Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 28, 2018 / Proposed Rules 43825 

(4) State each reason why the troubled 

institution cannot meet the standard set 

forth in § 1231.3(e)(2). 

(f) Waiver of form or content 

requirements. FHFA may waive or 

modify any requirement related to the 

form or content of a request or notice, 

in circumstances deemed appropriate by 

FHFA. 

(g) Additional information. FHFA 

may request additional information at 

any time during the processing of the 

request or after receiving a notice. 

Dated: August 20, 2018. 

Melvin L. Watt, 

Director, Federal Housing Finance Agency. 

[FR Doc. 2018–18511 Filed 8–27–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8070–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR 

Wage and Hour Division 

29 CFR Part 541 

White Collar Exemption Regulations; 

Public Listening Sessions 

AGENCY: Wage and Hour Division, 

Department of Labor. 

ACTION: Notification of public listening 

sessions. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Labor will 

conduct public listening sessions to 

gather views on white collar exemption 

regulations. The Fair Labor Standards 

Act (FLSA) generally requires covered 

employers to pay their employees at 

least the federal minimum wage 

(currently $7.25 an hour) for all hours 

worked, and overtime premium pay of 

not less than one and one-half times the 

employee’s regular rate of pay for any 

hours worked over 40 in a workweek. 

The FLSA exempts from both minimum 

wage and overtime protection ‘‘any 

employee employed in a bona fide 

executive, administrative, or 

professional capacity’’ and delegates to 

the Secretary of Labor the power to 

define and delimit these terms through 

regulation. 

DATES: The dates, locations, and times 

for the public listening sessions are 

listed below: 

September 7, 2018, Atlanta, Georgia, 10 

a.m.–12 p.m. 

September 11, 2018, Seattle, 

Washington, 10 a.m.–12 p.m. 

September 13, 2018, Kansas City, 

Missouri, 10 a.m.–12 p.m. 

September 14, 2018, Denver, Colorado, 

10 a.m.–12 p.m. 

September 24, 2018, Providence, Rhode 

Island, 10 a.m.–12 p.m. 

Members of the public may attend 

these listening sessions in person up to 

the seating capacity of the room. The 

Department will not attempt to achieve 

a consensus view in these listening 

sessions, but rather is interested in 

hearing the views and ideas of 

participants. 

ADDRESSES: To obtain specific location 

details and register to attend, please 

visit this link: https://

www.eventbrite.com/e/overtime-ruleoutreach-sessions-tickets-49216139799. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Stephen Davis, Listening Session 

Coordinator, Division of Regulations, 

Legislation, and Interpretation, Wage 

and Hour Division, U.S. Department of 

Labor, Room S–3502, 200 Constitution 

Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20210; 

telephone: (202) 693–0406 (this is not a 

toll-free number). Copies of this notice 

may be obtained in alternative formats 

(Large Print, Braille, Audio Tape, or 

Disc), upon request, by calling (202) 

693–0023 (not a toll-free number). TTY/ 

TTD callers may dial toll-free (877) 889– 

5627 to obtain information or request 

materials in alternative formats. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 

26, 2017, the Department of Labor 

published a Request for Information 

(RFI), Defining and Delimiting the 

Exemptions for Executive, 

Administrative, Professional, Outside 

Sales and Computer Employees. See 82 

FR 34616. The RFI was one opportunity 

for the public to provide information to 

aid the Department in formulating a 

proposal to revise the white collar 

exemption regulations. Public listening 

sessions will provide further 

opportunity for the public to provide 

input on issues related to the salary 

level test, such as: 

1. What is the appropriate salary level 

(or range of salary levels) above which 

the overtime exemptions for bona fide 

executive, administrative, or 

professional employees may apply? 

Why? 

2. What benefits and costs to 

employees and employers might 

accompany an increased salary level? 

How would an increased salary level 

affect real wages (e.g., increasing 

overtime pay for employees whose 

current salaries are below a new level 

but above the current threshold)? Could 

an increased salary level reduce 

litigation costs by reducing the number 

of employees whose exemption status is 

unclear? Could this additional certainty 

produce other benefits for employees 

and employers? 

3. What is the best methodology to 

determine an updated salary level? 

Should the update derive from wage 

growth, cost-of-living increases, actual 

wages paid to employees, or some other 

measure? 

4. Should the Department more 

regularly update the standard salary 

level and the total-annual-compensation 

level for highly compensated 

employees? If so, how should these 

updates be made? How frequently 

should updates occur? What benefits, if 

any, could result from more frequent 

updates? 

Dated: August 23, 2018. 

Melissa Smith, 

Director, Division of Regulations, Legislation 

and Interpretation. 

[FR Doc. 2018–18649 Filed 8–27–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510–27–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2017–0147; FRL–9982– 

90—Region 5] 

Air Plan Approval; Indiana; 

Reasonable Further Progress Plan and 

Other Plan Elements for the Chicago 

Nonattainment Area for the 2008 

Ozone Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

revision to the Indiana State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) to meet the 

base year emissions inventory, 

reasonable further progress (RFP), RFP 

contingency measure, nonattainment 

new source review (nonattainment 

NSR), volatile organic compound (VOC) 

reasonably available control technology 

(RACT), and motor vehicle inspection 

and maintenance (I/M) requirements of 

the Clean Air Act (CAA) for the Indiana 

portion of the Chicago-Naperville, 

Illinois-Indiana-Wisconsin area 

(Chicago area) for the 2008 ozone 

national ambient air quality standard 

(NAAQS or standard). EPA is also 

proposing to approve the 2017 

transportation conformity motor vehicle 

emissions budgets (MVEBs) for the 

Indiana portion of the Chicago area for 

the 2008 ozone NAAQS. EPA is 

proposing to approve the state’s 

submission as a SIP revision pursuant to 

section 110 and part D of the CAA and 

EPA’s regulations because it satisfies the 

emission inventory, RFP, RFP 

contingency measure, nonattainment 

NSR, VOC RACT, I/M, and 

transportation conformity requirements 

for areas classified as moderate 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
43826 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 28, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

1 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008), codified at 40 

CFR 50.15. 

2CAA sections 107(d)(1) and 181(a)(1). 

3CAA section 181(a)(1). 

4CAA section 182(a). 

5CAA section 182(b). 

6 77 FR 34221, effective July 20, 2012. 

7 81 FR 26697. 

8 82 FR 9158 (February 3, 2017). 

nonattainment for the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS. Final approval of Indiana’s SIP 

as meeting the nonattainment NSR 

requirements of the CAA for the 2008 

ozone NAAQS will permanently stop 

the sanctions and Federal 

Implementation Plan (FIP) clocks 

triggered by EPA’s February 3, 2017 

finding that Indiana failed to submit a 

marginal ozone nonattainment NSR 

plan. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before September 27, 2018. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R05– 

OAR–2017–0147, at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

Aburano.Douglas@epa.gov. For 

comments submitted at Regulations.gov, 

follow the online instructions for 

submitting comments. Once submitted, 

comments cannot be edited or removed 

from Regulations.gov. For either manner 

of submission, EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. EPA will generally not consider 

comments or comment contents located 

outside of the primary submission (i.e. 

on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 

system). For additional submission 

methods, please contact the person 

identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section. For the 

full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Kathleen D’Agostino, Environmental 

Engineer, Attainment Planning and 

Maintenance Section, Air Programs 

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West 

Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 

60604, (312) 886–1767, 

Dagostino.Kathleen@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, whenever 

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

EPA. This supplementary information 

section is arranged as follows: 

I. What is the background for this action? 

II. What is EPA’s evaluation of Indiana’s 

submittal? 

III. What action is EPA proposing? 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What is the background for this 

action? 

A. Background on the 2008 Ozone 

Standard 

On March 12, 2008, EPA promulgated 

a revised 8-hour ozone NAAQS of 0.075 

parts per million (ppm).1 Promulgation 

of a revised NAAQS triggers a 

requirement for EPA to designate all 

areas of the country as nonattainment, 

attainment, or unclassifiable for the 

NAAQS. For the ozone NAAQS, this 

also involves classifying any 

nonattainment areas at the time of 

designation.2 Ozone nonattainment 

areas are classified based on the severity 

of their ozone levels (as determined 

based on the area’s ‘‘design value,’’ 

which represents air quality in the area 

for the most recent 3 years). The 

classifications for ozone nonattainment 

areas are marginal, moderate, serious, 

severe, and extreme.3

Areas that EPA designates 

nonattainment for the ozone NAAQS are 

subject to the general nonattainment 

area planning requirements of CAA 

section 172 and also to the ozonespecific planning requirements of CAA 

section 182. Ozone nonattainment areas 

in the lower classification levels have 

fewer and/or less stringent mandatory 

air quality planning and control 

requirements than those in higher 

classifications. For marginal areas, a 

state is required to submit a baseline 

emissions inventory, adopt provisions 

into the SIP requiring emissions 

statements from stationary sources, and 

implement a nonattainment NSR 

program for the relevant ozone 

NAAQS.4 For moderate areas, a state 

needs to comply with the marginal area 

requirements, plus additional moderate 

area requirements, including the 

requirement to submit a modeled 

demonstration that the area will attain 

the NAAQS as expeditiously as 

practicable but no later than 6 years 

after designation, the requirement to 

submit an RFP plan, the requirement to 

adopt and implement certain emissions 

controls, such as RACT and I/M, and the 

requirement for greater emissions offsets 

for new or modified major stationary 

sources under the state’s nonattainment 

NSR program.5

B. Background on the Chicago 2008 

Ozone Nonattainment Area 

On June 11, 2012,6 EPA designated 

the Chicago area as a marginal 

nonattainment area for the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS. The Chicago area includes 

Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry, 

and Will Counties and part of Grundy 

and Kendall Counties in Illinois; Lake 

and Porter Counties in Indiana; and part 

of Kenosha County in Wisconsin. On 

May 4, 2016,7 pursuant to section 

181(b)(2) of the CAA, EPA determined 

that the Chicago area failed to attain the 

2008 ozone NAAQS by the July 20, 

2015, marginal area attainment deadline 

and thus reclassified the area from 

marginal to moderate nonattainment. In 

that action, EPA established January 1, 

2017, as the due date for the state to 

submit all moderate area nonattainment 

plan SIP requirements applicable to 

newly reclassified areas. 

In addition, effective March 6, 2017, 

EPA found that 15 states and the District 

of Columbia failed to submit SIP 

revisions in a timely manner to satisfy 

certain nonattainment plan 

requirements for the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS.8 This finding established 

certain deadlines for the imposition of 

sanctions if a state does not submit a 

timely SIP revision addressing the 

requirements for which EPA made the 

finding and for EPA to promulgate a FIP 

to address any outstanding SIP 

requirements. As part of that action, 

EPA made a finding that Indiana failed 

to submit a SIP submission to meet the 

marginal nonattainment NSR 

requirements for the Indiana portion of 

the Chicago area. 

II. What is EPA’s evaluation of 

Indiana’s submittal? 

Indiana submitted a SIP revision 

request on February 28, 2017, and 

submitted supplemental information on 

January 9, 2018, to address the moderate 

area requirements for the Indiana 

portion of the Chicago area for the 2008 

ozone NAAQS. The submission 

contained a number of nonattainment 

plan elements, including a revised 2011 

base year emissions inventory for VOC 

and oxides of nitrogen (NOX), a 15% 

RFP plan, a 3% RFP contingency 

measure plan, 2017 VOC and NOX

motor vehicle emissions budgets, a 

nonattainment NSR certification, a VOC 

RACT certification, and an enhanced I/ 

M certification. The nonattainment NSR 

certification included in the SIP 

submission addresses the deficiency 

that was the basis for the March 6, 2017, 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 28, 2018 / Proposed Rules 43827 

9 78 FR 34178, 34190, (June 6, 2013). 

10 82 FR 16934. 

11 80 FR 12264. (March 6, 2015). 

12 Ibid, at 12271 and 40 CFR 51.1110. 

13On February 16, 2018, the D.C. Circuit Court 

issued a decision in South Coast Air Quality 

Management District v. EPA, 882 F.3d 1138 (D.C. 

Cir. 2018), in which several parties challenged 

different aspects of EPA’s SIP Requirements Rule 

for the 2008 Ozone NAAQS. In this decision, the 

Court upheld 2011 as a reasonable baseline year for 

the 2008 ozone NAAQS but vacated the provision 

allowing for an alternate year. Because Wisconsin, 

Illinois, and Indiana have selected 2011 as the 

baseline year, the decision does not impact 

Indiana’s ROP plan. 

finding; therefore, approval of this SIP 

revision would permanently stop the 

sanctions and FIP clocks triggered by 

EPA’s February 3, 2017 finding that 

Indiana failed to submit a marginal 

ozone nonattainment NSR plan. The 

submission also included an attainment 

demonstration, which will be addressed 

in a separate action. 

A. Revised 2011 Base Year Emissions 

Inventory 

CAA sections 172(c)(3) and 182(a)(1), 

42 U.S.C. 7502(c)(3) and 7511a(a)(1), 

require states to develop and submit, as 

SIP revisions, comprehensive, accurate, 

and complete emissions inventories for 

all areas designated as nonattainment 

for the ozone NAAQS. An emissions 

inventory for ozone is an estimation of 

actual emissions of VOC and NOX from 

all sources located in the relevant 

designated nonattainment area. For the 

2008 ozone NAAQS, EPA has 

recommended that states use 2011 as a 

base year for the emissions estimates.9

On April 7, 2017,10 EPA approved the 

2011 base year emissions inventory 

submitted by the Indiana Department of 

Environmental Management (IDEM) on 

June 15, 2016, for the Indiana portion of 

the Chicago area. IDEM included a 

revised 2011 base year emissions 

inventory in its February 27, 2017, 

submission. The revised 2011 base year 

emissions inventory only modifies the 

emissions estimates for the on-road 

mobile sector, with emissions estimates 

for point, area, and non-road mobile 

sectors remaining unchanged from the 

inventory approved by EPA. 

In the original 2011 base year 

emissions inventory approved by EPA, 

Indiana derived 2011 onroad mobile 

emissions by back-casting emissions 

estimates generated by the MOVES2014 

model for 2015 and 2020. The revised 

onroad emissions estimates were 

generated by running the MOVES2014 

model for 2011. This is a more accurate 

method for estimating 2011 onroad 

emissions. Thus, EPA is proposing to 

approve the 2011 base year emissions 

inventory the state submitted with the 

RFP plan as a revision to the Indiana 

SIP. 

TABLE 1—REVISED 2011 BASE YEAR EMISSIONS INVENTORY IN TONS PER SUMMER DAY

[tpsd] 

Source sector 

VOC NOX

Lake County Porter County Total Lake County Porter County Total 

EGU Point ................................................ 0.44 0.19 0.63 24.62 5.53 30.15 

Point ......................................................... 15.39 1.68 17.07 43.10 23.36 66.46 

Area .......................................................... 12.54 5.53 18.07 5.80 3.89 9.69 

Non-road .................................................. 7.55 6.64 14.19 8.07 4.62 12.69 

On-road .................................................... 6.92 2.66 9.58 17.85 6.85 24.70 

Total .................................................. 42.84 16.70 59.54 99.44 44.25 143.69 

B. 15% RFP Plan and 3% Contingency 

Plan 

1. Background 

The CAA requires that states with 

areas designated as nonattainment for 

ozone achieve RFP toward attainment of 

the ozone NAAQS. CAA section 

172(c)(2) contains a general requirement 

that nonattainment plans must provide 

for emissions reductions that meet RFP. 

For areas classified moderate and above, 

section 182(b)(1) imposes a more 

specific RFP requirement that a state 

had to meet through a 15% reduction in 

VOC emissions from the baseline 

anthropogenic emissions within 6 years 

after November 15, 1990. The state must 

meet the 15% requirement by the end of 

the 6-year period, regardless of when 

the nonattainment area attains the 

NAAQS. As with other nonattainment 

plan requirements for more recent 

iterations of the ozone NAAQS, EPA has 

promulgated regulations and guidance 

to interpret the statutory requirements 

of the CAA. 

EPA’s final rule to implement the 

2008 ozone NAAQS (SIP Requirements 

Rule),11 addressed, among other things, 

the RFP requirements as they apply to 

areas designated nonattainment and 

classified as moderate for the 2008 

ozone NAAQS.12 EPA interprets the 

15% VOC emission reduction 

requirement in CAA section 182(b)(1) 

such that a state that has already met the 

15% requirement for VOC for an area 

under either the 1-hour ozone NAAQS 

or the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

would not have to fulfill that 

requirement through reductions of VOC 

again. Instead, EPA is interpreting CAA 

section 172(c)(2) to require states with 

such areas to obtain 15% ozone 

precursor emission reductions (VOC 

and/or NOX) over the first 6 years after 

the baseline year for the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS. The state previously met the 

15% VOC reduction requirement of 

CAA section 182(b)(1) for the Indiana 

portion of the Chicago area under the 1- 

hour ozone NAAQS. Therefore, the state 

may rely upon both VOC and NOX

emissions reductions to meet the RFP 

requirement for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. 

EPA’s SIP Requirements Rule 

indicates the base year for the 2008 

ozone NAAQS, for which areas were 

designated nonattainment effective July 

20, 2012, can be 2011 or a different year 

of the states choosing. However, states 

selecting a pre-2011 alternate baseline 

year must achieve 3% emission 

reductions each year after the initial 6- 

year period has concluded up to the 

beginning of the attainment year. For a 

multi-state area, states must agree on the 

same base year. Wisconsin, Illinois, and 

Indiana have selected the EPArecommended base year of 2011.13

States may not take credit for VOC or 

NOX reductions occurring from sources 

outside the nonattainment area for 

purposes of meeting the 15% ROP and 

3% RFP requirements of CAA sections 

172(c)(2), 182(b)(1) and 182(c)(2)(B). 

Indiana’s 15% RFP represents emissions 

reductions which occurred in Indiana’s 

portion of the nonattainment area from 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
43828 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 28, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

14See the March 6, 2015 SIP Requirements Rule 

(80 FR 12264 at 12285) and April 16, 1992 General 

Preamble section III.A.3.c (57 FR 13498 at 13511). 

15 80 FR 12264 at 12285. 

16 80 FR 12264 at 12285. 

2011 to 2017, thereby satisfying this 

requirement. 

Except as specifically provided in 

section 182(b)(1)(D) of the CAA, all state 

control measures approved into the SIP 

or Federal measures that provide 

emissions reductions that occur after the 

baseline emissions inventory year are 

creditable for purposes of the RFP 

requirements, provided that the 

reductions meet the standard 

requirements for creditability which 

include being enforceable, quantifiable, 

permanent, and surplus in terms of not 

having previously been counted toward 

RFP. 

States must also include contingency 

measures in their nonattainment plans. 

The contingency measures required for 

areas classified as moderate and above 

under CAA sections 172(c)(9) and 

182(c)(9) must provide for the 

implementation of specific measures if 

the area fails to attain or to meet any 

applicable RFP milestone. The state 

must submit these measures for 

approval by EPA into the SIP as adopted 

measures that would take effect without 

further rulemaking action by the state or 

the EPA upon a determination that an 

area failed to attain or to meet the 

applicable milestone. Per EPA guidance 

for purposes of the ozone NAAQS, 

contingency measures should represent 

one year’s worth of RFP progress, 

amounting to reductions of at least 3% 

of the baseline emissions inventory for 

the nonattainment area.14 The purpose 

of the contingency measures is to 

provide additional emission reductions 

in the event of a failure to attain or meet 

any applicable milestone, which would 

occur while the state is revising its SIP 

for the area to rectify the failure to attain 

or to meet RFP requirements.15

Regarding the contingency measures, 

EPA’s prior guidance for purposes of the 

ozone NAAQS specifies that some 

portion of the contingency measures 

must include VOC reductions. This 

previous limitation is no longer 

necessary in all areas. In particular, EPA 

has concluded that states with 

nonattainment areas classified as 

moderate and above that have already 

completed the initial 15% VOC 

reduction required by CAA section 

182(b)(1)(A)(i), can meet the 

contingency measures requirement 

based entirely on NOX controls if that is 

what the state’s analyses have 

demonstrated would be most effective 

in bringing the area into attainment. 

There is no minimum VOC requirement. 

Also, EPA is continuing its longstanding policy that allows states to use 

promulgated Federal measures as 

contingency measures as long as they 

provide emission reductions in the 

relevant years in excess of those needed 

for attainment or RFP.16

2. Indiana’s 15% RFP and 3% RFP 

Contingency Measures Plan 

To demonstrate that the Indiana 

portion of the Chicago area has achieved 

15% RFP over the 6-year attainment 

planning period, Indiana is using a 2011 

base year inventory and a 2017 RFP 

inventory. To develop the 2017 

inventory, Indiana calculated on-road 

emissions using EPA’s MOVES2014 

model and non-road emissions using 

EPA’s National Mobile Inventory Model 

(NMIM). The MOVES model for the onroad sector and NMIM for the non-road 

sector incorporate a number of Federal 

emissions control programs into its 

projections. These emissions reduction 

measures are permanent and 

enforceable and are implemented in the 

nonattainment area. The MOVES and 

NMIM models assumed increases in 

vehicle or equipment population and 

usage while projecting decreases in 

ozone precursor emissions from 2011 to 

2017. The estimated emissions 

reductions are therefore not due to 

reductions in source activity, but to the 

implementation of control measures. 

Tables 2 and 3 list the Federal 

permanent and enforceable control 

programs modeled by the MOVES 

model for the on-road sector and NMIM 

for the non-road sector, respectively. 

TABLE 2—FEDERAL ON-ROAD EMISSION CONTROL PROGRAMS MODELED BY MOVES 

On-road control program Pollutants Model year * Regulation 

Passenger vehicles, SUVs, and light duty trucks—emissions and fuel 

standards.

VOC & NOX ................ 2004–09+ (Tier 2) 

2017+ (Tier 3).

40 CFR parts 85 & 86. 

Light-duty trucks and medium duty passenger vehicle—evaporative 

standards.

VOC ............................ 2004–10 ..................... 40 CFR part 86. 

Heavy-duty highway compression engines .......................................... VOC & NOX ................ 2007+ ......................... 40 CFR part 86. 

Heavy-duty spark ignition engines ........................................................ VOC & NOX ................ 2005–08+ ................... 40 CFR part 86. 

Motorcycles ........................................................................................... VOC & NOX ................ 2006–10 (Tier 1 & 2) .. 40 CFR part 86. 

Mobile Source Air Toxics—fuel formulation, passenger vehicle emissions, and portable container emissions.Organic Toxics & VOC 2009–15 ** .................. 40 CFR parts 59, 80, 

85, & 86. 

Light duty vehicle corporate average fuel economy standards ............ Fuel efficiency (VOC & 

NOX).

2012–16 & 2017–25 ... 40 CFR part 600. 

* The range in model years affected can reflect phasing of requirements based on engine size or initial years for replacing earlier tier requirements. 

** The range in model years reflects phased implementation of fuel, passenger vehicle, and portable container emission requirements as well 

as the phasing by vehicle size and type. 

TABLE 3—FEDERAL NON-ROAD EMISSION CONTROL PROGRAMS MODELED BY NMIM 

Nonroad control program * Pollutants Model year ** Regulation 

Compression Ignition ............................................................................ VOC & NOX ................ 2000–2015+ (Tier 4) .. 40 CFR parts 89 & 

1039. 

Large Spark Ignition .............................................................................. VOC & NOX ................ 2007+ ......................... 40 CFR part 1048. 

Marine Spark Ignition ............................................................................ VOC & NOX ................ 2010+ ......................... 40 CFR part 1045. 

Recreational Vehicle ............................................................................. VOC & NOX ................ 2006–2012 (Tiers 1–3) 40 CFR part 1051. 

Small Spark Ignition Engine <19 Kw—emission standards ................. VOC & NOX ................ 2005–2012 (Tiers 2 & 

3).

40 CFR parts 90 & 

1054. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 28, 2018 / Proposed Rules 43829 

TABLE 3—FEDERAL NON-ROAD EMISSION CONTROL PROGRAMS MODELED BY NMIM—Continued 

Nonroad control program * Pollutants Model year ** Regulation 

Small Spark Ignition Engine <19 Kw—evaporative standards ............. VOC ............................ 2008–2016 ................. 40 CFR parts 1045, 

54, & 60. 

* Compression ignition applies to diesel non-road compression engines including engines operated in construction, agricultural, and mining 

equipment. Recreational vehicles include snowmobiles, off-road motorcycles, and all-terrain vehicles. Small spark ignition engines include engines operated in lawn and hand-held equipment. 

** The range in model years affected can reflect phasing of requirements based on engine size or initial years for replacing earlier tier 

requirements. 

Indiana used the 2017 EPA-projected 

National Emissions Inventory (NEI) to 

obtain estimated point and area source 

emissions. While EPA projected point 

and area source emissions to decrease 

between 2011 and 2017, Indiana did not 

document the control programs and 

associated reductions in emissions for 

these sectors or determine to what 

extent any reduction may be attributed 

to reductions in source activity. 

Therefore, Indiana took no credit for 

emissions reductions from these source 

sectors in its RFP or RFP contingency 

measures calculations. Table 4 shows 

Indiana’s 2017 projected emissions 

inventory. Table 5 shows Indiana’s 2017 

RFP and RFP contingency emissions 

inventory, which assumes no reduction 

in emissions between 2011 and 2017 

from the point and area source sectors. 

TABLE 4—PROJECTED 2017 EMISSIONS INVENTORY

[tpsd] 

Source sector 

VOC NOX

Lake County Porter County Total Lake County Porter County Total 

EGU Point ................................................ 0.09 0.07 0.16 4.07 1.36 5.43 

Non-EGU Point ........................................ 15.34 1.67 17.01 42.44 23.10 65.54 

Area .......................................................... 11.73 5.08 16.81 5.10 3.25 8.35 

Non-road .................................................. 5.03 4.44 9.47 5.59 3.48 9.07 

On-road .................................................... 4.33 1.63 5.96 10.15 4.35 14.50 

Total .................................................. 36.52 12.89 49.41 67.35 35.54 102.90 

TABLE 5—2017 RFP AND RFP CONTINGENCY MEASURES EMISSIONS INVENTORY

[tpsd] 

Source sector 

VOC NOX

Lake County Porter County Total Lake County Porter County Total 

EGU Point ................................................ 0.44 0.19 0.63 24.62 5.53 30.15 

Non-EGU Point ........................................ 15.39 1.68 17.07 43.10 23.36 66.46 

Area .......................................................... 12.54 5.53 18.07 5.80 3.89 9.69 

Non-road .................................................. 5.03 4.44 9.47 5.59 3.48 9.07 

On-road .................................................... 4.33 1.63 5.96 10.15 4.35 14.50 

Total .................................................. 37.73 13.47 51.20 89.26 40.61 129.87 

Indiana submitted documentation 

showing that emission reductions in the 

Indiana portion of the Chicago area met 

the 15% RFP and 3% RFP contingency 

measures requirements entirely through 

Federal permanent and enforceable 

control measures within the mobile 

source sectors. Table 6 shows the 

calculations Indiana used to determine 

that the mobile source emissions 

reductions meet the RFP and RFP 

contingency measures requirements. 

TABLE 6—2017 RFP AND CONTINGENCY TARGET LEVEL CALCULATIONS

[emissions in tpsd] 

Description Formula VOC NOX

A. 2011 RFP Base Year Inventory .............................................................................................. ........................ 59.54 143.69 

B. RFP Reductions totaling 15% ................................................................................................. ........................ 9% 6% 

C. RFP Emissions Reductions Required Between 2011 & 2017 ............................................... A * B 5.36 8.62 

D. RFP Target Level for 2017 ..................................................................................................... A¥C 54.18 135.07 

E. Contingency Percentage ......................................................................................................... ........................ 2% 1% 

F. Contingency Emission Reduction Requirements .................................................................... A * E 1.2 1.44 

G. RFP + Contingency Target Level ........................................................................................... A¥C¥F 52.99 133.63 

H. 2017 Projected Emissions (2017 RFP & Contingency Inventory) ......................................... ........................ 51.20 129.87 

I. Compare RFP & Contingency Target with 2017 Projected Emissions to determine if RFP 

and Contingency Measure Requirements Are Met ................................................................. H<G? Yes Yes 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
43830 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 28, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

17See the SIP requirements for the 2008 ozone 

standard in EPA’s March 6, 2015 implementation 

rule (80 FR 12264). 

18 40 CFR 93.101. 

19The MVEB concept is further explained in the 

preamble to the November 24, 1993, Transportation 

Conformity Rule (58 FR 62188). The preamble also 

describes how to establish the MVEB in the SIP and 

how to revise the MVEB, if needed, subsequent to 

initially establishing a MVEB in the SIP. 

TABLE 6—2017 RFP AND CONTINGENCY TARGET LEVEL CALCULATIONS—Continued 

[emissions in tpsd] 

Description Formula VOC NOX

J. Total Surplus Reductions ........................................................................................................ G¥H 1.79 3.76 

Indiana has demonstrated that 

emission reductions attributable to 

permanent and enforceable measures 

will result in at least an 18% reduction 

(15% for RFP and 3% for contingency 

measure requirements) in the Indiana 

portion of the Chicago area over the 6- 

year attainment planning time period, 

starting with the 2011 base year. Thus, 

EPA is proposing to approve Indiana’s 

15% RFP and 3% contingency measure 

plan for the Indiana portion of the 

Chicago area for the 2008 ozone 

standard. 

EPA notes that the control measures 

Indiana is relying upon to meet the RFP 

contingency measures requirement are 

already implemented. Contingency 

measures may include Federal measures 

and local measures already scheduled 

for implementation, as long as the 

resulting emission reductions are in 

excess of those needed for attainment or 

to meet other nonattainment plan 

requirements. EPA interprets the CAA 

not to preclude a state from 

implementing such measures before 

they are triggered by a failure to meet 

RFP or failure to attain. For more 

information on contingency measures, 

see the General Preamble (57 FR 13510) 

and the 2008 Ozone Implementation 

Rule (80 FR 12264, 12285). 

The appropriateness of relying on 

already-implemented control measures 

to meet the contingency measures 

requirement has been addressed in two 

Federal circuit court decisions. See 

Louisiana Environmental Action 

Network (LEAN) v. EPA, 382 F.3d 575, 

586 (5th Cir. 2004), Bahr v. United 

States EPA, 836 F.3d 1218 (9th Cir. 

2016), cert. denied, 199 L. Ed. 2d 525, 

2018 U.S. LEXIS 58 (Jan. 8, 2018). EPA 

believes that the language of section 

172(c)(9) and 182(c)(9) is ambiguous 

with respect to this issue, and that it is 

reasonable for the agency to interpret 

the statutory language to allow approval 

of already implemented measures as 

contingency measures, so long as they 

meet other parameters such as providing 

excess emissions reductions that the 

state has not relied upon to meet other 

nonattainment plan requirements or in 

the modeled attainment demonstration 

in the nonattainment plan for the 

NAAQS at issue. Until the Bahr 

decision, under EPA’s longstanding 

interpretation of CAA section 172(c)(9) 

and 182(c)(9), states could rely on 

control measures that were already 

implemented (so called ‘‘early 

triggered’’ contingency measures) as a 

valid means to meet the Act’s 

contingency measures requirement. The 

Ninth Circuit decision in Bahr leaves a 

split among the Federal circuit courts, 

with the Fifth Circuit upholding the 

Agency’s interpretation of section 

172(c)(9) to allow early triggered 

contingency measures and the Ninth 

Circuit rejecting that interpretation. The 

Seventh Circuit in which Indiana is 

located has not addressed the issue, nor 

has the Supreme Court or any other 

circuit court other than the Fifth and 

Ninth. 

Because there is a split in the Federal 

circuits on this issue, EPA expects that 

states located in circuits other than the 

Ninth may elect to rely on EPA’s 

longstanding interpretation of section 

172(c)(9) allowing early triggered 

measures to be approved as contingency 

measures, in appropriate circumstances. 

EPA’s revised Regional Consistency 

regulations pertaining to SIP provisions 

authorize the Agency to follow this 

interpretation of section 172(c)(9) in 

circuits other than the Ninth. See 40 

CFR part 56. To ensure that early 

triggered contingency measures 

appropriately satisfy all other relevant 

CAA requirements, EPA will carefully 

review each such measure, and intends 

to consult with states considering such 

measures early in the attainment plan 

development process. 

As shown above, the emissions 

reductions projected through 2018 are 

sufficient to meet the requirements for 

RFP contingency measures, consistent 

with EPA’s interpretation of the CAA to 

allow approval of already implemented 

control measures as contingency 

measures in states outside the Ninth 

Circuit. Therefore, we propose approval 

of the contingency measures submitted 

by the state in the nonattainment plan 

for the Wisconsin portion of the Chicago 

area. 

C. 2017 Motor Vehicle Emissions 

Budgets (MVEBs) 

Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new 

transportation plans, programs, or 

projects that receive Federal funding or 

support, such as the construction of new 

highways, must ‘‘conform’’ to (i.e., be 

consistent with) the SIP. Conformity to 

the SIP means that transportation 

activities will not cause new air quality 

violations, worsen existing air quality 

problems, or delay timely attainment of 

the NAAQS or interim air quality 

milestones. Regulations at 40 CFR part 

93 set forth EPA policy, criteria, and 

procedures for demonstrating and 

assuring conformity of transportation 

activities to a SIP. 

Under the CAA, states are required to 

submit, at various times, control strategy 

plans for nonattainment areas and 

maintenance plans for areas seeking 

redesignations to attainment of the 

ozone standard and maintenance 

areas.17 These control strategy plans 

(including reasonable further progress 

plans and attainment plans for purposes 

of the ozone NAAQS) and maintenance 

plans must include MVEBs for the 

relevant criteria pollutant or its 

precursor pollutants (VOC and NOX for 

ozone) to address pollution from onroad transportation sources. The MVEBs 

are the portion of the total allowable 

emissions that are allocated to highway 

and transit vehicle use that, together 

with emissions from other sources in 

the area, will meet an RFP milestone or 

provide for attainment or maintenance 

of the NAAQS.18 The MVEB serves as a 

ceiling on emissions from an area’s 

planned transportation system.19

When reviewing control strategy or 

maintenance plan submissions, EPA 

must affirmatively find that the MVEBs 

contained therein are adequate for use 

in determining transportation 

conformity. Once EPA affirmatively 

finds that the submitted MVEBs are 

adequate for transportation purposes, 

the MVEBs must be used by state and 

Federal agencies in determining 

whether proposed transportation 

projects conform to the SIP as required 

by section 176(c) of the CAA. 

EPA’s substantive criteria for 

determining adequacy of a MVEB are set 

out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). The process 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 28, 2018 / Proposed Rules 43831 

20 69 FR 40004. 

21 68 FR 38974, 38984. 

22The NEI, the Harris Manufacturing Directory 

and the Manta small business directory were 

reviewed to spot check the validity of the 

previously approved negative declaration for this 

category. No fiberglass boat manufacturing facilities 

subject to the CTG were identified. 

for determining adequacy consists of 

three basic steps: Public notification of 

a SIP submission; provision for a public 

comment period; and EPA’s adequacy 

determination. This process for 

determining the adequacy of submitted 

MVEBs for transportation conformity 

purposes was initially outlined in EPA’s 

May 14, 1999 guidance, ‘‘Conformity 

Guidance on Implementation of March 

2, 1999, Conformity Court Decision.’’ 

EPA adopted regulations to codify the 

adequacy process 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 

Decision and Additional Rule Change,’’ 

on July 1, 2004.20 Additional 

information on the adequacy process for 

transportation conformity purposes is 

available in a June 30, 2003, proposed 

rule titled, ‘‘Transportation Conformity 

Rule Amendments: Response to Court 

Decision and Additional Rule 

Changes.’’ 21

Indiana’s RFP and contingency 

measure plan includes VOC and NOX

MVEBs for the Indiana portion of the 

Chicago area for 2017. EPA reviewed the 

VOC and NOX MVEBs through the 

adequacy process. Indiana’s February 

28, 2017, RFP and contingency measure 

SIP submission (as supplemented on 

January 9, 2018), including the VOC and 

NOX MVEBs for the Indiana portion of 

the Chicago area, was available for 

public comment on EPA’s adequacy 

website on February 2, 2018, found at: 

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/ 

stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm. 

The EPA public comment period on 

adequacy of the 2017 MVEBs for the 

Indiana portion of the Chicago area 

closed on March 5, 2018. No comments 

on the submittal were received during 

the adequacy comment period. The 

submitted RFP and contingency 

measure plan, which included the 

MVEBs, was endorsed by the Governor’s 

designee and was subject to a state 

public hearing. The MVEBs were 

developed as part of an interagency 

consultation process which includes 

Federal, state, and local agencies. The 

MVEBs were clearly identified and 

precisely quantified. These MVEBs, 

when considered together with all other 

emissions sources, are consistent with 

the 15% RFP and 3% RFP contingency 

measures requirements of the 2008 8- 

hour ozone standard. 

TABLE 7—2017 VOC AND NOX MVEBS FOR THE INDIANA PORTION OF THE CHICAGO AREA

[tpsd] 

2017 

On-road emissions 

RFP + 

Contingency plan 

surplus reductions 

Allocation of 

surplus reductions 

to on-road mobile 

sector 

2017 MVEBs 

VOC ................................................. 5.96 1.79 0.89 6.85 

NOX .................................................. 14.50 3.65 2.18 16.68 

As shown in Table 7, the 2017 MVEBs 

exceed the estimated 2017 on-road 

sector emissions. In an effort to 

accommodate future variations in travel 

demand models and vehicle miles 

traveled forecast, Indiana allocated a 

portion of the surplus RFP and 

contingency plan reductions to the 

mobile sector. Indiana has demonstrated 

that the Indiana portion of the Chicago 

area can meet the 15% RFP and 3% RFP 

contingency measure requirements of 

the 2008 ozone NAAQS with mobile 

source emissions of 6.85 tpsd of VOC 

and 16.68 tpsd of NOX in 2017, because 

despite partial allocation of the RFP and 

RFP contingency measures plan surplus 

reductions, emissions will remain under 

2017 RFP plus contingency measure 

target levels. EPA has found adequate 

and is thus proposing to approve the 

2017 VOC and NOX MVEBs for use to 

determine transportation conformity in 

the Indiana portion of the Chicago area 

under the 2008 ozone NAAQS because 

EPA has determined that the area can 

meet the 15% RFP and 3% RFP 

contingency measure requirements of 

the 2008 ozone NAAQS with mobile 

source emissions at the levels of the 

MVEBs. 

D. VOC RACT Certification 

Sections 172(c)(1) and 182(b)(2) of the 

CAA require states to implement RACT 

in ozone nonattainment areas classified 

as moderate (and higher). Specifically, 

these areas are required to implement 

RACT for all major VOC and NOX

emissions sources and for all sources 

covered by a Control Techniques 

Guideline (CTG). A CTG is a document 

issued by EPA which establishes a 

‘‘presumptive norm’’ for RACT for a 

specific VOC source category. States 

must submit rules, or negative 

declarations when no such sources exist 

for CTG source categories. 

EPA’s SIP Requirements Rule for the 

2008 ozone NAAQS indicates that states 

may meet RACT through the 

establishment of new or more stringent 

requirements that meet RACT control 

levels, through a certification that 

previously adopted RACT controls in 

their SIPs approved by EPA for a prior 

ozone NAAQS also represent adequate 

RACT control levels for attainment of 

the 2008 ozone NAAQS, or with a 

combination of these two approaches. In 

addition, a state must submit a negative 

declaration in instances where there are 

no CTG sources. 

In its February 28, 2017 submission, 

Indiana certified that the existing VOC 

rules contained in 326 Indiana 

Administrative Code (IAC) 8 satisfy the 

VOC RACT requirements of Section 

182(b)(2) of the CAA and have been 

approved into the SIP by EPA. Indiana 

also certified that the negative 

declaration approved into the SIP by 

EPA for the fiberglass boat 

manufacturing materials CTG is still 

current.22 Table 8 lists these state 

regulations and identifies the associated 

SIP approvals by EPA. 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
43832 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 28, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 8—VOC RACT REGULATIONS APPROVED INTO THE INDIANA SIP 

CTGs and ACTs 1 Applicable Indiana 

regulation EPA approval into the SIP 

EPA 453/R–08–004 2008/09—Control Techniques Guidelines for Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials.Negative Declaration Letter—06/ 

05/2009.

75 FR 8246 (02/24/2010). 

EPA 453/R–08–006, 2008/09—Control Techniques Guidelines for 

Automobile and Light-Duty Truck Assembly Coatings and EPA 453/ 

R–08–002, 2008/09—Protocol for Determining the Daily Volatile Organic Compound Emission Rate of Automobile and Light-Duty Truck 

Primer-Surfacer and Topcoat Operations.

326 IAC 8–2–2—Automobile and 

Light Duty Truck Coating Operations. 

EPA 453/R–07–003, 2007/09—Control Techniques Guidelines for 

Paper, Film, and Foil Coatings.

326 IAC 8–2–5—Paper Coating 

Operations. 

EPA 453/R–07–005, 2007/09—Control Techniques Guidelines for 

Metal Furniture Coatings.

326 IAC 8–2–6—Metal Furniture 

Coating Operations. 

EPA 453/R–07–004, 2007/09—Control Techniques Guidelines for 

Large Appliance Coatings.

326 IAC 8–2–7—Large Appliance 

Coating Operations. 

EPA 453/R–08–003, 2008/09—Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Metal and Plastic Parts Coatings.326 IAC 8–2–9—Miscellaneous 

Metal and Plastic Parts Coating 

Operations.

75 FR 8246 (02/24/2010) Revision: 76 FR 63549 (10/13/2011). 

EPA–453/R–06–004 2006/09—Control Techniques Guidelines for Flat 

Wood Paneling Coatings.

326 IAC 8–2–10—Flat Wood Panels; Manufacturing Operations.75 FR 8246 (02/24/2010). 

EPA–453/R–06–003 2006/09—Control Techniques Guidelines for 

Flexible Package Printing.

326 IAC 8–5–5—Graphic Arts and 

Graphic Arts Operations.

63 FR 35141 (06/29/1998) and 75 

FR 8246 (02/24/2010). 

Non-CTG ................................................................................................. IAC 326 8–7—Specific VOC Reduction Requirements for Lake, 

Porter, Clark, and Floyd Counties.

60 FR 34856 (07/05/1995). 

EPA–453/R–06–002 2006/09—Control Techniques Guidelines for Offset Lithographic Printing and Letterpress Printing.326 IAC 8–16—Offset Lithographic 

Printing and Letterpress Printing.

75 FR 8246 (02/24/2010). 

EPA–453/R–06–001, 2006/09—Control Techniques Guidelines for Industrial Cleaning Solvents.326 IAC 8–17—Industrial Solvent 

Cleaning Operations. 

EPA–450/3–84–015 1984/12—Control of Volatile Organic Compound 

Emissions from Air Oxidation Processes in Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry and EPA–450/4–91–031 1993/08—Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Reactor Processes and Distillation Operations in Synthetic Organic Chemical 

Manufacturing Industry.

326 IAC 8–18—Synthetic Organic 

Chemical Manufacturing Industry Air Oxidation, Distillation, and 

Reactor Processes. 

EPA–453/R–93–020, 1994/02—Control of Volatile Organic Compound 

Emissions from Batch Processes ACT (Note—also released as 

EPA–453/R–93–017).

326 IAC 8–19—Control of Volatile 

Organic Compound Emissions 

from Process Vents in Batch 

Operations. 

EPA–453/D–93–056, 1992/09—Control of Volatile Organic Compound 

Emissions from Industrial Wastewater CTG (draft).

Note—CTG not finalized but issued as ACT in 1994. ............................

(No Report ID) 1994/04 Industrial Wastewater Alternative Control 

Technology..

Note—ACT consists of cover memo with option tables + CTG (draft) 

EPA–453/D-93–056..

326 IAC 8–20—Industrial Wastewater. 

59 FR–29216, 6/06/94—1994/06 Aerospace MACT and EPA–453/R– 

97–004, 1997/12 Aerospace (CTG & MACT).

326 IAC 8–21—Aerospace Manufacturing and Rework Operations. 

EPA 453/R–08–005, 2008/09—Control Techniques Guidelines for Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives.326 IAC 8–22—Miscellaneous Industrial Adhesives.

1ACTs describe available control technologies and their respective cost effectiveness but do not establish presumptive RACT. 

EPA has reviewed Indiana’s 

certification that it has adopted VOC 

control regulations for stationary 

sources that constitute RACT, and 

determined that the set of regulations 

cited by the state and negative 

declaration for fiberglass boat 

manufacturing constitute RACT for 

purposes of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in 

this nonattainment area. Therefore, EPA 

is proposing to approve the state’s 

submission as meeting the VOC RACT 

requirements for the Indiana portion of 

the Chicago area for the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS. 

E. Motor Vehicle I/M Program 

Certification 

The requirement to adopt a motor 

vehicle I/M program for moderate ozone 

nonattainment areas is described in 

CAA section 182(b)(4), and the 

regulations for basic and enhanced I/M 

programs are found at 40 CFR part 51, 

subpart S. Under these cumulative 

requirements, states with areas 

classified as moderate nonattainment for 

ozone with 1990 Census-defined 

urbanized populations of 200,000 or 

more are required to adopt basic I/M 

programs, while serious and higher 

classified ozone nonattainment areas 

outside of the northeast ozone transport 

region with 1980 Census-defined 

urbanized populations of 200,000 or 

more are required to adopt enhanced I/ 

M programs. The Chicago area meets the 

criteria for mandatory I/M under the 

2008 ozone NAAQS. 

The Indiana portion of the Chicago 

area was required to adopt an enhanced 

I/M program under the 1-hour ozone 

NAAQS. EPA approved Indiana’s 

enhanced I/M program on March 19, 

1996 (61 FR 11142). Indiana’s I/M 

program is authorized by state statute 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 28, 2018 / Proposed Rules 43833 

23The Cincinnati, Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana 8-hour 

ozone nonattainment area has since been 

redesignated to attainment effective April 7, 2017. 

See 82 FR 16940. 

24See 82 FR 9158. 

25The Chicago-Naperville 2008 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area was reclassified to moderate 

nonattainment effective June 3, 2017. See 81 FR 

26697. 26See 59 FR 51108. In its submittal, Indiana cites 

94 FR 24838 as the initial approval for each 

requirement. The Federal Register Document 

Number of the initial approval is 94–24838 and 

corresponds to the proposed Approval and 

Promulgation of a New Source Review 

Implementation Plan; Indiana. Federal Register 

Document Number 94–24837 is the direct final 

Approval and Promulgation of a New Source 

Review Implementation Plan; Indiana. The direct 

final rule can be found at 59 FR 51108. Throughout 

today’s proposed rule, the direct final approval of 

Indiana’s NSR program will be cited as 59 FR 

51108. 

27See 76 FR 40242. 

Indiana Code (IC) 13–17–5, paid 

through the general funds, and 

implemented through rules promulgated 

by the Indiana Environmental Rules 

Board at 326 IAC 13. These 

requirements remain in place in 

Indiana’s ozone SIP. In its February 28, 

2017, submission, Indiana certified that 

the existing enhanced I/M program 

continues to satisfy the I/M 

requirements of the CAA for the Indiana 

portion of the Chicago area. Therefore, 

EPA is proposing to find that Indiana 

has met the I/M requirement for its 

portion of the Chicago area for the 2008 

ozone NAAQS. 

F. Nonattainment New Source Review 

1. Background 

CAA sections 110(a)(2) and 172(c)(5) 

require permits for the construction of 

new or modified major stationary 

sources anywhere in a nonattainment 

area in accordance with CAA section 

173. CAA section 182 contains 

additional requirements applicable to 

ozone nonattainment areas. 

Nonattainment NSR requirements are 

codified at 40 CFR 51.165. 

On March 6, 2017, EPA found that 

Indiana failed to submit marginal ozone 

nonattainment NSR rules for the Indiana 

portions of the Chicago area and 

Cincinnati 23 2008 ozone nonattainment 

areas.24 On February 28, 2017, Indiana 

submitted its nonattainment NSR 

certification to address nonattainment 

NSR requirements for marginal and 

moderate ozone nonattainment areas.25

Indiana has certified that specific 

sections of its nonattainment NSR rules 

at 326 IAC 2–3 continue to meet the 

nonattainment NSR program 

requirements for ozone nonattainment 

areas under the 2008 ozone NAAQS. 

Table 9 provides the sections of 

Indiana’s nonattainment NSR rule 

corresponding to the relevant 

requirements at 40 CFR 51.165. 326 IAC 

2–3 was originally approved into the 

SIP effective December 6, 1994,26 with 

revisions subsequently approved into 

the SIP effective September 6, 2011.27

Each requirement identified in Indiana’s 

certification has been unchanged since 

EPA last approved it. 

TABLE 9—NONATTAINMENT NSR RULES INDIANA CERTIFIED AS MEETING FEDERAL RULES

Federal rule Indiana rule 

40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(1)(i)–(iii) .......................................................................................... 326 IAC 2–3–1(z)(1) and (2). 

40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(2) .................................................................................................... 326 IAC 2–3–1(z)(1) and (2). 

40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(3) .................................................................................................... 326 IAC 2–3–1(z)(5). 

40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(v)(E) ......................................................................................................... 326 IAC 2–3–1(y)(1). 

40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(x)(A)–(C) .................................................................................................. 326 IAC 2–3–1(pp). 

40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(1)–(2) ............................................................................................... 326 IAC 2–3–3(b)(5). 

40 CFR 51.165(a)(8) .................................................................................................................. 326 IAC 2–3–1(y); 326 IAC 2–3–2(a) and (b). 

40 CFR 51.165(a)(9)(ii)-(iv) ........................................................................................................ 326 IAC 2–3–3(a)(5)(B). 

For the following reasons, we are 

proposing to approve Indiana’s 

certification that 326 IAC 2–3 is 

consistent with 40 CFR 51.165 and 

meets the requirements of CAA sections 

172(c)(5), 173, 110(a)(2), 182(a)(4), and 

182(b)(5) under the 2008 ozone standard 

for the Indiana portion of the Chicago 

area ozone nonattainment area. 

Approval of Indiana’s nonattainment 

NSR certification would address the 

deficiency that was the basis for the 

March 6, 2017 finding. Therefore, final 

approval of this SIP revision will 

permanently stop the sanctions and FIP 

clocks triggered by EPA’s February 3, 

2017 finding that Indiana failed to 

submit a marginal ozone nonattainment 

NSR plan. 

2. Extreme Ozone Nonattainment Area 

and Ozone Transport Region 

Nonattainment NSR Requirements 

In its February 28, 2017 submission, 

Indiana states that its nonattainment 

NSR rules do not include extreme ozone 

nonattainment requirements because 

Indiana has never had an extreme ozone 

nonattainment area. We concur with the 

statement that Indiana has never had an 

extreme ozone nonattainment area. 

Further, the finding of failure to submit 

applies to marginal ozone 

nonattainment NSR requirements, not 

extreme. Finally, the Chicago area ozone 

nonattainment area was reclassified to a 

moderate ozone nonattainment area 

which requires moderate, not extreme, 

ozone nonattainment NSR requirements. 

For these reasons, Indiana’s 

nonattainment NSR program does not 

require extreme ozone nonattainment 

requirements at this time. The following 

extreme ozone nonattainment NSR 

requirements are not included as part of 

Indiana’s nonattainment NSR rules: 40 

CFR 51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(1)(iv), 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(2)(vi), 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(1)(v)(F), 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(1)(x)(E), and 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(9)(ii)(E). 

Indiana’s submission does not address 

ozone transport region requirements. 

However, no portion of Indiana is 

currently part of an ozone transport 

region; therefore, ozone transport region 

nonattainment NSR requirements do not 

apply in Indiana. The following ozone 

transport region nonattainment NSR 

requirements are not included as part of 

Indiana’s nonattainment NSR rules: 40 

CFR 51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(1)(ii), 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(2)(ii), 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(2)(ii), 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(1)(v)(E), 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(1)(x)(C), 40 CFR 51.165(a)(8), 

and 40 CFR 51.165(a)(9)(iii). 

Extreme ozone nonattainment area 

and ozone transport region 

nonattainment NSR requirements will 

not be addressed further in this analysis 

of Indiana’s ozone nonattainment NSR 

program certification because they do 

not apply to Indiana at this time. If, in 

the future, Indiana has an extreme 

ozone nonattainment area or becomes 

part of an ozone transport region, then 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
43834 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 28, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

Indiana’s SIP would need to be revised 

to establish the appropriate 

nonattainment NSR requirements. 

3. 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(1)(i)–(iv) 

and (2)—Major Source Thresholds for 

Ozone 

40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(1)(i)–(iv) 

and (2) defines the major source 

thresholds for the ozone precursors VOC 

and NOX. The major source threshold 

for both VOC and NOX vary depending 

on the classification of the ozone 

nonattainment area. For marginal and 

moderate ozone nonattainment areas, a 

major stationary source of ozone is a 

source that emits, or has the potential to 

emit, 100 tons per year or more of VOC 

or NOX. Different emissions thresholds 

apply for serious, severe, and extreme 

ozone nonattainment areas and areas in 

an ozone transport region. 

326 IAC 2–3–1(z)(1) generally defines 

a major stationary source as a stationary 

source that emits, or has the potential to 

emit, 100 tons per year or more of any 

regulated NSR pollutant, with an 

exception for ozone provided in 326 

IAC 2–3–1(z)(2). 326 IAC 2–3–1(z)(2) 

defines a major stationary source for 

ozone nonattainment areas, specifying 

that the major source threshold is 100 

tons per year or more of VOC or NOX

in marginal and moderate ozone 

nonattainment areas. 326 IAC 2–3– 

1(z)(1) and (2) remain consistent with 40 

CFR 51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(1)(i)–(iv) and (2) 

for marginal and moderate ozone 

nonattainment areas. 

4. 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(3)— 

Change Constitutes Major Source by 

Itself 

40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(3) requires 

any physical change that would 

constitute a major stationary source by 

itself to be treated as a major stationary 

source if the stationary source does not 

qualify as a major stationary source. 326 

IAC 2–3–1(z)(5) requires the same and 

remains consistent with 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(1)(iv)(A)(3). 

5. 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(v)(E)—Significant 

Net Emissions Increase of NOX is 

Significant for Ozone 

40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(v)(E) requires 

significant net emissions increases of 

NOX to be considered significant for 

ozone. For major modifications, 326 IAC 

2–3–1(y)(1) requires significant net 

emissions increases of NOX to be 

considered significant for ozone in 

ozone nonattainment areas. 326 IAC 2– 

3–1(y)(1) exempts NOX when the 

Administrator has granted a NOX waiver 

pursuant to CAA section 182(f) and 40 

CFR 51.165(a)(8). As a result, 326 IAC 

2–3–1(y)(1) remains consistent with 40 

CFR 51.165(a)(1)(v)(E). 

6. 40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(x)(A)–(C)— 

Significant Emission Rates for VOC and 

NOX as Ozone Precursors 

40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(x)(A) defines the 

significant emission rate for ozone as 40 

tons per year of VOC or NOX. 326 IAC 

2–3–1(pp) defines the significant 

emission rate for ozone in marginal and 

moderate nonattainment areas as 40 

tons per year of VOC or NOX (unless a 

NOX waiver is in effect). 326 IAC 2–3– 

1(pp) remains consistent with 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(1)(x)(A) for marginal and 

moderate ozone nonattainment areas. 

40 CFR 51.165(a)(1)(x)(B) and (C) 

define the significant emission rate for 

ozone in serious or severe 

nonattainment areas as 25 tons per year 

of VOC or NOX. For the purpose of 

implementing nonattainment NSR in 

marginal and moderate ozone 

nonattainment areas, serious and severe 

ozone significant emission rates are not 

required. 

7. 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(1)–(2)— 

Provisions for Emissions Reduction 

Credits 

40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(1) and (2) 

are the requirements that make emission 

reductions achieved by shutting down 

an existing emission unit or curtailing 

production or operating hours 

creditable. Such reductions must be 

surplus, permanent, quantifiable, and 

federally enforceable. Shutdowns or 

curtailments must have occurred after 

the last day of the base year for the SIP 

planning process. Reviewing authorities 

may choose to consider a prior 

shutdown or curtailment to have 

occurred after the last day of the base 

year if the projected emissions 

inventory used to develop the 

attainment demonstration explicitly 

includes emissions from the previously 

shutdown or curtailed emissions units, 

but in no event may credit be granted 

for shutdowns that occurred prior to 

August 7, 1977. Shutdown or 

curtailment reductions occurring before 

the last day of the base year for the SIP 

planning process may also be generally 

credited if the shutdown or curtailment 

occurred on or after the date the 

construction permit application is filed 

or if the applicant can establish that the 

proposed new emissions unit is a 

replacement for the shutdown or 

curtailed emission unit and the 

emission reductions that result are 

surplus, permanent, quantifiable, and 

federally enforceable. 326 IAC 2–3– 

3(b)(5) remains consistent with 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(1)(i) and 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(2)(ii). 

326 IAC 2–3–3(b)(5)(A) credits 

emission reductions from emission unit 

shutdowns and curtailments if they 

occurred on or after the date of the most 

recent emissions inventory or 

attainment demonstration. Prior 

shutdown or curtailment emission 

reductions may be considered to have 

occurred after the date of the most 

recent emissions inventory if the 

inventory explicitly includes the 

emissions from the previously 

shutdown or curtailed emissions units. 

326 IAC 2–3–3(b)(5)(A) remains 

consistent with 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(1)(ii). 

326 IAC 2–3–3(b)(5)(B) allows 

reductions to be credited absent an 

approved attainment demonstration if 

the shutdown or curtailment occurred 

on or after the date the new source 

permit application is filed or if the 

applicant can establish that the 

proposed new source is a replacement 

for the shutdown or curtailed emissions 

unit, with the exception of shutdowns 

occurring prior to August 7, 1977. 326 

IAC 2–3–3(b)(5)(B) remains consistent 

with 40 CFR 51.165(a)(3)(ii)(C)(2)(ii). 

8. 40 CFR 51.165(a)(8)—Requirements 

for VOC Apply to NOX as Ozone 

Precursors 

40 CFR 51.165(a)(8) requires that all 

requirements applicable to major 

stationary sources and major 

modifications of VOCs shall apply to 

NOX except where the Administrator 

has granted a NOX waiver applying the 

standards set forth under CAA section 

182(f) and the waiver continues to 

apply. In its submittal, Indiana certifies 

that 326 IAC 2–3–1(y) and 326 IAC 2– 

3–2(a) and (b) meet this requirement. 

326 IAC 2–3–1(y) defines major 

modification. As discussed above, 326 

IAC 2–3–1(y)(1) is consistent with 40 

CFR 51.165(a)(8) since it considers 

increases in both VOC and NOX unless 

a NOX waiver is in effect. 326 IAC 2– 

3–1(y) considers, in serious and severe 

ozone nonattainment areas, increases in 

VOC or NOX unless a NOX waiver is in 

effect and is consistent with 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(8). 326 IAC 2–3–1(y) remains 

consistent with the definition of major 

modification at 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(1)(v)(A) through (E) for 

marginal and moderate ozone 

nonattainment areas. 

326 IAC 2–3–2(a) states that ozone 

nonattainment NSR applies to new 

major stationary sources or major 

modifications in an area designated as 

nonattainment for which the stationary 

source or modification is major. As 

previously discussed, 326 IAC 2–3– 

1(z)(1), (2), and (5) and 326 IAC 2–3– 

1(y) define major source and major 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 28, 2018 / Proposed Rules 43835 

28See 69 FR 23857. 

modification, respectively, as they relate 

to ozone nonattainment areas and 

remain consistent with 40 CFR 

51.165(a)(8). 

326 IAC 2–3–2(b) applies to 

modifications of VOC and NOX major 

stationary sources in serious and severe 

ozone nonattainment areas. 326 IAC 2– 

3–2(b)(1) through (3) remain consistent 

with CAA sections 182(c)(6) through (8) 

and 182(d). 

9. 40 CFR 51.165(a)(9)(ii)–(iv)—Offset 

Ratios for VOC and NOX for Ozone 

Nonattainment Areas 

40 CFR 51.165(a)(9)(ii)(A)–(D) 

requires the VOC offset ratio to be 1.1:1 

in marginal ozone nonattainment areas, 

1.15:1 in moderate ozone nonattainment 

areas, 1.2:1 in serious ozone 

nonattainment areas, and 1.3:1 in severe 

ozone nonattainment areas. 326 IAC 2– 

3–3(a)(5)(B) requires offset ratios for 

both VOC and NOX that are consistent 

with 40 CFR 51.165(a)(9)(ii)(A)–(D). 

40 CFR 51.165(a)(9)(iv) requires, for 

ozone nonattainment areas subject to 

CAA Title I, Part D, Subpart 1 but not 

Subpart 2, an offset ratio of at least 1:1. 

All of the current ozone nonattainment 

areas in Indiana were designated 

pursuant to CAA Title I, Part D, Subpart 

2, so this requirement does not apply to 

Indiana at this time. 

10. 40 CFR 51.165(a)(12)—Antibacksliding Provisions 

40 CFR 51.165(a)(12) requires antiBacksliding requirements at 40 CFR 

51.1105 to apply in any area designated 

nonattainment for the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS and designated nonattainment 

for the 1997 ozone NAAQS on April 6, 

2015. Indiana certified that there were 

no areas designated as nonattainment 

for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS on 

April 6, 2015. 

40 CFR 81.315 provides the 

attainment status designations for 

Indiana. For the 1997 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, 40 CFR 81.315 codifies the fact 

that all areas in Indiana attained the 

1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS prior to 

April 6, 2015. Table 10 includes 

relevant information about the 1997 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS, including the date 

that areas previously designated as 

nonattainment under the 1997 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS were redesignated to 

attainment. All other areas in Indiana 

that are not listed in the table were 

designated unclassifiable/attainment for 

the 1997 8-hour ozone standard on June 

15, 2004.28

TABLE 10—1997 8-HOUR OZONE NAAQS REDESIGNATION DATES AND Federal Register CITATIONS

Designated areas Counties Redesignation 

date 

Federal 

Register citation 

Chicago-Gary-Lake County, IL-IN ............................ Lake, Porter ............................................................. 5/11/2010 75 FR 26113 

Cincinnati-Hamilton OH-KY-IN ................................. Dearborn (part) ........................................................ 5/11/2010 75 FR 26118 

Evansville, IN ........................................................... Vanderburgh, Warrick .............................................. 1/30/2006 70 FR 77026 

Fort Wayne, IN ......................................................... Allen ......................................................................... 2/12/2007 72 FR 1292 

Greene Co., IN ......................................................... Greene ..................................................................... 12/29/2005 70 FR 69085 

Indianapolis, IN ........................................................ Boone, Hamilton, Hancock, Hendricks, Johnson, 

Madison, Marion, Morgan, Shelby.

10/19/2007 72 FR 59210 

Jackson Co., IN ........................................................ Jackson .................................................................... 12/29/2005 70 FR 69085 

LaPorte Co., IN ........................................................ LaPorte ..................................................................... 7/19/2007 72 FR 39574 

Louisville, KY-IN ....................................................... Clark, Floyd .............................................................. 7/19/2007 72 FR 39571 

Muncie, IN ................................................................ Delaware .................................................................. 1/3/2006 70 FR 69443 

South Bend-Elkhart, IN ............................................ Elkhart, St. Joseph ................................................... 7/19/2007 72 FR 39577 

Terre Haute, IN ........................................................ Vigo .......................................................................... 2/6/2006 71 FR 541 

Since all areas in Indiana were 

designated as attainment or 

unclassifiable/attainment on April 6, 

2015 for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, 

the anti-backsliding requirements of 40 

CFR 51.165(a)(12) do not apply for the 

2008 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

11. Conclusion 

Indiana’s nonattainment NSR rules, 

codified at 326 IAC 2–3, remain 

consistent with Federal marginal and 

moderate ozone nonattainment NSR 

rules codified at 40 CFR 51.165. 

Therefore, EPA is proposing to approve 

Indiana’s certification that its 

nonattainment NSR rules at 326 IAC 2– 

3 meet the requirements of 40 CFR 

51.165 and CAA sections 172(c)(5), 173, 

110(a)(2), 182(a)(4), and 182(b)(5) for the 

Indiana portion of the Chicago area 

ozone nonattainment area. EPA’s final 

approval of Indiana’s nonattainment 

NSR certification will permanently stop 

the sanctions and FIP clocks triggered 

by EPA’s February 3, 2017 finding that 

Indiana failed to submit a marginal 

ozone nonattainment NSR plan. 

III. What action is EPA proposing? 

EPA is proposing to approve revisions 

to Indiana’s SIP pursuant to section 110 

and part D of the CAA and EPA’s 

regulations because Indiana’s February 

28, 2017, nonattainment plan 

submission and January 1, 2018, 

supplement satisfy the emissions 

inventory, RFP, RFP contingency 

measures, transportation conformity, 

VOC RACT, I/M, and nonattainment 

NSR requirements of the CAA for the 

Indiana portion of the Chicago area for 

the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Final approval 

of Indiana’s SIP as meeting the 

nonattainment NSR requirements of the 

CAA for the 2008 ozone NAAQS will 

permanently stop the sanctions and FIP 

clocks triggered by EPA’s February 3, 

2017 finding that Indiana failed to 

submit a marginal ozone nonattainment 

NSR plan. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

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

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves state law as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by state law. For that 

reason, this action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS
43836 Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 167 / Tuesday, August 28, 2018 / Proposed Rules 

• Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 

FR 9339, February 2, 2017) regulatory 

action because SIP approvals are 

exempted under Executive Order 12866; 

• 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, the SIP is not approved 

to apply on any Indian reservation land 

or in any other area where EPA or an 

Indian tribe has demonstrated that a 

tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of 

Indian country, the rule does not have 

tribal implications and will not impose 

substantial direct costs on tribal 

governments or preempt tribal law as 

specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 

FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

Dated: August 16, 2018. 

Cathy Stepp, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2018–18640 Filed 8–27–18; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R03–OAR–2017–0633; FRL–9982– 

79—Region 3] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; West 

Virginia; Revisions to Regulation for 

Control of Ozone Season Nitrogen 

Oxide Emissions 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve 

two state implementation plan (SIP) 

revisions submitted by the State of West 

Virginia. The revisions pertain to a West 

Virginia regulation that established the 

nitrogen oxides (NOX) ozone season 

trading program under the Clean Air 

Interstate Rule (CAIR), which 

implemented requirements for NOX

reductions necessary to reduce 

interstate transport of pollution. The 

EPA-administered trading programs 

under CAIR were discontinued upon the 

implementation of the Cross-State Air 

Pollution Rule (CSAPR), which was 

promulgated by EPA to replace CAIR. 

CSAPR established federal 

implementation plans (FIPs) for 28 

states, including West Virginia, and 

applied to electric generating units 

(EGUs) as defined. The SIP submittals 

are comprised of revisions to the West 

Virginia regulation that implemented 

the CAIR ozone season NOX trading 

program and that had previously been 

included in the West Virginia SIP. The 

revised West Virginia regulation 

removed the CAIR ozone season NOX

trading program provisions, which also 

addressed certain large non-electric 

generating units (non-EGUs), 

established new requirements for these 

large non-EGUs, included a state-wide 

NOX emissions cap, and recodified 

certain other provisions that address the 

NOX emission reductions required for 

cement kilns and internal combustion 

engines. This action is being taken 

under the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before September 27, 

2018. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R03– 

OAR–2017- 0633 at http://

www.regulations.gov, or via email to 

spielberger.susan@epa.gov. For 

comments submitted at Regulations.gov, 

follow the online instructions for 

submitting comments. Once submitted, 

comments cannot be edited or removed 

from Regulations.gov. For either manner 

of submission, EPA may publish any 

comment received to its public docket. 

Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

confidential business information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. EPA will generally not consider 

comments or comment contents located 

outside of the primary submission (i.e. 

on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 

system). For additional submission 

methods, please contact the person 

identified in the ‘‘For Further 

Information Contact’’ section. For the 

full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Marilyn Powers, (215) 814–2308, or by 

email at powers.marilyn@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On July 

13, 2016, the State of West Virginia, 

through the West Virginia Department 

of Environmental Protection (WVDEP), 

submitted a revised version of West 

Virginia Regulation 45CSR40—Control 

of Ozone Season Nitrogen Oxides 

Emissions for inclusion in the West 

Virginia SIP. The revised 45CSR40 

made the following changes—(1) 

removed the provisions that 

implemented the CAIR ozone season 

trading program, (2) added new 

requirements to address the NOX

reduction obligations for non-EGUs in 

the State that were trading under the 

CAIR ozone season trading program but 

are no longer part of a trading program, 

and (3) recodified the requirements that 

applied to cement kilns and internal 

combustion engines. On October 13, 

2017, WVDEP provided a supplemental 

SIP submission comprised of a 

demonstration showing that NOX

emissions from applicable non-EGUs do 

not exceed the West Virginia NOX

budget under the NOX SIP Call. 

I. Background 

On October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356), 

EPA finalized the ‘‘Finding of 

Significant Contribution and 

Rulemaking for Certain States in the 

Ozone Transport Assessment Group 

Region for Purposes of Reducing 

Regional Transport of Ozone’’— 

commonly called the NOX SIP Call. The 


daltland on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS