4510 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 19 / Monday, January 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

the person represents, if any; and (4) an 

indication of the amount of time needed 

for the testimony. Requests to testify 

must be submitted by email to Jennifer 

Lo at Jennifer.Lo@uspto.gov. Based upon 

the requests received, an agenda for 

witness testimony will be sent to 

testifying requesters and posted on the 

USPTO Internet Web site (address: 

www.uspto.gov/americainventsact). If 

time permits, the PPAC may permit 

unscheduled testimony as well. 

Effective September 16, 2011, with 

the passage of the AIA, the USPTO is 

authorized under Section 10 of the AIA 

to set or adjust by rule all patent and 

trademark fees established, authorized, 

or charged under Title 35 of the United 

States Code and the Trademark Act of 

1946, respectively. Patent and 

trademark fees set or adjusted by rule 

under Section 10 of the AIA may only 

recover the aggregate estimated costs to 

the Office for processing, activities, 

services, and materials relating to 

patents and trademarks, respectively, 

including administrative costs of the 

Office with respect to each as the case 

may be. 

Congress set forth the process for the 

USPTO to follow in setting or adjusting 

patent and trademark fees by rule under 

Section 10 of the AIA. Congress requires 

the relevant advisory committee to hold 

a public hearing about the USPTO fee 

proposals after receiving them from the 

agency. Congress likewise requires the 

relevant advisory committee to prepare 

a written report on the proposed fees 

and the USPTO to consider the relevant 

advisory committee’s report before 

finally setting or adjusting the fees. 

Further, Congress requires the USPTO 

to publish its proposed fees and 

supporting rationale in the Federal 

Register and give the public not less 

than 45 days in which to submit 

comments on the proposed change in 

fees. Finally, Congress requires the 

USPTO to publish its final rule setting 

or adjusting fees also in the Federal 

Register. 

Presently, the USPTO is planning to 

exercise its fee setting authority to set or 

adjust patent fees. The USPTO will 

publish a proposed patent fee schedule 

and related supplementary information 

for public viewing no later than 

February 7, 2012, on the USPTO 

Internet Web site (address: 

www.uspto.gov/americainventsact). In 

turn, the PPAC will hold two public 

hearings about the proposed patent fee 

schedule on the dates indicated herein. 

The USPTO will assist the PPAC in 

holding those hearings by providing 

resources to organize the hearings and 

by notifying the public about the 

hearings, such as through this Federal 

Register Notice. 

To gather information from the public 

about the USPTO’s proposed patent 

fees, the PPAC will post specific 

questions for the public’s consideration 

on the PPAC’s Internet Web site 

(address: http://www.uspto.gov/about/ 

advisory/ppac) after the USPTO 

publishes its proposed patent fee 

schedule. The public may wish to 

address those questions in its hearing 

testimony and/or in written comments 

submitted to PPAC as described herein. 

Following the PPAC public hearing, 

the USPTO will publish a Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal 

Register, setting forth its proposed 

patent fees. The publication of that 

Notice will open a comment window 

through which the public may provide 

written comments directly to the 

USPTO. Additional information about 

public comment to the USPTO will be 

provided in the USPTO’s Notice of 

Proposed Rulemaking. 

Dated: January 24, 2012. 

David J. Kappos, 

Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual 

Property and Director of the United States 

Patent and Trademark Office. 

[FR Doc. 2012–1939 Filed 1–27–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–16–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R04–OAR–2010–0255–201116; FRL– 

9624–2] 

Air Quality Implementation Plans; 

Kentucky; Attainment Plan for the 

Kentucky Portion of the HuntingtonAshland 1997 Annual PM2.5

Nonattainment Area 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA or Agency). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

a state implementation plan (SIP) 

revision submitted by the 

Commonwealth of Kentucky, through 

the Kentucky Energy and Environment 

Cabinet, Division for Air Quality (DAQ), 

to EPA on December 3, 2008, for the 

purpose of providing for attainment of 

the 1997 fine particulate matter (PM2.5) 

national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS) in the Kentucky portion of the 

Huntington-Ashland, West VirginiaKentucky-Ohio PM2.5 nonattainment 

area (hereafter referred to as the 

‘‘Huntington-Ashland Area’’ or ‘‘Area’’). 

The Huntington-Ashland Area is 

comprised of Boyd County and a 

portion of Lawrence County in 

Kentucky; Cabell and Wayne Counties 

and a portion of Mason County in West 

Virginia; and Lawrence and Scioto 

Counties and portions of Adams and 

Gallia Counties in Ohio. The Kentucky 

plan (hereafter referred to as the 

‘‘attainment plan’’) pertains only to the 

Kentucky portion of the HuntingtonAshland Area. EPA is now proposing to 

approve Kentucky’s submittal regarding 

reasonably available control technology 

(RACT) and reasonably available control 

measures (RACM); reasonable further 

progress (RFP); base-year and 

attainment-year emissions inventories; 

contingency measures; and, for 

transportation conformity purposes, an 

insignificance determination for PM2.5

and nitrogen oxides (NOX) for the 

mobile source contribution to ambient 

PM2.5 levels for the Commonwealth’s 

portion of the Huntington-Ashland 

Area. This action is being taken in 

accordance with the Clean Air Act (CAA 

or Act) and the ‘‘Clean Air Fine Particle 

Implementation Rule,’’ hereafter 

referred to as the ‘‘PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule,’’ issued by EPA on April 25, 2007. 

The States of West Virginia and Ohio 

have provided separate SIP revisions 

with attainment plans for their portions 

for the Huntington-Ashland Area. EPA 

will act on those SIP revisions in 

rulemaking separate from today’s 

rulemaking. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before February 29, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID Number EPA– 

R04–OAR–2010–0255 by one of the 

following methods: 

1. www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

2. Email: benjamin.lynorae@epa.gov. 

3. Fax: (404) 562–9019. 

4. Mail: EPA–R04–OAR–2010–0255, 

Regulatory Development Section, Air 

Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and 

Toxics Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. 

5. Hand Delivery or Courier: Ms. 

Lynorae Benjamin, Chief, Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Regional Office’s normal hours of 

operation. The Regional Office’s official 

hours of business are Monday through 


emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 19 / Monday, January 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules 4511 

Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, excluding Federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R04–OAR–2010– 

0255. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit through 

www.regulations.gov or email, 

information that you consider to be CBI 

or otherwise protected. The 

www.regulations.gov Web site is an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an email comment directly 

to EPA without going through 

www.regulations.gov, your email 

address will be automatically captured 

and included as part of the comment 

that is placed in the public docket and 

made available on the Internet. If you 

submit an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. For additional information 

about EPA’s public docket visit the EPA 

Docket Center homepage at http:// 

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

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the 

www.regulations.gov index. Although 

listed in the index, some information is 

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

information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Certain other 

material, such as copyrighted material, 

is not placed on the Internet and will be 

publicly available only in hard copy 

form. Publicly available docket 

materials are available either 

electronically in www.regulations.gov or 

in hard copy at the Regulatory 

Development Section, Air Planning 

Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics 

Management Division, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. EPA 

requests that if at all possible, you 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to 

schedule your inspection. The Regional 

Office’s official hours of business are 

Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 

excluding Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joel 

Huey of the Regulatory Development 

Section, in the Air Planning Branch, 

Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management 

Division, U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street 

SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303–8960. Joel 

Huey may be reached by phone at (404) 

562–9104, or via electronic mail at 

huey.joel@epa.gov 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents 

I. What action is EPA proposing to take? 

II. What is the background for EPA’s 

proposed action? 

A. Designation History 

B. Clean Air Fine Particle Implementation 

Rule 

C. Attaining Data Determination and 

Finding of Attainment 

III. What is included in Kentucky’s 

attainment plan submittal? 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of Kentucky’s 

attainment plan submittal? 

A. Attainment Demonstration 

1. Pollutants Addressed 

2. Emissions Inventory Requirements 

3. Modeling 

4. Reasonably Available Control Measures/ 

Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACM/RACT) 

5. Reasonable Further Progress 

6. Contingency Measures 

7. Attainment Date 

B. Insignificance Determination for the 

Mobile Source Contribution to PM2.5 and 

NOX Emissions 

V. Proposed Action 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What action is EPA proposing to 

take? 

EPA is proposing to approve 

Kentucky’s SIP revision, submitted 

through the DAQ to EPA on December 

3, 2008, for the purpose of 

demonstrating attainment of the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS for the Kentucky 

portion of the Huntington-Ashland 

Area. Kentucky’s PM2.5 attainment plan 

includes an analysis of RACM/RACT, an 

RFP plan, base-year and attainment-year 

emissions inventories for the Area, 

contingency measures, and an 

insignificance determination for mobile 

PM2.5 and NOx emissions for 

transportation conformity purposes. 

EPA has determined that Kentucky’s 

PM2.5 attainment plan for the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS for its portion of 

the Huntington-Ashland Area meets 

applicable requirements of the CAA and 

the PM2.5 Implementation Rule. EPA is 

proposing to approve Kentucky’s 

attainment plan for the 

Commonwealth’s portion of the 

Huntington-Ashland Area, including the 

insignificance determination for PM2.5

and NOX for the mobile source 

contribution to ambient PM2.5 levels for 

the Commonwealth’s portion of the 

Huntington-Ashland Area. EPA’s 

analysis for this proposed action is 

discussed in Section IV of this proposed 

rulemaking. 

II. What is the background for EPA’s 

proposed action? 

A. Designation History 

On July 18, 1997 (62 FR 36852), EPA 

established the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS as 

an annual standard of 15.0 micrograms 

per cubic meter (mg/m3), based on a 3- 

year average of annual mean PM2.5

concentrations, and a 24-hour (or daily) 

standard of 65 mg/m3, based on a 3-year 

average of the 98th percentile of 24-hour 

concentrations. EPA established the 

NAAQS based on significant evidence 

and numerous health studies 

demonstrating that serious health effects 

are associated with exposures to PM2.5. 

Following promulgation of a new or 

revised NAAQS, EPA is required by the 

CAA to designate areas throughout the 

United States as attaining or not 

attaining the NAAQS; this designation 

process is described in section 107(d)(1) 

of the CAA. EPA and state air quality 

agencies initiated the monitoring 

process for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in 

1999 and established a complete set of 

air quality monitors by January 2001. 

On January 5, 2005, EPA promulgated 

initial air quality designations for the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS (70 FR 944), which 

became effective on April 5, 2005, based 

on air quality monitoring data for 

calendar years 2001–2003. 

On April 14, 2005, EPA promulgated 

a supplemental rule amending the 

Agency’s initial designations (70 FR 

19844) but retaining the original 

effective date of April 5, 2005. As a 

result of that supplemental rule, PM2.5

nonattainment designations are in effect 

for 39 areas, comprising 208 counties 

within 20 states (and the District of 

Columbia) nationwide, with a combined 

population of about 88 million. The 

Kentucky portion of the tri-state WV– 

KY–OH Huntington-Ashland Area, 

which is the subject of this proposed 

rulemaking, is included in the list of 

areas designated nonattainment for the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. As mentioned 

above, the Kentucky portion of the 

Huntington-Ashland Area consists of 

Boyd County in its entirety and a 

portion of Lawrence County, Kentucky. 

On October 17, 2006, EPA 

strengthened the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS 

to 35 mg/m3 and retained the level of the 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS at 15.0 mg/m3. 


emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
4512 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 19 / Monday, January 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

See 71 FR 61144. On November 13, 

2009, EPA designated areas as either 

attainment/unclassifiable, unclassifiable 

or nonattainment with respect to the 

revised 24-Hour PM2.5 NAAQS. See 74 

FR 58688. Of relevance to the proposed 

rulemaking herein, EPA’s November 

2009 designation action clarified the 

designations for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS 

by relabeling the existing designation 

tables to specifically identify 

designations made for the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS and those made for the 

1997 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS (i.e., 65 mg/ 

m3). 

B. Clean Air Fine Particle 

Implementation Rule 

As noted above, on April 25, 2007, 

EPA issued the PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule for the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS (72 FR 

20586). This rule describes the CAA 

framework and requirements for 

developing SIPs to achieve attainment 

in areas designated nonattainment for 

the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. Such 

attainment plans must include a 

demonstration that a nonattainment area 

will meet the applicable NAAQS within 

the timeframe provided in the statute. 

This demonstration must include 

modeling that is performed in 

accordance with 40 CFR 51.112 

(Demonstration of adequacy) and 

Appendix W to part 51 (Guideline on 

Air Quality Models) and that is 

consistent with EPA modeling guidance. 

See 40 CFR 51.1007. The modeling 

demonstration should include 

supporting technical analyses and 

descriptions of all relevant adopted 

Federal, state, and local regulations and 

control measures that have been 

adopted in order to provide for 

attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS by 

the proposed attainment date. 

For the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, an 

attainment demonstration must show 

that a nonattainment area will attain the 

standards as expeditiously as 

practicable, but within five years of 

designation (i.e., by an attainment date 

of no later than April 5, 2010, based on 

air quality data for 2007 through 2009). 

If the area is not expected to meet the 

NAAQS by April 5, 2010, a state may 

request to extend the attainment date by 

one to five years based upon the severity 

of the nonattainment problem or the 

feasibility of implementing control 

measures in the specific area. CAA 

section 172(a)(2). For EPA to approve an 

extension of the attainment date beyond 

2010, the state must provide an analysis 

that is consistent with the statutory 

criteria for an extension and that 

demonstrates that the attainment date is 

as expeditious as practicable for the 

area, given the existing facts and 

circumstances. 

For each nonattainment area, the state 

(or each state of a multi-state area) must 

demonstrate that it has adopted all 

RACM, including all RACT, as needed 

to provide for attainment of the PM2.5

NAAQS in the area ‘‘as expeditiously as 

practicable.’’ The PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule provides guidance for making 

these RACM/RACT determinations. See 

discussion in section IV.A.4. below. 

Any measures that are necessary to meet 

these requirements that are not already 

federally promulgated or in an EPAapproved part of the SIP must be 

submitted as part of a state’s attainment 

plan. Any state measures in the control 

strategy must meet the applicable 

statutory and regulatory requirements, 

and, in particular, must be enforceable. 

The PM2.5 Implementation Rule also 

includes guidance on pollutants that 

states must address in their attainment 

plans. Section 302(g) of the CAA 

authorizes EPA to regulate criteria 

pollutants and their precursors. The 

main chemical precursors associated 

with fine particle formation are SO2, 

NOX, volatile organic compounds 

(VOCs), and ammonia. The effect of 

reducing emissions of precursor 

pollutants that contribute to PM2.5

concentrations varies by area, however, 

depending upon local PM2.5

composition, emission levels, and other 

area-specific factors. For this reason, the 

PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

recommends that states control the 

direct PM2.5 emissions and the precursor 

emissions that would be most effective 

for attaining the NAAQS within the 

specific area, based upon an appropriate 

technical demonstration. 

The PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

defines direct PM2.5 emissions as ‘‘solid 

particles emitted directly from an air 

emissions source or activity, or gaseous 

emissions or liquid droplets from an air 

emissions source or activity which 

condense to form particulate matter at 

ambient temperatures. Direct PM2.5

emissions include elemental carbon, 

directly emitted organic carbon, directly 

emitted sulfate, directly emitted nitrate, 

and other inorganic particles (including 

but not limited to crustal material, 

metals, and sea salt).’’ 40 CFR 51.1000. 

The PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

requires states to identify and evaluate 

sources of PM2.5 direct emissions and 

PM2.5 attainment plan precursors. 40 

CFR 51.1002(c). The rule requires states 

to address SO2 as a PM2.5 attainment 

plan precursor and to evaluate SO2 for 

possible control measures in all PM2.5

nonattainment areas. States are also 

required to address and evaluate 

reasonable controls for NOX as a PM2.5

attainment plan precursor unless the 

state and EPA make a finding that NOX

emissions from sources in the state do 

not significantly contribute to PM2.5

concentrations in the relevant 

nonattainment area. 

Although current scientific 

information shows that certain VOC 

emissions are precursors to the 

formation of secondary organic aerosol, 

and significant progress has been made 

in understanding the role of gaseous 

organic material in the formation of 

organic PM, this relationship remains 

complex. Further research and technical 

tools are needed to better characterize 

emissions inventories for specific VOCs 

and to determine the extent of the 

contribution of specific VOCs to organic 

PM mass. Because of these factors, the 

PM2.5 Implementation Rule does not 

require states to address or evaluate 

controls for VOCs as PM2.5 attainment 

plan precursors unless the state or EPA 

makes a finding that VOC emissions 

from sources in the state significantly 

contribute to PM2.5 concentrations in the 

relevant nonattainment area. 

The PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

describes the formation of particles 

related to ammonia emissions, which is 

a complex, nonlinear process. Though 

recent studies have improved our 

understanding of the role of ammonia in 

aerosol formation, further research is 

needed to better describe the 

relationship between ammonia 

emissions and particulate matter 

concentrations and the related impacts. 

Also, area-specific data is needed to 

evaluate the effectiveness of reducing 

ammonia emissions in reducing PM2.5

concentrations in different areas and to 

determine where ammonia decreases 

may increase the acidity of particles and 

precipitation. For these reasons, the 

PM2.5 Implementation Rule does not 

require states to address or evaluate 

controls for ammonia as PM2.5

attainment plan precursors unless the 

state or EPA makes a finding that 

ammonia emissions from sources in the 

state significantly contribute to PM2.5

concentrations in the relevant 

nonattainment area. 

The presumptive inclusion of NOX

and the presumptive exclusion of VOCs 

and ammonia as attainment plan 

precursors can be reversed based on an 

acceptable technical demonstration for a 

particular nonattainment area by the 

state or EPA. The state must 

demonstrate that, based on the sum of 

available technical and scientific 

information, it would be appropriate for 

a nonattainment area to reverse the 

presumptive approach for a particular 

precursor. Such a demonstration should 

include information from multiple 


emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 19 / Monday, January 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules 4513 

sources, such as results of speciation 

data analyses, air-quality modeling 

studies, chemical-tracer studies, 

emissions inventories, or special 

intensive measurement studies to 

evaluate specific atmospheric chemistry 

in an area. See PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule, 72 FR 20596. 

The PM2.5 Implementation Rule also 

provides guidance for the other 

elements of a state’s attainment plan, 

including, but not limited to, emissions 

inventories, contingency measures, and 

motor-vehicle emissions budgets used 

for transportation conformity purposes. 

There are, however, three aspects of the 

preamble to the PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule for which EPA received petitions 

requesting reconsideration. The specific 

guidance elements identified by 

petitioners pertain to the presumption 

or advance determination that 

compliance with the requirements of the 

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) 

automatically satisfies the requirements 

for RACT or RACM for NOX or SO2

emissions from electric generating unit 

(EGU) sources participating in regional 

cap and trade programs (See PM2.5

Implementation Rule, section II.F.7.); 

the suggestion that the economic 

feasibility element of a RACT 

determination should include 

consideration of whether the cost of a 

measure is reasonable in light of the 

benefits (See PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule, section II.F.5.); and the policy of 

allowing certain emissions reductions 

from outside the nonattainment area to 

be credited as meeting the RFP 

requirement (See PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule, section II.G.5.). EPA has granted 

these petitions and intends to propose 

rulemaking to change these aspects of 

the PM2.5 Implementation Rule. 

However, EPA’s evaluation of the 

attainment plan for the HuntingtonAshland Area is not impacted by its 

reconsideration of any of these aspects 

of the PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

because the plan does not rely upon 

them. 

C. Attaining Data Determination and 

Finding of Attainment 

On September 7, 2011, EPA 

determined that the HuntingtonAshland Area had attaining data for the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 76 FR 

55542. That determination was based on 

quality-assured, quality controlled and 

certified ambient air monitoring data 

that shows the area met the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. Furthermore, in 

accordance with CAA 179(c), EPA 

determined in the same notice that the 

Huntington-Ashland Area attained the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS by its 

applicable attainment date of April 5, 

2010. This information is mentioned 

here in support of EPA’s determination 

that Kentucky’s attainment plan was 

sufficient to bring the HuntingtonAshland Area into attainment no later 

than the required attainment date of 

April 5, 2010. 

III. What is included in Kentucky’s 

attainment plan submittal? 

Kentucky’s PM2.5 attainment plan 

submittal covers the Kentucky portion 

of the Huntington-Ashland Annual 

PM2.5 nonattainment area, which is the 

only portion for which the 

Commonwealth has jurisdiction. 

Today’s action regards only the 

Kentucky portion of the HuntingtonAshland Area. However, the modeling 

analysis provided with Kentucky’s 

attainment plan documentation 

includes modeling results for the entire 

tri-state Area and the results of Ohio 

and West Virginia’s demonstrations for 

their portions of the Area, for which the 

conclusions of attainment are consistent 

with that of Kentucky’s. 

In accordance with section 172(c) of 

the CAA and the PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule, the attainment plan submitted by 

the DAQ for the Kentucky portion of the 

Huntington-Ashland Area includes (1) 

emissions inventories for the plan’s base 

year (2002) and attainment year (2009); 

(2) an attainment demonstration; and (3) 

an insignificance finding for the mobile 

source contribution of PM2.5 and NOX. 

The attainment demonstration includes: 

(a) technical analyses that locate, 

identify, and quantify sources of 

emissions contributing to violations of 

the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS; (b) 

analyses of future-year emissions 

reductions and air quality 

improvements expected to result from 

national and local programs; adopted 

emission reduction measures with 

schedules for implementation; and 

contingency measures required under 

section 172(c)(9) of the CAA. See 72 FR 

20605. 

To analyze future-year emission 

reductions and air quality 

improvements, Kentucky used regional 

modeling analyses developed through 

the Association for Southeastern 

Integrated Planning (ASIP). The ASIP 

was a collaborative modeling and 

technical analysis effort among the 

states of Kentucky, Alabama, Florida, 

Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, 

South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia and 

West Virginia to develop a regional 

assessment of the controls needed to 

achieve attainment of the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS and the 2006 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. This regional modeling was 

performed in accordance with EPA’s 

‘‘Guidance on the Use of Models and 

Other Analyses for Demonstrating 

Attainment of Air Quality Goals for 

Ozone, PM2.5, and Regional Haze’’ 

(EPA–454/B–07–002, April 2007) 

(hereafter referred to as ‘‘EPA’s 

Modeling Guidance’’). 

IV. What is EPA’s analysis of 

Kentucky’s attainment plan submittal? 

A. Attainment Demonstration 

Consistent with CAA requirements 

(see, e.g., section 172), and 40 CFR 

51.1007, an attainment demonstration 

for a PM2.5 nonattainment area must 

include a showing that the area will 

attain the annual and 24-hour standards 

as expeditiously as practicable. The 

demonstration must also meet the 

requirements of 40 CFR 51.112 and Part 

51, Appendix W, and include inventory 

data, modeling results, and emissions 

reduction analyses on which the state 

has based its projected attainment. In 

the case of the Huntington-Ashland 

Area, the Area has already attained the 

standard. Thus, EPA is now proposing 

to determine that the attainment 

demonstration submitted by the 

Commonwealth was sufficient, and EPA 

is taking action to approve individual 

components that are necessary for the 

continued attainment and maintenance 

of the Area. 

1. Pollutants Addressed 

As discussed in section II.B. above, 

the PM2.5 Implementation Rule requires 

states to identify and evaluate sources of 

PM2.5 direct emissions and PM2.5

attainment plan precursors. The rule 

provides that SO2 is a PM2.5 attainment 

plan precursor in all areas. The rule also 

sets forth the rebuttable presumptions 

that NOX is a PM2.5 attainment plan 

precursor in all areas and that ammonia 

and VOCs are not PM2.5 attainment plan 

precursors. Neither Kentucky nor the 

EPA has found reason to reverse these 

presumptions for the HuntingtonAshland Area. Accordingly, Kentucky’s 

PM2.5 attainment plan evaluates 

emissions of direct PM2.5, SO2, and NOX

in the Kentucky portion of the 

Huntington-Ashland Area. 

2. Emissions Inventory Requirements 

States are required under section 

172(c)(3) of the CAA to develop 

comprehensive, accurate and current 

emissions inventories of all sources of 

the relevant pollutant or pollutants in 

the area. These inventories provide a 

detailed accounting of all emissions and 

emissions sources by precursor or 

pollutant. In addition, inventories are 

used in air quality modeling to 

demonstrate that attainment of the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS is as expeditious as 


emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
4514 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 19 / Monday, January 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

practicable and, if an attainment date 

extension beyond 2010 is needed, to 

support the need for such an extension. 

Emissions inventory guidance was 

provided in the April 1999 document, 

‘‘Emissions Inventory Guidance for 

Implementation of Ozone and 

Particulate Matter NAAQS and Regional 

Haze Regulations,’’ (EPA–454/R–99– 

006), which was updated in November 

2005 (EPA–454/R–05–001) (hereafter 

referred to as ‘‘EPA’s Emissions 

Inventory Guidance’’). Emissions 

reporting requirements were provided 

in the 2002 Consolidated Emissions 

Reporting Rule (CERR) (67 FR 39602). 

On December 17, 2008 (73 FR 76539), 

EPA promulgated the Air Emissions 

Reporting Requirements (AERR) to 

update emissions reporting 

requirements in the CERR and to 

harmonize, consolidate and simplify 

data reporting by states. 

In accordance with the CERR and 

EPA’s Emissions Inventory Guidance, 

the PM2.5 Implementation Rule requires 

states to submit inventory information 

on directly emitted PM2.5 and PM2.5

precursors and any additional inventory 

information needed to support an 

attainment demonstration and (where 

applicable) an RFP plan. 

PM2.5 is comprised of filterable and 

condensable emissions. Condensable 

particulate matter (CPM) can comprise a 

significant percentage of direct PM2.5

emissions from certain sources and are 

required to be included in national 

emissions inventories based on 

emission factors. Test Methods 201A 

and 202 are available for source-specific 

measurement of condensable emissions. 

However, the PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule notes that there were issues raised 

by commenters related to availability 

and implementation of these test 

methods as well as uncertainties in 

existing data for condensable PM2.5. 

EPA established a transition period 

during which EPA could assess possible 

revisions to available test methods and 

to allow time for states to update 

emissions inventories as needed to 

address direct PM2.5, including 

condensable emissions. Because of the 

time required for this assessment, EPA 

recognized that states would be limited 

in how to effectively address CPM 

emissions and established a period of 

transition, up to January 1, 2011, during 

which state submissions for PM2.5 were 

not required to address CPM emissions. 

Amendments to these test methods were 

proposed on March 25, 2009 (74 FR 

12969), and finalized on December 21, 

2010 (75 FR 80118). The amendments to 

Method 201A added a particle-sizing 

device for PM2.5 sampling, and the 

amendments to Method 202 revised the 

sample collection and recovery 

procedures of the method to reduce the 

formation of reaction artifacts that could 

lead to inaccurate measurements of 

CPM emissions. 

The period of transition for 

establishing emissions limits for 

condensable direct PM2.5 ended on 

January 1, 2011. PM2.5 submissions 

made during the transition period are 

not required to address CPM emissions, 

however, states must address the control 

of direct PM2.5 emissions, including 

condensable emissions, with any new 

action taken after January 1, 2011. 

Kentucky submitted the HuntingtonAshland Area attainment plan prior to 

January 1, 2011, and did not consider 

CPM in addressing the control of PM2.5

emissions. 

In July 2008, EarthJustice filed a 

petition requesting reconsideration of 

EPA’s transition period for CPM 

emissions provided in the PM2.5

Implementation Rule. In January 2009, 

EPA decided to allow states that have 

not previously addressed CPM to 

continue to exclude CPM for PSD 

permitting during the transition period. 

Today’s action reflects a review of 

Kentucky’s submittal based on current 

EPA guidance as described in the PM2.5

Implementation Rule. 

The 172(c)(3) emissions inventory is 

developed by the incorporation of data 

from multiple sources. States were 

required to develop and submit to EPA 

a triennial emissions inventory 

according to the CERR for all source 

categories (i.e., point, area, nonroad 

mobile and on-road mobile). This 

inventory often forms the basis of data 

that are updated with more recent 

information and data that also is used in 

their attainment demonstration 

modeling inventory. Such was the case 

in the development of the 2002 

emissions inventory that was submitted 

in the Commonwealth’s attainment SIP 

for this Area. The 2002 emissions 

inventory was based on data developed 

with Visibility Improvement State and 

Tribal Association of the Southeast 

(VISTAS) contractors for the same ten 

states of the ASIP effort and submitted 

by the states to the 2002 National 

Emissions Inventory. Several iterations 

of the 2002 inventories were developed 

for the different emissions source 

categories resulting from revisions and 

updates to the data. This resulted in the 

use of version G2 of the updated data to 

represent the point sources’ emissions. 

Data from many databases, studies and 

models (e.g., vehicle miles traveled, fuel 

programs, the NONROAD 2002 model 

data for commercial marine vessels, 

locomotives and Clean Air Market 

Division, etc.) resulted in the inventory 

submitted in this SIP. The data were 

developed according to EPA’s Emissions 

Inventory Guidance and a quality 

assurance project plan that was 

developed through VISTAS and 

approved by EPA. EPA agrees that the 

process used to develop this inventory 

was adequate to meet the requirements 

of the CAA, e.g., CAA section 172(c)(3), 

and the implementing regulations. 

Tables 1–5 below show the level of 

emissions in the Kentucky portion of 

the Huntington-Ashland Area for 2002 

by pollutant, county, and emissions 

source category. The point, area, and 

nonroad values for Lawrence County in 

the December 8, 2008, submittal were 

for the entire county, not just the census 

block that EPA designated as 

nonattainment. On May 26, 2011, at the 

request of EPA, the Commonwealth 

submitted updated tables to include 

information on point source emissions 

from the designated census block and 

population based apportionment of the 

area and nonroad sectors to support the 

mobile source insignificance finding 

discussed further in Section IV.B. 

below. A copy of the May 26, 2011, 

clarification letter and updated tables 

can be found in the docket for this 

proposed action (EPA–R02–OAR–2010– 

0255) on the www.regulations.gov Web 

site. EPA is proposing to approve the 

emissions inventory for the Kentucky 

portion of the Huntington-Ashland Area 

as meeting the requirements of Section 

172(c)(3) of the CAA. 

TABLE 1—BASE AND ATTAINMENT YEAR VOC INVENTORY FOR THE KENTUCKY PORTION OF THE HUNTINGTON-ASHLAND

AREA

VOC (tpy) 

Boyd County Lawrence County KY portion total 

2002 2009 2002 2009 2002 2009 

Point ................................. 3083 3259 98 119 3181 3378 

Area .................................. 780 775 374 357 1154 1132 


emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 19 / Monday, January 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules 4515 

TABLE 1—BASE AND ATTAINMENT YEAR VOC INVENTORY FOR THE KENTUCKY PORTION OF THE HUNTINGTON-ASHLAND

AREA—Continued 

VOC (tpy) 

Boyd County Lawrence County KY portion total 

2002 2009 2002 2009 2002 2009 

Mobile ............................... 991 613 409 269 1400 882 

Nonroad ........................... 312 256 223 271 535 527 

Total .......................... 5166 4903 1104 1016 6270 5919 

TABLE 2—BASE AND ATTAINMENT YEAR NOX INVENTORY FOR THE KENTUCKY PORTION OF THE HUNTINGTON-ASHLAND

AREA

NOX (tpy) 

Boyd County Lawrence County KY portion total 

2002 2009 2002 2009 2002 2009 

Point ................................. 7046 7281 17129 5730 24175 13011 

Area .................................. 40 46 87 93 127 139 

Mobile ............................... 1213 774 785 528 1998 1302 

Nonroad ........................... 3319 3107 726 664 4045 3771 

Total .......................... 11618 11208 18727 7015 30345 18223 

TABLE 3—BASE AND ATTAINMENT YEAR SO2 INVENTORY FOR THE KENTUCKY PORTION OF THE HUNTINGTON-ASHLAND

AREA

SO2 (tpy) 

Boyd County Lawrence County KY portion total 

2002 2009 2002 2009 2002 2009 

Point ................................. 9711 10432 48874 47739 58585 58171 

Area .................................. 542 578 96 102 638 680 

Mobile ............................... 54 6 30 4 84 10 

Nonroad ........................... 482 380 85 52 567 432 

Total .......................... 10789 11396 49085 47897 59874 59293 

TABLE 4—BASE AND ATTAINMENT YEAR PM2.5 INVENTORY FOR THE KENTUCKY PORTION OF THE HUNTINGTON-ASHLAND

AREA

PM2.5 (tpy) 

Boyd County Lawrence County KY portion total 

2002 2009 2002 2009 2002 2009 

Point ................................. 1256 1255 335 413 1591 1668 

Area .................................. 712 748 216 219 928 967 

Mobile ............................... 21 15 14 10 35 25 

Nonroad ........................... 131 121 30 28 161 149 

Total .......................... 2120 2139 595 670 2715 2809 

TABLE 5—BASE AND ATTAINMENT YEAR AMMONIA INVENTORY FOR THE KENTUCKY PORTION OF THE HUNTINGTONASHLAND AREA

Ammonia (tpy) 

Boyd County Lawrence County KY portion total 

2002 2009 2002 2009 2002 2009 

Point ................................. 336 378 31 44 367 422 

Area .................................. 38 38 28 28 66 66 

Mobile ............................... 44 53 20 26 64 79 

Nonroad ........................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Total .......................... 418 469 79 98 497 567 

EPA has reviewed Kentucky’s 

emissions inventory and finds that it is 

adequate for the purposes of meeting 

section 172(c)(3) emissions inventory 

requirement. The emissions inventory is 

approvable because the emissions were 


emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
4516 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 19 / Monday, January 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

developed consistent with the CAA, 

implementing regulations and EPA 

guidance for emissions inventories. 

Additional emissions inventory 

information, including summary tables 

for the Ohio and West Virginia portions 

of the Huntington-Ashland Area, are 

included in Appendix E of Kentucky’s 

attainment SIP and are located in the 

docket for this proposed action (EPA– 

R02–OAR–2010–0255) on the 

www.regulations.gov Web site. 

3. Modeling 

The PM2.5 attainment demonstrations 

must include modeling that should be 

developed in accordance with EPA’s 

Modeling Guidance. A brief description 

of the modeling used to support 

Kentucky’s attainment demonstration 

follows. More detailed information can 

be found in Kentucky’s December 3, 

2010, SIP revision in the docket for this 

proposed action (EPA–R02–OAR–2010– 

0255) on the www.regulations.gov Web 

site. 

Ambient PM2.5 typically includes 

both primary (directly emitted) PM2.5

and secondary PM2.5 (e.g., sulfates and 

nitrates formed by chemical reactions in 

the atmosphere). Some of the 

physicochemical processes leading to 

the formation of secondary PM2.5 may 

take hours or days, as may some of the 

removal processes. Thus, some sources 

of secondary PM2.5 may be sources 

outside of the nonattainment area. To 

model a sufficient geographic area to 

take these processes into account, 

Kentucky’ regional modeling domain 

covered an area slightly greater than the 

geographical area of the VISTAS/ASIP 

states in this attainment demonstration. 

Kentucky, through the ASIP and 

VISTAS, conducted an analysis of the 

major contributing components of PM2.5

in the Kentucky portion of the 

Huntington-Ashland Area. Specifically, 

organic carbon (OC) and sulfuric acid 

(SO4) account for the largest 

contributions. The majority of OC can 

be attributed to biogenic emissions and 

SO4 to emissions of SO2. SO2 emissions 

are primarily associated with the point 

source sector, accounting for 

approximately 98 percent of the SO2

emission in the Huntington-Ashland 

Area. Emissions sensitivity modeling for 

the Huntington-Ashland Area indicated 

that SO2 emissions reductions from 

EGUs in Kentucky, Tennessee, and West 

Virginia would have the greatest 

benefits for the Area. The VISTAS 

modeling also projects limited benefits 

to total PM2.5 emissions from reductions 

of NOX. The modeling performed by 

VISTAS showed that reductions of 

primary carbon from the mobile sector 

were more effective than reductions of 

either VOCs or NOX from mobile 

sources. EPA agrees with Kentucky’s 

assertion that controlling SO2 from 

point sources is the most effective 

means of addressing attainment of the 

1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS in the 

Huntington-Ashland Area. 

Model Selection and Inputs 

The ASIP performed modeling for 

ozone and PM2.5 for the 10 collaborating 

southeastern states, including Kentucky. 

The modeling analysis is a complex 

technical evaluation that began with 

selection of the modeling system. The 

ASIP and/or VISTAS used the following 

modeling system: 

• Meteorological Model: The 

Pennsylvania State University/National 

Center for Atmospheric Research 

Mesoscale Meteorological Model is a 

nonhydrostatic, prognostic 

meteorological model routinely used for 

urban- and regional-scale 

photochemical, ozone, PM2.5, and 

regional haze regulatory modeling 

studies. 

• Emissions Model: The Sparse 

Matrix Operator Kernel Emissions 

modeling system is an emissions 

modeling system that generates hourly 

gridded speciated emission inputs of 

mobile, non-road mobile, area, point, 

fire and biogenic emission sources for 

photochemical grid models. 

• Air Quality Model: The EPA’s 

Models-3/Community Multiscale Air 

Quality (CMAQ) modeling system is a 

photochemical grid model capable of 

addressing ozone, PM, visibility and 

acid deposition at a regional scale. The 

photochemical model selected for this 

study was CMAQ version 4.5. It was 

modified through VISTAS with a 

module for Secondary Organics 

Aerosols in an open and transparent 

manner that was also subjected to 

outside peer review. 

CMAQ modeling of regional haze in 

the VISTAS region for 2002 and 2009 

was carried out on a grid of 12 × 12 

kilometer cells that covers the ten 

VISTAS states and states adjacent to 

them. This grid is nested within a larger 

national CMAQ modeling grid of 36 × 

36 kilometer grid cells that covers the 

continental United States, portions of 

Canada and Mexico, and portions of the 

Atlantic and Pacific Oceans along the 

east and west coasts. Selection of a 

representative period of meteorology is 

crucial for evaluating baseline air 

quality conditions and projecting future 

changes in air quality due to changes in 

emissions of visibility-impairing 

pollutants. VISTAS conducted an indepth analysis which resulted in the 

selection of the entire calendar year of 

2002 as the best period of meteorology 

available for conducting the CMAQ 

modeling. As noted above, the VISTAS 

and ASIP states modeling was 

developed consistent with EPA’s 

Emissions Inventory Guidance and 

EPA’s Modeling Guidance. 

VISTAS examined the model 

performance of the regional modeling 

for the areas of interest before 

determining whether the CMAQ model 

results were suitable for use in the 

assessment of an attainment of the PM2.5

NAAQS and for use in the modeling 

assessment. The modeling assessment 

predicts future levels of emissions and 

visibility impairment used to support 

the 2009 PM2.5 control strategy. In 

keeping with the objective of the CMAQ 

modeling platform, the air quality 

model performance was evaluated using 

graphical and statistical assessments 

based on measured ozone, fine particles, 

and acid deposition from various 

monitoring networks and databases for 

the 2002 base year. A diverse set of 

statistical parameters from the EPA’s 

Modeling Guidance was used to stress 

and examine the model and modeling 

inputs. Once the model performance of 

the 2002 base year was determined to be 

acceptable, the EPA model attainment 

test was used to assess whether 

attainment of the PM2.5 NAAQS would 

be achieved in 2009. The DAQ provided 

the appropriate supporting 

documentation for all required analyses 

used to determine Kentucky’s control 

strategy. The technical analyses and 

modeling used to assess attainment in 

2009 for the Area is consistent with the 

CAA, EPA’s PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

and EPA’s Modeling Guidance. EPA 

accepts the VISTAS and ASIP technical 

modeling to support the attainment SIP 

for the Area because the modeling 

system was chosen and simulated 

according to EPA’s Modeling Guidance. 

For purposes of the Huntington-Ashland 

attainment demonstration, EPA agrees 

with the VISTAS model performance 

procedures and results, and that the 

CMAQ is an appropriate tool for the 

assessment of PM2.5 for the Kentucky 

attainment demonstration for this Area. 

Additional details on the ASIP and 

VISTAS modeling is included in the 

Kentucky SIP. 

Modeling Results 

The modeling results were used in a 

relative sense in concert with observed 

PM2.5 air quality data (i.e., taking the 

ratio of future to present model 

predicted air quality and multiplying it 

times an ‘‘ambient design value’’). The 

ambient design value is an average of 

the three current design values (i.e., 

2001, 2002, and 2003) that straddle the 

modeling base year (i.e., 2002). EPA 


emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 19 / Monday, January 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules 4517 

recommends using the average of the 

three design value periods which 

include the baseline inventory year. 

This average design value best 

represents the baseline concentrations, 

while taking into account the variability 

of meteorology and emissions (over a 

five-year period). This EPA attainment 

test approach should reduce some of the 

uncertainty involved with using 

absolute model predictions alone. Using 

the model in a relative sense also 

reduces the effects of uneven model 

performance and possible major biases 

in predicting absolute concentrations of 

one or more components. The ratio of 

future to present model predicted air 

quality resulted in relative reduction 

factors (RRF). The multiplication of the 

RRF by an ambient design value from 

the base year (i.e., 2002) provided 

estimates of future design values to 

determine if monitors and areas with 

monitors in the nonattainment area will 

comply with the annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 

EPA provided guidance to states and 

tribes for projecting PM2.5

concentrations using a ‘‘speciated 

modeled attainment test’’ (SMAT) 

(EPA–454/B–07–002, April 2007). Once 

modeling for a projection year and a 

base year are complete, RRFs are 

computed for each component of PM2.5

in the modeling domain. Modeling by 

Kentucky to assess attainment in the 

entire Huntington-Ashland Area used 

the following components of PM2.5: SO4, 

NO3, directly emitted organic particles, 

and directly emitted inorganic particles. 

Ammonia is treated as part of SO4 and 

NO3 molecules, and water is assumed to 

be present at a constant mass in both the 

base year and projection year. For each 

monitoring location, the RRF for a 

component is computed as the ratio of 

the projection year divided by the base 

year modeled concentration for a threeby-three array of modeled grid cells 

centered on the monitoring location. 

Projection year component 

concentrations are estimated by 

multiplying the RRFs times a 

monitoring based base year component 

concentration, determined by applying 

measured speciation data to the 

monitored total PM2.5 design 

concentration. The sum of these 

estimated projection year component 

concentrations is the estimated 

projection year PM2.5 concentration. If 

future estimates of PM2.5 concentrations 

are less than the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, 

then the modeling indicates attainment 

of the standard. 

PM2.5 includes a mixture of 

components that can behave 

independently from one another (e.g., 

primary vs. secondary particles) or that 

are related to one another in a complex 

way (e.g., different secondary particles). 

Thus, it is appropriate to consider the 

predicted future concentration of PM2.5

to be the sum of the predicted 

component concentrations. See 72 FR 

20608. As recommended in EPA’s 

Modeling Guidance, Kentucky divided 

PM2.5 into its major components and 

noted the future effects of already 

implemented strategies on each. The 

effect on PM2.5 was estimated as a sum 

of the effects on individual components. 

Future PM2.5 design values at specified 

monitoring sites were estimated by 

adding the future-year values of seven 

PM2.5 components. All future sitespecific PM2.5 design values were below 

the concentration specified in the 

NAAQS; therefore, the HuntingtonAshland Area passed the SMAT 

evaluation. 

EPA has also developed a software 

package called Modeled Attainment 

Test Software (MATS) which will 

spatially interpolate data, adjust the 

spatial fields based on model output 

gradients and multiply the fields by 

model calculated RRFs. EPA 

recommended that the Commonwealth 

provide MATS attainment test values 

for 2009 since the tool became available 

soon after Kentucky had drafted its 

attainment demonstration. The 2009 

MATS values for the entire HuntingtonAshland Area also indicate attainment 

of the annual PM2.5 NAAQS in 2009. 

Table 7 illustrates the current (2002 

DVC) and future (2009 DVF) annual 

design values for 2009 for the monitors 

in the nonattainment area. 

TABLE 7—2002 CURRENT AND 2009 PREDICTED ANNUAL PM2.5 DESIGN VALUES (μG/M3) 

Site No. State County 2002 Annual 

DVC 

2009 Annual 

DVF 

21–019–0017 ............................................................................... KY Boyd .......................................... 14.9 12.6 

39–087–0010 ............................................................................... OH Lawrence .................................. 15.7 13.7 

39–145–0013 ............................................................................... OH Scioto ........................................ 17.1 14.7 

54–011–0006 ............................................................................... WV Cabell ........................................ 16.5 14.4 

Additional Analysis 

Kentucky provided supplemental 

analysis to further support results from 

the modeled attainment tests. As a first 

step, Kentucky noted that the modeled 

attainment tests supported a conclusion 

that the proposed strategy will meet the 

air quality goals by the attainment year. 

As noted in section 7 of EPA’s Modeling 

Guidance, corroboratory analyses 

should be used to help assess whether 

a simulated control strategy is sufficient 

to meet the NAAQS. One of the metrics 

identified in the guidance is the 

calculations of the percent change in the 

number of grid cells greater than or 

equal to 15.0 mg/m3 in the 

nonattainment area. For Kentucky’s 

analysis, cell counts of modeling data 

were tallied for both the 2002 baseline 

and 2009 attainment year modeling runs 

for a subset of the highest days from the 

base year and which coincide with the 

29 days used in the model performance 

evaluation and modeling results 

discussed previously. The analysis 

indicates a 10 percent increase in the 

number of cells representing days with 

concentrations below 15.0 mg/m3. 

Kentucky conducted an additional 

unmonitored area analysis to ensure 

that a control strategy leads to 

reductions in PM2.5 at other locations 

which could have baseline (and future) 

design values exceeding the NAAQS 

were a monitor deployed there. 

Consistent with EPA’s Modeling 

Guidance, the ASIP determined the 

2002 current year and 2009 projected 

PM2.5 design values in the HuntingtonAshland Area using the 2002 typical 

and 2009 BaseG4 CMAQ 12 km 

modeling results. Appendix L of the 

Commonwealth’s submittal contains 

maps which illustrate that the MATS 

projections for the unmonitored areas in 

Kentucky and the entire HuntingtonAshland Area will be below the PM2.5

NAAQS by 2009. 

EPA Analysis 

Kentucky’s PM2.5 attainment 

demonstration submittal covers only the 

portion of the Huntington-Ashland Area 

for which Commonwealth has 

jurisdiction (Boyd County and a portion 

of Lawrence County). However, the 

modeling results for the West Virginia 

and Ohio portions of the Area reach 

conclusions of attainment which are 


emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
4518 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 19 / Monday, January 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

1West Virginia has a collocated monitor in place 

at the same site for quality assurance purposes. The 

primary monitor, and not the collocated monitor, is 

used to determine compliance with the PM2.5

NAAQS. Since the collocated monitor takes fewer 

readings than the primary monitor, its average 

annual values may be unrepresentatively high. (See 

40 CFR Part 50, Appendix N, 3(d)(1).) 

2The LCH Site was shut-down in February 2008. 

The Ironton DOT site began operation on the same 

day the LCH Site ceased monitoring. 

3The Ironton DOT site did not begin operation 

until February 2008. 

4The Ironton DOT site began operation in 

February 2008 and thus did collect 75 percent for 

the first quarter of 2008. However, this was a new 

site and monitoring data did meet 75 percent 

completeness for the remainder of the quarter and 

for the subsequent quarters. As such, EPA does not 

consider the first quarter data to be incomplete. 

consistent with that of Kentucky. The 

technical analyses and modeling to 

assess attainment of the entire 

nonattainment Area were developed 

consistent with EPA’s Modeling 

Guidance. The modeling system was 

chosen and simulated to develop a 

model performance evaluation of the 

nonattainment area to provide the 

necessary assurances and results that an 

assessment of future controls for 

attainment is merited. Application of 

the EPA modeled attainment test and 

the MATS indicated future design 

values that are less than 15.0 mg/m3 and 

consistent with attainment of the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. The additional 

analyses based on other regional 

modeling studies, including EPA and 

the Midwest RPO, support the modeling 

results developed by the ASIP and 

Kentucky. Finally, the area’s status as 

having attained the standard further 

supports the modeling results. 

