Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules 8133 

permitting program which is not part of 

the SIP. 

V. Statutory and Executive Orders 

Review 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act 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 Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this proposed action 

merely approves state law that meets 

federal requirements and disapproves 

state law that does not meet federal 

requirements; when finalized, this 

action would 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 Clean Air Act; 

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. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Lead, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Particulate 

matter, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides, and 

Volatile organic compounds. 

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

Dated: January 29, 2014. 

Shaun L. McGrath, 

Regional Administrator, Region 8. 

[FR Doc. 2014–02931 Filed 2–10–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R02–OAR–2013–0592; FRL–9906–06– 

Region 2] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; New 

York State; Redesignation of Areas for 

1997 Annual and 2006 24-Hour Fine 

Particulate Matter and Approval of the 

Associated Maintenance Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

redesignation request and State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the New York State 

Department of Environmental 

Conservation (NYSDEC). NYSDEC is 

requesting that EPA redesignate ten 

counties in the New York State portion 

of the New York-N.New Jersey-Long 

Island, NY–NJ–CT nonattainment area 

from nonattainment to attainment for 

the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 

Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient 

Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). 

Included with its redesignation request, 

New York submitted a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

containing a maintenance plan that 

provides for continued compliance of 

the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. The maintenance plan 

includes the 2007 attainment year 

emissions inventory that EPA is 

proposing to approve in this rulemaking 

in accordance with the requirements of 

the Clean Air Act (CAA). EPA had 

previously determined that the New 

York portion of the New York-N.New 

Jersey-Long Island, NY–NJ–CT 

nonattainment area has attained the 

1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. Additionally, EPA is proposing 

to approve the 2009, 2017, and 2025 

motor vehicle emissions budgets for 

PM2.5 and Nitrogen Oxides (NOX). 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before March 13, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R02–OAR–2013–0592 by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: Ruvo.Richard@epa.gov 

3. Fax: 212–637–3901 

4. Mail: Richard Ruvo, Chief, Air 

Programs Branch, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 

Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New 

York 10007–1866. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver 

your comments to: Richard Ruvo, Chief, 

Air Programs Branch, Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, 290 

Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, New 

York 10007–1866. Such deliveries are 

only accepted during the Regional 

Office’s normal hours of operation. The 

Regional Office’s official business hours 

is Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 

4:30 p.m., excluding Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R02–OAR–2013– 

0592. 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 through 

www.regulations.gov, or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. 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 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
8134 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

1The court found the Rockland County 

nonattainment designation was inconsistent with 

the approach EPA used in other designations. 

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 information 

about EPA’s public docket, visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http://

www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy at the Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 2 Office, Air 

Programs Branch, 290 Broadway, 25th 

Floor, New York, New York 10007– 

1866. EPA requests that if at all 

possible, you contact the contact listed 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section to view the hard copy 

of the docket. You may view the hard 

copy of the docket Monday through 

Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding 

legal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Raymond Forde (forde.raymond@

epa.gov) concerning emission 

inventories and Gavin Lau (lau.gavin@

epa.gov) concerning other portions of 

the SIP revision, Air Programs Branch, 

290 Broadway, 25th Floor, New York, 

New York 10007–1866, (212) 637–4249. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or ‘‘our’’ is used, we mean 

EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. What are the actions EPA is proposing to 

take? 

II. What is the background for EPA’s 

proposed actions? 

III. What are the criteria for redesignation? 

IV. What is the effect of EPA’s proposed 

actions? 

V. What is the effect of the January 4, 2013 

DC Circuit Decision Regarding PM2.5

Implementation under Subpart 4? 

VI. What is EPA’s analysis of New York’s 

redesignation request? 

VII. What is EPA’s analysis of New York’s 

proposed NOX and PM2.5 motor vehicle 

emission budgets? 

VIII. What is the status of EPA’s adequacy 

determination for the proposed NOX and 

PM2.5 motor vehicle emission budgets for 

2009, 2017 and 2025 for New York? 

IX. What action is EPA proposing to take? 

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What are the actions EPA is 

proposing to take? 

On June 27, 2013, the NYSDEC, 

submitted a package to EPA which 

included (1) a request to redesignate the 

New York portion of the New YorkN.New Jersey-Long Island, NY–NJ–CT 

nonattainment area (hereafter referred to 

as the New York PM2.5 nonattainment 

area or NYNAA), from nonattainment to 

attainment for the 1997 annual and the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS and (2) a 

maintenance plan for the NYNAA as a 

SIP revision to ensure continued 

attainment through 2025. In a 

supplemental submission to EPA dated 

September 18, 2013, NYSDEC submitted 

additional information clarifying 

portions of the redesignation request 

and maintenance plan. 

EPA is proposing to take several 

actions pursuant to the redesignation of 

the NYNAA for the 1997 annual and the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is 

proposing to find that the NYNAA 

meets the requirements for 

redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E) 

of the CAA. EPA is thus proposing to 

approve New York’s request to change 

the legal definition of the NYNAA from 

nonattainment to attainment. EPA has 

previously taken two separate actions 

redesignating the New Jersey and the 

Connecticut portion of the New York– 

N.New Jersey–Long Island, NY–NJ–CT 

nonattainment area (or NY–NJ–CT 

nonattainment area) for the 1997 annual 

and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

(See 78 FR 54396, September 4, 2013 

and 78 FR 58467, October 24, 2013). 

EPA is also proposing to approve the 

maintenance plan for the NYNAA as a 

revision to the New York SIP. Such 

approval is one of the criteria in the 

CAA for redesignating an area to 

attainment. The maintenance plan is 

designed to ensure continued 

attainment in the NYNAA for the 1997 

annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS for 10 years after redesignation. 

The maintenance plan includes the 

2007 attainment year, 2017 interim year, 

and 2025 end year projection emission 

inventories. EPA is also proposing to 

approve the 2009, 2017, and 2025 motor 

vehicle emissions budgets for PM2.5 and 

NOX. 

In this proposed redesignation, EPA 

takes into account the D.C. Circuit 

January 4, 2013 decision remanding to 

EPA the ‘‘Final Clean Air Fine Particle 

Implementation Rule’’ (72 FR 20586, 

April 25, 2007) and the 

‘‘Implementation of the New Source 

Review (NSR) Program for Particulate 

Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers 

(PM2.5)’’ final rule (73 FR 28321, May 

16, 2008), Natural Resources Defense 

Council v. EPA, 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 

2013). 

EPA’s analysis for these proposed 

actions is discussed in Sections VI, VII, 

and VIII of today’s proposed rulemaking 

action. 

II. What is the background for EPA’s 

proposed actions? 

A. General 

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 (mg/m3), 

based on a three-year average of annual 

mean PM2.5 concentrations. In the same 

rulemaking, EPA promulgated a 24-hour 

standard of 65 mg/m3, based on a threeyear average of the 98th percentile of 24- 

hour concentrations. On October 17, 

2006, at 71 FR 61144, EPA retained the 

annual average standard at 15 mg/m3 but 

revised the 24-hour standard to 35 mg/ 

m3, based again on the three-year 

average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour 

concentrations. 

On January 5, 2005, at 70 FR 944, as 

supplemented on April 14, 2005, at 70 

FR 19844, EPA designated the NY–NJ– 

CT nonattainment area as 

nonattainment for the 1997 PM2.5 air 

quality standards. In that action, EPA 

defined the nonattainment area to 

include the following ten New York 

counties: Bronx, Kings, Nassau, New 

York, Orange, Queens, Richmond, 

Rockland, Suffolk, and Westchester. 

On July 7, 2009, the D.C. Circuit, 

Catawba County, North Carolina, et al., 

v. EPA, 571 F.3d 20, (D.C. Cir. 2009), 

ruled on consolidated petitions for 

review of area designations for the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS filed by several states, 

counties, and industrial entities. The DC 

Circuit denied petitions for review in all 

respects except for the designation of 

Rockland County, which was remanded 

to EPA.1

On November 13, 2009, at 74 FR 

58688, EPA promulgated designations 

for the 24-hour standard set in 2006, 

designating the NY–NJ–CT 

nonattainment area as nonattainment for 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The 

nonattainment area boundaries for NY– 

NJ–CT nonattainment area for the 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS were identical to the 

boundaries for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, 

including all tens counties that were 

previously designated nonattainment in 

2005. The November 13, 2009 action 

also clarified that the NY–NJ–CT 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules 8135 

2The document is available at http://

www.epa.gov/crossstaterule/pdfs/AQModeling.pdf. 

nonattainment area was classified as 

unclassifiable/attainment for the 1997 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA did not 

promulgate designations for the annual 

average NAAQS promulgated in 2006 

since that NAAQS was essentially 

identical to the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS. 

This proposed action addresses the 

designation for the annual NAAQS 

promulgated in 1997 and the 24-hour 

NAAQS promulgated in 2006 for the 

NYNAA and also addresses the D.C. 

Circuit’s, Catawba County, 571 F.3d 20, 

remand of the Rockland County 

designation. 

In the final rulemaking action dated 

November 15, 2010 (75 FR 69589), EPA 

determined that the entire NY–NJ–CT 

nonattainment area had attained the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, based upon 

quality assured, quality controlled, and 

certified ambient air monitoring data for 

the period of 2007–2009. 

On December 31, 2012 (77 FR 76867), 

EPA finalized the determination that the 

entire NY–NJ–CT nonattainment area 

had attained the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS, based upon quality assured, 

quality controlled, and certified ambient 

air monitoring data that showed that the 

area had monitored attainment of the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for the 

2007–2009 and 2008–2010 monitoring 

periods. 

The 3-year ambient air quality data for 

the last four 3-year monitoring periods 

(2007–2009, 2008–2010, 2009–2011, 

and 2010–2012) indicated no violations 

for the 1997 annual PM2.5 and 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS. As a result, on June 12, 

2013 New York requested redesignation 

of the NYNAA to attainment for the 

1997 annual PM2.5 and 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS. Under the CAA, 

nonattainment areas may be 

redesignated to attainment if sufficient, 

complete, quality-assured data is 

available for the Administrator to 

determine that the area has attained the 

standard and the area meets the other 

CAA redesignation requirements under 

107(d)(3)(E). 

B. Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) and 

Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR 

or the Transport Rule) 

On May 12, 2005, EPA published 

CAIR, which requires significant 

reductions in emissions of SO2 and NOX

from electric generating units (EGUs) to 

limit the interstate transport of these 

pollutants and the ozone and PM2.5 they 

form in the atmosphere. See 70 FR 

25162. 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 D.C. 

Circuit’s decision, EPA issued the 

Transport Rule, also known as CSAPR, 

to address interstate transport of NOX

and SO2 in the eastern United States. 

See 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). 

On December 30, 2011, the D.C. 

Circuit issued an order addressing the 

status of CSAPR and CAIR in response 

to motions filed by numerous parties 

seeking a stay of CSAPR pending 

judicial review. In that order, the Court 

stayed CSAPR pending resolution of the 

petitions for review of that rule in EME 

Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA (No. 

11–1302 and consolidated cases). The 

Court also indicated that EPA was 

expected to continue to administer 

CAIR in the interim until judicial 

review of CSAPR was completed. 

On August 21, 2012, the DC Circuit 

issued a decision to vacate CSAPR. In 

that decision, it also ordered EPA to 

continue administering CAIR ‘‘pending 

the promulgation of a valid 

replacement.’’ EME Homer City, 696 

F.3d at 38. The DC Circuit denied all 

petitions for rehearing on January 24, 

2013. 

On March 29, 2013, the U.S. Solicitor 

General petitioned the Supreme Court to 

review the DC Circuit Court’s decision 

on CSAPR. On June 24, 2013, the 

Supreme Court granted the petition to 

review the decision. The Supreme 

Court’s decision to review the case does 

not alter the current status of CAIR or 

CSAPR. 

New York’s submittal and EPA 

modeling demonstrate that the 

attainment of the 1997 annual and 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS will be 

maintained with or without the 

implementation of CAIR or CSAPR. To 

the extent that attainment is due to 

emission reductions associated with 

CAIR, EPA is proposing to determine 

that those reductions are sufficiently 

permanent and enforceable for purposes 

of CAA sections 107(d)(3)(E)(iii) 

and175A. 

