Document ID: EPA-R05-OAR-2019-0216-0003
Agency: epa
Document Type: Proposed Rule
Title: Proposed Approval of the Ohio Second Maintenance Plans for the 1997 Ozone Nonattainment Areas
Posted Date: 2019-08-19T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 160 (Monday, August 19, 2019)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 42881-42887]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-17669]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R05-OAR-2019-0216; FRL-9998-44-Region 5]

Air Plan Approval; Ohio; Second Limited Maintenance Plans for 
1997 Ozone NAAQS

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Clean Air Act (CAA), the Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a state implementation 
plan (SIP) revision submitted by the State of Ohio. On April 12, 2019, 
the state submitted the 1997 8-hour ozone national ambient air quality 
standards (NAAQS or standard) Limited Maintenance Plan (LMP) for the 
Canton-Massillon (Stark County), Lima (Allen County), and Toledo (Lucas 
and Wood Counties) areas and the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-
Marietta [OH-WV] (Washington County), Steubenville-Weirton [OH-WV] 
(Jefferson County), Wheeling [OH-WV] (Belmont County), and Youngstown-
Warren-Sharon [OH-PA] (Columbiana, Mahoning, and Trumbull Counties) 
multi-state areas. EPA is proposing to approve these Ohio LMPs because 
they provide for the maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS through 
the end of the second 10-year portion of the maintenance period. The 
effect of this action would be to make certain commitments related to 
maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in these areas federally 
enforceable as part of the Ohio SIP.

DATES: Written comments must be received at the address below on or 
before September 18, 2019.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R05-
OAR-2019-0216 at http://www.regulations.gov, or via email to 
blakley.pamela@epa.gov. For comments submitted at Regulations.gov, 
follow the online instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, 
comments cannot be edited or removed from Regulations.gov. For either 
manner of submission, EPA may publish any comment received to its 
public docket. Do not submit electronically any information you 
consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Multimedia 
submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a written 
comment. The written comment is considered the official comment and 
should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will 
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of 
the primary submission (i.e. on the web, cloud, or other file sharing 
system). For additional submission methods, please contact the person 
identified in the For Further Information Contact section. For the full 
EPA public comment policy, information about CBI or multimedia 
submissions, and general guidance on making effective comments, please 
visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Charles Hatten, Environmental 
Engineer, Control Strategies Section, Air Programs Branch (AR-18J), 
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, 
Chicago, Illinois 60604, (312) 886-6031, hatten.charles@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document, the terms ``we'', 
``us'', and ``our'' refer to EPA.

Table of Contents

I. What action is EPA taking?
II. What is the background for these actions?

[[Page 42882]]

III. EPA's Evaluation of Ohio's SIP Submittal
    1. Attainment Emissions Inventory
    2. Maintenance Demonstration
    3. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
    4. Contingency Plan
IV. Transportation Conformity
V. Proposed Action
VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. What action is EPA taking?

    Under the CAA, EPA is proposing to approve the 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS LMPs for the Canton-Massillon (Stark County), Lima (Allen 
County), and Toledo (Lucas and Wood Counties) areas and the Ohio 
portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta [OH-WV] (Washington County), 
Steubenville-Weirton [OH-WV] (Jefferson County), Wheeling [OH-WV] 
(Belmont County), and Youngstown-Warren-Sharon [OH-PA](Columbiana, 
Mahoning, and Trumbull Counties) multi-state areas, submitted by Ohio 
on April 12, 2019. On June 15, 2004 these areas were designated as 
nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. The Canton-Massillon 
(Stark County), Lima (Allen County), Parkersburg-Marietta (Washington 
County), Steubenville-Weirton (Jefferson County), and Wheeling (Belmont 
County) areas were redesignated to attainment of that standard on May 
16, 2007 (72 FR 27647). The Toledo (Lucas and Wood Counties) and 
Youngstown-Warren-Sharon (Columbiana, Mahoning, and Trumbull Counties) 
areas were redesignated to attainment of that standard, respectively, 
on August 9, 2007 (72 FR 44784), and June 12, 2007 (72 FR 32190).
    These LMPs for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, submitted by Ohio, are 
designed to maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS through the end of the 
second 10-year period of the maintenance period. EPA is proposing to 
approve the LMPs because they meet all applicable requirements under 
CAA sections 110 and 175A.

