ENYIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 [EPA-R06-0AR-2009-0202; FRL- ] Approval and Promulgation ofImplementation Plans and Designation ofAreas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; Arkansas; Redesignation ofthe Crittenden County, Arkansas Portion ofthe Memphis, Tennessee-Arkansas 1997 8-Hour Ozone NonattainmentArea to Attainment

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Proposed Rule SUMMARY: On February 24, 2009, the State ofArkansas, through the Arkansas Department ofEnvironmental Quality (ADEQ), submitted a request to redesignate the Arkansas portion of the bi-state Memphis, Tennessee-Arkansas (Memphis TN-AR) 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area to attainment for the 8-hour ozone National AmbientAir Quality Standard (NAAQS); and to approve the State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision containing a maintenance plan for the Arkansas portion ofthe bi-state Memphis TN-AR Area. The bi-state Memphis TN-AR 1997 8- hour ozone nonattainment area is composed ofMemphis, Shelby County, Tennessee (Shelby County) and Crittenden County, Arkansas. In this action, EPA proposes to approve the 19978- hour ozone redesignation request for Crittenden County, Arkansas. Additionally, EPA proposes to approve the 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for Crittenden County, including the state motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEBs)fornitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) for the years 2006 and 2021. This proposed approval ofArkansas' redesignation request is based on EPA's determination that Arkansas has demonstrated that Crittenden County has met the criteria for redesignation to attainment specified in the Clean AirAct (CAA), including the determination that the entire Memphis TN-AR ozone nonattainment area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone standard.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before [insert date 30 days after date ofpublication in the Federal 

### Register].

ADDRESSES: Submityour comments, identifiedby Docket ID No. EPA-R06-0AR-2009- 0202, by one ofthe following methods: I. www.regulations.gov: Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. 2. E-mail: donaldson.guy@epa.gov. 3. Fax: (214) 665-7263. 4. Mail: EPA-R06-0AR-2009-0202 Air Planning Section, MultimediaPlanning and Permitting Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. 5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Mr. Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning Section, Air Planning Branch, MultimediaPlanning and Permitting Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. Such deliveries are only accepted during the Regional Office's normal hours of operation. The Regional Office's official hours ofbusiness are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal holidays.

Instructions: Directyour comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R06-0AR-2009-0202. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be 2made available online at www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information (CEl) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submitthrough www.regulations.gov or e-mail, information that you considerto be CEl or otherwise protected. The www.regulations.gov web site is an "anonymous access" system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body ofyour comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through www.regulations.gov, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part ofthe commentthat is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. Ifyou submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body ofyour comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. IfEPA cannotread your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files shouldavoid the use ofspecial characters, any form of encryption, and be free ofany defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at 

### http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.

Docket: All documents in the electronic docket are listed in the www.regulations.gov index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CEl or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Air Planning Section, Air Branch, MultimediaPlanning and Permitting
3Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6,1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 1200, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733. EPA requests that ifat all possible, you contactthe person listed in the 

### FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's official hours ofbusiness are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding federal holidays.



### FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jeffrey Riley, Air Planning Section (6PD-L), Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 700, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, telephone (214) 665-8542; fax number 214-665-7263; e-mail address riley.jeffrey@epa.gov.



### SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Table of Contents I. What Proposed Actions Is EPA Taking? II. What is the Background for EPA's Proposed Actions? III. What are the Criteria for Redesignation? IV. Why Is EPA Proposing These Actions? V. What is the Effect ofEPA's Proposed Actions? VI. What is EPA's Analysis of the Request? VII. What is EPA's Analysis of Arkansas' Proposed State NOx and VOC MVEBs for Crittenden County, Arkansas? VIII. What is the Status ofEPA's Adequacy Determination for the Proposed State NOx and VOC MVEBs for the years 2006 and 2021 for Crittenden County, Arkansas? 4IX.. Proposed Action on the Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan SIP Revision Including Proposed Approval ofthe 2006 and 2021 State NOx and VOC MVEBs for Crittenden County, Arkansas. X. Statutory and Executive OrderReviews

I. What Proposed Actions is EPA Taking? EPA proposes several related actions, which are summarized below and described in greater detail throughout this notice ofrulemaking: (1) To redesignate Crittenden County, Arkansas to attaimnent for the 1997 S-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA proposes to determine that the bi-state Memphis, TN-AR Area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, and that the Crittenden County, Arkansas portion has met the requirements for redesignation under section 107(d)(3)(E) ofthe CAA. The bi-state Memphis, TN-AR 1997 8-hour ozone area comprises Shelby County in Teunessee and Crittenden County in Arkansas. Today's proposal addresses only the Arkansas portion ofthe bi-state Memphis, TN-AR 1997 8-hour ozone area. EPA is now proposing to approve a request to change the legal designation ofCrittenden County, Arkansas from nonattaimnentto attaimnent for the 1997 8- hour ozone NAAQS. (2) To approve Arkansas' 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan into the Arkansas SIP, including the 2006 and 2021 motor vehicle emissions budgets (MVEB's) that are part ofthe maintenance plan. EPA has already made a finding ofadequacy for the MVEBs (74 FR 21356). These MVEBs apply only to Crittenden County, Arkansas. MVEB's contained in the Tennessee submittal for Shelby County will be addressed in a separate action. EPA proposes to approve
5Arkansas' 1997 8-hour ozone maintenance plan for Crittenden County (such approval being one ofthe CAA criteriafor redesignation to attainment status). The maintenance plan is designed to help keep the Memphis TN-AR area (ofwhich Crittenden County is a part) in attainment ofthe 1997 8-hour ozone NMQS through 2021.


### II. What is the Background for EPA's Proposed Actions? Ground-level ozone is not emitted directly by sources. Rather, emissions ofNOx and VOC react in the presence ofsunlight to form ground-level ozone. NOx and VOC are precursors ofozone. The CAA establishes a process for air quality managementthrough the NAAQS. EPA establishes NAAQS for criteriapollutants as the maximum level ofair pollution allowed to protectpublic health and welfare. On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a revised 8-hour ozone standard of0.08 parts per million(ppm). This standard is more stringentthan the previous l-hour ozone standard. Under EPA regulations at 40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour ozone standard is attained when the 3-year average ofthe annual fourth highest daily maximum 8-hour average ambient air quality ozone concentrations is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when rounding is considered). (See, 69 FR 23857 (April 30, 2004) for further information.) Ambient air quality monitoring data for the 3-yearperiod must meet a data completeness requirement. The ambientair quality monitoring data completeness requirement is met when the average percent ofdays with valid ambient monitoring data is greater than 90 percent, and no single year has less than 75 percent data completeness as determined in Appendix I ofpart 50. Specifically, section 2.3 of40 CFR part 50, Appendix I, "Comparisons with the Primary andSecondary Ozone Standards" states:



### 6"Theprimary andsecondary ozone ambientair quality standards are met at an ambient air quality monitoringsite when the 3-year average of the annualfourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration is less than or equal to 0.08 ppm. The number of significant figures in the level of the standarddictates the rounding conventionfor comparing the computed 3-year average annualfourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentration with the level of the standard. The thirddecimalplace of the computedvalue is rounded, with values equal to or greater than 

