Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 41735 

as appropriate, disproportionately high 

and adverse human health or 

environmental effects of their programs, 

policies, and activities on minority 

populations and low-income 

populations in the United States. 

EPA has determined that this 

proposed rule, if finalized, will not have 

disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects 

on minority or low-income populations 

because it does not affect the level of 

protection provided to human health or 

the environment. This proposed rule 

does not change any applicable 

emission limit for FCPP. This proposed 

rule merely extends a notification date 

by six months. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 49 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Indians, 

Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen 

Dioxide. 

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

Dated: June 25, 2013. 

Alexis Strauss, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 9. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, Title 40, chapter I of the Code 

of Federal Regulations is proposed to be 

amended as follows: 

PART 49—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 49 

continues to read as follows: 

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

■ 2. In § 49.5512, revise paragraph (i)(4) 

to read as follows: 

§ 49.5512 Federal Implementation Plan 

Provisions for Four Corners Power Plant, 

Navajo Nation. 

* * * * * 

(i) * * * 

(4) By January 1, 2013, the owner or 

operator shall submit a letter to the 

Regional Administrator updating EPA of 

the status of lease negotiations and 

regulatory approvals required to comply 

with paragraph (i)(3) of this section. By 

December 31, 2013, the owner or 

operator shall notify the Regional 

Administrator by letter whether it will 

comply with paragraph (i)(2) of this 

section or whether it will comply with 

paragraph (i)(3) of this section and shall 

submit a plan and time table for 

compliance with either paragraph (i)(2) 

or (3) of this section. The owner or 

operator shall amend and submit this 

amended plan to the Regional 

Administrator as changes occur. 

* * * * * 

[FR Doc. 2013–16078 Filed 7–10–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0698; FRL–9831–8] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana; 

Redesignation of the Indiana Portion of 

the Louisville Area to Attainment of the 

1997 Annual Standard for Fine 

Particulate Matter 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: On June 16, 2011, the Indiana 

Department of Environmental 

Management (IDEM) submitted a 

request for EPA to approve the 

redesignation of the Indiana portion of 

the Louisville (KY–IN) (Madison 

Township, Jefferson County and Clark 

and Floyd Counties) nonattainment area 

to attainment of the 1997 annual 

standard for fine particulate matter 

(PM2.5). EPA is proposing to determine 

that the entire Louisville area has 

attained the 1997 annual PM2.5

standard, based on the most recent three 

years of certified air quality data. EPA 

is proposing to approve, as revisions to 

the Indiana state implementation plan 

(SIP), the state’s plan for maintaining 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 National Ambient 

Air Quality Standard (NAAQS or 

standard) through 2025 in the area. EPA 

is proposing to approve the 2008 

emissions inventory for the Indiana 

portion of the Louisville area as meeting 

the comprehensive emissions inventory 

requirement of the Clean Air Act (CAA 

or Act). Indiana’s maintenance plan 

submission includes motor vehicle 

emission budgets (MVEBs) for the 

mobile source contribution of PM2.5 and 

nitrogen oxides (NOX) in the Louisville 

area for transportation conformity 

purposes; EPA is proposing to approve 

the MVEBs for 2015 and 2025 into the 

Indiana SIP for transportation 

conformity purposes. In this proposal, 

EPA is also proposing to approve a 

supplement to the emission inventories 

previously submitted by the state. EPA 

is proposing that the inventories for 

ammonia and volatile organic 

compounds (VOC), in conjunction with 

the inventories for NOX, direct PM2.5,

and sulfur dioxide (SO2) that EPA 

previously proposed to approve, meet 

the comprehensive emissions inventory 

requirement of the CAA. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 12, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2011–0698, by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: blakley.pamela@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (312) 692–2450. 

4. Mail: Pamela Blakley, Chief, 

Control Strategies Section (AR–18J), 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, 

Chief, Control Strategies Section (AR– 

18J), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries 

are only accepted during the Regional 

Office normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

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

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2011– 

0698. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

or viruses. For additional instructions 

on submitting comments, go to section 

I of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this document. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
41736 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 

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

Friday, excluding Federal holidays. We 

recommend that you telephone Carolyn 

Persoon, Environmental Engineer, 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: This 

supplementary information section is 

arranged as follows: 

I. What should I consider as I prepare my 

comments for EPA? 

II. What actions is EPA proposing to take? 

III. What is the background for these actions? 

IV. What are the criteria for redesignation to 

attainment? 

V. What is EPA’s analysis of the State’s 

request? 

1. Attainment (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)) 

2. The Area Has Met All Applicable 

Requirements under Section 110 and 

Part D and Has a Fully Approved SIP 

Under Section 110(k) (Sections 

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

3. The Improvement in Air Quality Is Due 

to Permanent and Enforceable 

Reductions in Emissions Resulting from 

Implementation of the SIP and 

Applicable Federal Air Pollution Control 

Regulations and Other Permanent and 

Enforceable Reductions (Section 

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

4. Indiana Has a Fully Approved 

Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 

175A of the CAA (Section 

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

5. Adequacy of Indiana’s MVEB 

6. 2008 Comprehensive Emissions 

Inventory 

7. Summary of Proposed Actions 

VI. What are the effects of EPA’s proposed 

actions? 

VII. Statutory and Executive order reviews. 

I. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

When submitting comments, 

remember to: 

1. Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

2. Follow directions—EPA may ask 

you to respond to specific questions or 

organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

3. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

4. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data that you used. 

5. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

6. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

7. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

8. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified. 

II. What actions is EPA proposing to 

take? 

EPA is proposing to take several 

actions related to redesignation of the 

Indiana portion of the Louisville area to 

attainment of the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS. In addition to EPA’s March 9, 

2011, determination that the area 

attained the 1997 annual NAAQS for 

PM2.5 by the applicable attainment date 

based on quality-assured, certified 

2007–2009 ambient air monitoring data 

(76 FR 12860), we are proposing to 

determine that the area continues to 

attain the NAAQS for PM2.5, based 

monitoring data for 2009–2011 and 

2010–2012 shows that the area 

continues to attain. EPA is proposing to 

find that Indiana meets the 

requirements for redesignation of the 

Louisville area to attainment of the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS under section 

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

Second, EPA is proposing to approve 

Indiana’s annual PM2.5 maintenance 

plan for the Louisville area as a revision 

to the Indiana SIP, including the MVEBs 

for PM2.5 and NOX emissions for the 

mobile source contribution of the 

Louisville area. 

Finally, EPA is proposing to approve 

2008 primary PM2.5, NOX, SO2, VOC, 

and ammonia emissions inventories as 

satisfying the requirement in section 

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

accurate and comprehensive emission 

inventory. In a supplemental 

submission to EPA on March 18, 2013, 

IDEM submitted ammonia and VOC 

emissions inventories to supplement the 

emissions inventories that had 

previously been submitted. 

In this proposed redesignation, EPA 

takes into account two decisions of the 

D.C. Circuit Court (referred to as ‘‘the 

D.C. Circuit’’ or ‘‘the Court’’). In the first 

of the two court decisions, the D.C. 

Circuit, on August 21, 2012, issued EME 

Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA, 696 

F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012, no. 11–1302 and 

consolidated cases) (referred to as ‘‘EME 

Homer City,’’) which vacated and 

remanded the Cross-State Air Pollution 

Rule (CSAPR) and ordered EPA to 

continue administering the Clean Air 

Interstate Rule (CAIR) ‘‘pending . . . 

development of a valid replacement.’’ 

EME Homer City at 38. The D.C. Circuit 

denied all petitions for rehearing on 

January 24, 2013. In the second 

decision, on January 4, 2013, in Natural 

Resources Defense Council v. EPA, the 

D.C. Circuit remanded to EPA the ‘‘Final 

Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation 

Rule’’ (72 FR 20586, April 25, 2007) and 

the ‘‘Implementation of the New Source 

Review (NSR) Program for Particulate 

Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers 

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

16, 2008). 706 F.3d 428 (D.C. Cir. 2013). 

EPA is proposing to approve the 

request from the state of Indiana to 

change the designation of Marion 

Township, Jefferson County and Clark 

and Floyd Counties (the Indiana portion 

of the Louisville area) from 

nonattainment to attainment of the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS. This action 

would not change the legal designation 

of the Kentucky portion of the area, 

which would be addressed in a separate 

rulemaking. 

III. What is the background for these 

actions? 

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. 

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 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 41737 

1As defined in 40 CFR part 50, appendix N(1)(c). 

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

of the 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 Louisville area as 

nonattainment 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 of the 2006 annual PM2.5

standard, the D.C. 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 (D.C. Cir. 2009). On December 

14, 2012, EPA finalized a rule revising 

the PM2.5 annual standard to 12 mg/m3

based on current scientific evidence 

regarding the protection of public 

health. Since the Louisville area is 

designated as nonattainment for the 

1997 annual PM2.5 standard, today’s 

proposed action addresses redesignation 

to attainment only for this standard. 

On March 9, 2011, EPA issued a final 

determination that the entire Louisville 

area attained the 1997 PM2.5 standard by 

the applicable attainment date (76 FR 

12860). Indiana’s original submittal 

contained complete, quality-assured and 

certified air monitoring data for years 

2008–2010. Based upon our review of 

complete, quality-assured and certified 

ambient air monitoring data from 2009– 

2011, we are proposing to determine 

that the area continues to attain the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Further, 

recently state certified data for 2012 

indicate that the area continues to attain 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 

IV. 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 for 

redesignation provided that: (1) The 

Administrator determines that the area 

has attained the applicable NAAQS 

based on current air quality data; (2) the 

Administrator has fully approved an 

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 emission reductions 

resulting from implementation of the 

applicable SIP, Federal air pollution 

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. 

V. What is EPA’s analysis of the State’s 

request? 

EPA is proposing to grant the 

redesignation of the Indiana portion of 

the Louisville area to attainment of the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS and is 

proposing to approve Indiana’s 

maintenance plan for the area and other 

related SIP revisions. The bases for 

these actions follow. 

1. Attainment (Section 107(d)(3)(E)(i)) 

As noted above, in a rulemaking 

published on March 9, 2011, EPA 

determined that the Louisville area 

attained the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

by the applicable attainment date. The 

basis and effect of this determination 

were discussed in the proposed (75 FR 

55725) and final (76 FR 12860) actions. 

The determination was based on 

certified quality-assured air quality 

monitoring data for 2007–2009 showing 

the area had met the standard by the 

attainment date. In this action, we are 

proposing to determine that the 

Louisville area has attained the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS based upon the 

most recent three years of complete, 

certified and quality-assured data, as 

required by section 107(d)(3)(E) of the 

CAA. Under EPA’s regulations at 40 

CFR 50.7, the annual primary and 

secondary PM2.5 standards are met when 

the annual arithmetic mean 

concentration, as determined in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 50, 

appendix N, is less than or equal to 15.0 

mg/m3 at all relevant monitoring sites in 

the area. 

EPA has reviewed the ambient air 

quality monitoring data in the Louisville 

area, consistent with the requirements 

contained at 40 CFR part 50. EPA’s 

review focused on data recorded in the 

EPA Air Quality System (AQS) database 

for the Louisville PM2.5 nonattainment 

area from 2009–2011, and 2010–2012. 

EPA also considered preliminary data 

for 2012, for which EPA has not yet 

calculated design values. 

The Louisville area has seven 

monitors that are located in Clark and 

Floyd counties, Indiana, and Jefferson 

County, Kentucky. Recently certified 

state monitored data has been used to 

calculate design value from 2010–2012 

for PM2.5 that ranged 11.0–13.2 mg/m3

for the 1997 annual standard. The 

monitors in the Louisville area recorded 

complete data in accordance with 

criteria set forth by EPA in 40 CFR part 

50, appendix N, where a complete year 

of air quality data comprises four 

calendar quarters, with each quarter 

containing data with at least 75% 

capture of the scheduled sampling days. 

Available data are considered to be 

sufficient for comparison to the NAAQS 

if three consecutive complete years of 

data exist. 

TABLE 1—THE 1997 ANNUAL PM2.5 DESIGN VALUES FOR THE LOUISVILLE MONITOR WITH COMPLETE DATA FOR THE

2009–2011 AND 2010–2012 DESIGN VALUES 1 IN μG/M3

County Site 

Annual standard design 

value 2009– 

2011 (μg/m3) 

Annual standard design 

value 2010– 

2012 (μg/m3) 

Clark County, IN .......................................................................................................................... 180190006 13.5 13.2 

Clark County, IN .......................................................................................................................... 180190008 11.4 11.0 

Floyd County, IN .......................................................................................................................... 180431004 12.3 11.8 

Jefferson County, KY ................................................................................................................... 211110043 12.6 11.8 

Jefferson County, KY ................................................................................................................... 211110044 12.8 12.1 

Jefferson County, KY ................................................................................................................... 211110051 12.7 12.3 

Jefferson County, KY ................................................................................................................... 211110067 12.1 11.5 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
41738 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

EPA’s review of monitoring data from 

the 2009–2011 and 2010–2012 

monitoring periods supports EPA’s 

determination that the Louisville area 

has monitored attainment. EPA 

proposes to determine that the 

Louisville area has attained the 1997 

annual PM2.5 standard. 

2. The Area Has Met All Applicable 

Requirements Under Section 110 and 

Part D and 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 Indiana’s 

SIP meets all applicable SIP 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation for the Louisville area 

under section 110 of the CAA for 

purposes of redesignation 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 previously approved all applicable 

requirements of the Indiana SIP for 

purposes of redesignation, in 

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

As discussed below, in this action EPA 

is approving Indiana’s 2008 emissions 

inventory as meeting the section 

172(c)(3) comprehensive emissions 

inventory requirement. 

In making these determinations, we 

have ascertained which SIP 

requirements are applicable to the area 

for purposes of redesignation, and have 

determined that they are fully approved 

under section 110(k) of the CAA. 

a. The Louisville Area Has Met All 

Applicable Requirements for Purposes 

of Redesignation 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 

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, 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 and classification 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 and 

classification 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 Indiana’s SIP and 

have concluded that it meets 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 into the Indiana 

SIP addressing section 110 elements 

under particulate standards (40 CFR 

52.770). 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. The requirements of 

section 110(a)(2), however, are 

statewide requirements that are not 

linked to the PM2.5 nonattainment status 

of the Louisville 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 Indiana SIP will 

meet the applicable SIP requirements 

for the Louisville 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. 

1. Subpart 1 

(a) Section 172 Requirements. 

For purposes of evaluating this 

redesignation request, the applicable 

section 172 SIP requirements for the 

Louisville 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 that are 

reasonably available for implementation 

in each area as components of the area’s 

attainment demonstration. Because the 

Louisville area has reached attainment, 

Indiana does not need to address 

additional measures 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. These requirements were 

suspended with the previous action (76 

FR 12860) that determined attainment of 

the standard, as discussed above. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 41739 

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 Louisville 

area has monitored attainment of the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. (‘‘General 

Preamble for the Interpretation of Title 

I of the CAA Amendments of 1990’’; (57 

FR 13498, 13564, April 16, 1992)). See 

also 40 CFR 51.918. The requirement to 

submit the section 172(c)(9) contingency 

measures is similarly 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. Indiana submitted a 2008 

base year emissions inventory along 

with the redesignation request. As 

discussed below in section IV.C., EPA is 

approving the 2008 inventory as 

meeting the section 172(c)(3) emissions 

inventory requirement for the Louisville 

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 

Indiana’s current part D (nonattainment) 

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 part D NSR 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 Louisville 

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 Louisville 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 Indiana SIP meets the 

section 110(a)(2) requirements 

applicable for purposes of 

redesignation. 

(b) Section 176 Conformity 

Requirements. 

Section 176(c) of the CAA requires 

states to establish criteria and 

procedures to ensure that Federallysupported or funded activities, 

including highway projects, conform to 

the air quality planning goals in the 

applicable SIPs. 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’’). State 

transportation conformity regulations 

must be consistent with Federal 

conformity regulations relating to 

consultation, enforcement, and 

enforceability, which EPA promulgated 

pursuant to CAA requirements. 

EPA approved Indiana’s general and 

transportation conformity SIPs on 

January 14, 1998 (63 FR 2146), and 

August 17, 2010 (75 FR 50730), 

respectively. Section 176(c) of the CAA 

was amended by provisions contained 

in the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, 

Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A 

Legacy for Users (SAFETEALU), which 

was signed into law on August 10, 2005 

(Pub. L. 109–59). In adopting this 

revision to the CAA, Congress 

streamlined the requirements for state 

conformity SIPs. Indiana is in the 

process of updating its transportation 

conformity SIP to meet these new 

requirements. 

Indiana has submitted on-road 

MVEBs for the Louisville area of 580.69 

tons per year (tpy) and 324.04 tpy of 

primary PM2.5 and 17,700.95 tpy and 

9,311.76 tpy of NOX for the years 2015 

and 2025, respectively. The area must 

use the MVEBs from the maintenance 

plan in any conformity determination 

that is made on or after the effective 

date of the adequacy finding and 

maintenance plan approval. 

2. Effect of the January 4, 2013, D.C. 

Circuit Decision Regarding PM2.5

Implementation Under Subpart 4 

a. Background 

As discussed above, on January 4, 

2013, in Natural Resources Defense 

Council v. EPA, the DC Circuit 

remanded to EPA the ‘‘Final Clean Air 

Fine Particle Implementation Rule’’ (72 

FR 20586, April 25, 2007) and the 

‘‘Implementation of the New Source 

Review (NSR) Program for Particulate 

Matter Less than 2.5 Micrometers 

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

16, 2008) (collectively, ‘‘1997 PM2.5

Implementation Rule’’). 706 F.3d 428 

(DC Cir. 2013). The Court found that 

EPA erred in implementing the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS pursuant to the general 

implementation provisions of subpart 1 

of part D of title I of the CAA, rather 

than the particulate-matter-specific 

provisions of subpart 4 of part D of title 

I. 

b. Proposal on This Issue 

As explained below, EPA is proposing 

to determine that the Court’s January 4, 

2013, decision does not prevent EPA 

from redesignating the Louisville area to 

attainment. Even in light of the Court’s 

decision, redesignation for this area is 

appropriate under the CAA and EPA’s 

longstanding interpretations of the 

CAA’s provisions regarding 

redesignation. EPA’slongstanding 

interpretation that requirements that are 

imposed, or that become due, after a 

complete redesignation request is 

submitted for an area that is attaining 

the standard, are not applicable for 

purposes of evaluating a redesignation 

request. Second, even if EPA applies the 

subpart 4 requirements to the Louisville 

redesignation request and disregards the 

provisions of its 1997 PM2.5

implementation rule recently remanded 

by the Court, the state’s request for 

redesignation of this area still qualifies 

for approval. 

i. Applicable Requirements for Purposes 

of Evaluating the Redesignation Request 

With respect to the 1997 PM2.5

implementation rule, the Court’s 

January 4, 2013, ruling rejected EPA’s 

reasons for implementing the PM2.5

NAAQS solely in accordance with the 

provisions of subpart 1, and remanded 

that matter to EPA, so that it could 

address implementation of the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS under subpart 4 of part D 

of the CAA, in addition to subpart 1. For 

the purposes of evaluating Indiana’s 

redesignation request for the area, to the 

extent that implementation under 

subpart 4 would impose additional 

requirements for areas designated 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
41740 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

2Applicable requirements of the CAA that come 

due subsequent to the area’s submittal of a complete 

redesignation request remain applicable until a 

redesignation is approved, but are not required as 

a prerequisite to redesignation. Section 175A(c) of 

the CAA. 

