Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 19413 

Dated: April 11, 2007. 

L.M. Bynum, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, DoD. 

[FR Doc. E7–7247 Filed 4–17–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2006–0305; FRL–8301–8] 

Determination of Attainment, Approval 

and Promulgation of Implementation 

Plans and Designation of Areas for Air 

Quality Planning Purposes; Indiana; 

Redesignation of the South BendElkhart 8-Hour Nonattainment Area to 

Attainment for Ozone 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: On May 30, 2006, the Indiana 

Department of Environmental 

Management (IDEM) submitted a 

request for EPA approval of a 

redesignation of St. Joseph and Elkhart 

Counties to attainment of the 8-hour 

ozone National Ambient Air Quality 

Standard (NAAQS) and of an ozone 

maintenance plan for St. Joseph and 

Elkhart Counties as a revision to the 

Indiana State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). Today, EPA is proposing to 

approve Indiana’s request and 

corresponding SIP revision. EPA is also 

proposing to approve the Volatile 

Organic Compounds (VOC) and 

Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) Motor Vehicle 

Emission Budgets (MVEBs) for these 

Counties, as supported by the ozone 

maintenance plan for this area, for 

purposes of transportation conformity 

determinations. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before May 18, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–

OAR–2006–0305, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (312) 886–5824. 

• Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, 

Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

• Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney, 

Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office’s 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office’s official hours of 

operation are Monday through Friday, 

8:30 AM to 4:30 PM, excluding Federal 

holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2006–

0305. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at http:// 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI, or otherwise 

protected, through www.regulations.gov 

or e-mail. 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 

e-mail comment directly to EPA without 

going through www.regulations.gov, 

your e-mail address will be 

automatically captured and included as 

part of the comment that is placed in the 

public docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters and any 

form of encryption, and should be free 

of any defects or viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hardcopy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hardcopy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 

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

Friday, excluding Federal holidays. It is 

recommended that you telephone 

Steven Rosenthal, Environmental 

Engineer, at (312) 886–6052, before 

visiting the Region 5 office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Steven Rosenthal, Environmental 

Engineer, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6052, 

doty.edward@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

the EPA. This supplementary 

information section is arranged as 

follows: 

I. What Action Is EPA Proposing to Take? 

II. What Is the Background for This Action? 

III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation 

to Attainment? 

IV. What Are EPA’s Analyses of the State’s 

Requests and What Are the Bases for 

EPA’s Proposed Action? 

V. Has Indiana Adopted Acceptable Motor 

Vehicle Emissions Budgets for the End of 

the 14-Year Maintenance Plan Which 

Can Be Used To Support Transportation 

Conformity Determinations? 

VI. What Is the Effect of EPA’s Proposed 

Action? 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What Action is EPA Proposing to 

Take? 

We are proposing to take several 

related actions for St. Joseph and 

Elkhart Counties. First, we are 

proposing to determine that St. Joseph 

and Elkhart Counties have attained the 

8-hour ozone NAAQS based on air 

quality for the period of 2003 through 

2005. Second, we are proposing to 

approve Indiana’s ozone maintenance 

plan for St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties 

as a revision of the Indiana SIP. The 

maintenance plan is designed to keep 

St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties in 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard 

through 2020. As supported by and 

consistent with the ozone maintenance 

plan, we are also proposing to approve 

the 2020 VOC and NOX MVEBs for St. 

Joseph and Elkhart Counties for 

transportation conformity purposes. 

Finally, we are proposing to approve the 

request from the State of Indiana to 

change the designation of St. Joseph and 

Elkhart Counties from nonattainment to 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

We have determined that the State and 

St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties have 

met the requirements for redesignation 

to attainment under section 107(d)(3)(E) 

of the Clean Air Act (CAA). 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
19414 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

1This standard is violated in an area when any 

ozone monitor in the area (or in its impacted 

downwind environs) records 8-hour ozone 

concentrations with an average of the annual 

fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour ozone 

concentrations over a three-year period equaling or 

exceeding 85 ppb. 40 CFR 50.10. 

2The 8-hour ozone design value and the 1-hour 

ozone design value for each area were not 

necessarily recorded at the same monitoring site. 

The worst-case monitoring site for each ozone 

concentration averaging time was considered for 

each area. 

II. What Is the Background for This 

Action? 

A. General Background Information 

EPA has determined that ground-level 

ozone is detrimental to human health. 

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated an 

8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.08 parts per 

million parts of air (0.08 ppm) (80 parts 

per billion (ppb)) (62 FR 38856).1 This 

8-hour ozone standard replaced a prior 

1-hour ozone NAAQS, which had been 

promulgated on February 8, 1979 (44 FR 

8202), and which was revoked on June 

15, 2005 (69 FR 23858). 

Ground-level ozone is not emitted 

directly by sources. Rather, emitted NOX

and VOC react in the presence of 

sunlight to form ground-level ozone 

along with other secondary compounds. 

NOX and VOC are referred to as ‘‘ozone 

precursors.’’ Control of ground-level 

ozone concentrations is achieved 

through controlling VOC and NOX

emissions. 

The CAA required EPA to designate 

as nonattainment any area that violated 

the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Federal 

Register notice promulgating these 

designations and classifications was 

published on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 

23857). 

The CAA contains two sets of 

provisions—subpart 1 and subpart 2—

that address planning and emission 

control requirements for nonattainment 

areas. Both are found in title I, part D 

of the CAA. Subpart 1 contains general, 

less prescriptive requirements for all 

nonattainment areas for any pollutant 

governed by a NAAQS. Subpart 2 

contains more specific requirements for 

certain ozone nonattainment areas, and 

applies to ozone nonattainment areas 

classified under section 181 of the CAA. 

In the April 30, 2004 designation 

rulemaking, EPA divided 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment areas into the categories 

of subpart 1 nonattainment (‘‘basic’’

nonattainment) and subpart 2 

nonattainment (‘‘classified’’

nonattainment). EPA based this division 

on the area’s 8-hour ozone design values 

(i.e., on the three-year averages of the 

annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8- 

hour ozone concentrations at the worstcase monitoring sites in the areas) and 

on their 1-hour ozone design values 

(i.e., on the fourth-highest daily 

maximum 1-hour ozone concentrations 

over the three-year period at the worstcase monitoring sites in the areas).2 EPA 

classified 8-hour ozone nonattainment 

areas with 1-hour ozone design values 

equaling or exceeding 121 ppb as 

subpart 2, classified nonattainment 

areas. EPA classified all other 8-hour 

nonattainment areas as subpart 1, basic 

nonattainment areas. The basis for area 

classification was defined in a separate 

April 30, 2004 final rule (the Phase 1 

implementation rule) (69 FR 23951). 

Emission control requirements for 

classified nonattainment areas are 

linked to area classifications. Areas with 

more serious ozone pollution problems 

are subject to more prescribed 

requirements and later attainment dates. 

The prescribed emission control 

requirements are designed to bring areas 

into attainment by their specified 

attainment dates. 

In the April 30, 2004, ozone 

designation/classification rulemaking, 

EPA designated St. Joseph and Elkhart 

Counties as a subpart 1 basic 

nonattainment area for the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. EPA based designation on 

ozone data collected during the 2001–

2003 period. 

On May 30, 2006, the State of Indiana 

requested redesignation of St. Joseph 

and Elkhart Counties to attainment of 

the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based on 

ozone data collected in these Counties 

from 2003–2005. 

B. What Is the Impact of the December 

22, 2006 United States Court of Appeals 

Decision Regarding EPA’s Phase 1 

Implementation Rule? 

1. Summary of Court Decision 

On December 22, 2006, the U.S. Court 

of Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit vacated EPA’s Phase 1 

Implementation Rule for the 8-hour 

Ozone Standard. (69 FR 23951, April 30, 

2004). South Coast Air Quality 

Management Dist. v. EPA, 472 F.3d 882 

(D.C.Cir. 2006). The Court held that 

certain provisions of EPA’s Phase I Rule 

were inconsistent with the requirements 

of the Clean Air Act. The Court rejected 

EPA’s reasons for implementing the 8- 

hour standard in nonattainment areas 

under Subpart 1 in lieu of subpart 2 of 

Title I, part D of the Act. The Court also 

held that EPA improperly failed to 

retain four measures required for 1-hour 

nonattainment areas under the antibacksliding provisions of the 

regulations: (1) Nonattainment area New 

Source Review (NSR) requirements 

based on an area’s 1-hour nonattainment 

classification; (2) Section 185 penalty 

fees for 1-hour severe or extreme 

nonattainment areas; (3) measures to be 

implemented pursuant to section 

172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9)of the Act, on the 

contingency of an area not making 

reasonable further progress toward 

attainment of the 1-hour NAAQS, or for 

failure to attain that NAAQS; and (4) 

certain conformity requirements for 

certain types of Federal actions. The 

Court upheld EPA’s authority to revoke 

the 1-hour standard provided there were 

adequate anti-backsliding provisions. 

