs contain measures 
to prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air 
quality problems in another state. EPA believes that the requirements 
linked with a particular nonattainment area's designation are the 
relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. The 
transport SIP submittal requirements, where applicable, continue to 
apply to a state regardless of the designation of any one particular 
area in the state. Thus, we believe that these requirements should not 
be construed to be applicable requirements for purposes of 
redesignation.
    Further, we believe that the other section 110 elements described 
above that are not connected with nonattainment plan submissions and 
not linked with an area's attainment status are also not applicable 
requirements for purposes of redesignation. A state remains subject to 
these requirements after an area is redesignated to attainment. We 
conclude that only the section 110 and

[[Page 71386]]

part D requirements that are linked with a particular area's 
designation are the relevant measures which we may consider in 
evaluating a redesignation request. This approach is consistent with 
EPA's existing policy on applicability of conformity and oxygenated 
fuels requirements for redesignation purposes, as well as with section 
184 ozone transport requirements. See Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed 
and final rulemakings (61 FR 53174-53176, October 10, 1996) and (62 FR 
24826, May 7, 1997); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio, final rulemaking (61 
FR 20458, May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida, final rulemaking (60 FR 
62748, December 7, 1995). See also the discussion on this issue in the 
Cincinnati, Ohio 1-hour ozone redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 
2000), and in the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 1-hour ozone redesignation 
(66 FR 50399, October 19, 2001).
    We have reviewed the Ohio SIP and have concluded that it meets the 
general SIP requirements under section 110 of the CAA to the extent 
they are applicable for purposes of redesignation. EPA has previously 
approved provisions of Ohio's SIP addressing section 110 requirements, 
including provisions addressing particulate matter, at 40 CFR 52.1870, 
respectively).
    On December 5, 2007, and September 4, 2009, Ohio made submittals 
addressing ``infrastructure SIP'' elements required under CAA section 
110(a)(2). EPA proposed approval of the December 5, 2007, submittal on 
April 28, 2011, at 76 FR 23757, and published final approval on July 
14, 2011, at 76 FR 41075. The requirements of section 110(a)(2), 
however, are statewide requirements that are not linked to the 
PM2.5 nonattainment status of the Parkersburg-Marietta area. 
Therefore, EPA believes that these SIP elements are not applicable 
requirements for purposes of review of the state's PM2.5 
redesignation request.
ii. Part D Requirements
    EPA is proposing to determine that, upon approval of the base year 
emissions inventories discussed in section V(6) of this rulemaking, the 
Ohio SIP will meet the SIP requirements for the Ohio portion of the 
Parkersburg-Marietta area applicable for purposes of redesignation 
under part D of the CAA.
    Subpart 1 of part D, found in sections 172-176 of the CAA, sets 
forth the basic nonattainment requirements applicable to all 
nonattainment areas.
    Subpart 1 Section 172 Requirements.
    For purposes of evaluating this redesignation request, the 
applicable section 172 SIP requirements for the Ohio portion of the 
Parkersburg-Marietta area are contained in section 172(c)(1)-(9). A 
thorough discussion of the requirements contained in section 172 can be 
found in the General Preamble for Implementation of title I (57 FR 
13498, April 16, 1992).
    Section 172(c)(1) requires the plans for all nonattainment areas to 
provide for the implementation of all Reasonably Achievable Control 
Measures (RACM) as expeditiously as practicable and to provide for 
attainment of the primary NAAQS. EPA interprets this requirement to 
impose a duty on all nonattainment areas to consider all available 
control measures and to adopt and implement such measures as are 
reasonably available for implementation in each area as components of 
the area's attainment demonstration. Because we are determining that 
the area has attained in this action, no additional measures are needed 
to provide for attainment, and section 172(c)(1) requirements are no 
longer considered to be applicable as long as the area continues to 
attain the standard until redesignation. (40 CFR 51.1004(c).)
    The Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) requirement under section 
172(c)(2) is defined as progress that must be made toward attainment. 
This requirement is not relevant for purposes of redesignation because 
the Parkersburg-Marietta area has monitored attainment of the 1997 
annual PM2.5 NAAQS. (General Preamble, 57 FR 13564). See 
also 40 CFR 51.918. In addition, because the Parkersburg-Marietta area 
has attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and is no longer 
subject to an RFP requirement, the requirement to submit the section 
172(c)(9) contingency measures is not applicable for purposes of 
redesignation. Id.
    Section 172(c)(3) requires submission and approval of a 
comprehensive, accurate and current inventory of actual emissions. Ohio 
submitted a 2005 base year emissions inventory along with their 
redesignation request. As discussed below in section V.6., EPA is 
approving the 2005 base year inventory as meeting the section 172(c)(3) 
emissions inventory requirement for the Ohio portion of the 
Parkersburg-Marietta area.
    Section 172(c)(4) requires the identification and quantification of 
allowable emissions for major new and modified stationary sources in an 
area, and section 172(c)(5) requires source permits for the 
construction and operation of new and modified major stationary sources 
anywhere in the nonattainment area. EPA approved Ohio's current NSR 
program on January 10, 2003 (68 FR 1366). Nonetheless, since PSD 
requirements will apply after redesignation, the area need not have a 
fully-approved NSR program for purposes of redesignation, provided that 
the area demonstrates maintenance of the NAAQS without part D NSR. A 
detailed rationale for this view is described in a memorandum from Mary 
Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, dated October 
14, 1994, entitled, ''Part D New Source Review Requirements for Areas 
Requesting Redesignation to Attainment.'' Ohio has demonstrated that 
the Parkersburg-Marietta area will be able to maintain the standard 
without part D NSR in effect; therefore, the state need not have a 
fully approved part D NSR program prior to approval of the 
redesignation request. The state's PSD program will become effective in 
the Parkersburg-Marietta area upon redesignation to attainment. See 
rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60 FR 12467-12468, March 7, 1995); 
Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio (61 FR 20458, 20469-20470, May 7, 1996); 
Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665, October 23, 2001); and Grand Rapids, 
Michigan (61 FR 31834-31837, June 21, 1996).
    Section 172(c)(6) requires the SIP to contain control measures 
necessary to provide for attainment of the standard. Because attainment 
has been reached, no additional measures are needed to provide for 
attainment.
    Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to meet the applicable 
provisions of section 110(a)(2). As noted above, we believe the Ohio's 
SIP meets the requirements of section 110(a)(2) applicable for purposes 
of redesignation.
    Subpart 1 Section 176(c)(4)(D) Conformity SIP Requirements.
    The requirement to determine conformity applies to transportation 
plans, programs and projects developed, funded or approved under title 
23 of the U.S. Code and the Federal Transit Act (transportation 
conformity), as well as to all other Federally-supported or funded 
projects (general conformity).
    Section 176(c) of the CAA was amended by provisions contained in 
the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A 
Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), which was signed into law on August 10, 
2005 (Public Law 109-59). Among the changes Congress made to this 
section of the CAA were streamlined requirements for state 
transportation conformity SIPs. State transportation

[[Page 71387]]

conformity regulations must be consistent with Federal conformity 
regulations and address three specific requirements related to 
consultation, enforcement and enforceability. EPA believes that it is 
reasonable to interpret the transportation conformity SIP requirements 
as not applying for purposes of evaluating the redesignation request 
under section 107(d) for two reasons.
    First, the requirement to submit SIP revisions to comply with the 
transportation 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, 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 transportation conformity requirements regardless of 
whether they are redesignated to attainment and, because they must 
implement conformity under Federal rules if state rules are not yet 
approved, EPA believes it is reasonable to view these requirements as 
not applying for purposes of evaluating a redesignation request. See 
Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding this 
interpretation. See also 60 FR 62748, 62749-62750 (Dec. 7, 1995) 
(Tampa, Florida).
    Ohio has an approved transportation conformity SIP (72 FR 20945). 
Ohio is in the process of updating its approved transportation 
conformity SIP, and EPA will review its provisions when they are 
submitted.
b. The Ohio Portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta Area Has a Fully 
Approved Applicable SIP Under Section 110(k) of the CAA
    Upon final approval of Ohio's comprehensive 2005 emissions 
inventory, EPA will have fully approved the Ohio SIP for the Ohio 
portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta area under section 110(k) of the 
CAA for all requirements applicable for purposes of redesignation to 
attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard. EPA may rely 
on prior SIP approvals in approving a redesignation request (See page 3 
of the September 4, 1992, John Calcagni memorandum entitled 
``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to 
Attainment''; Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 
F.3d 984, 989-990 (6th Cir. 1998); Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 
2001)), plus any additional measures it may approve in conjunction with 
a redesignation action. See 68 FR 25413, 25426 (May 12, 2003). Since 
the passage of the CAA of 1970, Ohio has adopted and submitted, and EPA 
has fully approved, provisions addressing various required SIP elements 
under particulate matter standards. In this action, EPA is proposing to 
approve Ohio's 2005 base year emissions inventory for the Parkersburg-
Marietta area as meeting the requirement of section 172(c)(3) of the 
CAA for the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard.
c. Nonattainment Requirements
    Under section 172, states with nonattainment areas must submit 
plans providing for timely attainment and meeting a variety of other 
requirements. On July 16, 2008, Ohio submitted a state-wide attainment 
demonstration for PM2.5, including the Parkersburg-Marietta 
area. However, pursuant to 40 CFR 51.1004(c), EPA's determination that 
the area has attained the 1997 PM2.5 annual standard 
suspends the requirement to submit certain planning SIPs related to 
attainment, including attainment demonstration requirements, the 
Reasonably Achievable Control Technology (RACT)-RACM requirement of 
section 172(c)(1) of the CAA, the RFP and attainment demonstration 
requirements of sections 172(c)(2) and (6) and 182(b)(1) of the CAA and 
the requirement for contingency measures of section 172(c)(9) of the 
CAA).
    As a result, the only remaining requirement under section 172 to be 
considered is the emissions inventory required under section 172(c)(3). 
As discussed in a later section, EPA is proposing to approve the 
inventory that Ohio submitted as part of its maintenance plan as 
satisfying this requirement.
    No SIP provisions applicable for redesignation of the Ohio portion 
of the Parkersburg-Marietta area are currently disapproved, 
conditionally approved or partially approved. If EPA approves Ohio's 
Parkersburg-Marietta area PM2.5 emissions inventories as 
proposed, Ohio will have a fully approved SIP for all requirements 
applicable for purposes of redesignation.

3. The Improvement in Air Quality Is Due to Permanent and Enforceable 
Reductions in Emissions Resulting From Implementation of the SIP and 
Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control Regulations and Other 
Permanent and Enforceable Reductions (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii))

    EPA believes that Ohio has demonstrated that the observed air 
quality improvement in the Parkersburg-Marietta area is due to 
permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from 
implementation of the SIP, Federal measures and other state-adopted 
measures.
    In making this demonstration, Ohio has calculated the change in 
emissions between 2005, one of the years used to designate the 
Parkersburg-Marietta area as nonattainment, and 2008, one of the years 
the Parkersburg-Marietta area monitored attainment. The reduction in 
emissions and the corresponding improvement in air quality over this 
time period can be attributed to a number of regulatory control 
measures that the Parkersburg-Marietta area and contributing areas have 
implemented in recent years.
a. Permanent and Enforceable Controls Implemented
    The following is a discussion of permanent and enforceable measures 
that have been implemented in the area:
i. Federal Emission Control Measures
    Reductions in fine particle precursor emissions have occurred 
statewide and in upwind areas as a result of Federal emission control 
measures, with additional emission reductions expected to occur in the 
future. Federal emission control measures include the following.
    Tier 2 Emission Standards for Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur 
Standards. These emission control requirements result in lower 
NOX and SO2 emissions from new cars and light 
duty trucks, including sport utility vehicles. The Federal rules were 
phased in between 2004 and 2009. The EPA has estimated that, by the end 
of the phase-in period, new vehicles will emit less NOX with 
the following percentage decreases: passenger cars (light duty 
vehicles)--77%; light duty trucks, minivans and sports utility 
vehicles--86%; and, larger sports utility vehicles, vans and heavier 
trucks--69% to 95%. EPA expects fleet-wide average emissions to decline 
by similar percentages as new vehicles replace older vehicles. The Tier 
2 standards also reduced the sulfur content of gasoline to 30 parts per 
million (ppm) beginning in January 2006. Most gasoline sold in Ohio 
prior to January 2006 had a sulfur content of about 500 ppm.
    Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Rule. EPA issued this rule in July 2000. 
This rule includes standards limiting the sulfur content of diesel 
fuel, which went into effect in 2004. A second phase took effect in 
2007 which reduced fine particle emissions from heavy-duty highway 
engines and further reduced the highway diesel fuel sulfur content to 
15 ppm. The total program is estimated to achieve a 90% reduction in 
direct PM2.5 emissions and a 95% reduction in NOX 
emissions for these new engines

[[Page 71388]]

using low sulfur diesel, compared to existing engines using higher 
sulfur content diesel. The reduction in fuel sulfur content also 
yielded an immediate reduction in sulfate particle emissions from all 
diesel vehicles.
    Nonroad Diesel Rule. In May 2004, EPA promulgated a new rule for 
large nonroad diesel engines, such as those used in construction, 
agriculture and mining equipment, to be phased in between 2008 and 
2014. The rule also reduces the sulfur content in nonroad diesel fuel 
by over 99%. Prior to 2006, nonroad diesel fuel averaged approximately 
3,400 ppm sulfur. This rule limited nonroad diesel sulfur content to 
500 ppm by 2006, with a further reduction to 15 ppm by 2010. The 
combined engine and fuel rules will reduce NOX and 
PM2.5 emissions from large nonroad diesel engines by over 
90%, compared to current nonroad engines using higher sulfur content 
diesel. It is estimated that compliance with this rule will cut 
NOX emissions from nonroad diesel engines by up to 90%. This 
rule achieved some emission reductions by 2008, and was fully 
implemented by 2010. The reduction in fuel sulfur content also yielded 
an immediate reduction in sulfate particle emissions from all diesel 
vehicles.
    Nonroad Large Spark-Ignition Engine and Recreational Engine 
Standards. In November 2002, EPA promulgated emission standards for 
groups of previously unregulated nonroad engines. These engines include 
large spark-ignition engines such as those used in forklifts and 
airport ground-service equipment; recreational vehicles using spark-
ignition engines such as off-highway motorcycles, all-terrain vehicles 
and snowmobiles; and recreational marine diesel engines. Emission 
standards from large spark-ignition engines were implemented in two 
tiers, with Tier 1 starting in 2004 and Tier 2 in 2007. Recreational 
vehicle emission standards are being phased in from 2006 through 2012. 
Marine diesel engine standards were phased in from 2006 through 2009. 
With full implementation of the entire nonroad spark-ignition engine 
and recreational engine standards, an 80% reduction in NOX 
expected by 2020. Some of these emission reductions occurred by the 
2008-2010 period used to demonstrate attainment, and additional 
emission reductions will occur during the maintenance period.
1. Control Measures in Contributing Areas
    Given the significance of sulfates and nitrates in the Parkersburg-
Marietta area, the area's air quality is strongly affected by 
regulation of SO2 and NOX emissions from power 
plants.
    NOX SIP Call. On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), EPA issued a 
NOX SIP Call requiring the District of Columbia and 22 
states to reduce emissions of NOX. Affected states were 
required to comply with Phase I of the SIP Call beginning in 2004, and 
Phase II beginning in 2007. Emission reductions resulting from 
regulations developed in response to the NOX SIP Call are 
permanent and enforceable.
    CAIR and the Transport Rule. On May 12, 2005, EPA published the 
Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), which requires significant reductions 
in emissions of SO2 and NOX from electric 
generating units to limit the interstate transport of these pollutants 
and the ozone and fine particulate matter they form in the atmosphere. 
See 76 FR 70093. The D.C. Circuit initially vacated CAIR, North 
Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008), but ultimately remanded 
the rule to EPA without vacatur to preserve the environmental benefits 
provided by CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 
2008). In response to the court's decision, EPA issued the Transport 
Rule, also known as the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, to address 
interstate transport of NOX and SO2 in the 
eastern United States. See 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). On August 21, 
2012, the D.C. Circuit issued a decision to vacate the Transport Rule. 
In that decision, it also ordered EPA to continue administering CAIR 
``pending the promulgation of a valid replacement.'' EME Homer 
Generation, L.P. v. EPA, No. 11-1302 (D.C. Cir., August 21, 2012).\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The court's judgment is not final, as of October 31, 2012, 
as the mandate has not yet been issued.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In light of these unique circumstances and for the reasons 
explained below, EPA proposes to approve the redesignation request and 
the related SIP revision for Washington County in Ohio, including 
Ohio's plan for maintaining attainment of the PM2.5 standard 
in the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta Area. The air quality 
modeling analysis conducted for the Transport Rule demonstrates that 
the Parkersburg-Marietta area would be able to attain the 
PM2.5 standard even in the absence of either CAIR or the 
Transport Rule. See ``Air Quality Modeling Final Rule Technical Support 
Document,'' App. B, B-62 to B-134. This modeling is available in the 
docket for this proposed redesignation action.
    In addition, CAIR remains in place and enforceable until 
substituted by a valid replacement rule. Ohio's CAIR SIP was approved 
on September 25, 2009 (74 FR 48857). As a result of CAIR, EPA projected 
that in 2009 emissions of NOX would decrease from a baseline 
of 264,000 tons per year (tpy) to 93,000 tpy while in 2010 emissions of 
SO2 would decrease from a baseline of 1,373,000 tpy to 
298,000 tpy within Ohio. And by 2015, we projected emissions of 
NOX would decrease to 83,000 tpy while emissions of 
SO2 would decrease to 208,000 tpy within Ohio (http://www.epa.gov/CAIR/oh.html). The monitoring data used to demonstrate the 
area's attainment of the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the 
April 2010 attainment deadline was also impacted by CAIR. To the extent 
that Ohio is relying on CAIR in its maintenance plan, the recent 
directive from the D.C. Circuit in EME Homer ensures that the 
reductions associated with CAIR will be permanent and enforceable for 
the necessary time period. EPA has been ordered by the court to develop 
a new rule and the opinion makes clear that after promulgating that new 
rule EPA must provide states an opportunity to draft and submit SIPs to 
implement that rule. CAIR thus cannot be replaced until EPA has 
promulgated a final rule through a notice-and-comment rulemaking 
process, states have had an opportunity to draft and submit SIPs, EPA 
has reviewed the SIPs to determine if they can be approved, and EPA has 
taken action on the SIPs, including promulgating a Federal 
Implementation Plan (FIP) if appropriate. These steps alone will take 
many years, even with EPA and the states acting expeditiously. The 
court's clear instruction to EPA that it must continue to administer 
CAIR until a ``valid replacement'' exists provides an additional 
backstop; by definition, any rule that replaces CAIR and meets the 
court's direction would require upwind states to have SIPs that 
eliminate significant contributions to downwind nonattainment and 
prevent interference with maintenance in downwind areas.
    Further, in vacating the Transport Rule and requiring EPA to 
continue administering CAIR, the D.C. Circuit emphasized that the 
consequences of vacating CAIR ``might be more severe now in light of 
the reliance interests accumulated over the intervening four years.'' 
EME Homer, slip op. at 60. The accumulated reliance interests include 
the interests of states who reasonably assumed they could rely on 
reductions associated with CAIR which brought certain nonattainment 
areas into attainment with the NAAQS. If EPA were prevented from 
relying on reductions associated with CAIR in redesignation actions, 
states would be

[[Page 71389]]

forced to impose additional, redundant reductions on top of those 
achieved by CAIR. EPA believes this is precisely the type of irrational 
result the court sought to avoid by ordering EPA to continue 
administering CAIR. For these reasons also, EPA believes it is 
appropriate to allow states to rely on CAIR, and the existing emissions 
reductions achieved by CAIR, as sufficiently permanent and enforceable 
for purposes such as redesignation. Following promulgation of the 
replacement rule, EPA will review SIPs as appropriate to identify 
whether there are any issues that need to be addressed.
b. Emission Reductions
    Ohio developed emissions inventories for NOX, direct 
PM2.5 and SO2 for 2005, one of the years used to 
designate the area as nonattainment, and 2008, one of the years the 
Parkersburg-Marietta area monitored attainment of the standard.
    Electric Generating Unit (EGU) SO2 and NOX 
emissions were derived from EPA's Clean Air Market's acid rain 
database. These emissions reflect Ohio and West Virginia NOX 
emission budgets resulting from EPA's NOX SIP call. The 2008 
emissions from EGUs reflect Ohio's emission caps under CAIR. All other 
point source emissions were obtained from Ohio's source facility 
emissions reporting.
    Area source emissions in the Parkersburg-Marietta area for 2005 
were taken from periodic emissions inventories.\3\ These 2005 area 
source emission estimates were extrapolated to 2008. Source growth 
factors were supplied by the Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium 
(LADCO).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Periodic emission inventories are derived by states every 
three years and reported to the EPA. These periodic emission 
inventories are required by the Federal Consolidated Emissions 
Reporting Rule, codified at 40 CFR Subpart A. EPA revised these and 
other emission reporting requirements in a final rule published on 
December 17, 2008, at 73 FR 76539.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Nonroad mobile source emissions were extrapolated from nonroad 
mobile source emissions reported in EPA's 2005 National Emissions 
Inventory (NEI). Contractors were employed by LADCO to estimate 
emissions for commercial marine vessels and railroads.
    On-road mobile source emissions were calculated using EPA's mobile 
source emission factor model, MOVES2010a, in conjunction with 
transportation model results developed by the local Metropolitan 
Planning Organization (MPO), the Wood-Washington-Wirt Interstate 
Planning Commission (WWW).
    All emissions estimates discussed below were documented in the 
submittal and appendices of Ohio's redesignation request submittal from 
February 29, 2012. For these data and additional emissions inventory 
data, the reader is referred to EPA's digital docket for this rule, 
http://www.regulations.gov, for docket number EPA-R05-OAR-2012-0212, 
which includes digital copies of Ohio's submittal.
    Emissions data in tpy for the entire Parkersburg-Marietta area are 
shown in Tables 2 and 3, below.

        Table 2--Summary of 2005 Emissions for the Entire Parkersburg-Marietta Area by Source Type (tpy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                SO2                NOX               PM2.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point (EGU)............................................         193,252.79          28,455.23           1,745.04
Non-EGU................................................          16,055.73           3,332.23              847.6
On-road................................................              58.79           5,200.52             173.49
Nonroad................................................              74.64             870.68               80.7
Area...................................................             823.36           1,047.18           1,213.27
MAR....................................................             141.75           2,547.49              86.64
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
    Total Parkersburg-Marietta.........................         210,407.06          41,453.33           4,146.74
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Table 3--Comparison of 2005 Emissions From the Non-Attainment Year and 2008 Emissions for an Attainment Year for
                                   the Entire Parkersburg-Marietta Area (tpy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                               Net change (2005-
                                                                2005               2008              2008)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5..................................................           4,146.74           3,796.59            -350.15
NOX....................................................          41,453.33          35,756.31          -5,967.02
SO2....................................................         210,407.06         159,593.17         -50,813.89
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 3 shows that in the entire Parkersburg-Marietta area reduced 
direct PM2.5 emissions by 350.15 tons, NOX 
emissions by 5,967.02 tons and SO2 emissions by 50,813.89 
tons between 2005, a nonattainment year, and 2008, an attainment year.
    Emissions data in tpy for Washington County, Ohio (the Ohio portion 
of the Parkersburg-Marietta area) are shown in Tables 4, and 5, below.

 Table 4--Summary of 2005 Non-Attainment Year Emissions for the Ohio Portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta Area by
                                                Source Type (tpy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   SO2               NOX              PM2.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Point (EGU)...............................................        140,957.01         16,137.09            384.81
Non-EGU...................................................          5,200.90          1,748.86            472.37
On-road...................................................             26.97          2,687.09             90.45
Nonroad...................................................             41.04            425.97             35.53
Area......................................................              9.78            168.44            148.43

[[Page 71390]]

 
MAR.......................................................             44.48            500.78             11.76
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
    Total Parkersburg-Marietta............................        146,280.18         21,668.23          1,143.35
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Table 5--Comparison of 2005 Emissions From the Non-Attainment Year and 2008 Emissions for an Attainment Year for
                             the Ohio Portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta Area (tpy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                Net change (2005-
                                                                  2005              2008              2008)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PM2.5.....................................................          1,143.35          1,203.35            +60.00
NOX.......................................................         21,668.23         22,365.96           +697.73
SO2.......................................................        146,280.18        138,786.24         -7,493.94
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table 5 shows that while NOX and PM2.5 
emissions rose by 697.73 tpy and 60 tpy, respectively, the Ohio portion 
of the Parkersburg-Marietta area reduced SO2 emissions by 
7,493.94 tpy between 2005, a nonattainment year and 2008, an attainment 
year. Despite NOX and PM2.5 emissions increasing 
in the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta area between 2005 and 
2008, the area demonstrated attainment of the NAAQS in 2008, as the 
combined Parkersburg-Marietta area reduced NOX emissions by 
5,697 tpy and PM2.5 by 350.15 tpy between 2005 and 2008. The 
state submission includes multiple lines of evidence to show that even 
with the increase in NOX and PM2.5 the area has 
still reached attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and 
will continue to maintain that designation into the future due to 
multiple actions on the state's behalf. The weight of evidence 
submitted by the state contains modeling, monitoring and trend 
analysis. The trend analysis for the area shows a steady trend of 
declining PM2.5 monitored data, with a significant drop in 
concentrations beginning in 2006. Since meteorology can play a large 
part in dispersion of PM2.5, which can greatly affect 
monitored concentrations, LADCO and the state have normalized the data 
to remove meteorological effects using a statistical analysis, the 
state has shown in their submission that the concentrations observed 
are due to real reductions in PM2.5 and its precursors, and 
not just meteorological effects. In addition, control of emissions from 
local power plants through local and national programs have impacted 
and will continue to impact the area, as we will describe below.
    In 2008, American Electric Power's Muskingum River Station in 
Washington County, Ohio, implemented the continuous operation of an 
advanced NOX control device on their largest of five units 
(unit 5), as part of a federally-enforceable consent decree. 
The Muskingum River Station is also required to retire, repower or 
retrofit all remaining units by 2015. Initial plans provided by the 
Muskingum River Station to Ohio indicate that unit 5 will also 
install a flue gas desulfurization device in addition to its consent 
decree-mandated NOX control device. Another local power 
plant, American Municipal Power's R.H. Gorsuch Station in Washington 
County, permanently shut down at the end of 2010, and would require an 
approvable permit to restart. This facility operated four 53 megawatt 
(MW) units. The result of federally-mandated consent decree actions and 
the shutdown of a power plant demonstrate that NOX 
reductions from power plants in the Parkersburg-Marietta area have 
occurred and will continue to occur in the future.
    Based on the information summarized above, Ohio has adequately 
demonstrated that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent 
and enforceable emissions reductions.

4. Ohio Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 175A 
of the CAA (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv))

    In conjunction with Ohio's request to redesignate the Ohio portion 
of the Parkersburg-Marietta nonattainment area to attainment status, 
Ohio has submitted a SIP revision to provide for maintenance of the 
1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the area through 2022.
a. What is required in a maintenance plan?
    Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the required elements of a 
maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainment to 
attainment. Under section 175A, the plan must demonstrate continued 
attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at least ten years after EPA 
approves a redesignation to attainment. Eight years after 
redesignation, the state must submit a revised maintenance plan which 
demonstrates that attainment will continue to be maintained for ten 
years following the initial ten-year maintenance period. To address the 
possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must 
contain contingency measures with a schedule for implementation as EPA 
deems necessary to assure prompt correction of any future annual 
PM2.5 violations.
    The September 4, 1992, memorandum from John Calcagni, entitled 
``Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to 
Attainment,'' (Calcagni Memorandum) provides additional guidance on the 
content of a maintenance plan. The memorandum states that a maintenance 
plan should address the following items: the attainment emissions 
inventories, a maintenance demonstration showing maintenance for the 
ten years of the maintenance period, a commitment to maintain the 
existing monitoring network, factors and procedures to be used for 
verification of continued attainment of the NAAQS and a contingency 
plan to prevent or correct future violations of the NAAQS.
b. Attainment Inventory
    Ohio developed emissions inventories for NOX, direct 
PM2.5 and SO2 for 2008, one of the years in the 
period during which the Parkersburg-Marietta area monitored attainment 
of the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard, as described previously. 
The attainment levels of emissions for the entire area, as well as the 
attainment levels of emissions for the Ohio portion of the area were 
summarized in Tables 3 and 5, above.

[[Page 71391]]

c. Demonstration of Maintenance
    Along with the redesignation request, Ohio submitted a revision to 
its PM2.5 SIP to include a maintenance plan for the 
Parkersburg-Marietta area, as required by section 175A of the CAA. 
Section 175A requires a State seeking redesignation to attainment to 
submit a SIP revision to provide for the maintenance of the NAAQS in 
the area ``for at least 10 years after the redesignation.'' EPA has 
interpreted this as a showing of maintenance ``for a period of ten 
years following redesignation.'' Calcagni Memorandum, p. 9. Where the 
emissions inventory method of showing maintenance is used, its purpose 
is to show that emissions during the maintenance period will not 
increase over the attainment year inventory. Calcagni Memorandum, pp. 
9-10.
    As discussed in detail in the section below, the state's 
maintenance plan submission expressly documents that the area's 
emissions inventories will remain below the attainment year inventories 
through 2022. In addition, for the reasons set forth below, EPA 
believes that the state's submission, in conjunction with additional 
supporting information, further demonstrates that the area will 
continue to maintain the PM2.5 standard at least through 
2023. Thus, if EPA finalizes its proposed approval of the redesignation 
request and maintenance plans in 2013, it is based on a showing, in 
accordance with section 175A, that the state's maintenance plan 
provides for maintenance for at least ten years after redesignation.
    Ohio's plan demonstrates maintenance of the 1997 annual 
PM2.5 standard through 2022 by showing that current and 
future emissions of NOX, directly emitted PM2.5 
and SO2 for the area remain at or below attainment year 
emission levels. A maintenance demonstration need not be based on 
modeling. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F. 3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001), Sierra Club 
v. EPA, 375 F. 3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also 66 FR 53094, 53099-
53100 (October 19, 2001), and 68 FR 25413, 25430-25432 (May 12, 2003).
    Ohio's submission uses emissions inventory projections for the 
years 2015 and 2022 to demonstrate maintenance for the Ohio portion of 
the Parkersburg-Marietta area. The projected emissions were estimated 
by Ohio, with assistance from LADCO and WWW using the MOVES2010a model. 
Projection of inventory emissions was done for the 2015 interim year 
emissions using estimates based on the 2009 and 2018 LADCO modeling 
inventory, using LADCO's growth factors, for all sectors. The 2022 
maintenance year emissions are based on emissions estimates from the 
2018 LADCO modeling. Table 7 shows the 2008 attainment base year 
emission estimates and the 2015 and 2022 emission projections for the 
entire tri-state Parkersburg-Marietta area that Ohio provided in its 
February 29, 2012, submission.

 Table 6--Comparison of 2008, 2015 and 2022 NOX, Direct PM2.5 and SO2 Emission Totals (tpy) for the Ohio Portion
                                        of the Parkersburg-Marietta Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                SO2                NOX               PM2.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2008 (baseline)........................................         138,786.24          22,365.96           1,203.35
2015...................................................          67,625.84          11,439.41           1,198.61
2022...................................................          37,351.17           6,417.53           1,181.01
Change.................................................        -101,435.07         -15,948.43             -22.34
2008-2022..............................................             \1\ 73             \1\ 71              \1\ 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ % decrease.

    Table 6 shows that the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta 
area will reduce NOX emissions by 15,948.43 tpy between 2008 
and the maintenance projection to 2022, direct PM2.5 
emissions by 22.34 tpy, and reduced SO2 emissions by 
101,435.07 tpy between 2008 and 2022. The 2022 projected emissions 
levels are significantly below attainment year inventory levels, and 
based on the rate of decline, it is highly improbable that any 
increases in these levels will occur in 2023 and beyond.
    EPA has done analysis of the areas emissions, and has concluded 
that the Parkersburg-Marietta area's emissions can be expected to stay 
well below the level of emissions from their attainment year emissions 
inventory. First, EPA has determined that the overall net rate of 
decline in emissions of PM2.5, NOX and 
SO2 projected from the attainment year 2008 through 2022 are 
approximately 1.59 tpy, 1139.17 tpy and 7246.10 tpy, respectively. EPA 
has also determined that no control measures taken into account in the 
projected analysis will end in 2023, nor does EPA expect any change in 
growth for the Parkersburg-Marietta area for the maintenance year 2023. 
The net rates of decline, coupled with continued control and growth 
factors, indicate that emissions inventory levels will not only 
significantly decline between 2008 and 2022, but that the reductions 
will continue into 2023 and beyond. Second, EPA notes that the rate of 
emissions decline is consistent with monitored and projected air 
quality trends. As Table 1 demonstrates, monitored PM2.5 
design value concentrations in Parkersburg-Marietta are well below the 
NAAQS in the years beyond 2008, an attainment year for the area. 
Further, those values are trending downward as time progresses. Based 
on the future projections of emissions in 2015 and 2022 showing 
significant emissions reductions in direct PM2.5, 
NOX and SO2, it is very unlikely that monitored 
PM2.5 values in 2023 and beyond will show violations of the 
NAAQS. Additionally, the 2009-2011 design value of 12.3 [mu]g/m\3\ 
provides a sufficient margin in the unlikely event emissions rise 
slightly in the future. We are proposing to find the mobile source 
contribution to these emissions insignificant (see section V(5) of this 
action for further discussion), and the mobile source contribution is 
expected to remain insignificant in 2023 and beyond because of fleet 
turnover and engine emission standards in upcoming years that will 
result in cleaner vehicles and cleaner fuels.
    As described in section V(3)(b) of this action, the result of 
federally-mandated consent decree actions and the shutdown of a power 
plant demonstrate that NOX reductions from power plants in 
the Parkersburg-Marietta area have occurred and are mandated to 
continue to occur in 2023 and beyond. Thus, the emissions inventories 
set forth in Table 6 show that the area will continue to maintain the 
annual PM2.5 standard during the maintenance period and at 
least through 2023. These consent decree actions are significant 
controls of NOX and SO2, along with 
implementation of Ohio's SIP approved CAIR controls for the area.

[[Page 71392]]

    In light of the unique circumstances surrounding CAIR and the 
Transport Rule discussed in section V(3)(a)(i)(1) of this action, and 
for the reasons explained below, EPA proposes to approve the 
redesignation request and the related SIP revision for Washington 
County in Ohio, including Ohio's plan for maintaining attainment of the 
PM2.5 standard in the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-
Marietta Area. The air quality modeling analysis conducted for the 
Transport Rule demonstrates that the Parkersburg-Marietta area would be 
able to attain the PM2.5 standard even in the absence of 
either CAIR or the Transport Rule. See ``Air Quality Modeling Final 
Rule Technical Support Document,'' App. B, B-62 to B-134. This modeling 
is available in the docket for this proposed redesignation action.
    In addition, CAIR remains in place and enforceable until 
substituted by a valid replacement rule. Ohio's CAIR SIP was approved 
on September 25, 2009 (74 FR 48857). As a result of CAIR, EPA projected 
that in 2009 emissions of NOX would decrease from a baseline 
of 264,000 tpy to 93,000 tpy while in 2010 emissions of SO2 
would decrease from a baseline of 1,373,000 tpy to 298,000 tpy within 
Ohio. And by 2015, we project emissions of NOX will decrease 
to 83,000 tpy while emissions of SO2 will decrease to 
208,000 tpy within Ohio (http://www.epa.gov/CAIR/oh.html). The 
monitoring data used to demonstrate the area's attainment of the 1997 
Annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the April 2010 attainment deadline was 
also impacted by CAIR. To the extent that Ohio is relying on CAIR in 
its maintenance plan, the recent directive from the D.C. Circuit in EME 
Homer ensures that the reductions associated with CAIR will be 
permanent and enforceable for the necessary time period. EPA has been 
ordered by the court to develop a new rule and the opinion makes clear 
that after promulgating that new rule EPA must provide states an 
opportunity to draft and submit SIPs to implement that rule. CAIR thus 
cannot be replaced until EPA has promulgated a final rule through a 
notice-and-comment rulemaking process, states have had an opportunity 
to draft and submit SIPs, EPA has reviewed the SIPs to determine if 
they can be approved, and EPA has taken action on the SIPs, including 
promulgating a FIP if appropriate. These steps alone will take many 
years, even with EPA and the states acting expeditiously. The court's 
clear instruction to EPA that it must continue to administer CAIR until 
a ``valid replacement'' exists provides an additional backstop; by 
definition, any rule that replaces CAIR and meets the court's direction 
would require upwind states to have SIPs that eliminate significant 
contributions to downwind nonattainment and prevent interference with 
maintenance in downwind areas.
    Further, in vacating the Transport Rule and requiring EPA to 
continue administering CAIR, the D.C. Circuit emphasized that the 
consequences of vacating CAIR ``might be more severe now in light of 
the reliance interests accumulated over the intervening four years.'' 
EME Homer, slip op. at 60. The accumulated reliance interests include 
the interests of states who reasonably assumed they could rely on 
reductions associated with CAIR which brought certain nonattainment 
areas into attainment with the NAAQS. If EPA were prevented from 
relying on reductions associated with CAIR in redesignation actions, 
states would be forced to impose additional, redundant reductions on 
top of those achieved by CAIR. EPA believes this is precisely the type 
of irrational result the court sought to avoid by ordering EPA to 
continue administering CAIR. For these reasons also, EPA believes it is 
appropriate to allow states to rely on CAIR, and the existing emissions 
reductions achieved by CAIR, as sufficiently permanent and enforceable 
for purposes such as redesignation. Following promulgation of the 
replacement rule, EPA will review SIPs as appropriate to identify 
whether there are any issues that need to be addressed.
    Based on the information summarized above, Ohio has adequately 
demonstrated maintenance of the PM2.5 standard in this area 
for a period extending in excess of ten years from expected final 
action on Ohio's redesignation request.
d. Monitoring Network
    Ohio's plan includes a commitment to continue working with West 
Virginia to operate its EPA-approved monitoring network, as necessary 
to demonstrate ongoing compliance with the NAAQS. Ohio currently does 
not operate a PM2.5 monitor in Washington County to monitor 
the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta area. West Virginia 
currently operates one monitor in Wood County for the Parkersburg-
Marietta area.
e. Verification of Continued Attainment
    Ohio remains obligated to continue to quality-assure monitoring 
data and enter all data into the Air Quality System in accordance with 
Federal guidelines. Ohio will use these data, supplemented with 
additional information as necessary, to assure that the area continues 
to attain the standard. Ohio will also continue to develop and submit 
periodic emission inventories as required by the Federal Consolidated 
Emissions Reporting Rule (67 FR 39602, June 10, 2002) to track future 
levels of emissions. Both of these actions will help to verify 
continued attainment in accordance with 40 CFR part 58.
f. Contingency Plan
    The contingency plan provisions are designed to promptly correct or 
prevent a violation of the NAAQS that might occur after redesignation 
of an area to attainment. Section 175A of the CAA requires that a 
maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems 
necessary to assure that the state will promptly correct a violation of 
the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The maintenance plan should 
identify the contingency measures to be adopted, a schedule and 
procedure for adoption and implementation of the contingency measures, 
and a time limit for action by the state. The state should also 
identify specific indicators to be used to determine when the 
contingency measures need to be adopted and implemented. The 
maintenance plan must include a requirement that the state will 
implement all measures with respect to control of the pollutant(s) that 
were contained in the SIP before redesignation of the area to 
attainment. See section 175A(d) of the CAA. Ohio's contingency measures 
include a Warning Level Response and an Action Level Response. An 
initial Warning Level Response is triggered when the average weighted 
annual mean for one year exceeds 15.5 [mu]g/m\3\. In that case, a study 
will be conducted to determine if the emissions trends show increases; 
if action is necessary to reverse emissions increases, Ohio will follow 
the same procedures for control selection and implementation as for an 
Action Level Response.
    The Action Level Response will be prompted by any one of the 
following: a Warning Level Response study that shows emissions 
increases, a weighted annual mean over a two-year average that exceeds 
the standard or a violation of the standard. If an Action Level 
Response is triggered, Ohio will adopt and implement appropriate 
control measures within 18 months from the end of the year in which 
monitored air quality triggering a response occurs.
    Ohio's candidate contingency measures include the following:
    i. ICI Boilers--SO2 and NOX controls;
    ii. Process heaters;
    iii. EGUS;

[[Page 71393]]

    iv. Internal combustion engines;
    v. Combustion turbines;
    vi. Other sources > 100 TPY;
    vii. Fleet vehicles;
    viii. Concrete manufacturers and;
    ix. Aggregate processing plants.
    Ohio further commits to conduct ongoing review of its data, and if 
monitored concentrations or emissions are trending upward, Ohio commits 
to take appropriate steps to avoid a violation if possible. Ohio 
commits to continue implementing SIP requirements upon and after 
redesignation.
    EPA believes that Ohio's contingency measures, as well as the 
commitment to continue implementing any SIP requirements, satisfy the 
pertinent requirements of section 175A(d).
    As required by section 175A(b) of the CAA, Ohio commits to submit 
to the EPA an updated PM2.5 maintenance plan eight years 
after redesignation of the Parkersburg-Marietta area to cover an 
additional ten-year period beyond the initial ten-year maintenance 
period. As required by section 175A of the CAA, Ohio has also committed 
to retain the PM2.5 control measures contained in the SIP 
prior to redesignation.
    For all of the reasons set forth above, EPA is proposing to approve 
Ohio's 1997 annual PM2.5 maintenance plan for the 
Parkersburg-Marietta area as meeting the requirements of CAA section 
175A.

5. Insignificance Determination for the Mobile Source Contribution to 
PM2.5 and NOX

    Under section 176(c) of the CAA, transportation plans and 
transportation improvement programs (TIPs) must conform to applicable 
SIP goals. This means that such actions will not: (1) Cause or 
contribute to violations of a NAAQS; (2) worsen the severity of an 
existing violation; or (3) delay timely attainment of a NAAQS or any 
interim milestone. Actions involving Federal Highway Administration 
(FHWA) or Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funding or approval are 
subject to the Transportation Conformity Rule (40 CFR part 93 subpart 
A). Under this rule, MPOs in nonattainment and maintenance areas 
coordinate with state air quality agencies and federal air and 
transportation agencies (EPA, FHWA and FTA) to demonstrate that their 
metropolitan transportation plans (``plans'') and TIPs conform to 
applicable SIPs. This is typically determined by showing that estimated 
emissions from existing and planned highway and transit systems are 
less than or equal to the motor vehicle emissions budgets contained in 
a SIP.
    For budgets to be approvable, they must meet, at a minimum, EPA's 
adequacy criteria (40 CFR 93.118(e)(4)). However, the Transportation 
Conformity Rule at 40 CFR 93.109(m) allows areas to forgo establishment 
of a budget(s) where it is demonstrated that regional motor vehicle 
emissions for a particular pollutant or precursor pollutant are an 
insignificant contributor to the air quality problem in the area. The 
general criteria for insignificance determinations per 40 CFR 93.109(m) 
are based on a number of factors, including (1) the percentage of motor 
vehicle emissions in context of the total SIP inventory; (2) the 
current state of air quality as determined by monitoring data for that 
NAAQS; (3) the absence of SIP motor vehicle control measures; and (4) 
historical trends and future projections of the growth of motor vehicle 
emissions in the area.
    The redesignation request that Ohio submitted for its portion of 
the Parkersburg-Marietta area includes a request for EPA to make an 
insignificance finding for NOX and directly emitted 
PM2.5 for the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta 
PM2.5 nonattainment area. Pursuant to Section 93.118(e)(4) 
and 93.109(k) of the Transportation Conformity Rule, as part of the 
review of Ohio's redesignation request and maintenance plan submittal, 
we have reviewed Ohio's justification for the finding of insignificance 
for direct PM2.5 and also for NOX as a precursor 
of PM2.5 in the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta 
area. EPA agrees with Ohio's conclusion that on-road emissions of 
PM2.5 and NOX are insignificant for 
transportation conformity purposes. We base our finding on several 
factors:

--The fact that on December 7, 2009 (74 FR 64075), EPA found these 
budgets to be insignificant as part of our review of the state's July 
16, 2008, PM2.5 attainment demonstration;
--The fact that the area has been determined to attain the annual 
PM2.5 standard, and continues to attain the standard with 
the most recent three years of complete, quality assured monitoring 
data;
--The absence of local on-road control measures; and
--The continued downward trend of on-road NOX and 
PM2.5 emissions from 2005-2022.

    Consistent with EPA's adequacy review of Ohio's redesignation 
request and maintenance plan and the Agency's thorough review of the 
entire SIP submission, EPA is proposing to approve Ohio's 
insignificance determination for the on-road motor vehicle contribution 
of NOX and PM2.5 emissions to the overall 
PM2.5 emissions in the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-
Marietta PM2.5 area.
    Because EPA finds that Ohio's submitted maintenance plan and 
redesignation request meets the criteria in the conformity rule for an 
insignificance finding for motor vehicle emissions of NOX 
and PM2.5 in the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta 
PM2.5 area, it is not necessary to establish 
PM2.5 and NOX budgets for the Ohio portion of the 
Parkersburg-Marietta PM2.5 area. That is, EPA finds that the 
submittal demonstrates that, for NOX and PM2.5, 
regional motor vehicle emissions are an insignificant contributor to 
the annual PM2.5 air quality problem in the Ohio portion of 
the area. Motor vehicle emissions in general, for the maintenance 
period of 2015 and 2022, are low and declining in the Ohio portion of 
the area. In 2015 the percentage contribution to emissions from the 
Ohio portion of the area from motor vehicles is 10.49% and 3.48% for 
NOX and PM2.5, respectively. In 2022, motor 
vehicles in the Ohio portion of the area are projected to contribute 
only 8.92% and 2.14% of emissions for NOX, and 
PM2.5, respectively, with the decrease due to Federal 
regulations on motor vehicle rules such as Heavy-duty Highway Vehicle 
standards and Tier 2 vehicle and fuel standards. Also, there have been 
no SIP requirements for motor vehicle control measures for the Ohio 
portion of the area and it is unlikely that motor vehicle control 
measures will be implemented for PM2.5 in this area in the 
future.
    Finally, as described above, the area has attained the 1997 annual 
PM2.5 NAAQS and we are proposing to approve the maintenance 
plan and redesignation request for the Ohio portion of the area. 
Therefore motor vehicle emissions budgets for PM2.5 and 
NOX are not required for the Parkersburg-Marietta area to 
maintain the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is proposing to 
approve the inventory and the findings of insignificant contribution by 
motor vehicles, resulting in no proposed motor vehicle emissions 
budgets for the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta area for 2015 
and 2022 projected maintenance years. On-road emissions were calculated 
using the EPA required MOVES2010a model.
    With regard to on-road emissions of SO2, volatile 
organic compounds and ammonia, Ohio did not provide emission budgets 
(or an insignificance demonstration) because it concluded, consistent 
with EPA's presumptions regarding these PM2.5 precursors, 
that

[[Page 71394]]

emissions of these precursors from motor vehicles are not significant 
contributors to the area's PM2.5 air quality problem.
    As discussed in section V(4)(c) of this action, EPA is proposing 
that if this approval is finalized in 2013 the area will continue to 
maintain the PM2.5 standard through at least 2023. 
Consistent with this proposal, EPA is proposing to determine the 
insignificance of motor vehicle emissions of NOX and 
PM2.5 as submitted by the State in its February 29, 2012, 
maintenance plan for the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta area. 
EPA is proposing that the proposed finding insignificance of these 
emissions is consistent with maintenance of the Ohio portion of the 
Parkersburg-Marietta area through 2023.

6. 2005 Comprehensive Emissions Inventory

    As discussed above, section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires areas to 
submit a comprehensive emissions inventory. Ohio submitted a 2005 base 
year emissions inventory that meets this requirement. Emissions 
contained in the submittals cover the general source categories of 
point sources, area sources, on-road mobile sources, and nonroad mobile 
sources.
    For the point source sector, EGU SO2 and NOX 
emissions were derived from EPA's Clean Air Market's database. All 
other point source emissions were obtained from Ohio's source facility 
emissions reporting.
    Area source emissions were extrapolated from Ohio's 2005 periodic 
emissions inventories. Source growth factors were supplied by LADCO.
    Nonroad mobile source emissions were extrapolated from nonroad 
mobile source emissions reported in EPA's 2005 NEI. LADCO estimated 
emissions for commercial marine vessels and railroads.
    On-road mobile source emissions were calculated using EPA's mobile 
source emission factor model, MOVES2010a, in conjunction with roadway 
network traffic information prepared by WWW.
    All emissions discussed in Table 4 were documented in the submittal 
and the Appendices of Ohio's redesignation request submittal. EPA has 
reviewed Ohio's documentation of the emissions inventory techniques and 
data sources used for the derivation of the 2005 emissions estimates 
and has found that Ohio has thoroughly documented the derivation of 
these emissions inventories. The submittal from the state shows that 
the 2005 emissions inventory is currently the most complete emissions 
inventories for PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in the 
Parkersburg-Marietta area. Based upon EPA's review, we propose to find 
that the 2005 emissions inventories are as complete and accurate as 
possible given the input data available to the Ohio, and we are 
proposing to approve them under CAA section 172(c)(3).

7. Summary of Proposed Actions

    EPA has previously determined that the Parkersburg-Marietta area 
has attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is proposing 
to determine that the entire Parkersburg-Marietta area continues to 
attain the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard using the latest three 
years of certified, quality-assured data, and that the Ohio portion of 
the area has met the requirements for redesignation under section 
107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is proposing to approve the request from 
Ohio to change the legal designation of the Ohio portion of the 
Parkersburg-Marietta area from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 
annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is proposing to approve Ohio's 
PM2.5 maintenance plan for the Parkersburg-Marietta area as 
a revision to the Ohio SIP because the plan meets the requirements of 
section 175A of the CAA. EPA is proposing to approve the 2005 emissions 
inventories for primary PM2.5, NOX, and 
SO2, documented in Ohio's February 29, 2012, submittal as 
satisfying the requirement in section 172(c)(3) of the CAA for a 
comprehensive, current emission inventory. Finally, for transportation 
conformity purposes EPA is also proposing to approve Ohio's 
determination that on-road emissions of PM2.5 and 
NOX are insignificant contributors to PM2.5 
concentrations in the area.

VI. What are the effects of EPA's proposed actions?

    If finalized, approval of the redesignation request would change 
the official designation of the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-
Marietta area for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, found at 40 
CFR part 81, from nonattainment to attainment. If finalized, EPA's 
proposal would approve as a revision to the Ohio SIP for the 
Parkersburg-Marietta area, the maintenance plan for the 1997 annual 
PM2.5 standard as well as the 2005 emissions inventories 
included with the redesignation request.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, redesignation of an area to attainment and the 
accompanying approval of a maintenance plan under section 107(d)(3)(E) 
are actions that affect the status of a geographical area and do not 
impose any additional regulatory requirements on sources beyond those 
imposed by state law. A redesignation to attainment does not in and of 
itself create any new requirements, but rather results in the 
applicability of requirements contained in the CAA for areas that have 
been redesignated to attainment. Moreover, the Administrator is 
required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions 
of the CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 
CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to 
approve state choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. 
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. For that reason, these actions:
     Are not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);
     Do not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Are certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Do 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);
     Do not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Are not economically significant regulatory actions based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Are not significant regulatory actions subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Are not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     Do not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

[[Page 71395]]

    In addition, this rule does not have tribal implications as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), 
because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in 
the state, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct 
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Particulate matter.

40 CFR Part 81

    Air pollution control, Environmental protection, National Parks, 
Wilderness.

    Dated: November 15, 2012.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2012-29012 Filed 11-29-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