As directed by the DC Circuit, CAIR 

remains in place and enforceable until 

EPA promulgates a valid replacement 

rule to substitute for CAIR. 

New York’s SIP revision lists CAIR 

among the Federal trading programs that 

have resulted in permanent and 

enforceable emissions reductions that 

have led to attainment of the PM2.5

NAAQS. New York rules, 6 NYCRR 

Parts 243, 244, and 245, effective on 

October 19, 2007, implement the CAIR 

trading program in New York. CAIR 

was, thus, in place and achieving 

emission reductions when the NY–NJ– 

CT nonattainment area began 

monitoring attainment of the 1997 

annual and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

standards during the 2007–2009 period. 

The quality assured, certified 

monitoring data continues to show the 

area in attainment with the 1997 and 

2006 PM2.5 standards through 2012, and 

through 2013 with preliminary data. 

In addition, air quality modeling 

analysis conducted during the CSAPR 

rulemaking process also demonstrated 

that the counties in the NY–NJ–CT 

nonattainment area will have PM2.5

levels below the 1997 annual and 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in both 2012 and 

2014 without taking into account 

emissions reductions from CAIR or 

CSAPR. See ‘‘Air Quality Modeling 

Final Rule Technical Support 

Document’’,2 App. B, B–18, B–19. This 

modeling is also available in the docket 

for this proposed redesignation. 

In sum, neither the current status of 

CAIR nor the current status of CSAPR 

affects any of the criteria for proposed 

approval of this redesignation request 

for the NYNAA. 

III. What are the criteria for 

redesignation? 

Under the CAA, designations can be 

revised if sufficient data is available to 

warrant such revisions. Section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA identifies five 

specific requirements that an area must 

meet in order to be redesignated from 

nonattainment to attainment: 

1. The area must have attained the 

applicable NAAQS. 

2. The area must meet all applicable 

requirements under section 110 and part 

D of the CAA. 

3. The area must have a fully 

approved SIP under section 110 (k) of 

the CAA. 

4. The air quality improvement must 

be permanent and enforceable. 

5. The area must have a fully 

approved maintenance plan pursuant to 

section 175A of the CAA. 

EPA has provided guidance on 

redesignation in the General Preamble 

for the Implementation of title I of the 

CAA Amendments of 1990 (April 

16,1992, 57 FR 13498, and 

supplemented on April 28, 1992, 57 FR 

18070) and has provided further 

guidance on processing redesignation 

requests in the following documents: 

1. ‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to 

Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’ 

Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, 

Air Quality Management Division, September 

4, 1992 (hereafter referred to as the ‘‘Calcagni 

Memorandum’’); 

2. ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Actions Submitted in Response to Clean Air 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
8136 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

3PM10 refers to particulates nominally 10 

micrometers in diameter or smaller. 

Act (CAA) Deadlines,’’ Memorandum from 

John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 

Management Division, October 28, 1992; 

3. ‘‘Part D New Source Review (Part D 

NSR) Requirements for Areas Requesting 

Redesignation to Attainment,’’ Memorandum 

from Mary D. Nichols, Assistant 

Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 

14, 1994; and 

4. ‘‘Implementation Guidance for the 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS,’’ Memorandum from 

Stephen D. Page, Director, Office of Air 

Quality Planning and Standards, March 2, 

2012. 

IV. What is the effect of EPA’s proposed 

actions? 

Final approval of the redesignation 

request would change the official 

designation of the NYNAA to 

attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5

and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, found 

at 40 CFR part 81. It would incorporate 

into the New York SIP a maintenance 

plan ensuring continued attainment of 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 and 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS until 2025. Approval of 

the 2007 base year emissions inventory, 

which is part of the maintenance plan, 

will satisfy the inventory requirements 

under section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. EPA 

is also proposing to approve the 2009, 

2017, and 2025 motor vehicle emissions 

budgets for PM2.5 and NOX. 

V. What is the effect of the January 4, 

2013 D.C. Circuit Decision Regarding 

PM2.5 Implementation under Subpart 4? 

A. Background 

As discussed above, on January 4, 

2013, in Natural Resources Defense 

Council v. EPA (hereafter referred to as 

NRDC v. EPA), the DC Circuit remanded 

to EPA the ‘‘Final Clean Air Fine 

Particle Implementation Rule’’ (72 FR 

20586, April 25, 2007) and the 

‘‘Implementation of the New Source 

Review (NSR) Program for Particulate 

Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers 

(PM2.5)’’ final rule (73 FR 28321, May 

16, 2008) (collectively, ‘‘1997 PM2.5

Implementation Rule’’). 706 F.3d 428 

(D.C. Cir. 2013). The Court found that 

EPA erred in implementing the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS pursuant to the general 

implementation provisions of subpart 1 

of part D of Title I of the CAA, rather 

than the particulate-matter-specific 

provisions of subpart 4 of Part D of Title 

I. Although the Court’s ruling did not 

directly address the 2006 PM2.5

standard, EPA is taking into account the 

Court’s position on subpart 4 and the 

1997 PM2.5 standard in evaluating 

redesignations for the 2006 standard. 

B. Subpart 4 Requirements and New 

York’s Redesignation Request 

In this portion of the proposed 

redesignation, EPA addresses the effect 

of the Court’s January 4, 2013 ruling on 

the proposed redesignation. As 

explained below, EPA is proposing to 

determine that the Court’s January 4, 

2013 decision does not prevent EPA 

from redesignating the NYNAA to 

attainment for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. Even in light of the Court’s 

decision, redesignation for this area is 

appropriate under the CAA and EPA’s 

longstanding interpretations of the 

CAA’s provisions regarding 

redesignation. EPA demonstrates that 

even if the subpart 4 requirements were 

applied to the New York redesignation 

request and disregards the provisions of 

its 1997 PM2.5 implementation rule 

recently remanded by the Court, New 

York’s request for redesignation of this 

area still qualifies for approval. EPA’s 

discussion takes into account the effect 

of the Court’s ruling on the area’s 

maintenance plan, which EPA views as 

approvable when subpart 4 

requirements are considered. 

With respect to evaluating the 

relevant substantive requirements of 

subpart 4 for purposes of redesignating 

the NYNAA, EPA notes that subpart 4 

incorporates components of subpart 1 of 

part D, which contains general air 

quality planning requirements for areas 

designated as nonattainment. See 

Section 172(c). Subpart 4 itself contains 

specific planning and scheduling 

requirements for PM10 3 nonattainment 

areas, and under the Court’s January 4, 

2013 decision in NRDC v. EPA, these 

same statutory requirements also apply 

for PM2.5 nonattainment areas. EPA has 

longstanding general guidance that 

interprets the 1990 amendments to the 

CAA, making recommendations to states 

for meeting the statutory requirements 

for SIPs for nonattainment areas. See, 

‘‘State Implementation Plans; General 

Preamble for the Implementation of 

Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments 

of 1990,’’ 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) 

(the ‘‘General Preamble’’). In the General 

Preamble, EPA discussed the 

relationship of subpart 1 and subpart 4 

SIP requirements, and pointed out that 

subpart 1 requirements were to an 

extent ‘‘subsumed by, or integrally 

related to, the more specific PM–10 

requirements.’’ 57 FR 13538 (April 16, 

1992). The subpart 1 requirements 

include, among other things, provisions 

for attainment demonstrations, 

reasonably available control measures 

(RACM), reasonable further progress 

(RFP), emissions inventories, and 

contingency measures. 

For the purposes of this redesignation, 

in order to identify any additional 

requirements which would apply under 

subpart 4, we are considering the NY– 

NJ–CT nonattainment area to be a 

‘‘moderate’’ PM2.5 nonattainment area. 

Under section 188 of the CAA, all areas 

designated nonattainment areas under 

subpart 4 would initially be classified 

by operation of law as ‘‘moderate’’ 

nonattainment areas, and would remain 

moderate nonattainment areas unless 

and until EPA reclassifies the area as a 

‘‘serious’’ nonattainment area. 

Accordingly, EPA believes that it is 

appropriate to limit the evaluation of 

the potential impact of subpart 4 

requirements to those that would be 

applicable to moderate nonattainment 

areas. Sections 189(a) and (c) of subpart 

4 apply to moderate nonattainment 

areas and include the following: (1) An 

approved permit program for 

construction of new and modified major 

stationary sources (section 189(a)(1)(A)); 

(2) an attainment demonstration (section 

189(a)(1)(B)); (3) provisions for RACM 

(section 189(a)(1)(C)); and (4) 

quantitative milestones demonstrating 

RFP toward attainment by the 

applicable attainment date (section 

189(c)). 

The permit requirements of subpart 4, 

as contained in section 189(a)(1)(A), 

refer to and apply the subpart 1 permit 

provisions requirements of sections 172 

and 173 to PM10, without adding to 

them. Consequently, EPA believes that 

section 189(a)(1)(A) does not itself 

impose for redesignation purposes any 

additional requirements for moderate 

areas beyond those contained in subpart 

1. In any event, in the context of 

redesignation, EPA has long relied on 

the interpretation that a fully approved 

nonattainment new source review 

program is not considered an applicable 

requirement for redesignation, provided 

the area can maintain the standard with 

a prevention of significant deterioration 

(PSD) program after redesignation. 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.’’ See also 

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). 

With respect to the specific 

attainment planning requirements under 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules 8137 

4 i.e., attainment demonstration, RFP, RACM, 

milestone requirements, contingency measures. 

5Preliminary monitoring data for the first three 

quarters of 2013 also indicates continued 

attainment. 

subpart 4,4 when EPA evaluates a 

redesignation request under either 

subpart 1 and/or 4, any area that is 

attaining the PM2.5 standard is viewed 

as having satisfied the attainment 

planning requirements for these 

subparts. For redesignations, EPA has 

for many years interpreted attainmentlinked requirements as not applicable 

for areas attaining the standard. In the 

General Preamble, EPA stated that: 

The requirements for RFP will not apply in 

evaluating a request for redesignation to 

attainment since, at a minimum, the air 

quality data for the area must show that the 

area has already attained. Showing that the 

State will make RFP towards attainment will, 

therefore, have no meaning at that point. 

‘‘General Preamble for the Interpretation 

of Title I of the Clean Air Act 

Amendments of 1990’’; (57 FR 13498, 

13564, April 16, 1992). 

The General Preamble also explained 

that 

[t]he section 172(c)(9) requirements are 

directed at ensuring RFP and attainment by 

the applicable date. These requirements no 

longer apply when an area has attained the 

standard and is eligible for redesignation. 

Furthermore, section 175A for maintenance 

plans . . . provides specific requirements for 

contingency measures that effectively 

supersede the requirements of section 

172(c)(9) for these areas. 

Id. 

EPA similarly stated in its 1992 

Calcagni memorandum that, ‘‘The 

requirements for reasonable further 

progress and other measures needed for 

attainment will not apply for 

redesignations because they only have 

meaning for areas not attaining the 

standard.’’ 

It is evident that even if we were to 

consider the Court’s January 4, 2013 

decision in NRDC v. EPA to mean that 

attainment-related requirements specific 

to subpart 4 should be imposed 

retroactively and thus are now past due, 

those requirements do not apply to an 

area that is attaining the 1997 and 2006 

PM2.5 standards, for the purpose of 

evaluating a pending request to 

redesignate the area to attainment. EPA 

has consistently enunciated this 

interpretation of applicable 

requirements under section 107(d)(3)(E) 

since the General Preamble was 

published more than twenty years ago. 

Courts have recognized the scope of 

EPA’s authority to interpret ‘‘applicable 

requirements’’ in the redesignation 

context. See Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 

F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). 

Moreover, even outside the context of 

redesignations, EPA has viewed the 

obligations to submit attainment-related 

SIP planning requirements of subpart 4 

as inapplicable for areas that EPA 

determines are attaining the standard. 