This section sets forth EPA’s views on 

the potential effect of the Court’s ruling 

on this redesignation action. For the 

reasons set forth below, EPA does not 

believe that the Court’s ruling alters any 

requirements relevant to this 

redesignation action so as to preclude 

redesignation, and does not prevent 

EPA from finalizing this redesignation. 

EPA believes that the Court’s decision, 

as it currently stands or as it may be 

modified based upon any petition for 

rehearing that has been filed, imposes 

no impediment to moving forward with 

redesignation of this area to attainment, 

because in either circumstance 

redesignation is appropriate under the 

relevant redesignation provisions of the 

Act and longstanding policies regarding 

redesignation requests. 

2. Requirements Under the 8-Hour 

Standard 

With respect to the 8-hour standard, 

the Court’s ruling rejected EPA’s reasons 

for classifying areas under Subpart 1 for 

the 8-hour standard, and remanded that 

matter to the Agency. Consequently, it 

is possible that this area could, during 

a remand to EPA, be reclassified under 

Subpart 2. Although any future decision 

by EPA to classify this area under 

Subpart 2 might trigger additional future 

requirements for the area, EPA believes 

that this does not mean that 

redesignation cannot now go forward. 

This belief is based upon (1) EPA’s 

longstanding policy of evaluating 

requirements in accordance with the 

requirements due at the time the request 

is submitted; (2) consideration of the 

inequity of applying retroactively any 

requirements that might in the future be 

applied; and, (3) the fact that the 

redesignation request preceded even the 

earliest possible due dates of any 

requirements for Subpart 2 areas. 

First, at the time the redesignation 

request was submitted, St. Joseph and 

Elkhart Counties were classified under 

Subpart 1 and were obligated to meet 

Subpart 1 requirements. Under EPA’s 

longstanding interpretation of section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act, to 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 19415 

3Clean Air Act section 176(c)(4)(E) currently 

requires States to submit revisions to their SIPs to 

reflect certain Federal criteria and procedures for 

determining transportation conformity. 

Transportation conformity SIPs are different from 

the motor vehicle emissions budgets that are 

established in control strategy SIPs and 

maintenance plans. 

qualify for redesignation, states 

requesting redesignation to attainment 

must meet only the relevant SIP 

requirements that came due prior to the 

submittal of a complete redesignation 

request. September 4, 1992, Calcagni 

memorandum (‘‘Procedures for 

Processing Requests to Redesignate 

Areas to Attainment,’’ Memorandum 

from John Calcagni, Director, Air 

Quality Management Division) See also 

Michael Shapiro Memorandum, 

September 17, 1993, and 60 FR 12459, 

12465–66 (March 7, 

1995)(Redesignation of Detroit-Ann 

Arbor). See Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 

537 (7th Cir. 2004), which upheld this 

interpretation. See, e.g. also 68 FR 

25418, 25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) 

(redesignation of St. Louis). 

Moreover, it would be inequitable to 

retroactively apply any new SIP 

requirements that were not applicable at 

the time the request was submitted. The 

D.C. Circuit has recognized the inequity 

in such retroactive rulemaking, See 

Sierra Club v. Whitman, 285 F. 3d 63 

(D.C. Cir. 2002), in which the D.C. 

Circuit upheld a District Court’s ruling 

refusing to make retroactive an EPA 

determination of nonattainment that 

was past the statutory due date. Such a 

determination would have resulted in 

the imposition of additional 

requirements on the area. The Court 

stated: ‘‘Although EPA failed to make 

the nonattainment determination within 

the statutory time frame, Sierra Club’s 

proposed solution only makes the 

situation worse. Retroactive relief would 

likely impose large costs on the States, 

which would face fines and suits for not 

implementing air pollution prevention 

plans in 1997, even though they were 

not on notice at the time.’’ Id. at 68. 

Similarly here it would be unfair to 

penalize the area by applying to it for 

purposes of redesignation additional SIP 

requirements under Subpart 2 that were 

not in effect at the time it submitted its 

redesignation request. 

For the reasons indicated above, EPA 

believes it would be inequitable to 

evaluate a redesignation request based 

on Subpart 2 requirements that might 

apply in the future. But even if a future 

Subpart 2 classification applied 

retroactively, the applicable 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation are only those that 

became due prior to submission of the 

redesignation request. In the case of St. 

Joseph and Elkhart Counties the 

redesignation request was submitted on 

May 30, 2006, and thus preceded even 

the earliest possible due date of 

requirements for areas classified under 

Subpart 2 effective June 2004. The 

earliest such submission date was June 

15, 2006, for the emissions statements 

requirement under section 182(a)(3)(B) 

and emissions inventories under section 

182(a)(1). Thus for this additional 

reason alone these additional Subpart 2 

requirements would not be applicable 

for purposes of evaluating a 

redesignation request for this area. 

3. Requirements Under the 1-Hour 

Standard 

With respect to the requirements 

under the 1-hour standard, St. Joseph 

and Elkhart Counties were an 

attainment area subject to a Clean Air 

Act section 175A maintenance plan 

under the 1-hour standard. The Court’s 

ruling does not impact redesignation 

requests for these types of areas. 

First, there are no conformity 

requirements that are relevant for 

redesignation requests for any standard, 

including the requirement to submit a 

transportation conformity SIP.3 Under 

longstanding EPA policy, EPA believes 

that it is reasonable to interpret the 

conformity SIP requirement as not 

applying for purposes of evaluating a 

redesignation request under section 

107(d) because state conformity rules 

are still required after redesignation and 

Federal conformity rules apply where 

state rules have not been approved. 40 

CFR 51.390. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F.3d 

426 (6th Cir. 2001), upholding this 

interpretation. See also 60 FR 62748 

(Dec. 7, 1995) (Tampa, FL 

redesignation). Federal transportation 

conformity regulations apply in all 

States prior to approval of 

transportation conformity SIPs. The 

one-hour ozone areas in Indiana were 

redesignated to attainment without 

approved State Transportation 

Conformity regulations because the 

Federal Regulations were in effect in 

Indiana. When challenged, these 1-hour 

ozone redesignations, which were 

approved without State regulations, 

were upheld by the courts. See Wall v. 

EPA, 265 F.3d 426 (6th Cir. 2001). See 

also 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 1995) 

(Tampa, Florida). Although Indiana 

does not have approved State 

transportation conformity regulations, 

Indiana has developed memorandums 

of understanding to address conformity 

consultation procedures which have 

been signed by all parties involved in 

conformity. The Federal transportation 

conformity regulations, which apply in 

Indiana, require the approved 1-hour 

ozone budgets to be used for 

transportation conformity purposes 

prior to 8-hour ozone budgets being 

approved. 

Second, with respect to the three 

other anti-backsliding provisions for the 

1-hour standard that the Court found 

were not properly retained, St. Joseph 

and Elkhart Counties are an attainment 

area subject to a maintenance plan for 

the 1-hour standard, and the NSR, 

contingency measure (pursuant to 

section 172(c)(9) or 182(c)(9)) and fee 

provision requirements no longer apply 

to an area that has been redesignated to 

attainment of the 1-hour standard. 

Thus the decision in South Coast 

should not alter requirements that 

would preclude EPA from finalizing the 

redesignation of this area. 

III. What Are the Criteria for 

Redesignation to Attainment? 

The CAA provides the requirements 

for redesignating a nonattainment area 

to attainment. Specifically, section 

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

redesignation provided that: (1) The 

Administrator determines that the area 

has attained the applicable NAAQS; (2) 

the Administrator has fully approved an 

applicable state implementation plan for 

the area under section 110(k) of the 

CAA; (3) the Administrator determines 

that the improvement in air quality is 

due to permanent and enforceable 

emission reductions resulting from 

implementation of the applicable SIP, 

Federal air pollution control 

regulations, and other permanent and 

enforceable emission reductions; (4) the 

Administrator has fully approved a 

maintenance plan for the area meeting 

the requirements of section 175A of the 

CAA; and, (5) the state containing the 

area has met all requirements applicable 

to the area under section 110 and part 

D of the CAA. 

