Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 213 / Friday, November 4, 2005 / Proposed Rules 67109 

TABLE NO. 3.—RESIDUAL FUNCTIONAL CAPACITY: MAXIMUM SUSTAINED WORK CAPABILITY LIMITED TO MEDIUM WORK AS

A RESULT OF SEVERE MEDICALLY DETERMINABLE IMPAIRMENT(S) 

Rule Age Education Previous work 

experience Decision 

203.01 ............ Advanced age, 

age 62 or 

older.

Marginal or 

none.

Unskilled or 

none.

Disabled. 

* * * * * * * 

203.10 ............ Advanced age, 

age 57–61.

Limited or less None ............... Disabled. 

* * * * * * * 

* * * * * 

PART 416—SUPPLEMENTAL 

SECURITY INCOME FOR THE AGED, 

BLIND, AND DISABLED 

Subpart I—[Amended] 

8. The authority citation for subpart I 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Secs. 702(a)(5), 1611, 1614, 

1619, 1631(a), (c), and (d)(1), and 1633 of the 

Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 902(a)(5), 

1382, 1382c, 1382h, 1383(a), (c), and (d)(1), 

and 1383(b); secs. 4(c) and 5, 6(c)–(e), 14(a), 

and 15, Pub. L. 98–460, 98 Stat. 1794, 1801, 

1802, and 1808 (42 U.S.C. 421 note, 423 note, 

1382h note). 

9. Amend § 416.962 by revising the 

paragraph heading and the first sentence 

of paragraph (b) to read as follows: 

§ 416.962 Medical-vocational profiles 

showing an inability to make an adjustment 

to other work. 

* * * * * 

(b) If you are at least 57 years old, 

have no more than a limited education, 

and have no past relevant work 

experience. If you have a severe, 

medically determinable impairment(s) 

(see §§ 416.920(c), 416.921, and 

416.923), are of advanced age (age 57 or 

older, see § 416.963), have a limited 

education or less (see § 416.964), and 

have no past relevant work experience 

(see § 416.965), we will find you 

disabled. * * * 

10. Amend § 416.963 by revising 

paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) to read as 

follows: 

§ 416.963 Your age as a vocational factor. 

* * * * * 

(c) Younger person. If you are a 

younger person (under age 52), we 

generally do not consider that your age 

will seriously affect your ability to 

adjust to other work. However, in some 

circumstances, we consider that persons 

age 47–51 are more limited in their 

ability to adjust to other work than 

persons who have not attained age 47. 

See Rule 201.17 in appendix 2 of 

subpart P of part 404 of this chapter. 

(d) Person closely approaching 

advanced age. If you are closely 

approaching advanced age (age 52–56), 

we will consider that your age along 

with a severe impairment(s) and limited 

work experience may seriously affect 

your ability to adjust to other work. 

(e) Person of advanced age. We 

consider that at advanced age (age 57 or 

older) age significantly affects a person’s 

ability to adjust to other work. We have 

special rules for persons of advanced 

age, including persons in this category 

who are age 62 or older. See 

§ 416.968(d)(4). 

* * * * * 

11. Amend § 416.968 by revising the 

first, fifth, and sixth sentences of 

paragraph (d)(4) to read as follows: 

§ 416.968 Skill requirements. 

* * * * * 

(d) Skills that can be used in other 

work (transferability). 

* * * * * 

(4) Transferability of skills for 

individuals of advanced age. If you are 

of advanced age (age 57 or older), and 

you have a severe impairment(s) that 

limits you to sedentary or light work, we 

will find that you cannot make an 

adjustment to other work unless you 

have skills that you can transfer to other 

skilled or semiskilled work (or you have 

recently completed education which 

provides for direct entry into skilled 

work) that you can do despite your 

impairment(s). * * * If you are of 

advanced age but have not attained age 

62, and you have a severe impairment(s) 

that limits you to no more than light 

work, we will apply the rules in 

paragraphs (d)(1) through (d)(3) of this 

section to decide if you have skills that 

are transferable to skilled or semiskilled 

light work (see § 416.967(b)). If you are 

age 62 or older and you have a severe 

impairment(s) that limits you to no 

more than light work, we will find that 

you have skills that are transferable to 

skilled or semiskilled light work only if 

the light work is so similar to your 

previous work that you would need to 

make very little, if any, vocational 

adjustment in terms of tools, work 

processes, work settings, or the 

industry. * * * 

[FR Doc. 05–21975 Filed 11–3–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4191–02–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Parts 52 and 81 

[R03–OAR–2005–VA–0013; FRL–7993–6] 

Approval and Promulgation of Air 

Quality Implementation Plans; Virginia; 

Redesignation of the Shenandoah 

National Park Ozone Nonattainment 

Area To Attainment and Approval of 

the Area’s Maintenance Plan 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve 

a redesignation request and a State 

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision 

submitted by the Commonwealth of 

Virginia. The Virginia Department of 

Environmental Quality (VADEQ) is 

requesting that the Shenandoah 

National Park area (the SNP area) be 

redesignated as attainment for the 8- 

hour ozone national ambient air quality 

standard (NAAQS). In conjunction with 

its redesignation request, the VADEQ 

submitted a SIP revision consisting of a 

maintenance plan for the SNP area that 

provides for continued attainment of the 

8-hour ozone NAAQS for the next 10 

years. EPA is proposing to make a 

determination that the SNP area has 

attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS based 

upon three years of complete, qualityassured ambient air quality ozone 

monitoring data for 2002–2004. EPA’s 

proposed approval of the 8-hour ozone 

redesignation request is based on its 

67110 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 213 / Friday, November 4, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

determination that the SNP area has met 

the criteria for redesignation to 

attainment specified in the Clean Air 

Act (CAA). EPA is providing 

information on the status of its 

adequacy determination for the motor 

vehicle emission budgets (MVEBs) that 

are identified in the maintenance plan 

for the SNP area for purposes of 

transportation conformity, and is also 

proposing to approve those MVEBs. 

EPA is proposing approval of the 

redesignation request and of the 

maintenance plan revision to the 

Virginia SIP in accordance with the 

requirements of the CAA. 

DATES: Written comments must be 

received on or before December 5, 2005. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Regional Material in 

EDocket (RME) ID Number R03–OAR–

2005–VA–0013 by one of the following 

methods: 

Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Agency Web site: http:// 

docket.epa.gov/rmepub/RME, EPA’s 

electronic public docket and comment 

system, is EPA’s preferred method for 

receiving comments. Follow the on-line 

instructions for submitting comments. 

E-mail: morris.makeba@epa.gov. 

Mail: R03–OAR–2005–VA–0013, 

Makeba Morris, Chief, Air Quality 

Planning Branch, Mailcode 3AP21, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Hand Delivery: At the previouslylisted EPA Region III address. Such 

deliveries are only accepted during the 

Docket’s normal hours of operation, and 

special arrangements should be made 

for deliveries of boxed information. 

Instructions: Direct your comments to 

RME ID No. R03–OAR–2005–VA–0013. 

EPA’s policy is that all comments 

received will be included in the public 

docket without change, and may be 

made available online at http:// 

docket.epa.gov/rmepub/, including any 

personal information provided, unless 

the comment includes information 

claimed to be Confidential Business 

Information (CBI) or other information 

whose disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Do not submit information that you 

consider to be CBI or otherwise 

protected through RME, regulations.gov 

or e-mail. The EPA RME and the Federal 

regulations.gov Web sites are an 

‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which 

means EPA will not know your identity 

or contact information unless you 

provide it in the body of your comment. 

If you send an e-mail comment directly 

to EPA without going through RME or 

regulations.gov, your e-mail address 

will be automatically captured and 

included as part of the comment that is 

placed in the public docket and made 

available on the Internet. If you submit 

an electronic comment, EPA 

recommends that you include your 

name and other contact information in 

the body of your comment and with any 

disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA 

cannot read your comment due to 

technical difficulties and cannot contact 

you for clarification, EPA may not be 

able to consider your comment. 

Electronic files should avoid the use of 

special characters, any form of 

encryption, and be free of any defects or 

viruses. 

Docket: All documents in the 

electronic docket are listed in the RME 

index at http://docket.epa.gov/rmepub/. 

Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, 

i.e., CBI or other information whose 

disclosure is restricted by statute. 

Certain other material, such as 

copyrighted material, is not placed on 

the Internet and will be publicly 

available only in hard copy form. 

Publicly available docket materials are 

available either electronically in RME or 

in hard copy during normal business 

hours at the Air Protection Division, 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103. 

Copies of the State submittal are 

available at the Virginia Department of 

Environmental Quality, 629 East Main 

Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Amy Caprio, (215) 814–2156, or by email at caprio.amy@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document whenever 

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

EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. What Actions are EPA Proposing to Take? 

II. What is the Background for These 

Proposed Actions? 

III. What are the Criteria for Redesignation to 

Attainment? 

IV. Why is EPA Taking These Actions? 

V. What Would be the Effect of these 

Actions? 

VI. What is EPA’s Analysis of the 

Commonwealth’s Request? 

VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions 

Budgets Established and Identified in the 

Maintenance Plan for the Shenandoah 

National Park Area Adequate and 

Approvable? 

VIII. General Information Pertaining to SIP 

Submittals for the Commonwealth of 

Virginia 

IX. Proposed Action 

X. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. What Actions Are EPA Proposing to 

Take? 

On September 21, 2005, VADEQ 

formally submitted a request to 

redesignate the SNP area from 

nonattainment to attainment of the 8- 

hour NAAQS for ozone. On September 

23, 2005, Virginia submitted a 

maintenance plan for the SNP area as a 

SIP revision, to ensure continued 

attainment over the next 10 years. The 

SNP area is composed of those portions 

of Page and Madison Counties located 

within the boundaries of Shenandoah 

National Park. It is currently designated 

as a basic 8-hour ozone nonattainment 

area. EPA is proposing to determine that 

the SNP area has attained the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS and that it has met the 

requirements for redesignation pursuant 

to section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA. EPA 

is, therefore, proposing to approve the 

redesignation request to change the 

designation of the SNP area from 

nonattainment to attainment for the 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. EPA is also 

proposing to approve the maintenance 

plan SIP revision for the area, such 

approval being one of the CAA 

requirements for approval of a 

redesignation request. The maintenance 

plan is designed to ensure continued 

attainment in the SNP area for the next 

10 years. Additionally, EPA is 

announcing its action on the adequacy 

process for the MVEBs identified in the 

maintenance plan, and proposing to 

approve the MVEBs identified for 

volatile organic compounds (VOC) and 

nitrogen oxides (NOX) for the SNP area 

for transportation conformity purposes. 

II. What Is the Background for These 

Proposed Actions? 

A. General 

Ground-level ozone is not emitted 

directly by sources. Rather, emissions of 

NOX and VOC react in the presence of 

sunlight to form ground-level ozone. 

The air pollutants NOX and VOC are 

referred to as precursors of ozone. The 

CAA establishes a process for air quality 

management through the attainment and 

maintenance of the NAAQS. 

On July 18, 1997, EPA promulgated a 

revised 8-hour ozone standard of 0.08 

parts per million (ppm). This new 

standard is more stringent than the 

previous 1-hour ozone standard. EPA 

designated, as nonattainment, any area 

violating the 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

based on the air quality data for the 

three years of 2001–2003. These were 

the most recent three years of data at the 

time EPA designated 8-hour areas. The 

SNP area was designated as basic 8-hour 

ozone nonattainment status in a Federal 

Register notice signed on April 25, 2004 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 213 / Friday, November 4, 2005 / Proposed Rules 67111 

and published on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 

23857). 

The CAA, Title I, part D, contains two 

sets of provisions—subpart 1 and 

subpart 2—that address planning and 

control requirements for nonattainment 

areas. Subpart 1(which EPA refers to as 

‘‘basic’’ nonattainment) contains 

general, less prescriptive requirements 

for nonattainment areas for any 

pollutant—including ozone—governed 

by a NAAQS. Subpart 2 (which EPA 

refers to as ‘‘classified’’ nonattainment) 

provides more specific requirements for 

ozone nonattainment areas. Some 8- 

hour ozone nonattainment areas are 

subject only to the provisions of subpart 

1. Other areas are also subject to the 

provisions of subpart 2. Under EPA’s 8- 

hour ozone implementation rule, signed 

on April 15, 2004, an area was classified 

under subpart 2 based on its 8-hour 

ozone design value (i.e., the 3-year 

average annual fourth-highest daily 

maximum 8-hour average ozone 

concentration), if it had a 1-hour design 

value at or above 0.121 ppm (the lowest 

1-hour design value in the CAA for 

subpart 2 requirements). All other areas 

are covered under subpart 1, based upon 

their 8-hour design values. In 2004, the 

SNP area was designated a basic 8-hour 

ozone nonattainment area based upon 

air quality monitoring data from 2001–

2003, and is subject to the requirements 

of subpart 1. 

Under 40 CFR part 50, the 8-hour 

ozone standard is attained when the 3- 

year average of the annual fourthhighest daily maximum 8-hour average 

ambient air quality ozone 

concentrations is less than or equal to 

0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when 

rounding is considered). See 69 FR 

23857, (April 30, 2004) for further 

information. Ambient air quality 

monitoring data for the 3-year period 

must meet data completeness 

requirements. The data completeness 

requirements are met when the average 

percent of days with valid ambient 

monitoring data is greater than 90 

percent, and no single year has less than 

75 percent data completeness as 

determined in Appendix I of 40 CFR 

part 50. The ozone monitoring data from 

the 3-year period of 2002–2004 

indicates that the SNP area has a design 

value of 0.082 ppm. Therefore, the 

ambient ozone data for the SNP area 

indicates no violations of the 8-hour 

ozone standard. Available preliminary 

monitoring data for 2005 indicates 

continued attainment of the 8-hour 

ozone standard. 

B. The Shenandoah National Park Area 

The SNP area consists of those 

portions of Page and Madison Counties 

located within the boundaries of the 

Shenandoah National Park. Prior to its 

designation as an 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area, the SNP area was 

designated as an attainment area for the 

1-hour ozone nonattainment NAAQS. 

On September 21, 2005, the VADEQ 

requested that the SNP area be 

redesignated to attainment for the 8- 

hour ozone standard. The redesignation 

request included 3 years of complete, 

quality-assured data for the period of 

2002–2004, indicating that the 8-hour 

NAAQS for ozone had been achieved for 

the SNP area. The data satisfies the CAA 

requirements when the 3-year average of 

the annual fourth-highest daily 

maximum 8-hour average ozone 

concentration (commonly referred to as 

the area’s design value) is less than or 

equal to 0.08 ppm (i.e., 0.084 ppm when 

rounding is considered). Under the 

CAA, a nonattainment area may be 

redesignated if sufficient complete, 

quality-assured data is available to 

determine that the area has attained the 

standard and the area meets the other 

CAA redesignation requirements set 

forth in section 107(d)(3)(E). 

III. What Are the Criteria for 

Redesignation to Attainment? 

The CAA provides the requirements 

for redesignating a nonattainment area 

to attainment. Specifically, section 

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

redesignation, providing that: 

(1) EPA determines that the area has 

attained the applicable NAAQS; 

(2) EPA has fully approved the 

applicable implementation plan for the 

area under section 110(k); 

(3) EPA 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) EPA has fully approved a 

maintenance plan for the area as 

meeting the requirements of section 

175A; 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: 

• ‘‘Ozone and Carbon Monoxide 

Design Value Calculations’’, 

Memorandum from Bill Laxton, June 18, 

1990; 

• ‘‘Maintenance Plans for 

Redesignation of Ozone and Carbon 

Monoxide Nonattainment Areas,’’

Memorandum from G.T. Helms, Chief, 

Ozone/Carbon Monoxide Programs 

Branch, April 30, 1992; 

• ‘‘Contingency Measures for Ozone 

and Carbon Monoxide (CO) 

Redesignations,’’ Memorandum from G. 

T. Helms, Chief, Ozone/Carbon 

Monoxide Programs Branch, June 1, 

1992; 

• ‘‘Procedures for Processing 

Requests to Redesignate Areas to 

Attainment,’’ Memorandum from John 

Calcagni, Director, Air Quality 

Management Division, September 4, 

1992; 

• ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Actions Submitted in Response to Clean 

Air Act (Act) Deadlines,’’ Memorandum 

from John Calcagni Director, Air Quality 

Management Division, October 28, 1992; 

• ‘‘Technical Support Documents 

(TSD’s) for Redesignation Ozone and 

Carbon Monoxide (CO) Nonattainment 

Areas,’’ Memorandum from G.T. Helms, 

Chief, Ozone/Carbon Monoxide 

Programs Branch, August 17, 1993; 

• ‘‘State Implementation Plan (SIP) 

Requirements for Areas Submitting 

Requests for Redesignation to 

Attainment of the Ozone and Carbon 

Monoxide (CO) National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards (NAAQS) On or After 

November 15, 1992,’’ Memorandum 

from Michael H. Shapiro, Acting 

Assistant Administrator for Air and 

Radiation, September 17, 1993; 

• Memorandum from D. Kent Berry, 

Acting Director, Air Quality 

Management Division, to Air Division 

Directors, Regions 1–10, ‘‘Use of Actual 

Emissions in Maintenance 

Demonstrations for Ozone and CO 

Nonattainment Areas,’’ dated November 

30, 1993; 

• ‘‘Part D New Source Review (part D 

NSR) Requirements for Areas 

Requesting Redesignation to 

Attainment,’’ Memorandum from Mary 

D. Nichols, Assistant Administrator for 

Air and Radiation, October 14, 1994; 

and 

• ‘‘Reasonable Further Progress, 

Attainment Demonstration, and Related 

Requirements for Ozone Nonattainment 

Areas Meeting the Ozone National 

Ambient Air Quality Standard,’’

Memorandum from John S. Seitz, 

Director, Office of Air Quality Planning 

and Standards, May 10, 1995. 

IV. Why Is EPA Taking These Actions? 

On September 21, 2005, the VADEQ 

requested redesignation of the SNP area 

to attainment for the 8-hour ozone 

67112 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 213 / Friday, November 4, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

standard. On September 23, 2005, the 

VADEQ submitted a maintenance plan 

for the SNP area as a SIP revision, to 

assure continued attainment over the 

next 10 years. EPA has determined that 

the SNP area has attained the standard 

and has met the requirements for 

redesignation set forth in section 

107(d)(3)(E). 

V. What Would Be the Effect of These 

Actions? 

Approval of the redesignation request 

would change the designation of the 

SNP area from nonattainment to 

attainment for the 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

found at 40 CFR part 81. It would also 

incorporate into the Virginia SIP a 

maintenance plan ensuring continued 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

in the SNP area for the next 10 years. 

The maintenance plan includes 

contingency measures to remedy any 

future violations of the 8-hour NAAQS 

(should they occur), and identifies the 

MVEBs for NOX and VOC for 

transportation conformity purposes for 

the years 2004, 2009 and 2015. These 

MVEBs are displayed in the following 

table: 

TABLE 1.—MOTOR VEHICLE EMISSIONS

BUDGETS IN TONS PER DAY (TPD) 

Year NOX VOC 

2004 ...................... 0.075 0.042 

2009 ...................... 0.057 0.038 

2015 ...................... 0.035 0.029 

VI. What Is EPA’s Analysis of the 

Commonwealth’s Request? 

EPA is proposing to determine that 

the SNP nonattainment area has 

attained the 8-hour ozone standard and 

that all other redesignation criteria have 

been met. The following is a description 

of how the VADEQ’s September 21, 

2005 and September 23, 2005 submittals 

satisfy the requirements of section 

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

A. The Shenandoah National Park Area 

Has Attained the 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS 

EPA is proposing to determine that 

the SNP area has attained the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. For ozone, an area may 

be considered to be attaining the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS if there are no violations, 

as determined in accordance with 40 

CFR 50.10 and Appendix I of part 50, 

based on three complete, consecutive 

calendar years of quality-assured air 

quality monitoring data. To attain this 

standard, the 3-year average of the 

fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour 

average ozone concentrations measured 

at each monitor within the area over 

each year must not exceed the ozone 

standard of 0.08 ppm. Based on the 

rounding convention described in 40 

CFR part 50, appendix I, the standard is 

attained if the design value is 0.084 ppm 

or below. The data must be collected 

and quality-assured in accordance with 

40 CFR part 58, and recorded in the 

Aerometric Information Retrieval 

System (AIRS). The monitors generally 

should have remained at the same 

location for the duration of the 

monitoring period required for 

demonstrating attainment. 

In the SNP area there is one ozone 

monitor, located in Madison County/Big 

Meadows (the Big Meadows Monitor), 

that measures air quality with respect to 

ozone. As part of its redesignation 

request, Virginia submitted ozone 

monitoring data for the years 2002–2004 

(the most recent three years of data 

available as of the time of the 

redesignation request). This data has 

been quality assured and is recorded in 

AIRS. The fourth high 8-hour daily 

maximum concentrations, along with 

the three-year average, are summarized 

in Table 2. 

TABLE 2.—SHENANDOAH NATIONAL

PARK NONATTAINMENT AREA

FOURTH HIGHEST 8-HOUR AVERAGE

VALUES; BIG MEADOWS MONITOR, 

AIRS ID 51–113–0003 

Year 

Annual 4th 

high reading (ppm) 

2002 ............................................ 0.086 

2003 ............................................ 0.086 

2004 ............................................ 0.075 

The average for the 3-year period 2002 

through 2004 is 0.082 ppm 

The data for 2002–2004 show that the 

area has attained the standard, and 

preliminary data for the 2005 ozone 

season show that the area continues to 

attain the standard. The data collected 

at the Big Meadows monitor satisfies the 

CAA requirement that the 3-year 

average of the annual fourth-highest 

daily maximum 8-hour average ozone 

concentration is less than or equal to 

0.08 ppm. The VADEQ’s request for 

redesignation for the SNP area indicates 

that the data was quality assured in 

accordance with 40 CFR part 58. The 

VADEQ uses AIRS as the permanent 

database to maintain its data and quality 

assures the data transfers and content 

for accuracy. In addition, as discussed 

below with respect to the maintenance 

plan, VADEQ has committed to 

continue monitoring in accordance with 

40 CFR part 58. In summary, EPA has 

determined that the data submitted by 

Virginia indicates that the SNP area has 

attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS. 

B. The Shenandoah National Park Area 

Has Met All Applicable Requirements 

Under Section 110 and Part D of the 

CAA and the Area Has a Fully 

Approved SIP Under Section 110(k) of 

the CAA 

EPA has determined that Virginia has 

met all SIP requirements for the SNP 

area applicable for purposes of 

redesignation under section 110 of the 

CAA (General SIP Requirements) and 

that it meets all applicable SIP 

requirements under Part D of Title 1 of 

the CAA, in accordance with section 

107(d)(3)(E)(v). In addition, EPA has 

determined that the SIP is fully 

approved with respect to all 

requirements applicable for purposes of 

redesignation in accordance with 

section 107(d)(3)(E)(ii). In making these 

proposed determinations, EPA 

ascertained what requirements are 

applicable to the area, and determined 

that the applicable portions of the SIP 

meeting these requirements are fully 

approved under section 110(k) of the 

CAA. We note that SIPs must be fully 

approved only with respect to 

applicable requirements. 

The September 4, 1992 Calcagni 

memorandum (‘‘Procedures for 

Processing Requests to Redesignate 

Areas to Attainment,’’ Memorandum 

from John Calcagni, Director, Air 

Quality Management Division, 

September 4, 1992) describes EPA’s 

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

with respect to the timing of applicable 

requirements. Under this interpretation, 

to qualify for redesignation, states 

requesting redesignation to attainment 

must meet only the relevant CAA 

requirements that come due prior to the 

submittal of a complete redesignation 

request. See also Michael Shapiro 

memorandum, September 17, 1993, and 

60 FR 12459, 12465–66, (March 7, 1995) 

(redesignation of Detroit-Ann Arbor). 

Applicable requirements of the CAA 

that come due subsequent to the area’s 

submittal of a complete redesignation 

request remain applicable until a 

redesignation is approved, but are not 

required as a prerequisite to 

redesignation. Section 175A(c)of the 

CAA. Sierra Club v. EPA, 375 F.3d 537 

(7th Cir. 2004). See also 68 FR 25424, 

25427 (May 12, 2003) (redesignation of 

St. Louis). 

1. Section 110 General SIP 

Requirements 

Section 110(a)(2) of Title I of the CAA 

delineates the general requirements for 

a SIP, which include enforceable 

emissions limitations and other control 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 213 / Friday, November 4, 2005 / Proposed Rules 67113 

measures, means, or techniques, 

provisions for the establishment and 

operation of appropriate devices 

necessary to collect data on ambient air 

quality, and programs to enforce the 

limitations. The general SIP elements 

and requirements set forth in section 

110(a)(2) include, but are not limited to, 

the following: 

• Submittal of a SIP that has been 

adopted by the state after reasonable 

public notice and hearing; 

• Provisions for establishment and 

operation of appropriate procedures 

needed to monitor ambient air quality; 

• Implementation of a source permit 

program; provisions for the 

implementation of Part C requirement 

(Prevention of Significant Deterioration 

(PSD)); 

• Provisions for the implementation 

of Part D requirements for New Source 

Review (NSR) permit programs; 

• Provisions for air pollution 

modeling; and 

• Provisions for public and local 

agency participation in planning and 

emission control rule development. 

Section 110(a)(2)(D) requires that SIPs 

contain certain measures to prevent 

sources in a state from significantly 

contributing to air quality problems in 

another state. To implement this 

provision, EPA has required certain 

states to establish programs to address 

transport of air pollutants in accordance 

with the NOX SIP Call, October 27, 1998 

(63 FR 57356), amendments to the NOX

SIP Call, May 14, 1999 (64 FR 26298) 

and March 2, 2000 (65 FR 11222), and 

the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), 

May 12, 2005 (70 FR 25161). However, 

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

a state are not linked with a particular 

nonattainment area’s designation and 

classification in that state. EPA believes 

that the requirements linked with a 

particular nonattainment area’s 

designation and classification are the 

relevant measures to evaluate in 

reviewing a redesignation request. The 

transport SIP submittal requirements, 

where applicable, continue to apply to 

a state regardless of the designation of 

any one particular area in the state. 

Thus, we do not believe that these 

requirements should be construed to be 

applicable requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. In addition, EPA believes 

that the other section 110 elements not 

connected with nonattainment plan 

submissions and not linked with an 

area’s attainment status are not 

applicable requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. The Commonwealth will 

still be subject to these requirements 

after the SNP area is redesignated. The 

section 110 and Part D requirements, 

which are linked with a particular area’s 

designation and classification, are the 

relevant measures to evaluate in 

reviewing a redesignation request. This 

policy is consistent with EPA’s existing 

policy on applicability of conformity 

(i.e., for redesignations) and oxygenated 

fuels requirement. See Reading, 

Pennsylvania, proposed and final 

rulemakings 61 FR 53174–53176 

(October 10, 1996), 62 FR 24816 (May 7, 

1997); Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio, 

final rulemaking 61 FR 20458 (May 7, 

1996); and Tampa, Florida, final 

rulemaking 60 FR 62748 (December 7, 

1995). See also the discussion on this 

issue in the Cincinnati redesignation 65 

FR 37890 (June 19, 2000), and in the 

Pittsburgh redesignation 66 FR 50399 

(October 19, 2001). Similarly, with 

respect to the NOX SIP Call rules, EPA 

noted in its Phase 1 Final Rule to 

Implement the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS, 

that the NOX SIP Call rules are not ‘‘an 

‘applicable requirement’ for purposes of 

section 110(l) because the NOX rules 

apply regardless of an area’s attainment 

or nonattainment status for the 8-hour 

(or the 1-hour) NAAQS.’’ 69 FR 23951, 

23983 (April 30, 2004). 

EPA believes that section 110 

elements not linked to the area’s 

nonattainment status are not applicable 

for purposes of redesignation. Any 

section 110 requirements that are linked 

to the Part D requirements for 8-hour 

ozone nonattainment areas are not yet 

due, because, as we explain later in this 

notice, no Part D requirements 

applicable for purposes of redesignation 

under the 8-hour standard became due 

prior to submission of the redesignation 

request. 

Because the Virginia SIP satisfies all 

of the applicable general SIP elements 

and requirements set forth in section 

110(a)(2), EPA concludes that Virginia 

has satisfied the criterion of section 

107(d)(3)(E) regarding section 110 of the 

Act. 

2. Part D Nonattainment Area 

Requirements Under the 8-Hour 

Standard 

The SNP area was designated a basic 

nonattainment area for the 8-hour ozone 

standard. Sections 172–176 of the CAA, 

found in subpart 1 of Part D, set forth 

the basic nonattainment requirements 

for all nonattainment areas. Since the 

SNP area was in attainment for the 1- 

hour standard at the time of its 

designation as a basic 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area on April 30, 2004, 

no Part D submittals under the 1-hour 

standard were required or made for this 

area. 

Section 182 of the CAA, found in 

subpart 2 of part D, establishes 

additional specific requirements 

depending on the area’s nonattainment 

classification. The SNP area was 

classified as a subpart 1 nonattainment 

area; therefore, no subpart 2 

requirements apply to this area. 

With respect to the 8-hour standard, 

EPA proposes to determine that the 

Virginia SIP meets all applicable SIP 

requirements under Part D of the CAA, 

because no 8-hour ozone standard Part 

D requirements applicable for purposes 

of redesignation became due prior to 

submission of the area’s redesignation 

request. Because the Commonwealth 

submitted a complete redesignation 

request for the SNP area prior to the 

deadline for any submissions required 

under the 8-hour standard, we have 

determined that the part D requirements 

do not apply to the SNP area for the 

purposes of redesignation. 

In addition to the fact that Part D 

requirements applicable for purposes of 

redesignation did not become due prior 

to submission of the redesignation 

request, EPA believes it is reasonable to 

interpret the general conformity and 

NSR requirements as not requiring 

approval prior to redesignation. 

With respect to 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. and the Federal Transit 

Act (‘‘transportation conformity’’) as 

well as to all other Federally supported 

or funded projects (‘‘general 

conformity’’). State conformity revisions 

must be consistent with Federal 

conformity regulations relating to 

consultation, enforcement and 

enforceability that the CAA required the 

EPA to promulgate. 

EPA believes it is reasonable to 

interpret the conformity SIP 

requirements as not applying for 

purposes of evaluating the redesignation 

request under section 107(d) since state 

conformity rules are still required after 

redesignation and Federal conformity 

rules apply where state rules have not 

been approved. See Wall v. EPA, 265 F. 

3d 426, 438–440 (6th Cir. 2001), 

upholding this interpretation. See also 

60 FR 62748 (Dec. 7, 1995). 

EPA has also determined that areas 

being redesignated need not comply 

with the requirement that a NSR 

program be approved prior to 

redesignation, provided that the area 

demonstrates maintenance of the 

standard without Part D NSR in effect, 

67114 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 213 / Friday, November 4, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

because PSD requirements will apply 

after redesignation. The rationale for 

this view is described in a 

memorandum from Mary Nichols, 

Assistant Administrator for Air and 

Radiation, dated October 14, 1994, 

entitled, ‘‘Part D NSR Requirements or 

Areas Requesting Redesignation to 

Attainment.’’ Virginia has demonstrated 

that the area will be able to maintain the 

standard without Part D NSR in effect in 

the SNP area, and therefore, Virginia 

need not have a fully approved Part D 

NSR program prior to approval of the 

redesignation request. Virginia’s SIPapproved PSD program will become 

effective in the area upon redesignation 

to attainment in the SNP area. See 

rulemakings for Detroit, MI (60 FR 

12467–12468, March 7, 1995); 

Cleveland-Akron-Lorrain, OH (61 FR 

20458, 20469–70, May 7, 1996); 

Louisville, KY (66 FR 53665, October 

23, 2001); Grand Rapids, Michigan (61 

FR 31834–31837, June 21, 1996). 

3. The Area Has a Fully Approved SIP 

for the Purposes of Redesignation 

EPA has fully approved the Virginia 

SIP for the purposes of redesignation. 

EPA may rely on prior SIP approvals in 

approving a redesignation request. 

Calcagni Memo, p. 3; Southwestern 

Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. 

Browner, 144 F. 3d 984, 989–90 (6th Cir. 

1998), Wall v. EPA, 265 F. 3d 426 (6th 

Cir. 2001), plus any additional measures 

it may approve in conjunction with a 

redesignation action. See 68 FR 25425 

(May 12, 2003) and citations therein. 

The SNP area was in attainment for the 

1-hour standard at the time of its 

designation as a basic 8-hour ozone 

nonattainment area on April 30, 2004. 

Because the area had not previously 

been designated as nonattainment, no 

Part D SIP submittals were previously 

required. Because there are no current 

SIP submission requirements applicable 

for the purposes of redesignation of the 

SNP area, the applicable 

implementation plan satisfies all 

pertinent SIP requirements. As 

indicated previously, EPA believes that 

the section 110 elements not connected 

with Part D nonattainment plan 

submissions and not linked to the area’s 

nonattainment status are not applicable 

requirements for purposes of 

redesignation. EPA also believes that no 

8-hour Part D requirements applicable 

for purposes of redesignation have yet 

become due for the SNP area, and 

therefore they need not be approved 

into the SIP prior to redesignation. 

4. The Air Quality Improvement in the 

Shenandoah National Park Area Is Due 

to Permanent and Enforceable 

Reductions in Emissions Resulting From 

Implementation of the SIP and 

Applicable Federal Air Pollution 

Control Regulations and Other 

Permanent and Enforceable Reductions 

EPA believes that the Commonwealth 

has demonstrated that the observed air 

quality improvement in the area is due 

to permanent and enforceable 

reductions in emissions resulting from 

implementation of the SIP, Federal 

measures, and other state-adopted 

measures. Emissions reductions 

attributable to these rules are shown in 

Table 3. It should be noted that within 

the SNP area boundaries, no point 

sources with emissions greater than 10 

tons per year (tpy) of either VOC or NOX

exist, therefore point source emissions 

equal zero. 

TABLE 3.—TOTAL VOC AND NOX EMISSIONS FOR 2002 AND 2004 (TPD) 

Year Point Area* Nonroad Mobile Total 

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) 

Year 2002 ...................................................................................... 0 0.390 0.182 0.052 0.624 

Year 2004 ...................................................................................... 0 0.375 0.162 0.042 0.579 

Diff. (02–04) ................................................................................... 0 ¥0.014 ¥0.020 ¥0.010 ¥0.044 

Nitrogen Oxides (NOX) 

Year 2002 ...................................................................................... 0 0.212 0.145 0.089 0.446 

Year 2004 ...................................................................................... 0 0.204 0.136 0.075 0.415 

Diff. (02–04) ................................................................................... 0 ¥0.008 ¥0.009 ¥0.014 ¥0.031 

*Area source category includes emissions from motor vehicle refueling. 

Between 2002 and 2004, VOC 

emissions were reduced by 0.044 tpd, 

and NOX emissions were reduced by 

0.031 tpd, due to the following 

permanent and enforceable measures 

implemented or in the process of being 

implemented in the SNP area: 

Programs Currently in Effect 

(a) National Low Emission Vehicle 

(NLEV); 

(b) Motor vehicle fleet turnover with 

new vehicles meeting the Tier 2 

standards; and, 

(c) Low-sulfur gasoline. 

Virginia has demonstrated that the 

implementation of permanent 

enforceable emissions controls have 

reduced local VOC and NOX emissions. 

Nearly all of these reductions are 

attributable to mobile source emission 

controls such as NLEV and Tier I 

programs. These mobile programs 

produced 0.010 tpd of VOC reductions 

and 0.014 tpd of NOX reductions. 

Additionally, Virginia has indicated 

in its submittal that the NOX SIP Call 

took effect in 2004. While there are no 

subject sources currently located in the 

SNP area, Virginia’s redesignation 

request explains that the SNP area 

indirectly benefits in terms of improved 

air quality due to this program. The 

VADEQ estimates that between 2003 

and 2004, emissions of NOX were 

reduced from facilities located within 

Virginia and subject to the NOX SIP Call 

by approximately 7,400 tons during the 

ozone season (May 1st through 

September 30th). The VADEQ believes 

that these emission reductions, which 

are taking place outside the SNP area, 

are significant in improving the SNP 

area’s air quality. 

Other regulations, such as the nonroad diesel, 69 FR 39858 (June 29, 

2004), the heavy duty engine and 

vehicle standards, 66 FR 5002 (January 

18, 2001) and the new Tier 2 tailpipe 

standards for automobiles, 65 FR 6698 

(January 10, 2000), are also expected to 

greatly reduce emissions throughout the 

country and thereby reduce the 

transported emissions impacting the 

SNP area monitor. The Tier 2 standards 

came into effect in 2004, and by 2030, 

EPA expects that the new Tier 2 

standards will reduce NOX emissions by 

about 74 percent. EPA believes that 

permanent and enforceable emissions 

reductions are the cause of the longterm improvement in ozone levels and 

are the cause of the area achieving 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 213 / Friday, November 4, 2005 / Proposed Rules 67115 

attainment of the 8-hour ozone 

standard. 

5. The Shenandoah National Park Area 

Has a Fully Approved Maintenance Plan 

Pursuant to Section 175A of the CAA 

In conjunction with its request to 

redesignate the SNP area to attainment 

status, Virginia submitted a SIP revision 

to provide for maintenance of the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS in the area for at least 10 

years after redesignation. 

What Is Required in a Maintenance 

Plan? 

Section 175A of the CAA sets forth 

the elements of a maintenance plan for 

areas seeking redesignation from 

nonattainment to attainment. Under 

section 175A, the plan must 

demonstrate continued attainment of 

the applicable NAAQS for at least 10 

years after approval of a redesignation of 

an area to attainment. Eight years after 

the redesignation, the Commonwealth 

must submit a revised maintenance plan 

demonstrating that attainment will 

continue to be maintained for the next 

10-year period following the initial 10- 

year period. To address the possibility 

of future NAAQS violations, the 

maintenance plan must contain such 

contingency measures, with a schedule 

for implementation, as EPA deems 

necessary to assure prompt correction of 

any future 8-hour ozone violations. 

Section 175A of the CAA sets forth the 

elements of a maintenance plan for 

areas seeking redesignation from 

nonattainment to attainment. The 

Calcagni memorandum dated September 

4, 1992, provides additional guidance 

on the content of a maintenance plan. 

An ozone maintenance plan should 

address the following provisions: 

(a) An attainment emissions 

inventory; 

(b) A maintenance demonstration; 

(c) A monitoring network; 

(d) Verification of continued 

attainment; and 

(e) A contingency plan. 

Analysis of the Shenandoah National 

Park Area Maintenance Plan 

(a) Attainment Inventory—An 

attainment inventory includes the 

emissions during the time period 

associated with the monitoring data 

showing attainment. The VADEQ 

determined that the appropriate 

attainment inventory year is 2004. That 

year establishes a reasonable year 

within the 3-year block of 2002–2004 as 

a baseline and accounts for reductions 

attributable to implementation of the 

CAA requirements to date. 

The VADEQ prepared comprehensive 

VOC and NOX emissions inventories for 

the SNP area, including area, mobile onroad, and mobile non-road sources for a 

base year of 2002. The SNP area does 

not have any point sources with actual 

emissions greater than 10 tpy, therefore 

they were not included in the emissions 

inventory (see the point source 

discussion). All inventories are based on 

actual emissions for a ‘‘typical summer 

day’’ and consist of a list of sources and 

their associated emissions. An 

attainment year of 2004 was used for the 

SNP area since it is a reasonable year 

within the 3-year block of 2002–2004 

and accounts for reductions attributable 

to implementation of the CAA 

requirements to date. 

To develop the NOX and VOC base 

year emissions inventories, VADEQ 

used the following approaches and 

sources of data: 

(i) Point source emissions—The SNP 

area is rural and considered a Class I 

area. No industrial facilities exist within 

the Shenandoah National Park 

boundaries. Also, there are no other 

point sources, such as those used for 

heating purposes, with actual emissions 

of more than 10 tpy of either NOX or 

VOC. A complete point source 

emissions inventory may be found in 

Air Emissions Inventory for 

Shenandoah National Park, which is in 

Appendix B of both the maintenance 

plan and the redesignation request that 

are in the docket for this proposed 

action. The registration database used 

and maintained by VADEQ also does 

not contain any sources emitting more 

than 10 tpy of ozone precursors. 

Because the SNP area lies solely within 

the boundaries of Shenandoah National 

Park, EPA believes VADEQ’s 

assumption that there will be no point 

source growth in this inventory area is 

reasonable. 

(ii) Area source emissions—The area 

source emissions were developed using 

the 2002 periodic year stationary area 

source emissions inventories along with 

growth factors. Before attempting to 

calculate the growth factors, VADEQ 

determined the appropriate annual 

growth rate representative of each 

industry or indicator. ‘‘Growth Rate’’

refers to the annual percentage of 

growth that occurs in a category per 

year. The area source growth rate 

estimates also involve the use of current 

local source data, including area 

populations and employment data by 

source type. 

The 2002 emissions data for forest 

fires was developed to estimate wildfire 

emissions. However, 2002 was not 

considered a typical year for wildfires. 

The VADEQ stated that an analysis of 10 

years of fire data was used to develop 

a ‘‘typical’’ year’s estimates for wildfire 

emissions in the SNP area. This 

‘‘typical’’ year is approximately 20 

percent less than actual emissions 

estimated for 2002. Based on this 

information, the SNP area wildfire data 

were estimated by decreasing the 

emissions from 2002 downward 20 

percent. It should be noted that the 

Shenandoah National Park has a fire 

management plan that looks forward 5 

years and recommends prescribed 

burning for the health and well being of 

the wilderness. These 5-year plans are 

conservative in nature; generally 

weather and resource constraints do not 

allow the full implementation of all 

planned fires in any year. The 5-year 

plan tries to manage prescribed burning 

throughout the Shenandoah National 

Park; therefore assuming a growth factor 

larger than 1.0000 would overestimate 

emissions from this category. 

(iii) On-road mobile source 

emissions—The process of estimating 

on-road mobile source emissions 

consists of two components: Vehicularrelated activity (i.e., VMT) and an 

average rate of pollutant produced as a 

result of a particular level of activity. 

The SNP area traffic data was obtained 

from the report entitled, ‘‘NPS Traffic 

Monitoring Program, Coverage Count, 

and Data Reporting Project for 

Shenandoah National Park,’’ dated 

March 12, 2004, which is in Appendix 

B of both the maintenance plan and the 

redesignation request that are in the 

docket for this proposed action. This 

report included VMT for 5 roadway 

segments within Shenandoah National 

Park. Since the SNP area only includes 

the portion of Shenandoah National 

Park within the boundaries of Page and 

Madison Counties, the VMT was 

adjusted downward to exclude that 

occurring outside the SNP area 

boundary. Based on information found 

in the previously cited document, 

vehicle travel through the Park appears 

to have been declining in recent years. 

A pollutant emission rate, associated 

with these particular levels of activity, 

was estimated using MOBILE6.2 

emissions factors. The VADEQ has 

provided detailed data summaries to 

document the calculations of mobile onroad VOC and NOX emissions for 2002, 

as well as for the projection years of 

2004, 2009, and 2015 (shown in tables 

4 and 5 below). The mobile on-road 

source emissions projections include 

the National Low Emissions Vehicle 

Program (NLEV), the 2004 Tier 2 and 

Low Sulfur Gasoline Rule, the 2004 and 

2007 Heavy-Duty Diesel Vehicle Rules, 

and the 2006 Low Sulfur Diesel Rule. 

(iv) Mobile non-road emissions—The 

mobile non-road emissions were 

calculated using the NONROAD2004 

67116 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 213 / Friday, November 4, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

model, which incorporates the projected 

emission reductions resulting from 

EPA’s Clean Air Non-road Diesel Rule. 

The mobile non-road emissions 

calculated by the model were scaled 

down based on equipment population 

data to account for a growth factor of 1.0 

in the non-road category. The 

assumption of no growth is supported 

by the very nature of the Shenandoah 

National Park, which strives to 

minimize the human footprint on the 

wilderness area, as well as the visitation 

data that shows a declining trend in 

Shenandoah National Park visitors since 

1993. 

The 2004 attainment year VOC and 

NOX emissions for the SNP area are 

summarized along with the 2009 and 

2015 projected emissions for this area in 

tables 4 and 5 below, which covers the 

demonstration of maintenance for this 

area. EPA has concluded that Virginia 

has adequately derived and documented 

the 2004 attainment year VOC and NOX

emissions for this area. 

(b) Maintenance Demonstration—On 

September 23, 2005, the VADEQ 

submitted a SIP revision to supplement 

its September 21, 2005 redesignation 

request. The submittal by VADEQ 

consists of the maintenance plan as 

required by section 175A of the CAA. 

This plan shows maintenance of the 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS by demonstrating 

that current and future emissions of 

VOC and NOX remain at or below the 

attainment year 2004 emissions levels 

throughout the SNP area through the 

year 2015. A maintenance 

demonstration need not be based on 

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

426 (6th Cir. 2001); Sierra Club v. EPA, 

375 F.3d 537 (7th Cir. 2004). See also 66 

FR 53094, 53099–53100 (October 19, 

2001), 68 FR 25430–32 (May 12, 2003). 

Tables 4 and 5 specify the VOC and 

NOX emissions for the SNP area for 

2004, 2009, and 2015. The VADEQ 

chose 2009 as an interim year in the 10- 

year maintenance demonstration period 

to demonstrate that the VOC and NOX

emissions are not projected to increase 

above the 2004 attainment level during 

the time of the 10-year maintenance 

period. 

TABLE 4.—TOTAL VOC EMISSIONS FOR 2004–2015 (TPD) 

Source category 2004 VOC 

emissions 

2009 VOC 

emissions 

2015 VOC 

emissions 

Mobile 1 ............................................................................................................................ 0.042 0.028 0.019 

Nonroad ........................................................................................................................... 0.162 0.109 0.081 

Area 2 ............................................................................................................................... 0.375 0.378 0.383 

Point ................................................................................................................................. 0 0 0 

Total .......................................................................................................................... 0.579 0.514 0.483 

1 Includes transportation conformity provisions. 

2 Includes vehicle refueling emissions. 

TABLE 5.—TOTAL NOX EMISSIONS 2004–2015 (TPD) 

Source category 2004 NOX

emissions 

2009 NOX

emissions 

2015 NOX

emissions 

Mobile1 ............................................................................................................................. 0.075 0.047 0.025 

Nonroad ........................................................................................................................... 0.136 0.110 0.077 

Area ................................................................................................................................. 0.204 0.204 0.204 

Point ................................................................................................................................. 0 0 0 

Total .......................................................................................................................... 0.415 0.361 0.306 

1 Includes transportation conformity provisions. 

Additionally, the following mobile 

programs are either effective or due to 

become effective and will further 

contribute to the maintenance 

demonstration of the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS: 

• Heavy duty diesel on-road (2004/ 

2007) and low-sulfur on-road (2006); 66 

FR 2001 (January 18, 2001); and 

• Non-road emissions standards 

(2008) and off-road diesel fuel (2007/ 

2010); 69 FR 39858 (June 29, 2004). 

In addition to the permanent and 

enforceable measures, the Clean Air 

Interstate Transport Rule (CAIR), 

promulgated May 12, 2005, (70 FR 

25161) should have positive impacts on 

the Commonwealth’s air quality. CAIR, 

which will be implemented in the 

eastern portion of the country in two 

phases (2009 and 2015) should reduce 

long range transport of ozone 

precursors, which will have a beneficial 

effect on the air quality in the SNP area. 

Based upon the comparison of the 

projected emissions and the attainment 

year emissions along with the additional 

measures, EPA concludes that VADEQ 

has successfully demonstrated that the 

8-hour ozone standard should be 

maintained in the SNP area. 

(c) Monitoring Network—There is 

currently one monitor measuring ozone 

in the SNP area. Virginia and the 

National Park Service, which operates 

the Big Meadows monitoring station, 

will continue to operate its current air 

quality monitor in accordance with 40 

CFR part 58. Should measured mobile 

source parameters change significantly 

over time, the Commonwealth will 

perform a saturation monitoring study 

to determine the need for, and location 

of, additional permanent monitors. 

(d) Verification of Continued 

Attainment—The Commonwealth of 

Virginia has the legal authority to 

implement and enforce specified 

measures necessary to attain and 

maintain the NAAQS. Additionally, 

federal programs such as the NLEV 

program, Tier2/Low Sulfur Gasoline 

Rule, 2007 On-Road Diesel Engine Rule, 

and Federal Non-road Engine/ 

Equipment Rules will continue to be 

implemented on a national level. These 

programs help provide the reductions 

necessary for the SNP area to maintain 

attainment. 

In addition to maintaining the key 

elements of its regulatory program, the 

Commonwealth will acquire ambient 

and source emissions data to track 

attainment and maintenance. The 

VADEQ will track the progress of the 

maintenance demonstration by 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 213 / Friday, November 4, 2005 / Proposed Rules 67117 

1 In the event that implementation of Stage I 

vapor recovery is selected as a contingency 

measure, Virginia would notify all sources located 

in the SNP area within 6 months after notification 

received from EPA that the contingency measure 

must be implemented, or within three months after 

a recorded violation. The newly subject Stage I 

vapor recovery sources would be required to 

comply with Stage I vapor recovery requirements 

no later than 12 months from the date VADEQ 

adopts the regulation. 

periodically updating the emissions 

inventory. This tracking will consist of 

annual and periodic evaluations. The 

annual evaluation will consist of checks 

on key emissions trend indicators such 

as the annual emissions update of 

stationary sources, the Highway 

Performance Monitoring System 

(HPMS) VMT data reported to the 

Federal Highway Administration, and 

other growth indicators. These 

indicators will be compared to the 

growth assumptions used in the plan to 

determine if the predicted versus the 

observed growth remains relatively 

constant. The Commonwealth will also 

develop and submit comprehensive 

tracking inventories to EPA every three 

years during the maintenance plan 

period. For the purpose of performing 

this tracking function for point sources, 

the Commonwealth will retain the 

annual emission statement requirements 

for the maintenance area (9 VAC 5–20–

160). 

(e) The Maintenance Plan’s 

Contingency Measures—The 

contingency plan provisions are 

designed to promptly correct a violation 

of the NAAQS that occurs after 

redesignation. Section 175A of the Act 

requires that a maintenance plan 

include such contingency measures as 

EPA deems necessary to ensure that the 

Commonwealth will promptly correct a 

violation of the NAAQS that occurs after 

redesignation. The maintenance plan 

should identify the events that would 

‘‘trigger’’ the adoption and 

implementation of a contingency 

measure(s), the contingency measures 

that would be adopted and 

implemented, and the schedule 

indicating the time frame by which the 

state would adopt and implement the 

measure(s). 

The ability of the SNP area to stay in 

compliance with the 8-hour ozone 

standard after redesignation depends 

upon VOC and NOX emissions in the 

area remaining at or below 2004 levels. 

The Commonwealth’s maintenance plan 

projects VOC and NOX emissions to 

decrease and stay below 2004 levels 

through the year 2015. The 

Commonwealth’s maintenance plan lays 

out two situations where the need to 

adopt and implement a contingency 

measure to further reduce emissions 

would be triggered. Those situations are 

as follows: 

(i) An actual increase of the VOC or 

NOX emissions above the 2004 

attainment levels is identified or 

predicted through the development of 

the comprehensive periodic tracking 

inventories—The maintenance plan 

states that the VADEQ will monitor the 

observed growth rates for VMT, 

population, and point source VOC and 

NOX emissions on a yearly basis which 

will serve as an early warning indicator 

of the potential for a violation. The plan 

also states that comprehensive tracking 

inventories will also be developed every 

3 years using current EPA-approved 

methods to estimate emissions, 

concentrating on areas identified in the 

less rigorous yearly evaluations as being 

potential problems. If the 2004 

attainment level emissions for VOC or 

NOX is exceeded or is predicted to be 

exceeded, the following measure will be 

implemented: 

• Preparation of a complete and 

thorough VOC and NOX emission 

inventory for the current year. 

(ii) In the event that a violation of the 

8-hour ozone standard occurs at the 

Madison County/Big Meadows 

monitor—The maintenance plan states 

that in the event that a violation of the 

ozone standard occurs at the Big 

Meadows monitor, the Commonwealth 

of Virginia, in consultation with EPA 

Region III and the Shenandoah National 

Park, will implement one of the 

following measures: 

• The implementation of Stage I 

vapor recovery on the gasoline stations 

located in the SNP area; 

• The Shenandoah National Park 

would expand their implementation of 

a series of voluntary, episodic control 

measures through an Air Quality Action 

Day Program (AQADP). The program 

will be based upon ozone forecasts 

created for the Shenandoah National 

Park by VADEQ meteorological staff. 

The AQADP would be operated by the 

Shenandoah National Park in 

partnership with the VADEQ. The 

VADEQ would issue an Air Quality 

Action Day forecast when 8-hour ozone 

levels are predicted to exceed 0.08 ppm. 

The VADEQ would notify the 

Shenandoah National Park 

representatives via email no later than 3 

p.m. of the afternoon before the 

exceedance is forecast. This information 

would also be provided to major media 

and other interested parties. The 

information would be included on the 

VADEQ Web site, http:// 

www.deq.virginia.gov/airquality. On 

days when 8-hour ozone levels are 

forecast to exceed 0.08 ppm (code 

orange or code red days), the 

Shenandoah National Park would 

implement the following actions or 

similar actions deemed appropriate by 

the park Superintendent: 

(1) Encourage employees to decrease 

vehicle use by car pooling and reducing 

the number of non-essential trips; (2) 

Postpone or decrease the use of mowers, 

weed eaters, chainsaws, electroshockers, 

and other similar gasoline engine 

equipment until the ozone level drops; 

(3) Postpone painting projects that use 

oil based paints or solvents; and (4) 

Encourage refueling of vehicles in the 

early morning or late evening hours. 

• The Commonwealth would 

implement of one or more of the 

following Virginia’s area source VOC 

regulations throughout the entire SNP 

area: Emission Standards for Portable 

Fuel Container Spillage (9 VAC 5 

Chapter 40, Article 42); Emission 

Standards for Mobile Equipment Repair 

and Refinishing Operations (9 VAC 5 

Chapter 40, Article 48); Emission 

Standards for Architectural and 

Industrial Maintenance Coatings (9 VAC 

5 Chapter 40, Article 49); Solvent 

Cleaning (9 VAC 5 Chapter 40 Article 

47); and Emission Standards for 

Consumer Products (9 VAC 5 Chapter 

40, Article 50). 

The following schedule for adoption, 

implementation and compliance applies 

to the contingency measures concerning 

the option of implementing either Stage 

I vapor recovery requirements or one or 

more area source VOC regulations. 

• Notification received from EPA that 

a contingency measure must be 

implemented , or three months after a 

recorded violation; 

• Applicable regulation to be adopted 

6 months after this date; 

• Applicable regulation to be 

implemented 6 months after adoption; 1

• Compliance with regulation to be 

achieved within 12 months of adoption. 

The following schedule for adoption, 

implementation and compliance applies 

to the contingency measures concerning 

the option of implementing an AQADP. 

• Implementation of meteorological 

forecasts for the SNP area commencing 

60 days after a recorded violation. 

• Implementation of the AQADP, 

based on meteorological forecasts 

created by VADEQ, no later than 60 

days after VADEQ notifies the SNP 

Superintendent that the meteorological 

forecasts are available. 

The maintenance plan adequately 

addresses the five basic components of 

a maintenance plan: attainment 

inventory, maintenance demonstration, 

monitoring network, verification of 

continued attainment, and a 

contingency plan. EPA believes that the 

maintenance plan SIP revision 

67118 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 213 / Friday, November 4, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

submitted by Virginia for the SNP area 

meets the requirements of section 175A 

of the Act. 

VII. Are the Motor Vehicle Emissions 

Budgets Established and Identified in 

the Maintenance Plan for the 

Shenandoah National Park Area 

Adequate and Approvable? 

A. What Are the Motor Vehicle 

Emissions Budgets (MVEBs)? 

Under the CAA, States are required to 

submit, at various times, control strategy 

SIPs and maintenance plans in ozone 

areas. These control strategy SIPs (i.e. 

RFP SIPs and attainment demonstration 

SIPs) and maintenance plans identify 

and establish MVEBs for certain criteria 

pollutants and/or their precursors to 

address pollution from on-road mobile 

sources. In the maintenance plan the 

MVEBs are termed ‘‘on-road mobile 

source emissions budgets.’’ Pursuant to 

40 CFR part 93 and 51.112, MVEBs must 

be established in an ozone maintenance 

plan. A MVEB is the portion of the total 

allowable emissions that is allocated to 

highway and transit vehicle use and 

emissions. A MVEB serves as a ceiling 

on emissions from an area’s planned 

transportation system. The MVEB 

concept is further explained in the 

preamble to the November 24, 1993, 

transportation conformity rule (58 FR 

62188). The preamble also describes 

how to establish and revise the MVEBs 

in control strategy SIPs and 

maintenance plans. 

Under section 176(c) of the CAA, new 

transportation projects, such as the 

construction of new highways, must 

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

the part of the State’s air quality plan 

that addresses pollution from cars and 

trucks. ‘‘Conformity’’ to the SIP means 

that transportation activities will not 

cause new air quality violations, worsen 

existing violations, or delay timely 

attainment of or reasonable progress 

towards the national ambient air quality 

standards. If a transportation plan does 

not ‘‘conform,’’ most new projects that 

would expand the capacity of roadways 

cannot go forward. Regulations at 40 

CFR part 93 set forth EPA policy, 

criteria, and procedures for 

demonstrating and assuring conformity 

of such transportation activities to a 

state implementation plan. 

When reviewing submitted ‘‘control 

strategy’’ SIPs or maintenance plans 

containing MVEBs, EPA must 

affirmatively find the MVEB budget 

contained therein ‘‘adequate’’ for use in 

determining transportation conformity. 

After EPA affirmatively finds the 

submitted MVEB is adequate for 

transportation conformity purposes, that 

MVEB can be used by state and Federal 

agencies in determining whether 

proposed transportation projects 

‘‘conform’’ to the state implementation 

plan as required by section 176(c) of the 

CAA. EPA’s substantive criteria for 

determining ‘‘adequacy’’ of a MVEB are 

set out in 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4). 

EPA’s process for determining 

‘‘adequacy’’ consists of three basic steps: 

public notification of a SIP submission, 

a public comment period, and EPA’s 

adequacy finding. This process for 

determining the adequacy of submitted 

SIP MVEBs was initially outlined in 

EPA’s May 14, 1999 guidance, 

‘‘Conformity Guidance on 

Implementation of March 2, 1999, 

Conformity Court Decision’’. This 

guidance was finalized in the 

Transportation Conformity Rule 

Amendments for the ‘‘New 8-Hour 

Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air 

Quality Standards and Miscellaneous 

Revisions for Existing Areas; 

Transportation Conformity Rule 

Amendments—Response to Court 

Decision and Additional Rule Change’’

on July 1, 2004 (69 FR 40004). EPA 

follows this guidance and rulemaking in 

making its adequacy determinations. 

The MVEBs for the SNP area are listed 

in Table 1 of this document for the 

2004, 2009, and 2015 years and are the 

projected emissions for the on-road 

mobile sources plus any portion of the 

safety margin allocated to the MVEBs. 

These emission budgets, when approved 

by EPA, must be used for transportation 

conformity determinations. 

B. What Is a Safety Margin? 

A ‘‘safety margin’’ is the difference 

between the attainment level of 

emissions (from all sources) and the 

projected level of emissions (from all 

sources) in the maintenance plan. The 

attainment level of emissions is the 

level of emissions during one of the 

years in which the area met the NAAQS. 

The following example is for the 2015 

safety margin: The SNP area first 

attained the 8-hour ozone NAAQS 

during the 2002 to 2004 time period. 

The Commonwealth used 2004 as the 

year to determine attainment levels of 

emissions for the SNP area. The total 

emissions from area, mobile on-road, 

and mobile non-road sources in 2004 

equaled 0.579 tpd of VOC and 0.415 tpd 

of NOX. The VADEQ projected 

emissions out to the year 2015 and 

projected a total of 0.493 tpd of VOC 

and 0.316 tpd of NOX from all sources 

in the SNP area. The safety margin for 

the SNP area for 2015 would be the 

difference between these amounts, or 

0.086 tpd of VOC and 0.099 tpd of NOX. 

The emissions up to the level of the 

attainment year including the safety 

margins are projected to maintain the 

area’s air quality consistent with the 8- 

hour ozone NAAQS. The safety margin 

is the extra emissions reduction below 

the attainment levels that can be 

allocated for emissions by various 

sources as long as the total emission 

levels are maintained at or below the 

attainment levels. Table 6 shows the 

safety margins for the 2009 and 2015 

years. 

TABLE 6.—2009 AND 2015 SAFETY

MARGINS FOR THE SHENANDOAH

NATIONAL PARK AREA

Inventory year VOC emissions (tpd) 

NOX

emissions 

(tpd) 

2004 Attainment 0 .0579 0.415 

2009 Interim ........ 0 .0525 0.371 

2009 Safety Margin ................... 0 .054 0.044 

2004 Attainment 0 .579 0.415 

2015 Final ........... 0 .493 0.316 

2015 Safety Margin ................... 0 .086 0.099 

The VADEQ allocated 0.010 tpd of the 

safety margin to both the 2009 interim 

VOC projected on-road mobile source 

emissions projection and the 2009 

interim NOX projected on-road mobile 

source emissions projection to arrive at 

the 2009 MVEBs. For the 2015 MVEBs 

the VADEQ allocated 0.010 tpd NOX

and 0.010 tpd VOC from the 2015 safety 

margins to arrive at the 2015 MVEBs. 

Once allocated to the mobile source 

budgets these portions of the safety 

margins are no longer available, and 

may no longer be allocated to any other 

source category. Table 7 shows the final 

2009 and 2015 MVEBS for the SNP area. 

TABLE 7.—2009 AND 2015 FINAL

MVEBS FOR THE SHENANDOAH NATIONAL PARK AREA

Inventory year VOC emissions (tpd) 

NOX

emissions 

(tpd) 

2009 projected onroad mobile 

source projected 

emissions .......... 0.028 0.047 

2009 Safety Margin Allocated to 

MVEBs .............. 0.010 0.010 

2009 MVEBs ......... 0.038 0.057 

2015 projected onroad mobile 

source projected 

emissions .......... 0.019 0.025 

2015 Safety Margin Allocated to 

MVEBs .............. 0.010 0.010 

2015 MVEBs ......... 0.029 0.035 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 213 / Friday, November 4, 2005 / Proposed Rules 67119 

C. Why Are the MVEBs Approvable? 

The 2004, 2009 and 2015 MVEBs for 

the SNP area are approvable because the 

MVEBs for NOX and VOC, including the 

allocated safety margins, continue to 

maintain the total emissions at or below 

the attainment year inventory levels as 

required by the transportation 

conformity regulations. 

D. What Is the Adequacy and Approval 

Process for the MVEBs in the 

Shenandoah National Park Area 

Maintenance Plan? 

The MVEBs for the SNP area 

maintenance plan are being posted to 

EPA’s conformity Web site concurrent 

with this proposal. The public comment 

period will end at the same time as the 

public comment period for this 

proposed rule. In this case, EPA is 

concurrently processing the action on 

the maintenance plan and the adequacy 

process for the MVEBs contained 

therein. In this proposed rule, EPA is 

proposing to find the MVEBs adequate 

and also proposing to approve the 

MVEBs as part of the maintenance plan. 

The MVEBs cannot be used for 

transportation conformity until the 

maintenance plan update and associated 

MVEBs are approved in a final Federal 

Register notice, or EPA otherwise finds 

the budgets adequate in a separate 

action following the comment period. 

If EPA receives adverse written 

comments with respect to the proposed 

approval of the SNP MVEBs, or any 

other aspect of our proposed approval of 

this updated maintenance plan, we will 

respond to the comments on the MVEBs 

in our final action or proceed with the 

adequacy process as a separate action. 

Our action on the SNP area MVEBs will 

also be announced on EPA’s conformity 

Web site: http://www.epa.gov/oms/traq, 

(once there, click on the ‘‘Conformity’’

button, then look for ‘‘Adequacy Review 

of SIP Submissions for Conformity’’). 

VIII. General Information Pertaining to 

Submittals From the Commonwealth of 

Virginia 

In 1995, Virginia adopted legislation 

that provides, subject to certain 

conditions, for an environmental 

assessment (audit) ‘‘privilege’’ for 

voluntary compliance evaluations 

performed by a regulated entity. The 

legislation further addresses the relative 

burden of proof for parties either 

asserting the privilege or seeking 

disclosure of documents for which the 

privilege is claimed. 

Virginia’s legislation also provides, 

subject to certain conditions, for a 

penalty waiver for violations of 

environmental laws when a regulated 

entity discovers such violations 

pursuant to a voluntary compliance 

evaluation and voluntarily discloses 

such violations to the Commonwealth 

and takes prompt and appropriate 

measures to remedy the violations. 

Virginia’s Voluntary Environmental 

Assessment Privilege Law, Va. Code 

Sec. 10.1–1198, provides a privilege that 

protects from disclosure documents and 

information about the content of those 

documents that are the product of a 

voluntary environmental assessment. 

The Privilege Law does not extend to 

documents or information (1) that are 

generated or developed before the 

commencement of a voluntary 

environmental assessment; (2) that are 

prepared independently of the 

assessment process; (3) that demonstrate 

a clear, imminent and substantial 

danger to the public health or 

environment; or (4) that are required by 

law. 

On January 12, 1998, the 

Commonwealth of Virginia Office of the 

Attorney General provided a legal 

opinion that states that the Privilege 

law, Va. Code Sec. 10.1–1198, precludes 

granting a privilege to documents and 

information ‘‘required by law,’’

including documents and information 

‘‘required by Federal law to maintain 

program delegation, authorization or 

approval,’’ since Virginia must ‘‘enforce 

Federally authorized environmental 

programs in a manner that is no less 

stringent than their Federal 

counterparts. * * *’’ The opinion 

concludes that ‘‘[r]egarding § 10.1–1198, 

therefore, documents or other 

information needed for civil or criminal 

enforcement under one of these 

programs could not be privileged 

because such documents and 

information are essential to pursuing 

enforcement in a manner required by 

Federal law to maintain program 

delegation, authorization or approval.’’

Virginia’s Immunity law, Va. Code 

Sec. 10.1–1199, provides that ‘‘[t]o the 

extent consistent with requirements 

imposed by Federal law,’’ any person 

making a voluntary disclosure of 

information to a state agency regarding 

a violation of an environmental statute, 

regulation, permit, or administrative 

order is granted immunity from 

administrative or civil penalty. The 

Attorney General’s January 12, 1998 

opinion states that the quoted language 

renders this statute inapplicable to 

enforcement of any Federally authorized 

programs, since ‘‘no immunity could be 

afforded from administrative, civil, or 

criminal penalties because granting 

such immunity would not be consistent 

with Federal law, which is one of the 

criteria for immunity.’’

Therefore, EPA has determined that 

Virginia’s Privilege and Immunity 

statutes will not preclude the 

Commonwealth from enforcing its 

program consistent with the Federal 

requirements. In any event, because 

EPA has also determined that a state 

audit privilege and immunity law can 

affect only state enforcement and cannot 

have any impact on Federal 

enforcement authorities, EPA may at 

any time invoke its authority under the 

Clean Air Act, including, for example, 

sections 113, 167, 205, 211 or 213, to 

enforce the requirements or prohibitions 

of the state plan, independently of any 

state enforcement effort. In addition, 

citizen enforcement under section 304 

of the Clean Air Act is likewise 

unaffected by this, or any, state audit 

privilege or immunity law. 

IX. Proposed Actions 

EPA is proposing to determine that 

the SNP area has attained the 8-hour 

ozone NAAQS. The EPA is also 

proposing to approve the 

Commonwealth of Virginia’s September 

21, 2005 request for the SNP area to be 

designated to attainment of the 8-hour 

NAAQS for ozone because the 

requirements for approval have been 

satisfied. EPA has evaluated Virginia’s 

redesignation request and determined 

that it meets the redesignation criteria 

set forth in section 107(d)(3)(E) of the 

CAA. EPA believes that the 

redesignation request and monitoring 

data demonstrate that the area has 

attained the 8-hour ozone standard. The 

final approval of this redesignation 

request would change the designation of 

the SNP area from nonattainment to 

attainment for the 8-hour ozone 

standard. EPA is also proposing to 

approve the associated maintenance 

plan for this area, submitted on 

September 23, 2005, as a revision to the 

Virginia SIP. EPA is proposing to 

approve the maintenance plan for the 

area because it meets the requirements 

of section 175A as described more fully 

above. EPA is also proposing to approve 

the MVEBs submitted by Virginia for the 

area in conjunction with its 

redesignation request. EPA is soliciting 

public comments on the issues 

discussed in this document. These 

comments will be considered before 

taking final action. 

X. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 

51735, October 4, 1993), this proposed 

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 

67120 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 213 / Friday, November 4, 2005 / Proposed Rules 

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 proposes 

to approve state law as meeting Federal 

requirements and imposes no additional 

requirements beyond those imposed by 

state law. Redesignation of an area to 

attainment under section 107(d)(3)(e) of 

the Clean Air Act does not impose any 

new requirements on small entities. 

Redesignation is an action that affects 

the status of a geographical area and 

does not impose any new regulatory 

requirements on sources. Redesignation 

of an area to attainment under section 

107(d)(3)(E) of the Clean Air Act does 

not impose any new requirements on 

small entities. Redesignation is an 

action that affects the status of a 

geographical area and does not impose 

any new regulatory requirements on 

sources. 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 rule 

proposes to approve pre-existing 

requirements under state law and does 

not impose any additional enforceable 

duty beyond that required by state law, 

it does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4). 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 affect the status of a 

geographical area, does not impose any 

new requirements on sources, or allow 

the state to avoid adopting or 

implementing other requirements, and 

does not alter the relationship or the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities established in the Clean 

Air Act. 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, 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 for 

failure to use VCS. It would thus be 

inconsistent with applicable law for 

EPA, when it reviews a SIP submission, 

to use VCS in place of a SIP submission 

that otherwise satisfies the provisions of 

the Clean Air Act. Redesignation is an 

action that affects the status of a 

geographical area and does not impose 

any new requirements on sources. 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, 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 rule proposing to approve 

the redesignation of the SNP area to 

attainment for the 8-hour ozone 

NAAQS, the associated maintenance 

plan, and the MVEBs identified in the 

maintenance plan, 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, Nitrogen oxides, 

Ozone, Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Volatile organic 

compounds. 

40 CFR Part 81 

Air pollution control, National parks, 

Wilderness areas. 

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

Dated: October 28, 2005. 

Donald S. Welsh, 

Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 05–22031 Filed 11–3–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 82 

[OAR–2003–0228, FRL–7993–2] 

RIN 2060–AN11 

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: 

Listing of Ozone Depleting Substitutes 

in Foam Blowing 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: Today the Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to 

determine that HCFC–22 and HCFC–

142b are unacceptable for use in the 

foam sector under the Significant New 

Alternatives Policy (SNAP) Program 

under section 612 of the Clean Air Act. 

The SNAP program reviews alternatives 

to Class I and Class II ozone depleting 

substances and approves use of 

alternatives which do not present a 

greater risk to public health and the 

environment than the substance they 

replace or than other available 

substitutes. Specifically, EPA is taking 

two actions. First, in response to a court 

decision upholding a challenge to EPA’s 

July 2002 final rule finding HCFC–22 

and HCFC–142b acceptable subject to 

Narrowed Use Limits in three foam end 

uses, we are proposing to find HCFC–22 

and HCFC–142b unacceptable as 

substitutes for HCFC–141b in the foam 

end uses of commercial refrigeration, 

sandwich panels, slabstock and ‘‘other’’

foams. Second, in the July 2002 final 

rule, EPA withdrew a proposed action 

to find HCFC–22 and HCFC–142b 

unacceptable as substitutes for CFCs in 

all foam end uses. We are now issuing 

a new proposal to find HCFC–22 and 

HCFC–142b unacceptable as substitutes 

for CFCs in all foam end uses. 

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule 

must be received on or before December 

5, 2005, unless a public hearing is 

requested. If requested by November 21, 

2005 a hearing will be held on 

December 5, 2005 and the comment 

period will be extended until January 3, 

2006 by a document published in the 

Federal Register. Inquires regarding a 

public hearing should be directed to the 

contact person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. OAR–2004–

0507 by one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking portal 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting 

comments;