Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 64825 

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. 

B. Submission to Congress and the 

Comptroller General 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

This action is not a ‘‘major rule’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

C. Petitions for Judicial Review 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean 

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by December 19, 

2011. Filing a petition for 

reconsideration by the Administrator of 

this final rule does not affect the finality 

of this action for the purposes of judicial 

review nor does it extend the time 

within which a petition for judicial 

review may be filed, and shall not 

postpone the effectiveness of such rule 

or action. Parties with objections to this 

direct final rule are encouraged to file a 

comment in response to the parallel 

notice of proposed rulemaking for this 

action published in the proposed rules 

section of today’s Federal Register, 

rather than file an immediate petition 

for judicial review of this direct final 

rule, so that EPA can withdraw this 

direct final rule and address the 

comment in the proposed rulemaking. 

This action to approve the Virginia 

Transportation Conformity Regulation 

may not be challenged later in 

proceedings to enforce its requirements. 

(See CAA section 307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Carbon monoxide, 

Incorporation by reference, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

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

Dated: October 3, 2011. 

W.C. Early, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for 40 CFR 

part 52 continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart VV—Virginia 

■ 2. In § 52.2420, the table in paragraph 

(c) is amended by revising the entries 

for Sections 5–151–40 and 5–151–70 to 

read as follows: 

§ 52.2420 Identification of plan. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

EPA-APPROVED VIRGINIA REGULATIONS AND STATUTES

State citation Title/subject State effective 

date EPA approval date Explanation [former SIP citation] 

*******

9 VAC 5, Chapter 151 Transportation Conformity 

*******

Part III .......................... Criteria and Procedures for Making Conformity Determinations 

5–151–40 ..................... General ...................................... 3/2/11 10/19/11 [Insert page number where the document 

begins].

* * * * * * * 

5–151–70 ..................... Consultation ............................... 3/2/11 10/19/11 [Insert page number where the document 

begins].

Section D.1.f. is amended. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–26905 Filed 10–18–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0017; EPA–R05– 

OAR–2011–0106; FRL–9480–6] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans, Ohio 

and Indiana; Redesignation of the Ohio 

and Indiana Portions CincinnatiHamilton Area to Attainment of the 

1997 Annual Standard for Fine 

Particulate Matter 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Direct final rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is approving, under the 

Clean Air Act (CAA), Ohio’s and 

Indiana’s requests to redesignate their 

respective portions of the CincinnatiHamilton nonattainment area (for Ohio: 

Butler, Clermont, Hamilton, and Warren 

Counties, Ohio; for IN: a portion of 

Dearborn County) to attainment for the 

1997 annual National Ambient Air 

Quality Standard (NAAQS or standard) 

for fine particulate matter (PM2.5). The 

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency 

(Ohio EPA) submitted its request on 

December 9, 2010, and the Indiana 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
64826 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

1Fine particulates directly emitted by sources 

and not formed in a secondary manner through 

chemical reactions or other processes in the 

atmosphere. 

2NOX and SO2 are precursors for fine particulates 

through chemical reactions and other related 

processes in the atmosphere. 

Department of Environmental 

Management (IDEM) submitted its 

request on January 25, 2011. Kentucky’s 

request to redesignate its portion of the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area, submitted to 

EPA on January 27, 2011, will be 

addressed in a separate rulemaking 

action. EPA’s approvals here involve 

several additional related actions. EPA 

has determined that the entire 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area has attained 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard. EPA is 

approving, as revisions to the Ohio and 

Indiana State Implementation Plans 

(SIPs), the states’ plans for maintaining 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS through 

2021 in the area. EPA is approving the 

2005 emissions inventories for the Ohio 

and Indiana portions of the CincinnatiHamilton area as meeting the 

comprehensive emissions inventory 

requirement of the CAA. Finally, EPA 

finds adequate and is approving Ohio 

and Indiana’s Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) 

and PM2.5 Motor Vehicle Emission 

Budgets (MVEBs) for 2015 and 2021 for 

the Cincinnati-Hamilton area. 

DATES: This direct final rule will be 

effective December 19, 2011, unless EPA 

receives adverse comments by 

November 18, 2011. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2011–0106 (Indiana) or EPA–R05– 

OAR–2011–0017 (Ohio) by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: Aburano.Douglas@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (312) 408–2279. 

• Mail: Doug Aburano, Chief, Control 

Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch 

(AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

• Hand Delivery: Doug Aburano, 

Control Strategies Section, Air Programs 

Branch, (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, 18th Floor, Chicago, Illinois 

60604. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office’s 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

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

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2011– 

0106, EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0017. 

EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through http:// 

www.regulations.gov or email. The 

http://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 http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your e-mail 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects 

and viruses. For additional instructions 

on submitting comments, go to section 

I of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this document. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the http:// 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

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

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

will be publicly available only in hard 

copy. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in http:// 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation 

Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is 

open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding 

Federal holidays. We recommend that 

you telephone Carolyn Persoon at (312) 

353–8290 before visiting the Region 5 

office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Carolyn Persoon, Environmental 

Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–8290, 

persoon.carolyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. What actions is EPA taking? 

II. What is the background for these actions? 

III. What are the criteria for redesignation to 

attainment? 

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

requests? 

A. Attainment Determination and 

Redesignation 

B. Adequacy of Ohio and Indiana’s MVEBs 

C. 2005 Comprehensive Emissions 

Inventory 

V. Summary of Actions 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What actions is EPA taking? 

EPA has previously determined that 

the entire Cincinnati-Hamilton area is 

attaining the 1997 annual PM2.5

standard and that the Ohio and Indiana 

portions of the area have met the 

requirements for redesignation under 

section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA through 

a final determination made on 

September 29, 2011. EPA is thus 

approving the requests from the states of 

Ohio and Indiana to change the legal 

designation of their portions of the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area from 

nonattainment to attainment for the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. This action 

does not address the Kentucky portion 

of the Cincinnati-Hamilton area. EPA is 

also taking several additional actions 

related to Ohio and Indiana’s PM2.5

redesignation requests, as discussed 

below. 

EPA is approving Indiana’s and 

Ohio’s PM2.5 maintenance plans for the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area as revisions to 

the Ohio and Indiana SIP (such 

approval being one of the CAA criteria 

for redesignation to attainment status). 

The maintenance plans are designed to 

keep the Cincinnati-Hamilton area in 

attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS through 2021. 

EPA is approving 2005 emissions 

inventories for primary PM2.5,1 NOX, 

and sulfur dioxide (SO2),2 documented 

in Ohio and Indiana’s PM2.5

redesignation request supplemental 

submittal. These emissions inventories 

satisfy the requirement in section 

172(c)(3) of the CAA for a 

comprehensive, current emission 

inventory. 

Finally, EPA finds adequate and is 

approving Ohio’s and Indiana’s 2015 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 64827 

and 2021 primary PM2.5 and NOX

MVEBs for the Cincinnati-Hamilton 

area. These MVEBs will be used in 

future transportation conformity 

analyses for the area. Further discussion 

of the basis for these actions is provided 

below. 

II. What is the background for these 

actions? 

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) of 

ambient air, based on a three-year 

average of the annual mean PM2.5

concentrations at each monitoring site. 

In the same rulemaking, EPA 

promulgated a 24-hour PM2.5 standard at 

65 mg/m3, based on a three-year average 

of the annual 98th percentile of 24-hour 

PM2.5 concentrations at each monitoring 

site. 

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

published air quality area designations 

for the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard 

based on air quality data for calendar 

years 2001–2003. In that rulemaking, 

EPA designated the CincinnatiHamilton, area as nonattainment (for 

Ohio: Butler, Clermont, Hamilton, and 

Warren Counties, Ohio; for IN: a portion 

of Dearborn County, and for Kentucky: 

Boone, Campbell, and Kenton Counties) 

for the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard. 

On October 17, 2006, at 71 FR 61144, 

EPA retained the annual PM2.5 standard 

at 15 mg/m3 (2006 annual PM2.5

standard), but revised the 24-hour 

standard to 35 mg/m3, based again on the 

three-year average of the annual 98th 

percentile of the 24-hour PM2.5

concentrations. In response to legal 

challenges to the 2006 annual PM2.5

standard, the U.S. Court of Appeals for 

District of Columbia Circuit (DC Circuit) 

remanded this standard to EPA for 

further consideration. See American 

Farm Bureau Federation and National 

Pork Producers Council, et al. v. EPA, 

559 F.3d 512 (DC Cir. 2009). However, 

given that the 1997 and 2006 annual 

PM2.5 standards are essentially 

identical, attainment of the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 standard would also indicate 

attainment of the remanded 2006 annual 

standard. Since the Cincinnati-Hamilton 

area is designated as nonattainment for 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard, today’s 

proposed action addresses redesignation 

to attainment only for this standard. 

Fine particulate pollution can be 

emitted directly from a source (primary 

PM2.5) or formed secondarily through 

chemical reactions in the atmosphere 

involving precursor pollutants emitted 

from a variety of sources. Sulfates are a 

type of secondary particulate formed 

from SO2 emissions from power plants 

and industrial facilities. Nitrates, 

another common type of secondary 

particulate, are formed from combustion 

emissions of NOX from power plants, 

mobile sources, and other combustion 

sources. 

III. What are the criteria for 

redesignation to attainment? 

The CAA sets forth the requirements 

for redesignating a nonattainment area 

to attainment. Specifically, section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA allows 

redesignation provided that: (1) The 

Administrator determines that the area 

has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) 

the Administrator has fully approved 

the applicable SIP for the area under 

section 110(k) of the CAA; (3) the 

Administrator determines that the 

improvement in air quality is due to 

permanent and enforceable reductions 

in emissions resulting from the 

implementation of the applicable SIP, 

Federal emission control regulations, 

and other permanent and enforceable 

emission reductions; (4) the 

Administrator has fully approved a 

maintenance plan for the area meeting 

the requirements of section 175A of the 

CAA; and, (5) the state containing the 

area has met all requirements applicable 

to the area for purposes of redesignation 

under section 110 and part D of the 

CAA. 

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

requests? 

A. Attainment Determination and 

Redesignation 

EPA has determined that the entire 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area has attained 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard and that 

the Ohio and Indiana portions of the 

area have met all other applicable 

redesignation criteria under CAA 

section 107(d)(3)(E). The basis for EPA’s 

approvals of the redesignation requests 

is as follows: 

1. The Area Has Attained the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS (Section 

107(d)(3)(E)(i)) 

On June 3, 2011, EPA proposed to 

determine that the entire CincinnatiHamilton area has attained the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS (76 FR 32110). No 

adverse comments were received and 

EPA’s Region 4 and Region 5 Regional 

Administrators signed the final 

determination of attainment for the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area on August 18, 

2011 and September 12, 2011, 

respectively and published in the 

Federal Register on September 29, 2011. 

Relevant discussion of the monitored 

concentrations and sites can be found in 

the notices for the proposed and final 

determinations that are referenced 

above. EPA’s September 29, 2011 final 

determination that the CincinnatiHamilton area has attained the 1997 

annual PM2.5 standard fulfills the 

requirement set forth in CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(i). 

2. The Area Has Met All Applicable 

Requirements Under Section 110 and 

Part D; and the Area Has a Fully 

Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) 

(Sections 107(d)(3)(E)(v) and 

107(d)(3)(E)(ii)) 

We have determined that Ohio and 

Indiana have met all currently 

applicable SIP requirements for 

purposes of redesignation of the Ohio 

and Indiana portions of the CincinnatiHamilton area under section 110 of the 

CAA (general SIP requirements). We are 

also finding that the Ohio and Indiana 

SIPs meet all SIP requirements currently 

applicable for purposes of redesignation 

under part D of title I of the CAA, in 

accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). 

In addition, with the exception of the 

emissions inventory under section 

172(c)(3), we have approved all 

applicable requirements of the Ohio and 

Indiana SIPs for purposes of 

redesignation, in accordance with 

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

below, in this action EPA is approving 

Ohio and Indiana’s 2005 emissions 

inventories as meeting the section 

172(c)(3) comprehensive emissions 

inventory requirement. 

In making these determinations, we 

have ascertained which SIP 

requirements are applicable for 

purposes of redesignation, and have 

determined that there are SIP measures 

meeting those requirements and that 

they are fully approved under section 

110(k) of the CAA. 

a. Ohio and Indiana Have Met All 

Applicable Requirements for Purposes 

of Redesignation of Their Portions of the 

Area Under Section 110 and Part D of 

the CAA 

i. Section 110 General SIP Requirements 

Section 110(a) of title I of the CAA 

contains the general requirements for a 

SIP. Section 110(a)(2) provides that the 

implementation plan submitted by a 

state must have been adopted by the 

state after reasonable public notice and 

hearing, and, among other things, must: 

include enforceable emission 

limitations and other control measures, 

means or techniques necessary to meet 

the requirements of the CAA; provide 

for establishment and operation of 

appropriate devices, methods, systems, 

and procedures necessary to monitor 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
64828 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

ambient air quality; provide for 

implementation of a source permit 

program to regulate the modification 

and construction of any stationary 

source within the areas covered by the 

plan; include provisions for the 

implementation of part C, Prevention of 

Significant Deterioration (PSD) and part 

D, New Source Review (NSR) permit 

programs; include criteria for stationary 

source emission control measures, 

monitoring, and reporting; include 

provisions for air quality modeling; and 

provide for public and local agency 

participation in planning and emission 

control rule development. 

Section 110(a)(2)(D) of the CAA 

requires that SIPs contain measures to 

prevent sources in a state from 

significantly contributing to air quality 

problems in another state. EPA believes 

that the requirements linked with a 

particular nonattainment area’s 

designation are the relevant measures to 

evaluate in reviewing a redesignation 

request. The transport SIP submittal 

requirements, where applicable, 

continue to apply to a state regardless of 

the designation of any one particular 

area in the state. Thus, we believe that 

these requirements should not be 

construed to be applicable requirements 

for purposes of redesignation. 

Further, we believe that the other 

section 110 elements described above 

that are not connected with 

nonattainment plan submissions and 

not linked with an area’s attainment 

status are also not applicable 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. A state remains subject to 

these requirements after an area is 

redesignated to attainment. We 

conclude that only the section 110 and 

part D requirements that are linked with 

a particular area’s designation are the 

relevant measures which we may 

consider in evaluating a redesignation 

request. This approach is consistent 

with EPA’s existing policy on 

applicability of conformity and 

oxygenated fuels requirements for 

redesignation purposes, as well as with 

section 184 ozone transport 

requirements. See Reading, 

Pennsylvania, proposed and final 

rulemakings (61 FR 53174–53176, 

October 10, 1996, and 62 FR 24826, May 

7, 1997); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio, 

final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7, 

1996); and Tampa, Florida, final 

rulemaking (60 FR 62748, December 7, 

1995). See also the discussion on this 

issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio 1-hour 

ozone redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 

19, 2000), and in the Pittsburgh, 

Pennsylvania 1-hour ozone 

redesignation (66 FR 50399, October 19, 

2001). 

We have reviewed Ohio and Indiana’s 

SIPs and have concluded that they meet 

the general SIP requirements under 

section 110 of the CAA to the extent 

they are applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. EPA has previously 

approved provisions of Ohio and 

Indiana’s SIPs addressing section 110 

requirements (including provisions 

addressing particulate matter, at 40 CFR 

52.770 and 40 CFR 52.1870, 

respectively). 

On December 7, 2007, September 9, 

2008, March 23, 2011, and April 7, 

2011, Indiana made submittals 

addressing ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ 

elements required by section 110(a)(2) 

of the CAA. EPA approved elements of 

Indiana’s submittals on July 13, 2011, at 

76 FR 41075. 

On December 5, 2007, and September 

4, 2009, Ohio made submittals 

addressing ‘‘infrastructure SIP’’ 

elements required under CAA section 

110(a)(2). EPA proposed approval of the 

December 5, 2007, submittal on April 

28, 2011, at 76 FR 23757 and published 

final approval on July 13, 2011, at 76 FR 

41075. EPA disapproved the element of 

the September 4, 2009, submittal that 

addresses section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) on July 

20, 2011, at 76 FR 43175, but has not 

taken rulemaking action on the 

remainder of the submittal. 

The remaining parts of the 

infrastructure SIPs required by section 

110(a)(2) are not relevant to this 

redesignation, and are statewide 

requirements that are not linked to the 

PM2.5 nonattainment status of the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area. Therefore, 

EPA believes that these SIP elements are 

not applicable requirements for 

purposes of review of the state’s PM2.5

redesignation request. 

ii. Part D Requirements 

EPA has determined that, upon 

approval of the base year emissions 

inventories discussed in section IV.C. of 

this rulemaking, the Ohio and Indiana 

SIPs will meet the SIP requirements for 

the Cincinnati-Hamilton area applicable 

for purposes of redesignation under part 

D of the CAA. Subpart 1 of part D, found 

in sections 172–176 of the CAA, sets 

forth the basic nonattainment 

requirements applicable to all 

nonattainment areas. 

Subpart 1—Section 172

Requirements. 

For purposes of evaluating these 

redesignation requests, the applicable 

section 172 SIP requirements for the 

Ohio and Indiana portions of the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area are contained 

in sections 172(c)(1)–(9). A thorough 

discussion of the requirements 

contained in section 172 can be found 

in the General Preamble for 

Implementation of Title I (57 FR 13498, 

April 16, 1992). 

