27652 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 94 / Wednesday, May 16, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 51 and 81 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2006–0892; FRL–8313–1] 

Determination of Attainment, Approval 

and Promulgation of Implementation 

Plans and Designation of Areas for Air 

Quality Planning Purposes; Ohio; 

Redesignation of Washington County 

to Attainment of the 8-Hour Ozone 

Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: On September 22, 2006, the 

Ohio Environmental Protection Agency 

(Ohio EPA) submitted a request to 

redesignate Washington County (the 

Ohio Portion of the ParkersburgMarietta, West Virginia-Ohio (WV-OH) 

bi-state ozone nonattainment area) to 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard 

(NAAQS). Additional information was 

submitted on November 17, 2006. In 

these submittals, Ohio EPA also 

requested EPA approval of an Ohio 

State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

revision containing a 12-year 

maintenance plan for the County. EPA 

is making a determination that the 

Parkersburg-Marietta (WV-OH) 

nonattainment area has attained the 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. This determination 

is based on three years of complete, 

quality-assured ambient air quality 

monitoring data for the 2003–2005 

ozone seasons that demonstrate that the 

8-hour ozone NAAQS has been attained. 

Quality assured monitoring data for 

2006 shows that the area continues to 

attain the standard. EPA is approving, as 

a SIP revision, the State’s maintenance 

plan for Washington County. As a 

result, Ohio has satisfied the criteria for 

redesignation of Washington County to 

attainment and EPA is approving the 

requested redesignation. Further, EPA is 

approving, for purposes of 

transportation conformity, the motor 

vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) for 

the year 2018 that are contained in the 

8-hour ozone maintenance plan. 

DATES: This final rule is effective on 

June 15, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a 

docket for this action under Docket ID 

No. EPA–R05–OAR–2006–0892. All 

documents in the docket are listed on 

the www.regulations.gov Web site. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., Confidential Business Information 

(CBI) or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically through 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 

8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We 

recommend that you telephone Steve 

Marquardt, Environmental Engineer, at 

(312) 353–3214 before visiting the 

Region 5 office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steve Marquardt, Environmental 

Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–3214, 

marquardt.steve@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the 

following, whenever ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ or 

‘‘our’’ are used, we mean the United 

States Environmental Protection 

Agency. 

Table of Contents 

I. What Is the Background for This Rule? 

II. What Comments Did We Receive on the 

Proposed Action? 

III. What Are Our Final Actions? 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Review 

I. What Is the Background for This 

Rule? 

The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires 

EPA to designate as nonattainment any 

area that is violating the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS based on three consecutive 

years of air quality monitoring data. 

EPA designated Washington County, 

Ohio as part of the Parkersburg-Marietta 

WV–OH nonattainment area in a 

Federal Register notice published on 

April 30, 2004, (69 FR 23857). At the 

same time EPA classified the area as a 

subpart 1 8-hour ozone nonattainment 

area, based on air quality monitoring 

data from 2001–2003. 

On September 22, 2006, Ohio EPA 

submitted a request for redesignation of 

Washington County, Ohio to attainment 

for the 8-hour ozone standard. 

Additional supporting information was 

also submitted on November 17, 2006. 

The redesignation request included 

three years of complete, quality-assured 

data for the period of 2003 through 

2005, indicating the 8-hour NAAQS for 

ozone had been achieved. The data 

satisfy the CAA requirements for 

attainment when the 3-year average of 

the annual fourth-highest daily 

maximum 8-hour average ozone 

concentration is less than or equal to 

0.08 ppm. Under the CAA, 

nonattainment areas may be 

redesignated to attainment if sufficient 

complete, quality-assured data are 

available for the Administrator to 

determine that the areas have attained 

the standard and the areas meet the 

other CAA redesignation requirements 

in section 107(d)(3)(E). The January 17, 

2007, proposed rule (72 FR 1956) 

provides a discussion of how the State 

of Ohio met these requirements for the 

area. 

II. What Comments Did We Receive on 

the Proposed Action? 

EPA provided a 30-day review and 

comment period on the January 17, 

2007, proposed rule. EPA received no 

comments. 

The United States Court of Appeals 

for the District of Columbia Circuit 

recently vacated EPA’s April 30, 2004 

‘‘Final Rule to Implement the 8-Hour 

Ozone National Ambient Standard’’ (the 

Phase 1 implementation rule). South 

Coast Air Quality Management District 

v. EPA, No. 04–1200, 472 F.3d 882 (D.C. 

Cir. 2007). EPA issued a supplemental 

proposed rulemaking that set forth its 

views on the potential effect of the 

Court’s ruling on these and other 

proposed redesignation actions. 72 FR 

13452 (March 22, 2007). EPA proposed 

to find that the Court’s ruling does not 

alter any requirements relevant to the 

proposed redesignations that would 

prevent EPA from finalizing these 

redesignations, for the reasons fully 

explained in the supplemental notice. 

The public comment period on this 

supplemental proposed rulemaking 

closed on April 6, 2007. EPA received 

six comments, all supporting EPA’s 

supplemental proposed rulemaking, and 

supporting redesignation of the affected 

areas. EPA recognizes the support 

provided in these comments and does 

not find that any specific response is 

necessary with respect to these 

supportive comments. Accordingly, 

EPA is proceeding with redesignation of 

these areas as proposed. 

III. What Are Our Final Actions? 

EPA is taking several related actions. 

EPA is making a determination that the 

Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH 

nonattainment area has attained the 8- 

hour ozone standard. EPA is approving 

Ohio’s maintenance plan SIP revision 

for Washington County (such approval 

being one of the CAA criteria for 

redesignation to attainment status). The 

maintenance plan is designed, in 

conjunction with the maintenance plan 

developed by West Virginia, to keep the 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES5
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 94 / Wednesday, May 16, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 27653 

Parkersburg-Marietta WV–OH area in 

attainment for ozone through 2018. 

Because Ohio has met these and other 

prerequisites for redesignation, EPA is 

approving the State’s request to change 

the legal designation of Washington 

County from nonattainment to 

attainment for the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. In addition, and supported by 

and consistent with the ozone 

maintenance plan, EPA is approving the 

2018 volatile organic compound (VOC) 

and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) MVEBs for 

transportation conformity purposes. The 

2018 MVEBs for Washington County, 

Ohio are 1.67 tons per day for VOC and 

1.76 tons per day for NOX. West Virginia 

develops MVEBs for its portion of the 

area. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Review 

Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this action is 

not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

and, therefore, is not subject to review 

by the Office of Management and 

Budget. 

Executive Order 13211: Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

Because it is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under Executive 

Order 12866 or a ‘‘significant energy 

action,’’ this action is also not subject to 

Executive order 13211, ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May 

22, 2001). 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

This action merely approves state law 

as meeting Federal requirements and 

imposes no additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. 

Redesignation of an area to attainment 

under section 107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean 

Air Act does not impose any new 

requirements on small entities. 

Redesignation is an action that affects 

the status of a geographical area and 

does not impose any new regulatory 

requirements on sources. Accordingly, 

the Administrator certifies that this rule 

will not have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities under the Regulatory Flexibility 

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

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Because this rule approves preexisting requirements under state law 

and does not impose any additional 

enforceable duty beyond that required 

by state law, it does not contain any 

unfunded mandate or significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments, as 

described in the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). 

Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This rule also does not have tribal 

implications because it will not have a 

substantial direct effect on one or more 

Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

as specified by Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action also does not have 

Federalism implications because it does 

not have substantial direct effects on the 

states, on the relationship between the 

national government and the states, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999). Redesignation is an 

action that merely affects the status of 

a geographical area, and does not 

impose any new requirements on 

sources, or allows a state to avoid 

adopting or implementing additional 

requirements, and does not alter the 

relationship or distribution of power 

and responsibilities established in the 

Clean Air Act. 

Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

This rule also is not subject to 

Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997), because it approves as 

state rule implementing a Federal 

Standard. 

National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act 

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Clean Air Act. In this context, in the 

absence of a prior existing requirement 

for the state to use voluntary consensus 

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 

to disapprove a SIP submission for 

failure to use VCS. It would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, 

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission 

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of 

the Clean Air Act. Redesignation is an 

action that affects the status of a 

geographical area but does not impose 

any new requirements on sources. Thus, 

the requirements of section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 

272 note) do not apply. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This rule does not impose an 

information collection burden under the 

provisions of the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). 

Congressional Review Act 

The Congressional Review Act, 5 

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

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides 

that before a rule may take effect, the 

agency promulgating the rule must 

submit a rule report, which includes a 

copy of the rule, to each House of the 

Congress and to the Comptroller General 

of the United States. EPA will submit a 

report containing this rule and other 

required information to the U.S. Senate, 

the U.S. House of Representatives, and 

the Comptroller General of the Untied 

States prior to publication of the rule in 

the Federal Register. A major rule 

cannot take effect until 60 days after it 

is published in the Federal Register. 

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

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

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

Air Act, petitions for judicial review of 

this action must be filed in the United 

States Court of Appeals for the 

appropriate circuit by July 16, 2007. 

Filing a petition for reconsideration by 

the Administrator of this final rule does 

not affect the finality of this rule for the 

purposes of judicial review, nor does it 

extend the time within which a petition 

for judicial review may be filed, and 

shall not postpone the effectiveness of 

such rule or action. This action may not 

be challenged later in proceedings to 

force its requirements. (See Section 

307(b)(2).) 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Particulate matter, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, National parks, 

Wilderness areas. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES5
27654 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 94 / Wednesday, May 16, 2007 / Rules and Regulations 

Dated: May 2, 2006. 

Margaret Guerriero, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

■ Parts 52 and 81, chapter I, title 40 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations is 

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 KK—Ohio 

■ 2. Section 52.1885 is amended by 

adding paragraph (ff) (4) to read as 

follows: 

§ 52.1885 Control strategy: Ozone. 

* * * * * 

(ff) * * * 

(4) Washington County, as submitted 

on September 22, 2006, and 

supplemented on November 17, 2006. 

The maintenance plan establishes 2018 

motor vehicle emission budgets for 

Washington county of 1.67 tons per day 

for volatile organic compounds and 1.76 

tons per day for oxides of nitrogen. 

PART 81—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 81 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. Section 81.336 is amended by 

revising the entry for ParkersburgMarietta, WV-OH: Washington county 

in the table entitled ‘‘Ohio Ozone (8- 

Hour Standard)’’ to read as follows: 

§ 81.336 Ohio. 

* * * * * 

OHIO OZONE (8-HOUR STANDARD) 

Designated area 

Designation a Classification 

Date 1 Type Date 1 Type 

* * * * * * * 

Parkersburg-Marietta, WV-OH: Washington 

County.

6/15/07 ............................... Attainment. 

* * * * * * * 

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

1This date is June 15, 2004, unless otherwise noted. 

[FR Doc. 07–2335 Filed 5–15–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–M 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC66 with RULES5