EPA provided guidance on 

redesignations in the General Preamble 

for the Implementation of Title I of the 

CAA Amendments of 1990 on April 16, 

1992 (57 FR 13498), and supplemented 

this guidance on April 28, 1992 (57 FR 

18070). The two main policy guidelines 

affecting the review of ozone 

redesignation requests are the following: 

‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests to 

Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’

Memorandum from John Calcagni, 

Director, Air Quality Management 

Division, September 4, 1992 (September 

4, 1992 Calcagni memorandum); and, 

‘‘Reasonable Further Progress, 

Attainment Demonstration, and Related 

Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment 

Areas Meeting the Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard,’’


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
19416 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

4The worst-case monitoring site-specific ozone 

design value in the area or in its affected downwind 

environs. 

Memorandum from John S. Seitz, 

Director, Office of Air Quality Planning 

and Standards, May 10, 1995. For 

additional policy guidelines used in the 

review of ozone redesignation requests, 

see our proposed rule for the 

redesignation of the Evansville, Indiana 

ozone nonattainment area at 70 FR 

53606 (September 9, 2005). 

IV. What Are EPA’s Analyses of the 

State’s Requests and What Are the 

Bases for EPA’s Proposed Action? 

EPA is proposing to: (1) Determine 

that St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties 

have attained the 8-hour ozone 

standard; (2) approve the ozone 

maintenance plan for St. Joseph and 

Elkhart Counties and the VOC and NOX

MVEBs supported by this maintenance 

plan; and, (3) approve the redesignation 

of St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties to 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

The bases for our proposed 

determination and approvals follow. 

A. St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties Have 

Attained the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS 

For ozone, an area may be considered 

to be attaining the 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

if there are no violations of the NAAQS, 

as determined in accordance with 40 

CFR 50.10 and appendix I, based on the 

most recent three complete, consecutive 

calendar years of quality-assured air 

quality monitoring data at all ozone 

monitoring sites in the area and in its 

nearby downwind environs. To attain 

this standard, the average of the annual 

fourth-high daily maximum 8-hour 

average ozone concentrations measured 

and recorded at each monitor (the 

monitoring site’s ozone design value) 

within the area and in its nearby 

downwind environs over the three-year 

period must not exceed the ozone 

standard. Based on an ozone data 

rounding convention described in 40 

CFR part 50, appendix I, the 8-hour 

standard is attained if the area’s ozone 

design value 4 is 0.084 ppm (84 ppb) or 

lower. The data must be collected and 

quality-assured in accordance with 40 

CFR part 58, and must be recorded in 

EPA’s Air Quality System (AQS). The 

ozone monitors generally should have 

remained at the same locations for the 

duration of the monitoring period 

required to demonstrate attainment (for 

three years or more). The data 

supporting attainment of the standard 

must be complete in accordance with 40 

CFR part 50, appendix I. 

As part of the May 30, 2006, ozone 

redesignation request, IDEM submitted 

ozone monitoring data indicating the 

top four daily maximum 8-hour ozone 

concentrations for each monitoring site 

in St. Joseph County (the Potato Creek, 

Harris Township and South Bend ozone 

monitoring sites) and Elkhart County 

(the Bristol ozone monitoring site) for 

each year during the 2003–2005 period. 

These worst-case ozone concentrations 

are part of the quality-assured ozone 

data that have been entered into EPA’s 

AQS. The annual fourth-high 8-hour 

daily maximum ozone concentrations, 

along with their three-year averages are 

summarized in Table 1. 

TABLE 1.—FOURTH-HIGH 8-HOUR OZONE CONCENTRATIONS

[In parts per billion (ppb)] 

County Monitoring site 2003 2004 2005 Average 

Elkhart ................................................................... Bristol .................................................................... 87 77 86 83 

St. Joseph ............................................................. Potato Creek ........................................................ 81 73 78 77 

St. Joseph ............................................................. Harris Twp ............................................................ 86 76 86 83 

St. Joseph ............................................................. South Bend ........................................................... 82 72 84 79 

These data show that the average 

fourth-high daily maximum 8-hour 

ozone concentrations for the monitoring 

sites in St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties 

are all below the 85 ppb ozone standard 

violation cut-off. The data support the 

conclusion that St. Joseph and Elkhart 

Counties did not experience a 

monitored violation of the 8-hour ozone 

standard from 2003–2005. In addition, 

the surrounding counties in Indiana and 

Michigan did not monitor 

nonattainment during the 2003–2005 

period. 

We also note that the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS continued to be attained in St. 

Joseph and Elkhart as well as the 

surrounding counties through 2006. 

Data in the AQS show that, in 2006, the 

Bristol, Potato Creek, Harris TWP and 

South Bend monitors recorded daily 

maximum fourth-high 8-hour ozone 

concentrations of 67 ppb, 70 ppb, 70 

ppb, and 61 ppb, respectively. 

The State has committed to continue 

ozone monitoring in this area during the 

maintenance period, through 2020. 

IDEM commits to consult with the EPA 

prior to making any changes in the 

existing monitoring network. An 

adequate demonstration has therefore 

been made that St. Joseph and Elkhart 

Counties have attained the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS. Therefore, we propose to find 

that St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties 

have attained the 8-hour ozone 

standard. 

B. St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties Have 

Met All Applicable Requirements Under 

Section 110 and Part D of the CAA and 

the Area Has a Fully Approved SIP 

Under Section 110(k) of the CAA 

EPA has determined that Indiana has 

met all currently applicable SIP 

requirements for St. Joseph and Elkhart 

Counties under section 110 of the CAA 

(general SIP requirements). EPA has 

determined that the Indiana SIP meets 

currently applicable SIP requirements 

under part D of title I of the CAA 

(requirements specific to basic and 

subpart 2 ozone nonattainment areas). 

See section 107(d)(3)(E)(v) of the CAA. 

In addition, EPA has determined that 

the Indiana SIP is fully approved with 

respect to all applicable requirements. 

See section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii) of the CAA. 

In making these determinations, EPA 

ascertained what requirements are 

applicable to the area, and determined 

that the applicable portions of the SIP 

meeting these requirements are fully 

approved under section 110(k) of the 

CAA. We note that SIPs must be fully 

approved only with respect to currently 

applicable requirements of the CAA, 

those CAA requirements applicable to 

St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties at the 

time the State submitted the final, 

complete ozone redesignation request 

for this area. 

1. St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties Have 

Met All Applicable Requirements Under 

Section 110 and Part D of the CAA 

The September 4, 1992, Calcagni 

memorandum describes EPA’s 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 19417 

interpretation of section 107(D)(3)(E) of 

the CAA. Under this interpretation, to 

qualify for redesignation of an area to 

attainment, the State and the area must 

meet the relevant CAA requirements 

that come due prior to the State’s 

submittal of a complete redesignation 

request for the area. See also a 

September 17, 1993, memorandum from 

Michael Shapiro, Acting Assistant 

Administrator for Air and Radiation, 

‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Requirements for Areas Submitting 

Requests for Redesignation to 

Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon 

Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) On or After 

November 15, 1992’’ and 66 FR 12459, 

12465–12466 (March 7, 1995) 

(redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor, 

Michigan to attainment of the 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS). Applicable 

requirements of the CAA that come due 

subsequent to the State’s submittal of a 

complete redesignation request remain 

applicable until a redesignation to 

attainment of the standard is approved, 

but are not required as a prerequisite to 

redesignation. See section 175A(c) of 

the CAA. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 

537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also 68 FR 

25424, 25427 (May 12, 2003) 

redesignation of the St. Louis/East St. 

Louis area to attainment of the 1-hour 

ozone NAAQS. 

General SIP requirements: Section 

110(a) of title I of the CAA contains the 

general requirements for a SIP, which 

include: enforceable emission 

limitations and other control measures, 

means, or techniques; provisions for the 

establishment and operation of 

appropriate devices necessary to collect 

data on ambient air quality; and 

programs to enforce the emission 

limitations. SIP elements and 

requirements are specified in section 

110(a)(2) of title I, part A of the CAA. 

These requirements and SIP elements 

include, but are not limited to, the 

following: (a) Submittal of a SIP that has 

been adopted by the State after 

reasonable public notice and a hearing; 

(b) provisions for establishment and 

operation of appropriate procedures 

needed to monitor ambient air quality; 

(c) implementation of a source permit 

program; (d) provisions for the 

implementation of new source part C 

requirements (Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD)) and new source 

part D requirements (New Source 

Review (NSR)); (e) criteria for stationary 

source emission control measures, 

monitoring, and reporting; (f) provisions 

for air quality modeling; and, (g) 

provisions for public and local agency 

participation. 

SIP requirements and elements are 

discussed in the following EPA 

documents: ‘‘Procedures for Processing 

Requests to Redesignate Areas to 

Attainment,’’ Memorandum from John 

Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 

Management Division, September 4, 

1992; ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Actions Submitted in Response to Clean 

Air Act (CAA) Deadlines,’’

Memorandum from John Calcagni, 

Director, Air Quality Management 

Division, October 28, 1992; and ‘‘State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Requirements for Areas Submitting 

Requests for Redesignation to 

Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon 

Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) on or After 

November 15, 1992,’’ Memorandum 

from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting 

Assistant Administrator, September 17, 

1993. 

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

requires SIPs to contain certain 

measures to prevent sources in one state 

from significantly contributing to air 

quality problems in another state. To 

implement this provision, EPA required 

states to establish programs to address 

transport of air pollutants (NOX SIP call, 

Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR)). EPA 

has also found, generally, that states 

have not submitted SIPs under section 

110(a)(1) of the CAA to meet the 

interstate transport requirements of 

section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA (70 FR 

21147, April 25, 2005). However, the 

section 110(a)(2)(D) requirements for a 

state are not linked with a particular 

nonattainment area’s classification. EPA 

believes that the requirements linked 

with a particular nonattainment area’s 

classification are the relevant measures 

to evaluate in reviewing a redesignation 

request. The transport SIP submittal 

requirements, where applicable, 

continue to apply to a state regardless of 

the designation of any one particular 

area in the state. 

These requirements should not be 

construed to be applicable requirements 

for purposes of redesignation. In 

addition, the other section 110 elements 

described above that are not connected 

with nonattainment plan submissions 

and that are not linked with an area’s 

attainment status are also not applicable 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. A state remains subject to 

these requirements after an area is 

redesignated to attainment. We 

conclude that only the section 110 and 

part D requirements which are linked 

with an area’s designation and 

classification are the relevant measures 

in evaluating this aspect of a 

redesignation request. This approach is 

consistent with EPA’s existing policy on 

applicability of conformity and 

oxygenated fuels requirements for 

redesignation purposes, as well as with 

section 184 ozone transport 

requirements. See: Reading, 

Pennsylvania proposed and final 

rulemakings (61 FR 53174–53176, 

October 10, 1996 and 62 FR 24826, May 

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

final rulemaking (61 FR 20458, May 7, 

1996); and Tampa, Florida final 

rulemaking (60 FR 62748, December 7, 

1995). See also the discussion on this 

issue in the Cincinnati, Ohio ozone 

redesignation (65 FR 37890, June 19, 

2000), and the Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 

ozone redesignation (66 FR 50399, 

October 19, 2001). In addition, Indiana’s 

response to the CAIR rule was due in 

September 2006. Because this deadline 

had not yet passed when the State 

submitted the final, complete 

redesignation request, the State’s CAIR 

submittal is also not an applicable 

requirement for redesignation purposes. 

It should be noted that section 110 

elements not linked to the area’s 

nonattainment status are not applicable 

for purposes of redesignation. 

Nonetheless, we also note that EPA has 

previously approved provisions in the 

Indiana SIP addressing section 110 

elements under the 1-hour ozone 

standard. We have analyzed the Indiana 

SIP as codified in 40 CFR part 52, 

subpart P and have determined that it is 

consistent with the requirements of 

section 110(a)(2) of the CAA. The SIP, 

which has been adopted after reasonable 

public notice and hearing, contains 

enforceable emission limitations; 

requires monitoring, compiling, and 

analyzing ambient air quality data; 

requires preconstruction review of new 

major stationary sources and major 

modifications of existing sources; 

provides for adequate funding, staff, and 

associated resources necessary to 

implement its requirements; and 

requires stationary source emissions 

monitoring and reporting, and otherwise 

satisfies the applicable requirements of 

section 110(a)(2). 

Part D SIP requirements: EPA has 

determined that the Indiana SIP meets 

applicable SIP requirements under part 

D of the CAA. Under part D, an area’s 

classification (marginal, moderate, 

serious, severe, and extreme) indicates 

the requirements to which it will be 

subject. Subpart 1 of part D, found in 

sections 172–176 of the CAA, sets forth 

the basic nonattainment area plan 

requirements applicable to all 

nonattainment areas. Subpart 2 of part 

D, found in section 182 of the CAA, 

establishes additional specific 

requirements depending on the area’s 

nonattainment classification. 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
19418 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

Part D, subpart 1 requirements: For 

purposes of evaluating this 

redesignation request, the applicable 

subpart 1 part D requirements for all 

nonattainment areas are contained in 

sections 172(c)(1)-(9) and 176. A 

thorough discussion of the requirements 

of section 172 can be found in the 

General Preamble for Implementation of 

Title I (57 FR 13498). (See also 68 FR 

4852–4853 regarding a St. Louis ozone 

redesignation notice of proposed 

rulemaking for a discussion of section 

172 requirements.) 

No requirements under part D of the 

CAA came due for St. Joseph and 

Elkhart Counties prior to the State’s May 

30, 2006, submittal of a complete 

redesignation request. For example, the 

requirement for an ozone attainment 

demonstration, as contained in section 

172(c)(1), was not yet applicable, nor 

were the requirements for Reasonably 

Available Control Measures (RACM) 

and Reasonably Available Control 

Technology (RACT) (section 172(c)(1)), 

Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) 

(section 172(c)(2)), and attainment plan 

and RFP contingency measures (section 

172(c)(9)). All of these required SIP 

elements are required for submittal after 

May 30, 2006. Therefore, none of the 

part D requirements are applicable to St. 

Joseph and Elkhart Counties for 

purposes of redesignation. 

Section 176 conformity requirements: 

Section 176(c) of the CAA requires 

states to establish criteria and 

procedures to ensure that Federallysupported or funded activities, 

including highway projects, conform to 

the air planning goals in the applicable 

SIP. The requirement to determine 

conformity applies to transportation 

plans, programs, and projects 

developed, funded, or approved under 

Title 23 U.S.C. and the Federal Transit 

Act (transportation conformity) as well 

as to all other Federally-supported or 

funded projects (general conformity). 

State conformity SIP revisions must be 

consistent with Federal conformity 

regulations that the CAA required the 

EPA to promulgate. 

In addition to the fact that part D 

requirements did not become due prior 

to Indiana’s submission of the complete 

ozone redesignation request for St. 

Joseph and Elkhart Counties, and, 

therefore, are not applicable for 

redesignation purposes, EPA has 

similarly concluded that the conformity 

requirements do not apply for purposes 

of evaluating the ozone redesignation 

request under section 107(d) of the 

CAA. In addition, it is reasonable to 

interpret the conformity requirements as 

not applying for purposes of evaluating 

the ozone redesignation request under 

section 107(d) of the CAA because state 

conformity rules are still required after 

redesignation of an area to attainment of 

a NAAQS and Federal conformity rules 

apply where state rules have not been 

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

426 (6th Cir. 2001). See also 60 FR 

62748 (December 7, 1995) (Tampa, 

Florida). 

We conclude that the State and St. 

Joseph and Elkhart Counties have 

satisfied all applicable requirements 

under section 110 and part D of the 

CAA to the extent that the requirements 

apply for the purposes of reviewing the 

State’s ozone redesignation request. 

2. St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties Have 

a Fully Approved Applicable SIP Under 

Section 110(k) of the CAA 

EPA has fully approved the Indiana 

SIP for St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties 

under section 110(k) of the CAA for all 

applicable requirements. EPA may rely 

on prior SIP approvals in approving a 

redesignation request (See the 

September 4, 1992 John Calcagni 

memorandum, page 3, Southwestern 

Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. 

Browner, 144 F.3d 984, 989–990 (6th 

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

(6th Cir. 2001)), plus any additional 

measures it may approve in conjunction 

with a redesignation action. See 68 FR 

25426 (May 12, 2003). Since the passage 

of the CAA of 1970, Indiana has adopted 

and submitted, and EPA has fully 

approved, provisions addressing the 

various required SIP elements 

applicable to St. Joseph and Elkhart 

Counties for purposes of redesignation. 

No St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties SIP 

provisions are currently disapproved, 

conditionally approved, or partially 

approved. As indicated above, EPA 

believes that the section 110 elements 

not connected with nonattainment plan 

submissions and not linked to the area’s 

nonattainment status are not applicable 

requirements for purposes of review of 

the State’s redesignation request. EPA 

has concluded that the section 110 SIP 

submission approved under the 1-hour 

standard will be adequate for purposes 

of attaining and maintaining the 8-hour 

standard. EPA also believes that since 

the part D requirements did not become 

due prior to Indiana’s submission of a 

final, complete redesignation request, 

they also are not applicable 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. 

C. The Air Quality Improvement in St. 

Joseph and Elkhart Counties Is Due to 

Permanent and Enforceable Reductions 

in Emissions From Implementation of 

the SIP and Applicable Federal Air 

Pollution Control Regulations and Other 

Permanent and Enforceable Emission 

Reductions 

EPA believes that the State of Indiana 

has demonstrated that the observed air 

quality improvement in St. Joseph and 

Elkhart Counties is due to permanent 

and enforceable emission reductions 

resulting from implementation of the 

SIP, Federal measures, and other Stateadopted measures. 

In making this demonstration, the 

State has documented the changes in 

VOC and NOX emissions from 

anthropogenic (man-made or manbased) sources in St. Joseph and Elkhart 

Counties between 1996 and 2004 and 

the statewide NOX emissions from 

Electric Generating Units (EGUs) from 

1999 to 2005. St. Joseph and Elkhart 

Counties were monitored in violation of 

the 8-hour ozone NAAQS during the 

period of 1997 through 1999 and in 

attainment with the NAAQS during the 

period of 2003 through 2005. The total 

VOC and NOX emissions for St. Joseph 

and Elkhart Counties for various years 

during the period of 1996 through 2004 

are given in Table 2. 

TABLE 2.—VOC AND NOX EMISSIONS IN ST. JOSEPH AND ELKHART COUNTIES, ALL SOURCES

[Emissions in tons/summer day] 

Pollutant 1996 1999 2002 2004 

VOC ............................................................................................................................... 127.88 113.82 89 .18 85.98 

NOX ................................................................................................................................ 91.21 74.63 63 .4 63.16 

The statewide NOX emissions for 

EGUs from 1999–2005 are given in 

Table 3. below. 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 19419 

TABLE 3.—NOX EMISSIONS FROM ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS IN INDIANA STATEWIDE

[Emissions in thousands of tons per ozone season (April–October)] 

Area 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 

Statewide ............................................................................. 149.8 133.9 136.1 114.0 99.3 66.6 55.5 

The NOX and VOC emissions for St. 

Joseph and Elkhart Counties and the 

statewide EGU NOX emissions have 

decreased from 1999, an 8-hour 

standard violation years, to 2004 and 

2005 (for EGUs), attainment years. IDEM 

notes that statewide NOX emissions 

have declined significantly as a result of 

the implementation of the Indiana NOX

SIP (in response to EPA’s NOX SIP call) 

and acid rain control regulations, both 

of which led to permanent, enforceable 

emission reductions. 

VOC and NOX emissions have 

declined between 1999 and 2004 as a 

result of enforceable emission 

reductions. As required by Section 172 

of the CAA, Indiana in the mid-1990s 

promulgated rules requiring RACT for 

emissions of VOCs. Statewide RACT 

rules have applied to all new sources 

locating in Indiana since that time and 

include the following VOC rules: 326 

Indiana Administrative Code (IAC) 8–1–

6 (Best Available Control Technology 

(BACT) for non-specific sources); 326 

IAC 8–2 (surface coating emission 

limitations); 326 IAC (organic solvent 

degreasing operations); 326 IAC 8–4 

(petroleum sources); and, 326 IAC 8–5 

(miscellaneous sources). The VOC 

emission reductions resulting from the 

implementation of these VOC emission 

control rules are permanent and 

enforceable. 

Besides the statewide VOC RACT 

rules and NOX emission control 

requirements, other Federal emission 

reduction requirements have resulted in 

decreased ozone precursor emissions in 

St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties and will 

produce future emission reductions that 

will support maintenance of the ozone 

standard in St. Joseph and Elkhart 

Counties. These emission reduction 

requirements include the following: 

Tier 2 Emission Standards for 

Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur Standards. 

These emission control requirements 

result in lower emissions from new cars 

and light duty trucks, including sport 

utility vehicles. The Federal rules are 

being phased in between 2004 and 2009. 

The EPA has estimated that, by the end 

of the phase-in period, the following 

vehicle NOX emission reductions will 

occur: passenger cars (light duty 

vehicles) (77 percent); light duty trucks, 

minivans, and sports utility vehicles (86 

percent; and larger sports utility 

vehicles, vans, and heavier trucks (69 to 

95 percent). VOC emission reductions 

are also expected to range from 12 to 18 

percent, depending on vehicle class, 

over the same period. Although some of 

these emission reductions have already 

occurred by the 2004 attainment year, 

most of these emission reductions will 

occur during the maintenance period for 

St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties. 

Heavy-Duty Diesel Engines. In July 

2000, EPA issued a final rule to control 

the emissions from highway heavy duty 

diesel engines, including low-sulfur 

diesel fuel standards. These emission 

reductions are being phased in between 

2004 and 2007. This rule is expected to 

result in a 40 percent decrease in NOX

emissions from heavy duty diesel 

vehicle. 

Non-Road Diesel Rule. Issued in May, 

2004, this rule generally applies to new 

stationary diesel engines used in certain 

industries, including construction, 

agriculture, and mining. In addition to 

affecting engine design, this rule 

includes requirements for cleaner fuels. 

This rule is expected to reduce NOX

emissions from these engines by up to 

90 percent, and to significantly reduce 

particulate matter and sulfur emissions 

from these engines in addition to the 

NOX emission reduction. This rule did 

not affect 2004 emissions from these 

sources, but will limit emissions from 

new engines beginning in 2008. 

Indiana commits to maintain all 

existing emission control measures that 

affect St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties 

after this area is redesignated to 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

All changes in existing rules affecting 

St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties and 

new rules subsequently needed to 

provide for the maintenance of the 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS in St. Joseph and 

Elkhart Counties will be submitted to 

the EPA for approval as SIP revisions. 

D. St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties Have 

a Fully Approvable Ozone Maintenance 

Plan Pursuant to Section 175A of the 

CAA 

In conjunction with its request to 

redesignate St. Joseph and Elkhart 

Counties to attainment of the ozone 

NAAQS, Indiana submitted a SIP 

revision request to provide for 

maintenance of the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS in St. Joseph and Elkhart 

Counties for at least 10 years after the 

redesignation of this area to attainment 

of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

1. What Is Required in an Ozone 

Maintenance Plan? 

Section 175A of the CAA sets forth 

the required elements of air quality 

maintenance plans for areas seeking 

redesignation from nonattainment to 

attainment of a NAAQS. Under section 

175A, a maintenance plan must 

demonstrate continued attainment of 

the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 

years after the Administrator approves 

the redesignation to attainment. Eight 

years after the redesignation, the State 

must submit a revised maintenance plan 

which demonstrates maintenance of the 

standard for 10 years following the 

initial 10 year maintenance period. To 

address the possibility of future NAAQS 

violations, the maintenance plan must 

contain such contingency measures, 

with a schedule for implementation, as 

EPA deems necessary, to assure prompt 

correction of any future NAAQS 

violations. The September 4, 1992, John 

Calcagni memorandum provides 

additional guidance on the content of 

maintenance plans. An ozone 

maintenance plan should, at minimum, 

address the following items: (1) The 

attainment VOC and NOX emissions 

inventories; (2) a maintenance 

demonstration showing maintenance for 

the 10 years of the maintenance period; 

(3) a commitment to maintain the 

existing monitoring network; (4) factors 

and procedures to be used for 

verification of continued attainment; 

and, (5) a contingency plan to prevent 

and/or correct a future violation of the 

NAAQS. 

2. What Are the Attainment Emission 

Inventories for St. Joseph and Elkhart 

Counties? 

IDEM prepared comprehensive VOC 

and NOX emission inventories for St. 

Joseph and Elkhart Counties, including 

point (significant stationary sources), 

area (smaller and widely-distributed 

stationary sources), mobile on-road, and 

mobile non-road sources for 2004 (the 

base year/attainment year). To develop 

the attainment year emission 

inventories, IDEM used the following 

approaches and sources of data: 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
19420 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

5The attainment year can be any of the three 

consecutive years in which the area has clean 

(below violation level) air quality data (2003, 2004, 

or 2005 for St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties). 

Area Sources—Area source VOC and 

NOX emissions were projected from 

Indiana’s 2002 periodic emissions 

inventory, which was previously 

submitted to the EPA. 

Mobile On-Road Sources—Mobile 

source emissions were calculated using 

the MOBILE6 emission factor model and 

traffic data (vehicle miles traveled, 

vehicle speeds, and vehicle type and age 

distributions) extracted from the 

region’s travel-demand model. 

Point Source Emissions—2004 point 

source emissions were compiled using 

IDEM’s 2004 annual emissions 

statement database and the 2005 EPA 

Air Markets acid rain emissions 

inventory database. 