### 5 rounding up. Thus, a computed3-year average ozone concentration of 0.085ppm is the smallestvalue that is greater than 0.08 ppm. " The CAA requires EPA to designate as nonattainment any area that was violating the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on the three most recent years ofambient air quality data. The CAA contains two sets ofprovisions

- subpart I and subpart 2 - that address plarming and control requirements for ozone nonattainment areas. (Both are found in title I, part D.) Subpart I (which EPA refers to as "basic" nonattainment) contains general, less prescriptive, requirements for nonattainment areas for any pollutant

- including ozone - governed by a NAAQS. Subpart 2 (which EPA refers to as "classified" nonattainment) provides more specific requirements for certain ozone nonattainment areas. Some 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment
areas are subject only to the provisions ofsubpart I. Other 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment areas are also subject to the provisions ofsubpart 2. Under EPA's Phase I 1997 8-hour ozone implementationrule (69 FR 23857) (Phase I Rule), signed on April 15, 2004, and published April 30, 2004, an area was classified under subpart 2 based on its 1997 8-hour ozone design value (i.e., the 3-year average ofthe armual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations), ifithad a l-hour design value at or above 0.121 ppm (the lowest l-hour design
7value in Table I ofsubpart 2). All other areas are covered under subpart 1, based upon their 8- hour ambient air quality design value. Shelby County, Tennessee was originally designated as a marginal nonattainment area for the l-hour ozone standard on November 6,1991 (56 FR 56694). Crittenden County, Arkansas was not part ofthe nonattainment area during the 1991 l-hour designations. On February 16, 1995 (60 FR 3352) Shelby County was redesignated as attainment for the l-hour ozone standard and is considered to be a l-hourmaintenance area subject to a CAA section 175A maintenance plan for the l-hour standard. On April 30; 2004, EPA designated the Memphis, TN-AR Area (which then included Crittenden County, Arkansas) as a "moderate" 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area (see, 69 FR 23857, April 30, 2004). On July 15,2004, pursuant to section 181(a)(4) ofthe CAA, the States ofTennessee and Arkansas submitted apetition to EPA Regions 4 and 6, requesting a downward reclassification ofthe Memphis TN-AR nonattainment area from "moderate" to "marginal" for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. The petition was based on the area's "moderate" design value of.092 ppm being within five percent ofthe maximum "marginal" design value of 0.091 ppm. Pursuant to Section 181(a)(4), areas with design values within five percent ofthe standardmay request a reclassification under specific circumstances. Factors for EPA to consider as part ofsuch a request are described in Section 181(a)(4) ofthe CAA. The petition for reclassification to "marginal" was approved by EPA, and became effective on November 22, 2004 (see, 69 FR 56697, September 22, 2004). As a result ofthe downward classification, the
new attainment date for the Memphis TN-AR "marginal" nonattainment area was set at June 15, 2007, consistentwith the CAA, with an attainment determination to be based on 2004-2006 air quality data. 8Air quality data monitored for the Memphis TN-AR nonattainment area subsequently showed that the area did not attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS by the June 15,2007, deadline. Section 181(b)(2)(A) ofthe CAA provides that, when EPA finds that an area failed to attain by the applicable date, the area is reclassified by operation oflaw to the higher of: the next higher classification or the classification applicable to the area's ozone design value at the time of the required notice under Section 181(b)(2)(B). The next higher classification for the Memphis TN-ARNonattainmentArea was "moderate." On March 28, 2008, the Memphis TN-AR nonattainment area was reclassified as "moderate" (73 FR 16547). EPA set a deadline ofMarch 1,2009 for the State to submitthe moderate area SIP provisions required under the area's new classification (73 FR 16550). In 2008, the ambient ozone data for the Memphis TN-AR Area showed attainment ofthe 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, using data from the 3-yearperiod of2006 - 2008. On February 24, 2009, Arkansas requested redesignation ofCrittenden County, Arkansas to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The redesignation request includedthree years ofcomplete, quality-assured ambient air quality data for the ozone seasons 

### (March l" thru November 30th) of 2006 - 2008, indicating thatthe 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS has been achieved for the entire Memphis TN-AR Area. Underthe CAA, nonattainment areas may be redesignated to attainment ifsufficient, complete, quality-assured data is available for the Administratorto determine that the area has attained the standard and the area meets the other CAA redesignation requirements in section 107(d)(3)(E).


### III. What are the Criteria for Redesignation?


### 9The CAA provides the requirements for redesignating anonattainment area to attaimnent. Specifically, section I 07(d)(3)(E) ofthe CAA allows for redesignation providing that: (1) the Administrator determines that the area has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) the Administrator has fully approved the applicable implementationplan for the area under section 

### IIO(k); (3) the Administrator determines that the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation ofthe applicable SIP and applicable Federal air pollutant control regulations and other permanent and enforceable reductions; (4) the Administratorhas fully approved a maintenance plan for the area as meeting the requirements ofsection 175A; and, (5) the state containing such area has met all requirements applicable to the area under section 110 and part D ofthe CAA. EPA provided guidance on redesignation in the General Preamble for the Implementation ofTitle I ofthe CAA Amendments of 1990, on April 16, 1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented this guidance on April 28, 1992 (57 FR 18070). EPA has provided further guidance on processing redesignation requests in the following documents:



### I. "Ozone and Carbon Monoxide Design Value Calculations;" Memorandum from Bill Laxton, Director, Technical Support Division, June 18,1990;

2. "Maintenance Plans for Redesignation ofOzone and CarbonMonoxide NonattaimnentAreas," Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, April 30, 1992;

103. "Contingency Measures for Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) Redesignations," Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, June I, 1992;

4. "Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment," Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, September 4, 1992 (hereafter referred to as the "Calcagni Memorandum");

5. "State Implementation Plan (SIP) Actions Submitted in Response to Clean Air Act (ACT) Deadlines," Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality ManagementDivision, October 28, 1992;

6. "Technical Support Documents (TSD's) for Redesignation ofOzone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) NonattainmentAreas," Memorandum from G. T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs Branch, August 17, 1993;

7. "State Implementation Plan (SIP) Requirements for Areas Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment ofthe Ozone and Carbon Monoxide (CO) National AmbientAir Quality Standards (NAAQS) On or AfterNovember 15, 1992," Memorandum from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, September 17, 1993;

118. "Use ofActual Emissions in Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone and CO Nonattainment Areas," Memorandum from D. KentBerry, Acting Director, Air Quality Management Division, November 30, 1993;

9. "Part D New Source Review (Part D NSR) Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment," Memorandum from Mary D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation, October 14, 1994; and

10. "Reasonable Further Progress, Attainment Demonstration, and Related Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment Areas Meeting the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard," Memorandum from John S. Seitz, Director, Office ofAir Quality Planning and Standards, May 10, 1995.

IV. Why is EPA Proposing These Actions? On February 24, 2009, Arkansas requested redesignation ofthe Arkansas portion (Crittenden County) ofthe bi-state Memphis TN-AR 1997 S-hour ozone nonattainment area to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. EPA's evaluation indicates that the bi-state Memphis Area has attained the standard and that Crittenden County has met the requirements for redesignation set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) , including the maintenance plan requirements under section l75A ofthe CAA. EPA is also announcing the status ofits adequacy determination and proposing approval ofthe 2006 and 2021 NOxand VOC MVEBs which are relevant to the requested redesignation.