3Sierra Club v. Whitman was discussed and 

distinguished in a recent D.C. Circuit decision that 

addressed retroactivity in a quite different context, 

where, unlike the situation here, EPA sought to give 

its regulations retroactive effect. National 

Petrochemical and Refiners Ass’n v. EPA. 630 F.3d 

145, 163 (D.C. Cir. 2010), rehearing denied, 643 

F.3d 958 (D.C. Cir. 2011), cert denied, 132 S. Ct. 571 

(2011). 

nonattainment, EPA believes that those 

requirements are not ‘‘applicable’’ for 

the purposes of CAA section 

107(d)(3)(E), and thus EPA is not 

required to consider subpart 4 

requirements with respect to the 

Louisville redesignation. Under its 

longstanding interpretation of the CAA, 

EPA has interpreted section 107(d)(3)(E) 

to mean, as a threshold matter, that the 

part D provisions which are 

‘‘applicable’’ and which must be 

approved in order for EPA to 

redesignate an area include only those 

which came due prior to a state’s 

submittal of a complete redesignation 

request. See ‘‘Procedures for Processing 

Requests to Redesignate Areas to 

Attainment,’’ Memorandum from John 

Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 

Management Division, September 4, 

1992 (Calcagni memorandum). See also 

‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Requirements for Areas Submitting 

Requests for Redesignation to 

Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon 

Monoxide (CO) NAAQS on or after 

November 15, 1992,’’ Memorandum 

from Michael Shapiro, Acting Assistant 

Administrator, Air and Radiation, 

September 17, 1993 (Shapiro 

memorandum); Final Redesignation of 

Detroit-Ann Arbor, (60 FR 12459, 

12465–66, March 7, 1995); Final 

Redesignation of St. Louis, Missouri, (68 

FR 25418, 25424–27, May 12, 2003); 

Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537, 541 

(7th Cir. 2004) (upholding EPA’s 

redesignation rulemaking applying this 

interpretation and expressly rejecting 

Sierra Club’s view that the meaning of 

‘‘applicable’’ under the statute is 

‘‘whatever should have been in the plan 

at the time of attainment rather than 

whatever actually was in the plan and 

already implemented or due at the time 

of attainment’’).2 In this case, at the time 

that Indiana submitted its redesignation 

request, requirements under subpart 4 

were not due,[and indeed, were not yet 

known to apply.] 

EPA’s view that, for purposes of 

evaluating the Louisville redesignation, 

the subpart 4 requirements were not due 

at the time the state submitted the 

redesignation request is in keeping with 

the EPA’s interpretation of subpart 2 

requirements for subpart 1 ozone areas 

redesignated subsequent to the D.C. 

Circuit’s decision in South Coast Air 

Quality Mgmt. Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 

882 (D.C. Cir. 2006). In South Coast, the 

Court found that EPA was not permitted 

to implement the 1997 8-hour ozone 

standard solely under subpart 1, and 

held that EPA was required under the 

statute to implement the standard under 

the ozone-specific requirements of 

subpart 2 as well. Subsequent to the 

South Coast decision, in evaluating and 

acting upon redesignation requests for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone standard that 

were submitted to EPA for areas under 

subpart 1, EPA applied its longstanding 

interpretation of the CAA that 

‘‘applicable requirements’’, for purposes 

of evaluating a redesignation, are those 

that had been due at the time the 

redesignation request was submitted. 

See, e.g., Proposed Redesignation of 

Manitowoc County and Door County 

Nonattainment Areas (75 FR 22047, 

22050, April 27, 2010). In those actions, 

EPA therefore did not consider subpart 

2 requirements to be ‘‘applicable’’ for 

the purposes of evaluating whether the 

area should be redesignated under 

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

EPA’s interpretation derives from the 

provisions of CAA Section 107(d)(3). 

Section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) states that, for an 

area to be redesignated, a state must 

meet ‘‘all requirements ‘applicable’ to 

the area under section 110 and part D’’. 

Section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) provides that the 

EPA must have fully approved the 

‘‘applicable’’ SIP for the area seeking 

redesignation. These two sections read 

together support EPA’s interpretation of 

‘‘applicable’’ as only those requirements 

that came due prior to submission of a 

complete redesignation request. First, 

holding states to an ongoing obligation 

to adopt new CAA requirements that 

arose after the state submitted its 

redesignation request, in order to be 

redesignated, would make it 

problematic or impossible for EPA to act 

on redesignation requests in accordance 

with the 18-month deadline Congress 

set for EPA action in section 

107(d)(3)(D). If ‘‘applicable 

requirements’’ were interpreted to be a 

continuing flow of requirements with no 

reasonable limitation, states, after 

submitting a redesignation request, 

would be forced continuously to make 

additional SIP submissions that in turn 

would require EPA to undertake further 

notice-and-comment rulemaking actions 

to act on those submissions. This would 

create a regime of unceasing rulemaking 

that would delay action on the 

redesignation request beyond the 18- 

month timeframe provided by the CAA 

for this purpose. 

Second, a fundamental premise for 

redesignating a nonattainment area to 

attainment is that the area has attained 

the relevant NAAQS due to emission 

reductions from existing controls. Thus, 

an area for which a redesignation 

request has been submitted would have 

already attained the NAAQS as a result 

of satisfying statutory requirements that 

came due prior to the submission of the 

request. Absent a showing that 

unadopted and unimplemented 

requirements are necessary for future 

maintenance, it is reasonable to view 

the requirements applicable for 

purposes of evaluating the redesignation 

request as including only those SIP 

requirements that have already come 

due. These are the requirements that led 

to attainment of the NAAQS. To require, 

for redesignation approval, that a state 

also satisfy additional SIP requirements 

coming due after the state submits its 

complete redesignation request, and 

while EPA is reviewing it, would 

compel the state to do more than is 

necessary to attain the NAAQS, without 

a showing that the additional 

requirements are necessary for 

maintenance. 

In the context of this redesignation, 

the timing and nature of the Court’s 

January 4, 2013, decision in NRDC v. 

EPA compound the consequences of 

imposing requirements that come due 

after the redesignation request is 

submitted. The state submitted its 

redesignation request on June 16, 2011, 

but the Court did not issue its decision 

remanding EPA’s 1997 PM2.5

implementation rule concerning the 

applicability of the provisions of 

subpart 4 until January 2013. 

To require the state’s fully-completed 

and pending redesignation request to 

comply now with requirements of 

subpart 4 that the Court announced only 

in January, 2013, would be to give 

retroactive effect to such requirements 

when the state had no notice that it was 

required to meet them. The D.C. Circuit 

recognized the inequity of this type of 

retroactive impact in Sierra Club v. 

Whitman, 285 F.3d 63 (D.C. Cir. 2002),3

where it upheld the District Court’s 

ruling refusing to make retroactive 

EPA’s determination that the St. Louis 

area did not meet its attainment 

deadline. In that case, petitioners urged 

the Court to make EPA’s nonattainment 

determination effective as of the date 

that the statute required, rather than the 

later date on which EPA actually made 

the determination. The Court rejected 

this view, stating that applying it 

‘‘would likely impose large costs on 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 41741 

4PM10 refers to particulates nominally 10 

micrometers in diameter or smaller. 

5The potential effect of section 189(e) on section 

189(a)(1)(A) for purposes of evaluating this 

redesignation is discussed below. 

6These are attainment demonstration, RFP, 

RACM, milestone requirements, contingency 

measures. 

7As EPA has explained above, we do not believe 

that the Court’s January 4, 2013, decision should be 

interpreted so as to impose these requirements on 

the states retroactively. Sierra Club v. Whitman, 

supra. 

states, which would face fines and suits 

for not implementing air pollution 

prevention plans . . . even though they 

were not on notice at the time.’’ Id. at 

68. Similarly, it would be unreasonable 

to penalize Indiana by rejecting its 

redesignation request for an area that is 

already attaining the 1997 PM2.5

standard and that met all applicable 

requirements known to be in effect at 

the time of the request. For EPA now to 

reject the redesignation request solely 

because the state did not expressly 

address subpart 4 requirements of 

which it had no notice, would inflict the 

same unfairness condemned by the 

Court in Sierra Club v. Whitman. 

ii. Subpart 4 Requirements and Indiana 

Redesignation Request 

Even if EPA were to take the view that 

the Court’s January 4, 2013, decision 

requires that, in the context of pending 

redesignations, subpart 4 requirements 

were due and in effect at the time the 

state submitted its redesignation 

request, EPA proposes to determine that 

the Louisville area still qualifies for 

redesignation to attainment. As 

explained below, EPA believes that the 

redesignation request for the Louisville 

area, though not expressed in terms of 

subpart 4 requirements, substantively 

meets the requirements of that subpart 

for purposes of redesignating the area to 

attainment. 

With respect to evaluating the 

relevant substantive requirements of 

subpart 4 for purposes of redesignating 

the Louisville area, EPA notes that 

subpart 4 incorporates components of 

subpart 1 of part D, which contains 

general air quality planning 

requirements for areas designated as 

nonattainment. See Section 172(c). 

Subpart 4 itself contains specific 

planning and scheduling requirements 

for PM10 4 nonattainment areas, and 

under the Court’s January 4, 2013, 

decision in NRDC v. EPA, these same 

statutory requirements also apply for 

PM2.5 nonattainment areas. EPA has 

longstanding general guidance that 

interprets the 1990 amendments to the 

CAA, making recommendations to states 

for meeting the statutory requirements 

for SIPs for nonattainment areas. See, 

‘‘State Implementation Plans; General 

Preamble for the Implementation of 

Title I of the Clear Air Act Amendments 

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

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

Preamble, EPA discussed the 

relationship of subpart 1 and subpart 4 

SIP requirements, and pointed out that 

subpart 1 requirements were to an 

extent ‘‘subsumed by, or integrally 

related to, the more specific PM10

requirements.’’ 57 FR 13538 (April 16, 

1992). The subpart 1 requirements 

include, among other things, provisions 

for attainment demonstrations, RACM, 

RFP, emissions inventories, and 

contingency measures. 

For the purposes of this redesignation, 

in order to identify any additional 

requirements which would apply under 

subpart 4, we are considering the 

Louisville area to be a ‘‘moderate’’ PM2.5

nonattainment area. Under section 188 

of the CAA, all areas designated 

nonattainment areas under subpart 4 

would initially be classified by 

operation of law as ‘‘moderate’’ 

nonattainment areas, and would remain 

moderate nonattainment areas unless 

and until EPA reclassifies the area as a 

‘‘serious’’ nonattainment area. 

Accordingly, EPA believes that it is 

appropriate to limit the evaluation of 

the potential impact of subpart 4 

requirements to those that would be 

applicable to moderate nonattainment 

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

4 apply to moderate nonattainment 

areas and include the following: (1) An 

approved permit program for 

construction of new and modified major 

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

(2) an attainment demonstration (section 

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

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

quantitative milestones demonstrating 

RFP toward attainment by the 

applicable attainment date (section 

189(c)). 

The permit requirements of subpart 4, 

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

refer to and apply the subpart 1 permit 

provisions requirements of sections 172 

and 173 to PM10, without adding to 

them. Consequently, EPA believes that 

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

impose for redesignation purposes any 

additional requirements for moderate 

areas beyond those contained in subpart 

1.5 In any event, in the context of 

redesignation, EPA has long relied on 

the interpretation that a fully approved 

nonattainment new source review 

program is not considered an applicable 

requirement for redesignation, provided 

the area can maintain the standard with 

a PSD program after redesignation. A 

detailed rationale for this view is 

described in a memorandum from Mary 

Nichols, Assistant Administrator for Air 

and Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, 

entitled, ‘‘Part D New Source Review 

Requirements for Areas Requesting 

Redesignation to Attainment.’’ See also 

rulemakings for Detroit, Michigan (60 

FR 12467–12468, March 7, 1995); 

Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio (61 FR 

20458, 20469–20470, May 7, 1996); 

Louisville, Kentucky (66 FR 53665, 

October 23, 2001); and Grand Rapids, 

Michigan (61 FR 31834–31837, June 21, 

1996). 

With respect to the specific 

attainment planning requirements under 

subpart 4,6 when EPA evaluates a 

redesignation request under either 

subpart 1 and/or 4, any area that is 

attaining the PM2.5 standard is viewed 

as having satisfied the attainment 

planning requirements for these 

subparts. For redesignations, EPA has 

for many years interpreted attainmentlinked requirements as not applicable 

for areas attaining the standard. In the 

General Preamble, EPA stated that: 

The requirements for RFP will not apply in 

evaluating a request for redesignation to 

attainment since, at a minimum, the air 

quality data for the area must show that the 

area has already attained. Showing that the 

State will make RFP towards attainment will, 

therefore, have no meaning at that point. 

‘‘General Preamble for the Interpretation 

of Title I of the CAA Amendments of 

1990’’; (57 FR 13498, 13564, April 16, 

1992). 

The General Preamble also explained 

that 

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

directed at ensuring RFP and attainment by 

the applicable date. These requirements no 

longer apply when an area has attained the 

standard and is eligible for redesignation. 

Furthermore, section 175A for maintenance 

plans . . . provides specific requirements for 

contingency measures that effectively 

supersede the requirements of section 

172(c)(9) for these areas. Id. 

EPA similarly stated in its 1992 

Calcagni memorandum that, ‘‘The 

requirements for reasonable further 

progress and other measures needed for 

attainment will not apply for 

redesignations because they only have 

meaning for areas not attaining the 

standard.’’ 

It is evident that even if we were to 

consider the Court’s January 4, 2013, 

decision in NRDC v. EPA to mean that 

attainment-related requirements specific 

to subpart 4 should be imposed 

retroactively 7 and thus are now past 

due, those requirements do not apply to 

an area that is attaining the 1997 PM2.5

standard, for the purpose of evaluating 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
41742 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

8Under either subpart 1 or subpart 4, for 

purposes of demonstrating attainment as 

expeditiously as practicable, a state is required to 

evaluate all economically and technologically 

feasible control measures for direct PM emissions 

and precursor emissions, and adopt those measures 

that are deemed reasonably available. 

a pending request to redesignate the 

area to attainment. EPA has consistently 

enunciated this interpretation of 

applicable requirements under section 

107(d)(3)(E) since the General Preamble 

was published more than twenty years 

ago. Courts have recognized the scope of 

EPA’s authority to interpret ‘‘applicable 

requirements’’ in the redesignation 

context. See Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 

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

Moreover, even outside the context of 

redesignations, EPA has viewed the 

obligations to submit attainment-related 

SIP planning requirements of subpart 4 

as inapplicable for areas that EPA 

determines are attaining the standard. 

EPA’s prior ‘‘Clean Data Policy’’ 

rulemakings for the PM10 NAAQS, also 

governed by the requirements of subpart 

4, explain EPA’s reasoning. They 

describe the effects of a determination of 

attainment on the attainment-related SIP 

planning requirements of subpart 4. See 

‘‘Determination of Attainment for Coso 

Junction Nonattainment Area,’’ (75 FR 

27944, May 19, 2010). See also Coso 

Junction proposed PM10 redesignation, 

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

Proposed and Final Determinations of 

Attainment for San Joaquin 

Nonattainment Area (71 FR 40952, 

40954–55, July 19, 2006; and 71 FR 

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

short, EPA in this context has also long 

concluded that to require states to meet 

superfluous SIP planning requirements 

is not necessary and not required by the 

CAA, so long as those areas continue to 

attain the relevant NAAQS. 

Elsewhere in this notice, EPA 

proposes to determine that the area has 

attained the 1997 PM2.5 standard. Under 

its longstanding interpretation, EPA is 

proposing to determine here that the 

area meets the attainment-related plan 

requirements of subparts 1 and 4. 

Thus, EPA is proposing to conclude 

that the requirements to submit an 

attainment demonstration under 

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

under section 172(c)d section 

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

189(c)(1), and contingency measure 

requirements under section 172(c)(9) are 

satisfied for purposes of evaluating the 

redesignation request. 

iii. Subpart 4 and Control of PM2.5

Precursors 

The D.C. Circuit in NRDC v. EPA 

remanded to EPA the two rules at issue 

in the case with instructions to EPA to 

re-promulgate them consistent with the 

requirements of subpart 4. EPA in this 

section addresses the Court’s opinion 

with respect to PM2.5 precursors. While 

past implementation of subpart 4 for 

PM10 has allowed for control of PM10

precursors such as NOX from major 

stationary, mobile, and area sources in 

order to attain the standard as 

expeditiously as practicable, CAA 

section 189(e) specifically provides that 

control requirements for major 

stationary sources of direct PM10 shall 

also apply to PM10 precursors from 

those sources, except where EPA 

determines that major stationary sources 

of such precursors ‘‘do not contribute 

significantly to PM10 levels which 

exceed the standard in the area.’’ 

EPA’s 1997 PM2.5 implementation 

rule, remanded by the D.C. Circuit, 

contained rebuttable presumptions 

concerning certain PM2.5 precursors 

applicable to attainment plans and 

control measures related to those plans. 

Specifically, in 40 CFR 51.1002, EPA 

provided, among other things, that a 

state was ‘‘not required to address VOC 

[and ammonia] as . . . PM2.5 attainment 

plan precursor[s] and to evaluate 

sources of VOC [and ammonia] 

emissions in the State for control 

measures.’’ EPA intended these to be 

rebuttable presumptions. EPA 

established these presumptions at the 

time because of uncertainties regarding 

the emission inventories for these 

pollutants and the effectiveness of 

specific control measures in various 

regions of the country in reducing PM2.5

concentrations. EPA also left open the 

possibility for such regulation of VOC 

and ammonia in specific areas where 

that was necessary. 

The Court in its January 4, 2013, 

decision made reference to both section 

189(e) and 40 CFR 51.1002, and stated 

that, ‘‘In light of our disposition, we 

need not address the petitioners’ 

challenge to the presumptions in [40 

CFR 51.1002] that volatile organic 

compounds and ammonia are not PM2.5

precursors, as subpart 4 expressly 

governs precursor presumptions.’’ 

NRDC v. EPA, at 27, n.10. 

Elsewhere in the Court’s opinion, 

however, the Court observed: 

Ammonia is a precursor to fine particulate 

matter, making it a precursor to both PM2.5

and PM10. For a PM10 nonattainment area 

governed by subpart 4, a precursor is 

presumptively regulated. See 42 U.S.C. 

§ 7513a(e) [section 189(e)]. 

Id. at 21, n.7. 

For a number of reasons, EPA believes 

that its proposed redesignation of [the 

area] is consistent with the Court’s 

decision on this aspect of subpart 4. 

First, while the Court, citing section 

189(e), stated that ‘‘for a PM10 area 

governed by subpart 4, a precursor is 

‘presumptively regulated,’ ’’ the Court 

expressly declined to decide the specific 

challenge to EPA’s 1997 PM2.5

implementation rule provisions 

regarding ammonia and VOC as 

precursors. The Court had no occasion 

to reach whether and how it was 

substantively necessary to regulate any 

specific precursor in a particular PM2.5

nonattainment area, and did not address 

what might be necessary for purposes of 

acting upon a redesignation request. 

However, even if EPA takes the view 

that the requirements of subpart 4 were 

deemed applicable at the time the state 

submitted the redesignation request, 

and disregards the implementation 

rule’s rebuttable presumptions regarding 

ammonia and VOC as PM2.5 precursors, 

the regulatory consequence would be to 

consider the need for regulation of all 

precursors from any sources in the area 

to demonstrate attainment and to apply 

the section 189(e) provisions to major 

stationary sources of precursors. In the 

case of Louisville, EPA believes that 

doing so is consistent with proposing 

redesignation of the area for the 1997 

PM2.5 standard. The Louisville area has 

attained the standard without any 

specific additional controls of VOC and 

ammonia emissions from any sources in 

the area. 

Precursors in subpart 4 are 

specifically regulated under the 

provisions of section 189(e), which 

requires, with important exceptions, 

control requirements for major 

stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors.8

Under subpart 1 and EPA’s prior 

implementation rule, all major 

stationary sources of PM2.5 precursors 

were subject to regulation, with the 

exception of ammonia and VOC. Thus 

we must address here whether 

additional controls of ammonia and 

VOC from major stationary sources are 

required under section 189(e) of subpart 

4 in order to redesignate the area for the 

1997 PM2.5 standard. As explained 

below, we do not believe that any 

additional controls of ammonia and 

VOC are required in the context of this 

redesignation. 

In the General Preamble, EPA 

discusses its approach to implementing 

section 189(e). See 57 FR 13538–13542. 

With regard to precursor regulation 

under section 189(e), the General 

Preamble explicitly stated that control 

of VOCs under other Act requirements 

may suffice to relieve a state from the 

need to adopt precursor controls under 

section 189(e). 57 FR 13542. EPA in this 

proposal proposes to determine that the 

SIP has met the provisions of section 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 41743 

9The Louisville area has reduced VOC emissions 

through the implementation of various SIPapproved VOC control programs and various onroad and nonroad motor vehicle control programs. 10See, e.g., ‘‘Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans for California—San Joaquin 

Valley PM–10 Nonattainment Area; Serious Area 

Plan for Nonattainment of the 24-Hour and Annual 

PM–10 Standards,’’ 69 FR 30006 (May 26, 2004) 

(approving a PM10 attainment plan that impose 

controls on direct PM10 and NOX emissions and did 

not impose controls on SO2, VOC, or ammonia 

emissions). 

11See, e.g., Assoc. of Irritated Residents v. EPA 

et al., 423 F.3d 989 (9th Cir. 2005). 

189(e) with respect to ammonia and 

VOCs as precursors. This proposed 

supplemental determination is based on 

our findings that: (1) The Louisville area 

contains no major stationary sources of 

ammonia, and (2) existing major 

stationary sources of VOC are 

adequately controlled under other 

provisions of the CAA regulating the 

ozone NAAQS.9 In the alternative, EPA 

proposes to determine that, under the 

express exception provisions of section 

189(e), and in the context of the 

redesignation of the area, which is 

attaining the 1997 annual PM2.5

standard, at present ammonia and VOC 

precursors from major stationary 

sources do not contribute significantly 

to levels exceeding the 1997 PM2.5

standard in the Louisville area. See 57 

FR 13539–42. 

EPA notes that its 1997 PM2.5

implementation rule provisions in 40 

CFR 51.1002 were not directed at 

evaluation of PM2.5 precursors in the 

context of redesignation, but at SIP 

plans and control measures required to 

bring a nonattainment area into 

attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

By contrast, redesignation to attainment 

primarily requires the area to have 

already attained due to permanent and 

enforceable emission reductions, and to 

demonstrate that controls in place can 

continue to maintain the standard. 

Thus, even if we regard the Court’s 

January 4, 2013, decision as calling for 

‘‘presumptive regulation’’ of ammonia 

and VOC for PM2.5 under the attainment 

planning provisions of subpart 4, those 

provisions in and of themselves do not 

require additional controls of these 

precursors for an area that already 

qualifies for redesignation. Nor does 

EPA believe that requiring Indiana to 

address precursors differently than they 

have already would result in a 

substantively different outcome. 

Although, as EPA has emphasized, its 

consideration here of precursor 

requirements under subpart 4 is in the 

context of a redesignation to attainment, 

EPA’s existing interpretation of subpart 

4 requirements with respect to 

precursors in attainment plans for PM10

contemplates that states may develop 

attainment plans that regulate only 

those precursors that are necessary for 

purposes of attainment in the area in 

question, i.e., states may determine that 

only certain precursors need be 

regulated for attainment and control 

purposes.10 Courts have upheld this 

approach to the requirements of subpart 

4 for PM10.11 EPA believes that 

application of this approach to PM2.5

precursors under subpart 4 is 

reasonable. Because the Louisville area 

has already attained the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS with its current approach to 

regulation of PM2.5 precursors, EPA 

believes that it is reasonable to conclude 

in the context of this redesignation that 

there is no need to revisit the attainment 

control strategy with respect to the 

treatment of precursors. Even if the 

Court’s decision is construed to impose 

an obligation in evaluating this 

redesignation request to consider 

additional precursors under subpart 4, it 

would not affect EPA’s approval here of 

Indiana’s request for redesignation of 

the Louisville area. In the context of a 

redesignation, the area has shown that 

it has attained the standard. Moreover, 

the state has shown and EPA has 

proposed to determine that attainment 

in this area is due to permanent and 

enforceable emissions reductions on all 

precursors necessary to provide for 

continued attainment. It follows 

logically that no further control of 

additional precursors is necessary. 

Accordingly, EPA does not view the 

January 4, 2013, decision of the Court as 

precluding redesignation of the 

Louisville area to attainment for the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS at this time. 

In sum, even if Indiana were required 

to address precursors for the Louisville 

area under subpart 4 rather than under 

subpart 1, as interpreted in EPA’s 

remanded PM2.5 implementation rule, 

EPA would still conclude that the area 

had met all applicable requirements for 

purposes of redesignation in accordance 

with section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) and (v). 

b. The Louisville Area Has a Fully 

Approved Applicable SIP Under Section 

110(k) of the CAA 

Upon final approval of Indiana’s 

comprehensive 2008 emissions 

inventory, EPA will have fully approved 

the Indiana SIP for the Louisville 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, John Calcagni 

memorandum; 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, Indiana has 

adopted and submitted, and EPA has 

fully approved, provisions addressing 

various required SIP elements under 

particulate matter standards. In this 

action, EPA is approving Indiana’s 2008 

emissions inventory for the Louisville 

area as meeting the requirement of 

section 172(c)(3) of the CAA. No 

Louisville area SIP provisions are 

currently disapproved, conditionally 

approved, or partially approved. 

3. The Improvement in Air Quality Is 

Due to Permanent and Enforceable 

Reductions in Emissions Resulting From 

Implementation of the SIP and 

Applicable Federal Air Pollution 

Control Regulations and Other 

Permanent and Enforceable Reductions 

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

EPA believes that Indiana has 

demonstrated that the observed air 

quality improvement in the Louisville 

area is due to permanent and 

enforceable reductions in emissions 

resulting from implementation of the 

SIP, Federal measures and other stateadopted measures. 

In making this demonstration, Indiana 

has calculated the change in emissions 

between 2005, one of the years the 

Louisville area was monitoring 

nonattainment, and 2008, one of the 

years the Louisville 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 Louisville area 

and contributing 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 area: 

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 requirements 

result in lower NOX and SO2 emissions 

from new cars and light duty trucks. 

The Federal rules were phased in 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
41744 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

between 2004 and 2009. The EPA has 

estimated that, by the end of the phasein period, new vehicles will emit less 

NOX with the following percentage 

decreases: Passenger cars (light duty 

vehicles)—77%; light duty trucks, 

minivans and sports utility vehicles— 

86%; and, larger sports utility vehicles, 

vans and heavier trucks—69% to 95%. 

EPA expects fleet-wide average 

emissions to decline by similar 

percentages as new vehicles replace 

older vehicles. The Tier 2 standards also 

reduced the sulfur content of gasoline to 

30 parts per million (ppm) beginning in 

January 2006. Most gasoline sold in 

Indiana prior to January 2006 had a 

sulfur content of about 500 ppm. 

Heavy-Duty Diesel Engine Rule. EPA 

issued this rule in July 2000. This rule 

includes standards limiting the sulfur 

content of diesel fuel, which went into 

effect in 2004. A second phase took 

effect in 2007 which reduced fine 

particle emissions from heavy-duty 

highway engines and further reduced 

the highway diesel fuel sulfur content to 

15 ppm. The total program is estimated 

to achieve a 90% reduction in direct 

PM2.5 emissions and a 95% reduction in 

NOX emissions for these new engines 

using low sulfur diesel, compared to 

existing engines using higher sulfur 

content diesel. The reduction in fuel 

sulfur content also yielded an 

immediate reduction in sulfate particle 

emissions from all diesel vehicles. 

Nonroad Diesel Rule. In May 2004, 

EPA promulgated a new rule for large 

nonroad diesel engines, such as those 

used in construction, agriculture and 

mining equipment, to be phased in 

between 2008 and 2014. The rule also 

reduces the sulfur content in nonroad 

diesel fuel by over 99%. Prior to 2006, 

nonroad diesel fuel averaged 

approximately 3,400 ppm sulfur. This 

rule limited nonroad diesel sulfur 

content to 500 ppm by 2006, with a 

further reduction to 15 ppm by 2010. 

The combined engine and fuel rules will 

reduce NOX and PM2.5 emissions from 

large nonroad diesel engines by over 

90%, compared to current nonroad 

engines using higher sulfur content 

diesel. It is estimated that compliance 

with this rule will cut NOX emissions 

from nonroad diesel engines by up to 

90%. This rule achieved some emission 

reductions by 2008, and was fully 

implemented by 2010. The reduction in 

fuel sulfur content also yielded an 

immediate reduction in sulfate particle 

emissions from all diesel vehicles. 

Nonroad Large Spark-Ignition Engine 

and Recreational Engine Standards. In 

November 2002, EPA promulgated 

emission standards for groups of 

previously unregulated nonroad 

engines. These engines include large 

spark-ignition engines such as those 

used in forklifts and airport groundservice equipment; recreational vehicles 

using spark-ignition engines such as offhighway motorcycles, all-terrain 

vehicles and snowmobiles; and 

recreational marine diesel engines. 

Emission standards from large sparkignition engines were implemented in 

two tiers, with Tier 1 starting in 2004 

and Tier 2 in 2007. Recreational vehicle 

emission standards are being phased in 

from 2006 through 2012. Marine diesel 

engine standards were phased in from 

2006 through 2009. With full 

implementation of the entire nonroad 

spark-ignition engine and recreational 

engine standards, an 80% reduction in 

NOX expected by 2020. Some of these 

emission reductions occurred by the 

2008–2010 period used to demonstrate 

attainment, and additional emission 

reductions will occur during the 

maintenance period. 

ii. Control Measures in Contributing 

Areas 

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. 

CAIR. On May 12, 2005, EPA 

published CAIR, which requires 

significant reductions in emissions of 

SO2 and NOX from electric generating 

units to limit the interstate transport of 

these pollutants and the ozone and fine 

particulate matter they form in the 

atmosphere. See 76 FR 70093. The D.C. 

Circuit initially vacated CAIR, North 

Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 

2008), but ultimately remanded the rule 

to EPA without vacatur to preserve the 

environmental benefits provided by 

CAIR, North Carolina v. EPA, 550 F.3d 

1176, 1178 (D.C. Cir. 2008). In response 

to the Court’s decision, EPA issued the 

Transport Rule, also known as CSAPR), 

to address interstate transport of NOX

and SO2 in the eastern United States. 

See 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011). 

On December 30, 2011, the D.C. 

Circuit issued an order addressing the 

status of CSAPR and CAIR in response 

to motions filed by numerous parties 

seeking a stay of CSAPR pending 

judicial review. In that order, the Court 

stayed CSAPR pending resolution of the 

petitions for review of that rule in EME 

Homer City Generation. The Court also 

indicated that EPA was expected to 

continue to administer CAIR in the 

interim until judicial review of CSAPR 

was completed. 

On August 21, 2012, the D.C. Circuit 

issued a decision to vacate CSAPR. In 

that decision, it also ordered EPA to 

continue administering CAIR ‘‘pending 

the promulgation of a valid 

replacement.’’ EME Homer City, 696 

F.3d at 38. The D.C. Circuit denied all 

petitions for rehearing on January 24, 

2013. EPA and other parties have filed 

petitions for certiorari to the U.S. 

Supreme Court, but those petitions have 

not been acted on to date. Nonetheless, 

EPA intends to continue to act in 

accordance with the EME Homer City 

opinion. 

In light of these unique circumstances 

and for the reasons explained below, to 

the extent that attainment is due to 

emission reductions associated with 

CAIR, EPA is here proposing to 

determine that those reductions are 

sufficiently permanent and enforceable 

for purposes of CAA sections 

107(d)(3)(E)(iii) and 175A. EPA 

therefore proposes to approve the 

redesignation request and the related 

SIP revision for Indiana portion of the 

Louisville area, including Indiana’s plan 

for maintaining attainment of the PM2.5

standard. 