Mobile Non-Road Emissions—Nonroad mobile source emissions were 

estimated by the EPA and documented 

in the 2002 National Emissions 

Inventory (NEI). IDEM used these 

emissions estimates along with growth 

factors to grow the non-road mobile 

source emissions to 2004. To address 

concerns about the accuracy of some of 

the emissions for various source 

categories in EPA’s non-road emissions 

model, the Lake Michigan Air Directors 

Consortium (LADCO) contracted with 

several companies to review the base 

data used by the EPA and to make 

recommendations for corrections to the 

model. Emissions were estimated for 

commercial marine vessels and 

railroads. Recreational motorboat 

population and spatial surrogates (used 

to assign emissions to each county) were 

updated. The populations for the 

construction equipment category were 

reviewed and updated based on surveys 

completed in the Midwest, and the 

temporal allocation for agricultural 

sources was also updated. Based on 

these and other updates, the EPA 

provided a revised non-road estimation 

model, which was used for the 2004 

projected non-road mobile source 

emissions. 

The 2004 attainment year VOC and 

NOX emissions for St. Joseph and 

Elkhart Counties are summarized along 

with the 2010 and 2020 projected 

emissions for these counties in Tables 4 

and 5, below. They confirm that the 

State has acceptably derived and 

documented the attainment year VOC 

and NOX emissions for St. Joseph and 

Elkhart Counties. 

3. Demonstration of Maintenance 

As part of the May 30, 2006, 

redesignation request submittal, IDEM 

included a requested revision to the SIP 

to incorporate a 13-year ozone 

maintenance plan which is consistent 

with the requirements under section 

175A of the CAA. Included in the 

maintenance plan is a maintenance 

demonstration. This demonstration 

shows maintenance of the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS by documenting current and 

projected VOC and NOX emissions and 

by documenting photochemical 

modeling results that support 

maintenance of the standard in this 

area.5

Table 4 specifies the VOC emissions 

in St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties for 

2004, 2010, and 2020. IDEM chose 2020 

as a projection year to meet the 10-year 

minimum maintenance projection 

requirement, allowing several years for 

the State to complete its adoption of the 

ozone redesignation request and ozone 

maintenance plan and for the EPA to 

approve the redesignation request and 

maintenance plan. IDEM also chose 

2010 as an interim year to demonstrate 

that VOC and NOX emissions will 

remain below the attainment levels 

throughout the 10-year maintenance 

period. 

Table 5, similar to Table 4, specifies 

the NOX emissions in St. Joseph and 

Elkhart Counties for 2004, 2010, and 

2020. Together, Tables 4 and 5 and the 

photochemical modeling results 

demonstrate that St. Joseph and Elkhart 

Counties should remain in attainment of 

the 8-hour ozone NAAQS between 2004 

and 2020, for more than 10 years after 

EPA is expected to approve the 

redesignation of St. Joseph and Elkhart 

Counties to attainment of the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. 

TABLE 4.—ATTAINMENT YEAR (2004) AND PROJECTED VOC EMISSIONS IN ST. JOSEPH AND ELKHART COUNTIES

[Tons per summer day] 

Source sector 

Year 

2004 2010 2020 

Point ......................................................................................................................................................... 25.63 29.16 39.78 

Area ......................................................................................................................................................... 29.43 31.15 35.20 

On-Road Mobile ....................................................................................................................................... 17.52 11.56 6.64 

Off-Road Mobile ....................................................................................................................................... 13.40 10.47 8.06 

Total .................................................................................................................................................. 85.98 82.34 89.68 

TABLE 5.—ATTAINMENT YEAR AND PROJECTED NOX EMISSIONS IN ST. JOSEPH AND ELKHART COUNTIES

[Tons per summer day] 

Source sector 

Year 

2004 2010 2020 

Point ......................................................................................................................................................... 6.36 6.32 7.17 

Area ......................................................................................................................................................... 7.13 7.54 7.98 

On-Road Mobile ....................................................................................................................................... 30.11 19.29 7.73 

Off-Road Mobile ....................................................................................................................................... 19.56 14.06 9.78 

Total .................................................................................................................................................. 63.16 47.21 32.66 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 19421 

IDEM also notes that the State’s EGU 

NOX emission control rules stemming 

from EPA’s NOX SIP call, implemented 

beginning in 2004, and CAIR will 

further lower NOX emissions in upwind 

areas, resulting in decreased ozone and 

ozone precursor transport into St. 

Joseph and Elkhart Counties (the State 

did not project the emission decreases 

resulting from CAIR and did not 

document future NOX emissions in 

upwind Counties). This will also 

support maintenance of the ozone 

standard in St. Joseph and Elkhart 

Counties. 

Based upon the data in Table 5, NOX

emissions in St. Joseph and Elkhart 

Counties are projected to decline by 

more than 48% between 2004 and 2020, 

but VOC emissions are projected to 

increase by a modest 4.3% during that 

period. This slight increase in VOC 

emissions, however, is more than offset 

by the significant local and regional 

decreases in NOX emissions to occur 

during the same timeframe. This 

offsetting of an increase in VOC 

emissions with NOX emission 

reductions is consistent with EPA’s 

December 1993 NOX Substitution Policy 

(which specifies that a percentage basis, 

rather than a mass basis, is used for 

equivalency calculations) which was 

transmitted under cover of a December 

15, 1993, memorandum from John Seitz, 

(then) Director, Office of Air Quality 

Planning and Standards, as clarified in 

an August 5, 1994, memorandum also 

from John Seitz, titled ‘‘Clarification of 

Policy for Nitrogen Oxides 

Substitution.’’ As discussed in Indiana’s 

submittal, EPA modeling shows that 

existing national emission control 

measures have brought St. Joseph and 

Elkhart Counties into attainment of the 

8-hour NAAQS. Rulemakings to be 

implemented in the next several years 

will provide even greater assurance that 

air quality will continue to meet the 

standard in the future. Modeling for the 

NOX SIP call, Heavy Duty Engine Rule, 

Highway Diesel Fuel and Tier II/Low 

Sulfur Fuel Rule, and CAIR shows that 

future year design values for St. Joseph 

and Elkhart Counties through 2020 will 

continue to show attainment of the 

ozone standard, with modeled future 

ozone design values well below 0.085 

ppm. 

Based on the comparison of the 

projected emissions and the attainment 

year emissions, and photochemical 

modeling results, we conclude that 

IDEM has successfully demonstrated 

that the 8-hour ozone standard should 

be maintained in St. Joseph and Elkhart 

Counties. We believe that this is 

especially likely given the expected 

impacts of the NOX SIP call and CAIR. 

As noted by IDEM, this conclusion is 

further supported by the fact that other 

states in the eastern portion of the 

United States are expected to further 

reduce regional NOX emissions through 

implementation of their own NOX

emission control rules for EGUs and 

other NOX sources and through 

implementation of CAIR, reducing 

ozone and NOX transport into St. Joseph 

and Elkhart Counties. 

4. Monitoring Network 

IDEM commits to continue operating 

and maintaining an approved ozone 

monitoring network in St. Joseph and 

Elkhart Counties in accordance with 40 

CFR part 58 through the 13-year 

maintenance period. This will allow the 

confirmation of the maintenance of the 

8-hour ozone standard in this area and 

the triggering of contingency measures if 

needed. 

5. Verification of Continued Attainment 

Continued attainment of the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS in St. Joseph and Elkhart 

Counties depends on the State’s efforts 

toward tracking applicable indicators 

during the maintenance period. The 

State’s plan for verifying continued 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard 

in St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties 

consists, in part, of a plan to continue 

ambient ozone monitoring in 

accordance with the requirements of 40 

CFR part 58. In addition, IDEM will 

periodically revise and review the VOC 

and NOX emissions inventories for St. 

Joseph and Elkhart Counties to assure 

that emissions growth is not threatening 

the continued attainment of the 8-hour 

ozone standard in this area. Revised 

emission inventories for this area will 

be prepared for 2005, 2008, and 2011 as 

necessary to comply with the emission 

inventory reporting requirements 

established in the CAA. The revised 

emissions will be compared with the 

2004 attainment emissions and the 2020 

projected maintenance year emissions to 

assure continued maintenance of the 

ozone standard. 

6. Contingency Plan 

The contingency plan provisions of 

the CAA are designed to result in 

prompt correction or prevention of 

violations of the NAAQS that might 

occur after redesignation of an area to 

attainment of the NAAQS. Section 175A 

of the CAA requires that a maintenance 

plan include such contingency 

measures as EPA deems necessary to 

assure that the State will promptly 

correct a violation of the NAAQS that 

might occur after redesignation. The 

maintenance plan must identify the 

contingency measures to be considered 

for possible adoption, a schedule and 

procedure for adoption and 

implementation of the selected 

contingency measures, and a time limit 

for action by the State. The State should 

also identify specific indicators to be 

used to determine when the 

contingency measures need to be 

adopted and implemented. The 

maintenance plan must include a 

requirement that the State will 

implement all measures with respect to 

control of the pollutant(s) that were 

controlled in the SIP before the 

redesignation of the area to attainment. 

See section 175A(d) of the CAA. 

As required by section 175A of the 

CAA, Indiana commits to review its 

Maintenance Plan eight years after 

redesignation and to adopt and 

expeditiously implement any necessary 

corrective actions (or contingency 

measures). Contingency measures to be 

considered will be selected from a 

comprehensive list of measures deemed 

appropriate and effective at the time the 

selection is made. The contingency plan 

has two levels of actions/responses 

depending on whether a violation of the 

8-hour ozone standard is only 

threatened (Warning Level Response) or 

has actually occurred (Action Level 

Response). 

A Warning Level Response will be 

prompted whenever an annual (1-year) 

fourth-high monitored daily peak 8-hour 

ozone concentration of 89 ppb (or 

greater) occurs at any monitor in St. 

Joseph and Elkhart Counties, or a 2-year 

averaged annual fourth-high daily peak 

8-hour ozone concentration of 85 ppb or 

greater occurs at any monitor in St. 

Joseph and Elkhart Counties. A Warning 

Level Response will consist of a study 

to determine whether the monitored 

ozone level indicates a trend toward 

higher ozone levels or whether 

emissions are increasing, threatening a 

future violation of the ozone NAAQS. 

The study will evaluate whether the 

trend, if any, is likely to continue, and, 

if so, the emission control measures 

necessary to reverse the trend, taking 

into consideration the ease and timing 

of implementation, as well as economic 

and social considerations. 

Implementation of necessary controls 

will take place as expeditiously as 

possible, but in no event later than 12 

months from the conclusion of the most 

recent ozone season. If new emission 

controls are needed to reverse the 

adverse ozone trend, the procedures for 

emission control selection under the 

Action Level Response will be followed. 

An Action Level Response will be 

triggered when a violation of the 8-hour 

ozone standard is monitored at any of 

the monitors in St. Joseph and Elkhart 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
19422 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

Counties (when a 3-year average annual 

fourth-high monitored daily peak 8-hour 

ozone concentration of 85 ppb or higher 

is recorded at any monitor in St. Joseph 

and Elkhart Counties). In this situation, 

IDEM will determine the additional 

emission control measures needed to 

assure future attainment of the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. IDEM will focus on 

emission control measures that can be 

implemented within 18 months from 

the close of the ozone season in which 

the ozone standard violation is 

monitored. 

Adoption of any additional emission 

control measures prompted by either of 

the two response levels will be subject 

to the necessary administrative and 

legal processes dictated by State law. 

This process will include publication of 

public notices, providing the 

opportunity for a public hearing, and 

other measures required by Indiana law 

for rulemaking by State environmental 

boards. If a new emission control 

measure is already promulgated and 

scheduled for implementation at the 

Federal or State level, and that emission 

control measure is determined to be 

sufficient to address the air quality 

problem or adverse trend, additional 

local emission control measures may be 

determined to be unnecessary. IDEM 

will submit to the EPA an analysis to 

demonstrate that the proposed emission 

control measures or existing emission 

control measures are adequate to 

provide for future attainment of the 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS in St. Joseph and 

Elkhart Counties. 

Contingency measures contained in 

the maintenance plan are those 

emission controls or other measures that 

the State may choose to adopt and 

implement to correct existing or 

possible air quality problems in St. 

Joseph and Elkhart Counties. These 

include, but are not limited to, the 

following: 

i. Lower Reid vapor pressure gasoline 

requirements; 

ii. Broader geographic applicability of 

existing emission control measures; 

iii. Tightened RACT requirements on 

existing sources covered by EPA Control 

Technique Guidelines (CTGs) issued in 

response to the 1999 CAA amendments; 

iv. Application of RACT to smaller 

existing sources; 

v. Vehicle Inspection and 

Maintenance (I/M); 

vi. One or more Transportation 

Control Measure (TCM) sufficient to 

achieve at least a 0.5 percent reduction 

in actual area-wide VOC emissions, to 

be selected from the following: 

A. Trip reduction programs, 

including, but not limited to, employerbased transportation management plans, 

area-wide rideshare programs, work 

schedule programs, and telecommuting; 

B. Transit improvement; 

C. Traffic flow improvements; and, 

D. Other new or innovative 

transportation measures not yet in 

widespread use that affect State and 

local governments as deemed 

appropriate; 

vii. Alternative fuel and diesel retrofit 

programs for fleet vehicle operations; 

viii. Controls on consumer products 

consistent with those adopted elsewhere 

in the United States; 

ix. VOC or NOX emission offsets for 

new or modified major sources; 

x. VOC or NOX emission offsets for 

new or modified minor sources; 

xi. Increased ratio of emission offsets 

required for new sources; and, 

xii. VOC or NOX emission controls on 

new minor sources (with VOC or NOX

emissions less than 100 tons per year). 

7. Provisions for a Future Update of the 

Ozone Maintenance Plan 

As required by section 175A(b) of the 

CAA, the State commits to submit to the 

EPA an update of the ozone 

maintenance plan eight years after 

redesignation of the Counties to 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

The revision will contain Indiana’s plan 

for maintaining the 8-hour ozone 

standard for 10 years beyond the first 

10-year period after redesignation. 

V. Has Indiana Adopted Acceptable 

Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets for 

the End of the 14-Year Maintenance 

Plan Which Can Be Used To Support 

Transportation Conformity 

Determinations? 

A. How Are the Motor Vehicle Emission 

Budgets Developed and What Are the 

Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for St. 

Joseph and Elkhart Counties? 

Under the CAA, states are required to 

submit, at various times, SIP revisions 

and ozone maintenance plans for 

applicable areas (for ozone 

nonattainment areas and for areas 

seeking redesignations to attainment of 

the ozone standard or revising existing 

ozone maintenance plans). These 

emission control SIP revisions (e.g., 

reasonable further progress and 

attainment demonstration SIP 

revisions), including ozone maintenance 

plans, must create MVEBs based on onroad mobile source emissions allocated 

to highway and transit vehicle use that, 

together with emissions from other 

sources in the area, will provide for 

attainment or maintenance of the ozone 

NAAQS. 

Under 40 CFR part 93, MVEBs for an 

area seeking a redesignation to 

attainment of the NAAQS are 

established for the last year of the 

maintenance plan. The MVEBs serve as 

ceilings on emissions from an area’s 

planned transportation system. The 

MVEB concept is further explained in 

the preamble to the November 24, 1993, 

transportation conformity rule (58 FR 

62188). The preamble also describes 

how to establish the MVEBs in the SIP 

and how to revise the MVEBs if needed. 

Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new 

transportation projects, such as the 

construction of new highways, must 

‘‘conform’’ to (i.e., be consistent with) 

the part of the SIP that addresses 

emissions from cars and trucks. 

Conformity to the SIP means that 

transportation activities will not cause 

new air quality standard violations, or 

delay timely attainment of the NAAQS. 

If a transportation plan does not 

conform, most new transportation 

projects that would expand the capacity 

of roadways cannot go forward. 

Regulations at 40 CFR part 93 set forth 

EPA’s policy, criteria, and procedures 

for demonstrating and assuring 

conformity of transportation activities to 

a SIP. 

When reviewing SIP revisions 

containing MVEBs, including 

attainment strategies, rate-of-progress 

plans, and maintenance plans, EPA 

must affirmatively find that the MVEBs 

are ‘‘adequate’’ for use in determining 

transportation conformity. Once EPA 

affirmatively finds the submitted 

MVEBs to be adequate for transportation 

conformity purposes, the MVEBs are 

used by state and Federal agencies in 

determining whether proposed 

transportation projects conform to the 

SIPs as required by section 176(c) of the 

CAA. EPA’s substantive criteria for 

determining the adequacy of MVEBs are 

specified in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). 

EPA’s process for determining 

adequacy of MVEBs consists of three 

basic steps: (1) Providing public 

notification of a SIP submission; (2) 

providing the public the opportunity to 

comment on the MVEBs during a public 

comment period; and, (3) making a 

finding of adequacy. The process of 

determining the adequacy of submitted 

SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in 

EPA’s May 14, 1999, guidance, 

‘‘Conformity Guidance on 

Implementation of March 2, 1999, 

Conformity Court Decision.’’ This 

guidance was finalized in the 

Transportation Conformity Rule 

Amendments for the ‘‘New 8-Hour 

Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards and Miscellaneous 

Revisions for Existing Areas: 

Transportation Conformity Rule 

Amendments—Response to Court 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 19423 

Decision and Additional Rule Change’’

published on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 

40004). EPA follows this guidance and 

rulemaking in making its adequacy 

determinations. 

The Transportation Conformity Rule, 

in 40 CFR section 93.118(f), provides for 

MVEB adequacy findings through two 

mechanisms. First, 40 CFR 93.118(f)(1) 

provides for posting a notice to the EPA 

conformity Web site at: http:// 

www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/ 

transconf/adequacy.htm and providing 

a 30-day public comment period. 

Second, a mechanism is described in 40 

CFR 93.118(f)(2) which provides that 

EPA can review the adequacy of an 

implementation plan MVEB 

simultaneously with its review of the 

implementation plan itself. 

The St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties 

14-year maintenance plan contains VOC 

and NOX MVEBs for 2020. EPA has 

reviewed the submittal and the VOC 

and NOX MVEBs for St. Joseph and 

Elkhart Counties and finds that the 

MVEBs meet the adequacy criteria in 

the Transportation Conformity Rule. 

The 30-day comment period for 

adequacy will be the same as the 

comment period for approval of the 

budgets and maintenance plan. Any and 

all comments on the adequacy or 

approvability of the budgets should be 

submitted during the comment period 

stated in the DATES section of this 

notice. 

EPA, through this rulemaking, is 

proposing to approve the MVEBs for use 

to determine transportation conformity 

in St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties 

because EPA has determined that the 

budgets are consistent with the control 

measures in the SIP and that St. Joseph 

and Elkhart Counties can maintain 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

for the relevant required 13-year period 

with mobile source emissions at the 

levels of the MVEBs. IDEM has 

determined the 2020 MVEBs for St. 

Joseph and Elkhart Counties to be 6.64 

tons per day for VOC and 7.73 tons per 

day for NOX. 

B. Are the MVEBs Approvable? 

The VOC and NOX MVEBs for St. 

Joseph and Elkhart Counties are 

approvable because they provide for 

continued maintenance of the 8-hour 

ozone standard through 2020. 

VI. What Is the Effect of EPA’s Proposed 

Action? 

Approval of the redesignation request 

would change the official designation of 

St. Joseph and Elkhart Counties for the 

8-hour ozone NAAQS, found at 40 CFR 

part 81, from nonattainment to 

attainment. It would also incorporate 

into the Indiana SIP a plan for 

maintaining the ozone NAAQS through 

2020. The maintenance plan includes 

contingency measures to remedy 

possible future violations of the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS, and establishes MVEBs 

of 6.64 tons per day for VOC and 7.73 

tons per day for NOX. 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, September 30, 1993), this action 

is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’

and, therefore, is not subject to review 

by the Office of Management and 

Budget. 

Paperwork Reduction Act 

This proposed rule does not impose 

an information collection burden under 

the provisions of the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 

et seq.). 

Regulatory Flexibility Act 

This proposed action merely proposes 

to approve state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and imposes no additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. Accordingly, the 

Administrator certifies that this 

proposed rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities under the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.). 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

Because this rule proposes to approve 

pre-existing requirements under state 

law and does not impose any additional 

enforceable duty beyond that required 

by state law, it does not contain any 

unfunded mandate or significantly or 

uniquely affect small governments, as 

described in the Unfunded Mandates 

Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). 

Executive Order 13132: Federalism 

This action also does not have 

Federalism implications because it does 

not have substantial direct effects on the 

states, on the relationship between the 

national government and the states, or 

on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999). This action merely 

proposes to approve a state rule 

implementing a federal standard, and 

does not alter the relationship or the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the Clean 

Air Act. 

Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This proposed rule also does not have 

tribal implications because it will not 

have a substantial direct effect on one or 

more Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

as specified by Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

This proposed rule also is not subject 

to Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997), because it is not 

economically significant. 

Executive Order 13211: Actions That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use 

Because it is not a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under Executive 

Order 12866 or a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action,’’ this action is also not subject to 

Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

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

22, 2001). 

National Technology Transfer 

Advancement Act 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (NTTAA), 15 U.S.C. 272, 

requires Federal agencies to use 

technical standards that are developed 

or adopted by voluntary consensus to 

carry out policy objectives, so long as 

such standards are not inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the Clean Air Act. Absent a prior 

existing requirement for the state to use 

voluntary consensus standards, EPA has 

no authority to disapprove a SIP 

submission for failure to use such 

standards, and it would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA to use voluntary consensus 

standards in place of a program 

submission that otherwise satisfies the 

provisions of the Clean Air Act. 

Therefore, the requirements of section 

12(d) of the NTTAA do not apply. 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS
19424 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 74 / Wednesday, April 18, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Air pollution control, Environmental 

protection, National parks, Wilderness 

areas. 

Dated: April 6, 2007. 

Walter W. Kovalick, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. E7–7347 Filed 4–17–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2006–0459; FRL–8301–9] 

Determination of Attainment, Approval 

and Promulgation of Implementation 

Plans and Designation of Areas for Air 

Quality Planning Purposes; Indiana; 

Redesignation of the LaPorte County 

8-Hour Nonattainment Area to 

Attainment for Ozone 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: On May 30, 2006, the Indiana 

Department of Environmental 

Management (IDEM) submitted a 

request for EPA approval of a 

redesignation of LaPorte County to 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) 

and of an ozone maintenance plan for 

LaPorte County as a revision to the 

Indiana State Implementation Plan 

(SIP). EPA is proposing to approve 

Indiana’s request and maintenance plan 

SIP revision. EPA is also proposing to 

approve the Volatile Organic 

Compounds (VOC) and Nitrogen Oxides 

(NOX) Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets 

(MVEBs) for LaPorte County, as 

supported by the ozone maintenance 

plan for this County, for purposes of 

conformity determinations. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before May 18, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05–

OAR–2006–0459, by one of the 

following methods: 

• www.regulations.gov: Follow the 

on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• E-mail: mooney.john@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (312) 886–5824. 

• Mail: John M. Mooney, Chief, 

Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 77 West Jackson 

Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. 

• Hand Delivery: John M. Mooney, 

Chief, Criteria Pollutant Section, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois. Such deliveries are only 

accepted during the Regional Office’s 

normal hours of operation, and special 

arrangements should be made for 

deliveries of boxed information. The 

Regional Office’s official hours of 

operation are Monday through Friday, 

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

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2006–

0459. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI, or otherwise 

protected, through www.regulations.gov 

or e-mail. The www.regulations.gov 

website 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 

e-mail comment directly to EPA without 

going through www.regulations.gov, 

your e-mail address will be 

automatically captured and included as 

part of the comment that is placed in the 

public docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD-ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters and any 

form of encryption, and should be free 

of any defects or viruses 

Docket: All documents in the docket 

are listed in the www.regulations.gov 

index. Although listed in the index, 

some information is not publicly 

available, e.g., CBI or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hardcopy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hardcopy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, Air and Radiation Division, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. This facility is open from 

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

Friday, excluding Federal holidays. It is 

recommended that you telephone 

Edward Doty, Environmental Scientist, 

at (312) 886–6057, before visiting the 

Region 5 office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Edward Doty, Environmental Scientist, 

Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 

60604, (312) 886–6057, 

doty.edward@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

the EPA. This supplementary 

information section is arranged as 

follows: 

I. What Action Is EPA Proposing To Take? 

II. What Is the Background for This Action? 

III. What Are the Criteria for Redesignation 

to Attainment? 

IV. What Are EPA’s Analyses of the State’s 

Requests and What Are the Bases for 

EPA’s Proposed Action? 

V. Has Indiana Adopted Acceptable Motor 

Vehicle Emissions Budgets for the End of 

the 10-Year Maintenance Plan Which 

Can Be Used To Support Conformity 

Determinations? 

VI. What Is the Effect of EPA’s Proposed 

Action? 

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What Action Is EPA Proposing To 

Take? 

We are proposing to take several 

related actions for LaPorte County. First, 

we are proposing to determine that 

LaPorte County has attained the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS based on air quality for 

the period of 2003 through 2005. 

Second, we are proposing to approve 

Indiana’s ozone maintenance plan for 

LaPorte County as a requested revision 

to the Indiana SIP. The maintenance 

plan is designed to keep LaPorte County 

in attainment of the 8-hour ozone 

standard for the next 14 years, through 

2020. As supported by and consistent 

with the ozone maintenance plan, we 

are also proposing to approve the 2020 

VOC and NOX MVEBs for LaPorte 

County for conformity purposes. 

Finally, we are proposing to approve the 

request from the State of Indiana to 

change the designation of LaPorte 

County from nonattainment to 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

We have determined that the State and 

LaPorte County have met the 


rmajette on PROD1PC67 with PROPOSALS