12V. Whatis the Effect ofEPA's Proposed Actions? Approval ofArkansas' redesignation request would change the legal designation of Crittenden County for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS found at 40 CFR part 81. Approval of Arkansas' request would also incorporate into the Arkansas SIP, a plan for Crittenden County for maintaining the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the area through 2021. This maintenance plan includes contingency measures to remedy future violations ofthe 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The maintenance plan also establishes state NOxand VOC MVEBs for Crittenden County. Table I identifies the state NOxand VOC MVEBs for the year 2006 and 2021 for Crittenden County. Table 

### 1. Crittenden County NOxand VOC MVEBs (Summer season tons per day) 

### 2006 2021 NOx 6.27 1.84 VOC 2.95 1.39 Approval ofArkansas' maintenance plan would also result in approval ofthe NOxand VOC state MVEBs. Additionally, EPA is notifying the public ofthe status ofits adequacy determination for the 2006 and 2021 NOxand VOC state MVEBs pursuant to 40 CFR 93.118(f)(I). VI. What isEPA's Analysis ofthe Request? EPA proposes to determine that the Crittenden County portion ofthe Memphis TN-AR 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, and that all otherredesignation criteria have been met for that portion ofthe Memphis TN-AR area. The basis for EPA's determination for the area is discussed in greater detail below.
13

### Criteria (1) - Crittenden County, Arkansas has attainedthe 19978-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA proposes to determine that the Crittenden County portion ofthe Memphis TN-AR area has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. For ozone, an area may be consideredto be attaining the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS ifthe air quality in the nonattainment area meets the standard, as determined in accordance with 40 CFR 50.10 and Appendix I ofpart 50, based on three complete, consecutive calendaryears ofquality-assured air quality monitoring data. To attain this standard, the 3-year average ofthe fourth-highest daily maximum 1997 8-hour average
ozone concentrations measured at each monitor within an area over each year must not exceed 0.08 ppm. Based on the rounding convention described in 40 CFR part 50, Appendix 

### I, the standard is attained ifthe design value is 0.084 ppm or below. The data must be collected and quality-assured in accordance with 40 CFR part 58, and recorded in the EPA Air Quality System (AQS). The monitors generally should have remained at the same location for the duration of the monitoring period required for demonstrating attainment. EPA reviewed ozone monitoring data from ambient ozone monitoring stations in the Memphis TN-AR area for the ozone season from 2006-2008. This data has been quality assured and is recorded in AQS. The fourth high averages for 2006, 2007 and 2008, and the 3-year average ofthese values (i.e., design values), are summarized in Table 2:



### Table 2. Annual 4th Max High and Design Value Concentration for 1997 

### 8-Hour Ozone for the Memphis, TN-ARArea (in parts per million)

14COUNTY Shelby County, Tennessee Crittenden County, Arkansas Memphis- Edmond Marion MONITOR Frayser Orgill Park (#05-035-0005) Boulevard (AQS In) (#47-157- (#47-157- 0021) 1004) 2006 0.083 0.084 0.089 2007 0.081 0.080 0.084 2008 0.084 0.077 0.074 Design Value 0.082 0.080 0.082

As discussed above, the design value for an area is the highest design value recorded at any monitor in the area. Therefore, the design value for the Memphis TN-AR Area is 0.082 ppm, which meets the standard as described above. Preliminary data from 2009 also indicate the
area continues to attain the standard. The data from 2009 is consideredpreliminary because it has not yet completed full data certification. As discussed in more detail below, Arkansas has committed to continue monitoring in this area in accordance 

### with 40 CFR part 58. The data submitted by Arkansas provides an adequate demonstration that Crittenden County (as part of the Memphis TN-AR area) has attained the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS.

Criteria (2) - 

### Arkansas has a fully approvedSIP undersection 11

### O(k)for Crittenden County and Criteria (5)

- 

### Arkansas has metallApplicableRequirements underSection 110 andpart 

### D of 

### the CAA. Below is a summary ofhow these two criteria were met. 15EPA has determined that Arkansas has met all applicable SIP requirements for Crittenden County under section 110 ofthe CAA (general SIP requirements). EPA has also determined that the Arkansas SIP satisfies the criterion that it meet applicable SIP requirements under part D oftitle I ofthe CAA (including requirements specific to subpart 2 marginal 1997 8- hour ozone nonattainment areas) in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, EPA has determined that the SIP is fully approved with respectto all requirements applicable for purposes ofredesignation in accordance with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these determinations, EPA ascertained which requirements are applicable to the area and that if applicable, they are fully approved under section II O(k). SIPs must be fully approved only with respect to applicable requirements.



### a. Crittenden County, Arkansas has met allApplicable Requirements under section 110 and partDo/the CAA

The September 4, 1992, Calcagni Memorandum (see "Procedures for Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment," Memorandum from John Calcagni, Director, Air Quality Management Division, September 4,1992) describes EPA's interpretation ofsection 107(d)(3)(E). Under this interpretation, to qualify for redesignation, states requesting redesignation to attainment must meet only the relevant CAA requirements that come due prior to the submittal ofa complete redesignation request. See also, Michael Shapiro Memorandum, ("SIP Requirements for Areas Submitting Requests for Redesignation to Attainment ofthe Ozone and Carbon Monoxide NAAQS On or After November 15, 1992," September 17, 1993), and 60 FR 12459,12465-66 (March 7,1995) (redesignation ofDetroit-Ann Arbor, Michigan). 16Applicable requirements ofthe CAA that come due subsequentto the area's submittal ofa complete redesignation request remain applicable until aredesignation is approved, but are not required as a prerequisite to redesignation. See, section 175A(c) ofthe CAA; Sierra Club, 375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004); see also, 68 FR 25424,25427 (May 12,2003) (redesignation ofSt. Louis, Missouri). GeneralSIP requirements. Section 11O(a)(2) oftitle I ofthe CAA delineates the general requirements for a SIP, which include enforceable emissions limitations and other control measures, means, or techniques, provisions for the establishment and operation ofappropriate devices necessary to collect data on ambient air quality, and programs to enforce the limitations. General SIP elements and requirements are delineated in section 110(a)(2) oftitle I, part A ofthe CAA. These requirements include, but are not limited to, the following: submittal ofa SIP that has been adopted by the state after reasonable public notice and hearing; provisions for establishment and operation ofappropriate procedures needed to monitor ambient air quality; implementation ofa source permitprogram; provisions for the implementation ofpart C requirements (Prevention ofSignificantDeterioration (PSD)) and provisions for the implementation ofpart D requirements (NSR permitprograms); provisions for air pollution modeling; and provisions for public and local agency participation in plarming and emission control rule development. Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs contain certain measures to prevent sources in a state from significantly contributing to air quality problems in another state. To implement this provision, EPA has required certain states to establishprograms to address the transport ofair pollutants (NOx SIP Call, Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)). The section 110(a)(2)(D)
17requirements for a state are not linked with a particular nonattainment area's designation and classification in that state. EPA believes that the requirements linked with aparticular nonattainment area's designation and classifications are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. The transport SIP submittal requirements, where applicable, continue to apply to a state regardless ofthe designation ofanyone particular areain the state. Thus, we do not believe that the CAA's interstate transportrequirements shouldbe construed to be applicable requirements for purposes ofredesignation. In addition, EPA believes that the other section 110 elements not connected with nonattainmentplan submissions and not linked with an area's attainment status are not applicable requirements for purposes ofredesignation. The area will still be subject to these requirements after the area is redesignated. The section 110 and part D requirements that are linked with aparticular area's designation and classification are the relevant measures to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation request. This approach is consistent with EPA's existing policy on applicability (i.e., for redesignations) ofconformity and oxygenated fuels requirements, as well as with section 184 ozone transportrequirements. See, Reading, Pennsylvania, proposed and final rulemakings (61 FR 53174-53176, October 10, 1996), (62 FR 24826, May 7, 1997); Cleveland-Akron-Loraine, Ohio, final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7, 1996); and Tampa, Florida, final rulemaking at (60 FR 62748, December 7,1995). See also, the discussion on this issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19,2000), and in the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvaniaredesignation (66 FR 50399, October 19,2001). EPA believes that section 110 elements not linked to the area's nonattainment status are not applicable forpurposes ofredesignation. Therefore, as discussed above, for purposes of redesignation, they are not considered applicable requirements. We have reviewed the Arkansas 18SIP and have concluded it meets the general requirements ofsection 110, to the extent that these are applicable for redesignation. EPA has previously approved provisions in the Arkansas SIP addressing section 110 elements under the I-hour ozone NAAQS (See, 40 CFR 

### § 52.172). In a letter to EPA dated March 28, 2008, the State set forth its belief that the existing SIP is also sufficient to meet the CAA 110(a)(2) requirements for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. EPA has not yet approved this submission, but such approval is not necessary for purposes of redesignation.

PartD requirements. EPA has also determined thatthe Arkansas SIP meets applicable SIP requirements under part D ofthe CAA. Sections 172-176 ofthe CAA, found in subpart 1 of part 

### D, set forth the basic nonattainmentrequirements applicable to all nonattainment areas. Section 182 ofthe CAA, found in subpart 2 ofpart 

### D,establishes additional specific requirements depending on the area's nonattainment classification and applies to the Memphis TN-AR area. As discussed in Section II, Crittenden County was classified as marginal, and then reclassified to moderate. In the reclassification, EPA required that the necessary SIP revisions for the new moderate area requirements be submittedby both Tennessee and Arkansas as expeditiously as practicable, but no later than March 1, 2009. The request for redesignation was submitted by Arkansas on February 24, 2009, prior to the date thatthe moderate area requirements came due. Thus, for purposes of redesignation, only the marginal area requirements under Part 

### D, subpart 2 are applicable to Crittenden County. A SIP revision submitted to EPA by the State ofArkansas on November 19, 2007 satisfied the marginal arearequirements set forth in section 182(a)(1). This submittal consisted
19ofan emissions inventory for the year 2002 containing NOx, VOC and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions as precursors to ozone formation, as well as a revision to State Regulation 19, Chapter 7 (Sampling, Monitoring, and Reporting Requirements), to require emissions statements. EPA approved this SIP revision on January 15,2009 (74 FR 2383). Requirements set forth in sections 182(a)(2)(A) (Reasonably Available Control Technology Corrections) and I82(a)(2)(B) (Savings Clause for Vehicle Inspection and Maintenance) are not applicable to Crittenden County due to its status ofattainment ofthe I-hour ozone standard. Requirements set forth in section I 82(a)(2)(C) (Permit Programs) are discussed in the NSR Requirements section ofthis notice. In addition to the fact that only the marginal classificationpart D requirements became due prior to submission ofthe redesignation request and therefore are applicable for purposes of redesignation, EPA believes it is reasonable to interpret the conformity requirements as not requiring approval prior to redesignation. Section 176 Conformity Requirements. Section I76(c) oftheCAArequires states to establish criteria and procedures to ensure that federally supported or funded projects conformto the air quality planning goals in the applicable SIP. The requirementto determine conformity applies to transportation plans, programs and projects developed, funded or approved undertitle 23 ofthe United States Code (U.S.C.) and the Federal TransitAct (transportation conformity) as well as to all other federally supported or funded projects (general conformity). State conformity revisions must be consistent with federal conformity regulations relating to consultation, enforcement and enforceability that the CAA required the EPA to promulgate. EPA believes 

### it is reasonable to interpretthe conformity SIP requirements as not applying for purposes ofevaluating the redesignation request under section I 07(d) because state conformity rules are still required after redesignation and Federal conformity rules apply where 20state rules have not been approved. See, Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 426, 438-40 (6th Cir. 2001) (upholding this interpretation). See also, 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995, Tampa, Florida). Although Crittenden County does not currently have fully approved conformity rules, a Memorandum ofAgreement outlining interagency consultation procedures is in place for transportation conformity purposes. NSR Requirements. Arkansas' permitting requirements for major sources in or impacting upon nonattainment areas are set forth in "RegulationNo. 31 - NonattainmentNew Source Review Requirements." On July 3, 2006, Arkansas submitted RegulationNo. 31 to address the marginal Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) permitting requirements in Crittenden County, and EPA approved the submittal on April 12, 2007 (72 FR 18394). This regulation applies to the construction and modification ofany major stationary source ofair pollution in a nonattainment area, as required by part D ofTitle I ofthe Act. Regulation No. 31 also includes provisions that implement EPA's designation ofCrittenden County as an Economic Development Zone (EDZ) subjectto the requirements ofSection I73(a)(1)(B) ofthe Act. These provisions establish VOC and NOx emissions caps and provide for the Director ofADEQ to grant growth allowances to affected sources in lieu ofmeeting the NNSR offsetrequirement. Arkansas has maintained that sources locating to the Memphis area will continue to undergo new
source review requirements and existing source control will continue under the NNSRlEDZ program until Crittenden County is redesignated to attainment. Upon redesignation, however, the identification ofCrittenden County as a section 173 EDZ expires under federal law. The rules that apply for the 1997 8-hour ozone standard after redesignation would be those contained in the Prevention ofSignificant Deterioration (PSD) SIP
21program. The State must reapply for EDZ status should Crittenden County be designated nonattainmentunder arevised 8-hour primary ozone standard. In any event, EPA notes that fully approved NSR is not required for redesignation to attainment as long as PSD applies after redesignation, and the area has shown it can attain and maintain without nonattainmentNSR. EPA has also determined that areas being redesignated need not comply with the requirement that a nonattainmentNSR program be approved priorto redesignation, provided that the area demonstrates maintenance ofthe standard without a part D NSRprogram in effect since PSD requirements will apply after redesignation. The 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 (Part D NSR) Requirements for Areas Requesting Redesignation to Attainment." Arkansas in its submittal for Crittenden County showed that sources locating to the Crittenden area will be subjectto PSD requirements and has demonstrated that Crittenden County will be able to maintain the standard without a part D nonattainmentNSR program in effect. Therefore, Arkansas need not have a fully approved part D NSR programprior to approval ofthe redesignation request. Arkansas's PSD program will become effective in Crittenden County upon redesignation to attainment. See, rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60 FR 12467-12468, March 7,1995); Cleveland-Akron-Lorraine, Ohio (61 FR 20458,20469-70, May 7,1996); Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665, October23,2001); Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 FR 31834-31837, June 21,1996): Thus, EPA believes that Crittenden County, Arkansas has satisfied all applicable requirements for purposes ofredesignation under section 110 and part D ofthe CAA.

22

### b. Crittenden County, Arkansas has afully approved applicable SIP under section 110(k) of the CAA. EPA has fully approved the applicable Arkansas SIP for Crittenden County, under section 110(k) ofthe CAA for all requirements applicable for purposes ofredesignation. EPA . may rely on prior SIP approvals in approving a redesignation request (see Calcagni

Memorandum at p. 3; Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989-90 (6th Cir. 1998); Wall, 265 F.3d 426, at 438) plus any additional measures it may approve in conjunctionwith aredesignation action. See, 68 FR 25426 (May 12,2003) and citations therein.As indicated above, EPA believes that the section 110 elements not connected with nonattainment plan submissions and not linked to the area's nonattainment status are not applicable requirements for purposes ofredesignation. EPA also believes that since the moderate areapart 

### 0 requirements applicable for purposes ofredesignation did not become due prior to submission ofthe redesignation request, they also are not applicable requirements for purposes ofredesignation. As set forth above, the area has met all other applicable requirements for purposes ofredesignation under its prior marginal classification.



### Criteria (3) - The airquality improvementin the Memphis TN-AR 19978-hour OzoneArea is due topermanentandenforceable reductions in emissions resultingfrom implementation of the SIPandapplicablefederal airpollution control regulations andotherpermanentand enforceable reductions.

23EPA believes that Arkansas has demonstrated that the observed air quality improvement in the Memphis-Crittenden County Nonattainment Area is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions resulting from implementation ofthe SIP, federal measures, and other state adopted measures. Additionally, new emissions control programs for fuels and motor vehicles will help ensure a continued decrease in emissions throughout the region. Because Crittenden County is Itselflargely rural in nature, measured reductions in ozone concentrations in and around Crittenden County are largely attributable to permanent and enforceable reductions from emission sources ofVOCs and NOx in the Memphis area. There
were reductions in Crittenen County. Table 3 summarizes several ofthe measures adopted that resulted in emissions reductions in Crittenden County.
Table 3. Crittenden County Emission Reductions Programs

. Mobile Sources o Tier 2 Fuel and Vehicle Emission Standards o Federal Motor Vehicle Controll'rc)gr:a lll o Duty Diesel Rule (2007)-lighway Rule) State and Local Measures o I. "-..-'" Keco1very o Proform LLC air voided o ClBA Corporation reclassified to minor source, MACT standard modifications o Diesel Emissions Reduction Act - received State Clean Diesel Grant in October 2008 o Retrofit ofcity and county (21 on-road, 12non-road trucks) w/diesel oxidation CHtHlvsr o Retrofit of50 school buses w/dicsel oxidation

# C~i:~i~;~f

# •••••••••••••••••• o Retrofit of 12refuse trucks w/diesel oxidationc o 196 CaliforniaAir Resources Board certified gas cans exchanged in Crittenden County o Truck stop electrification (equipped 65 parking spaces in Crittenden

24Emissionreductions in Shelby County as a result offederal motor vehicle controls from 2002 to 2006 are estimated to be 7 tons per day ofVOCs and 28 tons per day ofNOx. Additionally, continuing new emissions control programs will help to ensure a further decrease in emissions throughoutthe area in the future. Crittenden County is expected to receive upwind benefits in emissionreductions. Regarding point source emissions, the Tennessee Valley Authority's (TVA) Allen Steam Plant located in Shelby County operates three coal-fired boilers. As a result ofEPA's "Finding ofSignificant Contribution and Rulemaking for Certain States in the Ozone Transport Assessment Group Region for Purposes ofReducing Region Transport ofOzone" (NOx SIP Call), TVA began operation oftwo selective catalytic reduction (SCR) control units during the 2002 ozone control season, May 

### l" through September 30th• The third SCR began operating in 2003. Ozone season daily NOx reductions in the area as a result ofthese controls equal approximately 45 tons per day. These are substantial reductions when compared to the remaining total NOx inventory from all sources in Shelby and Crittenden counties in 2006 ofI 16.81 tons per day (99.09 tons per day in Shelby county and 17.72 tons per day in Crittenden county) and a VOC inventory of 128.67 tons per day (99.11 tons per day in Shelby county and 29.56 tons per day in Crittenden county). Because ofthe uncertainty introduced by the recent court actions affecting the CAIR Rule and NOx SIP Call, EPA undertook an analysis ofthe changes inNOx expected across a broader region. In particular, EPA reviewed available projections ofNOx emissions from nearby states from 2002 to 2018. These values are presented in Tables 4 and 5:
25Table 4. 2002 Base Annual Emission Inventory Summary for NOx * States EGU Non-EGU Non- Area Mobile Fires Total Point Point Road AR 24,722 47,698 62,472 21,700 141,894 5,492 303,978 

### KY 201,928 38,434 104,571 39,507 156,417 534 541,391 LA 111,703 199,218 114,711 93,Q69 180,664 6,942 706,307 MS 40,433 61,533 88,787 4,200 111,914 308 307175 MO 145,438 36,144 99,306 32,435 189,852 2,442 505,617 TN 152,137 64,344 96,827 17,844 238,577 217 569,946 Total 676,361 447,371 566,674 208,755 1,019,318 15,935 2,934,414 *From Tennessee Regional Haze SIP, Appendix D, page D.3-5 and supporttable for Technical Support Document for CENRAP Emissions and Air Quality Modeling to Support Regional Haze State Implementation Plans, page 2-40, figure 2-4
Table 5. 2018 Base Annual Emission Inventory Summary for NOx* States EGU Non-EGU Non- Area Mobile Fires Total Point Point Road AR 34,938 36,169 34,305 25,672 33,640 5,600 170,324 

### KY 64,378 41,034 79,392 44,346 52,263 714 282,127 LA 44,485 225,748 106,685 114,374 44,806 6,969 543,067 MS 21,535 61,252 68,252 4,483 30,619 1,073 187,214 MO 83,181 51,489 59,625 35,213 50,861 2,442 282,811 TN 31,715- 62,519 70,226 19,597 69,385 405 253,847 Total 280,232 478,211 418,485 243,685 281,574 17,203 1,708,390
26*From Tennessee Regional Haze SIP, Appendix D, page D.3-5 and support table for Technical Support Document for CENRAP Emissions and Air Quality Modeling to SupportRegional Haze State Implementation Plans, page 2-40, figure 2-4
From 2002 to 2018 NOx emissions are projectedto decrease in the region by 1,215,024 tons/year or 41.4 percent in all. EGU NOx anticipated decreases due to CAIR and the NOx SIP call were projectedto be 198,150 tons per year. However, the largest source in this region remains the motor vehicle sector, which is projectedto decrease 737,744 tons per year. Hence even without EGU controls on NOx emissions, total NOx emissions are projected to continually decrease throughoutthe maintenance period. As is noted in the following paragraph, the NOx SIP Call will remain in effect. The NOx SIP Call requires states to make significant, specific emissions reductions. It also provided a mechanism, the NOx Budget Trading Program, which states could use to achieve those reductions. When EPA promulgated CAIR, it discontinued (starting in 2009) the NOx Budget Trading Program, 40 CFR 51.121(r), but created anothermechanism -the CAIR ozone
season trading program - which states could use to meet their SIP Call obligations, 70 FR 25289-90. EPA notes that a number ofstates, when submitting SIP revisions to require sources to participate in the CAIR ozone season trading program, removed the SIP provisions that required sources to participate in the NOx Budget Trading Program. In addition, because the provisions ofCAIR including the ozone season NOx trading programremain in place during the remand 

### (North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 1176 (DC Cir. Dec. 23, 2008», EPA is not currently administering the NOx BudgetTrading Program. Nonetheless, all states regardless ofthe current status oftheir regulations thatpreviously required participation in the NOx Budget Trading Program, will remain subjectto all ofthe requirements in the NOx SIP Call even ifthe existing 27CAIR ozone season trading program is withdrawn or altered. In addition, the anti-backsliding provisions of40 CFR 51.905(f) specifically provide that the provisions ofthe NOx SIP Call, including the statewide NOx emissionbudgets, continue to apply after revocation of the I-hr standard. All NOx SIP Call states have SIPs that currently satisfy their obligations underthe SIP Call, the SIP Call reduction requirements are being met, and EPA will continue to enforce the requirements ofthe NOx SIP Call even after any response to the CAIRremand. For these reasons, EPA believes that regardless ofthe status ofthe CAIR program, the NOx SIP call requirements can be relied upon in demonstrating maintenance. Thus, the NOx SIP call adds to
assurances that the area will remain in attainment. These regional projections ofemissions data have been prepared only through 2018. However, since motor vehicle and offroad emissions continue to decrease long after a rule is adopted as the engine population is gradually replaced by newer engines, it is reasonable to assume that this projected decrease in regional NOx emissions from mobile and non road sources should continue through 2020 and assure that ozone in the Memphis region will continue to decline throughoutthe 10 year maintenance period. Hence we believe the projected regional NOx reductions are adequate to assure that the Memphis region will continue demonstrating maintenance throughout the 10 year maintenance period.



### Criteria (4) - 

### The area has afully approvedmaintenanceplanpursuantto section 175A of the 

### CM. In conjunction with its requestto redesignate Crittenden County, Arkansas (as part ofthe Memphis TN-AR 1997 8-hour ozone nonattainment area) to attainment, Arkansas submitted a 28SIP revision to provide for the maintenance ofthe 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS for at least 10 years after the effective date ofredesignation to attainment.


### a. What is required in a maintenance plan? Section l75A ofthe CAA sets forth the elements ofa maintenance plan for areas seeking ! redesignation from nonattainmentto attainment. Under section l75A, the plan must demonstrate continued attainment ofthe applicable NAAQS for at least 10 years after the Administrator approves aredesignation to attainment. Eight years after the redesignation, the State ofArkansas must submit a revised maintenance plan, which demonstrates that attainment will continue to be maintained for the 10 years following the initial 1O-yearperiod. To address the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance plan must contain such contingency measures, with a schedule for implementation as EPA deems necessary to assure prompt correction ofany future 8-hour ozone violations. Section l75A ofthe CAA sets forth the elements ofa maintenance plan for areas seeking redesignation from nonattainmentto attainment. The Calcagni Memorandum provides additional guidance on the content ofa maintenance plan. The Calcagni Memorandum explains that an ozone maintenance plan should address five requirements: the attainment emissions inventory, maintenance demonstration, monitoring, verification ofcontinued attainment, and a contingency plan. As is discussed more fully below, Arkansas' maintenance plan includes all the necessary components and is approvable as part ofthe redesignation request.



### b. AttainmentEmissions Inventory 

### 29

### In coordination with Shelby County, Tennessee, Arkansas selected 2006 "the attainment year" for the purposes ofdemonstrating attainment ofthe 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. This attainment inventory identifies the level ofemissions in the area, which is sufficientto attain the 1997 8-hour ozone standard. Arkansas began development ofthis attainment inventory by first developing a baseline emissions inventory for the Memphis area. The year 2006 was chosen as the base year for developing a comprehensive ozone precursor emissions inventory for which projected emissions could be developed for 2009, 2012, 2015, 2017, 2018 and 2021. The projected inventory estimates emissions forward to 2021, which is beyond the 10-yearinterval required in Section 175(A) ofthe CAA. Non-road mobile emissions estimates were based on the EPA's NONROAD2005 model. On-road mobile source emissions were calculated using EPA's MOBILE6.2 emission factors model. The 2006 VOC and NOx emissions, as well as the emissions for other years, for Crittenden County were developed consistent with EPA guidance, and are summarized in Tables 6 and 7 in the following subsection.

c. Maintenance Demonstration The February 24, 2009 final submittal includes a maintenance plan for Crittenden County. This demonstration: (i) Shows compliance and maintenance ofthe 1997 8-hour ozone standard by providing information to supportthe demonstration that current and future emissions ofVOC and NOx remain at or below attainment year 2006 emissions levels. The year 2006 was chosen as the attainment year because it is one ofthe most recent three years (i.e., 2006, 2007, and 2008) for which Crittenden County has clean air quality data for the 19978- hour ozone standard. 30(ii) Uses 2006 as the attainment year and includes future emission inventory projections for 2009, 2012, 2015, 2017, 2018, and 2021. (iii) Identifies an "out year," at least 10 years (and beyond) after the time necessary for EPA to review and approve the maintenance plan. Per 40 CFR part 93, state NOx and VOC MVEBs were established for the last year (2021) ofthe maintenance plan. Additionally, Arkansas chose, through interagency consultation, to establish MVEBs for the year 2006 for NOx and VOC. EPA has already notified the public ofits adequacy determination for these 2006 and 2021 MVEBs pursuantto 40 CFR 93.118(f)(1) (74 FR 21356). (iv) Provides the following actual and projected emissions inventories, in tons per day (tpd) for Crittenden County, Arkansas. See, Tables 6 and 7.
Table 6. Crittenden County VOC Emissions (Summer season tons er day) Source Category 2006 2009 2012 2015 2017 2018 2021 Point 2.13 2.17 2.27 2.36 2.43 2.47 2.62 Area 21.32 21.30 21.49 21.68 21.80 21.89 22.14 On-road" 3.12 2.63 2.30 1.97 1.75 1.68 1.50 Non-road** 2.99 2.85 2.60 2.36 2.19 2.14 1.97

. Total 29.56 28.94 28.65 28.36 28.17 28.18 28.23 *Calculated using MOBILE 6.2 **Calculated using NONROAD2005c
Table 7. Crittenden County Area NOx Emissions (summer season tons per day) I Source 2006 2009 2012 2015 2017 2018 2021 

### Cateaorv Point 1.09 1.15 1.22 1.29 1.34 1.37 1.45 Area 0.90 0.90 0.91 0.91 0.92 0.92 0.93 31On-road* 6.27 5.13 4.12 3.12 2.45 2.30 1.84 Non-road** 9.46 9.38 9.10 8.82 8.63 8.39 7.66 Total 17.72 16.56 15.35 14.14 13.34 12.97 11.88 *Calculatedusmg MOBILE 6.2 **Calculatedusing NONROAD2005c
Although the Arkansas SIP submissionprovided NOx and VOC emissions for the attainment and future years for Crittenden County, EPA has considered emissions for the entire Memphis TN-AR area for demonstration ofmaintenance. Maintenance is demonstrated ifthe future year NOx and VOC emission for the entire area remains at or below the level ofthe attainment year emissions. Both Tennessee and Arkansas chose 2006 for their "attainment year" for this area. It is important to note that this area is composed oftwo counties (Shelby County, Tennessee and Crittenden County, Arkansas) for which emissions should be considered. The area and point sources for both counties indicate a steady NOx and VOC emission increase. However, large projectedreductions in mobile source emissions more than compensate for this relatively small increase. Moreover, EPA's review ofthe entire area's total inventory for NOx and VOCs indicate that future total area emissions are below the level ofthe total area attainment year emissions. Therefore, EPA believes that the 1997 8-hour ozone standard will be maintained in the future for the Memphis TN-AR area.


### d Monitoring Network There are currently three monitors measuring ozone in the Memphis TN-ARArea (two in Shelby County, Tennessee and one in Crittenden County, Arkansas). ADEQ has committed, in

32the maintenance plan, to continue operation ofthe monitor in Crittenden County in compliance with 40 CFR part 58, and has addressed the requirementfor monitoring.
e. Verification of ContinuedAttainment Arkansas has the legal authority to enforce and implementthe requirements ofthe ozone maintenance plan. This includes the authority to adopt, implement and enforce any subsequent emissions control contingency measures determined to be necessary to correct future ozone attainmentproblems. Arkansas will track the progress ofthe maintenance plan by performing future reviews of triennial emissions inventory for Crittenden County using the latest emissions factors, models and methodologies. For these periodic inventories, Crittenden County will review the assumptions made for the purpose ofthe maintenance demonstration concerning projected growth ofactivity levels. Ifany ofthese assumptions appear to have changed substantially, Arkansas will re-project emissions.


## f ContingencyPlan. The contingencyplan provisions are designed to promptly correct a violation ofthe NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. Section l75A ofthe CAA requires that a maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems necessary to assure that the state will promptly correct a violation ofthe NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The maintenance plan should identify the contingency measures to be adopted, a schedule and procedure for adoption and implementation, and a time limit for action by the state. A state should also
33identify specific indicators to be used to determine when the contingency measures need to be implemented. The maintenance plan must include a requirement that a state will implement all
measures with respect to control ofthe pollutantthat were contained in the SIP before redesignation ofthe area to attainment in accordance with section 175A(d). In the February 24, 2009, submittal, Arkansas affirms that all programs instituted by the State and EPA will remain enforceable, and that sources are prohibited from reducing emissions controls following the redesignation ofthe area. The contingency plan included in the submittal provides a two-phase approach to tracking and triggering mechanisms to determine when contingency measures are needed and aprocess ofdeveloping and adopting appropriate control
measures.

Phase I

- Potential increases in local emissions specifically, when the certifiedtriennial emissions inventory for VOCs or NOx exceedthe 2006 baseyear attainment inventory by ten percentor more andat leastone documentation of an exceedance of the 

### 1997 ozone NAAQSat any nonattainmentmonitor in the area basedon certifieddata during the most recentmonitoring
season. In the eventthis occurs, ADEQ will conduct an investigation into the cause to determine ifthe data are due to reporting errors or a non-recurring variance in the local emission profile. The investigation will be coordinated with the Memphis/Shelby County Health Department and the State ofTennessee as appropriate. Ifthe investigationreveals the data are valid, ADEQ will expand voluntary programs and develop regulations to address the concerns. All regulatory programs will be implemented within 24 months and include a selection ofmeasures shown in Table 8. 34PhaseII

- Addresses a monitoredviolation of the 

### 1997 ozone'NAAQS in the nonattainmentarea according to certifieddata during the most recentmonitoringseason. In the eventthis occurs, ADEQ will conduct an investigationto determine ifthe cause of . the violation can be attributed to errors or clearly identifiable exceptional events outside oflocal

control. ADEQ will solicitthe involvement ofall State agencies havingjurisdiction in the surrounding area. Ifthe investigation reveals the data are valid, provisions will be adopted and implemented within 24 months ofthe monitored violation and include a selection ofmeasures shown in Table 8. Table 8. Crittenden County Contingency Measure Options

• Reasonable Available Control Technology (RACT) for VOC and NOx sources • Anti-idling ordinances
• Open burning restrictions during peak ozone season (May

- September) • Diesel retrofit/replacement initiatives • Programs orincentives todecrease motor vehicle use
• Trip reduction ordinances
• Implementation ofa program to require additional emissions reductions from stationary sources
• Implementation ofa program to enhance inspection ofstationary sources to ensure emissions control equipment is functioning pronerlv
• Implementation offuel programs, including incentives for alternative fuels
• Employer-based transportation management plans, including incentives • Programs to limitorrestrict vehicleuse indowntown areas, orother areas ofhigh emissions concentration, particularly during periods ofpeak use
• Programs for new construction and major reconstruction ofpaths for use by pedestrians or by nonmotorized vehicles when economically feasible and in the public interest
• Other currently unspecified control measures that might prove to be advantageous

EPA believes that the maintenance plan adequately addresses the five basic components ofa maintenance plan: attainment inventory, maintenance demonstration, monitoring network, verification ofcontinued attainment, and a contingency plan. The maintenance plan SIP revision submittedby Arkansas meets the requirements ofsection l75A ofthe CM and is approvable.
35VII. What is EPA's Analysis ofArkansas' Proposed State NO, and VOC MVEBs for Crittenden County, Arkansas? Under the CAA, states are required to submit, at various times, control strategy SIPs aod maintenaoce plans in ozone areas. These control strategy SIPs (reasonable further progress aod attainment demonstration) and maintenaoce plaos create MVEBs for criteriapollutaots aod/or theirprecursors to address pollution from cars aod trucks. Per 40 CFRpart 93, ao MVEB is established for the last year ofthe maintenance plan. A state may adopt MVEBs for other years as well. The MVEB is the portion ofthe total allowable emissions in the maintenaoce demonstration that is allocated to highway aod transit vehicle use aod emissions. See 40 CFR 93.101. The MVEB serves as a ceiling on emissions from ao area's planned traosportation system. The MVEB concept is further explained in the preamble to the November 24, 1993, transportation conformity rule (58 FR 62188). The preamble also describes how to establish the MVEB in the SIP and how to revise the MVEB. After interagency consultation with the traosportation partners for Crittenden County, Arkaosas has elected to develop state MVEBs for VOC aod NOx. Arkaosas has developed these MVEBs, as required, for the last year ofthe Crittenden County maintenaoce plao, 2021, and a base year of2006. The NOxaod VOC state MVEBs for Crittenden County are defined in Table 9 below. Table 9. CRITTENDEN COUNTY NOx AND VOC MVEBs (Summer season tons per day) 2006 2021 NO, 6.27 1.84 VOC 2.95 1.39

36.Through this rulemaking, EPA is proposing to fully approve the 2006 and 2021 MVEBs for VOC and NO, for Crittenden County into the SIP because EPA has determined that the area maintains the 1997 8-hour ozone standard with the emissions at the levels ofthe budgets. EPA has already made a finding ofadequacy for these MVEBs (74 FR 21356), and they must be used for future conformity determinations.

VIII. What Is the Status ofEPA's Adequacy Determination for the Proposed State NO, and VOC MVEBs for the years 2006 and 2021 for Crittenden County, Arkansas? Under section 176(c) ofthe CAA, new transportation projects, such as the construction of new highways, must "conform" to (i.e., be consistent with) the part ofthe state's air quality plan that addresses pollution from cars and trucks. "Conformity" to the SIP means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment ofthe NAAQS. Ifa transportation plan does not "conform," most new projects that would expand the capacity ofroadways cannot go forward. Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth EPA policy, criteria, and procedures for demonstrating and assuring conformity ofsuch transportation activities to a SIP. The regional emissions analysis is one, but not the only, requirement for implementing transportation conformity. Transportation conformity is a requirement for nonattainment and maintenance areas. Maintenance areas are areas that were previously nonattainment for a particularNAAQS but have since been redesignated to attainment with a maintenance plan for that NAAQS. When reviewing submitted "control strategy" SIPs or maintenance plans containing

37MVEBs, EPA may affirmatively find the MVEB contained therein "adequate" for use in determining transportation conformity. Once EPA affirmatively finds the submitted MVEB is adequate for transportation conformity purposes, that MVEB must be used by state and Federal agencies in determining whether proposed transportationprojects "conform" to the SIP as required by section I76(c) ofthe CAA. EPA's substantive criteria for determining "adequacy" ofan MVEB are set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). The process for determining "adequacy" consists ofthree basic steps: public notification ofa SIP submission, a public commentperiod, and EPA's adequacy finding. This process for determining the adequacy ofsubmitted SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in EPA's May 14, 1999, guidance, "Conformity Guidance on Implementation ofMarch 2, 1999, Conformity Court Decision." This guidance was finalized in the Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for the "New 8.Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National AmbientAir Quality Standards and Miscellaneous Revisions for Existing Areas; transportation conformity rule 

### amendments- Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Change," on July 

### I, 2004 (69 FR 40004). Additional information on the adequacy process for MVEBs is available in the proposed rule entitled, "Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments: Response to Court Decision and AdditionalRule Changes," 68 FR 38974,38984 (June 30, 2003). As discussed earlier, Arkansas' maintenance plan submission includes VOC and NOx state MVEBs for Crittenden County for the years 2006 and 2021. EPA reviewed both the VOCs and NOx state MVEBs through the adequacy process. The Arkansas SIP submission, including the Crittenden County VOC and NOx MVEBs was open for public comment on EPA's adequacy Web site on March 11,2009, found at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/siateresources/transcontlcurrsips.htm. The EPA public comment 38period on adequacy ofthe 2006 and 2021 VOC and NOx state MVEBs for Crittenden County, Arkansas closed on April 10, 2009. EPA did not receive any comments on the adequacy ofthe MVEBs, nor did EPA receive any requests for the SIP submittal. On May 7,2009, EPA made a finding ofadequacy for the MVEBs included in this 8-honr ozone maintenance plan. EPA provided a separate adequacy posting for the MVEBs in association with Shelby County, Tennessee. The status ofthe adequacy process for the Shelby County MVEBs is discussed in EPA's separate action related to Shelby County (74 FR 58277). The new MVEBs for VOC and NOxmust be used for futnre transportation conformity determinations. For required regional emissions analysis years that involve the years 2006 through 2020, the applicable budgets for the purposes ofconducting transportation conformity will be the new 2006 MVEBs; for required regional emissions analysis years that involve 2021
or beyond, the applicable budgets will be the new 2021 MVEBs. The 2006 and 2021 MVEBs
are defined in section VII ofthis proposed rulemaking.



### IX. Proposed Action on the Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan SIP Revision Including Proposed Approval of the 2006 and 2021 State NOx and VOC MVEBs for Crittenden County, Arkansas. EPA is proposing to make the determination that Crittenden County, Arkansas has met the criteria for redesignation from nonattainment to attainment for the 1997 8-honr ozone NAAQS. Further, EPA is proposing to approve Arkansas' February 24, 2009, SIP submittal including the redesignation request for Crittenden County, Arkansas (as part ofthe Memphis TN-AR 1997 8-honr ozone area). EPA's action with respect to the redesignation request for the
39Shelby County portion ofthe 1997 8-hour ozone area was proposed in a separate rulemaking (74 FR 59943). EPA believes that the redesignation request and complete quality-assured monitoring data demonstrate that the Memphis TN-AR area has attained, and will continue to maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, and that the Crittenden County portion ofthe area has met the other requirementsfor redesignation to attainmentunder CAA sections I07(d)(3)(E) and 175A. EPA is also proposing to approve the maintenance plan for Crittenden County included
. as part ofthe February 24, 2009, SIP revision, including state NOx and VOC MVEBs for 2006 and 2021. EPA has already made a finding ofadequacy for the MVEBs included in this 8-hour
ozone maintenance plan (74 FR 21356). EPA believes that the redesignation request and maintenance plan meet the requirements of CAA sections I 07{d)(3)(E) and 175A.



# x. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October4,1993), this proposed action is not a "significantregulatory action" and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, "Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly AffectEnergy Supply, Distribution, or Use" (66 FR 28355, May 22,2001). This proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyondthose imposed by state law. Redesignation ofan area to attainment under section 107(d)(3)(e) ofthe CAA does not impose any new requirements on small entities. Redesignation is an action that affects the status ofa geographical area and does not impose any new regulatory requirements on
40sources. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number ofsmall entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), Because this rule proposes to approve pre-existing**requirem~nts** 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 (Public Law 104-4). This proposed 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 ofpower and responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 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 ofpower and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely affects the status ofa geographical area, does not impose any new requirements on sources, or allow a state to avoid adopting or implementing other requirements and does not alter the relationship or the distribution ofpower and responsibilities established in the CAA. This proposed rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 "Protection ofChildren from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks" (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); because it is not economically significant and because the Agency does not have reason to believe that the rule
concerns an environmental health risk or safety risk that may disproportionately affect children.
41In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, providedthat they meet the criteria ofthe CAA. In this context, in the absence ofa prior existing requirement for the State to use voluntary consensus standards (YCS), EPA has no authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It would thus beinconsistentwith applicable law for EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission; to use VCS in place ofa SIP submission that otherwise satisfies the provisions ofthe CAA. Redesignation is an action that affects the status ofa geographical area but does not impose any new requirements on sources. Thus, the requirements ofsection 12(d) ofthe National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of1995 (15 U,S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This proposedrule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions ofthe Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.),

42Al Armendariz List of Subjects: 40 CFR Part 52 Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental relations, Incorporation by reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.
40 CFR Part 81 Environmental protection, Air pollution control.
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Regional Administrator, Region 6

43