36692 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 125 / Monday, June 30, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

disapproval and July 25, 2013, 

disapproval will stop. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

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 Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

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

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

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

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have Federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

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

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

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

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

and 

• Does not provide EPA with the 

discretionary authority to address, as 

appropriate, disproportionate human 

health or environmental effects, using 

practicable and legally permissible 

methods, under Executive Order 12898 

(59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994). 

In addition, this rule does not have 

tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the state, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on tribal governments or preempt 

tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Intergovernmental relations, 

Nitrogen dioxide, Particulate matter, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Sulfur oxides. 

Dated: June 17, 2014. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2014–15284 Filed 6–27–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[EPA–R05–OAR–2012–0989; FRL–9912–88- 

Region 5] 

Approval and Promulgation of 

Implementation Plans and Designation 

of Areas for Air Quality Planning 

Purposes; Indiana; Redesignation of 

Lake and Porter Counties to 

Attainment of the 2008 Eight-Hour 

Ozone Standard 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) proposes to disapprove a 

December 5, 2012, request from the state 

of Indiana to redesignate Lake and 

Porter Counties to attainment of the 

2008 eight-hour ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS 

or standard) because Indiana has not 

demonstrated that the ChicagoNaperville, Illinois-Indiana-Wisconsin 

(IL–IN–WI) ozone nonattainment area 

(Chicago nonattainment area), which 

includes Lake and Porter Counties, has 

attained this NAAQS. EPA proposes to 

take no action on Indiana’s ozone 

maintenance plan and Motor Vehicle 

Emission Budgets (MVEBs), submitted 

with Indiana’s ozone redesignation 

request, since approval of these State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) components 

is contingent on the attainment of the 

ozone standard. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before July 30, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–RO5– 

OAR–2012–0989, by one of the 

following methods: 

• http://www.regulations.gov: Follow 

the on-line instructions for submitting 

comments. 

• Email: Mooney.John@epa.gov. 

• Fax: (312) 692–2551. 

• Mail: John Mooney, Chief, Air 

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, 

Illinois 60604. 

• Hand Delivery: John Mooney, Air 

Programs Branch, (AR–18J), U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 77 

West Jackson Boulevard, 18th Floor, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604. 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 official hours of 

business are Monday through Friday, 

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

Federal holidays. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

Docket ID No. EPA–R05–OAR–2012– 

0989. EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change and may be 

made available online at 

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through www.regulations.gov 

or email. The www.regulations.gov Web 

site is an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, 

which means EPA will not know your 

identity or contact information unless 

you provide it in the body of your 

comment. If you send an email 

comment directly to EPA without going 

through www.regulations.gov, your 

email address will be automatically 

captured and included as part of the 

comment that is placed in the public 

docket and made available on the 

Internet. If you submit an electronic 

comment, EPA recommends that you 

include your name and other contact 

information in the body of your 

comment and with any disk or CD–ROM 

you submit. If EPA cannot read your 

comment due to technical difficulties 

and cannot contact you for clarification, 

EPA may not be able to consider your 

comment. Electronic files should avoid 

the use of special characters, any form 

of encryption, and be free of any defects 

and viruses. For additional instructions 

on submitting comments, go to section 

I of the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section of this document. 

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. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 125 / Monday, June 30, 2014 / Proposed Rules 36693 

1The states of Indiana and Wisconsin failed to 

certify 2011 ozone data by a February 29, 2012, 

deadline imposed by the EPA in December 9, 2011, 

letters to state governors notifying the states of 

EPA’s preliminary responses to state-recommended 

area designations for the 2008 eight-hour ozone 

standard. The letters to the governors of Illinois, 

Indiana, and Wisconsin informed these states of 

EPA’s intention to designate the Chicago area as 

nonattainment based on the monitored 2009–2011 

ozone standard violation at the Zion, Illinois 

monitoring site. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, will be publicly 

available only in hard copy. Publicly 

available docket materials are available 

either electronically in 

www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation 

Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604. This facility is 

open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, excluding 

Federal holidays. We recommend that 

you telephone Edward Doty at (312) 

886–6057 before visiting the Region 5 

office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Edward Doty, Environmental Scientist, 

Attainment Planning and Maintenance 

Section, Air Programs Branch (AR–18J), 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886–6057, 

or Doty.Edward@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 should I consider as I prepare my 

comments for EPA? 