Section 172(c)(1) requires the plans 

for all nonattainment areas to provide 

for the implementation of all 

Reasonably Available Control Measures 

(RACM) as expeditiously as practicable 

and to provide for attainment of the 

primary NAAQS. EPA interprets this 

requirement to impose a duty on all 

nonattainment areas to consider all 

available control measures and to adopt 

and implement such measures as are 

reasonably available for implementation 

in each area as components of the area’s 

attainment demonstration. Because 

attainment has been reached, no 

additional measures are needed to 

provide for attainment, and section 

172(c)(1) requirements are no longer 

considered to be applicable as long as 

the area continues to attain the standard 

until redesignation. (40 CFR 51.1004(c)). 

The Reasonable Further Progress 

(RFP) requirement under section 

172(c)(2) is defined as progress that 

must be made toward attainment. This 

requirement is not relevant for purposes 

of redesignation because the CincinnatiHamilton area has monitored attainment 

of the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 

(General Preamble, 57 FR 13564). See 

also 40 CFR 51.918. In addition, because 

the Cincinnati-Hamilton area has 

attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

and is no longer subject to an RFP 

requirement, the requirement to submit 

the section 172(c)(9) contingency 

measures is not applicable for purposes 

of redesignation. Id. 

Section 172(c)(3) requires submission 

and approval of a comprehensive, 

accurate and current inventory of actual 

emissions. Ohio and Indiana submitted 

2005 base year emissions inventories 

along with their redesignation requests. 

As discussed below in section IV.C., 

EPA is approving the 2005 base year 

inventories as meeting the section 

172(c)(3) emissions inventory 

requirement for the Cincinnati-Hamilton 

area. 

Section 172(c)(4) requires the 

identification and quantification of 

allowable emissions for major new and 

modified stationary sources in an area, 

and section 172(c)(5) requires source 

permits for the construction and 

operation of new and modified major 

stationary sources anywhere in the 

nonattainment area. EPA approved 

Ohio’s current NSR program on January 

10, 2003 (68 FR 1366). EPA approved 

Indiana’s current NSR program on 

October 7, 1994 (59 FR 51108). 

Nonetheless, since PSD requirements 

will apply after redesignation, the area 

need not have a fully-approved NSR 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 64829 

program for purposes of redesignation, 

provided that the area demonstrates 

maintenance of the NAAQS without 

part D NSR. A detailed rationale for this 

view is described in a memorandum 

from Mary Nichols, Assistant 

Administrator for Air and Radiation, 

dated October 14, 1994, entitled, ‘‘Part 

D New Source Review Requirements for 

Areas Requesting Redesignation to 

Attainment.’’ Indiana has demonstrated 

that the Indianapolis area will be able to 

maintain the standard without part D 

NSR in effect; therefore, the state need 

not have a fully approved part D NSR 

program prior to approval of the 

redesignation request. The state’s PSD 

program will become effective in the 

Indianapolis area upon redesignation to 

attainment. See rulemakings for Detroit, 

Michigan (60 FR 12467–12468, March 7, 

1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio 

(61 FR 20458, 20469–20470, May 7, 

1996); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 

53665, October 23, 2001); and Grand 

Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31834–31837, 

June 21, 1996). 

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

contain control measures necessary to 

provide for attainment of the standard. 

Because attainment has been reached, 

no additional measures are needed to 

provide for attainment. 

Section 172(c)(7) requires the SIP to 

meet the applicable provisions of 

section 110(a)(2). As noted above, we 

believe the Ohio and Indiana SIPs meet 

the requirements of section 110(a)(2) 

applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. 

Subpart 1—Section 176(c)(4)(D)

Conformity SIP Requirements. 

The requirement to determine 

conformity applies to transportation 

plans, programs and projects developed, 

funded or approved under title 23 of the 

U.S. Code and the Federal Transit Act 

(transportation conformity) as well as to 

all other Federally-supported or funded 

projects (general conformity). 

Section 176(c) of the CAA was 

amended by provisions contained in the 

Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient 

Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for 

Users (SAFETEA–LU), which was 

signed into law on August 10, 2005 

(Public Law 109–59). Among the 

changes Congress made to this section 

of the CAA were streamlined 

requirements for state transportation 

conformity SIPs. State transportation 

conformity regulations must be 

consistent with Federal conformity 

regulations and address three specific 

requirements related to consultation, 

enforcement, and enforceability. 

EPA believes that it is reasonable to 

interpret the transportation conformity 

SIP requirements as not applying for 

purposes of evaluating the redesignation 

request under section 107(d) for two 

reasons. First, the requirement to submit 

SIP revisions to comply with the 

transportation conformity provisions of 

the CAA continues to apply to areas 

after redesignation to attainment since 

such areas would be subject to a section 

175A maintenance plan. Second, EPA’s 

Federal conformity rules require the 

performance of conformity analyses in 

the absence of Federally-approved state 

rules. Therefore, because areas are 

subject to the transportation conformity 

requirements regardless of whether they 

are redesignated to attainment and, 

because they must implement 

conformity under Federal rules if state 

rules are not yet approved, EPA believes 

it is reasonable to view these 

requirements as not applying for 

purposes of evaluating a redesignation 

request. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 

(6th Cir. 2001), upholding this 

interpretation. See also 60 FR 62748, 

62749–62750 (Dec. 7, 1995) (Tampa, 

Florida). 

Ohio and Indiana both have approved 

transportation conformity SIPs (72 FR 

20945 (Ohio) and 75 FR 50708 

(Indiana)). Ohio and Indiana are in the 

process of updating their approved 

transportation conformity SIPs, and EPA 

will review these when they are 

submitted. 

b. The Cincinnati-Hamilton Area Has a 

Fully Approved Applicable SIP Under 

Section 110(k) of the CAA 

Upon final approval of Ohio and 

Indiana’s comprehensive 2005 

emissions inventories, EPA will have 

fully approved the Ohio and Indiana SIP 

for the Cincinnati-Hamilton area under 

section 110(k) of the CAA for all 

requirements applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. EPA may rely on prior 

SIP approvals in approving a 

redesignation request (See page 3 of the 

September 4, 1992, memorandum from 

John Calcagni, entitled ‘‘Procedures for 

Processing Requests to Redesignate 

Areas to Attainment,’’; Southwestern 

Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. 

Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989–990 (6th 

Cir. 1998); Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426 

(6th Cir. 2001)) plus any additional 

measures it may approve in conjunction 

with a redesignation action. See 68 FR 

25413, 25426 (May 12, 2003). Since the 

passage of the CAA of 1970, Ohio and 

Indiana have adopted and submitted, 

and EPA has fully approved, provisions 

addressing various required SIP 

elements under particulate matter 

standards. In this action, EPA is 

approving Ohio and Indiana’s 2005 base 

year emissions inventory for the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area as meeting the 

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

CAA. 

3. The Improvement in Air Quality Is 

Due to Permanent and Enforceable 

Reductions in Emissions Resulting From 

Implementation of the SIPs and 

Applicable Federal Air Pollution 

Control Regulations and Other 

Permanent and Enforceable Reductions 

(Section 107(d)(3)(E)(iii)) 

EPA finds that Ohio and Indiana have 

demonstrated that the observed air 

quality improvement in the CincinnatiHamilton area is due to permanent and 

enforceable reductions in emissions 

resulting from implementation of the 

SIPs, Federal measures, and other stateadopted measures. 

In making this demonstration, Ohio 

and Indiana have calculated the change 

in emissions between 2005, one of the 

years used to designate the CincinnatiHamilton area as nonattainment, and 

2008, one of the years the CincinnatiHamilton area monitored attainment. 

The reduction in emissions and the 

corresponding improvement in air 

quality over this time period can be 

attributed to a number of regulatory 

control measures that the CincinnatiHamilton area and upwind areas have 

implemented in recent years. 

a. Permanent and Enforceable Controls 

Implemented 

The following is a discussion of 

permanent and enforceable measures 

that have been implemented in the 

areas: 

i. Federal Emission Control Measures 

Reductions in fine particle precursor 

emissions have occurred statewide and 

in upwind areas as a result of Federal 

emission control measures, with 

additional emission reductions expected 

to occur in the future. Federal emission 

control measures include the following. 

Tier 2 Emission Standards for 

Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur Standards. 

These emission control and fuel 

requirements result in lower NOX

emissions from new cars and light duty 

trucks, including sport utility vehicles. 

The Federal rules were phased in 

between 2004 and 2009. The EPA has 

estimated that, by the end of the phasein period, NOX emissions will be 

reduced by 77 percent from new 

passenger cars (light-duty vehicles), 86 

percent from new light duty trucks, 

minivans, and sports utility vehicles 

and, 69 to 95 percent from new larger 

sports utility vehicles, vans, and heavier 

trucks. EPA expects fleet wide average 

NOX emissions to decline as new 

vehicles replace older vehicles each 

year. The Tier 2 standards included the 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
64830 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

3Periodic emission inventories are derived by 

States every three years and reported to the EPA. 

These periodic emission inventories are required by 

the Federal Consolidated Emissions Reporting Rule, 

codified at 40 CFR Subpart A. EPA revised these 

and other emission reporting requirements in a final 

rule published on December 17, 2008, at 73 FR 

76539. 

requirement to reduce the sulfur content 

of gasoline to 30 parts per million (ppm) 

by January 2006 primarily to improve 

the durability and effectiveness of 

vehicle emission control technology so 

that new vehicles could comply with 

these more stringent NOX emissions 

standards. 

The 2007 Heavy-Duty Highway Rule. 

EPA issued this rule in December 2000. 

This rule took effect in 2007. It reduced 

fine particle and NOX emissions from 

heavy-duty highway engines and 

included requirements to reduce the 

sulfur content of diesel fuel used by 

highway vehicles to 15 ppm beginning 

in mid-2006 in order to avoid damage to 

the advanced PM and NOX controls that 

are necessary to comply with stringent 

emissions standards. The total program 

is estimated to achieve a 90 percent 

reduction in direct PM2.5 emissions and 

a 95 percent reduction in NOX

emissions for these new engines using 

low sulfur diesel, compared to existing 

engines using higher sulfur content 

diesel. 

Nonroad Diesel Rule. In May 2004 

EPA promulgated a new rule for large 

nonroad diesel engines, such as those 

used construction, agriculture, and 

mining equipment, to be phased in 

between 2008 and 2014. The rule 

establishes stringent emissions 

standards for NOX and PM for these 

types of equipment and establishes 

limits for the sulfur content of the diesel 

fuel that they use. The requirement to 

reduce sulfur levels in the nonroad 

diesel fuel by as much 99 percent allows 

advanced emission-control systems to 

be used for the first time on the engines 

used in these types of equipment. The 

combined engine and fuel rules will 

reduce NOX and PM emissions from 

large nonroad diesel engines by over 90 

percent, compared to current nonroad 

engines using higher sulfur content 

diesel. This rule achieved some 

emission reductions by 2008 and was 

fully implemented by 2010. 

Control Measures in Upwind Areas 

Given the significance of sulfates and 

nitrates in the Cincinnati-Hamilton area, 

the area’s air quality is strongly affected 

by regulation of SO2 and NOX emissions 

from power plants. 

NOX SIP Call. On October 27, 1998 

(63 FR 57356), EPA issued a NOX SIP 

Call requiring the District of Columbia 

and 22 states to reduce emissions of 

NOX. Affected states were required to 

comply with Phase I of the SIP Call 

beginning in 2004, and Phase II 

beginning in 2007. Emission reductions 

resulting from regulations developed in 

response to the NOX SIP Call are 

permanent and enforceable. 

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). EPA 

proposed CAIR on January 30, 2004, at 

69 FR 4566, promulgated CAIR on May 

12, 2005, at 70 FR 25162, and 

promulgated associated Federal 

Implementation Plans (FIPs) on April 

28, 2006, at 71 FR 25328, in order to 

reduce SO2 and NOX emissions and 

improve air quality in many areas across 

the Eastern United States. However, on 

July 11, 2008, the United States Court of 

Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit (DC Circuit or Court) issued its 

decision to vacate and remand both 

CAIR and the associated CAIR FIPs in 

their entirety (North Carolina v. EPA, 

531 F.3d 836 (DC Cir. 2008)). EPA 

petitioned for a rehearing, and the Court 

issued an order remanding CAIR and 

the CAIR FIPs to EPA without vacatur 

(North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176 

(DC Cir. 2008)). The Court, thereby, left 

CAIR in place in order to ‘‘temporarily 

preserve the environmental values 

covered by CAIR’’ until EPA replaced it 

with a rule consistent with the Court’s 

opinion (id. at 1178). The Court directed 

EPA to ‘‘remedy CAIR’s flaws’’ 

consistent with the July 11, 2008, 

opinion, but declined to impose a 

schedule on EPA for completing this 

action (id). 

On August 8, 2011, at 76 FR 48208, 

EPA promulgated the Cross-State Air 

Pollution Rule (CSAPR) to address 

interstate transport of emissions and 

resulting secondary air pollutants and to 

replace CAIR. CAIR, among other 

things, required NOX and SO2 emission 

reductions that contributed to the air 

quality improvement in the CincinnatiHamilton nonattainment area. CAIR 

emission reduction requirements limit 

emissions through 2011; CSAPR 

requires similar or greater emission 

reductions in the relevant areas in 2012 

and beyond. CSAPR requires substantial 

reductions of SO2 and NOX emissions 

from Electric Generating Units (EGUs or 

power plants) across most of Eastern 

United States, with implementation 

beginning on January 1, 2012. In 

particular, this rule requires reduction 

of these emissions to levels well below 

the levels that led to attainment of the 

1997 annual PM2.5 standard in the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton nonattainment 

area. Because the emission reduction 

requirements of CAIR are enforceable 

through the 2011 control period, and 

because CSAPR has now been 

promulgated to address the 

requirements previously addressed by 

CAIR and gets similar or greater 

reductions in the relevant areas in 2012 

and beyond, EPA has determined that 

the EGU emission reductions that 

helped lead to attainment in the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area can now be 

considered permanent and enforceable 

and that the requirement of CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iii) has now been met. 

b. Emission Reductions 

Ohio and Indiana developed 

emissions inventories for NOX, direct 

PM2.5, and SO2 for 2005, one of the years 

used to designate the areas as 

nonattainment, and 2008, one of the 

years the Cincinnati-Hamilton area 

monitored attainment of the standard. 

EGU SO2 and NOX emissions were 

derived from EPA’s Clean Air Market’s 

acid rain database. These emissions 

reflect Ohio and Indiana’s NOX

emission budgets resulting from EPA’s 

NOX SIP call. The 2008 emissions from 

EGUs reflect Ohio and Indiana’s 

emission caps under CAIR. All other 

point source emissions were obtained 

from Ohio and Indiana’s source facility 

emissions reporting. 

Area source emissions for the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area for 2005 were 

taken from Ohio and Indiana’s 2005 

periodic emissions inventories.3 These 

2005 area source emission estimates 

were extrapolated to 2008. Source 

growth factors were supplied by the 

Lake Michigan Air Directors Consortium 

(LADCO). 

Nonroad mobile source emissions 

were extrapolated from nonroad mobile 

source emissions reported in EPA’s 

2005 National Emissions Inventory 

(NEI). Contractors were employed by 

LADCO to estimate emissions for 

commercial marine vessels and 

railroads. 

On-road mobile source emissions 

were calculated using EPA’s mobile 

source emission factor model, 

MOVES2010a, in conjunction with 

transportation model results developed 

by the Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional 

Council of Governments (OKI). 

All emissions estimates discussed 

below were documented in the 

submittals and Appendices of Ohio and 

Indiana’s redesignation request 

submittal from January 25, 2011, and 

December 9, 2010, respectively. For 

these data and additional emissions 

inventory data, the reader is referred to 

EPA’s digital docket for this rule, 

http://www.regulations.gov, for docket 

numbers EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0106 

(Indiana) or EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0017 

(Ohio), which include digital copies of 

Ohio and Indiana’s submittals. 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 64831 

Emissions data for the entire 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area (OH-IN-KY) 

are shown in Tables 1 through 4 below. 

TABLE 1—COMPARISON OF 2005 AND 2008 NOX EMISSION TOTALS BY SOURCE SECTOR (TPY) FOR THE CINCINNATIHAMILTON AREA (OH-IN-KY) 

Sector 

NOX

2005 2008 Net change 

2005–2008 

Point (Non-EGU) .............................................................................................................. 10,371.70 9,790.50 ¥581.20 

EGU ................................................................................................................................. 55,930.44 46,853.89 ¥9,076.55 

Area ................................................................................................................................. 7,810.74 7,966.67 155.93 

Nonroad ........................................................................................................................... 12,480.57 10,561.92 ¥1,918.65 

On-road ............................................................................................................................ 71,919.89 64,471.22 ¥7,448.67 

Total .......................................................................................................................... 158,513.34 139,644.20 ¥18,869.14 

TABLE 2—COMPARISON OF 2005 AND 2008 DIRECT PM2.5 EMISSION TOTALS BY SOURCE SECTOR (TPY) FOR THE

CINCINNATI-HAMILTON AREA (OH-IN-KY) 

Sector 

Direct PM2.5

2005 2008 Net change 

2005–2008 

Point (Non-EGU) .............................................................................................................. 1,352.79 1,458.52 105.73 

EGU ................................................................................................................................. 2,062.91 1,633.15 ¥429.76 

Area ................................................................................................................................. 1,828.55 1,864.80 36.25 

Nonroad ........................................................................................................................... 4,469.27 3,807.04 ¥662.23 

On-road ............................................................................................................................ 2,810.30 2,679.85 ¥130.45 

Total .......................................................................................................................... 12,523.79 11,443.36 ¥1080.46 

TABLE 3—COMPARISON OF 2005 AND 2008 SO2 EMISSION TOTALS BY SOURCE SECTOR (TPY) FOR THE CINCINNATIHAMILTON AREA (OH-IN-KY) 

Sector 

SO2

2005 2008 Net change 

2005–2008 

Point (Non-EGU) .............................................................................................................. 15,532.09 13,483.92 ¥2,048.17 

EGU ................................................................................................................................. 218,395.56 98,334.17 ¥150,061.39 

Area ................................................................................................................................. 3494.39 3520.77 26.38 

Nonroad ........................................................................................................................... 1,057.16 416.87 ¥640.29 

On-road ............................................................................................................................ 392.00 277.59 ¥114.41 

Total .......................................................................................................................... 238,871.20 116,033.32 ¥152,837.88 

Table 1 shows that the entire 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area reduced NOX

emissions by 18,869.14 tpy between 

2005 and 2008. Table 2 shows that the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area reduced direct 

PM2.5 emissions by 1,080.46 tpy 

between 2005 and 2008. Table 3 shows 

that the Cincinnati-Hamilton area 

reduced SO2 emissions by 152,837.88 

tpy between 2005 and 2008. 

Because PM2.5 concentrations in the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area are 

significantly impacted by the transport 

of sulfates and nitrates, the area’s air 

quality is strongly affected by regulation 

of SO2 and NOX emissions from power 

plants. Table 4, below, presents 

statewide EGU emissions data compiled 

by EPA’s Clean Air Markets Division for 

the years 2002 and 2008. Emissions for 

2008 reflect implementation of CAIR. 

TABLE 4—COMPARISON OF 2002 AND 2008 STATEWIDE EGU NOX AND SO2 EMISSIONS (TPY) FOR STATES IMPACTING

THE CINCINNATI-HAMILTON AREA

State 

NOX SO2

2002 2008 Net change 

2002–2008 2002 2008 Net change 2002–2008 

Alabama ................................................... 161,559 112,625 ¥48,934 448,248 357,546 ¥90,702 

Illinois ....................................................... 174,247 119,930 ¥54,317 353,699 257,357 ¥96,342 

Indiana ..................................................... 281,146 190,092 ¥91,054 778,868 565,459 ¥213,409 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
64832 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

TABLE 4—COMPARISON OF 2002 AND 2008 STATEWIDE EGU NOX AND SO2 EMISSIONS (TPY) FOR STATES IMPACTING

THE CINCINNATI-HAMILTON AREA—Continued 

State 

NOX SO2

2002 2008 Net change 

2002–2008 2002 2008 Net change 2002–2008 

Kentucky .................................................. 198,599 157,903 ¥40,696 482,653 344,356 ¥138,297 

Michigan ................................................... 132,623 107,624 ¥25,000 342,999 326,501 ¥16,498 

Missouri .................................................... 139,799 88,742 ¥51,057 235,532 258,269 22,737 

Ohio .......................................................... 370,497 235,049 ¥135,448 1,132,069 709,444 ¥422,625 

Pennsylvania ............................................ 200,909 183,658 ¥17,251 889,766 831,915 ¥57,851 

Tennessee ............................................... 155,996 85,641 ¥70,356 336,995 208,069 ¥128,926 

West Virginia ............................................ 225,371 99,484 ¥125,887 507,110 301,574 ¥205,536 

Wisconsin ................................................. 88,970 47,794 ¥41,175 191,257 129,694 ¥61,563 

Total .................................................. 2,129,716 1,428,541 ¥701,175 5,699,195 4,290,184 ¥1,409,011 

Table 4 shows that states impacting 

the Cincinnati-Hamilton area reduced 

NOX and SO2 emissions from EGUs by 

701,175 tons per year (tpy) and 

1,409,011 tpy, respectively, between 

2002 and 2008. 

Based on the information summarized 

above, Ohio and Indiana have 

adequately demonstrated that the 

improvement in air quality is due to 

permanent and enforceable emissions 

reductions. 

4. Ohio and Indiana Have Fully 

Approved Maintenance Plans Pursuant 

to Section 175A of the CAA (Section 

107(d)(3)(E)(iv)) 

In conjunction with Ohio and 

Indiana’s requests to redesignate the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton nonattainment area 

to attainment status, Ohio and Indiana 

have submitted SIP revisions to provide 

for maintenance of the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS in the area through 2021. 

a. What is required in a maintenance 

plan? 

Section 175A of the CAA sets forth 

the required elements of a maintenance 

plan for areas seeking redesignation 

from nonattainment to attainment. 

Under section 175A, the plan must 

demonstrate continued attainment of 

the applicable NAAQS for at least ten 

years after EPA approves a 

redesignation to attainment. Eight years 

after redesignation, the state must 

submit a revised maintenance plan 

which demonstrates that attainment will 

continue to be maintained for ten years 

following the initial ten-year 

maintenance period. To address the 

possibility of future NAAQS violations, 

the maintenance plan must contain 

contingency measures with a schedule 

for implementation as EPA deems 

necessary to assure prompt correction of 

any future annual PM2.5 violations. 

The September 4, 1992, John Calcagni 

memorandum provides additional 

guidance on the content of a 

maintenance plan. The memorandum 

states that a maintenance plan should 

address the following items: The 

attainment emissions inventories, a 

maintenance demonstration showing 

maintenance for the ten years of the 

maintenance period, a commitment to 

maintain the existing monitoring 

network, factors and procedures to be 

used for verification of continued 

attainment of the NAAQS, and a 

contingency plan to prevent or correct 

future violations of the NAAQS. 

b. Attainment Inventory 

The states developed emissions 

inventories for NOX, direct PM2.5, and 

SO2 for 2008, one of the years used to 

demonstrate monitored attainment of 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard, as 

described in section IV.A.3.b., above. 

The attainment level of emissions is 

summarized in Tables 1 through 4, 

above. 

c. Demonstration of Maintenance 

Along with the redesignation request, 

the two states submitted revisions to 

their PM2.5 SIPs to include maintenance 

plans for the Cincinnati-Hamilton area, 

as required by section 175A of the CAA. 

These demonstrations show 

maintenance of the annual PM2.5

standard through 2021 by showing that 

current and future emissions of NOX, 

directly emitted PM2.5 and SO2 for the 

area remain at or below attainment year 

emission levels. A maintenance 

demonstration need not be based on 

modeling. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 

426 (6th Cir. 2001), Sierra Club v. EPA, 

375 F. 3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also 

66 FR 53094, 53099–53100 (October 19, 

2001), 68 FR 25413, 25430–25432 (May 

12, 2003). 

Ohio and Indiana are using emissions 

inventory projections for the years 2015, 

and 2021 to demonstrate maintenance. 

The projected emissions were estimated 

by Ohio and Indiana, with assistance 

from LADCO, and the local 

Metropolitan Planning Organization 

(MPO), OKI using the MOVES2010a 

model. Emissions data are shown in 

Table 5, below. 

TABLE 5—COMPARISON OF 2008, 2015, AND 2021 NOX, DIRECT PM2.5, AND SO2 EMISSION TOTALS (TPY) FOR THE

CINCINNATI-HAMILTON AREA

2008 2015 2021 Net change 

(2008–2021) 

PM2.5 ................................................................................................ 8,904.64 8,634.55 8,202.63 ¥702.01 

NOX .................................................................................................. 148,706.15 105,712.02 78,819.13 ¥69,887.02 

SO2 .................................................................................................. 117,016.14 112,250.26 88,510.27 ¥28,505.87 

Table 5 shows that the NOX emissions 

in the Cincinnati-Hamilton area are 

69.887.02 tpy less in 2021, the 

outermost year of the maintenance plan, 

than in attainment year 2008. Direct 

PM2.5 emissions are 702.01 tpy lower in 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 64833 

2021 than in 2008, and SO2 emissions 

are 28,505.87 tpy lower in 2021 than in 

2008. 

Because the PM2.5 concentrations in 

the Cincinnati-Hamilton area are 

significantly impacted by the transport 

of sulfates and nitrates, the area’s air 

quality is strongly affected by regulation 

of SO2 and NOX emissions from power 

plants. Table 6, below, presents 

statewide EGU emissions data compiled 

for 2008 and 2014 and beyond. 

Emissions for 2008 reflect 

implementation of CAIR and an 

attainment year, while 2014 emissions 

reflect budgets established in the 

CSAPR. 

TABLE 6—COMPARISON OF 2008 AND 2014 AND BEYOND STATEWIDE EGU NOX AND SO2 EMISSIONS (TPY) FOR STATES

IMPACTING THE CINCINNATI-HAMILTON AREA

State 

NOX SO2

2008 2014 and 

beyond 

Net change 

2008–2014 2008 2014 and beyond 

Net change 

2008–2014 

Alabama ................................................... 112,625 69,192 ¥43,433 357,547 173,566 ¥183,981 

Illinois ....................................................... 119,930 49,162 ¥70,767 257,357 132,647 ¥124,710 

Indiana ..................................................... 190,092 110,740 ¥79,352 565,459 195,046 ¥370,413 

Kentucky .................................................. 157,903 76,088 ¥81,815 344,356 116,927 ¥227,429 

Michigan ................................................... 107,624 60,907 ¥46,717 326,501 162,632 ¥163,869 

Missouri .................................................... 88,742 52,103 ¥36,639 258,269 186,899 ¥71,370 

Ohio .......................................................... 235,049 89,753 ¥145,296 709,444 178,975 ¥530,469 

Pennsylvania ............................................ 183,658 118,981 ¥64,676 831,915 125,545 ¥706,370 

Tennessee ............................................... 85,641 20,512 ¥65,129 208,069 64,721 ¥143,348 

West Virginia ............................................ 99,484 53,975 ¥45,509 301,574 84,344 ¥217,230 

Wisconsin ................................................. 47,794 33,537 ¥14,257 129,694 50,137 ¥79,557 

Total .................................................. 1,428,541 734,951 ¥693,590 4,290,185 1,471,439 ¥2,818,746 

Table 6 shows that NOX emissions 

from EGUs are projected to decrease by 

693,590 tpy from 2008 to 2014 and 

beyond in states impacting the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area. Over that 

same time period, SO2 emissions from 

EGUs are projected to decrease by 

2,818,746 in states impacting the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area. 

Based on the information summarized 

above, Ohio and Indiana have 

adequately demonstrated maintenance 

of the PM2.5 standard in this area for a 

period extending in excess of ten years 

from the date that EPA is completing 

rulemaking on the state’s redesignation 

request. 

d. Monitoring Network 

Ohio currently operates nine monitors 

for purposes of determining attainment 

with the annual PM2.5 standard in the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area. Kentucky 

currently operates one monitor for the 

area. Currently, Indiana operates no 

monitors for the Cincinnati-Hamilton 

area since the state makes up only a 

small portion of the non-attainment 

area, and EPA has determined that the 

monitors maintained by both Ohio and 

Kentucky constitute an adequate 

monitoring network. Ohio has 

committed to continue to operate and 

maintain its monitors and will consult 

with EPA prior to making any changes 

to the existing monitoring network. 

Ohio remains obligated to continue to 

quality-assure monitoring data in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 58 and 

enter all data into EPA’s Air Quality 

System (AQS) database in accordance 

with Federal guidelines. 

e. Verification of Continued Attainment 

Continued attainment of the annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS in the CincinnatiHamilton area depends, in part, on the 

state’s efforts toward tracking indicators 

of continued attainment during the 

maintenance period. Ohio and Indiana’s 

plan for verifying continued attainment 

of the annual PM2.5 standard in the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area consists of 

continued ambient PM2.5 monitoring in 

accordance with the requirements of 40 

CFR part 58. The two states will also 

continue to develop and submit 

periodic emission inventories as 

required by the Federal Consolidated 

Emissions Reporting Rule (codified at 

40 CFR 51 Subpart A) to track future 

levels of emissions. 

f. Contingency Plan 

The contingency plan provisions are 

designed to promptly correct or prevent 

a violation of the NAAQS that might 

occur after redesignation of an area to 

attainment. Section 175A of the CAA 

requires that a maintenance plan 

include such contingency measures as 

EPA deems necessary to assure that the 

state will promptly correct a violation of 

the NAAQS that occurs after 

redesignation. The maintenance plan 

should identify the contingency 

measures to be adopted, a schedule and 

procedure for adoption and 

implementation of the contingency 

measures, and a time limit for action by 

the state. The state should also identify 

specific indicators to be used to 

determine when the contingency 

measures need to be adopted and 

implemented. The maintenance plan 

must include a requirement that the 

state will implement all measures with 

respect to control of the pollutant(s) that 

were contained in the SIP before 

redesignation of the area to attainment. 

See section 175A(d) of the CAA. 

As required by section 175A of the 

CAA, Ohio and Indiana have adopted 

contingency plans for the CincinnatiHamilton area to address possible future 

annual PM2.5 air quality problems. 

Under Indiana’s plan, if a violation of 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard occurs, 

Indiana will implement an ‘‘Action 

Level Response’’. Unless the violation is 

due to an atypical unfavorable 

meteorological condition, exceptional 

event, malfunction or noncompliance 

with a permit condition or rule 

requirement, Indiana will adopt and 

implement one or more of its 

contingency measures. Indiana has 

provided clarification that the state 

considers the term ‘‘an atypical 

unfavorable meteorological condition’’ 

to mean an exceptional event as 

determined by EPA. EPA agrees with 

and relies upon this clarification in 

approving Indiana’s contingency 

measures provisions. (See docket EPA– 

R05–OAR–2011–0106 for clarification 

communications). 

If a violation occurs, it will trigger an 

Action Level Response; that is, Indiana 

will adopt and implement one or more 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
64834 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

control measures from its list of 

candidate measures within 18 months 

from the end of the year in which 

monitored air quality triggering the 

response occurs. Indiana’s candidate 

contingency measures include the 

following: 

i. Alternative fuel and diesel retrofit 

programs for fleet vehicle operations; 

ii. NOX or SO2 controls on new minor 

sources; 

iii. Wood stove change out program; 

iv. Idle restrictions; and 

v. Broader geographic applicability of 

existing measures. 

Ohio’s contingency measures include 

a Warning Level Response and an 

Action Level Response. An initial 

Warning Level Response is triggered 

when the average weighted annual 

mean for one year exceeds 15.5 mg/m3. 

In that case, a study will be conducted 

to determine if the emissions trends 

show increases; if action is necessary to 

reverse emissions increases, Ohio will 

follow the same procedures for control 

selection and implementation as for an 

Action Level Response. 

The Action Level Response will be 

prompted by any one of the following: 

A Warning Level Response study that 

shows emissions increases, a weighted 

annual mean over a two-year average 

that exceeds the standard, or a violation 

of the standard. If an Action Level 

Response is triggered, Ohio will adopt 

and implement appropriate control 

measures within 18 months from the 

end of the year in which monitored air 

quality triggering a response occurs. 

Ohio’s candidate contingency 

measures include the following: 

i. ICI Boilers—SO2 and NOX controls; 

ii. Process heaters; 

iii. EGUS; 

iv. Internal combustion engines; 

v. Combustion turbines; 

vi. Other sources > 100 TPY; 

vii. Fleet vehicles; 

viii. Concrete manufacturers and; 

ix. Aggregate processing plants. 

Ohio and Indiana further commit to 

conduct ongoing review of their data, 

and if monitored concentrations or 

emissions are trending upward, Ohio 

and Indiana commit to take appropriate 

steps to avoid a violation if possible. 

Ohio and Indiana commit to continue 

implementing SIP requirements upon 

and after redesignation. 

EPA believes that both Ohio and 

Indiana’s contingency plans, as well as 

the commitment to continue 

implementing any SIP requirements, 

satisfy the pertinent requirements of 

section 175A(d). 

g. Provisions for Future Updates of the 

Annual PM2.5 Maintenance Plan 

As required by section 175A(b) of the 

CAA, Ohio and Indiana have each 

committed to submit to the EPA an 

updated maintenance plan eight years 

after redesignation of the CincinnatiHamilton area to attainment of the 1997 

annual PM2.5 standard to cover an 

additional ten-year period beyond the 

initial ten-year maintenance period. As 

required by section 175A of the CAA, 

Ohio and Indiana have committed to 

retain the control measures contained in 

the SIP prior to redesignation, or submit 

to EPA, as a SIP revision, any changes 

to its rules or emission limits applicable 

to SO2, NOX or direct PM2.5 sources as 

required for maintenance of the annual 

PM2.5 standard in the CincinnatiHamilton area. 

EPA has concluded that the 

maintenance plans adequately address 

the requisite five basic components: 

Attainment inventory, maintenance 

demonstration, monitoring network, 

verification of continued attainment, 

and a contingency plan. Thus EPA is 

fully approving the maintenance plan 

SIP revisions submitted by Ohio and 

Indiana for the Cincinnati-Hamilton 

area as meeting the requirements of 

section 175A of the CAA. 

B. Adequacy of Ohio and Indiana’s 

MVEBs 

1. How are MVEBs developed and what 

are the MVEBs for the CincinnatiHamilton area? 

Under the CAA, states are required to 

submit, at various times, control strategy 

SIP revisions and maintenance plans for 

PM2.5 nonattainment areas and for areas 

seeking redesignations to attainment of 

the PM2.5 standard. These emission 

control strategy SIP revisions (e.g., RFP 

and attainment demonstration SIP 

revisions) and maintenance plans create 

MVEBs based on on-road mobile source 

emissions for criteria pollutants and/or 

their precursors to address pollution 

from on-road transportation sources. 

The MVEBs are the portions of the total 

allowable emissions that are allocated to 

highway and transit vehicle use that, 

together with emissions from other 

sources in the area, will provide for 

attainment, RFP or maintenance, as 

applicable. 

Under 40 CFR part 93, a MVEB for an 

area seeking a redesignation to 

attainment is established for the last 

year of the maintenance plan and could 

also be established for an interim year 

or years. 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). 

Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new 

transportation plans and transportation 

improvement programs (TIPs) must be 

evaluated to determine if they conform 

to the purpose of the area’s SIP. 

Conformity to the SIP means that 

transportation activities will not cause 

new air quality violations, worsen 

existing air quality violations, or delay 

timely attainment of the NAAQS or any 

required interim milestone. If a 

transportation plan or TIP does not 

conform, most new transportation 

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. 

When reviewing SIP revisions 

containing MVEBs, including 

attainment strategies, rate-of-progress 

plans, and maintenance plans, EPA 

must affirmatively find adequate and/or 

approve the MVEBs for use in 

determining transportation conformity 

before the MVEBs can be used. Once 

EPA affirmatively approves and/or finds 

the submitted MVEBs to be adequate for 

transportation conformity purposes, the 

MVEBs must be used by state and 

Federal agencies in determining 

whether proposed transportation plans 

and TIPs conform to the SIP as required 

by section 176(c) of the CAA. EPA’s 

substantive criteria for determining the 

adequacy of MVEBs are set out in 40 

CFR 93.118(e)(4). Additionally, to 

approve a motor vehicle emissions 

budget EPA must complete a thorough 

review of the SIP, in this case the PM2.5

maintenance plans, and conclude that 

the SIP will achieve its overall purpose, 

in this case providing for maintenance 

of the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard in the 

Indiana and Ohio portions of the 

Cincinnati area. 

EPA’s process for determining 

adequacy of a MVEB consists of three 

basic steps: (1) Providing public 

notification of a SIP submission; (2) 

providing the public the opportunity to 

comment on the MVEB during a public 

comment period; and, (3) EPA taking 

action on the MVEB. The process for 

determining the adequacy of submitted 

SIP MVEBs is codified at 40 CFR 93.118. 

The maintenance plans submitted by 

Ohio and Indiana for the CincinnatiHamilton area contain new primary 

PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for the area for 

the years 2015 and 2021. The motor 

vehicle emissions budgets were 

calculated using MOVES2010(a). After 

the adequacy finding and approval of 

the budgets become effective, the 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 64835 

4EPA described the circumstances under which 

an area would be required to use MOVES in 

transportation conformity determinations in its 

March 2, 2010, Federal Register notice officially 

releasing MOVES2010 for use in SIPs and 

transportation conformity determinations. (75 FR 

9413) 

5EPA described the circumstances under which 

an area would be required to use MOVES in 

transportation conformity determinations in its 

March 2, 2010 Federal Register notice officially 

releasing MOVES2010 for use in SIPs and 

transportation conformity determinations. (75 FR 

9413) 

6EPA described the circumstances under which 

an area would be required to use MOVES in 

transportation conformity determinations in its 

March 2, 2010, Federal Register notice officially 

releasing MOVES2010 for use in SIPs and 

transportation conformity determinations. (75 FR 

9413) 

budgets will have to be used in future 

conformity determinations and regional 

emissions analyses prepared by the OKI, 

will have to be based on the use of 

MOVES2010a or the most recent version 

of MOVES required to be used in 

transportation conformity 

determinations.4 The states have 

determined the 2015 MVEBs for the 

combined Ohio and Indiana portions of 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area to be 1,678.60 

tpy for primary PM2.5 and 35,723.83 tpy 

for NOX. Ohio and Indiana have 

determined the 2021 MVEBs for their 

combined portions of the CincinnatiHamilton area to be 1,241.19 tpy for 

primary PM2.5 and 21,747.71 tpy for 

NOX. These MVEBs exceed the on-road 

mobile source primary PM2.5 and NOX

emissions projected by the states for 

2015 and 2021. Ohio and Indiana have 

decided to include ‘‘safety margins’’ as 

provided for in 40 CFR 93.124(a) 

(described below) of 79.93 tpy and 

112.84 tpy for primary PM2.5 and 

4,659.63 tpy and 2,836.65 tpy for NOX

in the 2015 and 2021 MVEBs, 

respectively, to provide for on-road 

mobile source growth. Ohio and Indiana 

did not provide emission budgets for 

SO2, VOCs, and ammonia because it 

concluded, consistent with EPA’s 

presumptions regarding these 

precursors, that emissions of these 

precursors from on-road motor vehicles 

are not significant contributors to the 

area’s PM2.5 air quality problem. 

In the Ohio and Indiana portions of 

the Cincinnati-Hamilton area, the motor 

vehicle budgets including the safety 

margins and motor vehicle emission 

projections for both NOX and PM2.5 are 

lower than the levels in the attainment 

year. 

EPA has reviewed the submitted 

budgets for 2015 and 2021 including the 

added safety margins using the 

conformity rule’s adequacy criteria 

found at 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4) and the 

conformity rule’s requirements for 

safety margins found at 40 CFR 

93.124(a). EPA has also completed a 

thorough review of the maintenance 

plan for the Ohio and Indiana portions 

of the Cincinnati-Hamilton area. Based 

on the results of this review of the 

budgets and the maintenance plans EPA 

is approving the 2015 and 2021 direct 

PM2.5 and NOX budgets including the 

requested safety margins for the Ohio 

and Indiana portions of the CincinnatiHamilton area. Additionally, EPA, 

through this rulemaking, has found the 

submitted budgets to be adequate for 

use to determine transportation 

conformity in the Indiana and Ohio 

portions of the area, because EPA has 

determined that the area can maintain 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the 

relevant maintenance period with onroad mobile source emissions at the 

levels of the MVEBs including the 

requested safety margins. These budgets 

must be used in conformity 

determinations made on or after the 

effective date of this direct final 

rulemaking (40 CFR 93.118(f)(iii)). 

Additionally, transportation conformity 

determinations made after the effective 

date of this notice must be based on 

regional emissions analyses using 

MOVES2010a or a more recent version 

of MOVES that has been approved for 

use in conformity determinations.5

2. What is a safety margin? 

A ‘‘safety margin’’ is the difference 

between the attainment level of 

emissions (from all sources) and the 

projected level of emissions (from all 

sources) in the maintenance plan. As 

shown in Table 5, the combination of 

the Ohio and Indiana portions of the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area is projected to 

have safety margins for NOX and direct 

PM2.5 of 42,994.13 tpy and 270.09 tpy in 

2015, and 69,887.02 tpy and 702.01 tpy 

for NOX and PM2.5 in 2021 (the 

difference between the attainment year, 

2008, emissions and the projected years 

of 2015 and 2021 emissions for all 

sources in the Cincinnati-Hamilton 

area). Even if emissions exceeded 

expectations by the full level of the 

safety margin, the area would still 

demonstrate maintenance since 

emission levels would equal those in 

the attainment year. 

The transportation conformity rule 

allows areas to allocate all or a portion 

of a ‘‘safety margin’’ to the area’s motor 

vehicle emissions budgets (40 CFR 

92.124(a)). The MVEBs requested by 

Ohio and Indiana contain NOX safety 

margins for mobile sources in 2015 and 

2021 and PM2.5 safety margins for 

mobile sources in 2015 and 2021 are 

much smaller than the allowable safety 

margins reflected in the total emissions 

for the Cincinnati-Hamilton area. The 

state is not requesting allocation to the 

MVEBs of the entire available safety 

margins reflected in the demonstration 

of maintenance. Therefore, even though 

the state is requesting MVEBs that 

exceed the projected on-road mobile 

source emissions for 2015 and 2021 

contained in the demonstration of 

maintenance, the increase in on-road 

mobile source emissions that can be 

considered for transportation 

conformity purposes is well within the 

safety margins of the overall PM2.5

maintenance demonstration. 

Therefore, EPA believes that the 

requested budgets, including the 

requested portion of the safety margins, 

provide for a quantity of mobile source 

emissions that would be expected to 

maintain the PM2.5 standard. Once 

allocated to mobile sources, these 

portions of the safety margins will not 

be available for use by other sources. 

3. What action is EPA taking on the 

submitted motor vehicle emissions 

budgets? 