Current Air Quality Analysis 

As noted in section II.C. above, on 

September 7, 2011, EPA determined that 

the Huntington-Ashland Area had 

attaining data for the 1997 Annual PM2.5

NAAQS based upon data for the 3-year 

period 2007–2009, with a design value 

(i.e., the highest 3-year average of 

annual mean PM2.5 concentrations) of 

14.3 mg/m3. In that same notice EPA 

noted that the Area also had attaining 

data for the 3-year period 2008–2010, 

with a design value of 13.1 mg/m3. These 

data, which have been quality-assured, 

certified, and recorded in EPA’s Air 

Quality System (AQS), are summarized 

in Tables 8 and 9 below. In addition, 

monitoring data thus far available, but 

not yet certified, in the AQS database 

for 2011 show that this Area continues 

to meet the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 

The continuing decrease in PM2.5

concentrations in the Area supports 

Kentucky’s determination that current 

measures were sufficient to bring the 

Area into attainment by no later than 

the required attainment date of April 5, 

2010. 

TABLE 8—2007–2009 ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS IN THE HUNTINGTON-ASHLAND AREA

Site name County Site No. 

Annual average 

concentration 

(μg/m3) 

Huntington ........................................................................................ Cabell, WV ........................ 54–011–0006 ................... 1 14.3 

Ashland Primary (FIVCO) ................................................................ Boyd, KY ........................... 21–019–0017 ................... 12.4 

Lawrence County Hospital ............................................................... Lawrence, OH ................... 39–087–0010 ................... 2 13.3 

Ironton Department of Transportation (DOT) 3 ................................ Lawrence, OH ................... 39–087–0012 ................... 12.2 

TABLE 9—2008–2010 ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS IN THE HUNTINGTON-ASHLAND AREA

Site name County Site No. 

Annual average 

concentration 

(μg/m3) 

Huntington ........................................................................................ Campbell ........................... 54–011–0006 ................... 13.1 

Ashland Primary (FIVCO) ................................................................ Boyd .................................. 21–019–0017 ................... 11.4 

Ironton DOT 4 ................................................................................... Lawrence .......................... 39–087–0012 ................... 12.2 

4. Reasonably Available Control 

Measures/Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACM/RACT) 

a. Requirements for RACM/RACT 

CAA section 172(c)(1) requires that 

each attainment plan ‘‘provide for the 

implementation of all reasonably 

available control measures as 

expeditiously as practicable (including 

such reductions in emissions from the 

existing sources in the area as may be 

obtained through the adoption, at a 

minimum, of reasonably available 

control technology), and shall provide 

for attainment of the national primary 

ambient air quality standards.’’ EPA 

interprets RACM, including RACT, 

under section 172 as measures that a 

state finds are both reasonably available 

and contribute to attainment as 

expeditiously are practicable in the 

nonattainment area. 40 CFR 51.1010; 72 

FR 20586, 20612. 

States are required to evaluate RACM/ 

RACT for direct PM2.5 emissions and all 

of the area’s attainment plan precursors. 

40 CFR 51.1002(c); 72 FR 20586,20589– 

97. The state must address SO2 as a 

PM2.5 attainment plan precursor and 

evaluate sources of SO2 emissions in the 

state for control measures. The state 

must address NOX as a PM2.5 attainment 

plan precursor and evaluate sources of 

NOX emissions in the state for control 

measures, unless the state and EPA 

provide an appropriate technical 

demonstration for a specific area 

showing that NOX emissions from 

sources in the state do not significantly 

contribute to PM2.5 concentrations in the 

nonattainment area. Also, because EPA 

concluded that VOCs and ammonia are 

presumptively not regulatory precursors 

for PM2.5, the state is not required to 

evaluate RACM/RACT for sources of 

VOCs or ammonia unless there is a 

determination supported by an 

appropriate demonstration that such 

emissions need to be regulated for 

expeditious attainment of the NAAQS 

in the specific area. 

For PM2.5 attainment plans, the PM2.5

Implementation Rule requires a 

combined approach to RACM and RACT 

under subpart 1 of Part D of the CAA 

(‘‘Plan Requirements for Nonattainment 

Areas/Nonattainment Areas in 

General’’). Subpart 1, unlike subparts 2 

and 4, does not identify specific source 

categories for which EPA must issue 

control technique documents or 

guidelines and does not identify specific 

source categories for state and EPA 

evaluation during attainment plan 

development. 72 FR 20586, 20610. 


emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 19 / Monday, January 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules 4519 

Rather, under subpart 1, EPA considers 

RACT to be part of an area’s overall 

RACM obligation consistent with the 

section 172 definition. Because the 

variable nature of the PM2.5 problem in 

different nonattainment areas may 

require states to develop attainment 

plans that address widely disparate 

circumstances, EPA determined not 

only that states should have flexibility 

with respect to RACM/RACT controls 

but also that in areas needing significant 

emission reductions, RACM/RACT 

controls on smaller sources may be 

necessary to reach attainment as 

expeditiously as practicable. 72 FR 

20586, 20612 and 20615. Thus, under 

the PM2.5 Implementation Rule, RACT 

and RACM are those reasonably 

available measures that contribute to 

attainment as expeditiously as 

practicable in the specific 

nonattainment area. 40 CFR 51.1010; 72 

FR 20586, 20612. 

The PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

requires that attainment plans include 

the list of measures that a state 

considered and information sufficient to 

show that the state met all requirements 

for the determination of what 

constitutes RACM/RACT in a specific 

nonattainment area. 40 CFR 51.1010(a). 

In addition, the rule requires that the 

state, in determining whether a 

particular emissions reduction measure 

or set of measures must be adopted as 

RACM/RACT, consider the cumulative 

impact of implementing the available 

measures and to adopt as RACM/RACT 

any potential measures that are 

reasonably available considering 

technological and economic feasibility 

if, considered collectively, they would 

advance the attainment date by one year 

or more. If a measure or measures is not 

necessary for expeditious attainment of 

the NAAQS in the area, then by 

definition that measure is not RACM/ 

RACT for purposes of the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS in that area. Any measures that 

are necessary to meet these 

requirements which are not already 

either federally promulgated, part of the 

state’s SIP, or otherwise creditable in 

SIPs must be submitted in enforceable 

form as part of a state’s attainment plan 

for the area. 72 FR 20586, 20614. 

Guidance provided in the PM2.5

Implementation Rule for evaluating 

RACM/RACT level controls for an area 

also indicates that there could be 

flexibility with respect to those areas 

that were predicted to attain the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS within five years of 

designation as a result of existing 

national or local measures. 72 FR 20586, 

20612. In such circumstances, the state 

may conduct a more limited RACM/ 

RACT analysis that does not involve 

additional air quality modeling. 

Moreover, the RACM/RACT analysis for 

such area would focus on a review of 

reasonably available measures, the 

estimation of potential emissions 

reductions, and the evaluation of the 

time needed to implement the measures. 

Thus, the PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

guidance recommends that an analysis 

for those areas expected to attain within 

five years of designation as a 

nonattainment area for the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS may be a less rigorous than for 

areas expected to attain later. 

A more comprehensive discussion of 

the RACM/RACT requirement for PM2.5

attainment plans and EPA’s guidance 

for it can be found in the preamble to 

the PM2.5 Implementation Rule. 72 FR 

20586, 20609–20633. 

b. Kentucky’s Analysis of Pollutants and 

Sources for the Huntington-Ashland 

Area 

Kentucky’s analysis, which appears in 

chapter 7 of the attainment plan 

submission, evaluates sources of PM2.5, 

SO2, and NOX located in the 

nonattainment area for potential control 

as RACM/RACT. The Commonwealth 

determined that controls of sources of 

VOCs or ammonia would not be 

necessary for expeditious attainment of 

the NAAQS in this area. EPA agrees that 

Kentucky’s determination is supported 

by its analysis. The Commonwealth’s 

determination with respect to which 

pollutants the plan should evaluate is 

discussed in chapter 1 of the submittal. 

After evaluating which pollutants 

should be addressed in the attainment 

plan, the Commonwealth identified all 

source categories of those emissions 

located within the nonattainment area 

to determine available controls that 

could advance the attainment date by 

one year or more. See Appendix M of 

the attainment plan submittal. Based on 

the emissions inventory and other 

information, the Commonwealth 

identified several source categories as 

sources that should be evaluated for 

controls. Stationary source measure 

categories identified include stationary 

diesel engine retrofit, rebuild or 

replacements; new or upgraded 

emission control requirements for direct 

PM2.5 emissions at stationary sources; 

improved capture of particulate 

emissions to increase the amount of 

PM2.5 ducted to control devices; new or 

upgraded emission controls for PM2.5

precursors at stationary sources; energy 

efficiency measures to reduce fuel 

consumption and associated pollutant 

emissions; and measures to reduce 

fugitive dust from industrial sites. 

Mobile source measure categories 

identified include on-road diesel engine 

retrofits for school buses, trucks and 

transit buses using EPA verified 

technologies; nonroad diesel engine 

retrofit, rebuild or replacement; diesel 

idling programs for trucks, locomotive, 

and other mobile sources; transportation 

control measures, including those listed 

in section 108(f) of the CAA and other 

transportation demand management and 

transportation systems management 

strategies; programs to reduce emissions 

or accelerate retirement of high emitting 

vehicles, boats, and lawn and garden 

equipment; emissions testing and 

repair/maintenance programs for onroad vehicles, nonroad heavy-duty 

vehicles and equipment; programs to 

expand use of clean burning fuels; low 

emissions specifications for equipment 

or fuel used for large construction 

contracts, industrial facilities, ship 

yards, airports, and public or private 

vehicle fleets; and opacity or other 

emissions standards for ‘‘grossemitting’’ diesel equipment or vessels. 

Area source measure categories 

identified include new open burning 

regulations and/or measures to improve 

program effectiveness such as programs 

to reduce or eliminate burning of land 

clearing vegetation; programs to reduce 

emissions from woodstoves and 

fireplaces including outreach programs, 

curtailments during days with expected 

high ambient levels of PM2.5, and 

programs to encourage replacement of 

woodstoves when houses are sold; 

controls on emissions from charbroiling 

or other commercial cooking operations; 

and reduced solvent usage or solvent 

substitution. 

In accordance with 40 CFR 51.1010, 

the attainment demonstration 

component for a PM2.5 nonattainment 

area SIP is required to demonstrate that 

all RACM (including RACT for 

stationary sources) necessary to 

demonstrate attainment as expeditiously 

as practicable have been adopted. The 

cumulative impact of implementing 

available measures must be considered 

in determining whether a particular 

emission reduction measure or set of 

measures is required to be adopted as 

RACM. Potential measures that are 

reasonably available considering 

technical and economic feasibility must 

be adopted as RACM if, considered 

collectively, they would advance the 

attainment date by one year or more. 

Therefore, since Kentucky demonstrated 

attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in 

the Kentucky portion of the HuntingtonAshland Area by the end of 2009, any 

RACM measures would have needed to 

be in effect at the beginning of 2008 to 

have had any potential to advance the 

attainment date by at least one year. 


emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
4520 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 19 / Monday, January 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

Through participation in regional 

planning efforts of the Southeast 

Regional Planning Organization, 

VISTAS and the ASIP, Kentucky has 

evaluated potential control measures to 

attain the fine particle. For the relevant 

source categories, the Commonwealth 

evaluated the potential control measures 

that would be considered reasonable for 

the Huntington-Ashland Area, in light 

of timing and other considerations 

consistent with EPA’s guidance. DAQ 

determined that there were no 

additional measures that could be 

adopted by January 1, 2008. In addition, 

existing measures and measures 

planned for implementation by 2009 

enabled the Huntington-Ashland Area 

to attain the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS. 

Therefore, no further actions on RACM 

or RACT are warranted. 

c. Kentucky’s Evaluation of RACM/ 

RACT Control Measures for the 

Huntington-Ashland Area 

In accordance with section 172 of the 

CAA, the Kentucky portion of the 

Huntington-Ashland Area has adopted 

all RACM, including RACT, needed to 

attain the standards ‘‘as expeditiously as 

practicable.’’ Kentucky’s demonstration 

for attaining the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS in 

the Kentucky portion of the HuntingtonAshland Area is based on the following 

enforceable measures, as discussed in 

Chapter 5 of the plan: tier 2 vehicle 

standards; heavy-duty gasoline and 

diesel highway vehicle standards; large 

nonroad diesel engine standards; 

nonroad spark-ignition engines and 

recreational engines standards; 

combustion turbine MACTs; VOC 2-, 

4-, 7-, and 10-year MACT standards; 

consent agreements; open burning bans; 

and fugitive emissions standards. 

d. Proposed Action on RACM/RACT 

Demonstration and Control Strategy 

EPA is proposing to approve 

Kentucky’s evaluation of RACM/RACT 

control measures for the Kentucky 

portion of the Huntington-Ashland 

Area. As noted in section C. above, EPA 

has already determined that the 

Huntington-Ashland Area has attaining 

data for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS 

and met the standard by its applicable 

attainment date of April 5, 2010. EPA’s 

guidance for the PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule recommends that if an area was 

predicted through the attainment plan 

to attain the standard within five years 

after designation, then the state could 

submit a more limited RACM/RACT 

analysis and the state could elect not to 

do additional modeling. 

In light of the fact that the Kentucky 

portion of the Huntington-Ashland Area 

is now attaining the standards, EPA 

proposes to conclude that the 

attainment plan meets the RACM/RACT 

requirements of the PM2.5

Implementation Rule and that the level 

of control in the Commonwealth’s 

attainment plan constitutes RACM/ 

RACT for purposes of the 1997 PM2.5

NAAQS. Because the PM2.5

Implementation Rule defines RACM/ 

RACT as that level of control that is 

necessary to bring the area into 

attainment as expeditiously as 

practicable, the current level of 

Federally enforceable controls on 

sources located within the Area is by 

definition RACM/RACT for this Area for 

this purpose, given the Area’s status as 

attaining the standard. 

5. Reasonable Further Progress 

Section 172(c)(2) of the CAA and the 

PM2.5 Implementation Rule require that 

attainment plans include a 

demonstration that reasonable further 

progress toward meeting air quality 

standards will be achieved through 

generally linear incremental 

improvement in air quality. For the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS, a state is required 

to submit a separate RFP plan for any 

area for which the state seeks an 

extension of the attainment date beyond 

2010. The PM2.5 Implementation Rule 

set forth that an area that demonstrates 

attainment within five years of the date 

of designation will be considered to 

have satisfied the RFP requirement and 

is not required to submit a separate RFP 

plan. See 40 CFR 51.1009(b). The 

Kentucky attainment plan submittal 

meets the RFP requirements for the 

Huntington-Ashland Area by 

demonstrating that the Area attained the 

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS by the 2010 

attainment date. 

6. Contingency Measures 

In accordance with section 172(c)(9) 

of the CAA, the PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule requires that PM2.5 attainment 

plans include contingency measures. 40 

CFR 51.1012 and 72 FR at 20642–20646. 

(April 25, 2007). Contingency measures 

are additional measures to be 

implemented in the event that an area 

fails to meet RFP or fails to attain a 

standard by its attainment date. These 

measures must be fully adopted rules or 

control measures that can be 

implemented quickly and without 

additional EPA or state action if the area 

fails to meet RFP or fails to attain by its 

attainment date and should contain 

trigger mechanisms and an 

implementation schedule. In addition, 

they should be measures not already 

included in the SIP control strategy for 

attaining the standard and should 

provide for emission reductions 

equivalent to one year of RFP. 

The Kentucky attainment plan 

describes the contingency measures for 

the Huntington-Ashland Area as being 

comprised of Federal measures that 

were already in place and that would 

take effect automatically, without 

further action by the Commonwealth or 

EPA, if the Area were to fail to attain the 

standard by its attainment date. As 

noted in section II.C. of this proposed 

rulemaking, EPA made a determination, 

based on complete, quality-assured, 

quality-controlled, and certified ambient 

air monitoring data for the 2007–2009 

monitoring period, that the HuntingtonAshland Area attained the 1997 Annual 

PM2.5 NAAQS by the applicable 

attainment date of April 5, 2010. 

Because EPA has determined, in 

accordance with CAA 179(c)(1), that the 

area attained by its required deadline, 

no contingency measures for failure to 

attain by this date need to be 

implemented. Furthermore, as set forth 

in the PM2.5 Implementation Rule, areas 

that attained the NAAQS by the 

attainment date are considered to have 

satisfied the requirement to show RFP, 

and as such do not need to implement 

contingency measures to make further 

progress to attainment. Since EPA has 

determined that the Area has attained 

by the attainment date, the contingency 

measures submitted by Kentucky are no 

longer necessary for the HuntingtonAshland Area to meet RFP requirements 

or to attain the annual PM2.5 NAAQS by 

the attainment date. 

7. Attainment Date 

Kentucky provided a demonstration 

of attainment of the 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS 

in the Huntington-Ashland Area by no 

later than five years after the Area was 

designated nonattainment. In 

accordance with the PM2.5

Implementation Rule, areas such as this, 

demonstrating that they will attain the 

standard by April 5, 2010, attainment 

deadline, are considered to have 

satisfied the requirement to show RFP 

toward attainment and need not submit 

a separate RFP plan. For similar reasons, 

such areas are also not subject to a 

requirement for a mid-course review. 

B. Insignificance Determination for the 

Mobile Source Contribution to PM2.5 and 

NOX Emissions 

The CAA requires federal actions in 

nonattainment and maintenance areas to 

‘‘conform to’’ the goals of SIPs. See, e.g., 

CAA section 176. This means that such 

actions will not cause or contribute to 

violations of a NAAQS; worsen the 

severity of an existing violation; or 

delay timely attainment of any NAAQS 


emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 19 / Monday, January 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules 4521 

5Since the July 1, 2004, revision, 40 CFR 93.109 

was again revised on March 24, 2010 because of the 

Transportation Conformity Rule PM2.5 and PM10

Amendments update. In the 2004 preamble and 

rule, the insignificance determinations were 

outlined in 40 CFR 93.109(k). Due to renumbering 

of this section in the 2010 update, the provisions 

for insignificance determinations are now located at 

40 CFR 93.109(m). 

6 In a letter dated October 23, 2009, EPA informed 

the State of Ohio that regional mobile emissions of 

direct PM2.5 and NOX are insignificant for 

transportation conformity purposes as well. That 

insignificance determination took effect on 

December 22, 2009. EPA will review the adequacy 

of the West Virginia submittal in a separate action. 

7 If Kentucky submits a redesignation request and 

maintenance plan for its portion of the HuntingtonAshland WV–KY–OH PM2.5 nonattainment area and 

believes that on-road emissions of NOX and direct 

PM2.5 remain insignificant during the maintenance 

Continued 

or any interim milestone. Actions 

involving Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA) or Federal 

Transit Administration (FTA) funding 

or approval are subject to the 

transportation conformity rule (40 CFR 

part 93, subpart A). Under this rule, 

metropolitan planning organizations 

(MPOs) in nonattainment and 

maintenance areas coordinate with state 

air quality and transportation agencies, 

EPA, and the FHWA and FTA to 

demonstrate that their metropolitan 

transportation plans and transportation 

improvement programs (TIP) conform to 

applicable SIPs. This is typically 

determined by showing that estimated 

emissions from existing and planned 

highway and transit systems are less 

than or equal to the motor vehicle 

emissions budgets contained in a SIP. 

For motor vehicle emissions budgets 

to be approvable, they must meet, at a 

minimum, EPA’s adequacy criteria 

found at 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). In certain 

instances, the Transportation 

Conformity Rule allows areas to forgo 

establishment of a MVEB where it is 

demonstrated that the regional motor 

vehicle emissions for a particular 

pollutant or precursor are an 

insignificant contributor to the air 

quality problem in an area. The general 

criteria for insignificance 

determinations can be found in 40 CFR 

93.109(m). Insignificance 

determinations are based on a number 

of factors, including the percentage of 

motor vehicle emissions in context of 

the total SIP inventory; the current state 

of air quality as determined by 

monitoring data for the relevant 

NAAQS; the absence of SIP motor 

vehicle control measures; and the 

historical trends and future projections 

of the growth of motor vehicle 

emissions. EPA’s rationale for providing 

for insignificance determinations is 

described in the July 1, 2004, revision 

to the Transportation Conformity Rule 

at 69 FR 40004.5 Specifically, the 

rationale is explained on page 40061 

under the subsection entitled ‘‘XXIII.B. 

Areas With Insignificant Motor Vehicle 

Emissions.’’ Any insignificance 

determination under review of EPA is 

subject to the adequacy and approval 

process for EPA’s action on the SIP. 

EPA made an insignificance finding 

through the transportation conformity 

adequacy process for NOX and directly 

emitted PM2.5 for the Kentucky portion 

of the Huntington-Ashland PM2.5

nonattainment area on June 18, 2010 (75 

FR 34734). As a result of EPA’s 

insignificance finding, the Kentucky 

portion of the Huntington-Ashland Area 

was no longer required to perform 

regional emissions analyses for either 

directly emitted PM2.5 or NOX as part of 

future PM2.5 conformity determinations 

for the 1997 Annual PM2.5 NAAQS until 

such time that EPA reviewed and took 

action on the Huntington-Ashland 

Area’s attainment plan (the subject of 

today’s proposed action). EPA’s June 18, 

2010, insignificance finding for directly 

emitted PM2.5 and NOX through the 

adequacy process (effective on July 6, 

2010) only relates to the Kentucky 

portion of the tri-state HuntingtonAshland Area.6

When EPA makes an insignificance 

determination through the adequacy 

process for transportation conformity, 

EPA notes that an adequacy 

determination does not imply that an 

insignificance determination in the SIP 

(i.e., in this case the attainment plan) 

will ultimately be approved. Consistent 

with EPA’s adequacy review of 

Kentucky’s December 3, 2008, 

attainment plan and the Agency’s 

subsequent thorough review of the 

entire SIP submission, EPA is proposing 

to approve Kentucky’s insignificance 

determination for the mobile source 

contribution of NOX and PM2.5

emissions to the overall PM2.5 emissions 

in the Huntington-Ashland Area. As 

stated previously, the point, area, and 

nonroad values for Lawrence County in 

the December 8, 2008 submittal were for 

the entire county, not just the census 

block that U.S.EPA designated as 

nonattainment. The on-road mobile 

emissions were determined specifically 

for the designated portion of Lawrence 

County. On May 26, 2011, at the request 

of EPA, the Commonwealth submitted 

updated tables to include information 

on point source emissions from the 

designated census block and population 

based apportionment of the area and 

non-road sectors to support the mobile 

source insignificance finding. 

EPA finds that Kentucky’s SIP 

submittal meets the criteria in the 

transportation conformity rules for an 

insignificance finding for both NOX and 

PM2.5 contribution from motor vehicles 

in the Kentucky portion of the 

Huntington-Ashland Area. That is, EPA 

finds that the SIP submittal 

demonstrates that, for NOX and PM2.5, 

regional motor vehicle emissions are an 

insignificant contributor to the annual 

PM2.5 concentrations in the Kentucky 

portion of the Area. This finding is 

based on the following factors: 

• Tables 8.2–3 and 8.2–5 of 

Kentucky’s submittal, as revised on May 

26, 2011, demonstrate that the on-road 

NOX and PM2.5 emissions in 2009 for 

the Kentucky portion of the Area are 

only 7.43 percent and 0.97 percent, 

respectively, of the total emissions for 

the Kentucky portion of the Area. 

• The tables also show that mobile 

source emissions of NOX and PM2.5 are 

declining. Specifically, NOX and PM2.5

mobile emissions were projected to 

decrease by approximately 28 percent 

and 40 percent, respectively, between 

the 2002 and 2009. The decrease in NOX

and PM2.5 emissions were expected 

during a time when the VMT were 

expected to increase by 16 percent in 

the Kentucky portion of the Area. 

• There have been no SIP 

requirements for motor vehicles control 

measures for the Kentucky portion of 

the Area. 

• According to the Ashland Area 

Metropolitan Planning Organization 

(Ashland MPO) analysis, the projected 

mobile source emissions to 2030 

indicate that there is no reason to expect 

highway motor vehicle growth that 

would cause a violation of the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 NAAQS. 

• As described above, the area has 

attained the 1997 Annual PM2.5

standard and EPA is proposing to 

approve the attainment plan for the 

Kentucky portion of the area. 

As discussed above, the Area is not 

currently required to perform a regional 

emissions analysis for the Kentucky 

portion of the Huntington-Ashland Area 

based on the adequacy determination 

for the finding that on-road emissions of 

NOX and direct PM2.5 are insignificant 

contributors to the area’s PM2.5 air 

quality problem. Today EPA is 

proposing to approve that insignificance 

finding as part of the state’s attainment 

plan for the Area. If finalized, such 

approval it would serve to confirm that 

the Kentucky portion of the Area is not 

required to perform a regional emissions 

analysis for either directly emitted PM2.5

or NOX as a part of future PM2.5

conformity determinations for the 1997 

Annual PM2.5 standard.7 PM2.5 hot-spot 


emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS
4522 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 19 / Monday, January 30, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

period, the maintenance plan will need to include 

information to support a finding that on-road 

emissions of NOX and direct PM2.5 continue to be 

insignificant during the maintenance period. The 

insignificance finding for the attainment 

demonstration does not automatically continue to 

apply to the maintenance plan. 

analysis will continue to apply for 

required projects under 40 CFR 93.116 

and 93.123(b) of the Transportation 

Conformity Rule. 

Weighing all the factors for an 

insignificance finding, particularly the 

minor contribution of mobile source 

NOX and PM2.5, EPA has determined 

that the NOX and PM2.5 contribution 

from motor vehicles emissions to the 

Annual PM2.5 pollution for the 

Kentucky portion of the Area are 

insignificant. EPA’s insignificance 

finding should be considered and 

specifically noted in the transportation 

conformity documentation that is 

prepared for this area. 

The insignificance determination that 

Kentucky submitted for the HuntingtonAshland Area was developed with 

projected mobile source emissions 

derived using the MOBILE6 motor 

vehicle emissions model. EPA is 

proposing to approve the inventory and 

the insignificance determination 

because this model was the most current 

model available at the time Kentucky 

was performing its analysis. However, 

EPA has now issued an updated motor 

vehicle emissions model known as 

Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator or 

MOVES. In its announcement of this 

model, EPA established a two-year grace 

period for continued use of MOBILE6 

(extending to March 2, 2012), after 

which states (other than California) 

must use MOVES in conformity 

determinations for transportation plans 

and transportation improvement 

programs. 

V. Proposed Action 

EPA is proposing to approve 

Kentucky’s annual PM2.5 attainment 

plan for the Kentucky portion of the 

Huntington-Ashland Area. EPA has 

determined that the SIP meets 

applicable requirements of the CAA, as 

described in the PM2.5 Implementation 

Rule. Specifically, EPA is proposing to 

approve Kentucky’s attainment 

demonstration, including the RACM/ 

RACT analysis; RFP analysis, base-year 

and attainment-year emissions 

inventories; and, for transportation 

conformity purposes, an insignificance 

determination for PM2.5 and NOX for the 

mobile source contribution to ambient 

PM2.5 levels for the Commonwealth’s 

portion of the Huntington-Ashland 

Area. The requirement for a RFP plan is 

satisfied because Kentucky 

demonstrated attainment of the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS in the Area by April 

2010. Also, because EPA has 

determined that the Area has attained 

by the attainment date, the contingency 

measures submitted by Kentucky are no 

longer necessary for the HuntingtonAshland Area to meet RFP requirements 

or to attain the annual PM2.5 NAAQS by 

the attainment date. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

Act and applicable federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this proposed 

action merely approves state law as 

meeting federal requirements and does 

not impose additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. For 

that reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ subject to review by the Office 

of Management and Budget under 

Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the CAA; and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this proposed rule does 

not have tribal implications as specified 

by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the Commonwealth, 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, Intergovernmental 

relations, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Particulate matter. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control. 

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

Dated: January 20, 2012. 

A. Stanley Meiburg, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 2012–1938 Filed 1–27–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 63 

[EPA–HQ–OAR–2008–0334; FRL–9621–7] 

RIN 2060–AQ89 

National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants for Chemical 

Manufacturing Area Sources 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of 

reconsideration of final rule. 

SUMMARY: On October 29, 2009, the EPA 

promulgated national emission 

standards for the control of hazardous 

air pollutants for nine area source 

categories in the chemical 

manufacturing sector: Agricultural 

Chemicals and Pesticides 

Manufacturing, Cyclic Crude and 

Intermediate Production, Industrial 

Inorganic Chemical Manufacturing, 

Industrial Organic Chemical 

Manufacturing, Inorganic Pigments 

Manufacturing, Miscellaneous Organic 

Chemical Manufacturing, Plastic 

Materials and Resins Manufacturing, 

Pharmaceutical Production and 

Synthetic Rubber Manufacturing. 

Following that action, the Administrator 

received a petition for reconsideration. 

In response to the petition, the EPA is 

reconsidering and requesting comment 


emcdonald on DSK29S0YB1PROD with PROPOSALS