II. What actions is EPA proposing? 

III. What is the background for these actions? 

IV. What are the criteria for redesignation to 

attainment? 

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

request? 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What should I consider as I prepare 

my comments for EPA? 

When submitting comments, 

remember to: 

1. Identify the rulemaking by docket 

number and other identifying 

information (subject heading, Federal 

Register date and page number). 

2. Follow directions—EPA may ask 

you to respond to specific questions or 

to organize comments by referencing a 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 

or section number. 

3. Explain why you agree or disagree; 

suggest alternatives and substitute 

language for your requested changes. 

4. Describe any assumptions and 

provide any technical information and/ 

or data you used. 

5. If you estimate potential costs or 

burdens, explain how you arrived at 

your estimate in sufficient detail to 

allow for it to be reproduced. 

6. Provide specific examples to 

illustrate your concerns, and suggest 

alternatives. 

7. Explain your views as clearly as 

possible, avoiding the use of profanity 

or personal threats. 

8. Make sure to submit your 

comments by the comment period 

deadline identified in the proposed rule. 

II. What actions is EPA proposing? 

EPA is proposing to disapprove 

Indiana’s December 5, 2012, ozone 

redesignation request for Lake and 

Porter Counties for the 2008 eight-hour 

ozone NAAQS because the Chicago 

nonattainment area continues to violate 

this standard based on the most recent 

three years (2011–2013) of quality 

assured, state-certified monitoring data 

for this ozone nonattainment area. 

Because this area continues to violate 

the 2008 ozone NAAQS, we cannot 

approve the ozone maintenance plan 

and MVEBs included in Indiana’s 

December 5, 2012, submittal. We are 

proposing to take no action on the 

maintenance plan and MVEBs at this 

time. 

III. What is the background for these 

actions? 

EPA has determined that ground-level 

ozone (O3) is detrimental to human 

health. On March 27, 2008 (73 FR 

16436), EPA promulgated an eight-hour 

ozone NAAQS of 0.075 parts per million 

parts of air (0.075 ppm) (the 2008 eighthour ozone NAAQS or standard). This 

standard is violated in an area when any 

monitor in the area records eight-hour 

ozone concentrations with a three-year 

average of the annual fourth-highest 

daily maximum eight-hour ozone 

concentrations that equals or exceeds 

0.076 ppm. 

Ground-level ozone is generally not 

emitted directly by sources. Rather, 

emitted Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX) and 

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) 

react in the presence of sunlight, 

particularly under warm conditions, to 

form ground-level ozone, as a secondary 

pollutant, along with other secondary 

compounds. NOX and VOC are ‘‘ozone 

precursors.’’ Reduction of peak groundlevel ozone concentrations is achieved 

through controlling VOC and NOX

emissions. 

Section 107 of the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) required EPA to designate as 

nonattainment any area that violated the 

2008 eight-hour ozone standard. EPA 

promulgated designations and 

classifications for this standard for most 

areas on May 21, 2012 (77 FR 30088). 

However, in that rulemaking (77 FR 

30091), EPA noted that the designation 

of the Chicago area was being delayed, 

pending review of 2011 ozone data 

certified by the state of Illinois in a 

December 7, 2011, letter. On June 11, 

2012 (77 FR 34221), EPA promulgated 

the designation of the Chicago area as 

nonattainment for the 2008 eight-hour 

ozone standard with a classification of 

marginal nonattainment based on the 

review of 2009–2011 ozone data from 

Illinois and 2008–2010 data from 

Indiana and Wisconsin.1 This review 

showed a violation of the standard at 

the Zion, Illinois monitoring site. The 

Chicago nonattainment area includes 

Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry 

and Will Counties, Aux Sable and Goose 

Lake Townships in Grundy County, and 

Oswego Township in Kendall County in 

Illinois, Lake and Porter Counties in 

Indiana, and the area east of and 

including the corridor of Interstate 94 in 

Kenosha County, Wisconsin. 

IV. What are the criteria for 

redesignation to attainment? 

The CAA provides the basic 

requirements for redesignating a 

nonattainment area to attainment. 