II. What is the background for these actions?

    Ground-level ozone is formed when oxides of nitrogen 
(NOX) and volatile organic compounds (VOC) react in the 
presence of sunlight. These two pollutants, referred to as ozone 
precursors, are emitted by many types of pollution sources, including 
on-road and off-road motor vehicles and engines, power plants and 
industrial facilities, and smaller area sources such as lawn and garden 
equipment and paints. Scientific evidence indicates that adverse public 
health effects occur following exposure to ozone, particularly in 
children and adults with lung disease. Breathing air containing ozone 
can reduce lung function and inflame airways, which can increase 
respiratory symptoms and aggravate asthma or other lung diseases.
    Ozone exposure also has been associated with increased 
susceptibility to respiratory infections, medication use, doctor 
visits, and emergency department visits and hospital admissions for 
individuals with lung disease. Ozone exposure also increases the risk 
of premature death from heart or lung disease. Children are at 
increased risk from exposure to ozone because their lungs are still 
developing and they are more likely to be active outdoors, which 
increases their exposure.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See ``Fact Sheet, Proposal to Revise the National Ambient 
Air Quality Standards for Ozone,'' January 6, 2010 and 75 FR 2938 
(January 19, 2010).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In 1979, under section 109 of the CAA, EPA established primary and 
secondary NAAQS for ozone at 0.12 parts per million (ppm), averaged 
over a 1-hour period. 44 FR 8202 (February 8, 1979). On July 18, 1997, 
EPA revised the primary and secondary NAAQS for ozone to set the 
acceptable level of ozone in the ambient air at 0.08 ppm, averaged over 
an 8-hour period. 62 FR 38856 (July 18, 1997).\2\ EPA established the 
8-hour ozone NAAQS based on scientific evidence demonstrating that 
ozone causes adverse health effects at lower concentrations and over 
longer periods of time than was understood when the pre-existing 1-hour 
ozone NAAQS was set. EPA determined that the 1997 8-hour ozone standard 
would be more protective of human health, especially for children and 
adults who are active outdoors, and individuals with a pre-existing 
respiratory disease, such as asthma.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ In March 2008, EPA completed another review of the primary 
and secondary ozone standards and tightened them further by lowering 
the level for both to 0.075 ppm. 73 FR 16436 (March 27, 2008). 
Additionally, in October 2015, EPA completed a review of the primary 
and secondary ozone standards and tightened them by lowering the 
level for both to 0.70 ppm. 80 FR 65292 (October 26, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Following promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, EPA is required 
by the CAA to designate areas throughout the nation as attaining or not 
attaining the NAAQS. On April 15, 2004, EPA designated the Ohio areas 
as nonattainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and the designations 
became effective on June 15, 2004. Under the CAA, states are also 
required to adopt and submit SIPs to implement, maintain, and enforce 
the NAAQS in designated nonattainment areas and throughout the state.
    When a nonattainment area has three years of complete, certified 
air quality data that has been determined to attain the 1997 8-hour 
ozone NAAQS, and the area has met other required criteria described in 
section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, the state can submit to EPA a request 
to be redesignated to attainment, referred to as a ``maintenance 
area''.\3\ One of the criteria for redesignation is to have an approved 
maintenance plan under CAA section 175A. The maintenance plan must 
demonstrate that the area will continue to maintain the standard for 
the period extending 10 years after redesignation and contain such 
additional measures as necessary to ensure maintenance and such 
contingency provisions as necessary to assure that violations of the 
standard will be promptly corrected. At the end of the eighth year 
after the effective date of the redesignation, the state must also 
submit a second maintenance plan to ensure ongoing maintenance of the 
standard for an additional 10 years. See CAA section 175A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ Section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA sets out the requirements 
for redesignation. They include attainment of the NAAQS, full 
approval under section 110(k) of the applicable SIP, determination 
that improvement in air quality is a result of permanent and 
enforceable reductions in emissions, demonstration that the state 
has met all applicable section 110 and part D requirements, and a 
fully approved maintenance plan under CAA section 175A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    EPA has published long-standing guidance for states on developing 
maintenance plans.\4\ The Calcagni memo provides that states may 
generally demonstrate maintenance by either performing air quality 
modeling to show that the future mix of sources and emission rates will 
not cause a violation of the NAAQS or by showing that future emissions 
of a pollutant and its precursors will not exceed the level of 
emissions during a year when the area was attaining the NAAQS (i.e., 
attainment year inventory). See Calcagni memo at 9. EPA clarified in 
three subsequent guidance memos that certain nonattainment areas could 
meet the CAA section 175A requirement to provide for maintenance by 
demonstrating that the area's design value \5\ was well below the NAAQS 
and that the historical stability of the area's air quality levels 
showed that the area was unlikely to violate the NAAQS in

[[Page 42883]]

the future.\6\ EPA refers to this streamlined demonstration of 
maintenance as an LMP. EPA has interpreted CAA section 175A as 
permitting this option because section 175A of the CAA defines few 
specific content requirements for maintenance plans, and in EPA's 
experience implementing the various NAAQS, areas that qualify for an 
LMP and have approved LMPs have rarely, if ever, experienced subsequent 
violations of the NAAQS. As noted in the LMP guidance memoranda, states 
seeking an LMP must still submit the other maintenance plan elements 
outlined in the Calcagni memo, including: An attainment emissions 
inventory, provisions for the continued operation of the ambient air 
quality monitoring network, verification of continued attainment, and a 
contingency plan in the event of a future violation of the NAAQS. 
Moreover, states seeking an LMP must still submit their section 175A 
maintenance plan as a revision to their state implementation plan, with 
all attendant notice and comment procedures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Calcagni, John, Director, Air Quality Management Division, 
EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, ``Procedures for 
Processing Requests to Redesignate Areas to Attainment,'' September 
4, 1992 (Calcagni memo).
    \5\ The ozone design value for a monitoring site is the 3-year 
average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average 
ozone concentrations. The design value for an ozone nonattainment 
area is the highest design value of any monitoring site in the area.
    \6\ See ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable 
Ozone Nonattainment Areas'' from Sally L. Shaver, Office of Air 
Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), dated November 16, 1994; 
``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO 
Nonattainment Areas'' from Joseph Paisie, OAQPS, dated October 6, 
1995; and ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Moderate 
PM10 Nonattainment Areas'' from Lydia Wegman, OAQPS, 
dated August 9, 2001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    While the LMP guidance memoranda was originally written with 
respect to certain NAAQS,\7\ EPA has extended the LMP interpretation of 
section 175A to other NAAQS and pollutants not specifically covered by 
the previous guidance memos.\8\ In this case, EPA is proposing to 
approve the Ohio LMPs, because the state has made a showing, consistent 
with EPA's prior LMP guidance, that each of the Ohio area's ozone 
concentrations are well below the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and have been 
historically stable. Ohio has submitted LMPs for the areas of Canton-
Massillon (Stark County), Lima (Allen County), Toledo (Lucas and Wood 
Counties), and the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta (Washington 
County), Steubenville-Weirton (Jefferson County), Wheeling (Belmont 
County), Youngstown-Warren-Sharon (Columbiana, Mahoning, and Trumbull 
Counties) to fulfill the second 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS maintenance 
plan requirement in the CAA. Our evaluation of these 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS LMPs is presented in section III.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ The prior memos addressed: Unclassifiable areas under the 1-
hour ozone NAAQS, nonattainment areas for the PM10 
(particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than 10 
microns) NAAQS, and nonattainment areas for the carbon monoxide 
NAAQS.
    \8\ See, e.g., 79 FR 41900 (July 18, 2014) (Approval of second 
ten-year LMP for Grant County 1971 SO2 maintenance area).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Under CAA section 175A(b), states must submit a revision to the 
first maintenance plan eight years after redesignation to provide for 
maintenance of the NAAQS for 10 additional years following the end of 
the first 10-year period. EPA's final implementation rule for the 2008 
ozone NAAQS revoked the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS and stated that one 
consequence of revocation was that areas that had been redesignated to 
attainment (i.e., maintenance areas) for the 1997 standard no longer 
needed to submit second 10-year maintenance plans under CAA section 
175A(b).\9\ In South Coast Air Quality Management District v. EPA, the 
D.C. Circuit vacated EPA's interpretation that, because of the 
revocation of the 1997 8-hour ozone standard, second maintenance plans 
were not required for ``orphan maintenance areas,'' i.e., areas that 
had been redesignated to attainment for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 
maintenance areas and were designated attainment for the 2008 ozone 
NAAQS. South Coast, 882 F.3d 1138 (D.C. Cir. 2018). Thus, states with 
these ``orphan maintenance areas'' under the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 
must submit maintenance plans for the second maintenance period. 
Accordingly, on April 12, 2019, Ohio submitted a second maintenance 
plan in the form of an LMP for the areas of Canton-Massillon (Stark 
County), Lima (Allen County), Toledo (Lucas and Wood Counties), 
Parkersburg-Marietta (Washington County), Steubenville-Weirton 
(Jefferson County), Wheeling (Belmont County), Youngstown-Warren-Sharon 
(Columbiana, Mahoning and Trumbull Counties). These LMPs show that each 
area is expected to remain in attainment of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS 
through the end of the last year of the second 10-year maintenance 
period, i.e., through the end of the full 20-year maintenance period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ See 80 FR 12315 (March 6, 2015).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. EPA's Evaluation of Ohio's SIP Submittal

    EPA has reviewed the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS LMPs which are 
designed to maintain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS within the areas of 
Canton-Massillon (Stark County, OH), Lima (Allen County, OH), Toledo 
(Lucas and Wood Counties, OH), and the Ohio portion in the areas of 
Parkersburg-Marietta (Washington County), Steubenville-Weirton 
(Jefferson County), Wheeling (Belmont County), Youngstown-Warren-Sharon 
(Columbiana, Mahoning and Trumbull Counties) through the end of the 20-
year maintenance period beyond redesignation, as required under CAA 
section 175A(b). The following is a summary of EPA's interpretation of 
the requirements \10\ and EPA's evaluation of how each requirement is 
met.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ See Calcagni memo.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Attainment Emissions Inventory

    For maintenance plans, a state should develop a comprehensive, 
accurate inventory of actual emissions for an attainment year to 
identify the level of emissions which is sufficient to maintain the 
NAAQS. A state should develop this inventory consistent with EPA's most 
recent guidance on emissions inventory development. For ozone, the 
inventory should be based on typical summer day emissions of VOCs and 
NOX, as these pollutants are precursors to ozone formation. 
The Ohio LMP's ozone attainment inventories reflect typical summer day 
emissions in 2014. Table 1 presents a summary of the inventories for 
2014 contained in the maintenance plans.

                              Table 1--Typical 2014 Summer Day VOC and NO Emissions
                                                   [Tons/day]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   NO  emissions
                     Area                                Source category          VOC  emissions
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Canton-Massillon (OH).........................  Nonroad.........................            6.46            4.74
                                                Onroad..........................            7.59           12.66
                                                Point...........................            2.87            3.81
                                                Area............................           14.85            3.31
                                                                                 -------------------------------

[[Page 42884]]

 
                                                  Total Area                               31.77           24.52
Lima (OH).....................................  Nonroad.........................            1.35            1.57
                                                Onroad..........................            2.29            4.46
                                                Point...........................            5.08            7.62
                                                Area............................            4.55            1.03
                                                                                 -------------------------------
                                                  Total Area                               13.27           14.68
Parkersburg-Marietta (OH-WV)..................  Nonroad.........................            2.82            1.55
                                                Onroad..........................            4.00            7.71
                                                Point...........................            2.84           16.81
                                                Area............................            8.29            6.21
                                                                                 -------------------------------
                                                  Total Area                               17.95           32.28
Steubenville-Weirton (OH-WV)..................  Nonroad.........................            2.07            1.09
                                                Onroad..........................            2.31            3.84
                                                Point...........................            2.13           37.54
                                                Area............................           15.76            4.53
                                                                                 -------------------------------
                                                  Total Area                               22.27           47.00
Toledo (OH)...................................  Nonroad.........................            8.70            8.41
                                                Onroad..........................           11.51           22.62
                                                Point...........................            7.37           12.48
                                                Area............................           21.19            9.37
                                                                                 -------------------------------
                                                  Total Area                               48.77           52.88
Wheeling (OH-WV)..............................  Nonroad.........................            2.69            1.26
                                                Onroad..........................            4.36            8.50
                                                Point...........................            1.25           24.68
                                                Area............................           27.64            5.97
                                                                                 -------------------------------
                                                  Total Area                               35.94           40.41
Youngstown-Warren-Sharon (OH-PA)..............  Nonroad.........................            9.71            6.68
                                                Onroad..........................           13.33           27.92
                                                Point...........................            5.01            7.07
                                                Area............................           40.73           10.53
                                                                                 -------------------------------
                                                  Total Area                               68.78           52.20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Ohio used 2014 summer day emissions from ``the EPA 2014 version 
7.0'' modeling platform as the basis for the attainment inventory. 
These data are based on the most recently available National Emissions 
Inventory (2014 NEI version 2).
    Based on our review of the methods, models, and assumptions used by 
Ohio to develop the VOC and NOX estimates, we propose to 
find that the Ohio 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS LMP areas include a 
comprehensive, reasonably accurate inventory of actual ozone precursor 
emissions in attainment year 2014, and propose to conclude that the 
plan's inventory is acceptable for the purposes of a subsequent 
maintenance plan under CAA section 175A(b).

2. Maintenance Demonstration

    The maintenance plan demonstration requirement is considered to be 
satisfied in a LMP if the state can provide sufficient weight of 
evidence indicating that air quality in the area is well below the 
level of the standard, that past air quality trends have been shown to 
be stable, and that the probability of the area experiencing a 
violation over the second 10-year maintenance period is low.\11\ These 
criteria are evaluated below with regard to the Ohio areas.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\ ``Limited Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable Ozone 
Nonattainment Areas'' from Sally L. Shaver, Office of Air Quality 
Planning and Standards (OAQPS), dated November 16, 1994; ``Limited 
Maintenance Plan Option for Nonclassifiable CO Nonattainment Areas'' 
from Joseph Paisie, OAQPS, dated October 6, 1995; and ``Limited 
Maintenance Plan Option for Moderate PM10 Nonattainment 
Areas'' from Lydia Wegman, OAQPS, dated August 9, 2001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

a. Evaluation of Ozone Air Quality Levels
    To attain the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, the three-year average of 
the fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average ozone concentrations 
(design value) at each monitor within an area must not exceed 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. 
Consistent with prior guidance, EPA believes that if the most recent 
air quality design value for the area is at a level that is well below 
the NAAQS (e.g., below 85% of the standard, or in this case below 0.071 
ppm), then EPA considers the state to have met the section 175A 
requirement for a demonstration that the area will maintain the NAAQS 
for the requisite period. Such a demonstration assumes continued 
applicability of Prevention of Significant Deterioration requirements, 
any control measures already in the SIP, and Federal measures will 
remain in place through the end of the second 10-year maintenance 
period, absent a showing consistent with section 110(l) that such 
measures are not necessary to assure maintenance.
    Table 2 presents the design values for each monitor site in the 
subject areas over the 2015-2017 period. For the multi-state areas that 
Ohio is addressing, Table 2 includes all applicable monitors in the 
area, including monitors located in other

[[Page 42885]]

states' portions of the area, to address whether the entire area is at 
or below 85 percent of the NAAQS. These monitoring sites have been well 
below the level of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS over the entire first 
10-year maintenance period. As shown below, the most current design 
value for all sites continues to be below the level of 85% of the 
NAAQS, consistent with prior LMP guidance.

                                 Table 2--1997 8-Hour Ozone NAAQS Design Values
                                               [Part per million]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Design value
               Area                       County          AQS site ID     (DV)  2016-    DV <0.071 ppm  eligible
                                                                             2018                  LMP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Canton-Massillon (OH)............  Stark..............     39-151-0016           0.069  Yes.
Canton-Massillon (OH)............  Stark..............     39-151-0022           0.066  Yes.
Canton-Massillon (OH)............  Stark..............     39-151-4005           0.068  Yes.
Lima (OH)........................  Allen..............     39-003-0009           0.067  Yes.
Parkersburg-Marietta (OH-WV).....  Washington.........     39-167-0004           0.064  Yes.
Parkersburg-Marietta (OH-WV).....  Wood (WV)..........    54-107-10021           0.065  Yes.
Steubenville-Weirton (OH-WV).....  Jefferson..........     39-081-0017           0.062  Yes.
Steubenville-Weirton (OH-WV).....  Hancock (WV).......     54-029-0009           0.066  Yes.
Toledo (OH)......................  Lucas..............     39-095-0024           0.066  Yes.
Toledo (OH)......................  Lucas..............     39-095-0027           0.064  Yes.
Toledo (OH)......................  Wood...............     39-173-0003           0.064  Yes.
Wheeling (OH-WV).................  Belmont............     54-069-0010           0.067  Yes.
Youngstown-Warren-Sharon (OH-PA).  Mahoning...........     39-099-0013           0.059  Yes.
Youngstown-Warren-Sharon (OH-PA).  Trumbull...........     39-155-0011           0.068  Yes.
Youngstown-Warren-Sharon (OH-PA).  Trumbull...........     39-155-0013           0.066  Yes.
Youngstown-Warren-Sharon (OH-PA).  Mercer (PA)........     42-085-0100           0.068  Yes.
Youngstown-Warren-Sharon (OH-PA).  Mercer (PA)........     42-085-9991           0.065  Yes.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Therefore, the areas of Canton-Massillon (Stark County, OH), Lima 
(Allen County, OH), Toledo (Lucas and Wood counties of OH), and the 
portions of Ohio within Parkersburg-Marietta OH-WV (Washington County), 
Steubenville-Weirton OH-WV (Jefferson County), Wheeling OH-WV (Belmont 
County), and Youngstown-Warren-Sharon OH-PA(Columbiana, Mahoning and 
Trumbull Counties) multi-states areas are eligible for the LMP option, 
and we propose to find that the long record of monitored ozone 
concentrations that attain the NAAQS, together with the continuation of 
existing VOC and NOX emissions control programs, adequately 
provide for the maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in the areas 
through the second 10-year maintenance period and beyond.
3. Monitoring Network and Verification of Continued Attainment
    EPA periodically reviews the ozone monitoring network that Ohio 
operates and maintains, in accordance with 40 CFR part 58. This network 
is consistent with the ambient air monitoring network assessment and 
plan developed by Ohio that is submitted annually to EPA and that 
follows a public notification and review process. Ohio has committed to 
continue to maintain a network in accordance with EPA requirements.
4. Contingency Plan
    The contingency plan provisions are designed to promptly correct or 
prevent a violation of the NAAQS that might occur after redesignation 
of an area to attainment. Section 175A of the CAA requires that a 
maintenance plan include such contingency measures as EPA deems 
necessary to assure that the state will promptly correct a violation of 
the NAAQS that occurs after redesignation. The maintenance plan should 
identify the contingency measures to be adopted, a schedule and 
procedure for adoption and implementation of the contingency measures, 
and a time limit for action by the state. The state should also 
identify specific indicators to be used to determine when the 
contingency measures need to be adopted and implemented. The 
maintenance plan must include a requirement that the state will 
implement all pollution control measures that were contained in the SIP 
before redesignation of the area to attainment. See section 175A(d) of 
the CAA.
    Ohio's contingency plan defines a warning level and action level 
response. A warning level shall be prompted whenever an annual fourth 
high monitored value of 0.088 ppm occurs in a single ozone season 
within the maintenance area. The action level response shall be 
prompted whenever a two year average fourth high monitored value of 84 
ppb or greater occurs within the maintenance area. A violation of the 
standard (three year average fourth high monitored value of 84 ppb or 
greater occurs within the maintenance area) shall prompt an action 
level response. In the event that the action level is triggered and is 
not due to an exceptional event, malfunction, or noncompliance with a 
permit condition or rule requirement, Ohio will determine additional 
control measures needed to assure future attainment of NAAQS for ozone. 
In this case, measures that can be implemented in a short time will be 
selected in order to be in place within eighteen 18 months from the 
close of the ozone season that prompted the action level.
    Contingency measures to be considered will be selected from a 
comprehensive list of measures deemed appropriate and effective at the 
time the selection is made. Listed below are example measures that may 
be considered. The selection of measures will be based upon cost-
effectiveness, emission reduction potential, economic and social 
considerations or other factors that Ohio deems appropriate. Ohio will 
solicit input from all interested and affected persons in the 
maintenance area prior to selecting appropriate contingency measures. 
The listed contingency measures are potentially effective or proven 
methods of obtaining significant reductions of ozone precursor 
emissions. Because it is not possible at this time to determine what 
control measure will be appropriate at an unspecified time in