EPA’s prior ‘‘Clean Data Policy’’ 

rulemakings for the PM10 NAAQS, also 

governed by the requirements of subpart 

4, explain EPA’s reasoning. They 

describe the effects of a determination of 

attainment on the attainment-related SIP 

planning requirements of subpart 4. See 

‘‘Determination of Attainment for Coso 

Junction Nonattainment Area,’’ (75 FR 

27944, May 19, 2010). See also Coso 

Junction proposed PM10 redesignation, 

(75 FR 36023, 36027, June 24, 2010); 

Proposed and Final Determinations of 

Attainment for San Joaquin 

Nonattainment Area (71 FR 40952, 

40954–55, July 19, 2006; and 71 FR 

63641, 63643–47 October 30, 2006). In 

short, EPA in this context has also long 

concluded that to require states to meet 

superfluous SIP planning requirements 

is not necessary and not required by the 

CAA, so long as those areas continue to 

attain the relevant NAAQS. 

Elsewhere in this action, EPA 

proposes to determine that the NYNAA 

continues to attain the 1997 and 2006 

PM2.5 standards. Under its longstanding 

interpretation, EPA is proposing to 

determine here that the area meets the 

attainment-related plan requirements of 

subparts 1 and 4. 

Thus, EPA is proposing to conclude 

that the requirements to submit an 

attainment demonstration under 

189(a)(1)(B), a RACM determination 

under section 172(c)(1) and section 

189(a)(1)(c), a RFP demonstration under 

189(c)(1), and contingency measure 

requirements under section 172(c)(9) are 

satisfied for purposes of evaluating the 

redesignation request. 

VI. What is EPA’s analysis of New 

York’s redesignation request? 

In an effort to comply with the CAA 

and to ensure continued attainment of 

the NAAQS, on June 27, 2013, NYSDEC 

submitted a redesignation request and 

maintenance plan for the 1997 annual 

and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS for 

NY–NJ–CT nonattainment areas. On 

September 18, 2013, NYSDEC submitted 

additional materials to supplement the 

redesignation request. 

The following is a description of how 

the state has fulfilled each of the CAA 

redesignation requirements. 

A. Attainment 

For redesignating a nonattainment 

area to attainment, the CAA requires 

EPA to determine that the area has 

attained the applicable NAAQS (CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)). In this action, 

EPA is proposing to determine that the 

NY–NJ–CT nonattainment area is 

continuing to attain the 1997 annual 

and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

An area may be considered to be 

attaining the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

if it meets the NAAQS as determined in 

accordance with 40 CFR 50.7 and 

Appendix N of part 50, based on three 

complete, consecutive calendar years of 

quality-assured air quality monitoring 

data. To attain this standard, the threeyear average of annual means must be 

less than or equal to 15 mg/m3 at all 

relevant monitoring sites in the subject 

area. The relevant data must be 

collected and quality-assured in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and 

recorded in the EPA Air Quality System 

(AQS). The monitors meet data 

completeness requirements when ‘‘at 

least 75 percent of the scheduled 

sampling days for each quarter have 

valid data’’. The use of less than 

complete data is subject to the approval 

of EPA, which may consider factors 

such as monitoring site closures/moves, 

monitoring diligence, and nearby 

concentrations in determining whether 

to use such data. 

As noted in Section II.A. above, EPA 

has finalized the determination that the 

NY–NJ–CT nonattainment area had 

attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 

(75 FR 69589, November 15, 2010). 

NYSDEC submitted ambient air 

monitoring data showing PM2.5

concentrations attaining the annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS for the 2007–2009 and 

2008–2010 time periods. EPA has also 

reviewed more recent quality-assured 

data for the NY–NJ–CT nonattainment 

area and found that the NYNAA 

continued to attain the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS through 2012.5

Table 1, below, shows the four most 

recent design values by county (i.e. 3- 

year average) of annual mean PM2.5

concentrations) for the 2007–2009, 

2008–2010, 2009–2011, and 2010–2012 

time periods for the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS for the NY–NJ–CT PM2.5

nonattainment area monitors. 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
8138 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

6Preliminary monitoring data for the three 

quarters of 2013 also indicates continued 

attainment. 

TABLE 1—DESIGN VALUE CONCENTRATIONS FOR THE NY–NJ–CT 1997 ANNUAL PM2.5NAAQS NONATTAINMENT AREA

(μG/M3) 

[The 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS is 15.0 μg/m3] 

County AQS Monitor ID 

3-Year design values 

2007–2009 2008–2010 2009–2011 2010–2012 

NEW YORK: 

Bronx ..................................................................... 36–005–0080/110 13.9 12.5 11.9 9.8 

Kings ..................................................................... 36–047–0122 12.2 10.8 10.3 9.9 

Nassau .................................................................. 36–059–0008 10.3 9.5 8.9 INC 

New York .............................................................. 36–061–0128/0134 12.1 12.1 11.7 11.8 

Orange .................................................................. 36–071–0002 9.3 8.5 8.2 8.1 

Queens ................................................................. 36–081–0124 10.6 10.0 9.4 9.1 

Richmond .............................................................. 36–085–0055 11.6 10.5 9.8 9.7 

Rockland ............................................................... NM NM NM NM NM 

Suffolk ................................................................... 36–103–0002 9.7 8.9 8.4 8.4 

Westchester .......................................................... 36–119–1002 10.6 9.6 9.1 INC 

NEW JERSEY: 

Bergen .................................................................. 34–003–0003 11.3 9.8 9.2 9.2 

Essex .................................................................... 34–0013–003 INC INC INC 9.5 

Hudson .................................................................. 34–017–2002 13.1 11.6 11.1 11.1 

Mercer ................................................................... 34–021–0008 10.8 10.0 9.7 9.5 

Middlesex .............................................................. 34–023–0006 10.4 8.8 7.9 8.0 

Monmouth ............................................................. NM NM NM NM NM 

Morris .................................................................... 34–027–0004 9.6 8.7 8.5 8.4 

Passaic ................................................................. 34–031–0005 11.3 9.8 9.3 9.3 

Somerset ............................................................... NM NM NM NM NM 

Union ..................................................................... 34–039–0006/2003 11.6 10.3 9.6 9.7 

CONNECTICUT: 

Fairfield ................................................................. 09–001–0010 11.3 10.0 9.4 9.4 

New Haven ........................................................... 09–009–1123 11.4 10.3 9.6 9.4 

INC—Counties listed as INC did not meet 75 percent data completeness requirement for the relevant time period. 

NM—No monitor located in county. 

Based on air monitoring data through 

2012, EPA concludes that N–NJ–CT 

nonattainment area is continuing to 

attain the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Therefore, EPA proposes that the 

statutory criterion for attainment of the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS (40 CFR 50.7 

and Appendix N of part 50) has been 

met. 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

An area may be considered to be 

attaining the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS if it meets the NAAQS as 

determined in accordance with 40 CFR 

50.13 and Appendix N of part 50, based 

on three complete, consecutive calendar 

years of quality-assured air quality 

monitoring data. To attain this standard, 

the 98th percentile 24-hour 

concentration, as determined in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 50, 

Appendix N, is less than or equal to 35 

mg/m3 at all relevant monitoring sites in 

the subject area over a 3-year period. 

The relevant data must be collected and 

quality-assured in accordance with 40 

CFR part 58 and recorded in EPA’s 

AQS. The monitors meet data 

completeness requirements when ‘‘at 

least 75 percent of the scheduled 

sampling days for each quarter have 

valid data.’’ The use of less than 

complete data is subject to the approval 

of EPA, which may consider factors 

such as monitoring site closures/moves, 

monitoring diligence, and nearby 

concentrations in determining whether 

to use such data. 

EPA previously finalized the 

determination that the NY–NJ–CT 

nonattainment area had attained the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, as noted in 

Section II.A. (77 FR 76867, December 

31, 2012). The ambient air monitoring 

data submitted by New York shows 

PM2.5 concentrations attaining the 24- 

hour PM2.5 NAAQS for 2007–2009 and 

2008–2010 time periods. EPA has also 

reviewed more recent quality-assured 

data for the NY–NJ–CT nonattainment 

area and found that the NYNAA 

continued to attain the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS through 2012.6

Table 2, below, shows the design 

value by county for the 98th percentile 

24-hour PM2.5 concentrations for the 

2007–2009, 2008–2010, 2009–2011, and 

2010–2012 time periods for the 2006 24- 

hour PM2.5 NAAQS for the NY–NJ–CT 

PM2.5 nonattainment area monitors. 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules 8139 

TABLE 2—DESIGN VALUE CONCENTRATIONS FOR THE NY–NJ–CT 2006 24-HOUR PM2.5 NAAQS NONATTAINMENT AREA

(μG/M3) 

[The 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS is 35 μg/m3] 

County AQS Monitor ID 

3-Year design values 

2007–2009 2008–2010 2009–2011 2010–2012 

NEW YORK: 

Bronx ..................................................................... 36–005–0080/133 33 29 28 24 

Kings ..................................................................... 36–047–0122 30 27 25 24 

Nassau .................................................................. 36–059–0008 28 25 23 INC 

New York .............................................................. 36–061–0134/0079 32 29 28 26 

Orange .................................................................. 36–071–0002 26 24 23 23 

Queens ................................................................. 36–081–0124 30 28 26 24 

Richmond .............................................................. 36–085–0055 29 26 24 24 

Rockland ............................................................... NM NM NM NM NM 

Suffolk ................................................................... 36–103–0002 26 25 23 22 

Westchester .......................................................... 36–119–1002 29 28 25 INC 

NEW JERSEY: 

Bergen .................................................................. 34–003–0003 31 28 25 23 

Essex .................................................................... 34–013–0003 INC INC INC 23 

Hudson .................................................................. 34–017–1003 32 29 28 26 

Mercer ................................................................... 34–021–0008 29 27 26 25 

Middlesex .............................................................. 34–023–0006 27 23 20 19 

Monmouth ............................................................. NM NM NM NM NM 

Morris .................................................................... 34–027–3001 26 23 23 21 

Passaic ................................................................. 34–031–0005 30 26 25 24 

Somerset ............................................................... NM NM NM NM NM 

Union ..................................................................... 34–039–0006 31 27 24 24 

CONNECTICUT: 

Fairfield ................................................................. 09–001–0010/1123 31 28 26 24 

New Haven ........................................................... 09–009–0027 31 29 28 25 

NM—No monitor located in county. 

INC—All counties listed as INC did not meet 75 percent data completeness requirement for the relevant time period. 

Based on air monitoring data through 

2012, EPA concludes that the NY–NJ– 

CT nonattainment area is continuing to 

attain the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Therefore, EPA proposes that the 

statutory criterion for attainment of the 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS (40 CFR 

50.13 and Appendix N of part 50) has 

been met. 

B. The Area Has Met All Applicable 

Requirements Under Section 110 and 

Part D of the CAA 

EPA has determined that the NYNAA 

has met all SIP requirements applicable 

for purposes of this redesignation under 

section 110 of the CAA (General SIP 

Requirements) and that, upon final 

approval of the 2007 attainment year 

emissions inventory, as discussed below 

in this proposed rulemaking, it will 

have met all applicable SIP 

requirements under part D of Title I of 

the CAA, in accordance with CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, EPA 

is proposing to find that all applicable 

requirements of the New York SIP for 

purposes of redesignation have been 

approved in accordance with CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). 

1. Section 110 SIP Requirements 

Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA 

delineates the general requirements for 

a SIP, which include enforceable 

emissions limitations and other control 

measures, means, or techniques, 

provisions for the establishment and 

operation of appropriate devices 

necessary to collect data on ambient air 

quality, and programs to enforce the 

limitations. The general SIP elements 

and requirements set forth in CAA 

section 110(a)(2) include, but are not 

limited to the following: 

• Submittal of a SIP that has been 

adopted by the state after reasonable 

public notice and hearing; 

• Provisions for establishment and 

operation of appropriate procedures 

needed to monitor ambient air quality; 

• Implementation of a source permit 

program; provisions for the 

implementation of part C requirements 

(Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD)); 

• Provisions for the implementation 

of part D requirements for New Source 

Review (NSR) permit programs; 

• Provisions for air pollution 

modeling; and 

• Provisions 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 certain 

measures to prevent sources in a state 

from significantly contributing to air 

quality problems in another state. To 

implement this provision, EPA has 

required certain states to establish 

programs to address the interstate 

transport of air pollutants in accordance 

with the NOX SIP Call, October 27, 1998 

(63 FR 57356), amendments to the NOX

SIP Call, May 14, 1999 (64 FR 26298) 

and March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), and 

CAIR, May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25162). 

However, the CAA section 110(a)(2)(D) 

requirements for a state are not linked 

with a particular nonattainment area’s 

designation and classification in that 

state. EPA believes that the 

requirements linked with a particular 

nonattainment area’s designation and 

classifications 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, EPA does not 

believe that these requirements are 

applicable requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. 

In addition, EPA believes that the 

other CAA section 110(a)(2) elements 

not connected with nonattainment plan 

submissions and not linked with an 

area’s attainment status are not 

applicable requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. The area will still be 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
8140 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

7AMEC and SRA for MARAMA Technical 

Support Document for the Development of the 2007 

Emission Inventory for PM Nonattainment Counties 

in the MANE–VU Region Version 3.3. AMEC 

Environment and Infrastructure and SRA 

International, Inc for Mid-Atlantic Regional Air 

Management Association (MARAMA), January 23, 

2012. 

subject to these requirements after it is 

redesignated. EPA concludes that the 

CAA section 110(a)(2) and part D 

requirements which are linked with a 

particular area’s designation and 

classification are the relevant measures 

to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation 

request, and that CAA section 110(a)(2) 

elements not linked in the area’s 

nonattainment status are not applicable 

for purposes of redesignation. This 

approach is consistent with EPA’s 

existing policy on applicability of 

conformity (i.e., for redesignations) and 

oxygenated fuels requirement. See 

Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and 

final rulemakings (61 FR 53174, October 

10, 1996), (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 redesignation (65 FR 

37890, June 19, 2000) and in the 

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania redesignation 

(66 FR 53099, October 19, 2001). 

New York submitted Section 110 

‘‘infrastructure SIPs’’ required under 

CAA section 110(a)(2) to EPA for the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS (dated October 2, 

2008) and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS (dated 

March 15, 2010). EPA has reviewed the 

New York SIP and has concluded that 

it meets the general SIP requirements 

under section 110(a)(2) of the CAA to 

the extent they are applicable for 

purposes for redesignating the NYNAA 

to attainment for the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. EPA took final action 

approving New York’s infrastructure SIP 

submittals on June 20, 2013 (78 FR 

37122). The requirements under section 

110(a)(2) of the CAA are, however, 

statewide requirements that are not 

linked to the PM2.5 nonattainment status 

of the NYNAA. Therefore, EPA believes 

that these SIP elements are not 

applicable requirements for purposes of 

review of New York’s PM2.5

redesignation request. 

2. Title I, Part D Nonattainment 

Requirements 

Subpart 1 of part D of Title I of the 

CAA sets forth the basic nonattainment 

requirements applicable to all 

nonattainment areas. All areas that were 

designated nonattainment for the 1997 

and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS were 

designated under this subpart of the 

CAA, and the requirements applicable 

to them are contained in sections 172 

and 176. EPA’s analysis of the 

particulate-matter-specific provisions of 

Subpart 4 of part D of Title I as a result 

of the January 4, 2013 D.C. Circuit 

decision is discussed earlier in this 

notice. 

Section 172 Requirements 

Under CAA section 172, states with 

nonattainment areas must submit plans 

providing for timely attainment and 

meet a variety of other requirements. As 

mentioned, EPA has previously 

finalized determinations that the NY– 

NJ–CT nonattainment areas had attained 

the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS. 

New York’s obligation to submit an 

attainment demonstration, RACT/

RACM, RFP, contingency measures, and 

other planning SIPs related to the 

attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS has 

been suspended due to EPA’s 

determination that the NY–NJ–CT 

nonattainment area has attained the 

1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. New York submitted a SIP 

revision (PM2.5 attainment plan) for 

attaining the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

on October 27, 2009. The requirements 

to submit PM2.5 attainment plans were 

suspended as a result of the 

determination of attainment and it was 

not necessary for New York to submit a 

plan for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. The only remaining 

requirement to be considered after the 

determination of attainment of the PM2.5

NAAQS is the emission inventory 

required under CAA section 172(c)(3). 

The General Preamble for 

Implementation of Title I also discusses 

the evaluation of these requirements in 

the context of EPA’s consideration of a 

redesignation request. The General 

Preamble sets forth EPA’s view of 

applicable requirements for purposes of 

evaluating redesignation requests when 

an area is attaining the standard. See 

General Preamble for Implementation of 

Title I (57 FR 13498, April 16, 1992). 

Because attainment has been reached 

for the NY–NJ–CT nonattainment area, 

no additional measures are needed to 

provide for attainment. CAA section 

172(c)(1) requirements for an attainment 

demonstration, and RACT/RACM are no 

longer considered to be applicable 

requirements for as long as the area 

continues to attain the standard until 

redesignation. See 40 CFR 51.1004(c). 

The RFP requirement under CAA 

section 172(c)(2) are similarly not 

relevant for purposes of redesignation. 

Section 172(c)(3) requires submission 

and approval of a comprehensive, 

accurate, and current inventory of actual 

emissions. As part of the maintenance 

plan submitted by New York on June 27, 

2013, the State has submitted an 

attainment year inventory that meets 

this requirement. For purposes of the 

PM2.5 NAAQS, the emissions inventory 

should address not only direct 

emissions of PM2.5, but also emissions of 

all precursors with the potential to 

participate in PM2.5 formation, i.e., SO2, 

NOX, VOC and ammonia (NH3). The 

2007 attainment year emissions 

inventory submitted by New York in the 

June 27, 2013 submission addressed 

PM2.5, SO2, NOX, VOC and NH3

emissions. 

The emissions cover the general 

source categories of point sources, area 

sources, onroad sources and nonroad 

sources. The proposed approval of the 

2007 attainment year emissions 

inventory in this rulemaking action will, 

when finalized, meet the requirements 

of CAA section 172(c)(3). 

The 2007 emissions inventory was 

prepared by NYSDEC and is presented 

in Table 5 located in Section VII.E.2(a), 

Attainment Emissions Inventory, of this 

action. Table 5 shows the 2007 base year 

PM2.5, NOX, SO2, VOC and NH3 annual 

emission inventories for the NYNAA. 

EPA’s detailed evaluation of the base 

year inventories for all pollutants is also 

addressed in Section VII.E.2.(a), 

Attainment Emissions Inventory, of this 

action. A copy of the Technical Support 

Document 7 submitted by New York is 

included in the TSD of the New York 

SIP submission. 

Section 172(c)(4) of the CAA requires 

the identification and quantification of 

allowable emissions for major new and 

modified stationary sources in an area, 

and CAA 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 has 

determined that, since the PSD 

requirements will apply after 

redesignation, areas being redesignated 

need not comply with the requirement 

that a nonattainment New Source 

Review (NSR) program be approved 

prior to redesignation, provided that the 

area demonstrates maintenance of the 

NAAQS without part D NSR. A more 

detailed rationale for this view is 

described in the 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.’’ New York’s approved 

PM2.5 PSD program will become 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules 8141 

8 Guidance on transportation conformity SIPs can 

be found at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/

stateresources/transconf/policy/420b09001.pdf. 

9CAA section 176(c)(4)(E) requires states to 

submit revisions to their SIPs to reflect certain 

Federal criteria and procedures for determining 

transportation conformity. Transportation 

conformity SIPs are different from MVEBs that are 

established in control strategy SIPs and 

maintenance plans. 

10See New York’ redesignation submission, 

Figures 5 thru 8 

11See New York’ redesignation submission, Table 

6 

effective in the NYNAA upon 

redesignation to attainment. 

Section 172(c)(6) requires the SIP to 

contain control measures necessary to 

provide for attainment of the standard. 

Because attainment has been reached in 

the NY–NJ–CT nonattainment area, no 

additional control 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, EPA 

believes the New York SIP meets the 

requirements of section 110(a)(2) 

applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. 

CAA section 172(c)(9) provides that 

SIPs in nonattainment areas ‘‘shall 

provide for the implementation of 

specific measures to be undertaken if 

the area fails to make reasonable further 

progress, or to attain the [NAAQS] by 

the attainment date applicable under 

this part. Such measures shall be 

included in the plan revision as 

contingency measures to take effect in 

any such case without further action by 

the State or [EPA].’’ This contingency 

measure requirement is inextricably tied 

to the reasonable further progress and 

attainment demonstration requirements. 

Because attainment has been reached for 

the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS, contingency measures 

are not applicable for redesignation. 

Section 176 Conformity Requirements 

Section 176(c) of the CAA requires 

states to establish criteria and 

procedures to ensure that federally 

supported or funded projects conform to 

the air quality planning goals in the 

applicable SIP. The requirement to 

determine transportation conformity 

applies to transportation plans, 

programs and projects that are 

developed, funded or approved under 

title 23 of the United States Code 

(U.S.C.) and the Federal Transit Act. 

The requirement to determine general 

conformity applies to all other federally 

supported or funded projects. State 

transportation conformity SIP revisions 

must be consistent with Federal 

transportation conformity regulations 

relating to consultation, enforcement 

and enforceability that EPA 

promulgated pursuant to its authority 

under the CAA.8

EPA interprets the conformity 9 SIP 

requirements as not applying for 

purposes of evaluating a redesignation 

request under section 107(d) because 

state conformity rules are still required 

after redesignation and Federal 

conformity rules apply where state rules 

have not been approved. See Wall v. 

EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001) 

(upholding this interpretation); see also 

60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995) 

(redesignation of Tampa, Florida). 

C. Fully Approved SIP Under Section 

110(k) of the CAA 

Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) of the CAA 

requires that for an area to be 

redesignated the Administrator has fully 

approved the applicable 

implementation plan for the area under 

section 110(k). 

Upon final approval of New York’s 

2007 attainment year emissions 

inventory, EPA will have fully approved 

the SIPs for the NYNAA for the 1997 

annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

under section 110(k) for all 

requirements applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. 

EPA is proposing to approve the 2007 

attainment year emissions inventory 

(submitted as part of its maintenance 

plan) for the NYNAA as meeting the 

requirement of section 172(c)(3) of the 

CAA for the 1997 annual and 2006 24- 

hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Therefore, New 

York will have satisfied all applicable 

requirements under part D of Title I of 

the CAA. 

D. The Air Quality Improvement Must 

Be Permanent and Enforceable 

The improvement in air quality must 

be 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 (CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iii)). EPA proposes to 

determine that the air quality 

improvement in the NYNAA is due to 

permanent and enforceable reductions 

in emissions resulting from 

implementation of the SIP, federal 

measures, and other state adopted 

measures. 

As indicated in Section VI.A., the 

NY–NJ–CT nonattainment area came 

into attainment with the 1997 annual 

and the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

beginning with the 2007–2009 time 

period. The area has remained in 

attainment and the air quality has 

improved. As shown in the State’s 

submittal 10, the PM2.5 maximum and 

average concentrations for NYNAA 

monitors shows a downward trend over 

the past decade. Additionally the State’s 

submittal 11 demonstrates that New 

York’s maximum design values in the 

NY–NJ–CT nonattainment area have not 

exceeded the annual NAAQS since 

2007, New Jersey’s maximum design 

values have not exceeded the annual 

NAAQS since 2006, and Connecticut’s 

maximum design value has not 

exceeded the annual NAAQS since 

2003. For the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS, New York’s and New Jersey’s 

maximum design values have not 

exceeded the NAAQS since 2008, and 

Connecticut’s maximum design value 

has not exceeded the NAAQS since 

2007. 

As demonstrated in the state’s 

maintenance plan, the improvement in 

air quality can be attributable to the 

Federal and SIP approved State control 

measures that provide for PM2.5, and 

PM2.5 precursors emission reductions 

from 2002 through PM2.5 NAAQS 

attainment beginning in 2007–2009 (see 

Table 3). The tables also indicate the 

maintenance plan measures with 

quantifiable emission reductions that 

New York is relying on to demonstrate 

maintenance. 

TABLE 3—LIST OF POST-2002 NEW YORK CONTROL MEASURES FOR PM2.5 AND PRECURSORS

Name of control 

measure 

Type of 

measure 

Targeted pollutants Maintenance 

plan measure State citation 

NOX PM2.5 SO2 VOC NH3

Architectural and Industrial Maintenance 

Coatings.

State ............... ................ ................ ................ X ................ ........................ 6 NYCRR 205. 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
8142 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 3—LIST OF POST-2002 NEW YORK CONTROL MEASURES FOR PM2.5 AND PRECURSORS—Continued 

Name of control 

measure 

Type of 

measure 

Targeted pollutants Maintenance 

plan measure State citation 

NOX PM2.5 SO2 VOC NH3

Reasonably Available 

Control Technology 

for Major Facilities.

State ............... X ................ ................ X ................ ........................ 6 NYCRR 212.10. 

Solvent Metal Cleaning 

Process.

State ............... ................ ................ ................ X ................ ........................ 6 NYCRR 226. 

Reasonably Available 

Control Technology 

for Major Facilities of 

Oxides of Nitrogen.

State ............... X ................ ................ ................ ................ X 6 NYCRR 227–2. 

Portland Cement 

Plants.

State ............... X ................ ................ ................ ................ ........................ 6 NYCRR 220–1. 

Glass Plants ................ State ............... X ................ ................ ................ ................ ........................ 6 NYCRR 220–2. 

Surface Coating Processes, Commercial 

and Industrial Adhesives, Sealants and 

Primers.

State ............... ................ ................ ................ X ................ X 6 NYCRR 228. 

Graphic Arts ................ State ............... ................ ................ ................ X ................ ........................ 6 NYCRR 234. 

Portable Fuel Container Spillage Control.State ............... ................ ................ ................ X ................ X 6 NYCRR 239. 

New York I/M Program State ............... X ................ ................ X ................ X 6 NYCRR 217. 

Residential Woodstove 

NSPS.

Federal rule .... X X ................ X ................ X 

CAIR ........................... Federal rule .... X ................ X ................ ................ ........................

Federal Tier 2 Gasoline Sulfur Program.Federal rule .... ................ ................ X ................ ................ X 

Federal Clean Diesel 

Program.

Federal rule .... X X X X ................ X 

Control of Emissions 

from Nonroad Large 

Sparking Engines, 

and Recreational Engines (Marine and 

Land-based).

Federal rule .... X X ................ X ................ X 

Control of Emissions of 

Air Pollution from 

Nonroad Diesel Engines and Fuel.

Federal rule .... X X X ................ ................ X 

Table 4 shows Federal and State post 

2007–2009 maintenance plan measures 

with creditable emissions reductions, 

including measures that have been 

adopted, but not yet implemented, that 

New York is relying on to demonstrate 

maintenance. New York’s submittal also 

included additional measures to provide 

additional assurance that New York’s air 

quality will continue to comply with the 

1997 annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5

NAAQS. 

TABLE 4—LIST OF 2007–2009 NEW YORK MAINTENANCE PLAN CONTROL MEASURES FOR PM2.5 AND PRECURSORS

Name of control 

measure 

Type of 

measure 

Targeted pollutants Maintenance 

plan measure State citation 

NOX PM2.5 SO2 VOC NH3

EGU- Oil ..................... State ............... X ................ X X ................ X 6 NYCRR Part 227. 

EGU- Gas ................... State ............... X ................ ................ X ................ X 6 NYCRR Part 227 

and 228. 

Low Sulfur Distillate 

and Residual Fuel 

Strategies.

State ............... ................ X X ................ ................ X 6 NYCRR Parts 225. 

Asphalt ........................ State ............... ................ ................ ................ X ................ X 6 NYCRR Part 241. 

Consumer Products .... State ............... ................ ................ ................ X ................ X 6 NYCRR Parts 231.

Oil Combustion 

Sources.

State ............... ................ ................ ................ X ................ X 6 NYCRR Parts 227. 

Natural Gas Combustion.State ............... ................ ................ ................ X ................ X 6 NYCRR Parts 227. 

New York Combustion 

Regulation.

State ............... X X X ................ ................ X 6 NYCRR Parts 227. 

New York Low Emission Vehicle Program (LEV II).State ............... X X ................ X ................ X 6 NYCRR Part 218. 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules 8143 

TABLE 4—LIST OF 2007–2009 NEW YORK MAINTENANCE PLAN CONTROL MEASURES FOR PM2.5 AND PRECURSORS— 

Continued 

Name of control 

measure 

Type of 

measure 

Targeted pollutants Maintenance 

plan measure State citation 

NOX PM2.5 SO2 VOC NH3

Heavy Duty Highway 

Rule-Vehicle Standards and Diesel Fuel 

Sulfur Co.

Federal Rule ... X X X X ................ X 

Nonroad Diesel Engines.Federal Rule ... X X ................ X ................ X 

Locomotive Engines 

and Marine Compression-Ignition Engines Less than 30 

Liters per Cylinder.

Federal Rule ... X X ................ X ................ X 

Phase 2 Standards for 

Non-Road Spark Ignition Non-handheld 

Engines at or below 

19 kW.

Federal Rule ... X ................ ................ X ................ X 

Phase 2 Standards for 

Small Spark Ignition 

Handheld Engines at 

or below 19 kW.

Federal Rule ... X ................ ................ X ................ X 

Recreational Vehicles 

(includes snowmobiles, off-highway 

motorcycles, and allterrain vehicles).

Federal Rule ... X ................ ................ X ................ X 

Gasoline Boats and 

personal watercraft, 

outboard engines.

Federal Rule ... X X ................ X ................ X 

Based on the information presented 

above, New York has adequately 

demonstrated that the decline in PM2.5

concentrations was due to permanent 

and enforceable control measures. EPA 

proposes to find that the combination of 

existing EPA-approved SIP and Federal 

measures contribute to the permanence 

and enforceability of reduction in 

ambient PM2.5 levels that have allowed 

New York to attain the 1997 PM2.5 and 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. 

E. The Area Must Have a Fully 

Approved Maintenance Plan Pursuant 

to Section 175A of the CAA 

For redesignating a nonattainment 

area to attainment, the CAA requires 

EPA to determine that the area has a 

fully approved maintenance plan 

pursuant to section 175A of the CAA 

(CAA section 107(d)(3)(E)(iv)). In 

conjunction with its request to 

redesignate the NYNAA to attainment 

for the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and 

the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS, New 

York submitted a SIP revision to 

provide for maintenance for at least 10 

years after the effective date of 

redesignation to attainment. EPA 

believes this maintenance plan meets 

the requirements for approval under 

section 175A of the CAA. 

1. What is required in a maintenance 

plan? 

Section 175A of the CAA sets forth 

the 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 10 

years after the Administrator approves a 

redesignation to attainment. Eight years 

after the redesignation, the State must 

submit a revised maintenance plan 

which demonstrates that attainment will 

continue to be maintained for the 10 

years following the initial 10-year 

period. To address the possibility of 

future NAAQS violations, the 

maintenance plan must contain 

contingency measures as EPA deems 

necessary to assure prompt correction of 

any future PM2.5 violations. The 

Calcagni Memorandum, dated 

September 4, 1992, provides further 

guidance on the content of a 

maintenance plan, explaining that a 

maintenance plan should address five 

requirements: (1) An attainment 

emissions inventory; (2) a maintenance 

demonstration showing maintenance for 

10 years; (3) a commitment to maintain 

the existing monitoring network; (4) 

verification of continued attainment; 

and (5) a contingency plan to prevent or 

correct future violations. As is discussed 

more fully below, EPA proposes to find 

that the New York maintenance plan 

includes all the necessary components 

and is thus proposing to approve it as 

a revision to the New York SIP. 

2. Analysis of the Maintenance Plan 

The maintenance demonstration must 

demonstrate effective safeguards of the 

NAAQS for at least 10 years following 

the redesignation showing that future 

PM2.5 and precursor emissions will not 

exceed the level of the attainment year. 

States are required to submit the 

following inventory elements to satisfy 

the redesignation/maintenance plan 

inventory requirements: 

Maintenance Plan Attainment 

Inventory. Maintenance plan provisions 

include a comprehensive, accurate, and 

current emissions inventory from all 

point, area, nonroad and onroad mobile 

sources for the PM2.5 nonattainment 

area. States are required to develop an 

attainment inventory to identify the 

level of emissions in the area that is 

sufficient to attain the NAAQS. This 

inventory should include the emissions 

during the time period associated with 

the monitoring data showing 

attainment. 

Maintenance Plan Interim Year 

Inventory. At a minimum, emissions 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
8144 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

should be projected to a midpoint year 

between the attainment year and the 

endpoint/10-year inventory. This 

inventory provides a summary of 

controlled emissions for point, area, 

nonroad and onroad mobile sources for 

the PM2.5 nonattainment area for the 

interim year inventory. 

Maintenance Plan Projected Final 

Year Inventory. Emissions should be 

projected from the attainment year to at 

least 10 years into the future. This 

inventory provides a summary of 

controlled emissions for point, area, 

nonroad and onroad mobile sources at 

the endpoint/10-year period. 

For the NYNAA, 2007 emissions were 

projected to 2017 and 2025. New York 

must demonstrate, with the control 

programs identified in this SIP, that 

total 2017 or 2025 projected emissions 

do not exceed the 2007 emission levels. 

Below are EPA’s review and 

evaluation of the maintenance 

demonstration for the two areas. 

Additional detail is provided in the 

TSD. 

(a) Attainment Emissions Inventory 

Selection of 2007 Base Year as the 

Maintenance Plan Attainment Year 

Inventory 

An attainment inventory is comprised 

of the emissions during the time period 

associated with the monitoring data 

showing attainment. New York selected 

2007 as the attainment inventory year 

for the NYNAA for the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 and 2006 24-hour PM2.5

standards. 

For the 1997 PM2.5 annual standard, 

the NYNAA had monitored attainment 

based on air monitoring data for 2007– 

2009. For the 2006 24-hour PM2.5

standard, the NYNAA had monitored 

attainment for 2007–2009, and 2008– 

1010. EPA proposes to concur that the 

2007 base year emissions inventory is 

appropriate as the attainment year 

inventory for the PM2.5 redesignation 

maintenance plan. 

Criteria for Approval of the 

Maintenance Plan Attainment Year 

Inventory 

There are general and specific 

components of an acceptable emission 

inventory. In general, the State must 

submit a revision to its SIP and the 

emission inventory must meet the 

minimum requirements for reporting by 

source category. 

For a base year emission inventory to 

be acceptable it must pass all of the 

following acceptance criteria: 

1. Evidence that the inventory was 

quality assured by the state and its 

implementation documented. 

2. The point source inventory must be 

complete. 

3. Point source emissions must have 

been prepared or calculated according 

to the current EPA guidance. 

4. The area source inventory must be 

complete. 

5. The area source emissions must 

have been prepared or calculated 

according to the current EPA guidance. 

6. Non-road mobile emissions were 

prepared according to current EPA 

guidance for all of the source categories. 

7. The method (e.g., HPMS or a 

network transportation planning model) 

used to develop vehicle miles traveled 

(VMT) estimates must follow EPA 

guidance. The VMT development 

methods must be adequately described 

and documented in the inventory 

report. 

8. The US EPA’s Motor Vehicle 

Emissions Simulator (MOVES) model 

must be correctly used to produce 

emission factors for each of the vehicle 

classes. 

EPA’s Evaluation of the Maintenance 

Plan Attainment Year Inventory 

Quality Assurance Plan Implementation 

The Quality Assurance (QA) plan was 

implemented for all portions of the 

inventory. QA checks were performed 

relative to data collection and analysis 

to avoid the double counting of 

emissions from point, area and mobile 

sources. QA/QC checks were conducted 

to ensure accuracy of units, unit 

conversions, transposition of figures, 

and calculations. 

Point and Area Source Inventories 

New York’s inventory includes major 

point sources for each pollutant in tons 

per year (tpy). The inventory report 

describes how point and area source 

activity levels and their associated 

parameters were developed, and how 

the data were used to calculate emission 

estimates. The inventory lists the source 

categories that are included in (and 

excluded from) the area source 

inventory. The report provides 

referenced documents for activity level 

and emission factors used. Information 

on how control efficiencies were 

derived (with the associated sample 

calculations) is also provided. Point and 

area source summary information on 

detailed county and/or nonattainment 

area levels, are included in the 

inventory. Where applicable, annual 

emissions are provided for PM2.5, PM10, 

NOX, SO2, VOC and NH3 for PM2.5

nonattainment areas. 

The primary sources of anthropogenic 

ammonia emissions are two agricultural 

operations, livestock and fertilizer. 

Ammonia emissions from livestock and 

fertilizer were prepared by the EPA 

using the Carnegie Mellon University 

(CMU) Ammonia Model, Version 3.6. 

The model runs are based on 2007 

activity levels. Ammonia emissions for 

industrial refrigeration, composting, and 

publicly owned treatment works were 

prepared by the EPA. 

Nonroad Mobile Source Inventory 

For the NYNAA, the predominant 

non-road mobile source categories (i.e., 

agricultural equipment, construction 

equipment, industrial equipment, 

airport service equipment, light 

commercial equipment, lawn and 

garden equipment, etc.) were developed 

by using version 2008a of EPA’s 

Nonroad Emissions Equipment Model 

released by EPA’s Office of 

Transportation and Air Quality (OTAQ). 

Nonroad mobile source emissions are 

presented on a source category, county 

and/or nonattainment area basis. Where 

applicable, annual emissions are 

provided for PM2.5, PM10, NOX, SO2, 

VOC and NH3 for the PM2.5

nonattainment areas. 

Aircraft, Locomotive and Commercial 

Marine Vessel Inventories 

Where applicable, aircraft, 

locomotive, and commercial marine 

vessel emissions on a county basis are 

provided for PM2.5, PM10, NOX, SO2, 

VOC and NH3. Activity level and 

emissions data for each source category 

is provided. Aircraft, locomotive and 

commercial marine vessel source 

emissions are presented on a source 

category, county and/or nonattainment 

area basis. Where applicable, annual 

emissions are provided for PM2.5, PM10, 

NOX, SO2, VOC and NH3 for PM2.5

nonattainment areas. 

Onroad Mobile Source Inventory 

For the onroad mobile source 

category, the primary indicator and tool 

for developing on-road mobile growth 

and expected emissions are vehicle 

miles traveled (VMT) and EPA’s 

MOVES model. The 2007 pollutant 

emission factors were generated by 

MOVES (with the associated controlled 

measures applied, where appropriate) 

and applied to the monthly VMT 

projections provided by the State. 

Monthly emissions were then combined 

to develop annual emission estimates. 

MOVES model was used to generate 

emission factors for VOC, NH3, PM2.5, 

PM10, NOX and SO2 on-road vehicle 

emission estimates. The report also 

explains how MOVES emission factors 

are used, in conjunction with VMT data, 

to estimate mobile source emissions for 

the inventoried areas. It provides the 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules 8145 

12Emission Inventory Improvement Program 

guidance document titled Volume X, Emission 

Projections, dated December 1999. 

sources for the key inputs into the 

MOVES model. Key assumptions are 

also included. The methods used to 

determine on-road emission estimates 

are explained in the report. VOC, NH3, 

PM2.5, PM10, NOX and SO2 annual 

combined on-road mobile emissions by 

county are provided. Where applicable, 

annual emissions are provided for VOC, 

NH3, PM2.5, PM10, NOX and SO2 for all 

areas. The breakdown of annual 

emissions by highway vehicle 

classifications is included in the 

inventory. 

Table 5 below shows the 2007 base 

year PM2.5, PM10, NOX, SO2, VOC and 

NH3 annual emission inventories for the 

NYNAA. 

TABLE 5—2007 NYNAA PM2.5 BASE YEAR INVENTORY

[In tons/year] 

Source sector VOC NOX PM10 PM2.5 SO2 NH3

Point ......................................................... 3,707.01 38,195.94 3,206.28 124,750.31 43,886.32 882.89 

Nonpoint ................................................... 101,481.89 41,899.74 48,054.84 11,621.00 29,513.22 1,960.83 

Nonroad ................................................... 46,026.72 59,512.46 4,170.45 3,899.30 6,052.88 1.96 

On-road .................................................... 71,379.46 149,501.91 9,723.36 6,835.30 982.77 3,484.40 

Road Dust ................................................ N/A N/A 3,483.59 1,174.60 N/A N/A 

Total .................................................. 222,595.08 289,110.05 68,638.51 148,280.52 80,435.19 6,610.08 

EPA is proposing to approve the 2007 

PM2.5 base year inventory for PM2.5, 

PM10, NOX, SO2, VOC and NH3 for the 

NYNAA. The Maintenance Plan 

Attainment Year/Base Year 2007 

emissions inventory is comprehensive, 

accurate, and current for all sources of 

relevant pollutants in the nonattainment 

area. In all cases the 2007 attainment/

base year inventory was done in 

accordance with EPA guidance. The 

technical support document provides 

additional information regarding the 

review conducted by EPA for the 2007 

PM2.5 base year inventory. EPA 

proposes that by approving the 2007 

base year inventory for PM2.5, PM10, 

NOX, SO2, VOC and NH3 for the 

NYNAA, will also serve to establish a 

PM10 emissions inventory specifically 

for New York County, which satisfies an 

existing SIP planning requirement for 

the PM10 New York County 

nonattainment area. See 78 FR 72032, 

December 2, 2013. 

(b) 2017 Interim and 2025 End Year 

Projection Inventories 

Criteria for Approval of the 2017 Interim 

and 2025 Projection End Year 

Inventories 

There are general and specific 

components for acceptable 2017 

Maintenance Plan Interim and 2025 End 

Year Projection Inventories. In general, 

the State must submit a revision to its 

SIP and the aforementioned components 

must meet certain minimum 

requirements for reporting by source 

category. 

For the projection inventories to be 

acceptable they must pass the following 

acceptance criteria: 12

1. Were the 2017 and 2025 projection 

inventories developed in accordance 

with the procedures outlined EPA’s 

latest guidance? 

2. Were the Plans developed in 

accordance with EPA’s latest guidance 

for Growth Factors, Projections, and 

Control Strategies for Reasonable 

Progress Goal Plans? 

EPA’s Evaluation of the Maintenance 

Plan 2017 Interim and 2025 End Year 

Projection Inventories 

A projection of 2007 PM2.5 and the 

associated PM2.5 precursors emissions to 

2017 and 2025 is required to determine 

the emission reductions needed for the 

inventory maintenance plan. The 2017 

and 2025 projection year emission 

inventories are calculated by 

multiplying the 2007 base year 

inventory by factors which estimate 

growth from 2007 to 2017 and 2025. A 

specific growth factor for each source 

type in the inventory is required since 

sources typically grow at different rates. 

Major Point Sources 

Electric Generating Units (EGU) and 

Non-Electric Generating Units (NonEGUs) 

For the major point source category, 

the projected emissions inventories 

were first calculated by estimating 

growth in each source category. As 

appropriate, the 2007 emissions 

inventory was used as the base for 

applying factors to account for 

inventory growth. The point source 

inventory was grown from the 2007 

inventory to 2017 and 2025 for each 

facility using growth factors utilized in 

U.S. Department of Energy’s (USDOE) 

Annual Energy Outlook (AEO) 

projections for 2011 Electric Region and 

Fuel Source for EGUs and AEO 2010, 

and State supplied employment data. 

Area Sources 

For the area source category, New 

York projected emissions from 2007 to 

2017 and 2025 using growth factors 

generated from USDOE AEO 2010, state 

supplied population, employment data 

and vehicle miles travelled (for road 

dust categories) where appropriate. 

Non-Road Mobile Sources 

Nonroad Vehicle Equipment Emissions 

Non-road vehicle equipment 

emissions were projected from 2007 to 

2017 and 2025 using the EPA’s 

NONROAD 2008a model. This model 

was used to calculate past and future 

emission inventories for all nonroad 

equipment categories except 

commercial marine vessels, locomotives 

and aircrafts. Emissions were 

determined on a monthly basis and 

combined to provide annual emission 

estimates. 

Aircrafts, Locomotives and Commercial 

Marine Vessels (CMV) 

Aircraft emissions were projected 

from 2007 to 2017 and 2025 based on 

landing and takeoff growth factors from 

the Federal Aviation Administration 

Terminal Area Forecast System for 

2009–2030. 

Locomotives emissions were 

projected from 2007 to 2017 and 2025 

based on combined growth and control 

factors from EPA’s RIA in May 2008 for 

control of locomotive engines and 

USDOE’s 2006 Annual Energy Outlook 

report. 

CMV emissions were projected to 

2017 and 2025 using EPA’s regulatory 

impact assessment (RIA) May 2008 RIA 

report, for category 1 and 2 vessels and 

EPA’s 2009 RIA report for category 3 

vessels based on combined growth and 

control factors. 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
8146 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

Onroad Mobile Sources 

For the onroad mobile source 

category, the primary indicator and tool 

for developing on-road mobile growth 

and expected emissions are VMT and 

US EPA’s mobile emissions model 

MOVES2010a. Projection years 2017 

and 2025 pollutant emission factors 

were generated by MOVES2010a (with 

the associated controlled measures 

applied, where appropriate) and applied 

to the monthly VMT projections 

provided by the State. Monthly 

emissions were then combined to 

develop annual emission estimates. 

Tables 6A–6C show the 2007 base 

year inventory and 2017 and 2025 

projection emission inventories 

controlled after 2007 using the 

aforementioned growth indicators/

methodologies for the NYNAA. 

TABLE 6A—2007 EMISSION TOTALS BY SOURCE SECTOR (TPY) FOR THE NYNAA 

Source sector VOC NOX PM10 PM2.5 SO2 NH3

Point ......................................................... 3,707.01 38,195.94 3,206.28 124,750.31 43,886.32 882.89 

Nonpoint ................................................... 101,481.89 41,899.74 48,054.84 11,621.00 29,513.22 1,960.83 

Nonroad ................................................... 46,026.72 59,512.46 4,170.45 3,899.30 6,052.88 1.96 

On-road .................................................... 71,379.46 149,501.91 9,723.36 6,835.30 982.77 3,484.40 

Road Dust ................................................ N/A N/A 3,483.59 1,174.60 N/A N/A 

Total .................................................. 222,595.08 289,110.05 68,638.51 148,280.52 80,435.19 6,610.08 

TABLE 6B—2017 EMISSION TOTALS BY SOURCE SECTOR (TPY) FOR THE NYNAA 

Source sector VOC NOX PM10 PM2.5 SO2 NH3

Point ......................................................... 4,131.72 37,066.75 3,193.99 124,290.57 43,484.29 867.60 

Nonpoint ................................................... 93,790.95 36,640.38 34,306.76 9,403.95 4,412.25 1,915 

Nonroad ................................................... 26,408.16 45,197.21 3,040.77 2,809.06 4,212.42 1.12 

On-road .................................................... 33,083.83 68,362.66 7,171.83 3,897.71 939.20 2,340.95 

Road Dust ................................................ N/A N/A 2,959.46 954.01 N/A ........................

Tappan Zee Project ................................. N/A 457.00 N/A N/A N/A 

Total .................................................. 157,414.67 187,724.00 50,672.82 141,355.28 53,048.17 5,124.68 

TABLE 6C—2025 EMISSION TOTALS BY SOURCE SECTOR (TPY) FOR THE NYNAA 

Source sector VOC NOX PM10 PM2.5 SO2 NH3

Point ......................................................... 4,153.64 37,645.59 3,201.53 124,294.66 43,596.39 872.33 

Nonpoint ................................................... 94,698.56 35,467.73 38,066.67 10,126.70 4,389.48 1,924.66 

Nonroad ................................................... 24,737.31 42,773.21 2,519.12 2,290.95 4,599.34 1.05 

On-road .................................................... 26,911.17 51,260.81 6,952.22 3,291.09 935.40 2,443.53 

Road Dust ................................................ N/A N/A 3,184.31 960.05 N/A 

Total .................................................. 150,500.68 167,147.34 53,923.85 140,963.45 53,520.61 5,241.57 

The permanent and enforceable 

control measures that are relied on to 

provide continued attainment of 

(‘‘maintenance’’) of the 1997 annual and 

2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS are listed as 

maintenance plan measures in Tables 3 

and 4. New York has already 

implemented, or adopted rules with 

future implementation dates, for these 

measures. Additional information 

regarding the control measures can be 

found in the TSD. 

EPA is proposing to approve the 2017 

interim and 2025 PM2.5 projections for 

the NYNAA. In all cases the 2017 and 

2025 projection year inventories were 

performed in accordance with EPA 

guidance. For further information 

concerning EPA’s evaluation and 

analysis of the emission inventories, see 

the TSD available in the docket. 

Tables 6A–6C above shows the 

inventories for the 2007 attainment year, 

the 2017 interim year, and the 2025 

endpoint year for the NYNAA. Tables 

6A–6C shows that when comparing the 

2007 inventory to the 2017 and 2025 

projected emission inventories the 

NYNAA is projected to reduce PM2.5

precursor emissions substantially. Thus, 

the 2017 and 2025 projected emissions 

inventories show that the NYNAA will 

continue to maintain the 1997 annual 

and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS during 

the 10 year maintenance period. 

Maintenance Demonstration Thru 2025 

As noted in Section VII.E.1, 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 10 years following 

redesignation.’’ See Calcagni 

Memorandum. 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. See 

Calcagni Memorandum. 

As discussed in detail above, the 

State’s maintenance plan submission 

expressly documents that the NYNAA 

emissions inventories will remain below 

the attainment year inventories through 

at least 2025. In addition, for the reasons 

set forth below, EPA proposes to 

determine that the State’s submission 

further demonstrates that the NYNAA 

will continue to maintain the 1997 

annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

at least through 2025: 

• For the NYNAA, emissions 

inventory levels for all PM2.5 precursors 

in 2025 are well below the attainment 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules 8147 

13 77 FR 9304 (February 16, 2012). 

14EPA is acting on this rule, which was 

submitted as a SIP revision on June 12, 2013, in a 

separate action. 

15EPA proposed approval on November 20, 2013 

(78 FR 69625). 

year inventory levels (see Table 6C). 

EPA proposes that it is highly 

improbable that sudden increases would 

occur that could exceed the attainment 

year inventory levels in 2025. 

• Air quality concentrations for PM2.5

are below the NAAQS by 3 mg/m3 or 

more, indicating a margin of safety in 

the event of any emissions increase. As 

shown in Table 1, for the 1997 annual 

NAAQS of 15 mg/m3, the design value 

for 2010–2012 for the NY–NJ–CT PM2.5

nonattainment area value was 11.8 mg/ 

m3. As shown in Table 2, for the 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS of 35 mg/m3, the design 

value for 2010–2012 for the NY–NJ–CT 

PM2.5 nonattainment area was 26 mg/m3. 

• Air quality concentrations showed a 

significant downward trend over time 

for the NY–NJ–CT PM2.5 nonattainment 

area for both the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS. See Figures 7 and 8 of the New 

York redesignation request, which is 

available in the docket. 

• Additional emissions reductions 

will occur through EPA’s Mercury and 

Air Toxics Standards (MATS) 13. See the 

TSD for more information regarding 

MATS, including expected emission 

reductions. 

(d) Monitoring Network 

New York currently operates ten 

Federal reference PM2.5 monitors in the 

NYNAA. In its June 27, 2013 Air 

Monitoring Network Plan submittal, 

New York has committed to continued 

operation of the PM2.5 air monitoring 

network, which meets the requirements 

of 40 CFR part 58, to verify continue 

attainment. 

New York is required to perform and 

submit to EPA an assessment of the air 

monitoring network every 5 years and to 

review the adequacy of its air 

monitoring network plan annually 

through the air monitoring network plan 

process. Any changes (aside from 

emergency changes) to the monitoring 

network, including replacing or moving 

monitor(s) to new locations, as 

necessary, would be made through this 

process. This review process undergoes 

a public notice period, and is subject to 

approval by the EPA. 

EPA proposes to conclude that the 

State of New York has met the 

requirement for continuing to operate an 

appropriate air monitoring network. 

(e) Verification of Continued Attainment 

Continued attainment of the PM2.5

NAAQS in the state depends, in part, on 

the state’s efforts towards tracking 

indicators of continued attainment 

during the maintenance period. New 

York’s plan for verifying continued 

attainment of the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

standards consists of continued 

operation of New York’s PM2.5 air 

monitoring network in accordance with 

the requirements of 40 CFR part 58. 

New York will also verify continued 

attainment by determining whether 

emission levels from New York’s 

emission inventory, which is developed 

every three years, are adequate. 

EPA proposes to approve New York’s 

plans for verifying continued attainment 

of the PM2.5 NAAQS. 

(f) Contingency Measures in the 

Maintenance Plan 

Section 175A of the CAA requires that 

a maintenance plan include such 

contingency provisions as EPA deems 

necessary to ensure 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. 

As required by 175A of the CAA, New 

York has included contingency 

provisions in the maintenance plan to 

address possible future PM2.5 air quality 

problems. However, instead of 

providing a specific schedule and 

procedure for the adoption and 

implementation of contingency 

measures, New York has identified the 

list of measures that are currently being 

pursued by the State, which will be 

adopted once the New York’s 

rulemaking process has been concluded. 

New York expects these rules to be 

adopted within the next few years. 

These measures include the following: 

1. New NOX and PM control limits on 

distributed generation sources that are 

not already subject to state or federal 

limits (6 NYCRR Part 222—Distributed 

Generation) 

2. Additional VOC emission 

reductions from gasoline dispensing 

facilities and gasoline transport vehicles 

(Revisions to 6 NYCRR Part 230— 

Gasoline Dispensing Sites and 

Transport Vehicles) 

New York has also identified two 

recently adopted rules as contingency 

measures: Revisions to 6 NYCRR Part 

225—Fuel Composition and Use 

(adopted April 5, 2013) 14, and 

Revisions to 6 NYCRR Part 228— 

Surface Coating Processes, Commercial 

and Industrial Adhesives, Sealants, and 

Primers (adopted June 5, 2013) 15. 

Although New York included these 

measures in the list of control measures 

that the State was relying on to 

demonstrate maintenance (see Section 

VI.D. for the list of identified 

maintenance control measures), and 

while EPA supports the adoption and 

implementation of these rules to reduce 

PM2.5 emissions, EPA is proposing that 

these two measures do not qualify as 

contingency measures since they have 

already been adopted and used for 

maintenance. Regardless, EPA notes that 

PM2.5 levels are sufficiently below the 

NAAQS indicating a sufficient margin 

of safety in the event of emissions 

increase. 2010–2012 design values are 

below the NAAQS by more than 3 mg/ 

m3 for both the 1997 annual and 2006 

24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. Tables 1 and 2 

of this proposal show the design values 

for the NY–NJ–CT PM2.5 nonattainment 

area. EPA proposes that it is unlikely 

that New York will violate the PM2.5

NAAQS, as design values in all counties 

in the NY–NJ–CT nonattainment area 

are well below the NAAQS, and 

continue to decrease. 

New York has affirmed that all control 

measures in the maintenance plan have 

been implemented, or adopted with 

future implementation dates. New York 

has also noted in their submittal that the 

control measures that have led to 

expeditious attainment of the annual 

and 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS are SIP 

implemented measures that cannot be 

repealed or relaxed without equivalent 

reductions from other sources(s) (e.g. 

CAA section 110 anti-backsliding 

provisions). 

Air quality modeling conducted 

during the CSAPR rulemaking process, 

as mentioned previously in Section II. 

B., demonstrated that the counties in the 

NY–NJ–CT nonattainment area will 

have PM2.5 levels below the NAAQS in 

2014, without taking into account 

emission reductions from CAIR or 

CSAPR. The highest PM2.5 design 

values, as determined from the CSAPR 

modeling, for sites in the NYNAA in 

2014 was 13.89 mg/m3 for the 1997 

annual NAAQS, and 32.0 ug/m3 for the 

24-hour 2006 NAAQS. The ‘‘modeled 

differential’’ between the modeled 

design values and the PM2.5 NAAQS 

indicates that there are excess emission 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
8148 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

reductions available for contingency 

based on EPA CSAPR modeling. 

EPA proposes to find that New York’s 

maintenance plan includes appropriate 

contingency measures to promptly 

correct any violation of the NAAQS that 

occurs after redesignation. 

Maintenance Plan Conclusion 

For all of the reasons discussed above, 

EPA is proposing to approve New 

York’s 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 maintenance plan for the NYNAA 

as meeting the requirements of section 

175A of the CAA. 

VII. What is EPA’s analysis of New 

York’s proposed NOX and PM2.5 motor 

vehicle emission budgets? 

Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new 

transportation plans, programs, and 

projects, such as the construction of 

new highways, must ‘‘conform’’ to (i.e., 

be consistent with) the part of the state’s 

air quality plan that addresses pollution 

from cars and trucks. Conformity to the 

SIP means that transportation activities 

will not cause new air quality 

violations, worsen existing violations, or 

delay timely attainment of the NAAQS 

or any interim milestones. If a 

transportation plan does not conform, 

most new projects that would expand 

the capacity of roadways cannot go 

forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 

set forth EPA policy, criteria, and 

procedures for demonstrating and 

assuring conformity of such 

transportation activities to a SIP. The 

regional emissions analysis is one, but 

not the only, requirement for 

implementing transportation 

conformity. Transportation conformity 

is a requirement for nonattainment and 

maintenance areas. 

Under the CAA, states are required to 

submit, at various times, control strategy 

SIPs and maintenance plans for 

nonattainment areas. These control 

strategy SIPs (including RFP and 

attainment demonstrations) and 

maintenance plans create motor vehicle 

emissions budgets (MVEBs or budgets) 

for criteria pollutants and/or their 

precursors to address pollution from 

cars and trucks. Per 40 CFR part 93, an 

MVEB must be established for the last 

year of the maintenance plan. A state 

may adopt MVEBs for other years as 

well. The MVEB is the portion of the 

total allowable emissions in the 

maintenance demonstration that is 

allocated to highway and transit vehicle 

use and emissions. The MVEB serves as 

a ceiling on emissions from an area’s 

planned transportation system. The 

MVEB concept is further explained in 

the preamble to the November 24, 1993, 

Transportation Conformity Rule (58 FR 

62188). The preamble also describes 

how to establish the MVEB in the SIP 

and how to revise the MVEB. 

New York has developed MVEBs for 

the NYNAA. The budgets are being 

established for both the 1997 annual 

and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standards. New 

York determined that budgets based on 

annual emissions of direct PM2.5 and 

NOX, a precursor, are appropriate for the 

2006 24-hour standard because 

exceedences of the standard were not 

isolated to one particular season; 

therefore, the budgets established by 

this maintenance plan will be used by 

transportation agencies to meet 

conformity requirements for both the 

annual and daily standards. 

New York developed these MVEBs, as 

required, for the last year of its 

maintenance plan, 2025, and two 

additional years, 2009 and 2017, for the 

purpose of establishing budgets for the 

near-term based on EPA’s MOVES 

model. Previously established and 

approved MVEBs had been based on 

MOBILE6.2. 

The 2009 MVEBs were developed 

without an accompanying full emissions 

inventory. EPA proposes that this 

approach is approvable and is 

consistent with attainment and 

maintenance of both the 1997 annual 

and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 standards 

because of our earlier determinations 

that the New York-N.New Jersey-Long 

Island, NY–NJ–CT nonattainment area 

had attained the standards based on 

monitored air quality that included the 

year 2009 (see Section II.A.). 

The MVEBs for the NYNAA are 

defined in Table 7 below. 

TABLE 7—PM2.5 AND NOX MVEBS FOR BOTH THE 1997 ANNUAL AND 2006 DAILY PM2.5 NAAQS 

[Tons per year] 

New York Metropolitan Transportation Council & Orange County Transportation Council Direct PM2.5 NOX

2009 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget ........................................................................................................... 5,516.75 106,020.09 

2017 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget ........................................................................................................... 3,897.71 68,362.66 

2025 Motor Vehicle Emissions Budget ........................................................................................................... 3,291.09 51,260.81 

EPA is proposing to approve the 2009, 

2017 and 2025 MVEBs for NOX and 

PM2.5 for the NYNAA because EPA has 

determined that the areas will maintain 

both the 1997 annual and 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 NAAQS with on-road vehicle 

emissions capped at the levels set by the 

budgets. EPA’s review thus far indicates 

that the budgets meet the adequacy 

criteria set forth by 40 CFR 

93.118(e)(4)(i) through (iv), as follows: 

i. The SIP revision was submitted to 

EPA by the Commissioner of the New 

York State Department of 

Environmental Conservation, who is the 

Governor’s designee. 

ii. New York State conducted an 

interagency consultation process 

involving EPA and USDOT, the New 

York State Department of 

Transportation and affected MPOs. All 

comments and concerns were addressed 

prior to the final submittal. 

iii. The motor vehicle emissions 

budgets were clearly identified and 

quantified and are presented here in 

Table 7. 

iv. The 2009, 2017 and 2025 motor 

vehicle emissions budgets are less than 

the on-road mobile source inventory for 

2007 that was shown to be consistent 

with attainment of the standards. The 

applicable state implementation plan 

demonstrates that the 2017 and 2025 

budgets are consistent with 

maintenance when considered with all 

other sources for each respective year. 

The 2009 budgets were developed with 

all the information for the year 2009, 

including on-road activity in 2009. 

Because New York demonstrated 

attainment in this year to the applicable 

air quality standards based on 

monitoring data, the 2009 budgets are 

therefore consistent with maintenance 

of the respective standards. 

v. The motor vehicle emissions 

budgets were developed from the onroad mobile source inventories, 

including all applicable state and 

Federal control measures. Inputs related 

to inspection and maintenance and fuels 

are consistent with New York State’s 

Federally-approved control programs. 

The submitted maintenance plan 

establishes new 2009, 2017 and 2025 

budgets to ensure continued 

maintenance of the standards; therefore 

there were no revisions made to 

previously submitted control strategy 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules 8149 

16The 2004 rulemaking addressed most of the 

transportation conformity requirements that apply 

in PM2.5 nonattainment and maintenance areas. The 

2005 conformity rule included provisions 

addressing treatment of PM2.5 precursors in MVEBs. 

See 40 CFR 93.102(b)(2). While none of these 

provisions were challenged in the NRDC case, EPA 

also notes that the Court declined to address 

challenges to EPA’s presumptions regarding PM2.5

precursors in the PM2.5 implementation rule. NRDC 

v. EPA, at 27, n. 10. 

implementation plans or maintenance 

plans. 

New York State did not provide 

emission budgets for SO2, VOC, and 

ammonia because it concluded, 

consistent with the presumptions 

regarding these precursors in the 

conformity rule at 40 CFR 

93.102(b)(2)(v), which predated and was 

not disturbed by the litigation on the 

PM2.5 implementation rule, that 

emissions of these precursors from 

motor vehicles are not significant 

contributors to the area’s PM2.5 air 

quality problem. 

EPA issued conformity regulations to 

implement the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in 

July 2004 and May 2005 (69 FR 40004, 

July 1, 2004 and 70 FR 24280, May 6, 

2005, respectively). Those actions were 

not part of the final rule remanded, on 

January 4, 2013, to EPA by the Court of 

Appeals for the District of Columbia in 

NRDC v. EPA, No. 08–1250, in which 

the Court remanded to EPA the 

implementation rule for the PM2.5

NAAQS because it concluded that EPA 

must implement that NAAQS pursuant 

to the PM-specific implementation 

provisions of subpart 4 of Part D of Title 

I of the CAA, rather than solely under 

the general provisions of subpart 1. That 

decision does not affect EPA’s proposed 

approval of these MVEBs. 

First, as noted above, EPA’s 

conformity rule implementing the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS was a separate action 

from the overall PM2.5 implementation 

rule addressed by the Court and was not 

considered or disturbed by the decision. 

Therefore, the conformity regulations 

were not at issue in NRDC v. EPA.16 In 

addition, as discussed in Section II.A, 

the New York-N.New Jersey-Long 

Island, NY–NJ–CT nonattainment area is 

attaining the 1997 annual and 2006 24- 

hour PM2.5 standards with 2010–2012 

design values of 11.8 mg/m3 and 26 mg/ 

m3, respectively, which is well below 

the annual PM2.5 NAAQS of 15 mg/m3

and 24-hour NAAQS of 35 mg/m3. The 

modeling analysis conducted for the 

RIA for the 2012 PMNAAQS indicates 

that the design value for this area is 

expected to continue to decline through 

2020. Further, the State’s maintenance 

plan shows continued maintenance 

through 2025 by demonstrating that 

NOX, and direct PM2.5 emissions 

continue to decrease through the 

maintenance period. For VOC and 

ammonia, RIA inventories for 2007 and 

2020 show that both on-road and total 

emissions for these pollutants are 

expected to decrease, supporting the 

state’s conclusion, consistent with the 

presumptions regarding these 

precursors in the conformity rule, that 

emissions of these precursors from 

motor vehicles are not significant 

contributors to the area’s PM2.5 air 

quality problem and the MVEBs for 

these precursors are unnecessary. With 

regard to SO2, the 2005 final conformity 

rule (70 FR 24280) based its 

presumption concerning on-road SO2

motor vehicle emissions budgets on 

emissions inventories that show that 

SO2 emissions from on-road sources 

constitute a ‘‘de minimis’’ portion of 

total SO2 emissions. As shown 

elsewhere in this proposal, on-road 

emissions in 2025 are less than 2% of 

total SO2 emissions in the area. 

EPA is proposing to approve the 2009, 

2017 and 2025 direct PM2.5 and NOX

motor vehicle emissions budgets for the 

NYNAA for the 1997 annual and 2006 

24-hour PM2 NAAQS. We are proposing 

approval based on our review that 

shows that the budgets meet the 

adequacy criteria found in the 

transportation conformity rule (40 CFR 

93.118(e)(4)) and our thorough review of 

the maintenance plan that shows that 

the plan will provide for maintenance of 

both PM2.5 NAAQS through 2025. 

VIII. What is the status of EPA’s 

adequacy determination for the 

proposed NOX and PM2.5 motor vehicle 

emission budgets for 2009, 2017 and 

2025 for New York? 

When reviewing submitted ‘‘control 

strategy’’ SIPs or maintenance plans 

containing MVEBs, EPA may 

affirmatively find the MVEB contained 

therein adequate for use in determining 

transportation conformity. Once EPA 

affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB 

is adequate for transportation 

conformity purposes, that MVEB must 

be used by state and Federal agencies in 

determining whether proposed 

transportation projects conform to the 

SIP as required by section 176(c) of the 

CAA. 

EPA’s substantive criteria for 

determining adequacy of a MVEB are set 

out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), and our 

review of New York’s submission in the 

context of these criteria was presented 

in Section VII. The process for 

determining adequacy consists of three 

basic steps: public notification of a SIP 

submission, a public comment period, 

and EPA’s adequacy determination. 

This process for determining the 

adequacy of submitted MVEBs for 

transportation conformity purposes was 

initially outlined in EPA’s May 14, 

1999, guidance, ‘‘Conformity Guidance 

on Implementation of March 2, 1999, 

Conformity Court Decision.’’ EPA 

adopted regulations to codify the 

adequacy process in the Transportation 

Conformity Rule Amendments for the 

‘‘New 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards and 

Miscellaneous Revisions for Existing 

Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule 

Amendments—Response to Court 

Decision and Additional Rule Change,’’ 

on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). 

Additional information on the adequacy 

process for transportation conformity 

purposes is available in the proposed 

rule entitled, ‘‘Transportation 

Conformity Rule Amendments: 

Response to Court Decision and 

Additional Rule Changes,’’ 68 FR 38974, 

38984 (June 30, 2003). 

As discussed earlier, New York’s 

maintenance plan submission includes 

NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs for the NYNAA 

for 2009, 2017 and 2025. EPA reviewed 

the NOX and PM2.5 MVEBs through the 

adequacy process. The New York SIP 

submission, including the NOX and 

PM2.5 MVEBs, was open for public 

comment on EPA’s adequacy Web site 

on July 15, 2013, found at: http://

www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/

transconf/currsips.htm. The public 

comment period closed on August 14, 

2013. EPA did not receive any 

comments on the adequacy of the 

MVEBs, nor did EPA receive any 

requests for the SIP submittal. 

A letter was sent to New York State 

on August 19, 2013, stating that the 

2009, 2017 and 2025 MVEB’s in New 

York’s SIP for the New York PM2.5

nonattainment area were adequate 

because they are consistent with the 

required maintenance demonstration. In 

the letter we noted that there are 

existing approved and adequate budgets 

for 2009, but that the 2009 budgets 

contained in the submitted maintenance 

plan will be the most recent budget in 

place to satisfy the latest Clean Air Act 

requirement and therefore will be the 

applicable 2009 budget to be used in 

future transportation conformity 

determinations for analysis years prior 

to 2017. 

EPA then published in the Federal 

Register its determination on the 

adequacy of the PM2.5 and NOX 2009, 

2017 and 2025 MVEBs for 

transportation conformity purposes. (78 

FR 54177, September 3, 2013). These 

budgets became effective on September 

18, 2013, after which they were required 

to be used for all future transportation 

conformity determinations. 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
8150 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 28 / Tuesday, February 11, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

IX. What action is EPA proposing to 

take? 

EPA is proposing to approve New 

York’s request for redesignating the 

NYNAA for the 1997 and 2006 PM2.5

NAAQS to attainment, because the State 

has demonstrated compliance with the 

requirements of section 107(d)(3)(E) for 

redesignation. EPA has evaluated New 

York’s redesignation request and 

determined that it meets the 

redesignation criteria set forth in section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA believes 

that the monitoring data demonstrate 

that the NYNAA has attained the 1997 

annual and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

and will continue to attain the standard. 

Final approval of this redesignation 

request would change the designation of 

the NYNAA from nonattainment to 

attainment for the 1997 PM2.5 annual 

and the 2006 PM2.5 24-hour NAAQS. 

EPA is also proposing to approve the 

maintenance plan for the NYNAA as a 

revision to the New York SIP. EPA is 

also proposing to approve the 2007 NH3, 

VOC, NOX, PM10, direct PM2.5, and SO2

emission inventories as meeting the 

comprehensive emissions inventory 

requirements of section 172(c)(3) of 

CAA. Additionally, EPA is proposing to 

approve the 2009, 2017, and 2025 motor 

vehicle emissions budgets for PM2.5 and 

NOX. EPA is soliciting public comments 

on the issues discussed in this 

document. These comments will be 

considered before taking final action. 

X. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the Clean Air Act, the 

Administrator is required to approve a 

SIP submission that complies with the 

provisions of the Act 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 Clean Air Act. 

Accordingly, this action merely 

proposes to approve state law as 

meeting Federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed 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 Clean Air Act; 

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 proposed 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 in 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Nitrogen dioxide, 

Particulate matter, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur 

oxides. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control. 

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

Dated: January 16, 2014. 

Judith A. Enck, 

Regional Administrator, Region 2. 

[FR Doc. 2014–02478 Filed 2–10–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 300 

[Docket No. 130717632–4070–01] 

RIN 0648–BD52 

International Fisheries; Pacific Tuna 

Fisheries; Fishing Restrictions in the 

Eastern Pacific Ocean 

Correction 

In proposed rule document 2014– 

02333 appearing on pages 6876–6880 in 

the issue of February 5, 2014, make the 

following correction: 

On page 6876, in the second column, 

in the first and second lines above the 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

heading, 

‘‘RegionalAdministrato.WCRHMS@

noaa.gov’’ should read 

‘‘RegionalAdministrator.WCRHMS@

noaa.gov’’. 

[FR Doc. C1–2014–02333 Filed 2–10–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D 


ehiers on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1