Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2001 / Proposed Rules 33505

normal business hours at the following

location:

Regulation Development Section, Air

Programs Branch, (AR–18J), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois, 60604.

Please contact Patricia Morris at (312)

353–8656 before visiting the Region 5

office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Patricia Morris, Environmental

Scientist, Regulation Development

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

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 353–8656.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document wherever

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

EPA.

This Supplementary Information

section is organized as follows:

What action is EPA taking today?

Where can I find more information

about this proposal and the

corresponding direct final rule?

What Action is EPA Taking Today?

In this action, we are proposing to

approve a revision to the ozone

maintenance plan for Cleveland/Akron/

Lorain, Ohio. The revision will change

the mobile source VOC emissions

budget that is used for transportation

conformity purposes. The revision will

keep the total emissions for the area at

or below the attainment level required

by law. This action will allow State or

local agencies to maintain air quality

while providing for transportation

growth.

Where Can I Find More Information

About this Proposal and the

Corresponding Direct Final Rule?

For additional information see the

direct final rule published in the rules

section of this Federal Register.

Dated: June 14, 2001.

David A. Ullrich,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

[FR Doc. 01–15750 Filed 6–21–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81

[KY–126–200113; IN–121–2; FRL–7001–4]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans and Designation

of Areas for Air Quality Planning

Purposes; KY and IN

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: On March 30, 2001, the

Commonwealth of Kentucky’s Natural

Resources and Environmental

Protection Cabinet submitted: a request

to redesignate the Kentucky portion of

the Louisville moderate ozone

nonattainment area to attainment for the

1-hour ozone National Ambient Air

Quality Standard (NAAQS), a plan to

maintain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS for

at least the next 10 years, and the

regional motor vehicle emission budgets

(MVEBs) for transportation conformity

purposes. In addition, on November 12,

1999, and May 23, 2001, Kentucky

submitted source-specific Board Orders

adopted by the Air Pollution Control

Board of Jefferson County to control

sources of nitrogen oxides ( NOX) at

eleven sources in Jefferson County,

Kentucky. On April 11, 2001, the State

of Indiana’s Department of

Environmental Management submitted:

a request to redesignate the Indiana

portion of the Louisville moderate

ozone nonattainment area to attainment

for the 1-hour ozone NAAQS, the

regional MVEBs for transportation

conformity purposes, and a plan to

maintain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS for

at least the next 10 years. The Louisville

moderate ozone nonattainment area

(Louisville area) includes Jefferson

County and portions of Bullitt and

Oldham Counties, Kentucky, and Clark

and Floyd Counties, Indiana.

Since Kentucky and Indiana had not

completed public participation

requirements for the submittals of

March 30, 2001 and April 11, 2001, they

requested that the EPA parallel process

the redesignation requests, maintenance

plans, and associated regional MVEBs.

EPA is proposing to approve

Kentucky’s and Indiana’s requests to

redesignate the Louisville area to

attainment for the 1-hour ozone

NAAQS. In proposing to approve this

request, the EPA is also proposing to

approve the States’ plans for

maintaining the 1-hour ozone NAAQS

through 2012, as revisions to the

Kentucky and Indiana State

Implementation Plans (SIPs). EPA is

also proposing to approve the MVEBs

for VOC and NOX in the submitted

maintenance plans for conformity

purposes. Finally, the EPA is proposing

to approve the source-specific Board

Orders to control NOX emissions from

eleven sources in Jefferson County,

Kentucky.

DATES: Comments on the EPA’s

proposed action must be received by

July 23, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be addressed to: Richard A. Schutt,

Acting Chief, Regulatory Planning

Section, Air Planning Branch, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 61

Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia

30303. J. Elmer Bortzer, Chief,

Regulation Development Section, Air

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, 77

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,

Illinois 60604.

Copies of Kentucky’s submittals, as

well as other information, are available

for inspection during normal business

hours at the following locations. The

interested persons wanting to examine

these documents should make an

appointment at least 24 hours before the

visiting day and reference files KY–126.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 4, Air Planning Branch,

Regulatory Planning Section, 61 Forsyth

Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303.

Commonwealth of Kentucky, Division

for Air Quality, 803 Schenkel Lane,

Frankfort, Kentucky 40601–1403. Air

Pollution Control District of Jefferson

County, 850 Barret Avenue, Louisville,

Kentucky 40204.

Copies of Indiana’s submittals, as well

as other information, are available for

inspection during normal business

hours at the following locations. The

interested persons wanting to examine

these documents should make an

appointment at least 24 hours before the

visiting day and reference files IN–121–

2. Regulation Development Section, Air

Programs Branch (AR–18J), U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard,

Chicago, Illinois 60604. Indiana

Department of Environmental

Management, Office of Air Quality, 100

North Senate Avenue, P.O. Box 6015,

Indianapolis, Indiana 46206–6015.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Allison Humphris, Environmental

Scientist, or Raymond Gregory,

Environmental Engineer, Regulatory

Planning Section, Air Planning Branch,

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street, SW,

Atlanta, Georgia 30303, (404) 562–9030,

(404) 562–9116,

(Humphris.Allison@epa.gov)

(Gregory.Ray@epa.gov). Ryan Bahr,

Environmental Engineer, Regulation

Development Section, Air Programs

Branch (AR–18J), U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency, Region 5, Chicago,

Illinois 60604, (312) 353–4366,

(bahr.ryan@epa.gov).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Determination of Attainment

33506 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2001 / Proposed Rules

II. Redesignation Request

A. What action is EPA proposing to take?

B. What would be the effect of the

redesignation?

C. What is the background for this action?

D. What are the redesignation review

criteria?

E. What is the EPA’s analysis of the

request?

F. Where is the public record and where

do I send comments?

III. Administrative Requirements

I. Determination of Attainment

On May 17, 2001, (66 FR 27483) EPA

proposed to determine that the

Louisville moderate ozone

nonattainment area has attained the 1-

hour ozone NAAQS. On the basis of this

determination, EPA also proposed to

determine that certain attainment

demonstration requirements (section

172(c)(1)), along with certain other

related requirements of part D of Title

I of the Clean Air Act (CAA),

specifically the section 172(c)(9)

contingency measure requirement, the

section 182(b)(1) attainment

demonstration requirement, and the

section 182(j) multi-state attainment

demonstration requirement, are not

applicable to the Louisville area, as long

as it continues to attain the 1-hour

ozone NAAQS. EPA did not propose to

determine, however, that the regulations

submitted by Kentucky with its 15

percent plan were inapplicable, since

these regulations were adopted by

Kentucky or the Air Pollution Control

District of Jefferson County (APCDJC)

prior to 1998 and provided permanent

and enforceable reductions for the

Louisville area during the 1998 to 2000

ozone seasons. EPA intends to approve

these regulations in a separate action.

Likewise, the May 17, 2001, Federal

Register action also noted that

previously-approved SIP revisions must

continue to be implemented and

enforced, and are not affected by this

action.

EPA based this proposed

determination upon three years of

complete, quality-assured, ambient air

monitoring data for the 1998, 1999, and

2000 ozone seasons that demonstrate

that the 1-hour ozone NAAQS has been

attained in the entire Louisville area.

This data is summarized in Table 1. A

complete discussion of the data and

background that provides the basis for

this proposed action can be found in the

above-cited May 17, 2001, Federal

Register action.

TABLE 1.—1-HOUR OZONE NAAQS EXCEEDANCES IN THE LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY-INDIANA AREA FROM 1998 TO 2000

Site County Year Exceedances

measured

Expected

exceedances

Charlestown .................................................................................................... Clark, IN ................ 1998 3 3.1

1999 0 0.0

2000 0 0.0

New Albany .................................................................................................... Floyd, IN ............... 1998 2 2.0

1999 0 0.0

2000 0 0.0

Bates .............................................................................................................. Jefferson, KY ........ 1998 1 1.2

1999 0 0.0

2000 0 0.0

Buckner .......................................................................................................... Oldham, KY .......... 1998 1 1.1

1999 1 1.2

2000 0 0.0

Sheperdsville .................................................................................................. Bullitt, KY .............. 1998 0 0.0

1999 0 0.0

2000 0 0.0

Watson ........................................................................................................... Jefferson, KY ........ 1998 1 1.2

1999 0 0.0

2000 0 0.0

WLKY–TV ....................................................................................................... Jefferson, KY ........ 1998 1 1.1

1999 0 0.0

2000 0 0.0

As indicated in the May 17, 2001,

Federal Register action, the States must

continue to operate appropriate air

quality monitoring networks, in

accordance with 40 CFR part 58, to

verify the attainment status of the area.

The air quality data relied upon to

determine that the area is attaining the

1-hour ozone NAAQS must be

consistent with 40 CFR part 58

requirements and other relevant EPA

guidance and recorded in the EPA’s

Aerometric Information Retrieval

System (AIRS).

As further indicated in the May 17,

2001, Federal Register action, the

proposed determination is not

equivalent to redesignation of this area

to attainment. Attainment of the ozone

1-hour ozone NAAQS is only one of the

criteria set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E)

that must be satisfied for an area to be

redesignated to attainment. To be

redesignated, the State must submit and

receive full approval of a redesignation

request for the area that satisfies all of

the remaining criteria of section

107(d)(3)(E), including a demonstration

that: the improvement in the area’s air

quality is due to permanent and

enforceable reductions; the area has a

fully approved SIP under 110(k); the

State has met the applicable

requirements under section 110 and part

D; and the area has a fully-approved

maintenance plan.

II. Redesignation Request

A. What Action is EPA Proposing to

Take?

EPA is proposing to approve

Kentucky’s and Indiana’s requests to

redesignate the Louisville area to

attainment for the 1-hour ozone

NAAQS, provided both States revise

their maintenance plans to include an

enforceable commitment to revise the

MVEBs using MOBILE6 (once it

becomes available) and to revise the

VOC MVEB so that the area’s 2012

projected emissions do not exceed the

1999 attainment year emissions. In

proposing to approve these requests,

EPA is also proposing to approve

Kentucky’s and Indiana’s plans for

maintaining the 1-hour ozone NAAQS

through 2012, as revisions to the

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2001 / Proposed Rules 33507

Kentucky and Indiana SIPs. The EPA is

also proposing to approve the MVEBs

for VOC and NOX in the submitted

maintenance plan as adequate for

conformity purposes. Final EPA

approval of the maintenance plan,

including the MVEBs, is contingent on

Kentucky’s and Indiana’s final submittal

of the above-cited revisions. Finally, the

EPA is proposing to approve the sourcespecific Board Orders submitted by

Kentucky to control NOX emissions

from eleven sources in Jefferson County,

Kentucky, as fulfilling the remaining

NOX reasonably available control

technology (RACT) requirements of

section 182(f) of the CAA for the

Kentucky portion of the Louisville area.

B. What Would be the Effect of the

Redesignation?

The redesignation would change the

official designation under 40 CFR

81.315 of the Louisville area, including

the Kentucky Counties of Jefferson,

Bullitt and Oldham, and the Indiana

Counties of Clark and Floyd, from

nonattainment to attainment for the 1-

hour ozone NAAQS. It would also put

into place plans for maintaining the 1-

hour ozone NAAQS through 2012.

These plans include contingency

measures to remedy any future

violations of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.

These plans also include the following

MVEBs for 2012, which must be revised

as indicated in Table 2, before the EPA

can take final action to approve the

MVEBs, the maintenance plans and

redesignation requests.

TABLE 2.—PROPOSED 2012 MVEBS

FOR LOUISVILLE NONATTAINMENT AREA

Pollutant

2012 MVEB

as submitted by

States

(Tons/day)

2012 MVEB

proposed

for approval

provided

States revise their

maintenance plan

submittal

(see analysis for

more detail)

VOC .................. 50.93 48.17

NOX .................. 92.93 92.93

C. What Is the Background for This

Action?

Under section 107(d) of the 1977

CAA, EPA promulgated the ozone

attainment status for each geographic

area of the country. The Louisville area

was designated as an ozone

nonattainment area in March 1978 (43

FR 8962). On November 15, 1990, the

CAA Amendments of 1990 were

enacted. Under section 107(d)(4)(A), on

November 6, 1991 (56 FR 56694), the

Kentucky Counties of Jefferson, Bullitt

and Oldham, and the Indiana Counties

of Clark and Floyd were designated as

the Louisville moderate ozone

nonattainment area, as a result of

monitored violations of the 1-hour

ozone NAAQS during the 1987–1989

time frame. On September 20, 1995, in

response to a request by Kentucky, EPA

published (60 FR 48653) corrections to

the boundaries of the Louisville area for

Bullitt and Oldham Counties to include

additional sources which contributed to

violation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.

Since that time, Kentucky, Indiana

and the APCDJC have adopted and

implemented programs required under

the CAA for a moderate 1-hour ozone

nonattainment area to reduce emissions

of VOC and NOX. These programs

include stationary source RACT, vehicle

inspection and maintenance (I/M)

programs, mobile source conformity and

other measures (See EPA’s analysis for

specific measures in section II.E.,

below). As a result of these programs,

monitors in the Louisville area have

recorded three years of complete,

quality-assured, ambient air quality

monitoring data for the 1998, 1999, and

2000 ozone seasons, thereby

demonstrating that the area has attained

the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. On March 30,

2001, Kentucky submitted: a request to

redesignate the Kentucky portion of the

Louisville area to attainment for the 1-

hour ozone NAAQS, a plan to maintain

the 1-hour ozone NAAQS through 2012,

and the regional MVEBs for

transportation conformity purposes. On

November 12, 1999, and May 23, 2001,

Kentucky submitted source-specific

Board Orders specifying NOX RACT

requirements for eleven sources in

Jefferson County, Kentucky. On April

11, 2001, Indiana submitted: a request to

redesignate the Indiana portion of the

Louisville area to attainment for the 1-

hour ozone NAAQS, a plan to maintain

the 1-hour NAAQS through 2012, and

the regional MVEBs for transportation

conformity purposes.

Both Kentucky and Indiana requested

that EPA parallel process the submittals.

Since Kentucky and Indiana had not

completed public participation

requirements at the time of submittal of

the March 30, 2001, and April 11, 2001,

redesignation requests, these submittals

were considered to be drafts. Kentucky

and Indiana therefore requested that the

EPA parallel process the redesignation

request, maintenance plans, and

associated regional MVEBs. The parallel

processing provision of 40 CFR part 51,

appendix V, allows EPA to propose

action on the draft revisions prior to

submission of State-adopted SIP

revisions. At the time of final EPA

action, the completed revisions must

have been submitted to EPA.

D. What Are the Redesignation Review

Criteria?

The CAA provides the requirements

for redesignating a nonattainment area

to attainment. Specifically, section

107(d)(3)(E) allows for redesignation

providing that: (1) The Administrator

determines that the area has attained the

applicable NAAQS; (2) The

Administrator has fully approved the

applicable implementation plan for the

area under section 110(k); (3) The

Administrator determines that the

improvement in air quality is due to

permanent and enforceable reductions

in emissions resulting from

implementation of the applicable SIP

and applicable federal air pollutant

control regulations and other permanent

and enforceable reductions; (4) The

Administrator has fully approved a

maintenance plan for the area as

meeting the requirements of section

175(A); and, (5) The State containing

such area has met all requirements

applicable to the area under section 110

and part D.

EPA provided guidance on

redesignation 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). EPA has provided further

guidance on processing redesignation

requests in the following documents:

1. ‘‘Part D New Source Review (Part

D NSR) Requirements for Areas

Requesting Redesignation to

Attainment,’’ Mary D. Nichols, Assistant

Administrator for Air and Radiation,

October 14, 1994. (Nichols, October

1994)

2. ‘‘Use of Actual Emissions in

Maintenance Demonstrations for Ozone

and Carbon Monoxide (CO)

Nonattainment Areas,’’ D. Kent Berry,

Acting Director, Air Quality

Management Division, November 30,

1993.

3. ‘‘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,’’ Michael H.

Shapiro, Acting Assistant Administrator

for Air and Radiation, September 17,

1993.

4. ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP)

Actions Submitted in Response to Clean

Air Act Deadlines,’’ John Calcagni,

Director, Air Quality Management

33508 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2001 / Proposed Rules

Division, October 28, 1992. (Calcagni,

October 1992)

5. ‘‘Procedures for Processing

Requests to Redesignate Areas to

Attainment,’’ John Calcagni, Director,

Air Quality Management Division,

September 4, 1992.

6. ‘‘Contingency Measures for Ozone

and Carbon Monoxide (CO)

Redesignations,’’ G.T. Helms, Chief,

Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs

Branch, June 1, 1992.

7. State Implementation Plans;

General Preamble for the

Implementation of Title I of the Clean

Air Act Amendments of 1990 (57 FR

13498), April 16, 1992.

E. What is the EPA’s Analysis of the

Request?

Criterion (1): The Area Must be

Attaining the 1-hour Ozone NAAQS

For ozone, an area may be considered

attaining the 1-hour ozone NAAQS if

there are no violations, as determined in

accordance with 40 CFR 50.9 and

Appendix H, based on three complete,

consecutive calendar years of qualityassured air quality monitoring data. A

violation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS

occurs when the annual average number

of expected daily exceedances is equal

to or greater than 1.05 per year at a

monitoring site. A daily exceedance

occurs when the maximum hourly

ozone concentration during a given day

is 0.125 parts per million (ppm) or

higher. The data must be collected and

quality-assured in accordance with 40

CFR part 58, and recorded in AIRS. The

monitors should have remained at the

same location for the duration of the

monitoring period required for

demonstrating attainment.

EPA published a proposal on May 17,

2001 (66 FR 27483), to make a

Determination of Attainment for the

Louisville area. This determination is

based on ozone air quality data for 1998,

1999, and 2000 which were qualityassured in accordance with 40 CFR part

58, and recorded in AIRS, and which

showed attainment of the 1-hour ozone

NAAQS in the Louisville area.

Criteria (2) and (5): The Area Must Have

a Fully Approved SIP Under Section

110(k); and the Area Must Have met all

Applicable Requirements Under Section

110 and Part D.

Before the Louisville area may be

redesignated to attainment for ozone,

Kentucky and Indiana must have

fulfilled the applicable requirements of

section 110 and part D. The Calcagni

memorandum dated September 4, 1992,

provides that States requesting that

areas be redesignated to attainment have

to fully adopt rules and programs that

come due prior to the submittal of a

complete redesignation request.

However, based on the Seitz

memorandum (see ‘‘Reasonable Further

Progress, Attainment Demonstration,

and Related Requirements for Ozone

Nonattainment Areas Meeting the

Ozone National Ambient Air Quality

Standards,’’ John Seitz, Director, Office

of Air Quality Standards, May 10,

1995.), and the May 17, 2001 (66 FR

27483), proposed determination that the

Louisville area has attained the 1-hour

ozone NAAQS, SIP revisions to address

some of these requirements need not be

submitted for EPA to approve the

request for redesignation of the

Louisville area, since they would no

longer be considered applicable

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

for so long as the area continues to

attain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. These

requirements include reasonable further

progress (RFP) (see the general

requirement of section 172(c)(2) and the

more specific requirement of section

182(b)(1) for a plan that reduces VOC

emissions by 15 percent), attainment

demonstration (see the general

requirement of section 172(c)(1) and the

specific requirement of section 182(j) for

a multi-state attainment demonstration)

and contingency measures (see the

general requirement of section

172(c)(9)).

Since these elements are no longer

required, EPA will not need to act on

the following: Indiana’s Attainment

Demonstration for the Indiana Portion of

the Louisville Nonattainment Area

submitted November 15, 1999; the 3

percent contingency requirement

associated with Indiana’s 15 percent

Rate of Progress (ROP) requirements,

submitted December 20, 1993;

Kentucky’s Attainment Demonstration

for the Kentucky Portion of the

Louisville Nonattainment Area

submitted November 12, 1999; and the

Kentucky 15 percent ROP planning SIP

submitted on November 12, 1993, and

amended on April 5, 1994, June 30,

1997, and March 21, 2000. A final

redesignation action would permanently

make these requirements no longer

applicable. However, all previouslyapproved SIP revisions must continue to

be implemented and enforced and are

not affected by this action. In addition,

EPA will continue to process any

submittals that have not yet been

approved and revise the SIP to

incorporate State- and locally-adopted

rules and other legally-enforceable

requirements which have helped the

area come into attainment prior to the

effective date for this rule. This will

ensure that the rules the area has

depended on for attainment are

permanent and enforceable as part of

the SIP.

If the area violates the 1-hour ozone

NAAQS prior to final action on the

redesignation request, however, not

only would the requirements again

become applicable, but the

redesignation request could not be

approved because the area would no

longer meet the criterion of having

attained the 1-hour NAAQS. (Seitz

memorandum dated May 10, 1995)

Furthermore, requirements of the

CAA that come due subsequent to the

area’s submittal of a complete

redesignation request would continue to

be applicable to the area until a

redesignation is approved, but are not

required as a prerequisite for

redesignation (see section 175A(c)). If

the redesignation were to be

disapproved, the States remain

obligated to fulfill those requirements.

Section 110 Requirements

General SIP elements are delineated

in section 110(a)(2) of Title I, part A.

These requirements include but are not

limited to the following: submittal of a

SIP that has been adopted by the State

after reasonable notice and public

hearing; provisions for establishment

and operation of appropriate apparatus,

methods, systems and procedures

necessary to monitor ambient air

quality; implementation of a permit

program; provisions for part C,

Prevention of Significant Deterioration

(PSD); and part D, New Source Review

(NSR) permit programs; criteria for

stationary source emission control

measures, monitoring and reporting;

provisions for modeling; and provisions

for public and local agency

participation. For purposes of

redesignation, the Kentucky and the

Indiana SIPs were reviewed to ensure

that all requirements under the

amended CAA were satisfied through

previously-approved SIP provisions or

SIP revisions that are in the process of

being reviewed or on which the EPA is

in the process of taking action. The EPA

must take final action on the required

SIP revisions presently in the process of

EPA review or action, before this

redesignation can be approved.

The EPA is proposing to approve

revisions submitted by Kentucky to

address the NOX RACT requirements of

section 182(f) of the CAA for the

Jefferson County portion of the

Louisville area in this Federal Register

action. These revisions are sourcespecific Board Orders that establish

NOX RACT requirements for eleven

sources in Jefferson County, Kentucky.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2001 / Proposed Rules 33509

In a future Federal Register action, the

EPA intends to propose action on

regulations submitted by Kentucky to

address outstanding VOC RACT

requirements of section 182(b)(2) of the

CAA for a specific source category and

a specific source. These regulations

include a regulation to address sources,

located in Jefferson County, subject to

the EPA’s Control Techniques Guideline

(CTG) published May 1993 ‘‘Control of

Volatile Organic Compound Emissions

from Reactor Processes and Distillation

Operations Processes in the Synthetic

Organic Chemical Manufacturing

Industry’’ (SOCMI) and source-specific

requirements for a lithographic printing

operation, Publisher’s Printing, Inc.,

located in Bullitt County, Kentucky.

EPA also intends to take final action on

the underlying regulations that were a

part of the Kentucky 15 percent plan

and propose action on other

miscellaneous revisions to update the

Jefferson County portion of the

Kentucky SIP.

Transport of Ozone Precursors to

Downwind Areas

Modeling results utilizing the EPA’s

regional oxidant model indicate that

ozone precursor emissions from various

States west and southeast of the ozone

transport region (OTR) in the

Northeastern United States contribute to

increases in ozone concentrations in the

OTR. EPA issued a NOX SIP Call on

October 27, 1998 (63 FR 57356),

requiring the District of Columbia and

22 States, including Indiana and

Kentucky, to reduce their emissions of

NOX in order to reduce the transport of

ozone and ozone precursors. EPA’s

initial NOX SIP Call submittal date of

September 1999, was stayed by the

United States Court of Appeals for the

District of Columbia Circuit Court. The

Court lifted this stay on June 22, 2000,

and established an October 30, 2000,

date for the submittal of State SIPs to

address the NOX SIP Call requirements.

Due to the length of Kentucky’s

regulation promulgation process, the

Commonwealth of Kentucky was unable

to meet this deadline, but submitted a

NOX SIP Call SIP for parallel processing

on February 20, 2001. Similarly, while

Indiana has been working on a rule in

response to the NOX SIP Call since July

1999, Indiana was unable to submit a

SIP to meet the deadline; however,

Indiana submitted a draft NOX SIP and

requested parallel processing on March

30, 2001.

The States are in the process of

finalizing NOX SIPs and intend to

submit final, adopted NOX SIPs by

August 2001. However, given that

affected States are not required to

implement the NOX SIP Call until 2004

(i.e., well after the date on which

Kentucky and Indiana submitted

redesignation requests), the EPA

believes that the requirement to submit

a NOX SIP cannot reasonably be

considered a prerequisite for

redesignation of the Louisville area.

NOX SIP Call controls have not yet been

implemented in this area. The fact that

Louisville is monitoring attainment of

the 1-hour ozone standard, even though

NOX SIP Call controls have not been

implemented, does not imply that NOX

SIP Call controls are not needed to

allow other, downwind areas to attain

the 1-hour ozone NAAQS. Furthermore,

this analysis does not address to what

extent the NOX SIP Call controls may be

needed to attain the new 8-hour ozone,

promulgated July 18, 1997 (62 FR

38855), in any areas that may be

designated nonattainment under that

standard. Therefore, EPA believes that

Kentucky and Indiana need not have

final NOX SIP Call regulations in place

to qualify for redesignation.

EPA has determined that the

Kentucky and Indiana SIPs for the

Louisville 1-hour ozone nonattainment

area satisfy all of the section 110 SIP

requirements of the CAA.

Part D: General Provisions for

Nonattainment Areas

Before the Louisville area may be

redesignated to attainment, it must have

fulfilled the applicable requirements of

part D of the CAA. Under part D, an

area’s classification determines the

requirements to which it is subject.

Subpart 1 of part D sets forth the basic

nonattainment requirements applicable

to all nonattainment areas. Subpart 2 of

part D establishes additional

requirements for nonattainment areas

classified under Table 1 of section

181(a). As described in the General

Preamble for the Implementation of

Title I, specific requirements of subpart

2 may override subpart 1’s general

provisions (57 FR 13501, April 16,

1992). The Louisville area was classified

as moderate ozone nonattainment.

Therefore, in order to be redesignated,

Kentucky and Indiana must meet the

applicable requirements of subpart 1 of

part D—specifically sections 172(c) and

176, as well as the applicable

requirements of subpart 2 of part D.

Section 172(c) Requirements

EPA has determined that the

redesignation requests received from

Kentucky and Indiana for the Louisville

area have satisfied all of the relevant

submittal requirements under section

172(c) necessary for the area to be

redesignated to attainment. On May 17,

2001 (66 FR 27483), the EPA proposed

to determine that certain CAA

requirements were no longer needed

because the area was attaining the ozone

NAAQS. These included a SIP revision

providing a 15 percent VOC emission

reduction plan, an ozone attainment

demonstration and the requirements of

section 172(c)(9) concerning

contingency measures for RFP or

attainment to meet the requirements of

section 172(c)(1), 172(c)(2), 182(b)(1)

and 182(j). Kentucky has submitted an

RFP plan. EPA intends to take final

action on the underlying regulations

that were submitted with the RFP plan

before taking final action on this

proposal, since emission reductions

resulting from implementation of these

regulations occurred during the 1998

through 2000 period. Indiana submitted

an RFP plan on December 20, 1993, and

supplemented the submittal on July 12,

1995, for Clark and Floyd Counties

which the EPA approved on May 7,

1997 (62 FR 24815). Since new

submittals of these elements would no

longer be required if this action is

finalized, a final approval action would

mean that EPA would not require

Indiana to submit the 3 percent

contingency requirement associated

with Indiana’s 15 percent ROP

requirements, submitted December 20,

1993, and July 12, 1995. Furthermore,

since the area would be redesignated to

attainment, the EPA approval of the

Kentucky 15 percent ROP planning SIP,

which was submitted on November 12,

1993, and amended on April 5, 1994,

June 30, 1997, and March 21, 2000,

would also no longer be required.

Section 172(c)(3) requires submission

and approval of a comprehensive,

accurate, and current inventory of actual

emissions. Kentucky submitted, on

November 12, 1993 (amended April 5,

1994, and June 30, 1997), an actual

emission inventory under section

182(a)(1) for the Kentucky counties of

Jefferson, Bullitt and Oldham. The EPA

intends to take final action on this

inventory in the same Federal Register

that addresses the underlying

regulations submitted with the RFP

plan. Indiana submitted, on January 15,

1994, the 1990 base year inventory for

the Indiana Counties of Clark and Floyd,

and EPA approved the submittal on

June 20, 1994 (59 FR 31544). EPA has

determined that upon final approval of

Kentucky’s actual emission inventory,

the requirement of 172(c)(3) for

Kentucky and Indiana will be satisfied.

Section 172(c)(5) mandates that SIPs

require permits for the construction and

operation of new and modified major

stationary sources anywhere in the

nonattainment area. Section 182(b)(5)

33510 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2001 / Proposed Rules

requires all major new sources or

modifications in a moderate

nonattainment area to achieve offsetting

reductions of VOCs at a ratio of at least

1.15 to 1.0. EPA has determined that

areas being redesignated to attainment

do not need to comply with the

requirement that a NSR program be

approved prior to redesignation,

provided that the area demonstrates

maintenance of the applicable NAAQS

without part D NSR in effect. The

rationale for this decision is described

in a memorandum from Mary Nichols

dated October 14, 1994. See also the

discussion in the Grand Rapids,

Michigan, action published on June 21,

1996 (61 FR 31834). The States have

demonstrated that the Louisville area

will be able to maintain the 1-hour

NAAQS without part D NSR in effect,

and, therefore, need not have fullyapproved part D NSR programs prior to

approval of the redesignation request for

the Louisville area. Kentucky’s and

Indiana’s PSD requirements will remain

enforceable after the redesignation of

the Louisville area.

Section 176 Conformity Requirements

Section 176(c) of the CAA requires

States to establish criteria and

procedures to ensure that federally

supported or funded projects conform to

the air quality planning goals in the

applicable SIP. The requirement to

determine conformity applies to

transportation plans, programs and

projects developed, funded or approved

under title 23 U.S.C. of the Federal

Transit Act (‘‘transportation

conformity’’), as well as to all other

federally supported or funded projects

(‘‘general conformity’’). Section 176

further provides that State conformity

revisions must be consistent with

federal conformity regulations that the

CAA required the EPA to promulgate.

The EPA believes it is reasonable to

interpret the conformity requirements as

not applying for purposes of evaluating

the redesignation request under section

107(d). The rationale for this is based on

a combination of two factors. First, the

requirement to submit SIP revisions to

comply with the conformity provisions

of the CAA continues to apply to areas

after redesignation to attainment, since

such areas would be subject to a section

175A maintenance plan. Second, the

EPA’s federal conformity rules require

the performance of conformity analyses

in the absence of federally approved

State rules. Therefore, because areas are

subject to the conformity requirements

regardless of whether they are

redesignated to attainment and must

implement conformity under federal

rules if State rules are not yet approved,

the EPA believes it is reasonable to view

these requirements as not applying for

purposes of evaluating a redesignation

request. Consequently, the EPA may

approve the ozone redesignation request

for the Kentucky and Indiana portions

of the Louisville area without a fullyapproved conformity SIP. See Detroit,

Michigan, carbon monoxide

redesignation published on June 30,

1999 (64 FR 35017), Cleveland-AkronLorain ozone redesignation published

on May 7, 1996 (61 FR 20458), and

Tampa, Florida ozone redesignation

published on December 7, 1995 (60 FR

62748).

Subpart 2 Section 182 Requirements

The Louisville area is classified

moderate nonattainment: therefore, part

D, subpart 2, section 182(b)

requirements apply. In accordance with

the September 17, 1993, EPA guidance

memorandum, the requirements which

came due prior to the submission of the

request to redesignate the area must be

fully approved into the SIP before or at

the time of the request to redesignate the

area to attainment. Those requirements

are discussed below.

1990 Base Year Inventory

The 1990 base year emissions

inventory, as required by sections

172(c)(3) and 182(b)(1)(B), was due on

November 15, 1992. Kentucky

submitted its 1990 base year emissions

inventory on November 12, 1993, and

submitted revisions on April 5, 1994,

and June 30, 1997. The EPA is

processing and intends to publish a

final Federal Register action on this

inventory before taking final action

approving today’s proposal. Indiana

submitted its 1990 base year inventory

on June 20, 1994 (59 FR 31544). The

EPA approved this inventory, including

the baseline for the Indiana portion of

the Louisville area, on January 4, 1995

(60 FR 375). The EPA approved

revisions to the 1990 base year

inventory for the Indiana portion of the

Louisville area as part of its May 7,

1997, approval of the 15 percent plan

(62 FR 24815).

Periodic Emissions Inventory

Periodic inventories, as required by

section 182(a)(3)(A), were due on

November 15, 1995, and November 15,

1998, providing an estimate of

emissions for 1993 and 1996,

respectively. These inventories are not

considered SIP requirements, and

therefore they do not need to be

approved into the SIP. Kentucky

provided the EPA with periodic

emissions for 1993 and 1996 on

November 3, 1996, and November 13,

1998, respectively. Indiana also

provided its estimates of periodic

emissions for 1996 on February 18,

1999.

Emission Statements

The emission statement SIP, as

required by section 182(a)(3)(B), was

due on November 15, 1992. An emission

statement SIP requires source owners to

submit information annually to the State

concerning actual emissions. Kentucky

submitted its emission statement SIP on

January 15, 1993, and supplemented the

submittal on December 29, 1994, to

satisfy the federal requirements. The

EPA published approval of the

Kentucky emission statement SIP on

May 2, 1995 (60 FR 21445). Kentucky

submitted the emission statement SIP

for Jefferson County on March 4, 1993,

to satisfy the same requirements. The

EPA published approval of the Jefferson

County emission statement SIP on June

23, 1994 (59 FR 32343). Indiana

submitted its emission statement SIP on

January 6, 1994, and the EPA approved

it on June 10, 1994 (59 FR 29953).

15 Percent Plan

As discussed above, EPA believes it is

reasonable to interpret certain

provisions of the CAA, including

section 182(b)(1)(A), as not being

required if an area is monitoring

attainment of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS

(i.e., attainment of the 1-hour ozone

NAAQS is demonstrated with three

consecutive years of complete, qualityassured, air quality monitoring data).

Since it has now attained the 1-hour

ozone NAAQS, the 15 percent VOC

emission reduction plan is one of these

requirements that will not be applicable

to the Louisville area. Indiana submitted

the Clark and Floyd County 15 percent

plan on December 20, 1993. EPA

approved it as part of the SIP on May

7, 1997 (62 FR 24815). Kentucky

submitted its 15 percent plan on

November 12, 1993, and amended this

plan on April 5, 1994, June 30, 1997,

and March 21, 2000. For so long as the

area continues to attain the 1-hour

ozone NAAQS, however, EPA will not

take action on the Kentucky submittals.

VOC RACT Requirements

SIP revisions requiring RACT for

three classes of VOC sources are

required under section 182(b)(2). The

categories are: (1) all sources covered by

a CTG document issued between

November 15, 1990, and the date of

attainment; (2) all sources covered by a

CTG issued prior to November 15, 1990;

and (3) all other major non-CTG

stationary sources. The non-CTG rules

were due by November 15, 1992, and

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2001 / Proposed Rules 33511

apply to the Kentucky and Indiana

submittals.

Section 183 of the CAA required EPA

to issue CTGs for 13 source categories

by November 15, 1993. EPA published

a CTG by this date for the following

source categories: Synthetic Organic

Chemical Manufacturing Industry

(SOCMI) Reactors and Distillation,

aerospace manufacturing coating

operation, shipbuilding and ship repair

coating operations, and wood furniture

coating operation; however, EPA has not

completed the CTGs for the remaining

source categories. The CAA requires

States to submit rules for sources

covered by a post-enactment CTG in

accordance with a schedule specified in

a CTG document. EPA created a CTG

document as appendix E to the General

Preamble for the Implementation of

Title I of the Clean Air Act Amendments

of 1990. (57 FR 18070, 18077, April 28,

1992). In appendix E, EPA interpreted

the CAA to allow a State to submit a

non-CTG rule by November 15, 1992, or

to defer submittal of a RACT rule for

sources that the State anticipated would

be covered by a post-enactment CTG,

based on the list of CTGs EPA expected

to issue to meet the requirement in

section 183. Appendix E states that if

EPA fails to issue a CTG by November

15, 1993 (which it failed to do for 11

source categories), the responsibility

shifts to the State to submit a non-CTG

RACT rule or negative declaration for

those sources by November 15, 1994.

EPA approved certain VOC RACT

rules as part of the Kentucky SIP on

January 25, 1980 (45 FR 6092), August

7, 1981 (46 FR 40188), February 7, 1990

(55 FR 4169), June 23, 1994, (59 FR

32344), and June 28, 1996 (61 FR

33674). EPA approved certain VOC

RACT rules as part of the Jefferson

County portion of the Kentucky SIP on

January 25, 1980 (45 FR 6092), June 9,

1982 (47 FR 25010), January 11, 1984

(49 FR 1341), April 27, 1989 (54 FR

18103), and October 22, 1993 (58 FR

54516). EPA is processing and intends

to take final action on certain revisions

to Jefferson County VOC RACT rules

prior to taking final action on today’s

proposal. For the Kentucky portion of

the Louisville area, these actions

fulfilled the RACT ‘‘fix up’’ and ‘‘catch

up’’ requirements such that identified

deficiencies in their pre-1990 RACT

program were addressed, satisfying

requirement (2) above that RACT be

established for all sources covered by a

CTG issued prior to November 15, 1990.

EPA intends to propose action on a

source-specific non-CTG RACT

determination for Publisher’s Printing,

Inc., submitted by Kentucky on April

16, 2001, and supplemented on May 4,

2001. This RACT determination must

receive final approval before today’s

action on this redesignation can be

finally approved by the EPA. Final

approval of this action will satisfy

requirement (3) above for the Kentucky

portion of the Louisville area.

To satisfy the requirement of (1)

above, Kentucky submitted a negative

declaration on December 14, 1999, for

the CTG categories of aerospace, SOCMI

reactor and distillation processes,

shipbuilding, and wood furniture. The

APCDJC submitted a negative

declaration for Jefferson County for all

four CTG categories on February 26,

2001. The APCDJC withdrew the

negative declaration for the SOCMI

category on May 1, 2001, and submitted

a SOCMI regulation for parallel

processing on May 10, 2001. Before the

EPA can take final action on today’s

proposal, the APCDJC’s SOCMI

regulation must be approved by EPA.

Regarding the Indiana portion of the

nonattainment area, EPA has likewise

taken numerous actions since the 1990

CAA Amendments approving Indiana

VOC RACT rules including March 6,

1992 (57 FR 8082), July 5, 1995 (60 FR

34857), and June 29, 1998 (63 FR

35141). For the Indiana portion of the

Louisville area, these actions fulfilled

the RACT ‘‘fix up’’ and ‘‘catch up’’

requirements such that identified

deficiencies in their pre-1990 RACT

program were addressed, satisfying

requirement (2) above that RACT be

established for all sources covered by a

CTG issued prior to November 15, 1990.

The July 5, 1995, action also approved

a non-CTG RACT rule, partially

fulfilling requirement (3) above.

However, Indiana’s non-CTG RACT rule

exempted the 13 categories for which

EPA had intended to develop CTGs (per

section 183). Indiana subsequently

submitted rules for four of these

categories: autobody refinishing,

shipbuilding, wood furniture, and

volatile organic storage tanks. EPA

approved these rules as revisions to the

SIP on June 13, 1996 (61 FR 29965),

October 30, 1996 (61 FR 55889), January

17, 1997 (62 FR 2593), and January 22,

1997 (62 FR 3216), respectively. For the

remaining RACT categories, Indiana

submitted negative declarations on

November 8, 1999. On June 8, 2000 (65

FR 36346), EPA approved these negative

declarations recognizing that, for the

nine source categories identified, there

were no sources with the potential to

emit 100 tons or more of VOC on an

annual basis.

As a result of these approved rules,

rules on which EPA is in the process of

taking action, and negative declarations,

Kentucky and Indiana have addressed

all sources covered by a CTG since

November 15, 1990 (Requirement 1

above), all sources covered by a CTG

issued prior to November 15, 1990

(Requirement 2 above), and all other

major non-CTG stationary sources

(requirement 3 above), thus fully

satisfying the VOC RACT requirements.

Upon redesignation of the area, all new

major VOC sources locating in the

Louisville area, and all major

modifications to existing major VOC

sources in the Louisville area, will

continue to be subject to the RACT

requirements.

Stage II Vapor Recovery

Section 182(b)(3) requires States to

submit Stage II vapor recovery rules no

later than November 15, 1992. EPA

originally approved Stage II

requirements for Jefferson County,

Kentucky, on March 6, 1996 (61 FR

8875). EPA is currently reviewing and

intends to take action on minor

revisions to Jefferson County’s Stage II

regulations prior to taking final action

on today’s proposal. Indiana submitted

Stage II vapor recovery rules as a SIP

revision on February 25, 1994. EPA

approved those rules on April 28, 1994

(59 FR 21942). Indiana submitted

amendments to its Stage II rules on

April 6, 1999. EPA approved these

amendments as revisions to the SIP on

November 3, 1999 (64 FR 59642). The

September 17, 1993, ‘‘Enforcement

Guidance for Stage II Vehicle Refueling

Control Programs,’’ guidance

memorandum states that once onboard

vapor recovery regulations are

promulgated, the Stage II regulations are

no longer applicable for moderate ozone

nonattainment areas. EPA promulgated

onboard vapor recovery rules in

February 1994. Therefore, under section

202(a)(6) of the CAA, Stage II would no

longer be required. However, both

Kentucky and Indiana have opted to

include reductions in VOCs from the

Stage II program as part of the submitted

maintenance plan.

Vehicle I/M

EPA’s final I/M regulations in 40 CFR

part 85 require the States to submit a

fully adopted I/M program by November

15, 1993. On September 11, 1998,

Kentucky submitted its I/M program

and the EPA approved the program rule

on December 8, 1998 (63 FR 67586).

Kentucky also submitted the Jefferson

County I/M regulation for approval on

November 12, 1993. EPA approved this

regulation on July 28, 1995 (60 FR

38700). EPA has approved several

additional revisions to the Jefferson

County I/M program, including actions

taken on January 5, 1999 (64 FR 415),

33512 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2001 / Proposed Rules

and March 15, 1999 (64 FR 12749); and

is in the process of taking action on

several additional minor revisions.

Indiana submitted rules for its improved

basic I/M program on September 28,

1995, and EPA published approval of

the rules on March 19, 1996 (61 FR

11142).

NOX Requirements

Section 182(f) establishes NOX

requirements for ozone nonattainment

areas which require the same provisions

for major stationary sources of NOX as

apply to major stationary sources of

VOCs. One of the requirements for

major sources of VOCs is RACT.

Therefore, pursuant to section 182(f) of

the CAA, RACT is a requirement for

major sources of NOX in an ozone

nonattainment area.