[[Page 42886]]

the future, the list of contingency measures outlined below is not 
exhaustive. Ohio anticipates that only a few of these measures will be 
required.
    (1) Tighten reasonably available control technology (RACT) on 
existing sources covered by EPA's Control Technique Guidelines issued 
in response to the 1990 CAA Amendments.
    (2) Apply RACT requirements to smaller existing sources.
    (3) Require one or more transportation control measures sufficient 
to achieve at least 0.5% reduction in actual area wide VOC emissions. 
Transportation measures will be selected from the following, based upon 
the factors listed above after consultation with affected local 
governments:
    (a) Trip reduction programs, including, but not limited to, 
employer-based transportation management plans, area wide rideshare 
programs, work schedule changes, and telecommuting.
    (b) Transit improvements.
    (c) Traffic flow improvements.
    (d) Other new or innovative transportation measures not yet in 
widespread use that affects state and local governments deemed 
appropriate.
    (4) Apply alternative fuel and diesel retrofit programs for fleet 
vehicle operations.
    (5) Require VOC or NOX emission offsets for new and 
modified major sources.
    (6) Require VOC or NOX emission offsets for new and 
modified minor sources.
    (7) Adopt NOX RACT requirements for existing combustion 
sources.
    (8) Apply high volume, low pressure coating application 
requirements for autobody facilities.
    (9) Apply requirements for cold cleaner degreaser operations (low 
vapor pressure solvents).
    EPA proposes to find that Ohio's contingency measures, as well as 
the commitment to continue implementing any SIP requirements, satisfy 
the pertinent requirements of CAA section 175A.

IV. Transportation Conformity

    Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the CAA. 
Conformity to a SIP means that transportation activities will not 
produce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or 
delay timely attainment of the NAAQS (CAA 176(c)(1)(B)). EPA's 
conformity rule at 40 CFR part 93 requires that transportation plans, 
programs and projects conform to SIPs and establish the criteria and 
procedures for determining whether or not they conform. The conformity 
rule generally requires a demonstration that emissions from the 
Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) and the Transportation Improvement 
Program (TIP) are consistent with the motor vehicle emissions budget 
(MVEB) contained in the control strategy SIP revision or maintenance 
plan (40 CFR 93.101, 93.118, and 93.124). A MVEB is defined as ``that 
portion of the total allowable emissions defined in the submitted or 
approved control strategy implementation plan revision or maintenance 
plan for a certain date for the purpose of meeting reasonable further 
progress milestones or demonstrating attainment or maintenance of the 
NAAQS, for any criteria pollutant or its precursors, allocated to 
highway and transit vehicle use and emissions (40 CFR 93.101).
    Under the conformity rule, LMP areas may demonstrate conformity 
without a regional emission analysis (40 CFR 93.109(e)).
    However, because LMP areas are still maintenance areas, certain 
aspects of transportation conformity determinations still will be 
required for transportation plans, programs and projects. Specifically, 
for such determinations, RTPs, TIPs and transportation projects still 
will have to demonstrate that they are fiscally constrained (40 CFR 
93.108), meet the criteria for consultation (40 CFR 93.105) and 
Transportation Control Measure (TCM) implementation in the conformity 
rule provisions (40 CFR 93.112 and 40 CFR 93.113, respectively). 
Additionally, conformity determinations for RTPs and TIPs must be 
determined no less frequently than every four years, and conformity of 
plan and TIP amendments and transportation projects is demonstrated in 
accordance with the timing requirements specified in 40 CFR 93.104. In 
addition, for projects to be approved they must come from a currently 
conforming RTP and TIP (40 CFR 93.114 and 93.115).

V. Proposed Action

    Under sections 110(k) and 175A of the CAA, for the reasons set 
forth above, EPA is proposing to approve the LMPs for Canton-Massillon 
(Stark County), Lima (Allen County), Toledo (Lucas and Wood Counties) 
areas, and the Ohio portion of the Parkersburg-Marietta (Washington 
County), Steubenville-Weirton (Jefferson County), Wheeling (Belmont 
County), Youngstown-Warren-Sharon (Columbiana, Mahoning, and Trumbull 
Counties) multi-state areas for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. These LMPs 
were submitted by Ohio on April 12, 2019, as a revision to the Ohio 
SIP. We find that the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS LMPs are sufficient to 
provide for maintenance of the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS in these areas 
through the second 10-year portion of the maintenance period.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the CAA and applicable 
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
proposed action merely proposes to approve state law as meeting Federal 
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those 
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because it is not a significant regulatory 
action under Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with 
practical,

[[Page 42887]]

appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive Order 
12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian 
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has 
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose 
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen oxides, Ozone, 
Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: August 6, 2019.
Cathy Stepp,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2019-17669 Filed 8-16-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P