EPA, through this rulemaking, has 

found adequate and is approving the 

MVEBs for use to determine 

transportation conformity in the Ohio 

and Indiana portions of the CincinnatiHamilton area, because EPA has 

determined that the area can maintain 

attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS for the relevant maintenance 

period with mobile source emissions at 

the levels of the MVEBs including the 

requested safety margins. These budgets 

must be used in conformity 

determinations made on or after the 

effective date of this direct final 

rulemaking, December 19, 2011. (40 

CFR 93.118(f)(iii)) Additionally, the 

determinations made after the effective 

date of this notice must be based on 

regional emissions analyses using 

MOVES2010a or a more recent version 

of MOVES that has been approved for 

use in conformity determinations.6

C. 2005 Comprehensive Emissions 

Inventory 

As discussed above in section 

IV.A.2.a.ii., section 172(c)(3) of the CAA 

requires areas to submit a 

comprehensive emissions inventory. 

Ohio and Indiana submitted 2005 base 

year emissions inventories that meet 

this requirement. Emissions contained 

in the submittals cover the general 

source categories of point sources, area 

sources, on-road mobile sources, and 

nonroad mobile sources. 

For the point source sector, EGU SO2

and NOX emissions were derived from 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
64836 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

EPA’s Clean Air Market’s database. All 

other point source emissions were 

obtained from Ohio and Indiana’s 

source facility emissions reporting. 

Area source emissions were 

extrapolated from Ohio and Indiana’s 

2005 periodic emissions inventories. 

Source growth factors were supplied by 

LADCO. 

Nonroad mobile source emissions 

were extrapolated from nonroad mobile 

source emissions reported in EPA’s 

2005 NEI. LADCO estimated emissions 

for commercial marine vessels and 

railroads. 

On-road mobile source emissions 

were calculated using EPA’s mobile 

source emission factor model, 

MOVES2010a, in conjunction with 

roadway network traffic information 

prepared by OKI. 

All emissions discussed in Table 1 

were documented in the submittal and 

the Appendices of Ohio and Indiana’s 

redesignation request submittals. EPA 

has reviewed Ohio and Indiana’s 

documentation of the emissions 

inventory techniques and data sources 

used for the derivation of the 2005 

emissions estimates and has found that 

Ohio and Indiana have thoroughly 

documented the derivation of these 

emissions inventories. The submittals 

for both the Ohio and Indiana state that 

the 2005 emissions inventories are 

currently the most complete emissions 

inventories for PM2.5 and PM2.5

precursors in the Cincinnati-Hamilton 

area. Based upon EPA’s review, we 

conclude that the 2005 emissions 

inventories areas complete and accurate 

as possible given the input data 

available to the states. 

V. Summary of Actions 

EPA has previously made the 

determination that the CincinnatiHamilton area has attained the 1997 

annual PM2.5 standard. EPA is 

determining that the area continues to 

attain the standard and that the Ohio 

and Indiana portions of the area meet 

the requirements for redesignation to 

attainment of that standard under 

section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA is 

thus approving the requests from Ohio 

and Indiana to change the legal 

designation of their portions of the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area from 

nonattainment to attainment for the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is 

approving Ohio and Indiana’s 1997 

annual PM2.5 maintenance plans for the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area as revisions to 

the respective SIPs because the plans 

meet the requirements of section 175A 

of the CAA. EPA is approving the 2005 

emissions inventories for primary PM2.5, 

NOX, and SO2, documented in Indiana’s 

and Ohio’s December 9, 2010, and 

January 25, 2011, submittals as 

satisfying the requirement in section 

172(c)(3) of the CAA for a 

comprehensive, current emission 

inventory. Finally, EPA finds adequate 

and is approving 2015 and 2021 primary 

PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs submitted from 

each state for the Ohio and Indiana 

portions of the Cincinnati-Hamilton 

area. These MVEBs will be used in 

future transportation conformity 

analyses for the area after the effective 

date for the adequacy finding and 

approval. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, redesignation of an 

area to attainment and the 

accompanying approval of a 

maintenance plan under section 

107(d)(3)(E) are actions that affect the 

status of a geographical area and do not 

impose any additional regulatory 

requirements on sources beyond those 

imposed by state law. A redesignation to 

attainment does not in and of itself 

create any new requirements, but rather 

results in the applicability of 

requirements contained in the CAA for 

areas that have been redesignated to 

attainment. Moreover, the Administrator 

is required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, these actions: 

• Are not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Do not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Are certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Do not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Do not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Are not economically significant 

regulatory actions based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Are not significant regulatory 

actions subject to Executive Order 

13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Are not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Do not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

Tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on Tribal governments or preempt 

Tribal law. 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this action and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the United 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

These actions are not ‘‘major rules’’ as 

defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2). 

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, 

petitions for judicial review of this 

action must be filed in the United States 

Court of Appeals for the appropriate 

circuit by December 19, 2011. Filing a 

petition for reconsideration by the 

Administrator of this final rule does not 

affect the finality of these actions for the 

purposes of judicial review nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. Parties with 

objections to this direct final rule are 

encouraged to file a comment in 

response to the parallel notice of 

proposed rulemaking for this action 

published in the proposed rules section 

of today’s Federal Register, rather than 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 64837 

file an immediate petition for judicial 

review of this direct final rule, so that 

EPA can withdraw these direct final 

rules and address the comment in the 

proposed rulemaking. These actions 

may not be challenged later in 

proceedings to enforce their 

requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Particulate matter. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Air pollution control, National parks, 

Wilderness areas. 

Dated: October 7, 2011. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 are amended 

as follows: 

PART 52—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 52 

continues to read as follows: 

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

Subpart P—Indiana 

■ 2. Section 52.776 is amended by 

adding paragraphs (v)(3) and (w)(3) to 

read as follows: 

§ 52.776 Control strategy: Particulate 

matter. 

* * * * * 

(v) * * * 

(3) The Cincinnati-Hamilton 

nonattainment area (Dearborn County), 

as submitted on December 9, 2010. The 

maintenance plan establishes 2015 

motor vehicle emissions budgets for the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area of 1,678.60 

tpy for primary PM2.5 and 35,723.83 tpy 

for NOX and 2021 motor vehicle 

emissions budgets of 1,241.19 tpy for 

primary PM2.5 and 21,747.71 tpy for 

NOX. 

(w) * * * 

(3) Indiana’s 2005 NOx, directly 

emitted PM2.5, and SO2 emissions 

inventory satisfies the emission 

inventory requirements of section 

172(c)(3) of the Clean Air Act for the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area. 

Subpart KK—Ohio 

■ 3. Section 52.1880 is amended by 

adding paragraphs (p) and (q) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.1880 Control strategy: Particulate 

matter. 

* * * * * 

(p) Approval—The 1997 annual PM2.5

maintenance plans for the following 

areas have been approved: 

(1) The Cincinnati-Hamilton 

nonattainment area (Butler, Clermont, 

Hamilton, and Warren Counties), as 

submitted on January 25, 2011. The 

maintenance plan establishes 2015 

motor vehicle emissions budgets for the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area of 1,678.60 

tpy for primary PM2.5 and 35,723.83 tpy 

for NOX and 2021 motor vehicle 

emissions budgets of 1,241.19 tpy for 

primary PM2.5 and 21,747.71 tpy for 

NOX. 

(2) [Reserved] 

(q) Approval—The 1997 annual PM2.5

comprehensive emissions inventories 

for the following areas have been 

approved: 

(1) Ohio’s 2005 NOx, directly emitted 

PM2.5, and SO2 emissions inventory 

satisfies the emission inventory 

requirements of section 172(c)(3) for the 

Cincinnati-Hamilton area. 

(2) [Reserved] 

PART 81—[AMENDED] 

■ 4. The authority citation for part 81 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 5. Section 81.315 is amended by 

revising the entry for CincinnatiHamilton, IN in the table entitled 

‘‘Indiana PM2.5 (Annual NAAQS)’’ to 

read as follows: 

§ 81.315 Indiana. 

* * * * * 

INDIANA PM2.5

[Annual NAAQS] 

Designated area 

Designation a

Date 1 Type 

*******

Cincinnati-Hamilton, IN: Dearborn County .............................................................................. December 19, 2011 Attainment. 

*******

a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 

1This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted. 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Section 81.336 is amended by 

revising the entry for CincinnatiHamilton, OH in the table entitled 

‘‘Ohio PM2.5 (Annual NAAQS)’’ to read 

as follows: 

§ 81.336 Ohio. 

* * * * * 

OHIO PM2.5

[Annual NAAQS] 

Designated area 

Designation a

Date 1 Type 

*******

Cincinnati-Hamilton, Ohio: 

Butler County.

Clermont County.

Hamilton County.


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES
64838 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 202 / Wednesday, October 19, 2011 / Rules and Regulations 

OHIO PM2.5—Continued 

[Annual NAAQS] 

Designated area 

Designation a

Date 1 Type 

Warren County .................................................................................................................. December 19, 2011 Attainment. 

*******

a Includes Indian Country located in each county or area, except as otherwise specified. 

1This date is 90 days after January 5, 2005, unless otherwise noted. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2011–26887 Filed 10–18–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with RULES