59338 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Notices 

opcwansley_decision2002(remanded) 

.pdf. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Art 

Hofmeister, Air Permits Section, EPA 

Region 4, at (404) 562–9115 or 

hofmeister.art@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Georgia Center for Law in the Public 

Interest originally submitted a petition 

on behalf of the Sierra Club (Petitioner) 

to the Administrator on February 4, 

2002, requesting that EPA object to a 

state title V operating permit issued by 

the EPD to Oglethorpe. Other 

inconsistencies (with the Act) alleged by 

the Petitioner were: (1) That the permit 

failed to require a case-by-case 

maximum achievable control 

technology determination for the 

emissions of hazardous air pollutants; 

(2) that the permit failed to include 

adequate monitoring of carbon 

monoxide; (3) that the permit 

impermissibly limited the enforceability 

of a federal stack height provision; and 

(4) that the permit failed to include 

short-term best available control 

technology limits. EPA’s responses to 

the above issues in the November 12, 

2002, Order were upheld by the Court; 

therefore, sections IV.B. through IV.E. of 

the November 12, 2002, Order are 

incorporated by reference into the Order 

Responding to Remand. 

Dated: October 5, 2005. 

J. I. Palmer, Jr., 

Regional Administrator, Region 4. 

[FR Doc. 05–20416 Filed 10–11–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[A–1–FRL–7982–5] 

Approval of Air Quality Implementation 

Plan Commitment to Submit MidCourse Review; Massachusetts, New 

Hampshire and Rhode Island 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice of commitment 

fulfillment. 

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that 

the states of Massachusetts, New 

Hampshire and Rhode Island have 

fulfilled the enforceable commitment 

each state made to EPA to complete a 

mid-course review (MCR) assessing 

whether their respective nonattainment 

area was or was not making sufficient 

progress toward attainment of the onehour ozone standard under the Clean 

Air Act (CAA). EPA has reviewed the 

MCR documents submitted by 

Massachusetts, New Hampshire and 

Rhode Island and has determined that 

each state has adequately met its 

commitment to perform a MCR. EPA has 

sent a letter to each state approving their 

respective MCR as fulfilling the 

commitment made by each state in their 

1-hour ozone attainment demonstration. 

ADDRESSES: Copies of each state’s MCR 

submittal, EPA’s approval letters and 

EPA’s technical support document 

(TSD) are available for public inspection 

during normal business hours (9 a.m. to 

4 p.m.) at the following address: U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region 1 (New England), One Congress 

St., 11th Floor, Boston, Massachusetts, 

telephone (617) 918–1664, please 

telephone in advance before visiting. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Richard P. Burkhart, Air Quality 

Planning, Office of Ecosystem 

Protection, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, EPA New England 

Regional Office, One Congress Street, 

11th floor, (CAQ), Boston, MA 02114–

2023. Phone: 617–918–1664, Fax: (617) 

918–0664, E-mail: 

burkhart.richard@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. General Information-Copies of 

Documents 

EPA’s approval letters and TSD and 

each State’s MCR submittal are available 

at the Regional Office, which is 

identified in the ADDRESSES section 

above. Copies of these same items are 

also available for public inspection 

during normal business hours, by 

appointment at the respective State Air 

Agency Division of Air Quality Control, 

Department of Environmental 

Protection, One Winter Street, 8th Floor, 

Boston, MA 02108; Air Resources 

Division, Department of Environmental 

Services, 6 Hazen Drive, P.O. Box 95, 

Concord, NH 03302–0095; and Office of 

Air Resources, Department of 

Environmental Management, 235 

Promenade Street, Providence, RI 

02908–5767. 

II. Further Information 

A. Background 

EPA’s 1996 modeling guidance 

recognized the need to perform a midcourse review as a means for addressing 

uncertainty in the modeling results. In 

its December 16, 1999 proposed 

rulemakings on the 1-hour ozone 

attainment demonstrations for ten ozone 

nonattainment areas (see one example at 

64 FR 70348), EPA stated that because 

of the uncertainty in long-term 

projections, it believes that an 

attainment demonstration that relies on 

weight of evidence needs to contain 

provisions for periodic review of 

monitoring, emissions, and modeling 

data to assess the extent to which 

refinements to emission control 

measures are needed. In those December 

16, 1999 proposed rulemakings, EPA set 

forth its framework for reviewing and 

processing 1-hour ozone attainment 

demonstrations and one element of that 

framework was a commitment for a 

MCR. 

A MCR provides an opportunity for 

the state and EPA to assess if a 

nonattainment area is or is not making 

sufficient progress toward attainment of 

the one-hour ozone standard. The MCR 

should utilize the most recent 

monitoring and other data to assess 

whether the control measures relied on 

in a SIP’s attainment demonstration 

have resulted in adequate improvement 

of the ozone air quality. The EPA 

believes that a MCR is a critical element 

in any attainment demonstration that 

employs a long-term projection period 

and relies on a weight-of-evidence test. 

The commitment to perform a MCR was 

required before EPA would approve 

most 1-hour ozone attainment 

demonstrations. Moreover, even though 

the 1-hour ozone standard has been 

revoked by EPA (70 FR 44470, June 15, 

2005), the anti-backsliding provisions of 

EPA’s 8-hour ozone implementation 

rule (69 FR 23951, April 30, 2004) 

continue to require areas with 

outstanding commitments to perform a 

1-hour MCR to do so. 

The three 1-hour ozone 

nonattainment areas in New England 

that are the subject of this notice are as 

follows: (1) The Massachusetts portion 

of the Boston-Lawrence-Worcester, MA–

NH area, (2) the New Hampshire portion 

of the Boston-Lawrence-Worcester, MA–

NH area, and (3) the Providence, Rhode 

Island area. EPA’s final approval of the 

attainment demonstrations for both 

portions of the Boston-LawrenceWorcester, MA–NH 1-hour ozone 

nonattainment area, each with a 

commitment to perform a MCR, was 

published on December 6, 2002 (67 FR 

72574 and 67 FR 72576). EPA’s final 

approval of the attainment 

demonstration for the Providence, 

Rhode Island 1-hour ozone 

nonattainment area with the 

commitment to perform a MCR was 

published on April 7, 2003 (68 FR 

16721). 

B. MCR Guidance 

On March 28, 2002, EPA issued a 

memorandum entitled ‘‘Mid-Course 

Review Guidance for the 1-Hour Ozone 

Nonattainment Areas that Rely on 

Weight-of-Evidence for Attainment 

Demonstration.’’ Attached to that 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Notices 59339 

memorandum was a technical guidance 

document dated January 2002 entitled 

‘‘Recommended Approach For 

Performing Mid-course Review of SIP’s 

To Meet the 1-hour NAAQS for Ozone.’’

The technical guidance contains three 

basic steps: (1) Perform an 

administrative test (e.g., demonstrate 

whether the appropriate emission limits 

were adopted and implemented); (2) 

analyze available air quality, 

meteorology, emissions and modeling 

data and document findings; and (3) 

document conclusions regarding 

whether progress toward attainment is 

being made using a weight of evidence 

determination (which may or may not 

include new modeling analyses). 

C. Review of MCR Submittals from 

Massachusetts, New Hampshire and 

Rhode Island 

This section compares the content of 

each state’s MCR submittal to the 

requirements in EPA’s January 2002 

technical guidance. A TSD with more 

detail on EPA’s review has been 

prepared and is available from EPA at 

the address provided in the ADDRESSES

section above. 

1. Massachusetts MCR Submittal 

The MCR for the Massachusetts 

portion of the Boston–Lawrence–

Worcester, MA–NH 1-hour ozone 

nonattainment area was submitted by 

the Massachusetts Department of 

Environmental Protection (DEP) on 

December 23, 2004. 

i. Administrative Review 

The Massachusetts DEP lists measures 

adopted to meet CAA mandates and 

rate-of-progress (ROP) requirements. 

The MCR lists the name of the control 

strategy or measure, whether it is a state 

or federal program, the rule approval 

date, and regulatory citation. 

Massachusetts also lists additional 

control measures that were not part of 

the Massachusetts SIP and that 

Massachusetts had not yet committed to 

adopt, but that it anticipates will be 

adopted in time to provide additional 

reductions prior to the 2007 ozone 

season. The administrative review 

analysis prepared by MA DEP satisfies 

EPA requirements. 

ii. Air Quality, Meteorology, Emissions 

and Modeling Data Analysis 

The Massachusetts DEP submittal 

analyzes ozone and precursor emissions 

trends, and looks at trajectory analysis 

of ozone exceedances in eastern 

Massachusetts. The results of the ozone 

data analysis show a downward trend in 

the ozone design values for eastern 

Massachusetts. The results show that 

eastern Massachusetts has had ozone 

design values below the now-revoked 

NAAQS since the end of the 2003 ozone 

season. Since the ozone design values 

are already below the NAAQS for 1- 

hour ozone, eastern Massachusetts is 

obviously on track to reach attainment 

by its 2007 deadline. Precursor emission 

data for eastern Massachusetts for both 

Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) and Volatile 

Organic Compounds (VOC) also show a 

substantial downward trend since 1990. 

This along with the ozone trends 

discussed above definitely shows the 

eastern Massachusetts area is on track to 

achieve attainment of the 1-hour ozone 

standard by 2007. In summary, the air 

quality, meteorology, and emissions 

analysis prepared by Massachusetts DEP 

satisfies EPA requirements, and shows 

eastern Massachusetts is on target to 

achieve attainment by 2007. 

iii. Document Conclusions Regarding 

Whether Progress Toward Attainment Is 

Being Made Using a Weight of Evidence 

Determination 

The Massachusetts MCR document 

states that ‘‘Massachusetts is fully 

implementing all control programs 

identified in the 2002 attainment 

demonstration. All regional and federal 

programs from which additional 

reductions were anticipated are being 

implemented according to schedule. 

Trajectory analyses results continue to 

demonstrate that high ozone 

concentrations at the Fairhaven and 

Truro monitors in EMA [eastern 

Massachusetts] are largely due to ozone 

transport from upwind areas.’’ The 

document goes on to state that ozone 

design values and 1-hour ozone levels 

continue to trend downward in eastern 

Massachusetts, furthermore ozone 

precursor trends are also downward, 

and provides data to back up these 

claims. EPA agrees with the 

Massachusetts DEP analysis. 

After reviewing the Massachusetts 

MCR with respect to EPA guidance, EPA 

concludes that the Massachusetts DEP 

has submitted an acceptable MCR 

fulfilling the commitment 

Massachusetts made in its one-hour 

attainment demonstration for the 

Massachusetts portion of the Boston–

Lawrence–Worcester, MA–NH serious 

1-hour zone nonattainment area. 

2. New Hampshire MCR Submittal 

The MCR for the New Hampshire 

portion of the Boston–Lawrence–

Worcester MA–NH 1-hour ozone 

nonattainment area was submitted by 

the New Hampshire Department of 

Environmental Services (DES) on 

December 30, 2004. 

i. Administrative Review 

The New Hampshire MCR lists all the 

measures that have been implemented 

and approved by EPA into the NH SIP. 

The document goes on to list additional 

control measures that will impact ozone 

precursor emissions in New Hampshire 

in a positive way. This section fulfills 

the required administrative review. 

ii. Air Quality, Meteorology, Emissions 

and Modeling Data Analysis 

The New Hampshire MCR contains 

air quality, meteorology, and emissions 

analysis for southern New Hampshire. 

New Hampshire states and EPA agrees 

that 1-hour design values in all areas of 

New Hampshire have been below the 

level of the 1-hour ozone standard since 

1998. However, this nonattainment area 

is a part of the eastern Massachusetts 1- 

hour nonattainment area so air quality 

in the entire multi-state area should be 

reviewed. Based on the Massachusetts 

MCR discussed above, it appears that 

the entire area (both the Massachusetts 

portion and the New Hampshire 

portion) is on target to achieve 

attainment by 2007. 

New Hampshire also examined 

emission trends for the four counties in 

southern New Hampshire. The trends in 

both VOC and NOX between 1996 and 

2007 are both downward. The trends in 

both VOC and NOX between 2002 and 

2007 are also downward. Based on New 

Hampshire’s ozone and precursors 

emission analysis coupled with 

Massachusetts’ similar analysis, this 

area is on target to attain by 2007 and 

thus this requirement is fulfilled. 

iii. Document Conclusions Regarding 

Whether Progress Toward Attainment Is 

Being Made Using a Weight of Evidence 

Determination 

New Hampshire documents several 

key parameters that show the State is on 

track to achieve attainment by 2007. 

First, all portions of New Hampshire, 

not just the nonattainment area, are 

currently meeting the 1-hour NAAQS 

for ozone. One-hour ozone design 

values continue to trend even lower. 

Ozone precursor emissions within New 

Hampshire continue to trend 

downward. New Hampshire uses 

trajectory modeling and references to 

additional photochemical ozone gridpoint modeling to add additional 

evidence to their MCR demonstration. 

The trajectories show that at the two 

sites in Eastern Massachusetts that have 

1-hour air quality near the 1-hour 

NAAQS, New Hampshire emissions 

have no impact. The photochemical 

modeling referenced by New Hampshire 

also shows that lower ozone values are 

59340 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 196 / Wednesday, October 12, 2005 / Notices 

forecast for 2007. The New Hampshire 

submittal meets this requirement. 

The New Hampshire DES has 

submitted an acceptable MCR and has 

fulfilled the commitment it made in its 

one-hour ozone attainment 

demonstration for the Boston–

Lawrence–Worcester MA–NH serious 1- 

hour zone nonattainment area. 

3. Rhode Island MCR Submittal 

The MCR for the Rhode Island 1-hour 

ozone nonattainment area was 

submitted on June 16, 2005. 

i. Administrative Review 

The Rhode Island MCR states that 

Rhode Island is on track to implement 

all of the state and federal emission 

control measures required by the CAA. 

The section goes further to state that 

Rhode Island has already achieved 

attainment for the one-hour ozone 

standard, and states that with the 

additional ozone precursor reductions 

that will occur both in Rhode Island and 

upwind of Rhode Island, one-hour 

ozone concentrations will continue to 

decline into the future. 

ii. Air Quality, Meteorology, Emissions 

and Modeling Data Analysis 

As stated above, Rhode Island 

presents evidence that it has already 

achieved attainment of the one-hour 

ozone standard. All design values for 

one-hour ozone are below 124 ppb. 

Rhode Island also provides ozone trends 

and trajectory analyses that support the 

findings that ozone in Rhode Island is 

below the 1-hour NAAQS and will 

continue to decline in the future. The 

trajectories show that upwind emissions 

affect ozone in Rhode Island and these 

emissions will continue to decline in 

the future lowering ozone in Rhode 

Island even more. 

iii. Document Conclusions Regarding 

Whether Progress Toward Attainment Is 

Being Made Using a Weight of Evidence 

Determination 

Rhode Island has already achieved 

attainment of the one-hour standard. 

This requirement is met. 

After reviewing Rhode Island’s MCR 

submittal, EPA agrees with Rhode 

Island that it has already achieved 

attainment of the one-hour ozone 

NAAQS and approves the Rhode Island 

submittal as fulfilling the commitment 

Rhode Island made in its one-hour 

attainment demonstration. 

III. Final Action 

EPA has reviewed the MCR 

documents submitted by Massachusetts, 

New Hampshire and Rhode Island and 

has determined that each state has 

adequately met its commitment to 

perform a MCR. This action is being 

taken for the following one-hour 

nonattainment areas: (1) The 

Massachusetts portion of the Boston–

Lawrence–Worcester, MA–NH area, (2) 

the New Hampshire portion of the 

Boston–Lawrence–Worcester, MA–NH 

area, and (3) the Providence, Rhode 

Island area. EPA has sent a letter to each 

state approving their respective MCR as 

fulfilling the commitment made by each 

state in their 1-hour ozone attainment 

demonstration. Copies of these letters 

are available from EPA at the address 

provided in the ADDRESSES section 

above. 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

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. For 

this reason, this action is also not 

subject to Executive Order 13211, 

‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

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

22, 2001). This action merely approves 

the states’ mid-course review as meeting 

federal requirements and imposes no 

additional requirements beyond those 

imposed by state law. Accordingly, the 

Administrator certifies that this action 

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 

action approves pre-existing 

requirements under state law and does 

not impose any additional enforceable 

duty beyond that required by state law, 

it does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). 

This action also does not have tribal 

implications because it will not have a 

substantial direct effect on one or more 

Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes, 

as specified by Executive Order 13175 

(65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This 

action also does not have federalism 

implications because it does not have 

substantial direct effects on the states, 

on the relationship between the national 

government and the states, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, as specified in 

Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, 

August 10, 1999), because it merely 

approves a state demonstration that the 

state is implementing a federal standard, 

and does not alter the relationship or 

the distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the Clean 

Air Act. This action also is not subject 

to Executive Order 13045 ‘‘Protection of 

Children from Environmental Health 

Risks and Safety Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, 

April 23, 1997), because it is not 

economically significant. 

In reviewing SIP submissions as well 

as submission of reports that fulfill a 

state commitment, EPA’s role is to 

approve state choices, provided that 

they meet the criteria of the Clean Air 

Act. In this context, in the absence of a 

prior existing requirement for the state 

to use voluntary consensus standards 

(VCS), EPA has no authority to 

disapprove a SIP submission or a SIP 

commitment for failure to use VCS. It 

would thus be inconsistent with 

applicable law for EPA, when it reviews 

a SIP submission or a SIP commitment, 

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission 

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of 

the Clean Air Act. 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. This action does 

not impose an information collection 

burden under the provisions of the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

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

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

Dated: September 26, 2005. 

Robert W. Varney, 

Regional Administrator, EPA New England. 

[FR Doc. 05–20420 Filed 10–11–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–U 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

[OPP–2005–0101; FRL–7740–9] 

Pesticide Program Dialogue 

Committee Meeting 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal 

Advisory Committee Act, EPA gives 

notice of a public meeting of the 

Pesticide Program Dialogue Committee 

(PPDC) on October 20 and 21, 2005. A 

draft agenda has been developed and is 

posted on EPA’s web site. Agenda topics 

will include: Pesticide performance 

measures; human studies; farmworker 

safety; spray drift; Pesticide Registration 

Improvement Act Workgroup on Process 

Improvements Update; integrated 

testing strategy and vision; updates on