Document ID: EPA-R05-OAR-2005-MI-0001-0004
Agency: epa
Document Type: Rule
Title: Final Approval of the Michigan NOx Exemptions
Posted Date: 2006-06-06T11:42:18Z

[Federal Register: June 6, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 108)]
[Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 32448-32450]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06jn06-6]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2005-MI-0001; FRL-8176-6]

 
Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; 
Michigan

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is approving a June 17, 2005, Michigan petition for 
exemptions from the Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) and 
New Source Review (NSR) requirements for major sources of nitrogen 
oxides (NOX). The petition is for sources in six of 
Michigan's eight-hour ozone nonattainment areas, which comprise eleven 
counties. EPA proposed approval of the petition in a January 5, 2006 
rulemaking action. Section 182(f) of the Clean Air Act allows this 
exemption for areas where additional reductions in NOX will 
not contribute to attainment of the ozone standard. The Grand Rapids, 
Kalamazoo/Battle Creek, Lansing/East Lansing, Benzie County, Huron 
County, and Mason County nonattainment areas will each receive an 
exemption.

DATES: This final rule is effective on July 6, 2006.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket ID 
No. EPA-R05-OAR-2005-0001. All documents in the docket are listed on 
the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the index, some 

information is not publicly available, i.e., Confidential Business 
Information (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 through http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at 

the Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Air and Radiation 
Division, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604. This 
facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
excluding Federal holidays. We recommend that you telephone Matt Rau, 
Environmental Engineer, at (312) 886-6524 before visiting the Region 5 
office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matt Rau, Environmental Engineer, 
Criteria Pollutant Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6524, rau.matthew@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,'' 
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA. This supplementary information 
section is arranged as follows:

I. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Supporting Materials?
II. What Are the Environmental Effects of These Actions?
III. What Is EPA's Response to Comments?
IV. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What Is EPA's Analysis of the Supporting Materials?

    Michigan submitted the 2002-04 monitoring data for the six ozone 
nonattainment areas. The eight-hour ozone concentrations for these 
areas were all below the National Ambient Air Quality Standard 
(NAAQS)for ozone. EPA records indicate the 2003-05 monitoring data is 
also below the eight-hour ozone NAAQS for all six areas. Michigan has 
not implemented NOX control provisions in the areas.
    EPA's January 14, 2005 document, ``Guidance on Limiting Nitrogen 
Oxides Requirements Related to 8-Hour Ozone Implementation'' gives the 
requirements for demonstrating that further NOX reduction in 
an ozone nonattainment area will not contribute to ozone attainment. 
The guidance provides that three consecutive years of monitoring data 
below the standard in areas that have not implemented NOX 
controls adequately demonstrates that additional NOX 
reductions will not aid attainment. EPA's approval of the petition is 
granted on a contingent basis. Michigan must continue to monitor the 
ozone levels in the areas. Each of the six areas receives its own 
exemption. If an area violates the standard, EPA will remove the 
exemption for that area.

II. What Are the Environmental Effects of These Actions?

    Nitrogen oxides are a precursor in ozone formation. Volatile 
organic compounds (VOC) are another ozone precursor. The photochemical 
reactions that form ozone are complex. Reducing NOX (NO and 
NO2) emissions will not always reduce ozone levels. When the 
ratio of NO to VOC emissions is high, the NO will react with ozone 
(O3) to form NO2 and oxygen (O2). In 
this environment, the NO2 will react with hydroxyl (OH) 
radicals instead of forming ozone. A decrease in NOX 
emissions would cause an increase in ozone formation when these 
conditions exist. This effect is usually localized.
    Because of this chemical reaction, the section 182(f) exemptions 
should not interfere with attainment of the standard NAAQS for ozone in 
the six Michigan ozone nonattainment areas. The state demonstrated that 
the areas were able to hold ozone levels under the NAAQS without 
employing NOX controls. Thus, additional NOX 
controls would not be expected to contribute to attainment. Ozone 
levels are expected to remain below the standard which will protect 
human health. If a violation occurs in one of the areas, EPA will 
remove the exemption for that area and will require additional control 
measures.

III. What Is EPA's Response to Comments?

    EPA received one comment on the January 5, 2006 (71 FR 577-579), 
proposed approval of Michigan's petition. That comment came from the 
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (New York). New 
York was concerned that EPA did not evaluate the impact of the 
NOX waivers on its ozone nonattainment areas. It cited the 
results of ozone contribution modeling from another EPA program, the 
Clean Air Interstate Rule. The contribution modeling shows a link 
between state-wide Michigan NOX and VOC emissions and 
nineteen counties, including the New York ozone nonattainment counties 
of Erie, Richmond, and Suffolk.
    In considering this petition, EPA did not evaluate the impact of 
the NOX waivers on downwind ozone nonattainment areas. This 
is not a part of the process for evaluating section 182(f) waiver 
requests. The NOX emission reductions required from Michigan 
under other EPA programs are not affected by granting of the waivers. 
Also, reductions of other ozone precursors, such as VOC, are unaffected 
by this action. If called for under other programs, Michigan will be 
required to reduce its state-wide emissions to address its contribution 
to nonattainment counties in other states. The Clean Air Interstate 
Rule will address the specific concern New York expressed by requiring 
ozone precursor reductions in Michigan and other states

[[Page 32449]]

that contribute to the New York ozone nonattainment areas.

IV. What Action Is EPA Taking Today?

    EPA is approving a Michigan petition for exemptions from the RACT 
and NSR requirements for major NOX sources in six of the 
state's eight-hour ozone nonattainment areas. These nonattainment areas 
encompass eleven counties. The Grand Rapids area includes Kent and 
Ottawa counties. Calhoun, Kalamazoo, and Van Buren counties make up the 
Kalamazoo/Battle Creek area. The Lansing/East Lansing area consists of 
Clinton, Eaton, and Ingham counties. Benzie, Huron, and Mason counties 
are all single county nonattainment areas.
    Section 182(f) of the Clean Air Act allows this exemption for areas 
where a state demonstrates that additional reductions in NOX 
will not contribute to attainment of the NAAQS for ozone. Monitoring 
data shows the ozone levels in the six areas are now below the NAAQS 
without utilizing NOX controls. These exemptions from the 
NOX requirements in section 182(f) are on a contingent 
basis. The state used monitoring data to demonstrate that it meets the 
requirements for the exemption. If an area's monitored level of ozone 
violates the NAAQS in the future, EPA will remove its exemption.

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Executive Order 12866: Regulatory Planning and Review

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.

Executive Order 13211: Actions Concerning Regulations That 
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use

    Because it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under 
Executive Order 12866 or a ``significant energy action,'' this action 
is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning 
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or 
Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001).

Regulatory Flexibility Act

    This action merely approves state law as meeting federal 
requirements and imposes no additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that 
this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 
601 et seq.).

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    Because this rule 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).

Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal 
Governments

    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    This action also does not have Federalism implications because it 
does not have substantial direct effects on the states, on the 
relationship between the National Government and the States, or on the 
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of 
government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 
10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule implementing a 
federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or the 
distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean Air 
Act.

Executive Order 13045: Protection of Children From Environmental Health 
and Safety Risks

    This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 ``Protection 
of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks'' (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.

National Technology Transfer Advancement Act

    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. 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.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule does not impose an information collection burden under 
the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 
et seq.).

Congressional Review Act

    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other 
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under Section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by August 7, 2006. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial 
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial 
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such 
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings 
to enforce its requirements. (See Section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental 
relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone.

    Dated: May 18, 2006.
Bharat Mathur,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 5.

0
For the reasons stated in the preamble, part 52, chapter I, of title 40 
of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

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

[[Page 32450]]

Subpart X--Michigan

0
2. Section 52.1174 is amended as follows:
0
A. The first paragraph designated as paragraph (c) is redesignated as 
paragraph (c)(1).
0
B. The second paragraph designated as paragraph (c) is redesignated as 
paragraph (c)(2).
0
C. Paragraph (w) is added to read as follows:

Sec.  52.1174  Control strategy: Ozone.

* * * * *
    (w) Approval--On June 17, 2005, the Michigan Department of 
Environmental Quality submitted a petition requesting the exemption 
from Clean Air Act oxides of nitrogen control requirements in six 8-
hour ozone nonattainment areas. The Grand Rapids, Kalamazoo/Battle 
Creek, Lansing/East Lansing, Benzie County, Huron County, and Mason 
County nonattainment areas each receive an exemption. Section 182(f) of 
the 1990 amended Clean Air Act authorizes the exceptions. The exemption 
will no longer apply in an area if it experiences a violation of the 8-
hour ozone standard.

[FR Doc. 06-4986 Filed 6-5-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P