As directed by the D.C. Circuit, CAIR 

remains in place and enforceable until 

substituted by a valid replacement rule. 

Indiana’s SIP revision lists CAIR as a 

control measure that became stateeffective October 22, 2007 and was fully 

approved by EPA on November 29, 2010 

(75 FR 72956), for the purpose of 

reducing SO2 and NOX emissions. CAIR 

was thus in place and getting emission 

reductions when the Louisville area 

began monitoring attainment of the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The qualityassured, certified monitoring data used 

to demonstrate the area’s attainment of 

the 1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS by the 

April 2010 attainment deadline was also 

impacted by CAIR. 

To the extent that Indiana is relying 

on CAIR in its maintenance plan, the 

recent directive from the D.C. Circuit in 

EME Homer City ensures that the 

reductions associated with CAIR will be 

permanent and enforceable for the 

necessary time period. EPA has been 

ordered by the Court to develop a new 

rule to address interstate transport to 

replace CSAPR and the opinion makes 

clear that after promulgating that new 

rule EPA must provide states an 

opportunity to draft and submit SIPs to 

implement that rule. Thus, CAIR will 

remain in place until EPA has 

promulgated a final rule through a 

notice-and-comment rulemaking 

process, States have had an opportunity 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 41745 

to draft and submit SIPs, EPA has 

reviewed the SIPs to determine if they 

can be approved, and EPA has taken 

action on the SIPs, including 

promulgating a FIP if appropriate. The 

Court’s clear instruction to EPA that it 

must continue to administer CAIR until 

a valid replacement exists provides an 

additional backstop: By definition, any 

rule that replaces CAIR and meets the 

Court’s direction would require upwind 

states to have SIPs that eliminate 

significant contributions to downwind 

nonattainment and prevent interference 

with maintenance in downwind areas. 

Further, in vacating CSAPR and 

requiring EPA to continue administering 

CAIR, the D.C. Circuit emphasized that 

the consequences of vacating CAIR 

‘‘might be more severe now in light of 

the reliance interests accumulated over 

the intervening four years.’’ EME Homer 

City, 696 F.3d at 38. The accumulated 

reliance interests include the interests of 

states who reasonably assumed they 

could rely on reductions associated with 

CAIR which brought certain 

nonattainment areas into attainment 

with the NAAQS. If EPA were 

prevented from relying on reductions 

associated with CAIR in redesignation 

actions, states would be forced to 

impose additional, redundant 

reductions on top of those achieved by 

CAIR. EPA believes this is precisely the 

type of irrational result the Court sought 

to avoid by ordering EPA to continue 

administering CAIR. For these reasons 

also, EPA believes it is appropriate to 

allow states to rely on CAIR, and the 

existing emissions reductions achieved 

by CAIR, as sufficiently permanent and 

enforceable for purposes such as 

redesignation. Following promulgation 

of the replacement rule, EPA will 

review SIPs as appropriate to identify 

whether there are any issues that need 

to be addressed. 

iii. Consent Decrees 

Along with Federal and state rules 

controlling direct PM and precursors, 

there have been a number of permanent 

and enforceable consent decrees that 

have reduced emissions and will 

continue to reduce emissions into the 

future. The EPA and Duke Energy 

consent decree created caps on both 

NOX and SO2 similar allocations 

provided for the Gallagher Generating 

Station in Floyd County. Duke Energy 

Indiana permanently shut-down two of 

its four coal-fired Electric Generating 

Units (EGUs) (Units 1 and 3) on 

February 1, 2012. The Tennessee Valley 

Authority has also recently entered into 

a consent decree with EPA that 

establishes system-wide annual tonnage 

limits for NOX and SO2 for its eleven 

coal-fired power plants located in 

Alabama, Kentucky, and Tennessee. 

NOX will be limited to 100,600 tpy 

beginning in 2011 and capped at 52,000 

tpy in 2018 and each year thereafter. 

SO2 will be limited to 285,000 tpy 

beginning in 2011 and capped at 

110,000 tpy in 2019 and each year 

thereafter. 

This will result in significant regional 

NOX and SO2 reductions, further 

ensuring that the area will continue to 

maintain the NAAQS in the future. 

b. Emission Reductions 

Indiana developed emissions 

inventories for NOX, direct PM2.5 and 

SO2 for 2005, one of the years the area 

monitored nonattainment, and 2008, 

one of the years the Louisville 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 Indiana and Kentucky’s NOX

emission budgets resulting from EPA’s 

NOX SIP call. The 2008 emissions from 

EGUs reflect Indiana’s emission caps 

under CAIR. All other point source 

emissions were obtained from Indiana’s 

source facility emissions reporting. 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
41746 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

12Periodic 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. 

Area source emissions in the 

Louisville area for 2005 were taken from 

periodic emissions inventories.12 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 local metropolitan planning 

organization, Kentuckiana Regional 

Planning and Development Agency 

(KIPDA), along with the Louisville 

Metro Air Pollution Control District and 

IDEM. 

All emissions estimates discussed 

below were documented in the 

submittal and appendices of Indiana’s 

redesignation request submittal from 

June 16, 2011. 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 number 

EPA–R05–OAR–2011–0698, which 

includes digital copies of Indiana’s 

submittal. 

Emissions data in tpy for the entire 

Louisville area are shown in Tables 2 

and 3, below. 

TABLE 2—SUMMARY OF 2005 EMISSIONS FOR THE ENTIRE LOUISVILLE AREA BY SOURCE TYPE

[tpy] 

SO2 NOX PM2.5

Point (EGU) ..................................................................................................................... 174,178.36 48,103.47 3,443.00 

Non-EGU ......................................................................................................................... 5,441.05 3,922.83 1,291.31 

On-road ............................................................................................................................ 144.23 32,744.55 1,055.61 

Nonroad ........................................................................................................................... 1,050.81 14,370.95 780.54 

Area ................................................................................................................................. 418.98 2,123.83 810.13 

Total Louisville .......................................................................................................... 181,233.43 101,265.63 7,380.59 

TABLE 3—COMPARISON OF 2005 EMISSIONS FROM THE NONATTAINMENT YEAR AND 2008 EMISSIONS FOR AN

ATTAINMENT YEAR FOR THE ENTIRE LOUISVILLE AREA

[tpy] 

2005 2008 Net change 

(2005–2008) 

PM2.5 ................................................................................................................................ 7,380.59 6,724.02 ¥656.57 

NOX .................................................................................................................................. 101,265.63 97,533.93 ¥3,731.70 

SO2 .................................................................................................................................. 181,233.43 151,503.01 ¥29,730.42 

Table 3 shows that in the entire 

Louisville area reduced direct PM2.5

emissions by 656.57 tons, NOX

emissions by 3,731.70 tons and SO2

emissions by 29,730.42 tons between 

2005, a nonattainment year, and 2008, 

an attainment year. 

Emissions data in tpy the Indiana 

portion of the Louisville area are shown 

in Tables 4, 5, and 6, below. 

TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF 2008 BASE YEAR EMISSIONS INVENTORY FOR THE INDIANA PORTION OF THE LOUISVILLE AREA BY

SOURCE TYPE

[tpy] 

SO2 NOX PM2.5

Point ................................................................................................................................. 108,861.34 27,916.08 847.78 

On-road ............................................................................................................................ 38.89 6,245.60 210.91 

Nonroad ........................................................................................................................... 141.97 2,553.23 131.41 

Area ................................................................................................................................. 330.32 811.15 12.37 

Total .......................................................................................................................... 109,372.52 37,526.06 1,202.47 

TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF 2007/2008 BASE YEAR EMISSIONS OF VOCS AND AMMONIA FOR THE ENTIRE LOUISVILLE AREA

BY SOURCE TYPE

[tpy] 

Ammonia VOC 

Point ....................................................................................................................................................................... 6 .304 916.25 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 41747 

TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF 2007/2008 BASE YEAR EMISSIONS OF VOCS AND AMMONIA FOR THE ENTIRE LOUISVILLE AREA

BY SOURCE TYPE—Continued 

[tpy] 

Ammonia VOC 

Area ....................................................................................................................................................................... 1,193 .20 5,618.26 

Nonroad ................................................................................................................................................................. 2 .13 1,246.43 

On-road .................................................................................................................................................................. 113 .13 2,886.02 

Total ................................................................................................................................................................ 1,314 .76 10,666.95 

TABLE 6—COMPARISON OF 2005 EMISSIONS FROM THE NONATTAINMENT YEAR AND 2008 EMISSIONS FOR AN

ATTAINMENT YEAR FOR THE INDIANA PORTION OF THE LOUISVILLE AREA

[tpy] 

2005 2008 Net change 

(2005–2008) 

PM2.5 ................................................................................................................................ 1,376.37 1,202.47 ¥173.90 

NOX .................................................................................................................................. 41,750.37 37,526.06 ¥4,224.31 

SO2 .................................................................................................................................. 135,182.59 109,372.52 ¥25,810.07 

Table 6 shows that in the Indiana 

portion of the Louisville area reduced 

direct PM2.5 emissions by 173.90 tons, 

NOX emissions by 4,224.31 tons and 

SO2 emissions by 25,810.07 tons 

between 2005, a nonattainment year, 

and 2008, an attainment year. 

Based on the information summarized 

above, Indiana has adequately 

demonstrated that the improvement in 

air quality is due to permanent and 

enforceable emissions reductions. 

4. Indiana Has a Fully Approved 

Maintenance Plan Pursuant to Section 

175A of the CAA (Section 

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

In conjunction with Indiana’s request 

to redesignate the Indiana portion of the 

Louisville nonattainment area to 

attainment status, Indiana has submitted 

a SIP revision to provide for 

maintenance of the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS in the area through 2025. 

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, 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 

Indiana developed emissions 

inventories for NOX, direct PM2.5 and 

SO2 for 2008, one of the years in the 

period during which the Louisville area 

monitored attainment of the 1997 

annual PM2.5 standard, as described 

previously. The attainment levels of 

emissions for the entire area, as well as 

the attainment levels of emissions for 

the Indiana portion of the area were 

summarized in Tables 3 and 5, above. 

c. Demonstration of Maintenance 

Along with the redesignation request, 

Indiana submitted a revision to its PM2.5

SIP to include a maintenance plan for 

the Louisville area, as required by 

section 175A of the CAA. Section 175A 

requires a state seeking redesignation to 

attainment to submit a SIP revision to 

provide for the maintenance of the 

NAAQS in the area ‘‘for at least 10 years 

after the redesignation.’’ EPA has 

interpreted this as a showing of 

maintenance ‘‘for a period of ten years 

following redesignation.’’ Calcagni 

Memorandum, p. 9. Where the 

emissions inventory method of showing 

maintenance is used, its purpose is to 

show that emissions during the 

maintenance period will not increase 

over the attainment year inventory. 

Calcagni Memorandum, pp. 9–10. A 

maintenance demonstration may be 

based on such an emissions inventory 

approach. 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). 

Indiana’s plan demonstrates 

maintenance of the 1997 annual PM2.5

standard through 2025 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. 

Indiana’s submission uses emissions 

inventory projections for the years 2015 

and 2025 to demonstrate maintenance 

for the Indiana portion of the Louisville 

area. The projected emissions were 

estimated by Indiana, with assistance 

from LADCO and KIPDA using the 

MOVES2010a model. Projection of 

inventory emissions was done for the 

2015 interim year emissions using 

estimates based on the 2009 and 2018 

LADCO modeling inventory, using 

LADCO’s growth factors, for all sectors. 

The 2025 maintenance year emissions 

are based on emissions estimates from 

the 2018 LADCO modeling. Table 7 

shows the 2008 attainment base year 

emission estimates and the 2015 and 

2025 emission projections for the entire 

tri-state Louisville area that Indiana 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
41748 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

provided in its June 16, 2011, 

submission. 

TABLE 7—COMPARISON OF 2008, 2015 AND 2025 NOX, DIRECT PM2.5 AND SO2 EMISSION TOTALS (TPY) FOR THE

LOUISVILLE AREA

SO2 NOX PM2.5

2008 (baseline) ................................................................................................................... 151,503.01 ....... 97,533.93 ......... 6,724.02 

2015 .................................................................................................................................... 76,958.54 ......... 69,936.67 ......... 5,540.29 

2025 .................................................................................................................................... 76,082.07 ......... 59,455.17 ......... 5,055.61 

Change 2008–2025 ............................................................................................................ ¥75,420.94 ......

50% decrease ..

¥38,078.76 ......

39% decrease ..

¥1,668.41 

25% decrease 

Table 7 shows that the Louisville area 

will reduce NOX emissions by 38,078.76 

tpy between 2008 and the maintenance 

projection to 2025, direct PM2.5

emissions by 1,668.41 tpy, and reduced 

SO2 emissions by 75,420.94 tpy between 

2008 and 2025. 

An air quality modeling analysis 

conducted by IDEM demonstrates that 

the Louisville area would be able to 

attain the PM2.5 standard even in the 

absence of either CAIR or CSAPR. See 

appendices H and I. This modeling is 

available in the docket for this proposed 

redesignation action. 

Based on the information summarized 

above, Indiana has adequately 

demonstrated maintenance of the PM2.5

standard in this area for a period 

extending in excess of ten years from 

expected final action on Indiana’s 

redesignation request. 

i. Maintenance Plan and Evaluation of 

VOCs and Ammonia 

With regard to the redesignation of 

Louisville, in evaluating the effect of the 

Court’s remand of EPA’s 

implementation rule, which included 

presumptions against consideration of 

VOC and ammonia as PM2.5 precursors, 

EPA in this proposal is also considering 

the impact of the decision on the 

maintenance plan required under 

sections 175A and 107(d)(3)(E)(iv). To 

begin with, EPA notes that the area has 

attained the 1997 PM2.5 standard and 

that the state has shown that attainment 

of that standard is due to permanent and 

enforceable emission reductions. 

EPA proposes to determine that the 

state’s maintenance plan shows 

continued maintenance of the standard 

by tracking the levels of the precursors 

whose control brought about attainment 

of the 1997 PM2.5 standard in the 

Louisville area. EPA therefore believes 

that the only additional consideration 

related to the maintenance plan 

requirements that results from the 

Court’s January 4, 2013, decision is that 

of assessing the potential role of VOC 

and ammonia in demonstrating 

continued maintenance in this area. As 

explained below, based upon 

documentation provided by the State 

and supporting information, EPA 

believes that the maintenance plan for 

the Louisville area need not include any 

additional emission reductions of VOC 

or ammonia in order to provide for 

continued maintenance of the standard. 

First, as noted above in EPA’s 

discussion of section 189(e), VOC 

emission levels in this area have 

historically been well controlled under 

SIP requirements related to ozone and 

other pollutants. Second, total ammonia 

emissions throughout the Louisville 

area are very low, estimated to be less 

than 1,500 tpy. See Table 8 below. This 

amount of ammonia emissions appears 

especially small in comparison to the 

total amounts of SO2, NOX, and even 

direct PM2.5 emissions from sources in 

the area, see Table 7. Third, as described 

below, available information shows that 

no precursor, except ammonia, is 

expected to increase over the 

maintenance period so as to interfere 

with or undermine the State’s 

maintenance demonstration. 

Indiana’s maintenance plan shows 

that emissions of direct PM2.5, SO2, and 

NOX are projected to decrease by 1,668 

tpy, 75,420 tpy, and 38,078 tpy, 

respectively, over the maintenance 

period. See Table 7 above. In addition, 

emissions inventories used in the 

regulatory impact analysis (RIA), found 

in the docket, for the 2012 PM2.5

NAAQS, shows that VOC emissions are 

projected to decrease by 14,551 tpy 

between 2007 and 2020. Although 

ammonia emissions are predicted to 

increase slightly between 2007 and 

2020, the large decrease of emissions in 

other precursors in comparison will 

keep the area well below the standard. 

See Table 8 below. While the RIA 

emissions inventories are only projected 

out to 2020, there is no reason to believe 

that this downward trend would not 

continue through 2025. Given that the 

Louisville area is already attaining the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS even with the 

current level of emissions from sources 

in the area, the downward trend of 

emissions inventories would be 

consistent with continued attainment. 

Indeed, projected emissions reductions 

for the precursors that the state is 

addressing for purposes of the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS, indicate that the area 

should continue to attain the NAAQS 

following the precursor control strategy 

that the state has already elected to 

pursue. Even if VOC and ammonia 

emissions were to increase 

unexpectedly between 2020 and 2025, 

the overall emissions reductions 

projected in direct PM2.5, SO2, and NOX

would be sufficient to offset any 

increases. For these reasons, EPA 

believes that local emissions of all of the 

potential PM2.5 precursors will not 

increase to the extent that they will 

cause monitored PM2.5 levels to violate 

the 1997 PM2.5 standard during the 

maintenance period. 

TABLE 8—COMPARISON OF 2007 AND 2020 VOC AND AMMONIA EMISSION TOTALS BY SOURCE SECTOR (TPY) FOR THE

LOUISVILLE AREA 13

Sector 

VOC Ammonia 

2007 2020 Net change 

2007–2020 2007 2020 Net change 2007–2020 

Point ......................................................... 1,084 1,099 15 6 97 91 

Area .......................................................... 5,504 5,460 ¥44 1,115 1,191 76 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 41749 

13These emissions estimates were taken from the 

emissions inventories developed for the RIA for the 

2012 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

TABLE 8—COMPARISON OF 2007 AND 2020 VOC AND AMMONIA EMISSION TOTALS BY SOURCE SECTOR (TPY) FOR THE

LOUISVILLE AREA 13—Continued 

Sector 

VOC Ammonia 

2007 2020 Net change 

2007–2020 2007 2020 Net change 2007–2020 

Nonroad ................................................... 1,273 6,39 ¥634 2 250 248 

On-road .................................................... 2,087 9,35 ¥1,152 97 68 ¥29 

Fires ......................................................... 73 73 0 5 5 0 

Total .................................................. 10,497 8,819 ¥1,678 1,270 1,407 137 

In addition, available air quality 

modeling analyses done by the state 

show continued maintenance of the 

standard during the maintenance 

period. The current air quality design 

value for the area is 13.5 mg/m3 (based 

on 2009–2011 air quality data), which is 

well below the 1997 annual PM2.5

NAAQS of 15 mg/m3. Moreover, the 

modeling analysis conducted for the 

RIA for the 2012 PM2.5 NAAQS 

indicates that the design value for this 

area is expected to continue to decline 

through 2020. In the RIA analysis, the 

highest 2020 modeled design value for 

the Louisville area is 9.8 mg/m3. Given 

that precursor emissions are projected to 

decrease through 2025, it is reasonable 

to conclude that monitored PM2.5 levels 

in this area will also continue to 

decrease through 2025. 

Thus, EPA believes that there is 

ample justification to conclude that the 

Louisville area should be redesignated, 

even taking into consideration the 

emissions of other precursors 

potentially relevant to PM2.5. After 

consideration of the D.C. Circuit’s 

January 4, 2013, decision, and for the 

reasons set forth in this notice, EPA 

proposes to approve the State’s 

maintenance plan and its request to 

redesignate the Louisville area to 

attainment for the 1997 PM2.5 annual 

standard. 

Based on the information summarized 

above, Indiana has adequately 

demonstrated maintenance of the PM2.5

standard in this area for a period 

extending in excess of ten years from 

expected final action on Indiana’s 

redesignation request. 

d. Monitoring Network 

Indiana’s plan includes a commitment 

to continue working with Kentucky to 

operate its EPA-approved monitoring 

network, as necessary to demonstrate 

ongoing compliance with the NAAQS. 

Indiana currently operates three PM2.5

monitors in Clark and Floyd counties in 

order to monitor the Indiana portion of 

the Louisville area. Kentucky currently 

operates four monitors in Jefferson 

County for the Louisville area. 

e. Verification of Continued Attainment 

Indiana remains obligated to continue 

to quality-assure monitoring data and 

enter all data into AQS in accordance 

with Federal guidelines. Indiana will 

use these data, supplemented with 

additional information as necessary, to 

assure that the area continues to attain 

the standard. Indiana will also continue 

to develop and submit periodic 

emission inventories as required by the 

Federal Consolidated Emissions 

Reporting Rule (67 FR 39602, June 10, 

2002) to track future levels of emissions. 

Both of these actions will help to verify 

continued attainment in accordance 

with 40 CFR part 58. 

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, Indiana has adopted a 

contingency plan for the Louisville 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’’ 

to evaluate what measures are 

warranted to address the violation, 

committing to implement one or more 

measures from a list of candidate 

measures given in the plan. Indiana’s 

candidate contingency measures 

include the following: 

i. Vehicle inspection and maintenance 

program; 

ii. Alternative fuel and diesel retrofit 

programs for fleet vehicle operations; 

iii. Requiring NOX or SO2 emissions 

offsets for new and modified major and 

minor sources; 

iv. Increasing the ratio of emissions 

offsets required for new sources; 

v. NOX or SO2 controls on new minor 

sources; 

vi. Wood stove change-out program; 

vii. Emission reduction measures for 

unpaved roads and parking lots; 

viii. Idle restrictions; 

ix. Broader geographic applicability of 

existing measures; and 

x. One or more transportation control 

measures sufficient to achieve at least a 

0.5% reduction in actual area wide 

precursor emissions. 

Under Indiana’s plan, control 

measures are to be adopted and 

implemented within 18 months from 

the end of the year in which air quality 

triggering the Action Level Response 

occurs. Indiana further commits to 

conduct ongoing review of its data, and 

if monitored concentrations or 

emissions are trending upward, Indiana 

commits to take appropriate steps to 

avoid a violation if possible. EPA 

believes that Indiana’s contingency plan 

satisfies the pertinent requirements of 

section 175A(d). 

EPA believes that Indiana’s 

contingency measures, as well as the 

commitment to continue implementing 

any SIP requirements, satisfy the 

pertinent requirements of section 

175A(d). 

As required by section 175A(b) of the 

CAA, Indiana commits to submit to the 

EPA an updated PM2.5 maintenance 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
41750 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

14EPA 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) 

15EPA 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) 

plan eight years after redesignation of 

the Louisville area to cover an 

additional ten year period beyond the 

initial ten year maintenance period. As 

required by section 175A of the CAA, 

Indiana has also committed to retain the 

PM2.5 control measures contained in the 

SIP prior to redesignation. 

For all of the reasons set forth above, 

EPA is proposing to approve Indiana’s 

1997 annual PM2.5 maintenance plan for 

the Louisville area as meeting the 

requirements of CAA section 175A. 

5. Adequacy of Indiana’s MVEB 

1. How are MVEBs developed and what 

are the MVEBs for the Louisville 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 redesignation 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 MVEB 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 portions 

of the Louisville 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 plan submitted by 

Indiana for the Louisville area contains 

new primary PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for 

the area for the years 2015 and 2025. 

The motor vehicle emissions budgets 

were calculated using MOVES2010(a). 

After the adequacy finding and approval 

of the budgets become effective, the 

budgets will have to be used in future 

conformity determinations and regional 

emissions analyses prepared by the 

KIPDA, 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.14 The states have 

determined the 2015 MVEBs for the 

combined Indiana and Kentucky 

portions of the Louisville area to be 

580.69 tpy for primary PM2.5 and 

17,700.95 tpy for NOX. Indiana has 

determined the 2025 MVEBs for the 

entire Louisville area to be 324.04 tpy 

for primary PM2.5 and 9,311.76 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. Indiana has decided to 

include ‘‘safety margins’’ as provided 

for in 40 CFR 93.124(a) (described 

below) of 75.74 tpy and 42.27 tpy for 

primary PM2.5 and 2,308.82 tpy and 

1,214.58 tpy for NOX in the 2015 and 

2025 MVEBs, respectively, to provide 

for on-road mobile source growth. 

Indiana did not provide emission 

budgets for SO2, VOCs, and ammonia 

because it concluded 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 Indiana portion of the 

Louisville 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 2025 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 Indiana portion of the 

Louisville area. Based on the results of 

this review of the budgets and the 

maintenance plans EPA is approving the 

2015 and 2025 direct PM2.5 and NOX

budgets including the requested safety 

margins for the Indiana portion of the 

Louisville area. Additionally, EPA, 

through this rulemaking, has found the 

submitted budgets to be adequate for 

use to determine transportation 

conformity in the Indiana portion of the 

area, because EPA has determined that 

the area can maintain the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS for the relevant 

maintenance period with on-road 

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.15


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 41751 

16EPA 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) 

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 8, the entire Louisville 

area is projected to have safety margins 

for NOX and direct PM2.5 of 38,078.76 

tpy and 1,668.41 tpy in 2025 (the 

difference between the attainment year, 

2008, emissions and the projected year 

of 2025 emissions for all sources in the 

Louisville area). 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 Indiana contain NOX safety 

margins for mobile sources in 2015 and 

2025 and PM2.5 safety margins for 

mobile sources in 2015 and 2025 are 

much smaller than the allowable safety 

margins reflected in the total emissions 

for the Louisville 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 2025 

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 Indiana 

portion of the Louisville 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 if this 

rulemaking goes final. (40 CFR 

93.118(f)(iii)) Additionally, the 

determinations must be based on 

regional emissions analyses using 

MOVES2010b or a more recent version 

of MOVES that has been approved for 

use in conformity determinations.16

6. 2008 Comprehensive Emissions 

Inventory 

As discussed above, section 172(c)(3) 

of the CAA requires areas to submit a 

comprehensive emissions inventory. 

Indiana submitted a 2008 base year 

emissions inventory that meets 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. Discussion of how these 

emissions were compiled is found in 

section V(3)(b) above, as well as in the 

docket. 

The emissions for the 2008 base year 

emission inventory and supplemental 

precursor emissions inventory are found 

in Tables 4 and 5, and documented in 

Indiana’s redesignation request 

submittal and supplemental submittal. 

EPA has reviewed Indiana’s 

documentation of the emissions 

inventory techniques and data sources 

used for the derivation of the 2008 

emissions estimates, and has found that 

Indiana has thoroughly documented the 

derivation of these emissions 

inventories. The submittal from the state 

shows that the 2008 emissions 

inventory is currently the most 

complete emissions inventories for 

PM2.5 and PM2.5 precursors in the 

Louisville area. Based upon EPA’s 

review, we propose to find that the base 

year emissions inventory are as 

complete and accurate as possible given 

the input data available to Indiana, and 

we are proposing to approve them under 

CAA section 172(c)(3). 

7. Summary of Proposed Actions 

EPA has previously determined that 

the Louisville area has attained the 1997 

annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is proposing 

to determine that the entire Louisville 

area continues to attain the 1997 annual 

PM2.5 standard using the latest three 

years of certified, quality-assured data, 

and that the Indiana portion of the area 

has met the requirements for 

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

of the CAA. EPA is proposing to grant 

the request from Indiana to change the 

legal designation of the Indiana portion 

of the Louisville area from 

nonattainment to attainment for the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS. EPA is 

proposing to approve Indiana’s PM2.5

maintenance plan for the Louisville area 

as a revision to the Indiana SIP because 

the plan meets the requirements of 

section 175A of the CAA. EPA is 

proposing to approve the 2008 

emissions inventory for primary PM2.5, 

NOX, SO2, VOC and ammonia 

documented in Indiana’s June 16, 2011, 

submittal and supplement on March 18, 

2013, 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 2025 primary 

PM2.5 and NOX MVEBs for the 

Louisville area. These MVEBs will be 

used in future transportation conformity 

analyses for the area. 

VI. What are the effects of EPA’s 

proposed actions? 

If finalized, approval of the 

redesignation request would change the 

official designation of the Indiana 

portion of the Louisville area for the 

1997 annual PM2.5 NAAQS, found at 40 

CFR part 81, from nonattainment to 

attainment. A final approval would also 

be a revision to the Indiana SIP for the 

Louisville area, the maintenance plan 

for the 1997 annual PM2.5 standard, 

MVEBs, as well as the 2008 emissions 

inventory included with the 

redesignation request. 

VII. 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 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
41752 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 133 / Thursday, July 11, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

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 CAA; 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. 

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, Environmental 

protection, National Parks, Wilderness. 

Dated: June 25, 2013. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2013–16659 Filed 7–10–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0337 and EPA–R05– 

OAR–2012–0462; FRL–9831–7] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Ohio; 

Redesignation of the Ohio Portion of 

the Steubenville-Weirton Area to 

Attainment of the 1997 Annual and 

2006 24-Hour Standards for Fine 

Particulate Matter 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: On April 16, 2012, and May 

25, 2012, the Ohio Environmental 

Protection Agency submitted a request 

under the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) 

for EPA to grant the redesignation of the 

Ohio portion of the SteubenvilleWeirton area (Jefferson County), West 

Virginia-Ohio (Brooke and Hancock 

counties) (WV–OH), nonattainment area 

to attainment of the 1997 annual and 

2006 24-hour standards for fine 

particulate matter (PM2.5). EPA is 

proposing to determine that the entire 

Steubenville-Weirton area attains both 

the 1997 annual and the 2006 24-hour 

PM2.5 standard, based on the most 

recent three years of certified air quality 

data. EPA is proposing to approve, as 

revisions to the Ohio state 

implementation plan (SIP), the state’s 

plan for maintaining the 1997 annual 

and 2006 24-hour PM2.5 National 

Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS or standard) through 2025 in 

the Ohio portion of the area. EPA is 

proposing to approve 2005 and 2008 

emission inventories for the Ohio 

portion of the Steubenville-Weirton area 

as meeting the comprehensive 

emissions inventory requirement of the 

CAA. In this proposal, EPA is also 

proposing to approve a supplement to 

the emission inventories previously 

submitted by the state. EPA is proposing 

that the inventories for ammonia and 

volatile organic compounds (VOC), in 

conjunction with the inventories for 

nitrogen oxides (NOX), direct PM2.5, and 

sulfur dioxide (SO2) that EPA 

previously proposed to approve, meet 

the comprehensive emissions inventory 

requirement of the CAA. Ohio’s 

maintenance plan submission includes 

a motor vehicle emission budget 

(MVEB) for the mobile source 

contribution of PM2.5 and NOX to the 

Steubenville-Weirton area for 

transportation conformity purposes; 

EPA is proposing to approve the MVEBs 

for 2015 and 2025 into the Ohio SIP for 

transportation conformity purposes. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before August 12, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2012–0337 or EPA–R05–OAR– 

2012–0462, by one of the following 

methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: blakley.pamela@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (312) 692–2450. 

4. Mail: Pamela Blakley, Chief, 

Control Strategies Section (AR–18J), 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. 

5. Hand Delivery: Pamela Blakley, 

Chief, Control Strategies Section (AR– 

18J), U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604. Such deliveries 

are only accepted during the Regional 

Office normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

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

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2012– 

0337 or EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0462. 

EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 


rmajette on DSK2TPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS