63388 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 206 / Thursday, October 24, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

EPA-APPROVED RHODE ISLAND REGULATIONS

State citation Title/subject 

State 

effective 

date 

EPA approval date Explanations 

*******

Air Pollution Control 

Regulation 9.

Air pollution control permits.1/31/2011 10/24/2013 [Insert FEDERAL REGISTER page 

number where the 

document begins].

Definitions of ‘‘Major modification’’; ‘‘Significant’’; and ‘‘Net emissions increase’’ are 

amended in Section 9.1. Definitions of ‘‘Regulated NSR pollutant’’; ‘‘Significant emissions 

increase’’; ‘‘Baseline actual emissions’’; and 

‘‘Subject to Regulation’’ are added to Section 

9.1. Definition of ‘‘Major stationary source’’ is 

amended in Section 9.5.1(f). Definition of 

‘‘PM2.5’’ is added to Section 9.1. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

§ 52.2072 [Amended] 

■ 3. Section 52.2072 is amended by 

removing and reserving paragraph (b). 

[FR Doc. 2013–24847 Filed 10–23–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2013–0136, EPA–R05– 

OAR–2013–0215, EPA–R05–OAR–2013– 

0344, EPA–R05–OAR–2013–0378; FRL– 

9901–61–Region5] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio; 

Dayton-Springfield, SteubenvilleWeirton, Toledo, and ParkersburgMarietta; 1997 8-Hour Ozone 

Maintenance Plan Revision to 

Approved Motor Vehicle Emissions 

Budgets 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: Under the Clean Air Act 

(CAA), EPA is approving requests by 

Ohio to revise the 1997 8-hour ozone 

maintenance air quality state 

implementation plan (SIP) for the 

Dayton-Springfield area, the Toledo 

area, and the Ohio portions of the 

Parkersburg-Marietta and SteubenvilleWeirton, West Virginia-Ohio areas, to 

replace onroad emissions inventories 

and motor vehicle emissions budgets 

(budgets) with inventories and budgets 

developed using EPA’s Motor Vehicle 

Emissions Simulator (MOVES) 

emissions model. The DaytonSpringfield area consists of Clark, 

Greene, Miami, and Montgomery 

Counties. The Ohio portion of the 

Steubenville-Weirton, West VirginiaOhio area consists of Jefferson County, 

Ohio. The Toledo area consists of Lucas 

and Wood Counties. The Ohio portion 

of the Parkersburg-Marietta, West 

Virginia-Ohio area consists of 

Washington County. Ohio submitted the 

SIP revision requests on the following 

dates: Dayton-Springfield on February 

11, 2013; Steubenville-Weirton on 

March 15, 2013; Toledo on April 18, 

2013; Parkersburg-Marietta on April 26, 

2013. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective December 23, 2013, unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by 

November 25, 2013. If adverse 

comments are received, EPA will 

publish a timely withdrawal of the 

direct final rule in the Federal Register 

informing the public that the rule will 

not take effect. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Nos. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2013–0136 (Dayton-Springfield), 

EPA–R05–OAR–2013–0215 

(Steubenville-Weirton), EPA–R05– 

OAR–2013–0344 (Toledo), EPA–R05– 

OAR–2013–0378 (Parkersburg-Marietta), 

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, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, 

Chief, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (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 Nos. EPA–R05–OAR–2013– 

0136, EPA–R05–OAR–2013–0215, EPA– 

R05–OAR–2013–0344, EPA–R05–OAR– 

2013–0378. 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. 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 


Emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 206 / Thursday, October 24, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 63389 

1The safety margin is achieved by adding a 

certain percentage of emissions, in tons per day, 

onto the MOVES-based onroad emissions budgets. 

In this case, Ohio chose to add a 15% safety margin 

to their budgets. The safety margin cannot exceed 

the combined emissions reduction for the area. 

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: 

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 approving? 

II. What is the background for this action? 

a. SIP Budgets and Transportation 

Conformity. 

b. Prior Approval of Budgets. 

c. The MOVES Emissions Model. 

d. Submission of New Budgets Based on 

MOVES2010a. 

III. What are the criteria for approval? 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of the state’s 

submittals? 

a. The Revised Inventories. 

b. Approvability of the MOVES2010abased Budgets. 

c. Applicability of MOBILE6.2-based 

Budgets. 

V. What action is EPA taking? 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews. 

I. What is EPA approving? 

EPA is approving new MOVES2010abased onroad emissions inventories and 

budgets for the Dayton-Springfield and 

Toledo areas, and the Ohio portions of 

the Steubenville-Weirton and 

Parkersburg-Marietta, West VirginiaOhio 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance 

areas, that will replace MOBILE-based 

inventories and budgets in the SIP. 

These areas were redesignated to 

attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard effective June 15, 2007 (72 FR 

26648, 44784, 27652, 27640), and 

MOBILE6.2-based onroad emissions 

inventories and budgets were approved 

in those actions. Upon effective date of 

approval of the MOVES-based budgets, 

they must then be used in future 

transportation conformity analyses for 

the area as required by section 176(c) of 

the CAA. See the official release of the 

MOVES2010 emissions model (75 FR 

9411–9414) for background, and section 

II.(c) below for details. 

II. What is the background for this 

action? 

a. SIP Budgets and Transportation 

Conformity 

Under the CAA, states are required to 

submit, at various times, control strategy 

SIP revisions and maintenance plans for 

nonattainment and maintenance areas 

for a given national ambient air quality 

standard (NAAQS). These SIP revisions 

and maintenance plans include budgets 

of onroad mobile source emissions for 

criteria pollutants and/or their 

precursors. Transportation plans and 

projects ‘‘conform’’ to (i.e., are 

consistent with) the SIP when they will 

not cause or contribute to air quality 

violations, or delay timely attainment of 

the NAAQS or an interim milestone. 

b. Prior Approval of Budgets 

EPA previously approved 

MOBILE6.2-based budgets for the 

Dayton-Springfield and Toledo areas, 

and the Ohio portions of the 

Parkersburg-Marietta and SteubenvilleWeirton, West Virginia-Ohio 8-hour 

ozone maintenance areas, for volatile 

organic compounds (VOCs) and 

nitrogen oxides (NOX). The DaytonSpringfield area’s ozone maintenance 

plan established 2005 and 2018 budgets. 

The Toledo area and the Ohio portions 

of the Parkersburg-Marietta and 

Steubenville-Weirton areas’ ozone 

maintenance plans established 2009 and 

2018 budgets. These budgets 

demonstrated a reduction in emissions 

from the monitored attainment year. 

c. The MOVES Emissions Model 

The MOVES model is EPA’s state of 

the art tool for estimating highway 

emissions. EPA announced the release 

of MOVES2010 in March 2010 (75 FR 

9411). Use of the MOVES model is 

required for regional emissions analyses 

for transportation conformity 

determinations outside of California that 

begin after March 2, 2013. 

MOVES2010a was used to estimate 

emissions in the areas for the same 

milestone years as the original onroad 

emissions inventories and budgets in 

the SIP. The Ohio Environmental 

Protection Agency (OEPA) is revising 

the onroad emissions inventories and 

budgets using the latest planning 

assumptions, including population and 

employment updates. In addition, 

newer vehicle registration data has been 

used to update the age distribution of 

the vehicle fleet. Since future 

demonstrations of conformity will use 

emissions estimates derived with 

MOVES, it is appropriate to establish 

benchmarks based on MOVES. The 

interagency consultation group has had 

extensive consultation on the 

requirements and need for new budgets. 

d. Submission of New Budgets Based on 

MOVES2010a 

Ohio submitted final budgets based 

on MOVES2010a that cover the DaytonSpringfield (submitted February 11, 

2013) and Toledo (submitted April 18, 

2013) areas and the Ohio portions of the 

Parkersburg-Marietta (submitted April 

26, 2013) and Steubenville-Weirton 

(submitted March 15, 2013), West 

Virginia-Ohio areas. Ohio did not 

receive any comments for the Toledo, 

Dayton-Springfield, or ParkersburgMarietta submittals. Ohio received 

comments requesting clarification on 

the Steubenville-Weirton submittal from 

the West Virginia Division of Air 

Quality and provided responses to the 

clarifications requested. 

For the Dayton-Springfield area, the 

new MOVES2010a-based budgets are for 

the years 2005 and 2018 for both VOCs 

and NOX. For the Toledo area and the 

Ohio portions of the ParkersburgMarietta and Steubenville-Weirton 

areas, the new MOVES2010a-based 

budgets are for the years 2009 and 2018 

for both VOCs and NOX. The budgets for 

these areas are detailed later in this 

notice. Ohio also provided the areas’ 

total emissions, including onroad 

mobile emissions inventories based on 

MOVES2010a, for the attainment year, 

the interim budget year, and the 

maintenance year. The combined 

emissions reduction from all sectors 

between the attainment year and the 

maintenance year is shown as well. 

Total emissions include point, area, 

nonroad mobile and onroad mobile 

sources. The total emissions and 

combined emissions reduction from all 

sectors from 2005 to 2018 for VOC and 

NOX for the area is shown in tables 1 

and 2. In tables 1 through 8, for onroad 

emissions of both VOC and NOX for the 

years noted with an asterisk, a 15% 

safety margin1 has been applied to reach 

the values shown. 


Emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
63390 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 206 / Thursday, October 24, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

TABLE 1—TOTAL VOC EMISSIONS WITH MOVES2010A MOBILE EMISSIONS IN DAYTON-SPRINGFIELD-SPRINGFIELD, OHIO

(CLARK, GREENE, MIAMI, AND MONTGOMERY COUNTIES) 

[tons per day] 

Sector 2005 

Attainment 

2009 

Interim 

2018* 

Maintenance 

Combined 

emissions 

reduction 

(2005–2018) 

Point ......................................................................................................... 3 .45 3 .47 3 .72 

Area ......................................................................................................... 46 .23 47 .76 52 .75 

Onroad ..................................................................................................... 55 .37 43 .02 19 .44 

Nonroad ................................................................................................... 12 .16 9 .62 7 .91 

Total .................................................................................................. 115 .21 103 .87 83 .82 31 .39 

TABLE 2—TOTAL NOX EMISSIONS WITH MOVES2010A MOBILE EMISSIONS IN DAYTON-SPRINGFIELD-SPRINGFIELD, OHIO

(CLARK, GREENE, MIAMI, AND MONTGOMERY COUNTIES) 

[tons per day] 

Sector 2005 

Attainment 

2009 

Interim 

2018* 

Maintenance 

Combined 

emissions 

reduction 

(2005–2018) 

Point ......................................................................................................... 36 .64 36 .24 37 .93 

Area ......................................................................................................... 4 .65 5 .09 5 .45 

Onroad ..................................................................................................... 20 .24 16 .68 9 .84 

Nonroad ................................................................................................... 84 .66 69 28 .23 

Total .................................................................................................. 146 .19 127 .01 81 .45 64 .74 

TABLE 3—TOTAL VOC EMISSIONS WITH MOVES2010A MOBILE EMISSIONS IN TOLEDO, OHIO (LUCAS AND WOOD

COUNTIES) 

[tons per day] 

Sector 2004 

Attainment 

2009* 

Interim 

2018* 

Maintenance 

Combined 

emissions 

reduction 

(2004–2018) 

Point ......................................................................................................... 7 .87 7 .21 7 .99 

Area ......................................................................................................... 30 .55 30 .40 32 .60 

Onroad ..................................................................................................... 26 .86 18 .79 8 .14 

Nonroad ................................................................................................... 10 .31 7 .78 0 .57 

Total .................................................................................................. 75 .59 64 .18 49 .30 26 .29 

TABLE 4—TOTAL NOX EMISSIONS WITH MOVES2010A MOBILE EMISSIONS IN TOLEDO, OHIO (LUCAS AND WOOD

COUNTIES) 

[tons per day] 

Sector 2004 

Attainment 

2009* 

Interim 

2018* 

Maintenance 

Combined 

emissions 

reduction 

(2004–2018) 

Point ......................................................................................................... 35 .54 27 .22 12 .90 

Area ......................................................................................................... 1 .70 1 .91 1 .97 

Onroad ..................................................................................................... 55 .12 40 .68 15 .34 

Nonroad ................................................................................................... 24 .82 19 .76 9 .65 

Total .................................................................................................. 117 .18 89 .57 39 .86 77 .32 


Emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 206 / Thursday, October 24, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 63391 

TABLE 5—TOTAL VOC EMISSIONS WITH MOVES2010A MOBILE EMISSIONS IN THE OHIO PORTION OF PARKERSBURGMARIETTA, WEST VIRGINIA-OHIO (WASHINGTON COUNTY, OHIO) 

[tons per day] 

Sector 2004 

Attainment 

2009* 

Interim 

2018* 

Maintenance 

Combined 

emissions 

reduction 

(2004–2018) 

Point ......................................................................................................... 2 .06 2 .28 2 .70 

Area ......................................................................................................... 2 .92 2 .81 2 .90 

Onroad ..................................................................................................... 4 .88 4 .15 1 .93 

Nonroad ................................................................................................... 1 .17 0 .96 0 .77 

Total .................................................................................................. 11 .03 10 .20 8 .30 2 .73 

TABLE 6—TOTAL NOX EMISSIONS WITH MOVES2010A MOBILE EMISSIONS IN THE OHIO PORTION OF PARKERSBURGMARIETTA, WEST VIRGINIA-OHIO (WASHINGTON COUNTY, OHIO) 

[tons per day] 

Sector 2004 

Attainment 

2009* 

Interim 

2018* 

Maintenance 

Combined 

emissions 

reduction 

(2004–2018) 

Point ......................................................................................................... 71 .87 15 .07 21 .96 

Area ......................................................................................................... 0 .22 0 .24 0 .25 

Onroad ..................................................................................................... 8 .30 7 .33 3 .25 

Nonroad ................................................................................................... 5 .00 4 .17 3 .59 

Total .................................................................................................. 85 .39 26 .81 29 .05 56 .34 

TABLE 7—TOTAL VOC EMISSIONS WITH MOVES2010A MOBILE EMISSIONS IN THE OHIO PORTION OF STEUBENVILLEWEIRTON, WEST VIRGINIA-OHIO (JEFFERSON COUNTY, OHIO) 

[tons per day] 

Sector 2004 

Attainment 

2009* 

Interim 

2018* 

Maintenance 

Combined 

emissions 

reduction 

(2004–2018) 

Point ......................................................................................................... 1 .15 1 .25 1 .26 

Area ......................................................................................................... 3 .06 2 .91 2 .91 

Onroad ..................................................................................................... 5 .62 4 .83 2 .14 

Nonroad ................................................................................................... 0 .93 0 .87 0 .60 

Total .................................................................................................. 10 .76 9 .86 6 .91 3 .85 

TABLE 8—TOTAL NOX EMISSIONS WITH MOVES2010A MOBILE EMISSIONS IN THE OHIO PORTION OF STEUBENVILLEWEIRTON, WEST VIRGINIA-OHIO (JEFFERSON COUNTY, OHIO) 

[tons per day] 

Sector 2004 

Attainment 

2009* 

Interim 

2018* 

Maintenance 

Combined 

emissions 

reduction 

(2004–2018) 

Point ......................................................................................................... 154 .73 66 .40 46 .38 

Area ......................................................................................................... 0 .18 0 .21 0 .21 

Onroad ..................................................................................................... 6 .69 5 .91 2 .43 

Nonroad ................................................................................................... 2 .25 1 .93 1 .58 

Total .................................................................................................. 163 .85 74 .45 50 .60 133 .25 

The metropolitan planning 

organizations for these areas added only 

a portion of the overall safety margin 

available for NOX and VOCs to the 

budgets for the years indicated with an 

asterisk in tables 1 through 8. As shown 

in tables 1 through 8, the submittals 

demonstrate how the areas’ emissions 

decline from the attainment year to 

maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard. 

No additional control measures were 

needed to maintain the 1997 8-hour 

ozone standard in the DaytonSpringfield and Toledo areas, and the 

Ohio portions of the ParkersburgMarietta and Steubenville-Weirton, 


Emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
63392 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 206 / Thursday, October 24, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

West Virginia-Ohio areas. An 

appropriate safety margin for NOX and 

VOCs was selected by the interagency 

consultation groups for each area, which 

consist of representatives from the 

Federal Highway Administration, 

OEPA, Ohio Department of 

Transportation, and EPA. The submitted 

budgets for these areas are addressed 

later in this notice. 

III. What are the criteria for approval? 

EPA requires that revisions to existing 

SIPs and budgets continue to meet 

applicable requirements (e.g., 

reasonable further progress, attainment, 

or maintenance). The SIP must also 

meet any applicable SIP requirements 

under CAA section 110. In addition, 

adequacy criteria found at 40 CFR 

93.118(e)(4) must be satisfied before 

EPA can find submitted budgets 

adequate and approve them for 

conformity purposes. 

Areas can revise their budgets and 

inventories using MOVES without 

revising their entire SIP if (1) the SIP 

continues to meet applicable 

requirements when the previous motor 

vehicle emissions inventories are 

replaced with MOVES base year and 

milestone, attainment, or maintenance 

year inventories, and (2) the state can 

document that growth and control 

strategy assumptions for non-motor 

vehicle sources continue to be valid and 

any minor updates do not change the 

overall conclusions of the SIP. The 

submittals meet this requirement as 

described below in the next section. 

For more information, see EPA’s latest 

‘‘Policy Guidance on the Use of 

MOVES2010 for SIP Development, 

Transportation Conformity, and Other 

Purposes’’ (April 2012), available online 

at: www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/ 

transconf/policy.htm#models. 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of the state’s 

submittals? 

a. The Revised Inventories 

The SIP revision requests for these 

areas’ 1997 ozone maintenance plans 

seek to revise only the onroad mobile 

source inventories. OEPA has certified 

that the control strategies for each area 

remain the same as in the original SIP, 

and that no other control strategies are 

necessary. OEPA finds that growth and 

control strategy assumptions for nonmobile sources (i.e., area, nonroad, and 

point) have not changed significantly 

from the original submittals. This is 

confirmed by the monitoring data for 

the areas, which continue to monitor 

attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard. 

OEPA’s submittals confirm that the 

total emissions in the revised SIP 

(which includes MOVES2010a 

emissions from mobile sources) as 

shown in tables 1 through 8 

demonstrate that emissions in the areas 

continue to decline and remain below 

the attainment levels. 

Ohio has submitted MOVES2010abased budgets for the DaytonSpringfield and Toledo areas, and the 

Ohio portions of the ParkersburgMarietta and Steubenville-Weirton, 

West Virginia-Ohio areas that are clearly 

identified in the submittals. The budgets 

are displayed in tables 9 through 12. 

TABLE 9—MOVES-BASED BUDGETS

FOR THE DAYTON-SPRINGFIELD 1997 

OZONE AREA (CLARK, GREENE, 

MIAMI, AND MONTGOMERY COUNTIES, OHIO) 

[tons per day] 

Year 2005 2018 

VOC ...... 53 .37 22 .35 

NOX ...... 84 .66 32 .47 

TABLE 10—MOTOR MOVES-BASED

BUDGETS FOR THE TOLEDO 1997 

OZONE AREA (LUCAS AND WOOD

COUNTIES) 

[tons per day] 

Year 2009 2018 

VOC ...... 21 .61 9 .36 

NOX ...... 46 .78 17 .64 

TABLE 11—MOTOR MOVES-BASED

BUDGETS FOR THE OHIO PORTION

OF THE PARKERSBURG-MARIETTA

1997 OZONE AREA (WASHINGTON

COUNTY, OHIO) 

[tons per day] 

Year 2009 2018 

VOC ...... 4 .15 1 .93 

NOX ...... 7 .33 3 .25 

TABLE 12—MOVES-BASED BUDGETS

FOR THE OHIO PORTION OF THE

STEUBENVILLE-WEIRTON 1997 

OZONE AREA (JEFFERSON COUNTY, 

OHIO) 

[tons per day] 

Year 2009 2018 

VOC ...... 4 .83 2 .14 

NOX ...... 5 .91 2 .43 

b. Approvability of the MOVES2010abased Budgets 

EPA is approving the MOVES2010abased budgets submitted by Ohio for use 

in determining transportation 

conformity in the Dayton-Springfield 

and Toledo areas, and the Ohio portions 

of the Parkersburg-Marietta and 

Steubenville-Weirton, West VirginiaOhio 1997 ozone maintenance areas. 

EPA evaluated the MOVES-based 

budgets submitted using the adequacy 

criteria found in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) 

and our in-depth evaluation of the 

state’s submittals and SIP requirements. 

Before submitting the revised budgets, 

OEPA followed all necessary conformity 

procedures. The budgets are clearly 

identified and precisely quantified in 

the submittals. The budgets, when 

considered with other emissions 

sources, are consistent with continued 

maintenance of the 1997 ozone 

standard. The budgets are clearly related 

to the emissions inventories and control 

measures in the SIP. The changes from 

the previous budgets are clearly 

explained with the change in the model 

from MOBILE6.2 to MOVES2010a and 

the revised and updated planning 

assumptions. The inputs to the model 

are detailed in the Appendices to the 

submittals. EPA has reviewed the inputs 

to the MOVES2010a modeling and 

participated in the consultation process. 

The Federal Highway Administration 

and the Ohio Department of 

Transportation have taken a lead role in 

working with the areas’ metropolitan 

planning organizations to provide 

accurate, timely information and inputs 

to the MOVES2010a model runs. The 

state has documented that growth and 

control strategy assumptions for nonmotor vehicle sources (i.e. area, 

nonroad, and point) continue to be valid 

and any minor updates do not change 

the overall conclusions of the SIP. 

Ohio’s submissions confirm that the 

SIP continues to demonstrate 

maintenance of the 1997 ozone standard 

because the total emissions in the 

revised SIP (including MOVES2010a 

emissions for onroad mobile sources) 

continue to decrease from the 

attainment year to the final year of the 

maintenance plans for these areas, as 

shown in tables 1 through 8. As tables 

1 through 12 show, the submitted 

budgets include an appropriate margin 

of safety while still maintaining total 

emissions below the attainment level. 

Based on our review of the SIP and 

the new budgets provided, EPA has 

determined that the SIP will continue to 

meet the requirements if the revised 

motor vehicle emissions inventories are 


Emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 206 / Thursday, October 24, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 63393 

replaced with MOVES2010a 

inventories. 

c. Applicability of MOBILE6.2-based 

Budgets 

Upon the effective date of the 

approval of the revised budgets, the 

state’s existing MOBILE6.2-based 

budgets for these areas will no longer be 

applicable for transportation conformity 

purposes. 

V. What action is EPA taking? 

EPA is approving the submitted 

onroad mobile source emissions 

inventories and the submitted budgets 

for the Dayton-Springfield (submitted 

February 11, 2013) and Toledo 

(submitted April 18, 2013), and the 

Ohio portions of the ParkersburgMarietta (submitted April 26, 2013) and 

Steubenville-Weirton (submitted March 

15, 2013), West Virginia-Ohio 1997 

ozone maintenance plans. We are 

publishing this action without prior 

proposal because we view this as a 

noncontroversial amendment and 

anticipate no adverse comments. 

However, in the proposed rules section 

of this Federal Register publication, we 

are publishing a separate document that 

will serve as the proposal to approve the 

state plan if relevant adverse written 

comments are filed. This rule will be 

effective December 23, 2013 without 

further notice unless we receive relevant 

adverse written comments by November 

25, 2013. If we receive such comments, 

we will withdraw this action before the 

effective date by publishing a 

subsequent document that will 

withdraw the final action. All public 

comments received will then be 

addressed in a subsequent final rule 

based on the proposed action. EPA will 

not institute a second comment period. 

Any parties interested in commenting 

on this action should do so at this time. 

Please note that if EPA receives adverse 

comment on an amendment, paragraph, 

or section of this rule and if that 

provision may be severed from the 

remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt 

as final those provisions of the rule that 

are not the subject of an adverse 

comment. If we do not receive any 

comments, this action will be effective 

December 23, 2013. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, 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, this action: 

• Is 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); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is 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.); 

• 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); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is 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 

• Does 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). 

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. 

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 action 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 CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by December 23, 2013. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of this action 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. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, rather than 

file an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw this direct final rule 

and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking. 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, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Volatile 

organic compounds. 

Dated: September 19, 2013. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—APPROVAL AND 

PROMULGATION OF 

IMPLEMENTATION PLANS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq. 

■ 2. Section 52.1885 is amended by 

adding paragraphs (ff)(17), (18), (19), 

and (20) to read as follows: 

§ 52.1885 Control strategy: Ozone. 

* * * * * 

(ff) * * * 

(17) Approval—On February 11, 2013, 

Ohio submitted a request to revise the 

approved MOBILE6.2 onroad mobile 

source emissions inventories and motor 

vehicle emission budgets (budgets) in 

the 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance 


Emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES
63394 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 206 / Thursday, October 24, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 

plan for the Dayton-Springfield, Ohio 

area. The inventories and budgets are 

being revised with inventories and 

budgets developed with the 

MOVES2010a model. The 2005 budgets 

for the Dayton-Springfield, Ohio area 

are 53.37 tons per day (tpd) VOC and 

84.66 tpd NOX. The 2018 budgets for the 

Dayton-Springfield, Ohio area are 22.35 

tpd VOC and 32.47 tpd NOX. 

(18) Approval—On March 15, 2013, 

Ohio submitted a request to revise the 

approved MOBILE6.2 onroad mobile 

source emissions inventories and motor 

vehicle emission budgets (budgets) in 

the 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance 

plan for the Ohio portion of the 

Steubenville-Weirton, West VirginiaOhio area. The inventories and budgets 

are being revised with inventories and 

budgets developed with the 

MOVES2010a model. The 2009 budgets 

for the Ohio portion of the SteubenvilleWeirton, West Virginia-Ohio area are 

4.83 tons per day (tpd) VOC and 5.91 

tpd NOX. The 2018 budgets for the Ohio 

portion of the Steubenville-Weirton, 

West Virginia-Ohio area are 2.14 tpd 

VOC and 2.43 tpd NOX. 

(19) Approval—On April 18, 2013, 

Ohio submitted a request to revise the 

approved MOBILE6.2 onroad 

inventories and motor vehicle emission 

budgets (budgets) in the 1997 8-hour 

ozone maintenance plan for the Toledo, 

Ohio area. The inventories and budgets 

are being revised with budgets 

developed with the MOVES2010a 

model. The 2009 budgets for the Toledo, 

Ohio area are 21.61 tons per day (tpd) 

VOC and 46.78 tpd NOX. The 2018 

budgets for the Toledo, Ohio area are 

9.36 tpd VOC and 17.64 tpd NOX. 

(20) Approval—On April 26, 2013, 

Ohio submitted a request to revise the 

approved MOBILE6.2 onroad mobile 

source emissions inventories and motor 

vehicle emission budgets (budgets) in 

the 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance 

plan for the Ohio portion of the 

Parkersburg-Marietta, West VirginiaOhio area. The inventories and budgets 

are being revised with inventories and 

budgets developed with the 

MOVES2010a model. The 2009 budgets 

for the Ohio portion of the ParkersburgMarietta, West Virginia-Ohio area are 

4.15 tons per day (tpd) VOC and 7.33 

tpd NOX. The 2018 budgets for the Ohio 

portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta, 

West Virginia-Ohio area are 1.93 tpd 

VOC and 3.25 tpd NOX. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–24706 Filed 10–23–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R10–OAR–2013–0548, FRL–9901–76– 

Region 10] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans; Idaho: State 

Board Requirements 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The EPA is taking final action 

to approve a revision to the Idaho State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by 

the State of Idaho on September 16, 

2013, for approval into the Idaho SIP for 

purposes of meeting the state board 

requirements of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA). The EPA is also approving the 

September 16, 2013, revision as meeting 

the corresponding state board 

infrastructure requirements of the CAA 

for the 1997 ozone National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). On 

August 1, 2013, the EPA proposed to 

approve the July 16, 2013, draft of this 

revision submitted for parallel 

processing. Because the final SIP 

revision submitted by Idaho to the EPA 

on September 16, 2013 is consistent 

with the July 16, 2013, submittal, the 

Idaho SIP will, upon the effective date 

of this final approval, contain the 

required provisions regarding board 

composition and disclosure of potential 

conflicts of interest. The EPA is taking 

final action to approve this revision 

because it satisfies the requirements of 

the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

November 25, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket 

Identification No. EPA–R10–OAR– 

2013–0548. All documents in the docket 

are listed on the http://

www.regulations.gov Web site. Although 

listed in the index, some information 

may not be publicly available, i.e., 

Confidential Business Information or 

other information the disclosure of 

which 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 

EPA Region 10, Office of Air, Waste, 

and Toxics, AWT–107, 1200 Sixth 

Avenue, Seattle, Washington 98101. The 

EPA requests that you contact the 

person listed in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 

excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kristin Hall at (206) 553–6357, 

hall.kristin@epa.gov, or by using the 

above EPA, Region 10 address. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, wherever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ are used, it is 

intended to refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. Background 

II. Final Action 

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. Background 

On July 16, 2013, the State of Idaho 

submitted a SIP revision for purposes of 

meeting the state board requirements of 

CAA section 128 and the corresponding 

state board infrastructure SIP 

requirements for the 1997 ozone 

NAAQS. Specifically, Idaho submitted 

Executive Order 2013–06, dated June 

26, 2013, and Idaho Code §§ 59–701 

through 705, Ethics in Government Act, 

and requested parallel processing on the 

submittal. Under the parallel processing 

procedure, a state submits a SIP revision 

to the EPA before final adoption by the 

state. The EPA reviews this proposed 

state action and prepares a notice of 

proposed rulemaking. The EPA 

publishes its notice of proposed 

rulemaking in the Federal Register and 

solicits public comment in 

approximately the same time frame 

during which the state is completing its 

rulemaking action. 

After submitting the draft July 16, 

2013, revision to the EPA, Idaho 

provided a public comment period on 

the draft, and a public hearing. Idaho’s 

comment period began July 12, 2013 

and ended August 13, 2013. The public 

hearing was held on August 13, 2013. 

No comments or testimony were 

received. In parallel, on August 1, 2013, 

the EPA proposed approval of the July 

16, 2013, draft SIP revision (78 FR 

46549). An explanation of the CAA 

requirements and implementing 

regulations that are met by this SIP 

revision, a detailed explanation of the 

revision, and the EPA’s reasons for 

approving it were provided in the notice 

of proposed rulemaking on August 1, 

2013, and will not be restated here (78 

FR 46549). The public comment period 

for the EPA’s proposed approval ended 

on September 3, 2013 and we received 

no comments. Subsequently, Idaho 

submitted the final SIP revision to the 

EPA on September 16, 2013. Because 

the September 16, 2013, final SIP 

revision is consistent with the July 16, 


Emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with RULES