On May 21, 1999, Kentucky submitted

to EPA for approval APCDJC Regulation

6.42, Reasonably Available Control

Technology Requirements for Major

Volatile Organic Compound and

Nitrogen Oxides-Emitting Facilities.

EPA is reviewing and intends to take a

separate action on Regulation 6.42

before taking final action on this

proposal. Regulation 6.42 requires the

establishment and implementation of

RACT for the major stationary sources of

NOX in Jefferson County, Kentucky. For

the 11 major sources of NOX in Jefferson

County, Regulation 6.42 has been

implemented by means of Board Orders

adopted by the Air Pollution Control

Board of Jefferson County. A Board

Order is a regulatory instrument

adopted by an air pollution control

board which specifies air pollution

control limits or requirements for a

specific source or company. The

following is a summary of the NOX

RACT requirements for each of the 11

Board Orders.

1. American Synthetic Rubber

Company, LLC (ASRC): The Board

Order submitted to the EPA on May 23,

2001, contains the following NOX RACT

requirements:

(a) The NOX emissions from Boiler #1

and Boiler #2 are not to exceed 0.50

pound per million Btu of heat input,

based upon a 30-day rolling average.

(b) The ASRC is required to have

continuous emission monitoring system

(CEMS) for measuring NOX emissions

from Boiler #1 and Boiler #2.

(c) The ASRC is required to maintain

the records listed in 40 CFR 60.49b (g)

for Boiler #1 and Boiler #2.

(d) The NOX emissions from each of

Boiler #3 and Boiler #4 are not to exceed

0.20 pound per million Btu of heat

input. Neither boiler is to combust a fuel

other than natural gas except that Boiler

#4 may also combust No. 2 fuel oil.

(e) The ASRC is required to conduct

a periodic performance test for NOX for

each of Boiler #3 and Boiler #4.

(f) The ASRC is required to keep a

record identifying all deviations from

the requirements of the NOX RACT Plan

and is required to submit to the APCDJC

a written report of all deviations that

occurred during the preceding semiannual period.

2. E. I. du Pont de Nemours &

Company (DuPont): The Board Order

submitted on November 12, 1999,

contains the following NOX RACT

requirements:

(a) The NOX emissions from Boiler #4

and Boiler #5 are not to exceed 0.20

pound per million Btu of heat input,

based upon a 30-day rolling average.

(b) DuPont is required to install,

calibrate, maintain, and operate a

CEMS, and record the output of the

system, for measuring NOX emissions

from each boiler.

(c) DuPont is required to maintain

records listed in 40 CFR § 60.49b(g).

(d) DuPont is required to submit to

the APCDJC excess emission reports for

any excess emissions that occurred

during the reporting period.

3. Ford Louisville Assembly Plant

(Ford LAP): The Board Order originally

submitted on November 12, 1999,

amended and resubmitted on May 23,

2001, contains the following NOX RACT

requirements:

(a) The NOX emissions from each of

Boiler #4 and Boiler #5 are not to exceed

0.20 pound per million Btu of heat

input.

(b) Ford LAP is required to conduct a

periodic performance test for NOX for

each of Boiler #4 and Boiler #5.

(c) Ford LAP is required each year to

perform and make a record of the

following non-routine boiler

maintenance activities for Boiler #4 and

Boiler #5: inspect the fuel combustion

system, adjust the system to minimize

total emissions of NOX and carbon

monoxide (CO), minimize excess air and

maximize boiler efficiency, and make

any needed adjustments or repairs to

improve boiler efficiency.

(d) Ford LAP was required to submit

to the APCDJC a one-time written

description of daily activities and

procedures that may be conducted by

the boiler operators to ensure optimum

operating efficiency of Boiler #4 and

Boiler #5.

(e) Ford LAP is required to ensure that

Boiler #1, Boiler #2, and Boiler #3

comply with the following

requirements: No boiler is to have a

monthly capacity factor greater than

10.0 percent for any month during the

period March 1 to October 31, and no

boiler is to combust a fuel other than

natural gas, distillate oil, or residual oil.

(f) Ford LAP is required to make a

record of the type and amount of fuel

combusted during each day of operation

of Boiler #1, Boiler #2, or Boiler #3

during the period March 1 to October

31.

(g) Ford LAP is required to keep a

record identifying all deviations from

the requirements of the NOX RACT Plan

and is required to submit to the APCDJC

a written report of all deviations that

occurred during the preceding semiannual period as well as a summary of

the non-routine boiler maintenance

activities for Boiler #4 and Boiler #5.

4. General Electric Company (GE

Appliances): The Board Order originally

submitted on November 12, 1999,

amended and resubmitted on May 23,

2001, contains the following NOX RACT

requirements:

(a) The NOX emissions from each of

Boiler #6 and Boiler #7 are not to exceed

0.20 pound per million Btu of heat

input.

(b) If either of Boiler #6 or Boiler #7

has a seasonal capacity factor greater

than 15.0 percent, then GE Appliances

is required, prior to operating that boiler

during any subsequent ozone control

season, to conduct a performance test

for NOX for that boiler.

(c) Each boiler of the group Boiler #1,

Boiler #2, Boiler #3, Boiler #4, and

Boiler #5 shall comply with one of the

following options: Option 1: The boiler

shall not have a seasonal capacity factor

greater than 10.0 percent, or Option 2:

The NOX emissions from the boiler are

not to exceed 0.70 pound per million

Btu of heat input. If one of these boilers

has a seasonal capacity factor greater

than 10.0 percent, then GE Appliances

is required, prior to operating that boiler

during any subsequent ozone control

season, to conduct a performance test

for NOX.

(d) GE Appliances was required to

submit to the APCDJC a written

description of daily activities and

procedures that may be conducted by

the boiler operators to ensure optimum

operating efficiency of the boilers used

during the ozone control season.

(e) GE Appliances is required to make

a record of the type, heat content, and

amount of fuel combusted during each

day of operation during the ozone

control season of each boiler identified

above. GE Appliances is required to

keep a record identifying all deviations

from the requirements of this NOX

RACT Plan and is required to submit to

the APCDJC a written report of all

deviations that occurred during the

preceding semi-annual period as well as

a summary of the non-routine boiler

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2001 / Proposed Rules 33513

maintenance activities for Boiler #6 and

the designated primary backup boiler.

5. Kosmos Cement Company

(Kosmos): The Board Order originally

submitted on November 12, 1999,

amended and resubmitted on May 23,

2001, contains the following NOX RACT

requirements:

(a) The NOX emissions from the

cement kiln shall not exceed 6.6 pounds

per ton of clinker produced by the kiln,

based upon a rolling 30-day average.

(b) Kosmos is required to install,

calibrate, maintain, and operate a NOX

CEMS for the cement kiln. Kosmos is

required to keep records and submit

required CEMS reports.

(c) Kosmos is required to keep a

record identifying all deviations from

these requirements and is required to

submit a written report of all deviations

to the APCDJC.

6. Louisville Gas and Electric

Company, Cane Run Generating Station

(LG&E/CRGS): The Board Order

originally submitted on November 12,

1999, amended and resubmitted on May

23, 2001, contains the following NOX

RACT requirements:

(a) The NOX emissions from each

utility boiler are required to be below

the rate as specified in the following,

based upon a rolling 30-day average:

Unit 4, 0.52 lb/mmBtu of heat input;

Unit 5, 0.52 lb/mmBtu of heat input;

and Unit 6, 0.47 lb/mmBtu of heat

input.

(b) LG&E/CRGS is required to install,

maintain, and operate a NOX CEMS for

each utility boiler and is required to

keep records and submit reports and

other notifications as specified in the

approved Board Order.

(c) The GT–11 turbine is not to be

operated for more than 500 hours per

calendar year. LG&E/CRGS is required

to make a record of the hours of

operation during each day of operation

and submit a quarterly report

summarizing the monthly and calendaryear-to-date hours of operation.

(d) LG&E/CRGS is required to keep a

record identifying all deviations and

submit to the APCDJC a written report

of all deviations that occurred during

the preceding calendar quarter.

7. Louisville Gas and Electric

Company, Mill Creek Generating Station

(LG&E/MCGS): The Board Order

originally submitted on November 12,

1999, amended and resubmitted on May

23, 2001, contains the following NOX

RACT requirements:

(a) The NOX emissions from each

utility boiler are required to be below

the rate as specified in the following,

based upon a rolling 30-day average:

Unit 1, 0.47 lb/mmBtu of heat input;

Unit 2, 0.47 lb/mmBtu of heat input;

Unit 3, 0.52 lb/mmBtu of heat input;

and Unit 4, 0.52 lb/mmBtu of heat

input.

(b) LG&E/MCGS is required to install,

maintain, and operate a NOX CEMS for

each utility boiler and shall keep

records and submit reports and other

notifications as specified in the

approved Board Order.

(c) LG&E/MCGS is required to keep a

record identifying all deviations and

submit to the APCDJC a written report

of all deviations that occurred during

the preceding calendar quarter.

8. Louisville Medical Center Steam

Plant (Medical Center): The Board Order

submitted on November 12, 1999,

amended and resubmitted on May 23,

2001, contains the following NOX RACT

requirements:

(a) The NOX emissions from each of

Boiler #2, Boiler #4, and Boiler #5 while

natural gas is combusted in that boiler

are not to exceed 0.20 pound per

million Btu of heat input.

(b) The NOX emissions from each of

Boiler #4, Boiler #5, and Boiler #6 while

coal is combusted in that boiler are not

to exceed 0.50 pound per million Btu of

heat input.

(c) The Medical Center is required to

conduct a periodic performance test for

NOX for each of Boiler #2, Boiler #4,

Boiler #5, and Boiler #6.

(d) The Medical Center is required

annually to perform and make a record

of non-routine boiler maintenance

activities for Boiler #2, Boiler #4, Boiler

#5, and Boiler #6. Also, the Medical

Center was required to submit to the

APCDJC a one-time written description

of daily activities and procedures that

may be conducted by the boiler

operators to ensure optimum operating

efficiency of Boiler #2, Boiler #4, Boiler

#5, and Boiler #6.

(e) Neither Boiler #1 nor Boiler #3 is

to have a seasonal capacity factor greater

than 10.0 percent. Also, the Medical

Center is required to make a record of

the type and amount of fuel combusted

during each day of operation of Boiler

#1 or Boiler #3 during the period April

1 through October 31.

(f) The Medical Center is required to

keep a record identifying all deviations

from the requirements of these NOX

RACT requirements and is required to

submit to the District a written report of

all deviations.

9. Oxy Vinyls, LP (Oxy Vinyls): The

Board Order originally submitted on

November 12, 1999, amended and

resubmitted on May 23, 2001, contains

the following NOX RACT requirements:

(a) The NOX emissions from Boiler #4

are not to exceed 0.60 pound per

million Btu of heat input.

(b) The NOX emissions from Boiler #6

are not to exceed 0.70 pound per

million Btu of heat input.

(c) Oxy Vinyls is required to conduct

a periodic performance test for NOX for

each of Boiler #4 and Boiler #6.

(d) Oxy Vinyls is required to include

in each related report to the APCDJC a

summary of non-routine boiler

maintenance activities for Boiler #4 and

Boiler #6, and submit a one-time written

description of daily activities and

procedures conducted by the boiler

operators to ensure optimum operating

efficiency of Boiler #4 and Boiler #6.

(e) Boiler #1 is required to comply

with the following requirements: Boiler

#1 is not to have an annual capacity

factor greater than 10.0 percent for any

consecutive 12-month period, and

Boiler #1 is not to combust a fuel other

than natural gas, distillate oil, or

residual oil.

(f) Oxy Vinyls is required to make a

record of the type, heat content, and

amount of fuel combusted during each

day of operation of Boiler #1.

(g) The NOX emissions from Boiler #5

are not to exceed 0.20 pound per

million Btu of heat input. Oxy Vinyls is

required to make a record of the type,

heat content, and amount of fuel

combusted during each day of operation

of Boiler #5.

(h) Oxy Vinyls is required to keep a

record identifying all deviations from

the requirements of the NOX RACT Plan

and is required to submit to the APCDJC

a written report of all deviations that

occurred during the preceding semiannual period.

10. Rohm and Haas Company (Rohm

& Haas): The Board Order submitted on

November 12, 1999, contains the

following NOX RACT requirements:

(a) When fossil fuel (natural gas or

distillate fuel oil) alone is combusted,

the NOX emissions from Boiler No. 100

are not to exceed 0.20 pounds per

million Btu of heat input, based upon a

30-day rolling average.

(b) When fossil fuel (natural gas or

distillate fuel oil) and chemical byproduct waste are simultaneously

combusted in Boiler No. 100, NOX

emissions from the boiler are not to

exceed 1.1 pounds per million Btu of

heat input, based upon a 30-day rolling

average.

(c) Rohm & Haas was required to

install, calibrate, maintain, and operate

a CEMS, and record the output of the

system, for measuring NOX emissions

from Boiler No. 100 and submit the

performance evaluation of the CEMS for

Boiler No. 100.

(d) Boiler No. 500 is required to either

have an annual capacity factor not

greater than 10.0 percent for any

33514 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2001 / Proposed Rules

consecutive 12-month period and keep

a record of the type and amount of fuel

combusted during each day of

operation, or to not have the NOX

emissions exceed 0.20 pound per

million Btu of heat input, based upon a

30-day rolling average.

(e) Rohm & Haas is required to submit

excess emission reports to the APCDJC.

11. Texas Gas Transmission (Texas

Gas): The Board Order submitted on

November 12, 1999, amended and

resubmitted on May 23, 2001, contains

the following NOX RACT requirements:

(a) The NOX emissions from each of

Internal Combustion (IC) Engines #1

through #9 are not to exceed 3 grams per

brake-horsepower-hour (g/bhp-hr),

according to the following schedule:

four IC engines by no later than

November 15, 2001, and the other five

IC engines by no later than November

15, 2002. Until an individual IC engine

is subject to the 3 g/bhp-hr NOX

emissions limit, Texas Gas is required to

restrict the operation of that IC engine

to less than or equal to 1350 brake

horsepower during the time period of

May 1 through September 30 each year.

(b) Until October 1, 2004, the NOX

emissions from Turbine T–1 are not to

exceed 100 pounds per hour, and the

exhaust temperature is not to exceed

1006 °F. On and after October 1, 2004,

the NOX emissions from Turbine T–1 is

not to exceed 75 parts per million by

volume on a dry gas basis (ppmvd)

corrected to 15 percent O2.

Additionally, Texas Gas is required to

submit a construction permit

application for Turbine T–1 by March 1,

2003, for Dry Low NOX (DLN) controls

and begin operation of DLN controls by

October 1, 2004.

(c) The NOX emissions from the

Emergency Generator Engine are not to

exceed 2.6 grams per brake horsepowerhour.

(d) Texas Gas is required to monitor

and record the operational parameters

for each IC engine, the Emergency

Generator Engine, and Turbine T–1, and

conduct NOX performance tests as

follows: annually one IC engine from

the group of IC Engines #1 through #6

(alternating such that each IC engine in

this group has been tested in a six-year

period), annually one IC engine from the

group of IC Engines #7 through #9

(alternating such that each IC engine in

this group has been tested in a threeyear period), and periodically, starting

in 2005, Turbine T–1.

(e) Texas Gas is required to keep a

record identifying all deviations from

the requirements of the NOX RACT Plan

and is required to submit to the APCDJC

a written report of all deviations that

occurred during the preceding semiannual period.

The EPA is proposing today to

approve the eleven Board Orders

discussed above. These Board Orders

are necessary to satisfy the requirements

of section 182(f) for the Kentucky’s

portion of the Louisville area. Kentucky

made a negative declaration in the

redesignation request that there were no

major sources of NOX in the

nonattainment portions of Bullitt and

Oldham Counties.

Indiana submitted the required NOX

RACT rules on August 26, 1996. In

addition, on April 30, 1997, Indiana

submitted a negative declaration that

there were no remaining major sources

of NOX in Clark and Floyd Counties.

The EPA approved Indiana’s NOX

revisions as meeting the requirements of

section 182(f) for the Indiana portion of

the Louisville area on June 3, 1997 (62

FR 30253).

Final action approving all items

needed to satisfy the requirements

identified above will enable Kentucky

and Indiana to have a fully-approved

SIP under section 110(k), and to meet

met all applicable requirements under

section 110 and part D.

Criterion (3): The Improvement in Air

Quality Must Be Due to Permanent and

Enforceable Reductions in Emissions

The improvement in air quality must

be due to permanent and enforceable

reductions in emissions resulting from

the SIP, federal measures, and other

State-adopted measures. VOC emissions

in the Kentucky portion of the

Louisville area were reduced by 4.93

tons per day between 1996 and 1999.

Regulatory programs which contributed

to these emission reductions include:

rule effectiveness (APCDJC Regulation

1.18); stage II gasoline vapor recovery

and control (APCDJC Regulation 6.40),

VOC emission reduction (APCDJC

Regulation 6.43), performance standards

for existing solid waste land fills

(APCDJC Regulation 6.45), an improved

vehicle I/M program (APCDJC

Regulations 8.01, 802, and 8.03), a ban

on most types of open burning (401

KAR 63:005), federal rules for

Architectural Coatings, Traffic Paints,

Auto Body Refinishing, and

Commercial/Consumer Products;

Kentucky and APCDJC opt-in to the

federally-enforceable reformulated

gasoline program, federal rules

establishing maximum allowable Reid

Vapor Pressure, and the Federal Motor

Vehicle Control Program (FMVCP).

In the Indiana portion of the

nonattainment area, VOC emissions

were reduced by 4.4 tons per day

between 1996 and 1999. Regulatory

programs contributing to the reductions

in emissions in the Indiana portion of

the Louisville area include the volatile

organic storage tanks rule (326 IAC 8–

9), the shipbuilding and ship repair rule

(326 IAC 8–12), the wood furniture

coating rule (326 IAC 8–11), the

automobile refinishing rule (326 IAC 8–

10), the stage II gasoline vapor recovery

rule (326 IAC 8–4–6), lower Reid Vapor

Pressure gasoline rule (326 IAC 13–3), a

ban on residential open burning (326

IAC 4–1), installation of gas collection

and combustion equipment at

municipal solid waste landfills (326 IAC

8–8), an improved vehicle I/M program

(326 IAC 13–1), a ridesharing program

and, the installation of thermal

incinerators at a printing facility in

Clark County. The 15 percent plan and

all of the reductions in the above list

have been approved into the SIP.

Federal programs contributing to

reductions include: the FMVCP, the

federal architectural and industrial

maintenance coatings rule, and VOC

(326 IAC 8–7) and NOX RACT (326 IAC

10–1) regulations.

Based on the listed programs,

Kentucky and Indiana have shown that

the improvement in air quality is based

on permanent and enforceable

reductions in emissions, thus meeting

this requirement.

Criterion (4): The Area Must Have a

Fully Approved Maintenance Plan

Meeting the Requirements of Section

175A

Section 175A of the CAA sets forth

the elements of a maintenance plan for

areas seeking redesignation from

nonattainment to attainment. The

maintenance plan is a SIP revision that

provides for maintenance of the relevant

NAAQS in the area for at least 10 years

after redesignation. The Calcagni

memorandum dated September 4, 1992,

provides additional guidance on the

required content of a maintenance plan.

An ozone maintenance plan should

address the following five areas: the

attainment emissions inventory,

maintenance demonstration, monitoring

network, verification of continued

attainment, and a contingency plan. The

attainment emissions inventory

identifies the emissions level in the area

that is sufficient to attain the 1-hour

ozone NAAQS, based on emissions

during a three year period which had no

monitored violations. Maintenance is

demonstrated by showing that future

emissions will not exceed the level

established by the attainment inventory.

Provisions for continued operation of an

appropriate air quality monitoring

network are to be included in the

maintenance plan. The State must show

how it will track and verify the progress

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2001 / Proposed Rules 33515

of the maintenance plan. Finally, the

maintenance plan must include a list of

potential contingency measures which

ensure prompt correction of any

violation of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS.

Kentucky and Indiana, in their

submittals, included their 1999

emissions inventories as their

attainment year inventories. Both

Kentucky’s and Indiana’s maintenance

plans provided emissions estimates

from 1999 to 2012 for VOCs and NOX,

and indicate that these emissions in the

Louisville area are projected to decrease

from 1999 levels. Considering only the

projected emissions, the results of this

analysis show that the area is expected

to maintain the air quality standard for

at least 10 years into the future after

redesignation. However, as shown in

tables 7 and 8, Kentucky and Indiana

also chose to include a safety margin, in

addition to projected emissions, for both

the VOC and NOX MVEBs.

The transportation conformity

regulations allow for a safety margin to

be allocated to a MVEB to the extent

that the projected emissions are less

than the attainment year emissions.

However, when the VOC safety margin

calculated by the States is included in

the 2012 projections in these draft

plans, the 2012 projected VOC

emissions will exceed the 1999

emissions by 2.76 tons/day. The total

projected 2012 emissions, taking the

safety margin into account, total 148.40

tons/day, or 2.76 tons/day more than the

1999 emissions. Therefore, the draft

maintenance plans must be revised to

control VOC emissions such that the

2012 projected inventories, including

the safety margin being used for the

VOC MVEB, are 2.76 tons/day less than

shown in the draft maintenance plans.

To remedy this issue, Indiana submitted

a letter on May 29, 2001, and Kentucky

submitted a letter on May 17, 2001,

indicating their intent to revise the draft

maintenance plans so that the final

maintenance plans will include a VOC

MVEB of 48.17 tons/day, 2.76 tons/day

less than the MVEB included in the

draft. For a more detailed discussion of

the revision to the VOC MVEB, please

see the following section on MVEBs.

EPA is proposing to approve the

maintenance plan as long as the final

plan is revised so that the projected

2012 VOC emissions, including the VOC

MVEB safety margin, do not exceed the

1999 attainment year emissions.

Table 3 and Table 4 provide the

emissions summary for VOCs and NOX

for the Indiana portion and Table 5 and

Table 6 provide the emission summary

for VOCs and NOX for the Kentucky

portion of the Louisville area. Table 7

and Table 8, respectively, provide the

emissions summary for VOCs and NOX

for the entire Louisville area.

TABLE 3.—VOC EMISSIONS IN TONS

PER SUMMER DAY FOR INDIANA

COUNTIES (CLARK AND FLOYD)

1999 attainment

2005

projected

2012

projected

Point ................ 4.16 4.49 4.88

Area ................. 17.67 17.11 18.12

Mobile .............. 9.80 8.58 8.81

Non-Highway ... 7.36 7.70 8.09

Totals ........... 38.99 37.88 39.90

TABLE 4.—NOX EMISSIONS IN TONS

PER SUMMER DAY FOR INDIANA

COUNTIES (CLARK AND FLOYD)

1999 attainment

2005

projected

2012

projected

Point ................ 26.04 12.35 12.38

Area ................. 8.39 8.78 9.23

Mobile .............. 19.33 16.66 12.82

Non-Highway ... 6.25 6.46 6.71

Totals ........... 60.01 44.25 41.15

TABLE 5.—VOC EMISSIONS IN TONS PER SUMMER DAY FOR KENTUCKY COUNTIES (JEFFERSON, AND NONATTAINMENT

PORTIONS OF BULLITT AND OLDHAM)

1999 attainment 2002 projected 2005 projected 2008 projected 2012 projected

Point ....................................................... 31.52 31.93 31.93 31.83 31.52

Area ....................................................... 18.94 19.10 19.27 19.47 19.64

Mobile .................................................... 41.13 36.38 30.50 28.02 27.23

Non-Highway ......................................... 15.07 15.12 15.15 15.20 15.22

Totals .......................................... 106.66 102.53 96.85 94.52 93.61

TABLE 6.—NOX EMISSIONS IN TONS PER SUMMER DAY FOR KENTUCKY COUNTIES (JEFFERSON, AND NONATTAINMENT

PORTIONS OF BULLITT AND OLDHAM)

1999 attainment 2002 projected 2005 projected 2008 projected 2012 projected

Point ....................................................... 116.86 99.08 46.37 47.78 47.99

Area ....................................................... 0.81 0.81 0.82 0.82 0.82

Mobile .................................................... 73.60 67.70 59.22 52.64 44.19

Non-Highway ......................................... 19.95 19.87 19.74 19.63 19.41

Totals .......................................... 211.22 187.46 126.15 120.87 112.41

TABLE 7.—VOC EMISSIONS IN TONS PER SUMMER DAY FOR THE ENTIRE LOUISVILLE AREA

Total VOC (tons/day) 1999 attainment 2005 projected 2012 projected

2012 projected

(including States’

calculated 14.89

mobile source

‘‘safety margin’’)

Point ......................................................................................... 35.68 36.42 36.40 36.40

Area ......................................................................................... 36.61 36.38 37.76 37.76

Mobile ...................................................................................... 50.93 39.08 36.04 50.93

33516 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2001 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 7.—VOC EMISSIONS IN TONS PER SUMMER DAY FOR THE ENTIRE LOUISVILLE AREA—Continued

Total VOC (tons/day) 1999 attainment 2005 projected 2012 projected

2012 projected

(including States’

calculated 14.89

mobile source

‘‘safety margin’’)

Non-Highway ........................................................................... 22.43 22.85 23.31 23.31

Totals ............................................................................ 145.65 134.73 133.51 148.40

TABLE 8.—NOX EMISSIONS IN TONS PER SUMMER DAY FOR THE ENTIRE LOUISVILLE AREA

Total NOX (tons/day) 1999 attainment 2005 projected 2012 projected

2012 projected

(including States’

calculated 35.92

mobile source

‘‘safety margin’’)

Point ......................................................................................... 142.90 58.72 60.37 60.37

Area ......................................................................................... 9.20 9.60 10.05 10.05

Mobile ...................................................................................... 92.93 75.88 57.01 92.93

Non-Highway ........................................................................... 26.20 26.20 26.12 26.12

Totals ............................................................................ 271.23 170.40 1 153.56 1 189.48

1Slight differences due to rounding.

Kentucky and Indiana have addressed

the maintenance plan requirements for

monitoring and emissions inventories.

Both have committed to continue the

operation of the monitors in the area in

accordance with 40 CFR Part 58.

Kentucky and Indiana will accomplish

verification of continued attainment by

regularly updating the emissions

inventory for the area.

The contingency plan for the

Kentucky portion of the Louisville area

contains four major components: a

commitment to submit a revised plan

eight years after redesignation,

attainment tracking, triggers to start the

implementation of the contingency

measures, and contingency measures to

be implemented in the event that a

trigger is activated. Section 175A(b) of

the CAA requires States to submit a

revision of the SIP eight years after the

original redesignation request is

approved to provide for maintenance of

the 1-hour ozone NAAQS for an

additional ten years following the first

ten-year period. Kentucky and Indiana

have committed to submit the revision

to the SIP eight years after redesignation

of the Louisville area. Attainment

tracking will include triennial reviews

of actual emissions for the redesignated

areas which will be performed using the

latest emission factors, models, and

methodologies. Kentucky will begin the

triennial assessments in 2003 for

calendar year 2002. At the time of this

periodic inventory, Kentucky will

review the assumptions made for the

purpose of the maintenance

demonstration concerning projected

growth of activity levels. If any of these

assumptions appear to have changed

substantially, Kentucky will re-project

the emissions.

In the event of a monitored violation

of the 1-hour ozone NAAQS in the

Louisville area, Kentucky commits to

adopt within nine months, and

implement the regulatory programs

within 18 months, one or more of the

following contingency measures to reattain the 1-hour ozone NAAQS:

1. A program to require additional

emission reductions at stationary

sources, either for specific types of

processes or an across-the-board

reduction for the larger stationary

sources.

2. More restrictive new source review

requirements.

3. A more rigorous vehicle emissions

testing program or an increase the area

subject to the current programs.

4. Restriction of certain roads or lanes

to, or construction of such roads or

lanes for use by, passenger buses or

high-occupancy vehicles.

5. Trip-reduction ordinances.

6. Employer-based transportation

management plans, including

incentives.

7. Programs to limit or restrict vehicle

use in downtown areas, or other areas

of emission concentration, particularly

during periods of peak use.

8. Programs for new construction and

major reconstructions of paths or tracks

for use by pedestrians or by nonmotorized vehicles when economically

feasible and in the public interest.

Kentucky also reserves the right to

implement other contingency measures

if new control programs should be

developed and deemed more

advantageous for the area. In addition,

the occurrence of either of the following

two events will trigger Kentucky to

evaluate existing control measures to

see if any further emission reduction

measures should be implemented: (1) if

exceedances of the 1-hour ozone

NAAQS are measured in any portion of

the Louisville area, or (2) if a periodic

emission inventory update reveals

excessive or unanticipated growth

greater than 10 percent in ozone

precursor emissions.

The contingency plan for the Indiana

portion of the Louisville area contains

four major components: a commitment

to submit a revised plan eight years after

redesignation, attainment tracking,

triggers to start the implementation of

the contingency measures, and

contingency measures to be

implemented in the event that a trigger

is activated. Attainment tracking will

include triennial reviews of actual

emissions for the redesignated areas

which will be performed using the latest

emission factors, models, and

methodologies. Indiana will begin the

triennial assessments in 2003 for

calendar year 2002. At the time of this

periodic inventory, Indiana will review

the assumptions made for the purpose

of the maintenance demonstration

concerning projected growth of activity

levels. If any of these assumptions

appear to have changed substantially,

then emissions will be re-projected.

Indiana used a two-tiered approach in

its maintenance plan to determine the

appropriate level of response to ensure

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2001 / Proposed Rules 33517

maintenance of the NAAQS. As

specified in the submittal, a ‘‘Level

Two’’ response is implemented in the

event that an ozone monitor records an

ozone concentration of 0.12 ppm or

more, or the level of VOC or NOX for the

entire Louisville area increases above

the 1999 baseline. In the case of one of

these triggers, a Level Two response

would consist of a study to determine

whether the noted trends are likely to

continue and, if so, the control measures

necessary to reverse the trend.

Implementation of these Level Two

controls would take place as

expeditiously as possible, and in no

case later than 18 months after Indiana

is aware of a trigger being exceeded. A

Level One response is activated in the

event of a monitored violation of the 1-

hour ozone NAAQS in the Louisville

area. With a violation, Indiana commits

to implement measures within 18

months. Indiana will select contingency

measures from the following list, or any

other measure deemed appropriate and

effective at that time:

1. Reformulated gasoline program.

2. Broader geographic applicability of

existing measures.

3. Tightening of RACT on existing

sources covered by EPA Control

Techniques Guidelines issued in

response to the CAA.

4. Application of RACT to smaller

existing sources.

5. A fully-enhanced I/M program.

6. One or more transportation control

measures sufficient to achieve at least

0.5 percent reduction in actual areawide VOC emissions. Transportation

measures will be selected from the

following, based upon the factors listed

above after consultation with affected

local governments:

(a) Trip reduction programs,

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

area-wide rideshare programs, work

schedule changes, and telecommuting.

(b) Transit improvements.

(c) Traffic flow improvements.

(d) Other heretofore ‘‘undiscovered’’

transportation measures not yet in

widespread use.

7. Alternative fuels programs for fleet

vehicle operations.

8. Controls on consumer products

consistent with those adopted elsewhere

in the United States.

9. VOC or NOX emission offsets for

new and modified major sources.

10. VOC or NOX emission offsets for

new and modified minor sources.

11. An increase in the ratio of

emission offsets required for new

sources.

12. VOC or NOX controls on new

minor sources (less than 100 tons).

Kentucky’s and Indiana’s submittals

adequately address the five basic

components which comprise a

maintenance plan (attainment

inventory, maintenance demonstration,

monitoring network, verification of

continued attainment, and a

contingency plan) and, therefore, satisfy

the maintenance plan requirement.

Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets

In addition to meeting the criteria for

redesignation, as a control strategy SIP,

the maintenance plans must contain

motor vehicle emissions budgets that, in

conjunction with emissions from all

other sources, are consistent with

attainment and maintenance. Kentucky,

Indiana, and APCDJC developed MVEBs

for the maintenance plan year of 2012.

The MVEBs are for both VOC and NOX

as precursors to ozone formation and

would be applicable for the entire

Louisville area upon the effective date

of a final approval or a MVEB adequacy

finding.

In order to develop the MVEBs, motor

vehicle emissions were projected to

2012 using the MOBILE5b emission

factor model and associated modeling

tools. The transportation conformity

regulations also allow for a safety

margin to be allocated to a MVEB to the

extent that the total projected emissions

are less than the total attainment year

emissions. The States calculated draft

safety margins for both NOX and VOC

using a slightly different methodology

than indicated in the definition of a

safety margin in the conformity rule.

The States calculated the difference

between the 1999 attainment year onroad mobile source inventory and the

2012 projected on-road mobile source

emissions. This methodology produces

an acceptable NOX MVEB. However, as

discussed above, the 2012 projected

VOC emissions, including the draft VOC

MVEB, exceed the 1999 attainment year

VOC emissions. The States’ draft

maintenance plan provides for a VOC

MVEB of 50.93 tons/day (the 2012

projected motor vehicle emissions,

36.04 tons/day, plus a safety margin of

14.89 tons/day). Since this MVEB, along

with the other emissions projected for

2012, would exceed the 1999 emissions,

the maintenance plans must be revised

prior to final submission. In response to

this concern, Kentucky and Indiana

submitted letters indicating their intent

to revise the draft maintenance plans so

that the final maintenance plans will

include a VOC MVEB of 48.17 tons/day,

2.76 tons/day less than the MVEB

included in the draft. This MVEB is

comprised of the 2012 projected motor

vehicle emissions, 36.04 tons/day, and a

safety margin of 12.13 tons/day (2.76

tons/day less than the draft safety

margin). Based on this change that the

States intend to make in their final

submittals, EPA is proposing to approve

the maintenance plans and MVEBs as

long as the final plan is revised to

include a VOC MVEB of no more than

48.17 tons/day.

TABLE 9.—PROPOSED 2012 MVEB FOR THE LOUISVILLE NONATTAINMENT AREA

Pollutant

2012 projected

emissions (tons/

day)

State draft safety

margin (tons/day)

State draft 2012

projected MVEB

(tons/day)

Allowable safety

margin (tons/day)

Allowable 2012

MVEB (tons/day)

VOC ....................................................... 36.04 14.89 50.93 12.13 48.17

NOX ........................................................ 57.01 35.92 92.93 35.92 92.93

One of the control programs the States

considered in developing their MVEBs

is the Tier II emission standards for

vehicles and the low sulfur gasoline

(Tier II/Low Sulfur) reductions that will

be implemented beginning in 2004. The

Tier II/Low Sulfur standards were

promulgated as federal rules February

10, 2000 (65 FR 6697). The rules require

more stringent emission limitations for

vehicles on a grams per mile of NOX

basis. The rules also require that the

sulfur levels in gasoline be significantly

less than current levels.

The States estimated the reduction

provided by the Tier II/Low Sulfur

gasoline program by using ‘‘Information

Sheet #8 Tier II Benefits Using MOBILE

5b’’, an EPA-supplied information sheet,

to adjust the MOBILE5b emission

factors for 2012. This information sheet

notes that users need to be aware of the

serious limitations of the information in

certain situations. The model used to

derive the estimates of Tier II reductions

incorporates changes proposed for

MOBILE6 that are unrelated to the Tier

33518 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2001 / Proposed Rules

II program and, as a result, produces

baseline emissions estimates that are

different from those produced by

MOBILE5. In the absence of MOBILE6,

users will apply these reductions to

baseline emissions calculated using

versions of MOBILE5. As a result, the

final inventories estimated using this

method may be substantially different

from what will be estimated once

MOBILE6 becomes available.

For this reason, when this information

sheet is used to estimate the reductions

achieved by the Tier II/Low Sulfur

program, EPA has required a

commitment from affected areas that the

MVEBs will be recalculated after the

release of MOBILE6. This commitment

is discussed in more detail in a

November 8, 1999, memorandum

entitled ‘‘1-Hour Ozone Attainment

Demonstrations and Tier 2/Sulfur

Rulemaking’’ from Lydia N. Wegman,

Director, Air Quality Strategies and

Standards Division, Office of Air

Quality Planning and Standards and

Merrylin Zaw-Mon, Director, Fuels and

Energy Division, Office of Mobile

Sources to EPA Regions I—VI Air

Directors. This memorandum requires

areas that rely in whole or in part on the

Tier II/Low Sulfur program emission

reductions to help demonstrate

attainment to commit to recalculate and

resubmit MVEBs, as a formal SIP

revision, within 1 year after the release

of MOBILE6. Subsequently, in a July 28,

2000 Federal Register action (65 FR

46383), EPA proposed to provide 1-hour

ozone nonattainment areas classified as

serious and severe an option, under

which States could commit to revise

their MVEBs 2 years following the

release of MOBILE6, provided that

conformity is not determined without

adequate MOBILE6 SIP MVEBs during

the second year.

While this memorandum and Federal

Register proposal specifically address

attainment demonstrations for the 1-

hour ozone nonattainment areas

classified as serious and severe, EPA

believes that the commitment is

applicable to any area that has estimated

the reductions from the Tier II/Low

Sulfur program and is depending on

those reductions for attainment or

maintenance. Indiana and Kentucky did

not include this commitment in their

draft submittal but have submitted

letters stating their intent to include, in

their final documents, a commitment to

revise their MVEBs 2 years following

the release of MOBILE6, recognizing

that conformity may not be determined

without adequate MOBILE6 SIP MVEBs

during the second year. EPA can only

take final approval action on this

redesignation request if the States make

this commitment in their final

submittals. If this commitment is made,

but either State fails to meet it, the EPA

could make a finding of failure to

implement the SIP, which would start a

sanctions clock under CAA section 179.

Indiana’s and Kentucky’s letters also

indicate that they intend to revise the

VOC MVEB, reducing the safety margin,

so that the 2012 projected emission

inventory is less than the 1999

attainment year. Provided the States

appropriately revise the VOC MVEB and

submit enforceable commitments to

revise their MVEBs using MOBILE6, the

EPA is proposing to approve their

maintenance plans, redesignation

requests and MVEBs.

EPA is also proposing to clarify what

will occur if the EPA finalizes approval

of these MVEBs based on the States’

commitments to revise the budgets in

the future. If this occurs, the approved

SIP MVEBs will apply for conformity

purposes only until the revised MVEBs

have been submitted and the EPA has

found the submitted MVEBs to be

adequate for conformity purposes.

In other words, when the States fulfill

their commitment to submit revised

MVEBs, if the EPA finds those MVEBs

to be adequate for conformity purposes,

those revised MVEBs will apply for

conformity purposes as soon as

affirmative adequacy findings are

effective. Provided these revised MVEBs

are submitted as revisions to the

maintenance plans’ 2012 MVEBs, they

would also replace the MVEBs in the

approved maintenance plans at the time

that the affirmative adequacy findings

are effective.

Since the EPA is proposing to approve

the MVEBs that were submitted with

their redesignation request only because

the States have committed to revise

these MVEBs, EPA wants its approval of

these MVEBs to last only until adequate

revised MVEBs are submitted pursuant

to the commitments. EPA believes the

revised MVEBs should apply as soon as

they are found adequate. EPA does not

believe it is necessary to wait until they

have been approved as revisions to the

maintenance plan. This is because EPA

knows now that if the revised MVEBs

are found adequate, they will be more

appropriate than the originally

approved budgets for conformity

purposes.

EPA also recognizes that an accurate

estimate of the benefits of the Tier II/

Low Sulfur program cannot be made

until the MOBILE6 model is released.

EPA is proposing to approve MVEBs

based on interim approximations of Tier

II/Low Sulfur benefits only because the

States are committing to recalculate the

MVEBs using MOBILE6 in a timely

fashion. According to this proposal,

revised MVEBs could be used for

conformity after the EPA has completed

the adequacy review process, provided

the submitted MVEBs are deemed

adequate.

If revised MVEBs raise issues about

the sufficiency of the maintenance

demonstration, EPA will work with the

States on a case-by-case basis. If the

revised MVEBs show that MVEBs are

lower than EPA is proposing to approve

today, a reassessment of the

maintenance plans must be done before

the States can reallocate any of the

emission reductions or assign them to

an MVEB as a safety margin. In other

words, the States must assess how their

original maintenance plan is impacted

by using MOBILE6 vs. MOBILE5 before

they reallocate any apparent motor

vehicle emission reductions resulting

from the use of MOBILE6.

This Federal Register action does not

propose any change to the existing

transportation conformity rule or to the

way it is normally implemented with

respect to other submitted and approved

SIPs, which do not contain

commitments to revise the MVEBs.

F. Where Is the Public Record and

Where Do I Send Comments?

The official record for this proposed

rule has been established under SIP

submittal numbers KY–126 and IN–

121–2 and is located at the addresses in

the ADDRESSES section at the beginning

of this document. The addresses for

sending comments are also provided in

the ADDRESSES section at the beginning

of this document.

Public comments are solicited on the

EPA’s proposed rulemaking action.

Public comments received in writing by

July 23, 2001 will be considered in the

development of the EPA’s final

rulemaking action.

III. Administrative Requirements

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. This

action merely proposes to approve State

law as meeting federal requirements and

imposes no additional requirements

beyond those imposed by State law.

Accordingly, the Administrator certifies

that this proposed rule will not have a

significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this

proposed rule to approve pre-existing

requirements under State law and does

not impose any additional enforceable

duty beyond that required by State law,

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 121 / Friday, June 22, 2001 / Proposed Rules 33519

it does not contain any unfunded

mandate or significantly or uniquely

affect small governments, as described

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

of 1995 (Public Law 104–4). This

proposed rule also does not have a

substantial direct effect on one or more

Indian tribes, on the relationship

between the Federal Government and

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of

power and responsibilities between the

Federal Government and Indian tribes,

as specified by Executive Order 13175

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor

will it 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), because it merely

proposes to approve a State rule

implementing a federal standard, and

does not alter the relationship or the

distribution of power and

responsibilities established in the CAA.

This proposed rule also is not subject to

Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885,

April 23, 1997), because it is not

economically significant.

In reviewing SIP submissions, the

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), the EPA has no

authority to disapprove a SIP

submission for failure to use VCS. It

would thus be inconsistent with

applicable law for the EPA, when it

reviews a SIP submission, to use VCS in

place of a SIP 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. As required by

section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61

FR 4729, February 7, 1996), in issuing

this proposed rule, the EPA has taken

the necessary steps to eliminate drafting

errors and ambiguity, minimize

potential litigation, and provide a clear

legal standard for affected conduct. EPA

has complied with Executive Order

12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by

examining the takings implications of

the rule in accordance with the

‘‘Attorney General’s Supplemental

Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk

and Avoidance of Unanticipated

Takings’’ issued under the executive

order. This proposed rule does not

impose an information collection

burden under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44

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

List of Subjects

40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Intergovernmental

relations, Ozone, Reporting and

recordkeeping requirements, Volatile

organic compounds.

40 CFR Part 81

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control.

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401–7671q.

Dated: June 7, 2001.

A. Stanley Meiburg,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

Dated: June 14, 2001.

David A. Ullrich,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

[FR Doc. 01–15748 Filed 6–21–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P