Specifically, section 107(d)(3)(E) of the 

CAA authorizes redesignation provided 

that: (1) The Administrator determines 

that the area has attained the applicable 

NAAQS based on current air quality 

data; (2) the Administrator has fully 

approved an applicable 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 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). 

Two significant policy documents 

affecting the review of ozone 

redesignation requests are the following: 

(1) ‘‘Procedures for Processing Requests 

to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,’’ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
36694 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 125 / Monday, June 30, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

Memorandum from John Calcagni, 

Director, Air Quality Management 

Division, September 4, 1992 (the 

September 4, 1992 Calcagni 

memorandum); and, (2) ‘‘Reasonable 

Further Progress, Attainment 

Demonstration, and Related 

Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment 

Areas Meeting the Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard,’’ 

Memorandum from John S. Seitz, 

Director, Office of Air Quality Planning 

and Standards, May 10, 1995 (the May 

10, 1995 Clean Data Policy 

memorandum). Additional guidance on 

processing redesignation requests is 

included in the following documents: 

• ‘‘Maintenance Plans for 

Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon 

Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,’’ 

Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief 

Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs 

Branch, April 30, 1992; 

• ‘‘Contingency Measures for Ozone 

and Carbon Monoxide (CO) 

Redesignations,’’ Memorandum from 

G.T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon 

Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 

1992; 

• ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Actions Submitted in Response to Clean 

Air Act (Act) Deadlines,’’ Memorandum 

from John Calcagni, Director, Air 

Quality Management Division, October 

28, 1992; 

• ‘‘Technical Support Documents 

(TSDs) for Redesignation of Ozone and 

Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment 

Areas,’’ Memorandum from G.T. Helms, 

Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide 

Programs Branch, August 17, 1993; 

• ‘‘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 for Air and 

Radiation, September 17, 1993; 

• ‘‘Use of Actual Emissions in 

Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone 

and CO Nonattainment Areas,’’ 

Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, 

Acting Director, Air Quality 

Management Division, November 30, 

1993; and 

• ‘‘Part D New Source Review (Part D 

NSR) Requirements for Areas 

Requesting Redesignation to 

Attainment,’’ Memorandum from Mary 

D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for 

Air and Radiation, October 14, 1994. 

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

request? 

EPA is proposing to disapprove 

Indiana’s ozone redesignation request 

for Lake and Porter Counties with a 

determination that the Chicago 

nonattainment area continues to violate 

the 2008 eight-hour ozone standard 

based on quality assured, state-certified 

ozone data for 2010–2013. Indiana’s 

ozone redesignation request fails to 

meet the critical air quality requirement 

of section 107(d)(3)(E)(1) of the CAA. 

The basis for EPA’s proposed 

disapproval of the redesignation request 

is discussed in more detail as follows. 

A. Has the Chicago area attained the 

2008 eight-hour ozone NAAQS? 

An area may be considered to attain 

the 2008 eight-hour ozone NAAQS if 

there are no violations of the NAAQS, 

as determined in accordance with 40 

CFR 50.10 and appendix P, based on the 

most recent three consecutive years of 

complete, quality-assured air quality 

monitoring data at all ozone monitoring 

sites in the area. To attain this standard, 

the average of the annual fourth-high 

daily maximum eight-hour averaged 

ozone concentrations measured and 

recorded at each monitoring site in the 

area over the most recent three-year 

period (the monitoring site’s ozone 

design value) must not exceed 0.075 

ppm. 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 monitoring data considered here 

meet these certification criteria. All 

ozone monitoring data considered here 

have been certified by the states of 

Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin. 

As part of the December 5, 2012, 

ozone redesignation request, the Indiana 

Department of Environmental 

Management (IDEM) summarized the 

annual fourth-high daily maximum 

eight-hour ozone concentrations and 

three-year eight-hour ozone design 

values for the period of 2006–2011 for 

all ozone monitoring sites in the 

Chicago nonattainment area. 

Since the December 5, 2012, submittal 

of Indiana’s ozone redesignation 

request, 2012 and 2013 ozone data have 

been quality-assured and certified by 

the states of Illinois, Indiana, and 

Wisconsin and entered into AQS. These 

data, along with the ozone data 

summarized in Indiana’s ozone 

redesignation request, must be 

considered in the review of Indiana’s 

ozone redesignation request. 

Table 1 summarizes the monitoring 

site-specific annual fourth-high daily 

maximum eight-hour ozone 

concentrations for all monitoring sites 

in the Chicago-Naperville, IL-IN-WI area 

for the period of 2006–2013. Note that 

the 2012 and 2013 ozone data were 

obtained from EPA’s AQS, whereas the 

2006–2011 ozone data were 

documented in Indiana’s ozone 

redesignation request and are confirmed 

by ozone monitoring data contained in 

AQS. 

TABLE 1—ANNUAL FOURTH-HIGH DAILY MAXIMUM EIGHT-HOUR OZONE CONCENTRATIONS FOR MONITORING SITES IN THE

CHICAGO-NAPERVILLE, ILLINOIS-INDIANA-WISCONSIN OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA

[ppm] 

Site/site No. County 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 

Indiana: 

Gary 180890022 .............................................. Lake ............ 0.073 0.085 0.062 0.058 0.064 0.066 0.078 0.064 

Hammond 180892008 ..................................... Lake ............ 0.075 0.077 0.068 0.065 0.069 0.072 0.077 0.063 

Whiting 180890030 ......................................... Lake ............ 0.081 0.088 0.062 0.062 0.069 0.069 0.081 0.062 

Ogden Dunes 181270024 ............................... Porter .......... 0.070 0.084 0.069 0.067 0.067 0.068 0.081 0.069 

Valparaiso 181270026 .................................... Porter .......... 0.071 0.080 0.061 0.064 0.061 0.063 0.067 0.063 

Illinois: 

Alsip 170310001 .............................................. Cook ............ 0.078 0.085 0.066 0.069 0.073 0.071 0.079 0.064 

Chicago—Southwest Filtration Plant 

170310032.

Cook ............ 0.075 0.082 0.067 0.065 0.074 0.079 0.091 0.071 

Chicago—Ellis Avenue 170310064 ................. Cook ............ 0.070 0.079 0.063 0.060 0.071 0.074 0.081 0.058 

Chicago—Ohio Street 170310072 .................. Cook ............ 0.065 0.075 0.063 0.062 0.071 0.074 0.090 NA 

Chicago—Lawndale 170310076 ..................... Cook ............ 0.075 0.080 0.066 0.067 0.068 0.073 0.081 0.062 

Chicago—Hurlbut Street 170311003 .............. Cook ............ 0.077 0.079 0.064 0.064 0.070 0.067 0.079 0.066 

Lemont 170311601 ......................................... Cook ............ 0.070 0.085 0.071 0.067 0.073 0.069 0.081 0.064 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 125 / Monday, June 30, 2014 / Proposed Rules 36695 

TABLE 1—ANNUAL FOURTH-HIGH DAILY MAXIMUM EIGHT-HOUR OZONE CONCENTRATIONS FOR MONITORING SITES IN THE

CHICAGO-NAPERVILLE, ILLINOIS-INDIANA-WISCONSIN OZONE NONATTAINMENT AREA—Continued 

[ppm] 

Site/site No. County 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 

Cicero 170314002 ........................................... Cook ............ 0.060 0.068 0.060 0.067 0.068 0.072 0.083 0.063 

Des Plaines 170314007 .................................. Cook ............ 0.065 0.078 0.057 0.057 0.064 0.065 0.073 0.067 

Northbrook 170314201 .................................... Cook ............ 0.068 0.076 0.065 0.069 0.072 0.076 0.087 0.069 

Evanston 170317002 ...................................... Cook ............ 0.072 0.080 0.058 0.064 0.067 0.078 0.093 0.069 

Lisle 170436001 .............................................. DuPage ....... 0.062 0.072 0.057 0.059 0,064 0.068 0.093 0.063 

Elgin 170890005 ............................................. Kane ............ 0.062 0.075 0.061 0.068 0.069 0.070 0.075 0.064 

Zion 170971007 .............................................. Lake ............ 0.068 0.080 0.069 0.075 0.078 0.076 0.093 0.072 

Cary 171110001 .............................................. McHenry ...... 0.057 0.074 0.065 0.066 0.065 0.071 0.077 0.065 

Braidwood 171971011 .................................... Will .............. 0.068 0.071 0.060 0.063 0.065 0.061 0.071 0.061 

Wisconsin: 

Chiwaukee Prairie 550590019 ........................ Kenosha ...... 0.079 0.085 0.072 0.071 0.081 0.081 0.092 0.075 

Table 2 gives the three-year averages 

of the annual fourth-high daily 

maximum eight-hour ozone 

concentrations for each monitoring site, 

the monitoring sites’ ozone design 

values. 

TABLE 2—THREE-YEAR AVERAGES OF THE ANNUAL FOURTH-HIGH DAILY MAXIMUM EIGHT-HOUR OZONE CONCENTRATIONS FOR MONITORING SITES IN THE CHICAGO-NAPERVILLE, ILLINOIS-INDIANA-WISCONSIN OZONE NONATTAINMENT

AREA

[ppm] 

Site/site No. 2006–2008 2007–2009 2008–2010 2009–2011 2010–2012 2011–2013 

Indiana: 

Gary 180890022 ....................................................... 0.073 0.068 0.061 0.062 0.069 0.069 

Hammond 180892008 .............................................. 0.073 0.070 0.067 0.068 0.073 0.070 

Whiting 180890030 ................................................... 0.077 0.070 0.064 0.064 0.073 0.070 

Ogden Dunes 181270024 ........................................ 0.074 0.073 0.067 0.067 0.072 0.072 

Valparaiso 181270026 .............................................. 0.070 0.068 0.062 0.062 0.064 0.064 

Illinois: 

Alsip 170310001 ....................................................... 0.076 0.073 0.069 0.071 0.074 0.071 

Chicago—Southwest Filtration Plant 170310032 ..... 0.074 0.071 0.068 0.068 0.081 0.080 

Chicago—Ellis Avenue 170310064 .......................... 0.071 0.067 0.064 0.068 0.075 0.071 

Chicago—Ohio Street 170310072 ............................ 0.067 0.066 0.065 0.069 0.078 NA 

Chicago—Lawndale 170310076 ............................... 0.073 0.071 0.067 0.069 0.074 0.072 

Chicago—Hurlbut Street 170311003 ........................ 0.073 0.069 0.066 0.067 0.072 0.070 

Lemont 170311601 ................................................... 0.075 0.074 0.070 0.069 0.074 0.071 

Cicero 170314002 .................................................... 0.063 0.065 0.065 0.069 0.074 0.072 

Des Plaines 170314007 ........................................... 0.066 0.064 0.059 0.062 0.067 0.068 

Northbrook 170314201 ............................................. 0.069 0.070 0.068 0.072 0.078 0.077 

Evanston 170317002 ................................................ 0.070 0.067 0.063 0.069 0.079 0.080 

Lisle 170436001 ....................................................... 0.063 0.062 0.060 0.063 0.069 0.068 

Elgin 170890005 ....................................................... 0.066 0.068 0.066 0.069 0.071 0.069 

Zion 170971007 ........................................................ 0.072 0.075 0.074 0.076 0.082 0.080 

Cary 171110001 ....................................................... 0.065 0.068 0.065 0.067 0.071 0.071 

Braidwood 171971011 .............................................. 0.066 0.064 0.063 0.063 0.066 0.064 

Wisconsin: 

Chiwaukee Prairie 550590019 ................................. 0.078 0.076 0.074 0.077 0.085 0.082 

As can be seen from table 2, the 2008 

eight-hour ozone standard is currently 

violated at the following sites in the 

Chicago area: (1) Chicago-Southwest 

Filtration Plant; (2) Northbrook; (3) 

Evanston; (4) Zion; and (5) Chiwaukee 

Prairie. In addition, the most recent 

three-years of quality assured, state 

certified ozone data (2010–2012) 

available for the Chicago-Ohio Street 

monitoring site show a violation of the 

2008 ozone standard (the 2013 ozone 

data for this monitoring site are 

incomplete and not available to assess 

the attainment of the ozone standard). 

This shows that the Chicago 

nonattainment area has not attained the 

2008 eight-hour ozone standard. 

IDEM based the state’s ozone 

redesignation request on the lack of 

ozone standard violations in Lake and 

Porter Counties. IDEM, however, has 

failed to demonstrate that the 2008 

eight-hour ozone standard has been 

attained throughout the Chicago 

nonattainment area. The quality-assured 

and state certified ozone data for 2011– 

2013 show a violation of the 2008 eighthour ozone standard in the Chicago 

nonattainment area. Preliminary 2014 

ozone data also indicate that multiple 

monitors in the Chicago nonattainment 

area continue to violate the 2008 ozone 

standard for the period of 2012–2014. 

Therefore, Indiana’s ozone 

redesignation request fails to meet the 

first, and most important, criterion for 

the approval of ozone redesignation 

requests: attainment of the 2008 eighthour ozone standard throughout the 

entire nonattainment area. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
36696 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 125 / Monday, June 30, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

B. Has Indiana submitted an approvable 

ozone maintenance plan and 

approvable motor vehicle emission 

budget? 

To be approvable, an ozone 

maintenance plan, in part, must 

demonstrate that the ozone standard 

will be maintained in the ozone 

nonattainment area for at least 10 years 

after EPA approves the state’s ozone 

redesignation request. A critical 

component of ozone maintenance plans 

is an ozone attainment emissions 

inventory documenting the VOC and 

NOX emissions inventory for the period 

in which the area has attained the ozone 

standard. The ozone maintenance 

demonstration usually involves the 

demonstration that future (during the 10 

years after redesignation) VOC and NOX

emissions will be at or below the 

attainment emissions. Indiana’s ozone 

redesignation request contains such an 

ozone maintenance demonstration. 

Since the Chicago ozone 

nonattainment area continues to violate 

the 2008 eight-hour ozone standard, we 

cannot conclude that Indiana has 

developed an acceptable attainment 

year emissions inventory. This means 

that the ozone maintenance 

demonstration portion of the ozone 

maintenance plan is unacceptable. 

Since the estimation of the VOC and 

NOX MVEBs depends on the 

determination of mobile source 

emissions that, along with other 

emissions in the nonattainment area, 

provide for attainment of the ozone 

standard, and since the Chicago 

nonattainment area continues to violate 

the 2008 eight-hour ozone standard, we 

conclude that Indiana’s estimates of the 

VOC and NOX MVEBs are also not 

acceptable. 

We are not proposing action on 

Indiana’s ozone maintenance 

demonstration and plan and MVEBs at 

this time. However, we note that, if we 

were to propose actions on these ozone 

redesignation request elements, we 

would find it necessary to propose 

disapproval. 

VI. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Executive Order 12866: Regulatory 

Planning and Review 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 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 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 action merely disapproves state 

law as not meeting Federal requirements 

and imposes no additional requirements 

beyond those imposed by state law. 

Accordingly, the Administrator certifies 

that this 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 disapproves preexisting 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 Mandate 

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 

disapproves a state rule, and does not 

alter the relationship or the distribution 

of power and responsibilities 

established in the CAA. 

Executive Order 13175: Consultation 

and Coordination With Indian Tribal 

Governments 

This 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 

(59 FR 22951, November 9, 2000). 

Executive Order 13045: Protection of 

Children From Environmental Health 

and Safety Risks 

This 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 disapproves 

a state rule. 

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 energy 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 

In reviewing state submissions, EPA’s 

role is to approve state choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. In this context, in the absence 

of a prior existing requirement for the 

state to use voluntary consensus 

standards (VCS), EPA has no authority 

to disapprove a state submission for 

failure to use VCS. It would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA, when it reviews a state 

submission, to use VCS in place of a 

state submission that otherwise satisfies 

the provisions of the CAA. Thus, the 

requirements of section 12(d) of the 

National Technology Transfer and 

Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 

272 note) do not apply. 

List of Subjects 

40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Intergovernmental 

relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Volatile organic compounds. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, National parks, 

Wilderness areas. 

Dated: June 18, 2014. 

Susan Hedman, 

Regional Administrator, Region 5. 

[FR Doc. 2014–15287 Filed 6–27–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 300 

[EPA–HQ–SFUND–1989–0007; FRL–9912– 

80–Region 5] 

National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency 

Plan; National Priorities List: Partial 

Deletion of the Naval Industrial 

Reserve Ordnance Plant (NIROP) 

Superfund Site 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS